Ted, I share your frustration, truly I do, but to give up on government is exactly what the GOP wants you to do. (You've heard of Paul Weyrich, right?). The GOP knows that when people vote, Democrats win. By engendering dissatisfaction of and distruct in the government, the GOP knows they will keep voters away from the polls. All you have to do is look to Wisconsin to see the consequences of giving up. Similarly, to believe that BOTH sides suck, that both Repubs and Dems are the same, is to fall again into GOP voter suppression strategy. Take a step back, breathe, look at the big picture, and you'll see that it's the Republican/Conservative/Tea Party side that has prevented and continues to prevent, deliberately (and systematically through the so far 38 new laws aimed at voter suppression), every bill that would prove beneficial to us un-millionaires. Under the circumstances, Ted, surrendering to frustration is only self-defeating. What you, and the rest of us who believe in equality in all aspects of life in America, need to do is show up. If we disappear, we lose.

September 19, 2011

Obama's Recipe for Tax Disaster

By Adam Yoshida

President Obama's "Buffett Tax" proposal to change the nation's tax laws may sound seductively reasonable. Ensuring that nobody earning over a million dollars a year pays a lower percentage than the middle class sounds like justice. The truth, however, is that -- no matter how well-packaged it may be -- Obama's proposal is a nasty bit of class warfare that will destroy jobs, drive investment out of the economy, and harm the middle class, and it is certain to raise far less revenue than predicted.

Let's begin our discussion of this with the last part. Those, such as Warren Buffett, who feign outrage at the idea that a handful of extremely productive citizens might pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than those with other kinds of income are being intentionally dishonest. They know full well that the reason why this occurs it that the sort of income being earned by these individuals consists largely of money that is realized in forms other than ordinary wage income, such as capital gains. Income of this sort is deliberately treated differently from how other kinds of income are treated because it accumulates over time, and is realized all at once. And for decades, inflation has been causing illusory capital gains to be reported.

Obama's proposal would amount to a massive increase in taxes on capital gains and other similar sources of income. People whose income comes in this fashion tend to have a very high degree of control over how and when they get paid. Does anyone think that such a massive change in taxation would not be accompanied by a corresponding change in behavior? Because most individuals with incomes in this range have the resources to engage in all sorts of behavior for the purpose of tax avoidance, it seems likely that a tax of this nature would raise far less revenue than any initial predictions would suggest.

Republicans need to absolutely home in on this point. It's bad enough to have a tax that's unfair and economically destructive. It's altogether another level of terrible to pass a tax that is both of those things and which doesn't bring in very much money

This is not an issue of seeking to protect our friends. I -- and I think I speak for many other conservatives in saying this -- oppose increasing taxes on the "rich" not because I have any great affection for most of them. I oppose it because all of the evidence that we have suggests that it won't work, that it will hurt the economy, and that any measures passed to target the "rich" today will come to haunt the middle class tomorrow.

It is important, in this context, to remind the general public of two things. First, almost all taxes that initially target only the "rich" -- the original income tax immediately comes to mind -- typically trickle down to target the middle class. This will especially prove to be the case for a tax, such as this one, where the facts on the ground make it likely to bring in far less money than initially estimated. Second, one doesn't even need to look as far back as the introduction of the income tax to see how this will go wrong: there's already a tax of this exact nature on the books called the Alternative Minimum Tax. Plenty of middle-class Americans already know how the AMT, also a tax passed to target supposedly tax-avoiding millionaires, has come to attack them. The Congress knows this as well, given that they have to annually pass "patches" onto the AMT to keep it from harming most of the middle class.

The sort of tax-avoiding behavior that these measures would incentivize are just about the worst thing that could happen to a fragile economy. Investors and other millionaires would defer income whenever possible, leaving money in already swollen corporate coffers and keeping it out of general circulation. We often underestimate the distorting effects that high taxes have on the economy and society as a whole. To pick just a single example, the strange state of American health care and the unique American reliance on private health insurance is a quirk that came to be as a result of extremely high taxes during the Second World War, when employers sought to hire away workers by offering tax-deductible health insurance to potential employees in lieu of other forms of compensation.

"The suspension of one man's dividends," Calvin Coolidge once reminded us, "means the suspension of another man's pay envelope." It is hard to think of anything that the government could do to better illustrate that essential truth than making it less attractive for the wealthy to dynamically invest their money.

There is one other point to consider. We are in the preliminary stages of one of the greatest public policy battles in our history. The government has current obligations that far exceed its ability to pay. In the coming years we will find ourselves with a choice: we can either pay, or we can reject as odious the promises made on our behalf by past generations. If we give in now, to this supposedly "reasonable" demand, we will simply have set the stage for the showdown over the next demand, and then for the one after that.

What we must do instead is stand firm in support of the policy that we know to be both best for the economy and morally right. It is morally wrong when laws are written to do special favors for a single individual or group. As conservatives, we believe in equality before the law and, just as it is wrong that the law should treat anyone with special favoritism, it is equally wrong to write laws that target a specific group for special mistreatment. The solution to a tax code full of easily exploited loopholes is not to target any single group for attack through addition to the code; it is to rewrite the code from the ground up in order to ensure equitable treatment for all.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2011/09/obamas_recipe_for_tax_disaster.htmlat September 19, 2011 - 12:20:55 PM CDT

// //

I coined the term "Profitize" years ago. Where are my royalty checks?

Dear Thom,

I love your program. I hardly watch television anymore as I cannot stand the lies of the corporate media and the plutocrat Republicans. You and Alyona are a breath of fresh air.

We shall see if Obama has any kind of balls to finally fight back against the plutocrat Republicans.

I have given up on the two-party system. I am so, so fricking tired of the right-wing lies and propaganda about "Class Warfare" and the Frank Luntz slogans about "Job Creators" and the "Government Option."

After 30 plus years of Reagan-Trickle Down plutocratic policies, these Republicans have gall to accuse anyone of "Class Warfare." Just remember: whenever you hear some plutocrat Republican or conservative or libertarian whine about "Class Warfare" it just means that they are too scared to have an honest debate about taxes, fairness, equity, or poverty. When was the last time you heard any politician mention the words "poverty" or "the poor" ?

God bless,

Ted,

New York City

I hope so. Obama appears to be going into their districts and rallying support/ Hopefully this will work and the GOP will cave. If Obama is able to convince their districts that America needs the Jobs Act and Congressional Republicans still don't support it and the economic recovery stays flat (which is what the GOP really wants for Nov 2012) it's likely that America will blame the GOP instead of Obama (which the GOP is banking on). 250 billion of the 447 billion American Jobs Act "spending" is actually tax cuts (which Republicans suddenly consider spending when it's part of Obama's recovery plan). It was the same with the stimulus package. Roughly $200 billion of the spending came in the form of tax cuts. But Republicans still tout it as over $800 in spending (as opposed to $600 billion). Of course, when they propose tax cuts they rarely admit this is "spending" but rather claim they are simply giving American tax payers their money back. They even falsely claim that tax cuts increase revenue.

Yes, and in fact, if Obama really cared about jobs, he would declare war on every country in the entire world, so that every American who wants a job can have one, going to foreign countries, meeting interesting people, and killing them. I mean, come on, does Obama want us to be without jobs, or is he going to declare war on the entire world? (Actually, this is a variant of the old tried and true question: "Do you still beat your dog? And I want a yes or no answer, because there's no grey area here: do you still beat your dog?")

It's easy to say Obama should ok every single well the oil industry wants to drill, because if he doesn't, then he doesn't want us to have jobs. But if you look just a little deeper into the way that our government handles oil leases, you'll see that America makes only a fraction of the money on oil leases, that other countries make, because our government has been bribed to charge little or nothing to international oil companies that drill in America and in American waters. In pretty much every other country where they have oil, the governments charge a lot more money. And the income from oil leases, if our government forced the oil companies to pay fairly for the leases, would go a very long way toward easing our national debt.

But because your real reason for criticizing Obama has nothing to do with jobs or with keeping America financially solvent, I'm sure you'll come back with another republican talking point. I know, how about this one: "If Obama really cared about health care, he wouldn't encourage people to be so lazy that they can't afford doctors." I think that's a good one. Let's just forget about the fact that the reason so many Americans don't have jobs is because their rich republican bosses decided they wanted to take all of the profit for themselves and leave nothing for the workers, so they outsourced your job to China. And why, exactly, is that Obama's fault? Did Obama make those wealthy people greedy and selfish?

Or how about, "If Obama is concerned about unemployment, why does he talk about rich people paying taxes, because when you tax rich people, they take their businesses out of the country." Oh no, wait a minute, that one doesn't work either, because even though American corporations pay NO income tax, American corporations have still outsourced most of the manufacturing jobs from America, to Asia and India. Because, see, here's the thing: those rich corporate boys don't want a fair deal. No they don't. They want the whole ____ing thing. They don't want their manufacturing plants in America where they'd have to pay fair wages and not pollute. No, they want to do business in China, where they can get slave labor and pay them almost nothing, with no worker's rights, no health care or sick leave, no retirement, no lunch breaks, and horribly unsafe working conditions where workers are used up and then thrown away like garbage. And I know that you, as a republican, think it's funny to throw people away as though they were garbage, but what if it was your father getting thrown away? Or your uncle, your brother, your sister, your wife? Or, God forbid, what if it was YOU getting thrown away like garbage by your boss because his unsafe manufacturing plant broke your leg or your arm? Oh boy, then we'd be hearing some real bitching from you about worker's rights. But as long as it's not YOU or YOUR family or anyone YOU care about, you really and truly don't give a crap what happens to workers.

How about this one: I'll tell you why Obama isn't doing anything about the illegal immigrants: it's because Obama is an illegal immigrant." Now, personally I like this one a lot because it totally ignores the fact that illegal immigrants are not really responsible for ANY of the things that tea partiers are angry about. The ones who are really responsible for the unemployment and other problems our country faces now, are the rich republicans. But let's ignore the greedy, selfish factory owners who laid you off from your job, and blame it on the illegals, because if you do, the factory owners will repay your for your loyalty by contining to outsource American jobs.

You hear only the sound of my voice. Your are getting very sleepy. Obey the rich people. Obey the Rich people.

Here's another one I like a lot: "I'll tell you whose fault it is that I drink too much: it's Obama's fault. You see, I love my country so much and I worry about my country so much, that it's driven me to drink." (With a tip of the hat to Newt Gingrich, who pioneered that particular bit of, ah... logic, when he said he screwed around on his wives because he loves his country.)

Sorry Bubba, but them there dogs just won't hunt. You wanta blame someone? How about blaming the people who are really causing these problems. In fact, you wanta know WHY all those illegals are coming here from Mexico? I'll tell you why: American foreign policy. For decades, our government has bribed and bribed and bribed the Mexican government with billions of dollars in foreign aid. And you know what our government wanted in return for all that money? We wanted American food and other goods exported to Mexico, at such low prices that it destroyed Mexico's economy. Then, the small family farmers had a choice to make: grow marijuana and other drugs for the drug cartels, starve to death, or sneak across the border into America and try to make money to send home to their families.

So, Bubba, you tell me: if someone did that to YOUR family, what would you do? Would you grow illegal drugs for the cartels? Would you starve to death? Or would YOU sneak across the border into America. Come on, now, Bubba, tell the truth: you'd sneak across that border, wouldn't you? Why Bubba, do you realize that you are about a half inch from being an illegal alien yourself? I am shocked!

How many bridges, roads and other infrastructure will America get as well as the jobs?

HAVEn't WE HEARD Enough to know that we need to thow these moron out of congress?

I certainly hope he does. This continued impass in congress has to STOP! America is in crisis and under seige by the top 1-2% of the population/transnational corporations/lobbyist and the US Supreme Court rulling of citizens united. The President MUST continue to appeal to the majority of the people and mobilize the citizens to FORCE congress to ACT.

It is easy these days to point out that our nation is lost in a complex web of socio-econonomic catastrophes and so on.

It is easy to complain.

It is hard work to build anything that even has a 50% chance of working. As a licensed electrical contractor for 30 years I have witnessed an expanding disconnect between what my customers expect and what can actually be done in real time. And real cost.

Expecting an electrical contractor to fix electrical systems after decades of neglect is like expecting a politician to fix economic systems after decades of neglect. It can be done but it takes a lot of time and expertise to do it.

If the expectation is that someone will come along who can fix it without the work it takes to do it, then the necessary work will never get done.

In a world where sound bytes dictate decisions it is no wonder that foundational structures have come to such a state of disrepair.

My grandparents grew up without electricity and consequently did not depend on it for every day life. My parents grew up with 1st generation electrical systems and quickly learned to depend on it to do their work and provide for their families.

Will my children need to learn how to do without electricity?

All that I can teach them is to never take it for granted.

I don't know what else to do other than pray that there are enough American citizens left who remember what happens when systems fail.

PoliticsSolyndra Not Sole Firm to Hit Rock Bottom Despite Stimulus Funding

Published September 15, 2011

| FoxNews.

AP

In this May 26, 2010, file photo, President Obama, with Solyndra Chief Executive Officer Chris Gronet, looks at a solar panel during a tour of Solyndra, Inc., a solar panel manufacturing facility, in Fremont, Calif.

Solyndra, the solar panel company whose highly publicized failure and consequent investigation by federal authorities has flashed across headlines recently, isn't the only business to go belly up after benefiting from a piece of the $800 billion economic stimulus package passed in 2009.

At least four other companies have received stimulus funding only to later file for bankruptcy, and two of those were working on alternative energy.

Evergreen Solar Inc., reportedly received $5.3 million of stimulus cash through a state grant to install 11,000 photovoltaic panels installed at 11 colleges and universities, a recycling facility and an education center in Massachusetts.

Related Video

Lawmakers Question White House Role in Solyndra Scandal

Did administration know about troubles of green energy firm before $535M loan was given?

The company, once a rock star in the solar industry, filed for bankruptcy protection last month, saying it couldn't compete with Chinese rivals without reorganizing. The company intends to focus on building up its manufacturing facility in China.

SpectraWatt, based in Hopewell Junction, N.Y., is also a solar cell company that was spun out of Intel in 2008. In June 2009, SpectraWatt received a $500,000 grant from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory as part of the stimulus package. SpectraWatt was one of 13 companies to receive the money to help develop ways to improve solar cells without changing current manufacturing processes.

The company filed for bankruptcy last month, saying it could not compete with its Chinese competitors, which receive "considerable government and financial support."

On Tuesday, Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman wrote an editorial for "USA Today" in which he blamed China in part for the failure of U.S. solar energy manufacturers to compete.

"Winning will require substantial investments. Last year, for example, the China Development Bank offered more than $30 billion in financing to Chinese solar manufacturers, about 20 times more than U.S.-backed loans to solar manufacturers," Poneman wrote.

"Unfortunately, expanding production has coincided with short-term softening demand, a product of the banking crisis in Europe and its wider economic effects. The combination has had a dramatic effect on the price of solar cells, which has plummeted 42 percent in the past nine months. This has taken a serious toll on solar manufacturers everywhere, including the U.S," he continued.

On Thursday, White House spokesman Jay Carney noted that the U.S. is on track to double its renewable energy production in 2012, but it will require commitment in the U.S. to grow.

"We have a choice to make as a nation, because we will be buying renewable energy products, you know, whether it's wind, biofuel, solar, whether alternative -- rather, you know, advanced battery technology, we're going to be buying that stuff. Do we want to buy it with a stamp on it that says 'Made in America' or are we going to buy it from the Chinese or from other countries?" Carney asked.

"We have to be aggressive in competing in the global economy. And, you know, high-tech clean-energy industries are going to be key to winning this century economically."

But Republicans balk at claims that the Obama administration can decide which companies are winners or losers, and questioned a plan to approve $10 billion more in loans before the stimulus program expires.

"Solar panels have been subsidized by the federal government. States' governments are also subsidizing or giving taxpayers write-off on their tax return. And yet, these solar panels cannot make it in the competitive world without all these subsidies. And even with them, China is flooding the market with this cheap labor and the solar panels just don't make sense," House Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subommittee Chairman Cliff Stearns R-Fla., told Fox News.

"So I think the administration is on this fervent religion of green jobs and clinging to the idea that solar panel is the answer and it is not the answer," he said.

Another winner of stimulus who ultimately lost is Mountain Plaza Inc. Despite declaring bankruptcy in 2003, the company received $424,000 from the Tennessee Department of Transportation as part of a grant aimed at installing "truck stop electrification" systems that allow idling truckers to plug-in during extended stops and turn off their exhaust-belching, environment polluting diesel engines.

Mountain Plaza had filed for bankruptcy protection again in June 2010. TDOT, which received a $2 million stimulus grant from the Environmental Protection Agency for the project, said it didn't learn about the bankruptcy until October, but it is closely monitoring the project.

Elsewhere, Olsen's Crop Service and Olsen's Mills Acquisition Co. also failed despite Olsen's Mills receiving $10 million to increase employment, add equipment and machinery, refinance existing debts and work capital for operations and acquire land. The payout -- part of a $64 million package to nine rural businesses in Wisconsin for economic development loan assistance -- was delivered in January 2010, after Olsen's Mills filed for bankruptcy protection for defaulting on a $60 million bank loan.

I hate it when people try to be misleading by dividing the cost of the bill by the number of jobs and ignoring the infra structure that will be updated. You also ignore that it will move money through the economy and hopefully jump start the economy back. Now if we could get the "do nothing Republicans" to actually do something besides cut taxes, we just might be able to do something for all of the people!