Blog response.....

Here's what I'm responding to in order to keep things straight...http://mamareallytried.blogspot.com/2013/07/political-bitch.html

I’ll first respond to the blog – and handle the comments later.  Probably not what you were looking for Lauren, but is what it is.  Let me start by saying that the relationship between myself an Lauren is interesting.   

However – what you feel is mostly right.  It is hard.  Employers are cutting hours and not for profits in the first quarter (which was at the end of March, but I’ll get to comments later). 

Truth be told, My generation and your generation are the laziest generations compared to those before us.  Working 18 hours a day was nothing to my grandparents generation.  16 hour days were nothing to my parents generation.  Now we complain about working 8 hours a day.  Not enough time on the Xbox on Playstation or Facebook or whatever.  I still work two jobs.  Morning starts about 6:30 am.  Work regular job – and when I’m not in a hotel, I work at the tax shop or I umpire.  So day starts at 6:30 – get home in the summers about 8pm.  Winters get home about 10pm.  I’d love to feel your pain here. 

I don’t think that everyone working two jobs at 25 hours a week will create this catastrophe of on the job accidents, burnout, etc.  Really, even with two jobs – you are working 50 hours a week.  Scheduling sucks, but it’s 50 hours.  Remember I work 50 a week in my regular job (salary, so paid for 40) then work another 20 in a second job.  I’m working 70 hours a week.  Yes – it sucks.   But it’s what I have to do right now.  After 16 months of unemployment it’s what I have to do.  And unemployment was 3 years ago. 

Now, to continue my walking uphill to school through 4 feet of snow, uphill both ways story….I can’t say that I had to take out student loans.  I was left with a trust fund that paid for my schooling.  Fortunately (if you want to say that) my mother was smart enough to bank money for us after my Dad died when I was 5.  When she died when I was 9, I had a good sum of money there that paid for my local college and helped me buy a house.  Now – keep this in mind too:

 I was working through college, not only full time, but 20 hours of overtime.  I went to school part time since I had 2 kids that I also had to support.  I swept floors until I could move up to packaging steel coils, and then moved up to a machine operator position.  As a machine operator, I made a whopping $11 per hour.  All the while – going to campus on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday.  We didn’t have online classes way back in 1998.  Al Gore hadn’t invented the internet yet.  Energy supplements were black coffee.  Starbucks didn’t exist – so no double shots of espresso either.

This isn’t a 5 year zombie walk.  It’s a couple of lazy generations not realizing the value of work.  Wanting something for nothing.  Everything to be given to them.  Unfortunately, I see a bad pattern of this continuing and even more of an extreme.  “The Ex” and I have discussed this on more than one occasion and he doesn’t like where his generation is.  Not Generation Y – more Generation Gimmie. 

But you bring up good points.  I too have seen people that have told me, “I’m not going to look for another job because it’s going to be less than unemployment.”  Seen people that get on disability pretty much because they can.  Heard people complain at the tax office because their refund should be higher – even though there refund was what I paid in.  The incentive is that you make your own way.  You don’t need a government incentive.  In fact, this was done before – way back in the 1990’s when the Democrat golden child was in office – Bill Clinton.  See – Rick Santorum (you may remember his name from a couple of years ago…) wrote a bill that put people on the payrolls and not on the government dole.  It was a welfare bill that has been steadily undone over the last multiple years of a Democrat controlled congress.  It worked.  Bill Clinton saw HUGE job gains because of it in his second term.  Obama Claus – has given more out of the government dole and unemployment is the same (say what you will about job creation – more on that later).

I don’t think this was the grand master scheme by Obama.  Get more people working more jobs.  May play into the Job Creation number though.  Cut half your workforce at McDonalds and you’ve created twice as many jobs.  I don’t think this was the master plan though.  I think this falls into what I have called for years – unintended consequences.  Many would say – looks great on paper.  Now, we’ve had another delay in the employer mandate.  Which, by the way, cost my household $150 per month.

See – my wife is a part time worker.  She had been working 32 hours a week at her company for several years.  Due to the Obamacare regulations of being under 30 hours a week for a company with 50 employees or more – she was cut back to 28 hours.  It’s not Fox News Channel rhetoric.  It’s real.  Guess we just transitioned Patrick Carey.

I’ve done my research as you can see.  I’m going to make a presumption that you are an Occupy whatever or wherever.  I’ve done more than reading.  I’ve talked to Occupy Indianapolis.  I was at their rally at the statehouse, not as a participant, but to see what they were thinking.  I’d guess you haven’t been to a Tea Party rally.  Time to turn of MSNBC and Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews.  You have no shot with her.  She’s gay. 

Truly – if you look at it – The Affordable Care Act is an Obama, Pelosi, Reed bill.  It’s actually hurt the American worker.  A 38 hour job is no more.  Companies can’t shoulder the cost.  And in reality, neither can the working class.  This is not free healthcare.  It's going to cost.  Especially the young as they are trying to work up the ladder.  You are required to have healthcare starting January 1, 2014.  You will get subsidies based on your 2012 income.  Hopefully, you won't get a raise or a better paying job since you will have to PAY BACK the subsidies you received.  Lower income, higher subsidy.  Goes back to the dis-incentive to work and better yourself Lauren mentioned.

 

Not sure where the first quarter profits came from, but again – the first quarter ended in March.  Perhaps you should do some research on when quarters end.  It’s July.  Let me know – I’ll spend the $1 and send you a calendar.  Hell, I’ll email you a link and you can download one. 

There’s no magical speculation in the reduction in hours.  I live it – every month losing my wife’s $150. 

OK – on to Job Creation.  You do realize that according to Gallup, job creation today is not what it was in 2008?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127541/Job-Creation-Index-Weekly.aspx  

February 2008 – 28.  June 24 2013 – 24.  Pretty easy to add jobs when nobody is working.  Reality is that if you do your homework on this and download the numbers, the average is 10.4 on the index scale. I gave some leniency as well and started it in February of 2009.  Sorry, bro – your chosen president sucks on job creation.  Don’t even go that we needed to spend more money to get more people working.  Keynesian isn’t working and it doesn’t work when you are in a deficit.  The Fed has been pumping money for years now.  It’s not working. 

Now – let’s talk about the Nazi Republicans.  I remember not too long ago that the entire left was bitching like crazy about a sign that had a Hitler moustache on Obama (note that they also did this to G.W. Bush).  But now you say Nazi Republicans?  Can you spell out which bills exactly the Republicans shot down that would have created jobs?  I can already predict that you can’t and I’m a racist, homophobe, right wing, neocon, 1%-er.  I’m sure I’ve left something out there – but you can feel free to fill it in.  But conservatives are the hateful ones.  Nice play there showing true colors of the left. 

Not sure if and where you work, but part of my pay is based on performance.  Guess what CEO pay is based on…..performance.  Yes they have a big salary.  On stock option.  Stock tanks?  So does their pay.  Haven’t they earned it?  Have you ever seen a P/L statement?  Do you even know what that is?  Good thing somebody does. 

Companies aren’t greedy.  People are greedy by nature.  We all are.  Otherwise, why would the Occupy (formerly) exist?  They want what someone else has.  They want the money that the CEO’s have right?  Is that not greed?  It’s not earning your way to the top.  Occupy (and you from your comments) just want it.  PLEASE explain to me why that is not greed.   

Please explain to me what the Occupy movement has donated to charity.  I know that Rush Limbaugh doesn’t take a penny from the sales of his Two If By Tea company.  That goes to the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation.

See, we conservatives don’t have to flaunt what we do with our money to get a “feel good” moment.  We just donate.  We play golf in outings that benefit the local food pantry for twice the cost of golf.  We tithe to our Church.  Not seeing that much greed there.  I’ve been blessed in life – I give back.  Most conservatives do.    

So in 5 days we collectively go over the fiscal cliff.  Now – let’s look at what this REALLY is going to be as Obama, Reid, and Pelosi lick their chops as to how bad the Republicans are going to look.  But they are worried more about the country than politics, right?  Maybe not. 

The Dems continue to parade around like a proud peacock – holding to “give me what I want and we’ll have a deal.”  Even with the bi-partisan defense bill that just passed the Senate today by an 81-14 vote.  The White House has threatened to veto.  http://news.yahoo.com/congress-completes-633b-defense-bill-203351297.html 

But it’s a Republican issue.  I digress…. 

What does the fiscal cliff really look like?  Let’s take a look at where it really hits home.

Your paycheck will go down by at least 2% due to the expiration of the social security payroll tax holiday.  It went down from 6.2% withholding rate to 4.2% withholding. 

The expiration of the “Bush” tax cuts will raise the tax rates for everyone.  Obama threatened veto and Harry Reid said he would ignore the bill if it passed the House.  He’s done quite a bit of that in the last couple of years – especially when it comes to money matters.  Reality is that the Senate hasn’t passed a budget in 4 years now. 

Bottom line – expect another 3 to 5 percent to come out of your paycheck every week and headed to Uncle Sam.

Don’t believe this BS that “they can make it retroactive”.  It’s not a false statement, but let’s say they reach an agreement in March.  Your payroll withholdings will change, likely on February 1.  The IRS has not released the withholding schedules yet and January will stay the same.  After that -  You will have 3 to 5% taken out of your paycheck every week until a deal is reached.  Sure – you will get it back NEXT April when you file your taxes.  You will have had more withheld than you needed and will get your FEDERAL withholdings back.  If they extend the Social Security withholdings, that will have to be figured out.  Don’t expect to see that 2% back though.  That has nothing to do with your tax refund.  Beyond that – if no deal is reached?  They will withhold MORE so they can make up for the lack of withholdings from January.  Think I’m being extreme?  Do a google search. 

 Speaking of Taxes and what we all have to do starting in January.  Or does it start in January??? 

Right now, the IRS is not accepting returns until January 20^th.  That’s about a week later than normal.  BUT with the fiscal cliff negotiations going nowhere, it’s predicted by the IRS that two thirds (2/3) of American taxpayers – 100,000,000 people won’t be able to file until MARCH!!  Why?  The IRS has to update the forms and the software which takes between 4 and 6 weeks.  The forms have to be approved by congress.

 Right now, a few things that are at stake are unreimbursed employee expenses, child care credits, educator expenses (the deduction that teachers get when they spend their own money for materials not provided in the classroom), and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). 

Ultimately, if you itemize your deductions over the standard deduction – you can’t file.  Unreimbursed employee expenses are filed on Schedule A – which is also where you deduct your mortgage interest, your state income taxes, etc.  This form won’t be finalized. 

Teachers?  You won’t be able to file unless you want to give up your credit of $250 and you are single or married with no kids.  The form won’t be done. 

Have kids and get Earned Income Credit?  You won’t be able to file.  That goes on 1040 long form or 1040A.  Not a 1040EZ – single or joint filers with no dependents.  1040 long form won’t be finalized – nor will 1040A (remember the educator deductions?).  Don’t plan on using that money for anything anytime soon.  Probably not coming until April now.

I know I was looking forward to my refund in February.  Looks like we might have to wait until mid-April with the way things are going.  Don’t worry – the IRS so far hasn’t changed the April 15^th deadline – so no pressure to get your taxes done.  You will have a few weeks to get them done, rather than a few months. 

Keep holding that line Mr. President, Mr. Reid, and Mrs. Pelosi.  You say you are for the working class – but by not even considering the compromise of taxing Millionaires and Billionaires as you say (which apparently starts at $200,000) you are screwing all of us.  Especially those that really need it.  Single mothers that get EIC.  Working parents that get EIC.  They can’t file their taxes. 

I’ve said it many times – unintended consequences.  Looks like it is better for President Obama to hold campaign promise this time than it is to really do something for Main Street. 

Let’s take this a step further.  As Pelosi has said – lower income people spend the money right away and it puts money into the economy.  Now, it’s better to hold of people getting money in February and delaying it until April.  So – the money that is typically infused into the economy in February and March will now be delayed until April and May.  Everyone now see where I was coming from with my predictions of another recession? 

Let me clarify if I’ve lost you.  Lost money from paychecks, lack of tax refund money?  No spending.  No spending – no goods to produce, and no reason to keep on store employees.  All seasonal help let go (usually some stay on – a few will, but not like normal).  More lost income.  Less spending.

 I’ve said before and will say again – 12/21/12 wasn’t the day of Armageddon.  1/1/13 will be the fiscal Armageddon for the everyday taxpayer.  We’re screwed.  Nobody wants to see it, but I don’t have the Obama rose-colored glasses on either. 

 I didn’t even address the Obamacare taxes that hit this year…..even more coming in 2014.  That’s going to be a lot of fun.

But don’t blame me – I didn’t vote for Obama or Cap’n Corrupt Visklosky. 

Since I know some will say that I complain, but don’t offer a solution – I’ll offer a solution.  Let me present the DickieH Tax Plan.

1. Capital Gains – remain at 15% Long Term, 28% short term.  Encourages investment and allows some tax income on initial dollars that were already taxed.  Just because you made a good investment, you shouldn’t be penalized.  Capital losses - $3000 carryover for 5 years.  Currently unlimited.  If you are a dumbass and invest poorly, you shouldn’t be able to carry these over forever as it currently is. 
2. Social Security Payroll tax –
1. Stays the same for 2013
2. 0.5% increase in 2014
3. 0.5% increase in 2015
4. 1% increase in 2016 (economy dependant – alternate to lower to 0.5% 2016, 0.5%2017)

Better to increase gradually than snatch 2% out of workers paychecks effective immediately. 

 

5. Increase 0.5% in 2017 (2018 if alternative is enacted) – more retirees, means more expense.  We have to do this in order to fund just the obligations.
6. Maximum income cutoff is raised by $10,000 per year (adjusted for inflation) from 2014 through 2034.  Currently at $161,000. 

HOWEVER – Effective in 2015 we enact the Paul Ryan proposal for those under 55 and allow an option to go into the private market – essentially creating a 401K for social security.  Those choosing to go into the Social Security IRA can invest half of their own payroll withholdings, the rest goes to traditional Social Security.  Of that invested, half is required to be in safe investments (Governement bonds, money market, etc.) while the rest can be invested in US companies.  No foreign accounts.  No risk limitations on the last quarter of investments – but must be in US companies.

3. Tax rates
1. Rates stay the same for those under $1 million (trying to garner bi-partisan support, stick with me here though…)
2. Child Tax Credit

                                                              i.      Limited to 5 kids in 2014

                                                            ii.      Limited to 4 kids in 2015

This credit is currently unlimited.  Thus the “buying and selling” of kids for tax purposes that we always hear rumors about.  It’s true.  It happens.  This cuts out the fraud from the tax code.  4 is plenty.  This is worth $1,000 per kid.  Sorry, but if you are Kate plus 8 or Octomom?  Your choice, not mine.  I shouldn’t have to pay for a tax credit for you.  Octomom gets $8000 for the Octuplets and $6000 for all the other kids – fully refundable.  Her tax refund likely starts at $14,000 given that she admits being on public assistance.  Public Assistance (TANF, etc) is not reported as income on tax returns.    

4. Education Credits – Keep the American Opportunity credit.  Keep tuition and fees deductions, keep lifetime learning credit, keep student loan interest deduction.
5. EITC – and this is a big one.
1. Keep the 3 child tables through 2014 – but they stay the same, reducing the amount of refundable credit available as wages rise through inflation
2. Keep the income levels the same through 2017.  As wages rise through general inflation, the amount paid out on this credit will decrease (this goes back to “skin in the game” aspect.  Currently, there are a whole lot of negative tax liability people in the country)
6.   Medicaid –
1. Set up Health Savings Accounts rather than current method. 

                                                              i.      Those with disability, not able to work at all and no earned income remain on current plan

                                                            ii.      Those under $5,000 per year remain on current plan unless they qualify for Earned Income Credit

                                                          iii.      Anyone receiving Earned Income Credit above the guidelines set forth – half of the Earned Income Credit will go into the Health Savings Account.  The rest will be refunded.

                                                          iv.      If in the case that someone is qualified for Medicaid and has health insurance through their employer, Half of the EIC will go to their Social Security savings account. 

7. Medicare
1. Raise the age of eligibility to the same as Social Security eligibility.

                                                              i.      Under 55 years of age goes to immediate match

                                                            ii.      56 – 60 pro-rated phase in depending on age (i.e. 65 age of eligibility - someone 60 years old would go up by a percentage of age vs. eligibility.  Actual numbers not yet calculated.)

                                                          iii.      60+ no change

2. Means test to receive
3. Raise withholdings by 0.5% in 2014.
4. Anyone 55 and under can opt into a Health Saving Account where half of their payroll withholdings for Medicare would go into their own account and could be invested.  Additional contributions can be made by the taxpayer with a tax deduction and disbursements are tax free if made on healthcare costs after the age of 65.  No early withdraw or loans. 
7. Inheritance Tax (death tax) – eliminated.  They were taxed.  No need to tax again.  Any capital gains from sale of assets are taxed at capital gains rates. 
8. Gradual shift to flat tax of 18% with the first $10,000 per individual on the tax return exempted ($20,000 Married Joint) with elimination of deductions.  To be completed by 2035. 

 

So there it is in a nutshell.  No, I won’t run for congress.

 

 

Effective Tax Rates vs Tax Brackets: An Educational Experience

I know it's been a while.  Sorry about that.  Life gets in the way sometimes.

Given the release today of our Fearless Leader's plan (or should I refer to him as the leader we fear..) I felt it was time to explain a little bit of how the tax laws work.  Folks, it's not about the tax bracket.  Plain and simple.  It's all about the EFFECTIVE tax rate.

Let's look at the last several years of Barry O's tax returns.  He's in the 35% tax bracket and is paying 35% right?  Wrong.  In fact, he's never paid 35%.  You can see it here:  http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/web/presidentialtaxreturns

Truth is, Barry O has paid:

2000 - 26.5%
2001 - 31.5%
2002 - 27.3%
2003 - 21.8%
2004 - 19.5%
2005 - 32.9%
2006 - 28.2%
2007 - 33.7%
2008 - 32.2%
2009 - 32.5%
2010 - 26.3%

Doesn't look like he was wanting to help the country too much in 2010...taking a 3000 capital loss as well...  By the numbers, in 2010 while he is calling for the rich to pay their "Fair Share", he in fact paid the third lowest effective rate in 10 years.  Also every year he takes itemized deductions.  Just to inform Mr. President - that is a voluntary deduction.  You can take the standard deduction that will increase your taxes.  Rather than the $373,000 you took on your 2010 return, you could have made it the standard deduction of $11,400 for Married filing joint.  But you opted not to do so.

But let's look a the Democrat's reincarnation of Joe the Plumber...Warren Buffet's Secretary.  Mr. Buffet makes most of his money on capital gains at a rate of 15%.  Let's presume the stereotypical secretary for a minute.  I know this person likely makes much more, but let's presume this is a single mom with two kids making 40,000 per year.  She files as Head of Household.  She gets the Earned Income Tax Credit.  In the end - she will be paying $0 in tax liability and likely have a negative EFFECTIVE tax rate since she will make a profit off of the government due to the refundable tax credits (see lines 61 through 72 on the federal 1040 form). 

While the calls are there to get "skin in the game" from the Prez - we're going about it the wrong way.  Steve Forbes put together a plan many, many, many years ago.  The Flat Income Tax.  Everyone pays a flat percentage.  For those in Indiana - you already know how it works.  You pay 3.4% plus county tax - unless you live in Lake County.  You may say that it's not fair to the poor!  Uh - the first 40,000 was exempt from income tax for everyone under the Forbes plan.  Herman Cain is about as close to this as possible with his 9-9-9 plan, but I'm waiting for some better numbers to come back.  This plan hurts me overall.  I'll see a tax increase as last year I had an EFFECTIVE tax rate just over 7%.  But it's more fair to everyone. 

Herman Cain this week also tackled something that nobody is willing to talk about either - Subchapter S and LLC corps.  ALL of the income from these entities gets paid on your PERSONAL income tax form.  Let's say you have an LLC business that made $175,000.  You took a salary of $40,000.  Your wife/husband has a job and made $40,000.  Your AGI is now $215K.  You plowed the $175K in business profit back to the business.  Doesn't matter.  You made on your K-1 form - $175,000.  Rather than showing the $60,000 on your return, you show  $255,000.  You Fat Cat riding around in your private jet....

Just last week, I had federal withholdings, Social Security withholdings, and Medicare withholdings of 12.5%.  Let alone state withholdings....  What would I do with an extra 3 1/2%?  Pay down debt - and buy stuff.  Increasing the consumption factor of the GDP rather than having the government spending component add to the GDP. 

Ultimately, no new taxes is the way to go.  It's more in the pocket of those that need it - and those that will buy stuff.  Buying stuff increases sales taxes in the states.  Buying stuff puts people back to work.  Companies want tax breaks - but they want customers even more.  Increased revenues at companies will lead to more hiring.  More hiring leads to more payroll taxes.  More payroll taxes leads to a balanced budget (as long as congress is willing to freeze and decrease the budget).  A balanced budget leads to a surplus that pays off debt.  Decreased debt leads to less interest payments.  Less interest payments leads to a bigger surplus.

We need a bold and long term plan.  Something longer than the next election in order to give our businesses some confidence.  Right now, they don't know what is going to happen so they are hoarding cash.  Free the businesses and you will reopen the free markets.  Just wait and see what would happen. 

Mr. Fenton, while I admire your position as a journalist, I must oppose…well, pretty much everything you have written – especially your positions on the economic front. I understand that you are paid for this but also think that you may be singing for your supper here rather than writing about what you actually believe. I’ve put your original text in italics and have written my thoughts below yours.




I understand this may be too much to follow given your viewpoint. But remember, that your entire text in it’s entirety is included – in italics. Just in case you forgot what you wrote.



Green Energy Opponents Are the Real Job Killers

David Fenton
January 13, 2011

Listen to how we discuss clean energy in this country, and you'll note that the conversation is exactly upside down. To hear the mainstream discourse tell it, clean energy may be a nice idea but it's prohibitively expensive. Going green, it's said, will cost jobs and strangle growth at a time when America must do whatever it takes to get our economy and people working again. Environmentalists are going to raise everyone's energy bills. We're the "job killers."

OK, I guess I am confused here with your charge against the mainstream discourse. Are you talking about the media here? If so, your comment would be exactly upside down. Palin was criticized for “Drill Baby, Drill” by the Mainstream Media (heretofore known as the MSM). And Going Green will strangle growth and decrease employment. It’s very simple – as I will show.

This framing of the issue runs 180 degrees counter to the actual facts of life in the year 2011. Clean energy transformation is the best—perhaps the only—path to economic and job growth, including rebuilding our industrial base and competitiveness. As British economist Nicholas Stern has said of clean energy, "These investments will play the role of the railways, electricity, the motor car and information technology in earlier periods of economic history."

While you have a very impressive quote from someone that nobody has heard of – it is very possible that this could be the new industrial revolution. However, while I wasn’t there at the time, I would guess that it wasn’t being crammed down everyone’s throat in order to make it happen. I am curious however how the framing of this issue runs 180 degrees counter to the actual facts. But I’m sure we’ll see in your writings going forward. Clean Energy transformation is certainly not the best path to economic and job growth. In fact this sentence just doesn’t make sense. I’m sure you understand that many, if not all, of the windmills that are currently being installed in the Midwest are in fact manufactured in Europe. And imported through the Port of Indiana at the southern tip of Lake Michigan. Hey…so far so good right? We put people to work unloading boats! I’m not seeing how this is helping employment since these people would have been working anyway – just unloading steel pipes, electric motors, and screws and bolts – rather than working in the factory to manufacture these products. But I’m sure you knew that…..

Renewable energies, if properly financed and combined with energy-saving investments, will lead to lower net energy bills for Americans, cheaper transportation and price stability. With a smart grid, the savings from new refrigerators, cars, lights and air-conditioners that use far less energy will more than compensate for the relatively small increases in electric rates needed to discourage carbon and switch to wind and solar. McKinsey & Company's 2009 report "Unlocking Energy Efficiency in the U.S. Economy" shows that for every dollar spent making buildings and appliances more efficient, we'll get two in return. What other investment can match that? The same report estimates that the United States could reduce annual energy consumption by 23 percent with net dollar savings (not counting savings in transportation from vehicles, which would add more). And this is based on the price of fossil fuels remaining constant, which it won't.

Well, with this statement, you pretty much prove the theory of “Cap and Tax.” “Renewable energies, if properly financed” – Government subsidized…hey it’s working for Amtrak right? Oh…they are still bankrupt…. “with energy-savings investments” – huh? You mean tax credits right? From a government that is pretty much bankrupt. “will lead to lower net energy bills for Americans” – thank you government subsidies. We’ll pay the balance in taxes…because it’s not in our electric bill every month. “Cheaper transportation and price stability” – really? You think so? Wow….keep drinking the kool-aid.

Then you go on to say that with a smart grid…You actually support raising energy rates in order to discourage carbon to switch to solar and wind. Do you, or more importantly your readers understand who this is going to affect? It’s not the “millionaires making $200,000 a year or more” as your political disposition likes to believe. This will be the single mom making $10K per year with 2 kids that was happy to salvage a refrigerator out of the trash that worked. It’s not energy star rated and was probably built in the 80’s. Oh yes I did… I just used your own words against you…

I can’t say I’ve ever heard of McKinsey & Company but would guess you work there. This sounds a lot like Pelosi and the unemployment benefits. $2 in return for every $1 spent. Really…come on now. They why is the government pushing it. If this was the case, then it would have already been done by a private entity. You advocate that we will double our money. So did Pelosi and unemployment. With her plan, we could pay everyone to be unemployed and double our money! I call B.S.

You did have one correct statement. The price of fossil fuels will not stay constant. They will fluctuate up and down. Currently, they are up. However, they will fall. It’s called a cycle and you offer no indication on what your baseline is for this assumption. No link, no further info. Just that this is what it is. Keep your Kool-Aid.

Meanwhile, it is well established that labor-intensive investments in solar, wind and increased building efficiency create far more jobs than similar investments in fossil fuels. These technologies will most likely go down in cost while fossil prices will only go up long-term. And with a renewable energy economy, there is no cost of fuel or fuel price volatility. Imagine that.

Wow…Labor Intensive Wind and solar farms? Have you ever driven through a wind farm? Or a solar farm? I have…in the corn fields of Illinois. Guess how many people you see? Even under construction? At most – I’ve seen three trucks. Three. Even if each truck carried three people each…that’s 9 people. No, not per windmill….per HUNDRED windmills. That certainly doesn’t seem labor intensive to me compared to keeping a coal fired electricity plant running. Or even a nuclear plant running.

And this is during construction that there are about 9 people working. What happens when construction is done? How many people work there after construction? Oh…one or two to do maintenance? On a hundred windmills/solar panels? This is where there is no volatility. You have two people working – that are likely not union (sorry, but the people in the heartland are not particularly union folk…Once you get out of the big cities, they just want to go to work and live their lives…they don’t need to be told what to think).

Yet, despite this mountain of evidence, clean energy supporters have allowed themselves to be tarred as the public's economic enemy by the very fossil fuel forces whose policies will guarantee the economic decline of America. As long as the public conversation remains tethered to these ridiculous assumptions, you can be sure there will be no progress made in Washington against the major challenge facing our civilization—climate destabilization.

Well, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill and need to go out in the real world. You apparently haven’t left your desk and been out to drive through the farm fields of Indiana and Illinois and Iowa. The clean energy supporters have been tarred as public enemy because since the 60’s they have been wrong. Now….you say in this paragraph about the ‘very fossil fuel forces whose policies will guarantee the economic decline of America” however later in this same article – you talk about giving prosperity to Middle East nations. Where exactly do you think you get prosperity in the middle of the desert? Oh…it’s OIL!! How much Oil is under the US and/or just off the coast? And why are we not drilling for our own consumption? These are truly the policies (as implemented by Obama – stopping offshore drilling) that are crippling economic prosperity.

And congrats on coining your own phrase – even though it comes with no explanation or theory – What the hell is “Climate destabilization?” It will snow here tomorrow. That’s climate destabilization. Low pressure is moving in…..other than that, it has absolutely nothing to do with..well...anything, but put “climate” in front of it and it apparently means something for the MSM to pick up.

With the campaign for green jobs, progressives and environmentalists have made some headway in conveying our positive economic message, but we remain too often on the defensive. Why not come out swinging? We should hammer home the point that sticking to fossil fuels will guarantee the economic decline of our country. It will lead to much higher gasoline and food prices, as world demand increases; losing the next industrial wave to China and Korea; the transfer of even more of our wealth to the Middle East; trillions more for resource wars; the enormous costs of climate adaptation and climate disruption. Droughts, floods, snowpack loss, loss of agriculture and drinking water—not exactly economic benefits.

Wow…now I want to get out the Tye Dye and smoke another one….You can’t be serious here. And you should be on the defensive as you have pretty much nothing to defend. That’s why you are attacked.

First, you haven’t proven anything economically. Think about how many people it takes to run a coal plant or nuclear plant and how many people it takes to run a wind farm. Wow…there’s job growth.

Sticking to fossil fuels will contrarily lead to prosperity in this country – if we will only drill. Unfortunately, you and your types are too busy hugging trees to realize that we should be drilling oil here where along the Alaskan oil pipeline the wildlife is thriving rather than dying as you would like to claim. In the same paragraph, you also contradict yourself – you say that this is the death of us…but you say that we are transferring wealth to the middle east. Uhh..which one is it? Is there wealth in Fossil Fuel? If not…then why are we transferring it? If so – why are we transferring it to the middle east? Oh…it’s because we are stifled by the Federal Government from drilling.  I'm a believer that you have predicted an opportunity - the increased demand for fossil fuel in the world market.  We should capitalize on that by drilling rather than moving away from it.  Use this to finance the new energy markets. 

Then you really go off the deep end….Losing the next industrial wave to China and Korea. Have you been to Wal-Mart lately? That’ pretty much all that is there. Made in China, Made in Korea, Made in Taiwan, Made in Vietnam. And why would that be? I’ll answer….undue and overreaching of the federal government into a free market society. And those are COMMUNIST COUNTRIES. They are KICKING OUR ASS on a manufacturing front. It’s not even close anymore. Why? American citizens are too good to make $6.00 per hour and no benefits. They have to make $18 per hour otherwise it’s not worth going off of unemployment. This is the American mentality today. We’re too good. All along, we are losing our edge and competitive edge. I fear where this country will be.  Have you seen their environmental reports?  They had to shut down factories before the Bejing Olympic Games to get rid of the pollution haze.  Now that's really responsible environmental government and change you can believe in!

The rest of this paragraph is right out of Al Gore’s book…and is just a bunch of alarmist crap. I’ll leave it at that.



We also have good news to tell. Energy analysts have calculated that to charge a plug-in hybrid or fully electric vehicle with wind power, at today's prices, costs the equivalent of well under $1 for a gallon of gas. And that's a dollar that stays in America. The latest projections for the price of solar electricity show steeply declining costs over the next few years. Already, companies like SunRun and Sun Edison are growing rapidly by converting homes and offices to solar with no money down, offering lower energy bills over twenty-year contracts.

But you don’t account that the Chevy Volt will cost over $35,000 AND you will have to have a 220 plug put in your garage, AND you will have to buy a power conversion station. Also remember that until your “smart grid” or everyone in America has a windmill whipping in their back yard…this electricity will be powered by…wait for it….COAL!!!!

So with your windmills and solar panels you will put all of the people working in these plants as well as the coal miners, refiners, trucking, etc. in order to have “clean” energy. Buy up those Chevy Volts. It’s powered by coal and nuclear.

It's time we claimed our position as the true pro-growth forces, painting the tiny group of companies standing in the way, and their corrupt political agents, as anti-growth. Because that's what they are. Anti-growth for everyone but themselves.

Call someone at Commonwealth Edison, Nisource or another energy company. Many of which are beginning to augment their portfolio with wind farms and solar…to cut labor cost.

The Wall Street Journal—anti-growth. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell—anti-growth. Exxon, Peabody, the Koch brothers, Midwestern utilities resisting change, BP, Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes, Sarah Palin—all standing in the way of a better economic future for America. All leading us to further industrial decline, decaying infrastructure, job loss and much higher energy and food prices.

And you call the Republicans name callers? Actually, Boehner is from Ohio – a huge manufacturing state. I won’t even comment on this one. You blame food prices on these guys due to not going to green energy? You probably believe that cow farts are also causing global warming due to the carnivores not being vegans. Wow…this is an insane paragraph.

When are the White House and the Democratic leadership going to come out swinging? The real job killers are the Republicans. Do you think rejecting science is good for economic and technological innovation? Do flat-earthers generate economic growth?

I hope the White House and Dems do come out swinging with some of the stuff you have posted here. I’m just a regular guy and can see right through all of the BS you are trying to throw around. This could only get better when the argument is coming from someone who is a heck of a lot more educated on the subject than I am. That would be coming to a knife fight with a lego block. Yes..you would have the lego block.

Uhh…flat-earthers? Huh? Guessing this is your attempt at an insult at conservatives being pretty much neanderthals. And yes…they generate the job growth. They own the companies. Don’t like it? Start a company and make it successful. They you will be the one that is different. Until then, keep collecting.....

We also need to get more aggressive about the science, not just the economics. Climate and Congressional skeptics need to be put on the defensive, and the media must be challenged to stop placing industry propagandists on an equal footing with published, peer-reviewed climate scientists. It's time to attack the Washington flat-earthers leading their city to the inevitable flooding of the nation's monuments and heat deaths from weeks of scorching temperatures.

OK, you are now way off the deep end now with the flooding of the national monuments and heat deaths. In fact, any credibility you may have had through the article has now just been lost. You complain about extremist position….and then take an extremist position. Wow….

If we don't show that our path leads to prosperity, and theirs to economic decline, we won't win legislation now or in the next Congress. We won't get the R&D and investment funds the industry needs. We won't end fossil fuel subsidies or restore Americans' jobs. And we will still be trying to get a price on carbon five years from now or even later.

Only problem is that you can’t PROVE your path leads to prosperity. You can’t PROVE that the other leads to economic decline. Here’s a challenge. As soon as you prove that Dubai Saudi Arabia has seen prosperity due to using solar power – I’ll believe you. Here’s a hint….DUBAI IS IN THE FREAKIN’ DESERT! THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF SUNSHINE! But they got their wealth from…………..(fill in the blank here).  In fact it's been disproven.  And Americans aren't buying what you are selling.

But here it is…the plea for subsidies – not an end to them…but a shift of them. For R&D funding from the government. Here’s a newsflash….the “Obama money” comes from the taxpayers. That’s where the money comes from. The taxpayers.

Let's get serious about communicating our clean energy vision and solutions to the broad American public. Only by winning them over can we generate the pressure to overcome the special interests' stranglehold on Washington.


It's time to turn the debate right side up.

Unfortunately, I believe your argument in Left side up. Not Right side up. And I don’t get paid to write this.

________________________________________


Source URL: http://www.thenation.com/article/157727/green-energy-opponents-are-real-job-killers

Big Government Isn't To Blame for Bad Economy??

I read this column this morning, and just can't believe that people really think this way.  Then again, guess I shouldn't be surprised by a professer from UC Berkley.

I've put the original article in italics and my responses in bold.

Here's the original article:  http://www.sfgate.com/columns/reich/


Big government isn't to blame for bad economy



Robert Reich


Sunday, December 19, 2010






The tax deal negotiated between the president and Republicans is the latest version of trickle-down economics. It also confirms the Republican story of what happened to the economy and how to fix it: The bad economy is big government's fault, and the solution is to shrink government.


But the Republicans' story is wrong.


Here's the real story. Trickle-down economics has been a resounding failure. The Reagan and Bush tax cuts on the wealthy didn't help most Americans.

Well....I guess a robust employment figure since the recession of the 80's isn't good enough. Dems were complaining that there weren't enough jobs when unemployment was at 4.5% - and those are mostly the unemployable, those between jobs, and the vountarily unemployed. It also lead to the record surpluses during the Clinton administration. Hmm....Seems like it worked pretty well overall.

For three decades, an increasing share of the benefits of economic growth has gone to the top 1 percent. Thirty years ago, the top 1 percent got 9 percent of total income before taxes. Now they take in almost a quarter. Meanwhile, the earnings of the typical worker have barely budged, adjusted for inflation.

Soo.....what you are saying is that the middle class incomes kept up with inflation. Year over year, they had the same purchasing power. The real problem is that the middle class was trying to live the life of the upper class, and based it all on debt - myself included. When the housing bubble burst, the adjustable mortgage rates cashed in, and unemployment went up, everyone was left holding the bag. The problem is not income - it's outgo. You could still purchase everything that you needed. Just not what you wanted. I haven't run numbers on this, but my nearest guess is that the increase in the upper income brackets and their paychecks is from unearned income. Stocks, bonds, dividends, other investments. While middle class America was buying a big screen TV on credit, the wealthy were putting this money into stocks. This was also a very robust time in the stock markets. The Dow from January 1981 to January 2008 was up about 1200%, the S&P 500 up about 1000%. So a dollar invested in 1981 would be worth $1200 today. Even factoring in inflation, that's a 490% increase.

As a result, America's vast middle class no longer has the purchasing power to keep the economy going. (The rich spend a much lower portion of their incomes.) The crisis was averted before now only because middle-class families found ways to keep their spending up even though their wages flattened - by women going into paid work, by working longer hours and finally by using their homes as collateral to borrow. But when the housing bubble burst, the game was up.

Precisely. The middle class borrowed their way to prosperity. Thus the banking crisis, thus the credit card defaults, thus the massive amounts of foreclosures. What was considered affordable was based on income with overtime. Overtime dried up, then the job dried up. Bills didn't get paid. Debt is the problem, not the rich.

The solution is to reorganize the economy so the benefits of economic growth are more widely shared.

There are already countries like this, Greece, Ireland, North Korea, it's called socialism and communism.

Exempt the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes, and apply payroll taxes to incomes greater than $250,000.


Extend the Earned Income Tax Credit - a wage subsidy - all the way up through families earning $50,000.

This is where you are way, way, way wrong and a little research goes a long way.


I just ran a 2009 tax return on a married couple with 3 kids using a standard deduction. Note that the income limit for 3 kids in 2009 tax year was $48,279 MFJ with three kids (45,295 for 2 kids, and 40,463 for 1 - this is going up in TY2010. Their total tax liability was $538 before the child tax credit. They got their tax reduced to $0. Now, they get back all of their withholdings ($1357), the ADDITIONAL child tax credit of $2462, making work pay for $800 and the EITC of $1738.


So this couple is actually getting a REFUND of $6357. This is redistribution of wealth. They are actually getting an 18% bonus on their gross wages courtesy of Uncle Sam. Nothing paid in, but $5K coming back - and withholdings don't count. They are all getting paid back in this example. If we curtail the amount of refundable tax credits, I'd bet we could balance the budget and pay down debt. I'm not advocating that we eliminate these credits in this writing, just that here is part of your problem - not with the wealthy.

Make higher education free to families that can't afford it now.

And who exactly is paying for this? The $6357 refunded in the above example is about a full time semester at a local community college. But I'm pretty certain this will fund big screens and a shopping spree. 

There are also tax credits available (and they are refundable that would add more to this family's tax refund). Along with the numerous grants offered at both the state and federal levels. The colleges also work with students that can't afford it but really want to go. I think they tried this in Britain didn't they? Oh yeah...riots in the streets...

Create an infrastructure bank to repair and rebuild our crumbling roads, bridges, and water and sewer systems.

And where is this money coming from? How about leaving this to the states to take care of - make them balance their budget as well. Take a look at Indiana for a prime example. I don't know how much ARRA money Indiana got - but the highways were already under construction paid for by the states.

Create a new WPA to put the long-term unemployed back to work.

I prefer that anyone that is unemployed for over the state funded 26 weeks is required to perform community service - starting with 4 hours per week and increasing by 1/2 hour per week until they go off of unemployment. I would also like to see this for welfare recipients as well. Even the disabled could perform some sort of community service. This isn't all swinging a broom, raking, or painting. I'm sure the local Boys & Girls Club would love to have someone doing admin work.

Pay for all this by raising marginal income tax on millionaires to 70 percent. This won't hamper economic growth. Under President Dwight Eisenhower, whom no one accused of being a socialist, the highest marginal rate was 91 percent, and the economy flourished.


A millionaire marginal tax of 70 percent also would go a long way toward eliminating the nation's future budget deficit.

And in 1945, there was no exemptions for anyone. Even the lowest wage earners had "skin in the game". We could go back to these policies as well. Also, see the comments on the EITC. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find the tax tables from 1953, but in looking at the tax charts - from $0 to $2000, you paid 20%. This would be $16,000 today. In the above example from 2009, this would be an equivalent income of $4271. This would put this family in the 26% tax bracket. Rather than 15%.


You also fail to realize that it is much easier to get around the world than it was in the '50's. Thus making it much easier to relocate. I'll predict that if the tax bracket raises to 70%, the only wealthy people around will be those that are making $250K to $3 mill. The rest are leaving town - and the country.

But here's the obstacle. As income and wealth have risen to the top, so has political power. Money is being used to bribe politicians and fill the airwaves with misleading ads that block all of this.

Taliban Dan comes to mind. So does submit to your husbands courtesy of soon to be former Rep. Grayson.

The midterm elections offered dramatic evidence. Shortly after election day, for example, NBC News reported that Crossroads GPS, one of the biggest Republican secret-money organizations, got "a substantial portion" of its loot from a group of extremely wealthy Wall Street hedge fund and private equity managers. Why would they sink so much money into the midterm elections? Because they oppose a proposal by congressional Democrats to treat the earnings of hedge fund and private-equity managers as ordinary income rather than capital gains (subject to only a 15 percent rate), as they're now treated.

And projections right now are that Obama will raise over $1 billion for the 2012 election campaign. The issue here isn't Repub or Dem. The issue is that they all are getting too much money. The politicians we are sending to DC are mostly power hungry and corrupt. Both sides.

In other words, the real problem isn't big government. It's power and privilege at the top.


So another part of the solution must be to limit the impact of big money on politics. This requires, for example, publicly financed campaigns, disclosure of all sources of political spending and resurrection of the fairness doctrine for broadcasters.


It's the same power and privilege that got the Bush tax cuts in the first place and claimed the lion's share of the benefits. It's the same power and privilege that phased out the estate tax.


By agreeing to another round of massive tax cuts for the wealthy and another huge cut in the estate tax, the president and the Democrats are just continuing Republican policy.


Cutting taxes on the rich while freezing discretionary spending (which the president also agreed to do) says, in effect, the underlying problem is big government, and the solution is to shrink government and expect the extra wealth at the top to trickle down to everyone else.


It's another version of the same trickle-down economics America has been force-fed for 30 years, as the rich have become richer and almost nothing has trickled down.


When will we learn?

Actually, I believe the issue is not the power at the top - except in Washington. This is proposing trickle up poverty. The problem is the entitlest state that we currently live in. Everyone wants something for nothing. They want the new sports car in the garage, but will go way into debt in order to get that car.


There are plenty of ways to make a living in this world - it all comes down to desire and not waiting for Big Brother to lay it in your hands. Ultimately, it's the redistribution of wealth through the tax code that is the real culprit here. When half the country has no tax liability and many others are profiting, there is a problem. Simply by eliminating all of the refundable credits would save the country over $6,000 in this one example. They weren't even on the top of the bell curve for EIC. Others get more.


I'm not one to say that these people don't need the help - but an 18% bonus from Uncle Sam sure seems to be a lot. If we reduce the amount of refundable credits - not eliminate - there will be Billions not being paid out in April, increasing the total revenue of the government, balancing the budget.


I won't even get into the flat tax debate here.

Robert Reich, former U.S. secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of the new book "Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future." He blogs at www.robertreich.org. Send your feedback to us through our online form at SFGate.com/chronicle/submissions/#1.

Do They Think We are That Dumb?

Do the Democrats really think we are that dumb?

We continue to hear about the compromise that “Cuts taxes for Millionaires.” Hmmm….

So…let me do some Democrat math here. $1,000,000 = $200,000. I know I went to a pretty good high school and a pretty good college. I’m not sure how someone making $200,000 is a millionaire.

Sorry to inform everyone, but there is only one tax cut in the entire compromise. It cuts taxes for Millionaires? No – it extends the current tax rate for everyone. It does not cut tax rates. But yet, they continue to harp that Millionaires and Billionaires are getting tax cuts. And now, the lefties in the House have delayed the bill.

Really? Do they not understand that by not voting passage of this bill, they will be raising taxes across the board? They will be denying unemployment benefits? Also, do they not understand that the Estate tax they are now whining about is actually an INCREASE over 2010? Remember, the estate tax is set at 0% for 2010 – this is an increase to 35%.

The only tax cut in the entire bill is the 2% reduction in the Social Security payroll withholdings. You currently pay 6.2%. If this goes through, you will pay 4.2% for one year. This will put dollars back in your pocket – and better than the “making work pay” credit that Obama and the Dems passed in the stimulus bill two years ago. That gave you less money in your paycheck ($8 per week average) and it affected your tax return. This will give you more in your pocket – and won’t affect your tax return. Keep in mind that the Making Work Pay credit will expire on 12/31.

I’m not a fan of the bill tossing in all of these other subsidies that aren’t paid for. I am somewhat a fan of the Unemployment extension – even though I don’t believe this is the best stimulus for the economy as Pelosi states (you get $2 per $1 invested…hell, we should make everyone unemployed and double our money!) But I think that the federal extensions should come with strings. You get your 26 weeks of state unemployment. On week 27, you are required to perform 4 hours of community service. This increases by ½ hour a week for the next 72 weeks. Then it’s over. By the end of the 99 weeks, we would have volunteers in our community working 40 hour weeks to earn their unemployment checks. I’m sure the community organizer in the White House who encouraged all Americans to give back to the community would support this.

http://change.gov/americaserves/

He calls on High School and College – why not the unemployed?
Overall, pass the bill. It’s not perfect from any side of the aisle – but this is how compromise works. We get a little, you get a little. Neither of us fully likes it, but it’s the best for both sides.

Apparently, that’s not how it works in Washington.

My daughter just told me a great joke:

If Pro is the opposite of Con, what is the opposite of Progress?

The Chinese/North Korean Crossroads

We stand at a crossroads.

With the recent attacks by North Korea against our allies in South Korea – we stand at a crossroads. Certainly President Obama stands at a crossroads. He can either see this for what it is, or back down and "negotiate".

What North Korea has done to the small island of Yeonpyeong, it also leaves China in a precarious position. China has thus far, not effectively told the North Koreans to “Knock it off.” And now the USS George Washington is moving in – and I think there will be more to come.

The President of China – Hu Jintao - will be in Washington in January. What a state dinner this will be! I have a suggestion for President Obama on how to approach this:

“President Jintao, if you like selling your products here in the United States, you best tell your buddies in North Korea to shape up. Otherwise, we’re going to tax the living crap out of your stuff coming in. Go ahead and cry to the United Nations. File your sanctions, call your bonds…whatever. If you want to hang out with the North Koreans, we’re OK with that. Just don’t expect to move your products here unless you are ready to pay a 100% import tax. Besides, we truly don’t need you – we just like your prices because we can’t make it here ourselves due to the outrageous wages we have to pay.”

Pretty much – play by our rules…or don’t sell anything here. We’ll cripple your economy in a couple of months. If I’m Walmart – I’d be looking for other vendors as soon as possible. As a shopper – I’ll be saving some money. Why? Prices will go sky high due to the wage demands of the American worker.

Or will America step up to the challenge and go back to work for less than what they want and/or feel they deserve?

Just to be clear – prices will go through the roof. However, unemployment will drop like a rock. We’ll have the same standard of living, but we’ll be back to work. We’ll shore up the federal coffers and pay off the debt since more tax money will be rolling back into the system.

So how do we accomplish this? Line up the US Marine Corps at the South Korean border. Line up the US Navy all the way around the Korean Peninsula. Have the US Army hanging out in Seoul until it’s time. Have the US Air Force on our carriers and military bases throughout Asia. On the ready. Do you really want to see a “show of military strength”? Really? We’ll show you…but you aren’t going to like what you see. Then if they don’t decide to play nice…we move the troops north until we hit China.

Then we will come back and help you build your country again. We will help you train your troops. We’ll give you not only humanitarian aid again, but we will teach you to be self sustaining after we get rid of your Communist government. So far it hasn’t worked out so well has it? Famine and poverty are commonplace in North Korea – but yet they still want to do the same thing over and over again expecting different results – which according to Albert Einstein is the definition of insanity.

Oh, and China? Since our troops are now standing on your border, do you want to play nice now too? Stop your currency manipulation?

It’s high time we revived some patriotism in this country and start believing we ARE EXCEPTIONAL! We need to get our "swagger" back and not pander to these countries and their developmental threats. 

We are the best. We are the brightest. We are the land of opportunity. 

Otherwise, we’d be North Korea.

references:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_koreas_clash_china_analysis
http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_16697757?source=rss
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933874.html