PDA

View Full Version : Obama How about everyone pay $1300 to UN?


HonestChieffan
06-13-2012, 11:53 AM
I could see Obama being ok with this. Not sure how it could happen without congressional action unless he just gave up the cash.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/un-consider-1300-green-tax-us/596056


Diplomats at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Conference in Rio de Janeiro next week will consider proposals that would levy taxes on American families and energy industries in order to support international efforts to combat global warming, according to a draft agenda for the conference.

We recognize that subsidies for non-renewable energy development should be eliminated and replaced with a global tax on the production of energy from non-renewable energy sources, the UN draft agenda, amended by non-governmental organizations at the invitation of the UN, says. The income of this tax should be allocated to renewable energy development. The draft agenda was obtained by the Center for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), a group skeptical of the UNs position on global warming.

President Obama has adopted similar policy positions in his discussions of energy and tax policy over recent months. I am writing to urge you to take immediate action to eliminate unwarranted tax breaks for the oil and gas industry, and to use those dollars to invest in clean energy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, Obama said in an April 26 letter to top-ranking members of the House and Senate.

Another proposal would spread the cost of investing in other countries throughout society. We call for the fulfilment of all official development assistance commitments, including the commitments by many developed countries to achieve the target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product for official development assistance to developing countries by 2015, the draft says. The proposal would provide a target of .015 to .020 percent of gross national product for official development assistance to least developed countries. That plan would cost $1,325 for an American family of four, according to CFACT.

Garcia Bronco
06-13-2012, 11:57 AM
LOL...he doesn't have the authority to do that and I don't think he would.

vailpass
06-13-2012, 12:00 PM
I wish he'd try.

Aries Walker
06-13-2012, 12:21 PM
Just to point a few things out, no one in the UN or the US Government is suggesting levying an additional tax on American families to pay for other nations' green energy policies. That's completely invented by CFACT, and reported by the Examiner.

Also, Obama has always been for ending the oil and gas subsidies (as am I), but he does not, in that quote, propose taxing them extra. Somebody in a UN committee suggested that, and they don't make American tax policy.

Finally, the title of the thread suggests "everybody" pay $1300 to the UN. The article gives that number for a family of four, not for one person, and the money wouldn't go to the UN anyway.

patteeu
06-13-2012, 12:36 PM
Just to point a few things out, no one in the UN or the US Government is suggesting levying an additional tax on American families to pay for other nations' green energy policies. That's completely invented by CFACT, and reported by the Examiner.

Also, Obama has always been for ending the oil and gas subsidies (as am I), but he does not, in that quote, propose taxing them extra. Somebody in a UN committee suggested that, and they don't make American tax policy.

Finally, the title of the thread suggests "everybody" pay $1300 to the UN. The article gives that number for a family of four, not for one person, and the money wouldn't go to the UN anyway.

FWIW, in his political wisdom, Obama has shied away from proposing an explicit carbon tax. But he has effectively supported such a tax by expanding subsidies for green (i.e. non-carbon) energy.

Iz Zat Chew
06-13-2012, 12:44 PM
I've seen this posted around before, but now would be a great time to defund the U.N. Pull out of the U.N. and tell them to move their headquarters elsewhere.

The U.N. has become one of the most corrupt, if not the most corrupt, organization on the earth in my opinion.

Aries Walker
06-13-2012, 12:51 PM
FWIW, in his political wisdom, Obama has shied away from proposing an explicit carbon tax. But he has effectively supported such a tax by expanding subsidies for green (i.e. non-carbon) energy.
Granted, but taxing one industry is not the same thing as giving a subsidy that used to go them, to their opposite.

patteeu
06-13-2012, 01:44 PM
Granted, but taxing one industry is not the same thing as giving a subsidy that used to go them, to their opposite.

It really is when you strip it down to it's essence.

Aries Walker
06-13-2012, 02:29 PM
This is semantics, of course, but no it isn't.

If you and I each make $100, and the government gives you an extra $20 in January, that's a subsidy, and you can buy more stuff than I can. If in February, they gave me the extra $20 instead, you're not being taxed; you still make your $100 and can keep it all. Now, if in March they said you needed to give them $10 of your $100 for whatever reason, then you would be being taxed. See the difference?

That's as much stripped down to its essence as it gets, I think.

patteeu
06-13-2012, 03:02 PM
This is semantics, of course, but no it isn't.

If you and I each make $100, and the government gives you an extra $20 in January, that's a subsidy, and you can buy more stuff than I can. If in February, they gave me the extra $20 instead, you're not being taxed; you still make your $100 and can keep it all. Now, if in March they said you needed to give them $10 of your $100 for whatever reason, then you would be being taxed. See the difference?

That's as much stripped down to its essence as it gets, I think.

If the basic tax rate is 20% and I'm receiving a $5 subsidy, I end up with $85 after tax and you end up with $80. If they take the subsidy away from me and give it to you, I end up with $80 after tax and you end up with $85. My effective tax rate has been increased and yours has been decreased. You get the same result if you increase my basic tax rate to 25% and decrease yours to 15% while leaving the subsidies unchanged.

RaiderH8r
06-13-2012, 08:26 PM
Just to point a few things out, no one in the UN or the US Government is suggesting levying an additional tax on American families to pay for other nations' green energy policies. That's completely invented by CFACT, and reported by the Examiner.

Also, Obama has always been for ending the oil and gas subsidies (as am I), but he does not, in that quote, propose taxing them extra. Somebody in a UN committee suggested that, and they don't make American tax policy.

Finally, the title of the thread suggests "everybody" pay $1300 to the UN. The article gives that number for a family of four, not for one person, and the money wouldn't go to the UN anyway.

Then we should just end deductions for business expenses for all American businesses since by Obama's logic those are subsidies.

HonestChieffan
06-13-2012, 08:30 PM
Then we should just end deductions for business expenses for all American businesses since by Obama's logic those are subsidies.

Most people who have never run a business actually think a deduction for expenses is a subsidy. Thats why you need to ignore the ignorant when they rail against subsidies.