The American Spectator : An Obsession With Corporate Jets

Text Size

The Obama Watch

An Obsession With Corporate Jets

By Andrew Cline on 6.30.11 @ 6:09AM

Our president was against taxing them before he was for it.

Who knew that straw men could fly jets?

To justify his destructive economic policies over the past two years, President Obama has set fields full of straw men aflame. Not surprisingly, the economy continues to struggle. Burning political props, it turns out, doesn’t create jobs. Alas, the president has not noticed.

During his press conference yesterday, the president presented his newest straw man: the tax-escaping corporate jet owner. The tax-escaping corporate jet owner is such a bad person that President Obama mentioned him six times during his press conference. He portrayed these people as “millionaires and billionaires” whose big tax breaks stand in the way of Washington adequately funding college scholarships and child safety programs.

“I’ve said to some of the Republican leaders, ‘You go talk to your constituents — the Republican constituents — and ask them,” Obama said, “are they willing to compromise their kids’ safety so that some corporate jet owner continues to get a tax break? And I’m pretty sure what the answer would be.”

But how are corporate jets preventing Washington from keeping children safe?

Politics, of course. A few years ago, we had a president who wanted to pass some tax breaks in the name of stimulating the economy. He thought it would be a great idea to let corporations depreciate the cost of their company jets more quickly. Allowing a faster depreciation would help the companies as well as aircraft manufacturers, who were hurting for business. That president’s name was Barack Obama.

In 2009, as part of the stimulus, Obama supported accelerated depreciation for many corporate assets, including jet aircraft. The Associated Press reported in 2009 that the accelerated depreciation for corporate jets was first used after 9/11 and, according to an industry study, increased sales by 43 percent. It was widely viewed two years ago, including by the administration, as a proven way to help the economy by stimulating purchases of American-made jets.

For a president who boasts constantly of all the taxes he has cut, it seems odd that Obama would advocate not just undoing one of his own stimulus-based tax changes, but would single it out as an unfair advantage for the super-rich. It seems odd until one realizes that this is President Obama we are talking about. This is the same man who campaigned in 2008 against a federal health insurance mandate, only to embrace the idea almost immediately after taking office. This is the man who promised that one of his first official acts as president would be to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. More than two years into his presidency, it is still open.

These were not just campaign promises broken. They were telling signs of how this politician operates. Obama did not believe a word of what he said about the impracticality of Hillary Clinton’s individual mandate. He simply deployed the argument he thought most effective against it. Likewise, Gitmo. If he really believed that the prison at Guantanamo Bay was a betrayal of America’s core values, it would be closed by now. He is the commander in chief. It is a military prison. He could close it. But he never meant what he said. It was a straw man to use against President Bush.

And so are the evil corporate executives in their three-piece suits filling the cabins of their corporate jets with smoke from cigars they light from the corners of flaming $100 bills. They are not preventing Congress from funding child safety programs. Their tax advantage, which the president supported only two years ago, amounts to roughly $3 billion over 10 years. The federal debt rises by $3.9 billion a day. This is chump change by Washington standards. And the president knows it.

But that doesn’t mean it is economically meaningless. In 1991, a 10 percent luxury tax on yachts took effect. This is how the Baltimore Sun reported on the effects of the tax just two years later:

The luxury tax was meant to soak the blue-blazer crowd when it went into effect in 1991. Instead, it slammed into the boating industry with the force of a northeaster, leaving the scattered debris of decreased sales and lost jobs.

Before the tax went into effect, there were 600,000 people employed in the marine industry nationwide. The recession cost 100,000 jobs, and the luxury tax resulted in the loss of another 25,000, the National Marine Manufacturers Association estimates. Boat sales nationally dropped 42 percent during the period, from $17 billion in 1989 to $10 billion in 1992.

While industry officials note that most of that downfall can be blamed on the nagging recession, they say the luxury tax helped make a bad situation worse.

Many businesses failed.

Page: 1 2 >

About the Author

Andrew Cline is editorial page editor of the New Hampshire Union Leader. His Twitter ID is @Drewhampshire.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (108) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

k962| 6.30.11 @ 6:41AM

This whole "news conference" was just another of the Obama class warfare course. He never has solutions just charges! Now Corporate jets are a problem? Only a simpleton would even consider that a rational answer to 14.5 trillion dollar debt crisis! Why would you even mention it unless you are trying to stir up hate?

SpiralArchitect| 6.30.11 @ 12:42PM

The end of America and any Republic ( OK, maybe a banana republic) is Obummers goal.

To force his Marxist practices upon this nation until it reaches a breaking point - then what..? Tough to say from there.

lydia | 6.30.11 @ 1:31PM

I am a 28 years old doctor, mature and beautiful.and now I am seeking a good man who can give me real love , so i got a username Andromeda2002 on--s'e'ek'c'ou'ga'r.c óm--.it is the first and best club for y'ounger women and old'er men, or older women and y'ounger men,to int'eract with each other. Maybe you wanna ch'eck 'it out or tell your friends!
He's not being deceptive, he really be;ieves this stuff. It is delusional. Frankly we might start asking if he is not mentally unbalanced. The performance with The Speech certainly raises that question.

Ol' Will| 6.30.11 @ 5:12PM

Put a lid on it, lydia!

You're everything you say you are and you have to troll for men at American Spectator?

I don't see any way to flag your posts as offensive or I would have done that.

Bug off, b***h.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 6:48PM

There's no Lydia. It's a site for "older women seeking younger men" according to the link. Ignore it and maybe AmSpec can get it out.

Trinacria| 6.30.11 @ 7:19PM

"Only a simpleton would even consider that a rational answer to 14.5 trillion dollar debt crisis!"

Essentially true, though I hasten to note you've rather missed the point: SIMPLETONS ARE HIS BASE! For all his faults, the Community Organizer in Chief has one indisputable attribute - he most assuredly knows his base.

This is a classic (though tired) "community organizing" (read: rabble rousing) tactic: create a villain (usually referred to generically as "da man"), blame said villain for the present state of affairs ("you don't have a job because of da man", "70% of our children are born out of wedlock because of da man", "we have floods and tornados because of da man"...), and then offer the victims an opportunity to strike back at the oppressive Mr. Man by voting for hope and change.

And guess what? It works! It works because simpletons are willing to settle for hope rather than results. And when their hope begins to fade after 2 years of unprecedented failures - no need to worry - there's a proven strategy: "It's not my fault; I tried to help you, but da man won't let me." And like sheep being led to slaughter, the simpletons fall in line...

Shamus| 7.4.11 @ 4:00PM

Democrats destroyed the schools in the US so that voters would be dumb enough to elect them. Now the country is run by simpletons.

Michael Tomlinson| 6.30.11 @ 7:05AM

As a handout to his rich donors Obama shoveled taxpayer dollars to rich Democrats to buy private planes. From the Associated Press in 2009: “Just a few months after lawmakers scolded auto executives for flying to Washington in private jets, Congress approved a tax break in the stimulus package to help businesses buy their own planes.”

Warren| 7.1.11 @ 1:11PM

If "The Associated Press reported in 2009 that the accelerated depreciation for corporate jets was first used after 9/11", how did this become Obama's proposal? I thought that was under President Bush's watch.

Melvin| 6.30.11 @ 7:06AM

Barrack doesn't like Corporate jets? Hmm you mean the one like his wife Michelle and her entourage keeps gallivanting around the world on?
That Africa jaunt is quite expensive.

Michael Tomlinson| 6.30.11 @ 8:30AM

Her little jaunt cost us $800,000.00. For what? Time to send the Party Boy and his "Beards" packing.

Redstateboy| 6.30.11 @ 8:43AM

I Seriously doubt Laura Bush - if in the same National economic circumstances - would be carrying on like Michelle-Let-them-eat-cake-Obama.

MoeBlotz| 6.30.11 @ 2:31PM

Whilst she eats fries?

russel| 6.30.11 @ 10:01AM

Right , Melvin . He's so stupid , stuck on ploys , that the hypocracy escapes him . Just like tax the yacht , more lost jobs . If only one R had the balls to stand up and point their finger back at him " Ok , Mr. Air Force One , how about you and your AF Two wife start paying for the biggest jets of all ? " .

Stan Redmond| 6.30.11 @ 10:23AM

That's public property paid for with public taxpayer dollars. There's nothing private about it so no problem for her to use it whenever she wants... Right?

Old Soldier| 6.30.11 @ 10:50AM

That’s all I could think of by the end of Obama's rambling pack of nonsense.

He and his family absolutely love the corporate jets I am paying for. They travel the world in private jumbo jets - visiting nice spots, vacationing in Hawaii, Brazil, and Martha’s Vineyard. It's also makes fundraisers and campaign stops so convenient.

I was grinding my teeth and trying not scream by the end.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 12:38PM

After the speech there can no longer be any doubt that what we have in the Presidency is a Leftist, redistributionist ideologue, intellectually hostage to academia and theoretical economics. This class warfare thinking is tiresome and certainly has had its disreputable day.

Mattled| 6.30.11 @ 7:37AM

AmSpec should start a new series:

O.D.D.

Obamas Daily Deception.

Grzmlyk| 6.30.11 @ 8:48AM

How could they possibly pick just one, when there are so many to choose from?

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 12:40PM

He's not being deceptive, he really be;ieves this stuff. It is delusional. Frankly we might start asking if he is not mentally unbalanced. The performance with The Speech certainly raises that question.

Grzmlyk| 6.30.11 @ 2:23PM

I think half of his lies are delusion, but I think half are just out and out lies. Look at the whoppers he told in deliberately misrepresenting Obamacare to enslave this country's producers - bend the cost curve, anyone? Or his lies about private meetings with folks like Paul Ryan and John Boehner. Or how he sat in a pew at the Rev. Wright's church for 20 years and never heard a word Wright said.

If you are going to be a liberal, one of the first things you do is enthusiastically embrace the concept that the ends justify the means; lying is a staple of totalitarianism, after all - you cannot sell corruption, misery, sclerosis, graft, extortion and economic decline unless you lie about it.

After all, liberalism is socialism, and socialism does not work and cannot work.

Also, lying was institutionalized by one of the left's favorite glittering lights, the author of the traitor's textbook, Saul Alinsky.

However, I do think Obama's a pathological liar, so we may ultimately be talking about a distinction without a difference. Obama thinks the only truth is Obama's truth, and if he says it, it is so. If he declares that gravity no longer exists, then it is so - and the mainstream media will scurry around to build a potemkin village for him in which it appears that, indeed, the Great God Obama has changed one of the universe's immutable laws. And Obama would look at the media's false world and declare it GOOD. It's win-win: The media get to keep their god and the god thinks he rules the universe.

It's kind of like when Newsweek's Evan Thomas said of the public lynching of the Duke LaCrosse players without benefit of a trial: Hey, the facts may be wrong, but the narrative is right.

I think he very succinctly crystalized liberalism's view of the world.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 2:34PM

GRZ,
Is not a pathological liar mentally ill? If I recall there is some provision under the succession amendment for the cabinet to certify a President unable to fulfil his duties. I'll have to go look it up.

Grzmlyk| 6.30.11 @ 3:15PM

Al Adab, YES.

I think Obama is mentally ill. Seriously. Unfortunately, though, he has the same illness as every Democrat in our Congress and virtually every member of the mainstream media (Dick Durbin, Deborah Wasserman-shithead, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Michael Moore, etc. just to name a few).

I have come to believe liberalism itself is nothing but a form of mental illness; Obama's is compounded with a pathological need for vengeance and a gnawing realization that he's an absolutely empty human being. He is a true sociopath. Then again, so was Ted Kennedy. Bill Clinton. Andrew Weiner. Al Gore. Jimmy Carter. And on and on. The Democrat Party specializes in sociopaths.

After all, the whole POINT of liberalism is to stand on your head and then complain that the world is upside down, and never, ever stop pushing your agenda until you uproot the universe from its moorings and invert it so that your world view is validated. And if annihilation is the inevitable result, it's a small price to pay.

So while I have thought Obama wasn't fit for the office since I first saw him speak, the sad reality is that most of government thinks it's you and I who are crazy. In their world view, it is WE who are upside down.

Besides, I cannot say "President Biden" with a straight face!

Ol' Will| 6.30.11 @ 5:16PM

Al Adab
Make it Obama's Daily Deception or Obama's Daily Delusion - Whichever fits the day.

Purpleguy| 6.30.11 @ 7:49AM

Senator Alan Simpson (R,WY, retired) says that there are 180 "tax expenditures" in the tax code that give huge tax breaks to the top 10%. By closing them, the tax on the first $60,000 income could be reduced to 8%, 14% for over $60,000, and the corporate rate reduced to 26% and jobs would be produced and the deficit will just about be history. Now that's what I call tax reform! A few cuts here and there and we're solvent again. Something to think about.

Redstateboy| 6.30.11 @ 8:28AM

Let me tell you something you disengenious Slave Party Pawn... The intelligent - which excludes You and your fellow Slavers - understand clearly the vast majority of the "Millionaires and Billionaires" Das Messiah, Nazi Pelosi and Harry-the-War-is-lost-Reid are alluding to is a Single person Grossing $200K and a Family (could be just 2 adults or a family of 8!) Grossing $250K.
Put in Local, State and Federal Taxes and you're talking about the confiscation of just a shade under 50% of their Income!! Suck on that Fact you Socialist Bananahead.

Michael Tomlinson| 6.30.11 @ 8:32AM

If tax cheating Democrats would just pay their taxes that would be a start. Even better every Democrat should file a Standard 1040 tax return (no itemizing) and their taxes would immediately go up. That should make them happy and at least then they'd be paying their fair share.

Truth to Power| 6.30.11 @ 8:35AM

Alan Simpson was part of the President's Debt Commission. The President has ignored him. Why should we take him seriously? The President doesn't submit budgets, he forms commissions and then ignores them, he is an incurable spendthrift. He is not a serious man and the people who have supported this incompetent are not serious either. We need lots of cuts before we talk about loopholes. This is a spending problem. Irresponsible hacks like Purpleguy dream of getting their hands on a little more money before we become like Greece.

Grzmlyk| 6.30.11 @ 8:59AM

Well, gee, if Alan Simpson said it, you can take it to the bank, right?

We're solvent again??????? We have over a hundred TRILLION in unfunded madates. We borrow $188 million every hour of every day, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. We borrow 42 cents of every dollar we spend.

It is a known fact that government NEVER shrinks; it only grows. When revenue increases, it is not used to pay down debt - it is used to buy more votes, and you buy more votes by providing government sinecures to useless morons and giving goodies away from those who are stupid enough to believe there's a free lunch.

And this is before we cut the private sector's femoral artery by imposing Obamacare.

You people are INSANE.

You could confiscate ALL the wealth in this country and it wouldn't make a dent in our current debt.

http://tizona.wordpress.com/20.....our-later/

My only consolation is that, when the shit hits the fan - and it will hit the fan as soon as the dollar is sufficiently debauched that the only way to finance the debt will be to print MORE money - YOU people will be ejected from your sandcastles in air and hurled into the abyss along with everybody else.

See, moral vanity is no match for reality.

George S| 6.30.11 @ 10:04AM

Then let Alan Simpson put his name on a ballot and take his proposal on the campaign trail.

Melvin| 6.30.11 @ 10:18AM

Does your opinion also apply to millions of Democrats, which make up over half of the Congress and Senate?
Just think if we were to tax George Soros. Purpleguy you and I would be sipping Pina Coladas at a resort somewhere arguing why our drinks didn't come with a plastic umbrella.
Nancy Pelosi might tend to differ on your opinion as well.

chuck| 6.30.11 @ 9:36PM

The problem is not revenue, IT IS THE SPENDING!! THEY SPEND TOO DAMNED MUCH!!

Timothy L. Pennell| 6.30.11 @ 7:56AM

Saul Alinsky would be proud. Vladimir Lenin would be proud. Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Ho Chi Min, Castro, Chavez, and Mugabe, would be proud.
These are his Role Models. They are WHO he is. And, THIS is all he knows.
Will somebody please READ HIS BOOKS?

Stan Redmond| 6.30.11 @ 10:35AM

It is quite ironic that Putin is warning America about what Obama loves.

It makes sense really. When Obama turns America in to just another country the Putins and Chavezes of the world will have no one left to blame for their failed communist states.

Louis Jenkins| 6.30.11 @ 8:11AM

So Obama's kids get their homework done two days ahead of time? I seem to recall doing my homework, which was required, the night before because that's when I got the assignment. It was due the next day. Maybe if Obama did his homework his speeches wouldn't be so boring, and he wouldn't have to rely on the teleprompter.

Redstateboy| 6.30.11 @ 8:39AM

Yahoo News reported Hussein got the age of his eldest daughter wrong... He kept referring her as age 13... she's 12. She'll be 13 July 4th.

KyMouse| 6.30.11 @ 9:44AM

I take second place to no one in my loathing for Obama, but I don't think this "gaffe" is a big deal. Fifty-one weeks of her age-12 year is behind her, with only one left until she turns 13? Sounds to me as if calling her 13 is okay. If he had been calling her 13 last Christmas, I'd say he was way too soon.

Redstateboy| 6.30.11 @ 9:47AM

fair enough argument - I'll give Hussein the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Kishego| 6.30.11 @ 12:01PM

Agreed KyMouse, I get my kids and Grandkids ages AND names mixed up all the time.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 12:42PM

It really isn't about the gaffes. It is about the blind adherence to a failed ideology in which this President believes.

Grzmlyk| 6.30.11 @ 9:48AM

It annoys the crap out of me when liberals ask conservatives like Sean Hannity if there's anything they like about Obama, and in a craven effort to seem "fair" and equanimous, and to inoculate himself against the charge of racism, Hannity (and others) always says, well, obviously, Obama's a very good father and has a wonderful family.

Just typing that, I almost threw up.

Something tells me that being an ignorant, arrogant, vengeful, puerile, lazy, naricssistic sociopath is NOT conducive to good parenting skills.

Obama couldn't care less about anybody but Obama (remember when he threw his "typical white grandmother" under the bus?).

And anyone who would marry a hideous, avaricious harridan like "let-'em-eat-cake-while-I-travel-the-world-partying-with-celebrities-and-eating-junk-food" Michele simply to have a Clintonesque marriage of political convenience probably isn't going to be much of a nurturer.

His kids serve the same function for this vaccuous piece of detritus as his harpy of a wife: They are props.

The Bruce| 6.30.11 @ 11:40PM

"Just typing that, I almost threw up."

You should have put that just before the Hannity paragraph as a disclaimer, because I read it and threw up.

How on earth could Hannity know he's a good father, or that they have a great family? Does he know the first family personally?

It's like these polls stating that the majority of people like the president personally (if not politically). Am I the only one that didn't get a personal White House invite to meet the president so as to evaluate him personally?

I neither like nor dislike people I've not met personally. Policies are different, as they are known to me.

Drunken Sailor| 6.30.11 @ 11:16AM

Last I checked the Democrat controlled Congress homework of passing a budget is still a incomplete. Perhaps he should give them a F before pointing fingers at the Republican house which is at least doing their homework.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 6.30.11 @ 8:15AM

The government would get more money if it actually started taxing government fat cats who fly around on the public dime. Start with the Obama's.

Petronius| 6.30.11 @ 8:31AM

The only reason we have to listen to this tripe is that there are enough spiteful idiots who believe in strict material equality. These lowrent plebes #1 emotional investment is the desire for a world where nobody is allowed to get ahead of them regarding property and enjoyment of luxuries. And it works only too well. Dickless Gephardt pushed excise tax increases on private planes and boats that put so many people in these industries out of work it eventually got repealed. Wichita KS almost folded up because Beachcraft and Cessna had no business on their books after that tax passed. The insane wish of the gutter dwelling no nothings to make "the rich feel what it's like" is the main tenet of the blind populism perpetuating poverty everywhere. Nor will it cease until enough people grow up and do something other than buy Powerball tickets to improve their standard of living. Most poor people are in that state for two reasons. They do not know how to manage the money they have. And they refuse to adapt themselves and do those things required to become successful and accumulate enough wealth to become economically independent. I should not tell them this. If they really want the money that rich people have end up in their pockets, they should find ways to please their betters instead of reviling them.

Pecos Pete| 6.30.11 @ 8:36AM

Petronius: Get ready for ms purpleguy who will soon post his response. We can hardly wait to start laughing.

BD57| 6.30.11 @ 10:46AM

Sadly, there are a lot of people out there who think their lot in life is made better when someone else is made to "suffer."

Redstateboy| 6.30.11 @ 8:33AM

Gangs of hundreds of Black youth raging and looting in the Streets of our largest cities..
Black Youth (18-24) unemployment at 40% under 4 years of the Slave Party and 2+ Years of Das Messiah.
Connection?

Stan Redmond| 6.30.11 @ 10:37AM

And a near guarantee the DOJ will not investigate or prosecute these crimes.

Redstateboy| 6.30.11 @ 9:16AM

"The luxury tax was meant to soak the blue-blazer crowd when it went into effect in 1991. Instead, it slammed into the boating industry with the force of a northeaster, leaving the scattered debris of decreased sales and lost jobs.

Before the tax went into effect, there were 600,000 people employed in the marine industry nationwide. The recession cost 100,000 jobs, and the luxury tax resulted in the loss of another 25,000, the National Marine Manufacturers Association estimates. Boat sales nationally dropped 42 percent during the period, from $17 billion in 1989 to $10 billion in 1992.

While industry officials note that most of that downfall can be blamed on the nagging recession, they say the luxury tax helped make a bad situation worse.

Many businesses failed."

Right here.. the evidence of which is indesputible, should be enough to cause those like Purpleguy to reevaluate their entire political philosophy.. but it won't - It Must be True... "Liber-ulsim is a Mental disorder."

David W| 6.30.11 @ 9:29AM

Does any Republican member of Congress read this site? For Pete's sake, there is enough fodder here to basically destroy Obama's credibility. Yet the Republicans who go on the various MSM shows basically sit on their hands and never bring this stuff up. Get with it you morons or get set for another 4 years of the "One".

Bill Diebold| 6.30.11 @ 10:04AM

...beyond a small number of tea party freshmen the goverment is a cancer of self serving parasites who we have allowed to become the elite ruling class. That includes lifer democrats, republicans and independants. To make the situation more dire they all bow down and pray to the little boy anti-semite muslim. If we as a nation don't rise up and depose this political sludge Nov 6, '12 our plight will be deserved.

BD57| 6.30.11 @ 11:06AM

In some respects, you're right (about the parasites thing).

However ....

let's run through the argument:

* "In 1991, Congress passed the luxury yacht tax to get at the fat cats."

* "Predictably (to a lot of us), people started considering the tax in making their "boat purchase" decisions - boat sales plummeted."

* "As a result of which boat makers & marine related services took a huge hit - fewer boats being sold -> reduced income -> lower profits (or losses) -> businesses going under -> boat manufacturing, servicing, etc. jobs lost."

Now ... what is our conclusion?

Some people will say "that tax put people out of work" - Obama's not looking for their votes.

The prototypical Obama voter curses his employer for laying him off. He won't concede that it was "rational" for yacht buyers to change their buying habits because of the tax - "the fat cats have enough & don't pay their fair share ... greedy SOB's." He won't concede that any employer who doesn't go out of business had reason - or even concede him the "right" - to lay him off - "sure ... they can me so they can keep their precious profits. No matter what happens, it's the 'little guy' who gets screwed."

While the audience here accepts the economic argument (for the most part .... the second group is well represented here too), with the masses, in large part, you're talking to a brick wall.

The typical Obama voter's attitude is this: "It's OK for me to look out for MY interests each and every day .... my boss (and everyone else I'm depending on in my everyday life) has no right to do so.

Conservative View| 6.30.11 @ 11:43AM

CONGRESS NEEDS A MATH COUSE

There is an obscure branch of mathematics called modeling. You take an event, say Ms. Jones buying a car, and then you work out all the impacts that occur when she buys the car. Impacts like the car dealer having a job, the men who make the car having a job, the gas station guy having a job, the dry cleaners getting a customer, and so on. It can get quite involved. Congress needs to take a math course in modeling.

It is the unintended results of good ideas that keep killing us. Take the buying boats idea of Jimmy Carter, that was his doing. It put many Americans out of work, and didn't do a thing in rasing taxes. It looked good on paper, it stank in practice. Those job loses were an unintended result.

Two questions that Consertives need to ask our political leaders. First, by "closeing tax loop holes just exactly how much money would be added to the Governments coffers. What the heck is the dollar amount that the President is expecting?" Does anyone have an good answer to that question? I doubt it. Second question just as important, "When it is modeled out, what are the results? Are there any unintended consequences to such an act?" These are two questions I can't find an answer to. These are two questions that the liberal media seems unwilling to ask. These are two questions that the American people better have an answer to before we even think of passing new taxes.

Redstateboy| 6.30.11 @ 9:48AM

Great Point David... TAS Rocks!!

Louis Jenkins| 6.30.11 @ 9:50AM

Addition: If the entitlement society would get off their rear ends and earn a living we wouldn't have the huge government debt we now have. Seems we're focusing on the individuals who have employment, how about the "brickers" who don't do anything but accept government handouts? We'd have the government debt licked in no time at all.

George S| 6.30.11 @ 9:58AM

It's not that's it is a jet, but a corporate jet. Somehow that turns it into a villain; never mind all the people who are employed building it. A few questions, if you please, Barry:

If we get rid of those tax breaks, will the jobs lost in the manufacture, sales and support of business aviation (the proper term) "cost" the taxpayer more from the lost tax revenue or the unemployment benefits?

Does GE have anything to do with this latest hit on the private sector? I'm sure you know that GE manufactures jet engines and would love to get even with Rolls-Royce and Pratt & Whitney for taking most of the light turbofan market.

Stan Redmond| 6.30.11 @ 10:40AM

Interesting point. As one who was in the business GE engines are not on any private, oh sorry evil corporate, size jets that I know of.

But I think OBama is just too stupid to even consider this. "Corporate Jet" is the new straw boogeyman.

Richard | 6.30.11 @ 9:54PM

Actually the CF34 engine GE Aviation markets to the business aviation is a very successful engine.

Danny| 6.30.11 @ 9:58AM

'You go talk to your constituents -- the Republican constituents -- and ask them," Obama said, "are they willing to compromise their kids' safety so that some corporate jet owner continues to get a tax break?

Well, the question I have for you, O exalted One, is whether you are willing to sacrifice kids' safety (let's admit for the moment that it is in fact in danger) so that some ethanol producer gets a tax break?

DRed| 6.30.11 @ 9:59AM

Americans support higher taxes to help pay the debt. Why is the republican party so deaf to the will of the people?

http://capitalgainsandgames.co.....xes-really

Conservative View| 6.30.11 @ 11:56AM

The question deserves response. The problem is not taxes as such, it is spending. The will of the American people is in cutting spending. Congress as a whole has been on a spending spree unmatched sense the days of Rome. The spending needs to stop.

Now, I'll make you a deal, I'll support an increase of taxes to match your elemination of spending, dollar for dollar. Are you willing to cut spending? Lets see. Are you willing to cut the NEA, or OSHA? How about public radio, willing to kill Big Bird? Do we really need the Department of Commerce? What do you intend to do about Social Security.

Republicans are desperate to stop the tax flow in order to force cuts in Government programs that are counter productive and wasteful of tax dollars. No money, no spending.

You are perhaps asking the wrong question. It is not that the Republican Party is deaf to the will of the people, it is that the Republican Party is listening to them all to well.

So, please, what is your list of cuts? How much are you going to save? What programs are you willing to lose, funding for ACORN?, tax breaks for unions? If you are willing to rasie taxes on the rich, or richer, are you willing to cut spending as well? And just exactly how much money do you think you will actually raise with an increase in taxes?

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 1:25PM

CV:
Reductions in tax rates and regulatory imposts increases revenue. As business expands, consumers buy and people produce the congruent strength of the economy produces more revenue. That is the fact which escapes our friends on the Left.

Your list of agencies is a good one. Are there others such as EPA, DOE (both) OSHA which we could eliminate to reduce spending? Funding of private groups like ACORN, Urban League, La Raza, NPR, Planned Parenthood (60 million?) should never have begun. If a group can stand on its merits then the contributers can support it like USO or others.

Thanks for your post and the explanation.

BD57| 6.30.11 @ 12:50PM

Now go the next step ...

"We can't tax our way out of this mess. Still support that tax increase?"

George S| 6.30.11 @ 2:14PM

Yet these stupid politicians never propose raising taxes in an election year nor did they let the Bush tax cuts expire. Go figure.

Henty Drummond| 6.30.11 @ 10:28AM

Does Obama know how many corporate jets there are in America? If there are - at a guess, -1,000, then taxing them at the rate of $14,000,000 each would wipe out the deficit. Problem solved by our super-brain.

Stan Redmond| 6.30.11 @ 10:47AM

We should go one further. A government subsidy so corporations to buy jets then they can collect taxes on those jets. THAT would be an investment.

BTW. There are probably ZERO jets out there owned by a private person. Most jets and private aircraft are owned by an LLC even if it is a one person LLC. Guess why... Liability and tax reasons.

IF The Won [pbuh] manages to tax jet ownership I have a sneaky suspicion there would be a lot of planes with new Canadian ("C" is Canadian registration "N" is USA) tail numbers.

Frank| 6.30.11 @ 2:49PM

Your math is off.
$14 million x 1000 = 14 billion.

Ed| 6.30.11 @ 11:29AM

Obama and his minions are Stuck on Stupid.

Maybe we should start calling him Obama the Jobslayer.

Oldefarte| 6.30.11 @ 11:32AM

Andrew, it's a shame that he doesn't critisize the tax breaks received by Tony Rezko when he was building/non-managing those Chicago slum properties. His dear friend Valerie also substantially benefited from same tax breaks that financed/built those federal welfare projects that her family had constructed, and then after they became delapidated from misuse by their welfare residents, more tax breaks and federal monies financed their reconstruction/repair. Wow, golly, shazam, WHAT FATCATS, huh?????????

SpiralArchitect| 6.30.11 @ 1:12PM

How is someone that is a carear politician worth nearly $15 million??

Oldefarte| 6.30.11 @ 2:43PM

Additionally, how was someone who supposedly came from an semi-impoverished background able to attend exclusively private [and extrmeely expensive] schools. Supposedly, student loans were involved, but if so, how was he then able to pay off same while working as a lowely paid social worker in Chicago?????????

CforUS| 6.30.11 @ 11:58AM

Got to transfer the blame to someone, much like the The National Socialist German Workers' Party did in the early 1930's. Find a scape goat and beat the crap out of them with media. Goebbels knew what he was doing blaming capitalizim, the rich, democracy, and yes the Jews. If people wake up the use of a scape goat in time the administration will become the goat. They are effectively using a tool that may last until the election. Until then we have to put up with a tool using a tool.

Thomas| 6.30.11 @ 12:06PM

My congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-ME) railed against corporate jet owning 'fat cats', until she 'fell in love' with hedge fund fat cat Donald Sussman. She defends herself by saying she now saves the Maine taxpayers $660 every time she uses it! Not including vacations in the Virgin Islands.

MoeBlotz| 6.30.11 @ 2:53PM

Some of those corporate jets are used as ambulances to transport hospital patients with debilitating illnesses across America for life saving treatment. Last year I read about a terminal cancer patient in Texas who would not have survived a surface transportation ambulance ride to go back home to a locale I canna' remember. An eeeevil corporate jet miraculously appeared available to do the deed,by the grace of G*d. Should the Fat Cats not be permitted to write off that expense?

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 2:53PM

What's her real name.
Just think if Pingree-Sussman married Wasserman-Shultz... ouch.

Dustoff| 6.30.11 @ 12:07PM

I wonder if O-dumber has ever heard of (Mercy Flights /Angel flights) Yeah let's tax the heck out of them too.

G. Field| 6.30.11 @ 12:26PM

Obama, the original 'listen to what I say and ignore what I actually do so you can be fooled' president.

Mike Gabel| 6.30.11 @ 1:06PM

The use of straw men, class warfare and, frankly, lies, are favored tactics of this president. Any clear thinking American sees this.

Put aside the president's continuance of failing to provide leadership, passing the buck, giving despicable speeches and otherwise disgracing our nation's highest office, is there a better argument against tax increases than our present situation?

We've given the governemnt tax dollars, at high rates and low, for many years now. Our result? Maxed out credit cards, larger government, overreaching government and unfunded liabilities in the multi-TRILLIONS.

The plain lesson is that the governemnt is a poor stewart of our private property. We must return to the founding principles of limited government, private property rights and self-reliance.

Also notice a few other important changes from our founding:
One, the government, especially Obama, now believes that your hard earned wages are no longer your property, but that of the government. They are doing us a "favor" by providing "tax breaks" and Obama tries to shame Americans for simply complying with the tax code.
Two, no matter how much tax we pay, at whatever rate, it is not enough to satisfy the profligate government.
Three, the leftist class warfare tactic sends such an anti-American, anti-prosperity message. Yet the president wonders why there is low economic innovation and growth. (psst...I don't think he wonders, I think he knows exactly what he is doing).

SpiralArchitect| 6.30.11 @ 1:07PM

The King's wife flies on Air Force Two. That is a Gov owned & opperated package ( with entorage ) funded by the US taxpayer - not private.

Old Soldier| 6.30.11 @ 1:22PM

Can I book a flight on Air Force One (or two)?

If not, it's private - even though I'm paying for it.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 1:27PM

Actually you can get a ride...for the proper campaign donation.

Drunken Sailor| 6.30.11 @ 2:20PM

Zing!! and a meal cooked by the white house chef.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 2:37PM

Ahhh DS... and liquid refreshment of your choice.

Conservative View| 6.30.11 @ 3:36PM

I wonder if the trip comes with hot and cold running blonds?

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 3:46PM

Not since the Clinton days. At least this President is a faithful husband.

Drunken Sailor| 6.30.11 @ 4:36PM

Comes complete with a clueless VP and a beer summit.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 5:55PM

That's all true. What about that Jack of ours - maybe at the All Star game?

Richard | 6.30.11 @ 10:00PM

The King's mother in law flew on AF2 free to South Africa. Will the imputed cost of this taxpayer-funded trip be reported in her 2011 W-2 form?

Frank| 6.30.11 @ 2:43PM

If he is serious about the corporate/private jet deal, then this year, when they go to Martha's Vineyard, the family dog Bo will not be flown there on a small jet like he was in a prior year.

gary siebel| 6.30.11 @ 3:23PM

Repubs are virtually guaranteeing the reelection of Obama by painting themselves into a corner over their favoring of the wealthy. Fat cats have the most money, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but they certainly do not have the most votes.
The economy is still the Repubs (Bushwits) tar baby no matter how hard they try to get rid of it.

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 3:53PM

It is the common misunderstanding of many, and one which The Left promulgates, that the GOP favors the rich. In fact they support business growth as that provides jobs and creates wealth. There is nothing wrong about wealth or becomming wealthy. The GOP hopes that many, many of our citizens in fact become rich. Lincoln said, "That some become rich means that others may become rich." JFK stated, "A rising tide lifts all ships" in arguing for his tax cut proposal. It is only dogma of the Left that tells us if one becomes rich someone else goes without. That is a falacy. We cannot raise the poor by impoverishing the rich. Government should pursue policies which make it easier for people to make money not policies which penalize wealth or retard business growth. This is why Progressive taxation is regressive in effect and why lower tax rates grow the economy and "Raise all ships".

gary siebel| 6.30.11 @ 6:14PM

Well ain't you just a hoot, Al. Ever hear of history? It's a little something that demonstrates beyond a shadow of doubt that the modern Repub party favors the wealthy. That's one of the reasons the party couldn't become the "permanent majority" that Karl Rove so earnestly desired.

Please spare me the economic dogma. Alice in Wonderland makes for more plausible reading.

Perhaps you are unaware that it was conservative economists who extolled the virtues of exporting our manufacturing? How's that working out so far? I suppose you think that helped out the lower and middle classes, eh?

Al Adab| 6.30.11 @ 6:57PM

Obviously you are not interested in a serious policy discussion, so we'll just be done with it. Like I said, the GOP wants to make as many people wealthy as possible. That means lowering taxes, reducing regulatory costs and expanding business opportunity for all. It was not "free trade" that drove companies out of the country, but rather the government imposed costs of doing business. Enjoy your life in wolkenkuckkuckshiem.

Pat| 6.30.11 @ 5:00PM

Obama, currently a wealthy man who will grow even wealthier when he is a speaking engagement fee earning ex-president, really has it in for those other rich Americans. And us average Joes and Jills are expected to cheer him on from the sidelines as he whips their tax dodging butts, or so we’re admonished by his mainstream media coat-holders and gym bag carriers. Job perqs, like corporate jets, are an abomination we’re told: of course that refers only to perqs in the private sector, no one is seriously suggesting we review the White House food budget for excessive taxpayer funded Kobe beef or Maine lobster tails – what would visiting foreign dignitaries think if we slapped down a plate of good old mac and cheese in front of them - and then, from his place at the head of the table, Obama told the French president to “just dig in”?

And MSNBC or the Huffington Post hasn’t asked for a breakdown of Air Force One costs, that plane is military not corporate, so it’s not related to those outrageous tax breaks the private sector is enjoying at the expense of some hard working waitress in Atlanta or hardware store owner in Boise. And we don’t talk about what it takes to move Air Force One and its members of the nobility about our country. No mention of commercial flights being re-routed from the flight path of Air Force One and, by the way, re-routing your Southwest Airlines 737 isn’t something you vote on according to the air traffic controllers. Nor the added cost of escort planes, nor the cost of special take-off and landing arrangements, not to mention the in-flight meals and drinks for the first class passengers - and which, for reasons unknown, is the only seating class available on Air Force One.

But since Air Force One is military owned, not corporate jet, it’s actually in the military’s budget, another high profile target for Obama lately. So, when mac and cheese is served daily in the Roosevelt Dining Room and our president is flying his Air Force One Cessna to Detroit for some well-deserved back-slapping, we can fully believe Obama is serious about bringing all those other wealthy Americans into the mainstream.

Son Of Liberty| 6.30.11 @ 5:45PM

So maybe he wants them to fly commercial. They now deduct that cost which will be substantial when the businessman tries to hit two or three sites a day. The loss of productivity while he/she goes through airports and airport security causes the company to hire another half million to million dollar executive to pick up the slack which is also deducted.

So we lose jobs in the corporate jet industry and drive up the costs that are deducted by the business that used to use the jets which offsets any tax revenue gains. Makes a lot of sense to me. Just another example of the zero business background that Obama and his team have. November 2012 can't come fst enough.

that dorsey| 6.30.11 @ 6:37PM

I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW AN ORDINARY BLACK MAN BEAT YOU UPPER CRUST EXTRA RICH WHITE PEOPLE AT THE "MOST HIGH" GAME IN THE WORLD TO BECOME PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. NOW YOU CAN NOT HAVE IT YOUR WAY.

that dorsey| 6.30.11 @ 6:41PM

I HOPE AND PRAY THAT THE PRESIDENT IS MAN ENOUGH TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT ALL THE UNDERHANDED TRICKS THAT JEWS HAVE USED TO KEEP JEWS ON TOP. FIRST, UNTIL RECENTLY JEWS GOT MORE MONEY THAN ARAB COUNTRIES. NEED I SAY MORE, YOU GET THE PICTURE.

that dorsey| 6.30.11 @ 6:47PM

LET US SUPPOSE THE PRESIDENT REALLY REALLY WANTED TO STICK IT TO EVERYBODY. TO SHOW THAT HE IS TOUGH ENOUGH HE COULD GET ALL EMPLOYEES IN THE UNITED STATES DRUG TESTED ,USING OSHA AS AN INROAD. DRUG TESTING WOULD BRING DRUG ACTIVITY WAY DOWN. IT WOULD ALSO BRING CRIME WAY DOWN.

that dorsey| 6.30.11 @ 7:00PM

NOT YET TOUGH ENOUGH FOR YOU? WELL, HE COULD RIDE WITH THE REPULICANS AND CUT EVERY GRANT , AID, PAY RASIE, AND WELFARE TO THE BONE. ONCE THE PRESIDENT STARTS CUTTING IT SHOULD START FEELING WARM AND FUZZY,SO HE CUTS SOME MORE. THIS TIME THE PRESIDENT GOES OUT AND GETS A CHAIN SAW SO THE REPUBLICANS CAN REALLY FEEL IT. WITH THE CHAINSAW - NO IMMIGRANTS CAN COME INTO THE UNITED STATES UNTIL NEARLY ALL BLACK PEOPLE ARE GAINFULLY EMPLOYED, NO ILLEGALS UNTIL MOSTLY ALL BLACKS ARE TREATED DECENT. THE TRUTH IS THE REPUBLICANS WOULD LET A DOG GET IN THEIR BED, TO THE DINNER, BEFORE THEY WOULD HELP BLACK PEOPLE. FREE COUNTRY I SAID IT.

that dorsey| 6.30.11 @ 7:01PM

UNITED WE STAND THAT IS THE ONLY WE IT SHOULD BE

Zak Klemmer | 6.30.11 @ 7:38PM

If we fly in private jets are we safe from being fondled by the TSA?

Tom in Michigan| 6.30.11 @ 8:29PM

Not really. You still have to come through the airport and, if you're an enemy of the left - expect the same rough treatment, even if you have a private jet. Just ask Rush Limbaugh.

The TSA tried to target private planes for special treatment in 2008-2009. Though the idea didn't "fly," so to speak - expect another go at it as they specifically want to target private jet owner as evidenced by Obama's speech.

This ain't America folks. The left is close to achieving their fever-swamp dream of a totalitarian state.

Tom in Michigan| 6.30.11 @ 8:25PM

When your entire life, your political career and philosophy are a lie; if you are a serial liar like Obama - heck, like ALL leftists, you're bound to stumble once in a while. Get off The One's back. It's his nature. It's what he does. Expecting more is just foolish.

Albaby| 6.30.11 @ 10:24PM

How much tax does Obama pay on his personal 747's, helicopters and transport planes he uses to fly his limousines, security and roadys around?

weddingdress | 7.1.11 @ 12:34AM

Jason B| 7.5.11 @ 10:51PM

Since the The President seems to equate every business deduction in terms of how many scholarships we are depriving poor students from receiving, I would like to see the media start equating all the White House extravagant parties, expensive First Family vacations, and separate flights for family members in terms of lost scholarships. Also, is mother-in-law still in the White House? Bet she is costing a few lost scholarships as well. It is nice to have the grandmother in DC so the children get to enjoy bonding with their grandmother while they are still young, but Obama, and Michelle are multi-millionaires; they could afford a nice, luxurious place for Michelle's mother in Georgetown, or other nice area of DC which would free up some funds for the scholarships The President seems to be so obsessed about providing.

rowley| 7.15.11 @ 10:44AM

Obama is obsessed with Corp. jets because
Rush Limbaugh owns one.
His fear and hate of Rush is only rivaled by his fear and hate for FOX.
STOP SPENDING STUPID