Friday, December 10, 2010

Cruising the Web

New York teachers are going to court in order to keep parents from finding out how individual teachers are doing.

IBD contrasts the economic recovery under Reagan and under Obama.

Keith Hennessey explains why he supports the tax deal. He reminds those complaining that we shouldn't be comparing the deal to some ideal measure, but to what Republicans could possibly have gotten.

Bruce Walker writes to ponder what would happen if doctors went John Galt.

Jim Morrison can rest easy. Charlie Crist has pardoned him.

Ah, that tasteful CNN - airing the diarrhea scene from Dumb and Dumber to introduce a report on ulcerative colitis. Stay classy, CNN.

19 comments:

Tacitus Voltaire said...

Keith Hennessey explains why he supports the tax deal

thanks for helping to pay for tax cuts for people like me! we'll be sure to think of you when we stimulate the economy with one of those fancy dinners that my wife likes so much. glad you are able to donate part of your tax money to pay the interest on the $700 billion dollars the country will need to borrow to keep us over $250k/yr earners in expensive belgian ale and mercedes benz's. but - hey! - the theory is that somehow the money i spend on the chanel #5 i will buy for the niece for christmas is gonna trickle down to you - right?

of course, mercedes is german and chanel is a french firm. oops! you just helped the german and french socialist retirement and health schemes! i'm sure they appreciate it!

also - "the tax breaks will help businesses hire" - keep in mind that these are personal tax breaks, not breaks in business taxes

Pat Patterson said...

BTW, some of thse German-made Mercedes are built right here in Alabama by lederhosen wearing rednecks. Plus who the heck does TV thinks sells those Mercedes in the US, elves?

tfhr said...

TV,

Nice of you to choose a topic listed in the post.

1. Nobody is stopping you from sending extra, or all of your money to the U.S. Treasury. Write a check today and get over yourself, limousine liberal. Be sure to give your fair share, like John "yacht-scam" Kerry. Just don't cheat like Rangel or you'll have to go through a painful censure in front of Nancy Pelosi. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/john-kerry-saves-500000-b_n_656985.html

2. Given that this deal merely maintains an existing tax rate, it really is not a cut in taxes. It does however prevent everyone's tax rate from jumping in January, provided of course, that the Dem controlled Congress can manage to deal with an issue it has blown off all year.

3. Let me hear how you think the AMT is a good thing. Remember how it was originally intended to deal with 155 high income households back in 1970? It is a monster today and impacts many middle class taxpayers now because of bracket creep. This can has been kicked down the road for too long.

4. As per the Hennessey article, Full expensing of business investment for all non-property investment for all businesses made between September 8, 2010 and December 31, 2011. 50% expensing for investment made in 2012. Seems to refute your claim, "to keep in mind that these are personal tax breaks, not breaks in business taxes."

This current deal adds to the deficit because it spends, not because it lets people keep the money they have earned. The notion of "paying" for a tax cut presumes a payment is forthcoming from the Treasury, as in a rebate. No, it does not work that way and you should know that. Want to have a smaller deficit? Then spend less money but I guess a money bag liberal, such as yourself, does not have the worry of staying within a budget. Maybe Congress will learn someday that when it has spent everyone else's money, it will have to stop. Then again, this deal has plenty of pork attached, so my guess, is no, they won't ever learn.

This latest effort does not solve the problem because it does not permanently reduce income tax, it merely maintains the present rate. Democrats lacked the courage to deal with the issue prior to the election and now seek a temporary extension of measures that do not provide enough reform over our present day system.

Class warfare, like race baiting, are favorite tools of the left. They're good fun to use while electioneering but in the end, they're worthless when applied to governing. All that garbage, along with free health care and closing Gitmo were great fodder in 2008 but it's 2010 now and it failed when tested against reality. You failed, TV, and so did your Hopey - Changey pretender of a President. When nearly half the people in the United States pay no income tax at all, when our country has the highest corporate tax rates among modern nations, you have to admit that vilifying the "rich" and demanding a greater slice of someone else's wealth through the death tax is a disservice. You had both Houses and the White House for two years and now you're down to the last couple of weeks in December and all you can do is carp, complain and cry. It's just like old times - no solutions from the left.

We need real, permanent reductions in the personal and corporate rates, or better yet, an elimination of the current code in favor of a flat tax or even the Fair Tax.

Freeven said...

Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to:

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 6D37
Hyattsville, MD 20782

Any tax-related questions regarding these contributions should be directed to the Internal Revenue Service at (800) 829-1040.

Tacitus Voltaire said...

Pat Patterson said...
BTW, some of thse German-made Mercedes are built right here in Alabama


but ultimately the profits go back to germany. doh!

tfhr
This current deal adds to the deficit because it spends, not because it lets people keep the money they have earned. The notion of "paying" for a tax cut presumes a payment is forthcoming from the Treasury, as in a rebate. No, it does not work that way and you should know that.


it's this kind of fuzzy thinking that is keeping us in deep debt. if we want the government to spend money, we have to come up with the cash. if we want to continue to pay your rent by paying out your military pension, somebody has to pay for it. if republicans continue insist that taxes should go down - especially on the people like me who can best affford it - we will have to borrow the money. if you can't understand that you need to come up with the money to pay for the things, how clearly are you thinking?

the current bill adds to the debt because it refuses to ask us to come up with the money to pay for what we want. the greater part of the increased debt by far comes from continuing the tax break

Want to have a smaller deficit? Then spend less money but I guess a money bag liberal, such as yourself, does not have the worry of staying within a budget

when i asked you to try your hand at reducing spending, you directed me to that famous web page where people who think like you from all over the united states submitted their suggestions. two things happened: 1) you guys came up with savings amounting to about .002% of the budget, and 2) no single legislator in the republican party managed to get a single thing to happen even in regard to the wimpy cuts y'all came up with

i have been hearing about getting serious about cutting spending from the republican party for 30 years and it's never happened. so i am supposed to take this fertilizer seriously?

as for the rest of your rant, emotional outbreaks, schoolyard taunts, and crackpot schemes are not the same thing as serious political debate.

Tacitus Voltaire said...

tfhr
...When nearly half the people in the United States pay no income tax at all...


so you say you don't like "class warfare", but you are willing to conduct it against half of american taxpayers? the lower income half? the ones, say, who are trying to raise a family on $25k/yr? but you get emotional over the possibility that taxes might have gone back up on the top 6% of income earners?

that's the way you stand up for the average american???

the median u.s. family income is around $49k/yr. you think taxes should go up on everybody making less than that. but when i suggest that perhaps families making $500k/yr could pay more, you get all upset and talk about "class warfare"? are you for real?

why do you want to hurt ordinary americans?

Tacitus Voltaire said...

look, tfhr, you have allowed yourself to be dazzled and confused by a load of fertilizer. i'm going to explain some simple facts to you that you should already know, but have allowed yourself to forget:

1. if you want to buy something, but refuse to come up with the money for it, you will end up borrowing money for it and go into debt. therefore, since both democrats and republicans refuse to get serious about about cutting the budget, if republicans refuse to find the money to pay for what they want - for example, by letting taxes on people like me go back to the rates levied under clinton, nixon, or eisenhower - then we will continue to borrow money, have a deficit, and pay more interest. most people would have to be on drugs to swallow the argument that tax rates aren't related to the deficit

2. why do we have a progressive tax rate and not a flat tax? for that matter, why does every country in the world that levies income taxes have a progressive tax rate and not a flat tax? any intelligent person would understand that people who are making less money - hard working people with families, who are doing things like butchering and processing our meat, maintaining our roads and other public utilities, and cleaning toilets and carpets in public places - and the other people in the bottom half of american working families who you want to pay more taxes - have less spare money left over after feeding and housing themselves and their children, than people in the top 6% of income earners. if you can't understand that, then you have no business attempting to participate in a discussion of taxes and economics. by the way, try some simple arithmetic and try to work out how we could have a flat tax without raising the deficit even further (since republicans never get serious about cutting spending) without your taxes going up significantly or taking food out of the mouths of millions of children. so much for your crackpot schemes

3. you need to learn some basic facts about the federal budget - what we spend our money on. fifteen minutes on the web will do wonders in regard to your fairytale attitude about "cutting spending". i'm getting tired of talking to somebody who doesn't seem to know the basic facts of where the money comes from or how it's spent

budget balancing, if it ever happens, is going to be accomplished not by the lawyer's gas you've been breathing, but by arithmetic

learn some

Tacitus Voltaire said...

hey! i know! how about taking tfhr seriously!

every year the federal government spends roughly half again as much as it takes in. to even balance the budget, we'd have to cut 1/3. let's cut the entire budget outlay 1/3 across the board, no exceptions, no "special interests", no whining. ok? so, tfhr, your pension would be reduced by 1/3, right? i said no whining! no, i said across the board, no special interests, i don't care what you were "promised", if you want us to take you seriously about cutting the budget, your pension payments get cut back by 1/3, punta no mas

now let's apply your flat tax scheme: my taxes go down, your taxes go up. that's taxes now due on the 2/3rds of what's left of your pension. i said no whining!

now let's get to work on those out-of-balance state budgets. i heard gov christie on the video that betsy linked castigating the teacher's union because they wouldn't accept a pay cut for public school teachers - instead, because there was less money, some got let go instead. christie thought the morally correct thing to do was cut salaries for public school teachers. i'm not sure how much the state comes into it, since i heard that public schools get most of their funding from local taxes, but i can't say i really know how public school funding works. but public school teachers are government employees, so they need to take a pay cut - right?

i said no whining!

Tacitus Voltaire said...

The notion of "paying" for a tax cut presumes a payment is forthcoming from the Treasury, as in a rebate

no, the notion of paying for a tax cut presumes that adults understand that if they want something, they have to pay for it

Pat Patterson said...

Most of the profit of each sale stays in the country where it is sold not repatriated overseas. BTW, as TV acknowledges over half of Americans do not pay taxes so describing them as 'taxpayers' seems confused to say the least.

tfhr said...

TV,

I must've touched a nerve or was that long, rambling, disconnected rant of yours some sort of holdover from the mid-term drubbing the left took in November or the slap in the face that Obama just delivered to his base a couple of days ago?

You sound angrier than ever and as usual, irrational.

A rational man would realize that we cannot continue to spend at the current rate. He would also realize that we cannot tax our way out of a recession. The level-headed conclusion would be to reduce spending and cut taxes. Why does this elude you?

You also still seem to be obsessed with my pension. It's a little disturbing that you rarely fail to bring it up in any discussion on taxes - as though you feel personally aggrieved that military personnel should be able to retire with any pay and benefits they've earned. If it helps you get over yourself, you can have mine. You already are - you and everyone else that draws any sort of benefit from taxation. My pension from the Army amounts to less than a third of my total income these days, so you can easily imagine that the IRS and the state of Maryland get all of it.

You said, "the current bill adds to the debt because it refuses to ask us to come up with the money to pay for what we want."

Two things about that statement:

1. You chose "want" instead of need, which reveals much about you.

2. Your statement also ignores the fact that the bill adds to the debt by extending unemployment "insurance" payouts and that it is yet another pork marbled DC contrivance. The bill offers a few useful, but temporary measures, but it spends money that does precious little to help generate economic growth, the real solution to unemployment and flagging revenue. Instead, this sorry legislation will run hundreds of pages and will be largely unread when it passes, if it passes.

Stop chasing your tail - you remind me of watching a dog that works itself up into a froth attempting to catch it's own tail. It's already caught you. Your economic and political philosophies have been rejected at every turn. First in New Jersey when it elected Christie then in Virginia and Massachusetts. Did you learn? Of course not and as a result you had your butt handed to you in the mid-terms. And STILL, you chase around and around trying to convince yourself that everyone wants more and more government when in fact, we've been voting decisively for less government.

You're clueless. Now go read about flat tax options and the FairTax.

Tacitus Voltaire said...

okay, tfhr, you've proven conclusively that you are unable to take an adult attitude toward our nation's budget issues

Tacitus Voltaire said...

as TV acknowledges over half of Americans do not pay taxes so describing them as 'taxpayers' seems

your stubborn ignorance is really biting you in the tail this time. only 47% pay inome taxes - all pay payroll taxes and other taxes

you might take the trouble to read your own paystub some time and figure out what all those numbers mean

Tacitus Voltaire said...

Most of the profit of each sale stays in the country

i'll believe you if you can prove it

you are asserting that when somebody buys a german brand car here that most of the profit stays here. please tell us what the numbers are and show your sources

Tacitus Voltaire said...

tfhr
You also still seem to be obsessed with my pension. It's a little disturbing that you rarely fail to bring it up in any discussion on taxes


focus, tfhr, focus - on spending and budget cutting

we pay for it with our tax money, just as much if not more so than we pay for ss or unemployment, so i have a right to ask you if you will live with the implications of your desire to cut the federal budget and take a 1/3rd cut in it -

now quit evading the question and answer yes or no

Pat Patterson said...

Average profit on car sales in the US ranges from 10-12% but that is not how much is repatriated as almost half of that goes to the dealer and the finance company. And then a further chunk stays in the US in the form of corporate taxes and capital gains. And Toyota Honda keep most of that profit either in the US or paying dividends to the almost 45% of their stock owned by Americans well stays in the US just as much as most of Mercedes, VW and BMW profits stay in the US so that plants can be maintained and companies that did not get bailout money can stay in business.

Since your very first non cut and past line you made no distinction among types of taxes paid then I merely continued. And I believe that tfhr gets his checks from DEFAS then he has indeed already seen some of his retirement check either stay the same or in some cases decrease. But unlik some he hasn't simply thrown up his hands and claimed it is the adult thing to simply give up and raise taxes because it might be too hard to actually cut some services.

Tacitus Voltaire said...

pat, i asked you to provide documentation and figures.

what you have written is unspecific and unsubstantiated. what i said originally and in my first reply is that profits made on mercedes go back to germany. profits always come after costs and taxes, so mentioning that they exist does not tell me much about profits unless you know the figures and provide documentation to show evidence that your figures are accurate

as for stocks, the usual arrangement is that the company gets the money from the initial sale, so all that mercedes stock that americans own represents an amount of money that originally went to germany. also, not all stocks pay dividends.

i haven't said raising taxes are the only way to balance the budget, and that's not what i believe. i have demonstrated, instead, that tfhr is a typical budget chickenhawk who loves to insist that all budget problems can be solved with cuts, but can't come up with even a fraction of the cuts necessary, and won't agree to cut the part of the federal budget that affects him directly

Tacitus Voltaire said...

p.s. businesspeople would know that if a retail business cleared 10% net profit, that would be pretty good

Pat Patterson said...

Well, for a change I won't provide the documentation due to the number of sources I had to use. But considering my reputation for proof and yours I remain sure of my bona fides.