-- James Salt, executive director for Catholics United, responding to Rep. Ryan's continued defense of his budget as being in keeping with the tenets of his faith.
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Friday, April 27, 2012
Quote Of The Day - Here And Now Edition
-- James Salt, executive director for Catholics United, responding to Rep. Ryan's continued defense of his budget as being in keeping with the tenets of his faith.
Monday, April 16, 2012
The Privatization Of Everything
April 16th, 2012
Just in time for tax day comes another reminder that the race to privatize the public sector, particularly the infrastructure we all paid to build, is an exercise which provides consistently diminishing returns.
The Sun-Times reports:
But let's stop right here. I could catalog hundreds of examples from all over the country. This is just wrong in principle.
Supporters of privatization argue the real issue in this latest flap is that the city seems to have reneged on a legal agreement. With all due respect, this bargain was designed to create a territorial monopoly for an investment firm at the expense of the taxpayers who previously had already underwritten the properties. It was taxes that built and/or at least partially maintained these facilities. Now, Morgan Stanley is demanding that those same taxpayers pony up another couple hundred million dollars because a more efficient private corporation is offering them a better deal down the street.
This isn't rational finance. In nearly every instance of the privatization revolution, terms lasting as long or longer than the modern human lifetime are being doled out with anti-free market guarantees of exclusivity in exchange for dollar amounts that are only large enough to plug short-term budget holes.
This is akin to selling the store to paint the front door. And the taxpayer's formerly owned the store.
Had this parking garage deal been structured as something other than a one-time payment, it would come to a little over 5 and a half million dollars a year. If inflation were to stop dead in its tracks for the next century, it still wouldn't make sense. In fact it's nuts.
We can pretend to be a Capitalist culture all we want. That doesn't make it so. This isn't even worthy of being called "crony Capitalism."
This is Corporatism. Period.
This is also the new American "normal."
So...
As many of you file those last minute tax returns, just think what you might be paying for today that an organization like Morgan Stanley will buy for a song tomorrow. And then, for all intents and purposes, sue you for more.
 |
| Image Via |
The Sun-Times reports:
"Under the $563 million, 99-year deal that privatized four city-owned parking garages in downtown Chicago, City Hall made a promise:
It wouldn’t allow any parking facilities to open nearby.
That was six years ago, under then-Mayor Richard M. Daley.
Today, though, you can park just a block away in a new garage at the 82-story Aqua building — and it’s cheaper, too.
That’s angered the consortium of investors who took control of the garages and thought they were safe from competition. Their group, known as Chicago Loop Parking LLC, has filed an arbitration claim against the city that could leave Chicago taxpayers on the hook for $200 million or more, documents obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times show."The story goes on to mention the legal mess Chicago is facing from one of Daley II's other privatization schemes, the wholesale turnover of parking meters (to what is also essentially Morgan Stanley, the controlling interest over the garages in the current dispute). They could have gone further and reminded everyone of the Skyway boondoggle. Or, they could have ventured just a bit to the East and examined Indiana's brewing privatization nightmare under Gov. Mitch Daniels.
But let's stop right here. I could catalog hundreds of examples from all over the country. This is just wrong in principle.
Supporters of privatization argue the real issue in this latest flap is that the city seems to have reneged on a legal agreement. With all due respect, this bargain was designed to create a territorial monopoly for an investment firm at the expense of the taxpayers who previously had already underwritten the properties. It was taxes that built and/or at least partially maintained these facilities. Now, Morgan Stanley is demanding that those same taxpayers pony up another couple hundred million dollars because a more efficient private corporation is offering them a better deal down the street.
This isn't rational finance. In nearly every instance of the privatization revolution, terms lasting as long or longer than the modern human lifetime are being doled out with anti-free market guarantees of exclusivity in exchange for dollar amounts that are only large enough to plug short-term budget holes.
This is akin to selling the store to paint the front door. And the taxpayer's formerly owned the store.
Had this parking garage deal been structured as something other than a one-time payment, it would come to a little over 5 and a half million dollars a year. If inflation were to stop dead in its tracks for the next century, it still wouldn't make sense. In fact it's nuts.
We can pretend to be a Capitalist culture all we want. That doesn't make it so. This isn't even worthy of being called "crony Capitalism."
This is Corporatism. Period.
This is also the new American "normal."
So...
As many of you file those last minute tax returns, just think what you might be paying for today that an organization like Morgan Stanley will buy for a song tomorrow. And then, for all intents and purposes, sue you for more.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Chris Christie - No Ordinary Liar
April 10th, 2012
When New Jersey Governor Chris Christie announced he was killing the The Trans-Hudson Passenger Rail Tunnel, a project 20 years in the making, he framed as some incredibly responsible and brave decision making on his part. It represented the new, post Tea Party GOP brand. The project was wasteful and something New Jersey simply couldn't afford!
As it turns out, nearly every metric he pronounced to defend this move was a flat out lie. Ahead of a new GAO report to be released this week detailing his many falsehoods, the NY Times reports:
When New Jersey Governor Chris Christie announced he was killing the The Trans-Hudson Passenger Rail Tunnel, a project 20 years in the making, he framed as some incredibly responsible and brave decision making on his part. It represented the new, post Tea Party GOP brand. The project was wasteful and something New Jersey simply couldn't afford!
As it turns out, nearly every metric he pronounced to defend this move was a flat out lie. Ahead of a new GAO report to be released this week detailing his many falsehoods, the NY Times reports:
"Canceling the tunnel, then the largest public works project in the nation, helped shape Mr. Christie’s profile as a rising Republican star, an enforcer of fiscal discipline in a country drunk on debt. But the report is likely to revive criticism that his decision, which he said was about “hard choices” in tough economic times, was more about avoiding the need to raise the state’s gasoline tax, which would have violated a campaign promise. The governor subsequently steered $4 billion earmarked for the tunnel to the state’s near-bankrupt transportation trust fund, traditionally financed by the gasoline tax."
You see? He did do exactly what needed to be done. For himself. The congestion of physical interstate commerce the project would have alleviated extends far beyond New Jersey or New York.
Steve Benen is appalled:
Steve Benen is appalled:
"Even at the time, Christie's decision on this project in 2010 was hard to understand. Conservatives, who've become increasingly hostile towards American infrastructure improvements, cheered the move, but from a substantive perspective, the governor's decision was fairly characterized as "destructive and incredibly foolish."
But this new report casts that decision in an even more damaging light. The Government Accountability Office is a non-partisan research/audit arm of Congress, and it's reporting this week that Christie's rationale for his strange decision wasn't even true. It was a mistake to scrap a major public works project during a weak economy; it was a bigger mistake to explain the move with dishonest claims."
This is big stuff. Gov. Christie, in an act of supreme political selfishness, quite literally damaged a whole sector of the American economy. On purpose.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons the Governor thought better of entering the 2012 race for POTUS.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons the Governor thought better of entering the 2012 race for POTUS.
Monday, February 27, 2012
About That Romney "Tax Plan", cont...
Feb 27th, 2012
We looked at the numbers yesterday HERE and HERE. It's not just a more radical approach to revenue than even the W tax cuts; One of the component's of his plan is a full scale gutting of the social "safety net" he said he would preserve just weeks ago.
Frum savages Romney's departure from the comparatively rational proposal he released only last September and sums up the weekend's developments as follows:
"Compassionate conservatism has been dead for a long time. Romney's Detroit speech cremated the remains. As a man, Romney remains far and away the most capable of the presidential candidates seeking the Republican nomination. But he has now finally eliminated the policy differences separating him from the radical congressional wing. If Romney should win the Republican nomination, moderate and independent voters nationwide will be forced to decide: If they vote for Romney, who is it they're truly voting for?"
We looked at the numbers yesterday HERE and HERE. It's not just a more radical approach to revenue than even the W tax cuts; One of the component's of his plan is a full scale gutting of the social "safety net" he said he would preserve just weeks ago.
Frum savages Romney's departure from the comparatively rational proposal he released only last September and sums up the weekend's developments as follows:
"Compassionate conservatism has been dead for a long time. Romney's Detroit speech cremated the remains. As a man, Romney remains far and away the most capable of the presidential candidates seeking the Republican nomination. But he has now finally eliminated the policy differences separating him from the radical congressional wing. If Romney should win the Republican nomination, moderate and independent voters nationwide will be forced to decide: If they vote for Romney, who is it they're truly voting for?"
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Bartlett On The Daily Show
Feb 23rd, 2012
Once again, the strongest allies progressives have against the current GOP are generally real conservatives. Interesting times...
Once again, the strongest allies progressives have against the current GOP are generally real conservatives. Interesting times...
Friday, February 10, 2012
Reagan Revolution Architects Vs Today's GOP
Feb 10th, 2012
It has been a remarkable experience over the last year or so watching the economic team Ronald Reagan assembled three decades ago mount increasingly passionate attacks against contemporary GOP orthodoxy (examples HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE).
The two most prominent figures waging this battle are David Stockman and Bruce Bartlett. Both men recently sat down with Bill Moyers to continue their push for a return to reason.
David Stockman on Taxes from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.
Bruce Bartlett on Where the Right Went Wrong from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.
It has been a remarkable experience over the last year or so watching the economic team Ronald Reagan assembled three decades ago mount increasingly passionate attacks against contemporary GOP orthodoxy (examples HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE).
The two most prominent figures waging this battle are David Stockman and Bruce Bartlett. Both men recently sat down with Bill Moyers to continue their push for a return to reason.
David Stockman on Taxes from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.
Bruce Bartlett on Where the Right Went Wrong from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
9-9-9 And The Challenge For Cain's GOP Opponents
Oct 15th, 2011
Dave Weigel explains:
"The Republican voters who love 9-9-9 believe the same things that the old Forbes devotees believed. They believe that other Americans are paying no net income taxes, and they don’t think it’s fair. They know how much time they have to spend figuring out all of their deductions, and so a simple code—Forbes promised a tax form that could fit on a postcard—would solve their problem. Cain got a handle on that sentiment early, using it in this ad for his campaign for a U.S. Senate seat in Georgia in 2004. “The United States tax code,” he said. “It’s an 8-million-word mess!”
Cain’s rivals have to engage in a little bit of deprogramming. They must convince voters who think that the tax code is stacked against them of the truth: That complicated code is wasting some time while saving a lot of money. After the debate, NBC News’ Domenico Montanaro checked one of Cain’s claims—that a family pulling in $50,000 currently pays $10,000 in taxes. As Cain would say, the problem with that analysis is that it’s incorrect. With the grab bag of deductions left in place by Bush and Obama reforms, that family pays $766 in taxes. According to the professional rain-on-parade economist Bruce Bartlett, the first stage of 9-9-9 would do what it sounds like—it would increase the cost of living for poor people by 9 percent. Either Cain is right, and the supercharged economy would bail them out, or Cain is wrong, and they’ll be worse off than ever.
So how has Cain gotten so far on this idea?
"It’s a rejection of redistributionist tax policy," says Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, who is doing his gentle best to point out that 9-9-9’s a bad idea. "No one has done the calculations, so people are reacting viscerally to the idea. A single rate flat tax is a very attractive thing."
It’s attractive because it tells conservative voters what they already believe: Tax the free-loaders, simplify the forms, and the rest of the problems take care of themselves. To take Cain down, Republicans have to blow up the anti-tax arguments of 30 years."
Dave Weigel explains:
"The Republican voters who love 9-9-9 believe the same things that the old Forbes devotees believed. They believe that other Americans are paying no net income taxes, and they don’t think it’s fair. They know how much time they have to spend figuring out all of their deductions, and so a simple code—Forbes promised a tax form that could fit on a postcard—would solve their problem. Cain got a handle on that sentiment early, using it in this ad for his campaign for a U.S. Senate seat in Georgia in 2004. “The United States tax code,” he said. “It’s an 8-million-word mess!”
Cain’s rivals have to engage in a little bit of deprogramming. They must convince voters who think that the tax code is stacked against them of the truth: That complicated code is wasting some time while saving a lot of money. After the debate, NBC News’ Domenico Montanaro checked one of Cain’s claims—that a family pulling in $50,000 currently pays $10,000 in taxes. As Cain would say, the problem with that analysis is that it’s incorrect. With the grab bag of deductions left in place by Bush and Obama reforms, that family pays $766 in taxes. According to the professional rain-on-parade economist Bruce Bartlett, the first stage of 9-9-9 would do what it sounds like—it would increase the cost of living for poor people by 9 percent. Either Cain is right, and the supercharged economy would bail them out, or Cain is wrong, and they’ll be worse off than ever.
So how has Cain gotten so far on this idea?
"It’s a rejection of redistributionist tax policy," says Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, who is doing his gentle best to point out that 9-9-9’s a bad idea. "No one has done the calculations, so people are reacting viscerally to the idea. A single rate flat tax is a very attractive thing."
It’s attractive because it tells conservative voters what they already believe: Tax the free-loaders, simplify the forms, and the rest of the problems take care of themselves. To take Cain down, Republicans have to blow up the anti-tax arguments of 30 years."
Good luck with that, GOP.
Friday, October 14, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
Cracks In The Norquist Pledge
Oct 7th, 2011
For months, the GOP's slavish devotion to the so-called "Norquist Pledge" against raising taxes ever, for any purpose, on anyone (except the lower and middle class, apparently) has been one of the most obvious sources of gridlock in congress.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Getting Back To "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs"
Oct 1st, 2011
Krugman makes an accurate observation in his latestet critique of GOP obstructionism and self-delusion:
"The starting point for many claims that antibusiness policies are hurting the economy is the assertion that the sluggishness of the economy’s recovery from recession is unprecedented.
But, as a new paper by Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute documents at length, this is just not true. Extended periods of “jobless recovery” after recessions have been the rule for the past two decades. Indeed, private-sector job growth since the 2007-2009 recession has been better than it was after the 2001 recession."
I have pointed out, time and again, that job creation ended as we once knew it a decade ago. We are now, in fact, on track to add more jobs to the American economy in a single Obama term than were added under eight years of Bush II.
Krugman makes an accurate observation in his latestet critique of GOP obstructionism and self-delusion:
But, as a new paper by Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute documents at length, this is just not true. Extended periods of “jobless recovery” after recessions have been the rule for the past two decades. Indeed, private-sector job growth since the 2007-2009 recession has been better than it was after the 2001 recession."
I have pointed out, time and again, that job creation ended as we once knew it a decade ago. We are now, in fact, on track to add more jobs to the American economy in a single Obama term than were added under eight years of Bush II.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Inequalstan
Sept 25th, 2011
I must admit, the new Chris Hayes weekend show is off to a fine start. Yesterday, he did a great job of exposing just how dishonest one very familiar conservative talking point really is. Oh, and he took a righteous shot at David Brooks, as well.
I must admit, the new Chris Hayes weekend show is off to a fine start. Yesterday, he did a great job of exposing just how dishonest one very familiar conservative talking point really is. Oh, and he took a righteous shot at David Brooks, as well.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Relative American Inequality
Sept 20th, 2011
Max Fisher has written a spirited defense of the so-called "Buffett Rule" in the plan President Obama outlined yesterday.
"Obama's "Buffett rule" is a response to a number of U.S. economic issues (as well as some relevant political openings) related to the recession. One of the most severe is income inequality -- the gaps between wealthy, super-wealthy, and everyone else -- a serious, long-worsening problem that makes the recession more painful and recovery more difficult. To get a sense of just how bad our income inequality has become, it's worth taking a look at how we stack up to the rest of the world.
Viewed comparatively, U.S. income inequality is even worse than you might expect. Perfect comparisons across the world's hundred-plus economies would be impossible -- standards of living, the price of staples, social services, and other variables all mean that relative poverty feels very different from one country to another. But, in absolute terms, the gulf between rich and poor is still telling. Income inequality can be measured and compared using something called the Gini coefficient, a century-old formula that measures national economies on a scale from 0.00 to 0.50, with 0.50 being the most unequal. The Gini coefficient is reliable enough that the CIA world factbook uses it."
For those of you who have not heard of the Gini coefficient before, here is an explanation of how it works based on its metric, the Lorenz curve:
"The Lorenz curve maps the cumulative income share on the vertical axis against the distribution of the population on the horizontal axis. In this example, 40 percent of the population obtains around 20 percent of total income. If each individual had the same income, or total equality, the income distribution curve would be the straight line in the graph – the line of total equality. The Gini coefficient is calculated as the area A divided by the sum of areas A and B. If income is distributed completely equally, then the Lorenz curve and the line of total equality are merged and the Gini coefficient is zero. If one individual receives all the income, the Lorenz curve would pass through the points (0,0), (100,0) and (100,100), and the surfaces A and B would be similar, leading to a value of one for the Gini-coefficient."
As he explains, the map below illustrates the range of income inequality with "the most unequal countries in red and the most equal in green."
Max Fisher has written a spirited defense of the so-called "Buffett Rule" in the plan President Obama outlined yesterday.
"Obama's "Buffett rule" is a response to a number of U.S. economic issues (as well as some relevant political openings) related to the recession. One of the most severe is income inequality -- the gaps between wealthy, super-wealthy, and everyone else -- a serious, long-worsening problem that makes the recession more painful and recovery more difficult. To get a sense of just how bad our income inequality has become, it's worth taking a look at how we stack up to the rest of the world.
Viewed comparatively, U.S. income inequality is even worse than you might expect. Perfect comparisons across the world's hundred-plus economies would be impossible -- standards of living, the price of staples, social services, and other variables all mean that relative poverty feels very different from one country to another. But, in absolute terms, the gulf between rich and poor is still telling. Income inequality can be measured and compared using something called the Gini coefficient, a century-old formula that measures national economies on a scale from 0.00 to 0.50, with 0.50 being the most unequal. The Gini coefficient is reliable enough that the CIA world factbook uses it."
For those of you who have not heard of the Gini coefficient before, here is an explanation of how it works based on its metric, the Lorenz curve:
Fine, you might say. What does all that mean? Fisher shows us with this stark presentation:
As he explains, the map below illustrates the range of income inequality with "the most unequal countries in red and the most equal in green."
Monday, September 19, 2011
A Vast Majority Backs Higher Taxes... Still
Sept 19th, 2011
Is the President's call to raise taxes on those who make more than one million dollars a year "class warfare" as so many Republicans have been suggesting? Well, not according to a vast majority of Americans. Period.
Bruce Bartlett did a round up today of every current poll that has asked Americans their opinions on the matter. He notes that "three-fourths of people support higher taxes and only 21 percent support the doctrinaire right-wing position." A screen cap of the results is shown below (the original is interactive and links back to each source).
Is the President's call to raise taxes on those who make more than one million dollars a year "class warfare" as so many Republicans have been suggesting? Well, not according to a vast majority of Americans. Period.
Bruce Bartlett did a round up today of every current poll that has asked Americans their opinions on the matter. He notes that "three-fourths of people support higher taxes and only 21 percent support the doctrinaire right-wing position." A screen cap of the results is shown below (the original is interactive and links back to each source).
Quote Of The Day - Here and Now Edition
Sept 19th, 2011
"This is not class warfare. It's math."
-- President Barack Obama on his latest revenue proposals.
-- President Barack Obama on his latest revenue proposals.
Friday, September 2, 2011
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
"I'll Eat Your Shoe"
Aug 23rd, 2011
Any regular reader can tell you I have no great love for Ben Stein. He is vulgar and elitist. However, he has come hurtling back to the truth regarding taxes. On O'Reilly last night, it was clear that Stein has simply had enough of Fox's economic propaganda. Dynamite stuff.
"There is no correlation, Mr. O’Reilly, between taxes rates on millionaires and people above that level, billionaires, and the growth of the economy… Higher taxes have historically correlated with more growth."
"Mr. O’Reilly, sir, there is no correlation of raising taxes and unemployment. If you can show it to me, I’ll eat your shoe."
via Media Matters
Any regular reader can tell you I have no great love for Ben Stein. He is vulgar and elitist. However, he has come hurtling back to the truth regarding taxes. On O'Reilly last night, it was clear that Stein has simply had enough of Fox's economic propaganda. Dynamite stuff.
"There is no correlation, Mr. O’Reilly, between taxes rates on millionaires and people above that level, billionaires, and the growth of the economy… Higher taxes have historically correlated with more growth."
"Mr. O’Reilly, sir, there is no correlation of raising taxes and unemployment. If you can show it to me, I’ll eat your shoe."
via Media Matters
Thursday, August 4, 2011
How Long Until The Next One?
August 4th, 2011
Jason Linkins ponders when the next GOP hostage taking might occur:
"So where's the next hostage situation likely to take place? Could be any number of venues. Debate over the gas tax. Policy riders. Per McConnell's promise, certainly the next time there's a need to raise the debt ceiling. Anytime a government shutdown is possible."
It is just a matter of time.
Jason Linkins ponders when the next GOP hostage taking might occur:
"So where's the next hostage situation likely to take place? Could be any number of venues. Debate over the gas tax. Policy riders. Per McConnell's promise, certainly the next time there's a need to raise the debt ceiling. Anytime a government shutdown is possible."
It is just a matter of time.
Quote Of The Day
August 4th, 2011
"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometric progression as they rise."
-- Thomas Jefferson
-- Thomas Jefferson
Monday, August 1, 2011
Quote Of The Day
August 1st, 2011
"I like to pay taxes. With them, I buy civilization."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Shameful Spin
July 28th, 2011
A few nights ago, while monitoring the primetime opinion broadcasts, I began to see wave after wave of Republican elected officials marching past the Fox cameras and touting a recent CNN poll which they said showed that "66% of Americans support 'Cut, Cap and Balance.'" I was, needless to say, a little bit curious about this. I went to read the poll in question. A full examination reveals their claims to be the worst sort of spin. Indeed, their exclamations rise to the levels of naked propaganda.
Here is the actual text of the question and the breakdown of the responses.
At first glance, this might seem impressive. But it is not. In fact, it is a testament to the average citizen's total lack of knowledge about what "Cut, Cap and Balance" would actually legislate.
How do we know this? Because CNN continued to ask more questions. They asked the respondents about specific spending cuts and tax increases. Meaning, they actually put quantifiable policy proposals to the test. What this reveals is that roughly two thirds to three quarters of the electorate is opposed to the entire contemporary Republican mission.
Period.
A few nights ago, while monitoring the primetime opinion broadcasts, I began to see wave after wave of Republican elected officials marching past the Fox cameras and touting a recent CNN poll which they said showed that "66% of Americans support 'Cut, Cap and Balance.'" I was, needless to say, a little bit curious about this. I went to read the poll in question. A full examination reveals their claims to be the worst sort of spin. Indeed, their exclamations rise to the levels of naked propaganda.
Here is the actual text of the question and the breakdown of the responses.
How do we know this? Because CNN continued to ask more questions. They asked the respondents about specific spending cuts and tax increases. Meaning, they actually put quantifiable policy proposals to the test. What this reveals is that roughly two thirds to three quarters of the electorate is opposed to the entire contemporary Republican mission.
Period.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
