Categories: Government & Politics, Political Humor, Taxes, Unemployment Tags: David Horsey, political humor, Unemployment
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 – What ties all our articles together today
by Steven M. Finger
As always, this is not done to till much later. If you’ve come here now – thanks – please check back. Actually, I’m working on it right now.
Yesterday was an exercise in calling out what was being defended as right but, surely, was wrong from a principled point of view… as much of the leanings had to do with personal, discriminatory bias.
Here are another few issues, also patently counter to our best interests as a society, but more contrived for other’s interests that are not founded in prejudice.
We’ve a look at the consequence of the higher earners’ tax contribution [1]- smaller in percentage than the large percentage of population. It’s a route taken not because the rich don’t want others to be rich, as much as they just want to stay rich. And I’m going to suppose that will hold true (as a general rule) whether the ‘rich’ is an immigrant, a woman, an elderly person, or a Gay one. (All of whom were mentioned in yesterday’s article, and, who, by the way, could all be an all-in-one.) And, just for good measure, I’ll add that it probably holds true with all colors.
But, per the article, leaving the poor without resources to share among themselves – the infrastructure of a society: public works and highways , social services and all – will, eventually, erode the base on which personal fortunes were and being built. To put it another way, the fairy tale ended when the goose that laid the golden egg, was consumed as well.
Once one particular phrase of the next article [2] is read, it’s like seeing the man in the booth – there’s no going back, an all-powerful wizard he’s not. Take charge or you’re just not going home, Dorothy.
Oddest opening to an article to an article on gerrymandering? Well, it’s a goofy sounding word, anyway. But here’s the eye opener:
“…the democratic process is subverted. In this system, politicians select voters rather than voters electing politicians.”
Seems as if there is an opening for change – rather than asking the same good folk to re-district or ‘go back to the way it was’, perhaps we the public will have a chance to draw the boundaries of fair representation.
Congrats in that the author of this next article [3] did what he could to make every detail clear, and foot-noted from whence each illumination came. Certainly apropos for an article that is about the loss of intellectualism – not just individually, but as a society as a whole. He just forgot to figure in the attention deficit disorder that has inflicted us also; so, into the 10 pages of discourse take a peek at the two links I’m providing (they are at the bottom of both this and the article). ([4], [5]) They are a quick trot out to the ‘news’ – just to feed your need to switch, and they buttress his case.
Now, go see it all for yourself.
[1] – http://losangelesfreepress.com/are-low-taxes-exacerbating-the-recession/
[2] – http://losangelesfreepress.com/the-people-should-be-able-to-gerrymander-not-just-the-politicians/
[3] – http://losangelesfreepress.com/the-disappearing-intellectual-in-the-age-of-economic-darwinism/
[4] – http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0711/kyl-you-offset-tax-cuts/
[5] – http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_07/024674.php
Key words of this discussion: Society change, changing society, culture and Society, taxes, recession, WRSTGD, gerrymandering, government and politics, re-districting, education, intellectualism, community
Categories: Business & Finance, Changing Society, Community, Education, Government & Politics, Social Change, Society and Culture, Taxes Tags: Changing Society, Community, Culture and Society, Education, gerrymandering, government and politics, intellectualism, re-districting, recession, society change, Steven M. Finger, Taxes, WRSTGD
Are Low Taxes Exacerbating the Recession?
By David Sirota
The real problem facing the Greeks is not how to reduce spending but how to increase revenue collections.
Republicans who ran up massive deficits say the recession comes from overspending. Democrats who gutted the job market with free trade policies nonetheless insist it’s all George W. Bush’s fault. Meanwhile, pundits who cheered both sides now offer non-sequiturs, blaming excessive partisanship for our problems.
But as history (and Freakonomics) teaches, such oversimplified memes tend to obscure the counterintuitive notions that often hold the most profound truths. And in the case of the WRSTGD, the most important of these is the idea that we are in economic dire straits because tax rates are too low.
This is the provocative argument first floated by former New York governor Eliot Spitzer in a Slate magazine article evaluating 80 years of economic data.
“During the period 1951-63, when marginal rates were at their peak — 91 percent or 92 percent — the American economy boomed, growing at an average annual rate of 3.71 percent,” he wrote in February. “The fact that the marginal rates were what would today be viewed as essentially confiscatory did not cause economic cataclysm — just the opposite. And during the past seven years, during which we reduced the top marginal rate to 35 percent, average growth was a more meager 1.71 percent.”
Months later, with USA Today reporting that tax rates are at a 60-year nadir, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a Brookings Institution audience that “the rich are not paying their fair share in any nation that is facing (major) employment issues…whether it is individual, corporate, whatever the taxation forms are.”
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/6209/are_low_taxes_exacerbating_the_recession/
Categories: Business & Finance, Government & Politics, Social Change, Society and Culture, Taxes, World Politics Tags: David Sirota, recession, Society and Culture, society change, Taxes, WRSTGD
Taliban funded by US taxes
The US military has been giving tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars to warlords in Afghanistan, through logistics firms in the war-torn country.
Investigators say as much as $4 million per week end up in the hands of the Taliban via local security companies in return for not attacking convoys carrying supplies to American troops based across Afghanistan.
The money allegedly ensures a safe passage for the Pentagon transport contractors in dangerous Afghan regions.
If the mafia-style protection payments are not made, the trucks responsible for transporting food, water, fuel and ammunition will allegedly come under attack.
The report carried out by the House Subcommittee for National Security further adds that armed groups are not the only beneficiaries of the hefty sum.
Categories: Government & Politics, Military, Taxes, World Politics Tags: afghanistan, Taliban
5 Ways to Avoid Financial Ruin, Hollywood-Style
Just when you thought Madoff was rotting away in prison, along comes alleged Ponzi schemer to the stars, Ken Starr, arrested last week on charges of swindling $30 million in Hollywood fortunes. Herein, bold-faced lessons for your own (much smaller) fortune.
By Marty Beckerman
Oceanic Media Group via FilmMagic
1. Savings
You could… …make $737,000 a month, just like Britney Spears, then save or invest exactly zero dollars. Just like Britney Spears, according to actual court documents.
You should… …give away some of that gargantuan salary and all the goodies that come with it. George Clooney donated his Oscar gift bag to charity for $45,000, and the IRS is cracking down on swag anyway.
You’re probably better off… …regularly depositing your earnings into a tax-deferred annuity that would support you in old age and shield you from your worst youthful impulses. Also: adhere to a restrained lifestyle, à la Warren Buffett. Note: this is way less fun than racking up $600,000 in credit-card debt, like Lindsay Lohan reportedly managed to do.
Walt Disney Pictures
2. Real Estate
You could… …make like Nicolas Cage and buy a bunch of castles all over the world, then flip them (headache-free!) for a huge markup whenever you want. And by “for a huge markup,” we mean “for a loss of unfathomable millions.”
You should… …get a mortgage for a house — one house — now that rates are at their lowest in decades. And remember: you are the king of the sofa, not Bavaria.
You’re probably better off… …keeping some penalty-free liquid assets. The FDIC has bumped-up its insurance guarantee from $100,000 to a just-for-this-neverending-recession cap of $250,000, which you and your spouse can bump up much higher by opening a joint account, two retirement accounts, and dual trusts. Because when you’re married, it’s always good to have cash on hand for — how should we put this, Tiger? — unpredictable emergencies.
RELATED: How to Blow a a Million Dollars
3. Accounting
You could… …emulate Starr’s clients and hand off “total control” of your finances to a mysterious guru — he even allegedly paid their bills — but the federally mandated Securities Investor Protection Corporation only protects $500,000 per account. And the SIPC might deny your claim anyway, as many of Madoff’s victims cataclysmically discovered.
You should… …emulate a (non-dickish) banker and diversify your own portfolio, like Shia LaBeouf claims to have done with a self-made $500,000 in his Schwab account while preparing for Oliver Stone’s Wall Street sequel. If you must entrust another, make sure he is not himself entrusting an exotic dancer, a handbag-obsessed secretary, or a “glamorous, club-hopping lifestyle.”
You’re probably better off… …double-checking your statements — Uma Thurman’s attention to detail apparently led to Starr’s arrest. No word on whether she is coming for his scalp with the Kill Bill katana.
Read more: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/feature/celebrity-financial-advice-060210#ixzz0pi6hPeWY
Categories: Business & Finance, Entertainment, Taxes Tags: Avoid Financial Ruin, Britney Spears, George Clooney, Ken Starr, Lindsay Lohan, Marty Beckerman, Nicolas Cage, Shia LaBeouf, Uma Thurman
Tax Bills in 2009 at Lowest Level Since 1950
Amid complaints about high taxes and calls for a smaller government, Americans paid their lowest level of taxes last year since Harry Truman’s presidency, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data found.Some conservative political movements such as the “Tea Party” have criticized federal spending as being out of control. While spending is up, taxes have fallen to exceptionally low levels.
Federal, state and local taxes — including income, property, sales and other taxes — consumed 9.2% of all personal income in 2009, the lowest rate since 1950, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reports. That rate is far below the historic average of 12% for the last half-century. The overall tax burden hit bottom in December at 8.8.% of income before rising slightly in the first three months of 2010.
“The idea that taxes are high right now is pretty much nuts,” says Michael Ettlinger, head of economic policy at the liberal Center for American Progress. The real problem is spending, counters Adam Brandon of FreedomWorks, which organizes Tea Party groups. “The money we borrow is going to be paid back through taxation in the future,” he says.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2010-05-10-taxes_N.htm
Categories: Business & Finance, Government & Politics, Taxes Tags: Center for American Progress, Dennis Cauchon, FreedomWorks, Michael Ettlinger, Taxes