World Politics

Page 418 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 11, 2009
10,526
3,856
28,180
Whatever you say.

Meanwhile, poll numbers are out and Obama's approval rating is the lowest it's ever been at 39%. Not to be outdone, Rick Perry's approval rating is only 43% in his home state of Texas.

Of course, neither could come close to that of Congress, which now sits at 12% approval rating. This ties the lowest ever with 2008. You have to go back to the Great Depression and informal polls there to find equally low numbers.

What's more staggering is that only 6% said they felt Congress deserved to be re-elected. Now, before you say people like their own Representative and hate the others, that poll was taken as well, and collectively only gained 33% approval.

Just to give you a comparison, about 15% of the people in the world think 9/11 was a US inside job or Bush let it happen on purpose. About 10% still think OJ Simpson is innocent, and nearly 4% of adults are either incarcerated or in correctional supervision (parole, work release, etc.).
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
""Bachmann: Obama Just ‘Sat On His Hands’ And Let Mubarak Fall

Michele Bachmann argued that President Obama should have tried to stop Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak from falling, saying that “we saw President Mubarak fall while President Obama sat on his hands.”

Bachmann was speaking to about 400 people at the California Republican convention Friday, and as the National Journal reports, blamed President Obama’s for “the hostilities of the Arab spring,” which saw the toppling of regimes in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya and pro-democracy protests across the region.

“We saw President Mubarak fall while President Obama sat on his hands,” Bachmann said, referring to the former Egyptian President. “And we’ve also seen now the rise of radical elements all across the Middle East region.""
 
Mar 11, 2009
10,526
3,856
28,180
More proof that the neocons have taken the Tea Party for a ride (and that Bachmann is clueless, but we all knew that).
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
More proof that the neocons have taken the Tea Party for a ride (and that Bachmann is clueless, but we all knew that).


Her views on Turkey vs Israel would be of epic comic substance.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
George Will: The tea party is the Republican establishment

Conservative columnist George Will says that Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry doesn’t need to worry about the “Republican establishment” derailing his campaign because they have been co-opted by the tea party.

“They are the establishment today,” Will explained. “In fact, the Republican establishment died at the Cow Palace in San Francisco in 1964 when Goldwater was nominated against their frenzied wishes.”
 
gregod said:
i agree that the nature of the messages is important. but that is not the point i was originally trying to make. i was addressing the question of the vitriol toward sarah palin by bringing up the vitriol that was directed at clinton. the substance of that vituperation is different, but no less passionate on either side. the right arm themselves because they lack ideas. the left use ideas that frighten the right. i'm not applying value judgements, although you can probably guess on which side i would be more comfortable. i am pointing out that the effect is the same. sarah palin draws equal measures of adoration and hate. so did bill clinton.

This is because it is an arms race.

Although, then again, form and style, even if one draws equal measures of adoration and hate, are of consequence, however appalling the consequences may, or may not, be. The degree to which the American right-wing, however, has become totally reactionary, inept and inadmissible, as well as being resolutely against intellectualism, can only be completely appreciated by the fact that Palin is even taken at all seriously politically.

The American right of the nation's heartland has never been the most well instructed, while it has always been prone to finding congenial a certain type of obscurantism and rather crass populism in its political candidates; however, She really takes the case in evidencing just how hopelessly backwards, provincial and out of touch with the rest of the civilized world this Americana has become. Clinton, naturally, partook of none of these disastrous image effects.

For this reason I found your comparison of the two to be hazarded and off-base, even if I got your point.
 
Mar 11, 2009
10,526
3,856
28,180
redtreviso said:
George Will: The tea party is the Republican establishment.

I think what he's saying is mostly true. The heart of the full conservative movement is in essence represented by the tea party. That would be the goal of having almost nothing governed on a federal level, and the entire progressive movement dating back to the New Deal erased. This is why Perry's calls for Social Security elimination doesn't draw much retort, and actually a lot of praise from many on the right. Same with the Ryan plan, that is actually the Republican plan, as all Republicans supported it in the House, with it's elimination of Medicare.

If we go back though I don't really think it's the '64 election, but the 1980 election, as it elevated Ronald Reagan to a mythical figure, and his most extreme proposals adopted today as being a necessity. You could also look back to the 1976 election. Had Ford won re-election, it would have pushed Reagan to the background for 1980, and kept the conservative movement viewed as being too extreme within the GOP circles leading into the 1980 election.

Of course what's most interesting is that the tea party conservatives of today have been taken for a ride by the neocons and moneyed interests. A movement that once had it's inception in anger about the banking bailouts, have now forgiven that, and have allowed themselves to be manipulated into turning that into the anti-government, anti-regulation (benefiting banks) movement, with little criticism about government collusion and bribery from the banking and financial establishment.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
I think what he's saying is mostly true. The heart of the full conservative movement is in essence represented by the tea party. That would be the goal of having almost nothing governed on a federal level, and the entire progressive movement dating back to the New Deal erased. This is why Perry's calls for Social Security elimination doesn't draw much retort, and actually a lot of praise from many on the right. Same with the Ryan plan, that is actually the Republican plan, as all Republicans supported it in the House, with it's elimination of Medicare.

If we go back though I don't really think it's the '64 election, but the 1980 election, as it elevated Ronald Reagan to a mythical figure, and his most extreme proposals adopted today as being a necessity. You could also look back to the 1976 election. Had Ford won re-election, it would have pushed Reagan to the background for 1980, and kept the conservative movement viewed as being too extreme within the GOP circles leading into the 1980 election.

Of course what's most interesting is that the tea party conservatives of today have been taken for a ride by the neocons and moneyed interests. A movement that once had it's inception in anger about the banking bailouts, have now forgiven that, and have allowed themselves to be manipulated into turning that into the anti-government, anti-regulation (benefiting banks) movement, with little criticism about government collusion and bribery from the banking and financial establishment.


The 1980 election made the Republican Party the party of the Ku Klux Klan..
His kickoff speech in Philadelphia Ms was "I am one of you"
If you ask any of these tb retards with a "don't tread on me" flag on their house , who exactly do they think is treading on them you'd find out in a hurry what they really are.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
The things ALL republicans believe

76% Believe Sarah Palin has an “Alaskan accent.”

92% Believe that Bill Clinton left Barack Obama with a surplus, which he spent.

96% Believe the economy was doing great when Barack Obama took office.

84% Believe the Tea Party is a grassroots movement without any corporate sponsorship.

94% Believe the Constitution mentions Jesus Christ as America’s savior

http://www.freewoodpost.com/2011/09/16/shocking-things-fox-news-viewers-believe/
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
Andrew Breitbart Incites Violence Against Liberals, Says Military Will Back The Tea Party Up

Source: Addicting Info

Tea Party favorite Andrew Breitbartz told a conservative audience in Massachusetts that conservatives outnumber liberals and have most of the guns. He also claimed that the military is ready to take action against liberals if violence ever erupted between liberals and conservatives.

“I’m under attack all the time. They call me gay, there are death threats… There are times where I’m not thinking as clearly as I should, and in those unclear moments, I always think to myself, ‘Fire the first shot.’ Bring it on. Because I know who’s on our side. They can only win a rhetorical and propaganda war. They cannot win. We outnumber them in this country, and we have the guns… I’m not kidding. They talk a mean game, but they will not cross that line because they know what they’re dealing with.

Then he claimed that some senior military officials have personally assured him that they’ll join the right wing in a civil war.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/18/andrew-breitbart-incites-violence-against-liberals-says-military-will-back-the-tea-party-up/
 
Mar 11, 2009
10,526
3,856
28,180
redtreviso said:
The things ALL republicans believe...
First, that's "Fox Viewers", not "ALL Republicans". That's you're interpretation. Second, while there's probably some truth to it, this is an unsourced poll, and more likely just satire:

63% Believe Glenn Beck is a healthy weight.

9% Believe that homosexuals are trying to take over America with glitter.

15% Believe that George Washington defeated the King of England in a duel for America.

24% Believe Santa Claus is real.

37% Believe Nancy Pelosi is a witch, and that she can cast spells.


Actually, that last one may be true, depending on how one chooses to define "witch" or "spells". ;)
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
First, that's "Fox Viewers", not "ALL Republicans". That's you're interpretation. Second, while there's probably some truth to it, this is an unsourced poll, and more likely just satire:

Satire??You think??? ALL is fair though..sheep that they are.
 
Obama has finally decided to do something left. It's called the "Buffet Rule", that is "if you're so rich, you have to pay at least your secretary's fiscal percentage in taxes."

Amidst growing dissatisfaction and "incredible frustration" of his constituency (and especially of MoveOn.org, the leftist organization that helped mobilize the American youth that played a key role in the president's election), Obama has at last had a conscience crisis.

The privileges of the super-rich are to be done away with, for example paying just 15% in taxes on capital gains of hedge funds, instead of the normally required 35%, thus giving birth to a "just millionaires' tax": whoever earns a million dollars per year and up, if the motion is passed, will be subject to a 35% fiscal responsibility toward the state just like any employed worker. The destination of the new tax income will also be translated into a form of social solidarity in funding public schools, infrastructure things like repairing bridges and lightening the tax burden for those that create jobs.

Naturally the republican opposition will vehemently obstruct such a motion, as Speaker of the House, John Boehner, has let it be known: "The new tax is not an option on the table of the bipartisan 12 member committee for deficit reduction." Boehner, who isn't one of the true republican hardliners, has to contend with the circa 70 republican congressmen who owe their deputy seats to the Tea Party movement and have thus taken a "sworn oath" with their voters to impede and not vote for any law that has anything to do with increasing the fiscal revenues of the state.

Not even taxing the rich like any other worker? Of course not, since according to the neolibral ideology of the Tea Party taxing the rich "penalizes the investors and, therefore, slows down economic growth and job increases." Yet as far as Warren Buffet is concerned, for himself and his colleagues: "I exclude that any investment project has ever been either approved nor denied for purely fiscal considerations." Buffet rather espouses an "enlightened" capitalism for which the government expects sacrifices by the super-rich, while the middle class is supporting the weight and onerous hardships of lowering the public debt.

However the roots of the less taxes for the rich in the name of the economy and jobs runs very deep within US politics and is not an exclusively republican ideology, given that Bill Clinton, under the sway of his state treasurer Robert Rubin, also approved the 15% flat tax rate on hedge fund capital gains.


Source: Federico Rampini, la Repubblica
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
1
0
Obama's millionaire tax is class war, say Republicans

Dominic Rushe in New York
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 18 September 2011 18.29 BST

US Republican leaders have accused president Barack Obama of "class warfare" as he prepares to unveil plans to increase taxes for millionaires.

Obama is set to reveal details of the so-called "Buffett tax" – named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who has repeatedly called for the rich to pay higher taxes – on Monday. Obama looks set to propose a tax hike for those earning more than $1m a year as part of a wider plan to tackle the US's massive deficit.

The proposals, which have little chance of becoming law without Republican support, look set to become the latest battle ground for Republicans and Democrats gearing up for next year's election and an increasingly contentious fight over how to support the US's struggling economic recovery.

Paul Ryan, chairman of the House of Representatives budget committee, said: "Class warfare may make for good politics, but it makes for rotten economics." Speaking on Fox News Sunday, Ryan said the plan "adds further instability to our system, more uncertainty, and it punishes job creation and those people who create jobs." Ryan said higher taxes would hurt job creation. "If you tax something more, you get less of it," said Ryan.

Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, said the proposal would further damage the US's fragile economy. "We have thrown a big wet blanket over the private sector economy. We've borrowed too much, we've spent too much and we've dramatically over-regulated every aspect of the private sector in our country and now we are threatening to raise taxes on top of it. That's not going to get the economy moving," McConnell said on NBC's Meet the Press.

The fight comes as clashes between Republicans and Democrats over the economy intensify in the runup to next year's election. The would-be Republican presidential candidates will hold their next debate on Thursday and Obama's proposals are bound to be a central issue.

Former president Bill Clinton defended the plan. "The least harmful tax increases are the ones that senator McConnell and the people who agree with him hate the most, and that is restoring the tax levels that existed when I was president for those of us in high-income groups. That's the one that does the least harm."

Obama's proposal comes a month after Buffett began reviving his longstanding objection that he and his "megarich friends" pay significantly less tax than most people thanks to tax breaks that favour investors. "My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress," he wrote in the New York Times. "It's time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice."

Obama's poll ratings hit a new low last week, thanks to the continuing economic malaise in the US. According to the latest CBS/New York Times poll, Obama's approval rating is now 43%, down from 57% in May.

Those surveyed said the economy and jobs were the two biggest issues the US faces. Some 86% said the state of the US economy is either very bad or fairly bad. Nearly half – 48% – believe the nation is moving toward another recession.

Obama's millionaire tax hike will be a central component of the president's proposals to a special joint Congressional "super committee" that is working to reach a bipartisan budget deal by late November.

With unemployment now at 9.1% and income inequality at record levels, the president is hoping to put pressure on Republicans who have staunchly rejected any tax increases and have called for deep cuts in government spending on the US's Medicare, Medicaid and social security programmes.

Last week Republican speaker John Boehner said Obama should tackle tax reform to get rid of many tax breaks. "Tax increases, however, are not a viable option for the joint committee," Boehner said.

The tax fight comes in another tough week for Obama. The United Nations is set to vote on recognising Palestinian statehood this week after the US fought unsuccessfully to stop the vote taking place. Last week the Democrats lost a key congressional district in New York where some of the area's heavily Jewish voters said they were protesting against the administration's record on Israel.

He is also expected to meet European leaders amid fears that Europe's economic crisis will prove a further drag on the US's fragile recovery. US Treasury secretary Tim Geithner travelled to Poland last week to meet Europe's finance ministers and asked them to step up efforts to tackle the crisis. Geithner was rebuffed by Austria's finance minister, Maria Fekter. "I found it peculiar that even though the Americans have significantly worse fundamental data than the eurozone, they tell us what we should do and when we make a suggestion ... that they say no straight away," said Fekter.

(my bold added)

Ding. Round 27 :rolleyes:
 
Jul 14, 2009
2,498
0
0
Dear Mr Pres, please encourage people to tweet and organize thru Facebook protests all over the Middle East. The sooner we get hard line Islamic governments in place we can understand where to spend our defense budget.

Please send beer and whiskey to Israel so they can be drunk as the UN vote comes up and Egypt and Turkey solidify their opinion against the current structure. If you could, lets get this Yemen and Syria mess behind us by just arming anybody who asks. Libya is no big deal if you can free up bank accounts to pay unknown rebel groups. You are right that the Mujahideen thing is old news it will probably never happen again.

I hardly blame the Dems for the economy it's was handed to you w a blown motor. It took true skill to re-screw our foreign policy after Bush, his multi unjust wars and banking buffoonery. Hats off to you. If you start stumping I hope people ask you about Guantanamo, that place you promised to close on your first go around . Your flip flop on Palestine is really silly, you shouldn't have said that nobody else needs to wait except the Palestinians

Your latest floating bubble of the millionaires tax that started w people at 250,000 and above is going to sink any small boats in your fleet. Almost impossible to make John Boehner to look bold, but you are doing it, bravo.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
""Tea party Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) used himself as an example Monday while arguing against President Barack Obama’s plan to make sure millionaires pay about the same tax rate as the people that work for them.

“In my own case, I own LLCs,” Fleming told MSNBC’s Chris Jansing. “The income flows to my personal tax return and whatever is left over after taxes are paid, I feed my family on the one hand and on the other hand, I reinvest in my business.”

“With all due respect, The Wall Street Journal estimated that your businesses, which I believe are Subway sandwich shops and UPS stores — very successful — brought you last year, over $6 million,” Jansing noted.

“Yeah, that’s before you pay 500 employees, you pay rent, you pay equipment and food,” Fleming agreed. “Since my net income — and again, that’s the individual rate that I told you about — the amount that I have to reinvest in my business and feed my family is more like $600,000 of that $6.3 million. And so by the time I feed my family, I have maybe $400,000 left over to invest in new locations, upgrade my locations, buy more equipment.”"""


http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/09/tea-party-rep-only-400000-left-after-i-feed-my-family/

Well fed family
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
""I simply cannot emphasize this point enough: No meme is too extreme or radical. "Obama is worse than Bush!" "Obama is a war criminal!" Remember: the reader thinks he is reading the opinion of a fellow liberal. It's all about peer suggestibility, people. Keep expanding the Overton Window. The more you push a radical notion, the more likely a slightly less radical notion becomes acceptable. Someone else said it this way: "The bigger the lie, the more likely people will believe it."
So take it over the top. Absolutely nothing is outside the realm of plausibility. "Obama is an alien from the planet Negron." I like it!""

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/27/1010778/-BREAKING
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
1
0
America's debt woe is worse than Greece's

By Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Special to CNN

Editor's note: Laurence J. Kotlikoff, an economist, is a William Fairfield Warren Professor at Boston University, a columnist for Bloomberg and Forbes, and the author of 14 books including "Jimmy Stewart Is Dead" (John Wiley and Sons), "The Healthcare Fix" (MIT Press), and "The Coming Generational Storm" (co-authored with Scott Burns, MIT Press).

Boston, Massachussetts (CNN) -- Our government is utterly broke. There are signs everywhere one looks. Social Security can no longer afford to send us our annual benefit statements. The House can no longer afford its congressional pages. The Pentagon can no longer afford the pension and health care benefits of retired service members. NASA is no longer planning a manned mission to Mars.

We're broke for a reason. We've spent six decades accumulating a huge official debt (U.S. Treasury bills and bonds) and vastly larger unofficial debts to pay for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits to today's and tomorrow's 100 million-plus retirees.

The government's total indebtedness -- its fiscal gap -- now stands at $211 trillion, by my arithmetic. The fiscal gap is the difference, measured in present value, between all projected future spending obligations -- including our huge defense expenditures and massive entitlement programs, as well as making interest and principal payments on the official debt -- and all projected future taxes.

The data underlying this figure come straight from the horse's mouth -- the Congressional Budget Office. The CBO's June 22 Alternative Fiscal Scenario presents nothing less than a Greek tragedy. It's actually worse than the Greek tragedy now playing in Athens. Our fiscal gap is 14 times our GDP. Greece's fiscal gap is 12 times its GDP, according to Professor Bernd Raffelhüschen of the University of Freiburg.

In other words, the U.S. is in worse long-term fiscal shape than Greece. The financial sharks are circling Greece because Greece is small and defenseless, but they'll soon be swimming our way.

To grasp the magnitude of our nation's insolvency, consider what tax hikes or spending cuts are needed to eliminate our fiscal gap. The answer is an immediate and permanent 64% increase in all federal revenues or an immediate and permanent 40% cut in all federal noninterest spending.

Such adjustments go miles beyond anything Congress and the president are considering. No wonder. They are focused on limiting growth in the official debt, while ignoring what's happening to the unofficial debt. To understand the thickness of their blinders, note that the fiscal gap, after inflation, grew by $6 trillion last year, whereas the official debt grew by only $1 trillion. Hence, our leaders are looking at one-sixth of the problem.

The August budget ceiling crisis deal calls for $2.5 trillion in budgetary savings over the next ten years. President Obama is unveiling plans Monday to cut the debt by $3 trillion. Both of these are peanuts compared to what's needed to start eliminating the fiscal gap.

There is a way forward to deal with both our fiscal mess and the economy, which is lying on the operating table in desperate need of open-heart surgery. Such surgeries are called radical because they require radical intervention. But they are also extremely safe compared with the alternative -- administering Band-Aids and letting the patient die.

At http://www.thepurpleplans.org, I provide five radical, but absolutely essential plans to fix taxes, health care, Social Security, the financial system, and energy policy. Collectively, they would more than eliminate the fiscal gap and get our economy out of the emergency room and onto the racetrack.

The plans are called purple because they should appeal to blue Democrats and red Republicans. If neither party adopts them, I guarantee that a third-party candidate running via http://www.americanselect.org will.

The Purple Tax Plan is of particular relevance now, given Obama's decision to push for a repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the rich and to levy a new tax on the super rich -- those with incomes above $1 million.

The president wants to raise taxes. Can't argue with that. We desperately need much higher revenues along with much lower expenditures. Federal revenues measured as share of GDP are at a postwar low. And the president wants the rich to bear a bigger share of the tax burden. It's hard to disagree with this either. The rich have been getting off far too easy for far too long.

But the Republicans want to ensure that more taxes don't mean more spending or smaller spending cuts than would otherwise arise. They also worry about high tax rates discouraging work, saving, and job creation by entrepreneurs.

Most of us agree with both the president and the Republicans, which is possible because they're both talking past each other. But what we really want is a tax system that's simple, transparent, fair, and efficient. Neither the personal income tax, the corporate income tax, nor the estate and gift tax meet these criteria. Each is a bigger nightmare than the next.

The Purple Tax Plan entails radical surgery. It eliminates the personal income tax, the corporate income tax, and the estate and gift tax. In their place it substitutes a highly progressive 17.5% federal retail sales tax plus a demogrant -- a monthly payment to each household, large enough that it reimburses the poor for the sales tax they've paid. (The 17.5% rate is the tax's nominal rate. Its effective rate is 15%, since 15 cents of every dollar spent goes to taxes and 85 cents to goods and services, with 15 divided by 85 equaling the 17.5% nominal rate.)

If you're a Democrat, a sales tax, apart from the demogrant, probably sounds highly regressive. But nothing could be further from the truth. Taxing consumption is mathematically identical to taxing what's used to buy consumption, namely one's wealth and one's wages. Warren Buffett would effectively pay 15% on his wages, but also 15% on the principal of all his wealth, which is not now being taxed.

The day the Purple Tax is implemented, Buffett will have the same number of dollars in wealth, but the purchasing power of his wealth will fall by 15%, thanks to the 17.5% higher costs of goods and services. And whether he spends his wealth on himself or gives it to his kids to spend, his wealth, plus any accumulated asset income, will buy 15% less in goods and services.

The Purple Tax also makes the payroll tax highly progressive by eliminating its ceiling and exempting the first $40,000 in wages from the employee portion of the tax. Finally, the Purple Tax includes a 15% inheritance tax on inheritances and gifts received in excess of $1 million.

Since the payroll tax is levied at close to a 15% rate, and the sales tax has an effective rate of 15%, and the inheritance tax rate is 15%, the Purple Tax plan imposes a single tax rate. This is very important for budgetary discipline. Under the Purple Tax, everyone will know that if Congress spends more on anything, the 15% effective tax rate will need to go up.

The ongoing food fight between Obama and the Republicans is hiding the real game -- spending ever-larger sums on ourselves and leaving ever-larger bills for our kids. This fiscal child abuse must stop. The Purple plans would let both sides claim victory, save our kids, and get our economy back in the race.


Sobering reading.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
""U.S. Representative Joe Walsh (R-IL), introduced on Monday a resolution (with 30 co-sponsors) to support Israel’s right to annex the West Bank in the event that the Palestinian Authority continues to push for vote at the United Nations.

“We’ve got what I consider to be a potential slap in the face coming up with the vote in the UN, which is absolutely outrageous,” Walsh told Politico website last July.

He was quoted as saying that "it’s clear that the United States needs to make a very strong statement. I would argue that the president should make this statement, but he’s not capable of making it. So, the House needs to make this statement, if the continues down this road of trying to get recognition of statehood, the U.S. will not stand for it. And we will respect Israel’s right to annex Judea and Samaria.”

Meanwhile on Sunday, Congressman John Boehner (R-West Chester) delivered the keynote address at the Jewish National Fund’s 2011 National Convention in Cincinnati, Ohio. Boehner said that it is the U.S.'s duty to stand by Israel "not just as a broker or observer – but as a strong partner and reliable ally.” ""

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-republicans-submit-resolution-supporting-israel-s-right-to-annex-west-bank-1.385394
 
Amsterhammer said:
America's debt woe is worse than Greece's

By Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Special to CNN

Editor's note: Laurence J. Kotlikoff, an economist, is a William Fairfield Warren Professor at Boston University, a columnist for Bloomberg and Forbes, and the author of 14 books including "Jimmy Stewart Is Dead" (John Wiley and Sons), "The Healthcare Fix" (MIT Press), and "The Coming Generational Storm" (co-authored with Scott Burns, MIT Press).

Boston, Massachussetts (CNN) -- Our government is utterly broke. There are signs everywhere one looks. Social Security can no longer afford to send us our annual benefit statements. The House can no longer afford its congressional pages. The Pentagon can no longer afford the pension and health care benefits of retired service members. NASA is no longer planning a manned mission to Mars.

We're broke for a reason. We've spent six decades accumulating a huge official debt (U.S. Treasury bills and bonds) and vastly larger unofficial debts to pay for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits to today's and tomorrow's 100 million-plus retirees.

The government's total indebtedness -- its fiscal gap -- now stands at $211 trillion, by my arithmetic. The fiscal gap is the difference, measured in present value, between all projected future spending obligations -- including our huge defense expenditures and massive entitlement programs, as well as making interest and principal payments on the official debt -- and all projected future taxes.

The data underlying this figure come straight from the horse's mouth -- the Congressional Budget Office. The CBO's June 22 Alternative Fiscal Scenario presents nothing less than a Greek tragedy. It's actually worse than the Greek tragedy now playing in Athens. Our fiscal gap is 14 times our GDP. Greece's fiscal gap is 12 times its GDP, according to Professor Bernd Raffelhüschen of the University of Freiburg.

In other words, the U.S. is in worse long-term fiscal shape than Greece. The financial sharks are circling Greece because Greece is small and defenseless, but they'll soon be swimming our way.

To grasp the magnitude of our nation's insolvency, consider what tax hikes or spending cuts are needed to eliminate our fiscal gap. The answer is an immediate and permanent 64% increase in all federal revenues or an immediate and permanent 40% cut in all federal noninterest spending.

Such adjustments go miles beyond anything Congress and the president are considering. No wonder. They are focused on limiting growth in the official debt, while ignoring what's happening to the unofficial debt. To understand the thickness of their blinders, note that the fiscal gap, after inflation, grew by $6 trillion last year, whereas the official debt grew by only $1 trillion. Hence, our leaders are looking at one-sixth of the problem.

The August budget ceiling crisis deal calls for $2.5 trillion in budgetary savings over the next ten years. President Obama is unveiling plans Monday to cut the debt by $3 trillion. Both of these are peanuts compared to what's needed to start eliminating the fiscal gap.

There is a way forward to deal with both our fiscal mess and the economy, which is lying on the operating table in desperate need of open-heart surgery. Such surgeries are called radical because they require radical intervention. But they are also extremely safe compared with the alternative -- administering Band-Aids and letting the patient die.

At http://www.thepurpleplans.org, I provide five radical, but absolutely essential plans to fix taxes, health care, Social Security, the financial system, and energy policy. Collectively, they would more than eliminate the fiscal gap and get our economy out of the emergency room and onto the racetrack.

The plans are called purple because they should appeal to blue Democrats and red Republicans. If neither party adopts them, I guarantee that a third-party candidate running via http://www.americanselect.org will.

The Purple Tax Plan is of particular relevance now, given Obama's decision to push for a repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the rich and to levy a new tax on the super rich -- those with incomes above $1 million.

The president wants to raise taxes. Can't argue with that. We desperately need much higher revenues along with much lower expenditures. Federal revenues measured as share of GDP are at a postwar low. And the president wants the rich to bear a bigger share of the tax burden. It's hard to disagree with this either. The rich have been getting off far too easy for far too long.

But the Republicans want to ensure that more taxes don't mean more spending or smaller spending cuts than would otherwise arise. They also worry about high tax rates discouraging work, saving, and job creation by entrepreneurs.

Most of us agree with both the president and the Republicans, which is possible because they're both talking past each other. But what we really want is a tax system that's simple, transparent, fair, and efficient. Neither the personal income tax, the corporate income tax, nor the estate and gift tax meet these criteria. Each is a bigger nightmare than the next.

The Purple Tax Plan entails radical surgery. It eliminates the personal income tax, the corporate income tax, and the estate and gift tax. In their place it substitutes a highly progressive 17.5% federal retail sales tax plus a demogrant -- a monthly payment to each household, large enough that it reimburses the poor for the sales tax they've paid. (The 17.5% rate is the tax's nominal rate. Its effective rate is 15%, since 15 cents of every dollar spent goes to taxes and 85 cents to goods and services, with 15 divided by 85 equaling the 17.5% nominal rate.)

If you're a Democrat, a sales tax, apart from the demogrant, probably sounds highly regressive. But nothing could be further from the truth. Taxing consumption is mathematically identical to taxing what's used to buy consumption, namely one's wealth and one's wages. Warren Buffett would effectively pay 15% on his wages, but also 15% on the principal of all his wealth, which is not now being taxed.

The day the Purple Tax is implemented, Buffett will have the same number of dollars in wealth, but the purchasing power of his wealth will fall by 15%, thanks to the 17.5% higher costs of goods and services. And whether he spends his wealth on himself or gives it to his kids to spend, his wealth, plus any accumulated asset income, will buy 15% less in goods and services.

The Purple Tax also makes the payroll tax highly progressive by eliminating its ceiling and exempting the first $40,000 in wages from the employee portion of the tax. Finally, the Purple Tax includes a 15% inheritance tax on inheritances and gifts received in excess of $1 million.

Since the payroll tax is levied at close to a 15% rate, and the sales tax has an effective rate of 15%, and the inheritance tax rate is 15%, the Purple Tax plan imposes a single tax rate. This is very important for budgetary discipline. Under the Purple Tax, everyone will know that if Congress spends more on anything, the 15% effective tax rate will need to go up.

The ongoing food fight between Obama and the Republicans is hiding the real game -- spending ever-larger sums on ourselves and leaving ever-larger bills for our kids. This fiscal child abuse must stop. The Purple plans would let both sides claim victory, save our kids, and get our economy back in the race.


Sobering reading.

Yes, but I often wonder what good the race is doing us? But that is entirely another matter, I know.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
That health insurance her family OWNED when she was growin up obviously did not cover MENTAL ILLNESS..


""WATERLOO, Iowa - Back in her hometown Monday, Republican presidential contender Michele Bachmann waxed nostalgic for an era when people were responsible for purchasing their own insurance, rather than being tethered to an employer for coverage.

"When I grew up here in Iowa, we owned our own health insurance. We didn't necessarily have it from our employer," she said.

Asked in a round-table with workers at OMJC Signal, a family-owned public-safety equipment manufacturer, how small businesses can afford health care for their employees, the Minnesota congresswoman said they shouldn't have to buy it.

"I think you should be able to own your plan, so your employer doesn't own it - you get to own it, and you buy it with your own tax-free money," Bachmann responded. She added, "You should be able to set aside whatever amount of your income you need to purchase the kind of health care you need for yourself, for your family."""
 
Just had one of those conversations that want to make your arms drop in sheer exasperation, or disbelief.

I was talking with a beyond middle aged American woman, whom I have known for years and who has lived in Rome longer than I have. She also happens to be the secretary at the US university where I work.

She was bothered about the economy and about how much she'd like to be rich, having too many expenses and too little cash flow. This woman, as I have come to understand, is happily and decidedly situated on the right, a detail that I'm always reminded of whenever she opens her mouth about anything political or the economy. It is always dangerous to enter into conversations with such people, I've thought, therefore I usually try to remain noncommittal and disengaged as an evasive measure to avoid any conflict at work. In any case we are not work piers, since she assists the administration while I work in the classroom. However there a times when it is simply unavoidable like today.

She said that it was awful though that somebody has to be penalized, by which she meant the high wage earners: people who after all, so she claimed, had worked so hard to achieve the success that they did and that it is just terribly unjust that they should have to pay for "all the loafers." Callous as it may seem for her to have stated it so baldly, she said, to have actually called basically the entire working class a bunch of good-for-nothing "loafers," for that is exactly what they are so there's no sense in mixing words and why should the wealthy have to contribute to the collective well being anyway, she said. They do so already by the jobs they create and thus she didn't find any truth in the idea that those that have made such large sums have ever done so at the expense of society, that they, in reality, always help society by their investments and so forth, so they really should be awarded and not penalized by government for having done so, she thought.

Needless to say I could only have reminded her of the onerous penalties simply being poor inflicts - other than lounging at the country club - when one struggles to just make ends meet, and so I could hardly feel sorry for the rich being asked to pay the same percentage of taxes on their earnings as the working class, but of course that was of no consequence. Thus I didn't even bother to talk to her about the judicial, political and military backing of so many an financial and industrial enterprise, which has given some incomparable advantages over entire nations and societies that have as a result been horribly oppressed and penalized. Or the fact that fiscal relief of the rich has never been an economic steroid, but by contrast has always been a means to avoid a civic responsibility. All of which was, naturally, was just like Greek to her.

I now know exactly what it means to be a member of the Tea Party.
 
Mar 18, 2009
1,844
1
0
rhubroma said:
Just had one of those conversations that want to make your arms drop in sheer exasperation, or disbelief.

I was talking with a beyond middle aged American woman, whom I have known for years and who has lived in Rome longer than I have. She also happens to be the secretary at the US university where I work.

She was bothered about the economy and about how much she'd like to be rich, having too many expenses and too little cash flow. This woman, as I have come to understand, is happily and decidedly situated on the right, a detail that I'm always reminded of whenever she opens her mouth about anything political or the economy. It is always dangerous to enter into conversations with such people, I've thought, therefore I usually try to remain noncommittal and disengaged as an evasive measure to avoid any conflict at work. In any case we are not work piers, since she assists the administration while I work in the classroom. However there a times when it is simply unavoidable like today.

She said that it was awful though that somebody has to be penalized, by which she meant the high wage earners: people who after all, so she claimed, had worked so hard to achieve the success that they did and that it is just terribly unjust that they should have to pay for "all the loafers." Callous as it may seem for her to have stated it so baldly, she said, to have actually called basically the entire working class a bunch of good-for-nothing "loafers," for that is exactly what they are so there's no sense in mixing words and why should the wealthy have to contribute to the collective well being anyway, she said. They do so already by the jobs they create and thus she didn't find any truth in the idea that those that have made such large sums have ever done so at the expense of society, that they, in reality, always help society by their investments and so forth, so they really should be awarded and not penalized by government for having done so, she thought.

Needless to say I could only have reminded her of the onerous penalties simply being poor inflicts - other than lounging at the country club - when one struggles to just make ends meet, and so I could hardly feel sorry for the rich being asked to pay the same percentage of taxes on their earnings as the working class, but of course that was of no consequence. Thus I didn't even bother to talk to her about the judicial, political and military backing of so many an financial and industrial enterprise, which has given some incomparable advantages over entire nations and societies that have as a result been horribly oppressed and penalized. Or the fact that fiscal relief of the rich has never been an economic steroid, but by contrast has always been a means to avoid a civic responsibility. All of which was, naturally, was just like Greek to her.

I now know exactly what it means to be a member of the Tea Party.

Why? Are you that insecure in your beliefs? Or is it you just can't handle anyone not following your long drawn out line of thinking?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.