Remember, Hillary bragged about flying almost a million miles on fossil fueled planes during her tenure as Secretary of State, something Ed King at Responding to Climate Change fails to note
Hillary Clinton to make climate ‘top of agenda’ for White House run
Tacking climate change and investing in clean energy would be a priority for a Hillary Clinton presidency, according to the man running her bid to become the next US president.
John Podesta, who recently quit his job as advisor to President Barack Obama, tweeted this would be “top of the agenda†for Clinton as she prepares her run for the White House.
Helping working families succeed, building small businesses, tackling climate change & clean energy. Top of the agenda. #Hillary2016
— John Podesta (@johnpodesta) April 12, 2015
In a speech last December Hillary Clinton said Obama’s carbon cutting policies “must be protected at all costsâ€, labeling them “unprecedented†and calling for politicians to “act decisively… to head off catastrophic consequences.â€
Isn’t it interesting how uber-rich folks like Hillary and Obama want to skyrocket your cost of living, and Warmists/Dems follow right along in their own destruction?
It seems strange that she would be advocating a climate agenda that would be certain to eliminate the middle class, at the same time she wants to save them. Very strange. I wonder when she is going to start talking about saving the children. The Clintons were big on that kind of talk in all their elections. Thankfully they never worked on the problems when they got into office. Otherwise we wouldn’t have any children.
Actually, the uber-rich Demos always make sure there’s a loophole their accountants and lawyers can wiggle through.
That old wheeeze is as true as ever, “There’s no such thing as a poor, white Liberal”.
How do the uber rich demos manage to put those loop holes in when they were the majority in Congress for only 2 years ? Isn’t the US Congress usually run by the GOP and doesn’t Congress pass the laws governing the tax code ?
And formwiz I think you are off base with the GOP message which is we SHOULD give tax breaks to those uber rich billionaires because of trickle down economics.
It must be awesome to get the job to slay imaginary dragons while being the most powerful person in the world. A narcissist’s pinnacle fantasy.
And people ask why she wants this job.
In fact, aren’t the Repubicums working night and day to eliminate all estate taxes (H.R. 1105 – The Heiress Relief Act)? If enacted (Obama promises a veto), the bill results in an additional average tax cut of $3 million for the richest American families and will add $269 billion to the debt over 10 years.
So who will have to make up that $269 billion? Folks who aren’t super wealthy. Listen Teabaggers, if you don’t think that Paris Hilton has enough money, give her some of yours.
I hope Paris appreciates the hard work the Teapublicans are doing for her benefit.
How is it that the minority party the Dems in Congress are able to make sure that there are these tax loopholes to slip through ? Do they have supernatural powers? Jedi mind game s
Right now the Dems seem to be somehow forcing the majority to try and eliminate the “death tax” Of course this tax is only applicable to about 5600 estates each year those with more than 5 million dollars the uber super wealthy that Dems hold so dear. But now these Dems are forcing the GOP to do away with that tax in order to appease the uber rich overlords of the Dem
LOL just saw her on TV saying that “we must get unaccountable money out of our system”.
OMG! That’s like hiring a porn star to do chastity talks at middle school.
John wrote:
Since 1933, 82 years ago, the Republicans have controlled both Houses of Congress for exactly 12¾ years; during those 12¾ years, the Republicans also held the White House for 5¼ of them.
In addition, the GOP controlled one House of Congress for 10¾ years, 6¾ of which occurred when a Republican was President. That’s it; that’s the extent of Republican control.
Jeffrey wrote:
Wealthy Americans built up their estates through decades of hard work, and they paid taxes on their earnings throughout the process. Why should estates on which the taxes were already paid be subject to taxation again when the owners want to pass down what they’ve built to their children?
The Framers had it right in the original Constitution: they said that the federal government could impose no direct taxes except on a per person basis. The Sixteenth Amendment, which allowed taxation on incomes, is the most pernicious thing to ever sully our Constitution and our Republic.
Mr Teach and Jeffrey and Bill Gates and John and I ought to all owe exactly the same tax, as a dollar amount, not a percentage of income.
That’s an interesting proposition.
In a nation of 330,000,000 and 150,000,000 workers, and $3,000,000,000,000 in federal expenses (I’ve simplified to make the math easier). 3,000,000/150 = $20,000 per worker. Great. That’s a whopping tax cut for me of over $100,000 a year!
Even at the new proposed minimum wage of $15/hr, a full time worker makes around $31,000 a yr. Do you really propose that I get a $100,000 tax cut so that a worker making $31,000 pays $20,000 in taxes!!
Do you know the median household income in the US? It’s about $52,000 a year. If that’s a two worker family, your proposal leaves them with $12,000 a year, so that Bill Gates, Lebron James, Warren Buffett, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Rush Limbaugh, Mitt Romney, Kevin Hart, Al Sharpton, George Clooney, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Barack Obama, and VPs and CEOs can get 100s of billions in tax cuts!
A rock-ribbed conservative will make the claim that we just need to cut spending. If we cut spending by half, the tax burden drops to $10,000/worker. What half will you cut? We spend about a third of the total on the military, a third on Social Security and healthcare and a third on everything else (highways, airports, Homeland Security, NASA, FDA, USDA, CDC, courts, FBI etc).
What is your reasoning for claiming that each worker should pay the same amount?
“So who will have to make up that 269 billion.” Well, we could start by having all workers pay at least some income tax, as the bottom 40% or so pay nothing. Funny though, that you never hear liberals ask the “how are we going to make up for all that money we just spent” line when the subject is some new spending bill, but when it’s a tax cut…oh, my-what are we going to do?
j,
How much do the bottom 40% make a year? The median family income is $52,000 – so the bottom 40% is significantly below that. How much more do you want them to pay? They pay payroll taxes that support your Social Security and Medicare payments. In fact, they’ve overpaid over the years and the surplus was used to pay down the debt. They pay local taxes on almost all their income since they spend almost every penny they make.
Do you agree with Dana that a man making $31,000 a year should be forced to pay $20,000 to allow Paris Hilton’s taxes to be cut by a $100,000?
How would you cut $269 billion from the current budget so we can afford to cut the taxes for billionaires without adding to the debt?
Hillary is a piker. Here’s how it’s done:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/04/how-jeb-bushs-pension-deals-enriched-his-brothers-donors/
In exchange for $5 million in campaign contributions to his brother, Jeb Bush “invested” nearly $2 billion of Florida state funds, and paid at least $19 million of taxpayer monies in handling fees to the donor companies.
Now that’s the way you conduct crony capitalism! Usually, the companies just buy the ear of the politicians – in this case they got an immediate huge return on their investment. It was a way to launder campaign donations
How come this isn’t on the nightly news? Imagine if Hillary had done something like this? FOX and friends would be soiling themselves with excitement.
I am sorry to say that Ontario has now signed on to “Cap & Trade.â€
The premiere and her cronies mean to do good, but they are naive chumps who could not tell you the first thing about climate change, yet believe or more importantly want to believe that it is real.
What is even more sad is that it will not reduce C02 emmissions. You now just have to pay them to emit C02. Now most Ontarians think this will not involve them. That it is industry that will pay. However, it will add 3 or 4 cents a litre about (15 cents a gallon) to gas prices plus add to inflation.
Industry will likey not leave to avoid it but fewer will set up shop here as a result. The general population today is indifferent. However, sheep rarely complain when they are sheared.
So this is a warning to you Yanks. All they need is enough consensus of the indifferent to pass the laws to rob you.
The world’s problems are not mostly caused by evil doers, but do-gooders that mean to do well, but leave a wake of misery in their path.
I am ashamed to be an Ontarian today.
Here is the link that explains the heist:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ontario-adopts-cap-and-trade-system-to-reduce-greenhouse-gases-1.3030996
I’m more into regime change… and electing Hillary ain’t no change
That’s exactly what this country needs – a godless, foul-mouthed liar who’s greatest accomplishment is not killing her husband every time he sexually assaulted some poor woman. Go, Cankles!
dessertpuppies,
Secretary Clinton is godless? How do you know? And so what?
And your criticisms includes her marriage and her appearance. Classic conservative critique.
How would you cut 269 billion from the budget for tax cuts for billionaires without adding to the debt.” That’s easy-do it the same way Obama did when he added around 900 billion to the debt for the “stimulus”. First of all, it’s not really tax cuts just for billionaires. There are many people affected by the inheritance tax that aren’t billionaires, obviously. And the tax cuts don’t go to the billionaires-they’re dead, remember. They would go to their heirs. The real question is why can’t a family pass down what they’ve worked for to their children without a tax? As is said, that money was taxed when they made it and then taxed again if put in the stock market. As far as Paris Hilton, no. Not the same dollar amount but maybe the same percentage with no deductions. “How much should the bottom 40% pay?” Not sure, but something. When the subject of tax cuts, or tax raises comes up everyone should have some skin in the game. “52,000 median income” Last I saw, the bottom 50% pay only 3% of income taxes, the top 50% pay 97%. Lots of room to manuver in there. Also, the top 1%, who pay over 40% of the bill, is comprised of only 3 million people. 3 million people paying a bit under half the bill is way beyond the definition of a progressive tax code.
…“must be protected at all costs 
Gonna go out on limb here but I’m pretty sure this did not apply to Ambassador Stevens.
The dirty little whore was fired by her Democrat boss for allegedly being a liar and lacking any ethics during Watergate.
So there’s that.
drowningtrash,
When you finish your disgusting deed with your puppy, do you swallow it or spit it out?
j,
By definition the estate tax only applies to millionaires and richer.
The first $5 million is untaxed for an individual and $10 million for a couple.
In conservative lore, the individual is sacrosanct, now you tell me it’s the family. Does the lay-about son of a rich couple somehow “deserve” a $10 million tax-free gift? That’s the current law.
The Repubicums want to be able to pass along $50 million, $100 million or $5 billion tax free. In twenty years that $5 billion turns into 20 and is passed to another generation. No one in an entire lineage has to work even one day!
Little jeffy, have you stopped molesting the grandkids yet?