Thursday, September 15, 2011

Obama's Jobs Plan Is Paid For By Charities That Feed The Poor

Why would Obama put out a jobs plan that will take money away from charities that feed the poor? Closing the tax loophole for charitable giving is not the way to create jobs. The poor in this country have been growing in numbers. No one in their right mind would vote for a jobs bill that is paid for on the backs of hungry children and the charities that feed them. I can't believe anyone would even think about doing such a thing to charities. Is that how we "spread the wealth"?
I trust the "rich" in this country more then I trust the government. The government can't do what charities do. I know Obama wants to give even more money to his union army but is it worth it? I know Obama and the Democratic Party think they can buy the votes of the poor if they become beholden to the Democratic Party for a pittance in return. But there is a real cost to their attacks on the "rich".
Anyone that supports the Obama jobs bill is cold hearted. Haven't the poor and sinking middle class paid a high enough price for Obama's spending spree? Please contact your Reps. and tell them to not sign on the Obama's jobs bill. Taking money away from charities is not the right way to pay for this added spending.


  1. The jobs bill will never become law. That said, capping the charitable deduction is just another means of transferring power from the private (in this case, nonprofit) sector to the public sector. Obama believes government should be the primary provider of programs and services, and needy citizens (or non-citizens) should be dependent on and beholden to the government. It’s a power grab, pure and simple.

    After two and a half years of blaming Bush, Obama will shift the blame for the stalled recovery to Congress, specifically tea party freshmen. It’s a strategy that worked for Truman in 1948, and with at historically low approval (polling 12%), it just might work with some Independent voters.

  2. Chris,
    I think you should take time to actually examine the facts and see what is being suggested and how things might actually turn out.

    1. The suggested cap is only reinstating the 1986 cap signed into law by Ronald Reagan.

    2.70 percent of high earner donations go to Arts institutions instead of 8 percent of all other donators.

    3. The Liberal center on Philanthropy estimated donations would drop by only 2 percent.

    4. During an 11 year span in which the Alt Minimum tax capped many donations by 6 figure earners donations rose by 8 percent.

    So before you get all sanctimonious can you please tell us why your really upset? Could it be that your worried that Church's would lose donations? My feeling is that donations to church are not to a charity and should not be tax deductible all things considered.

  3. Joe, dropping anything while the poor in this country are growing in number is wrong. Why would anyone cut anything from the poor? Do you not care about the poor and hungry in this time of need? Why take from the poor?


Please keep it clean and nice. Thank you for taking the time to post you thought. It means a lot to me that you do this.