 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
Tigger in Red Square.
Friday, March 06, 2009
Cut Nose to Spite Face
Amazing--
...there has been a near total absence of discussion of what higher rates will mean in the real world. Say you're a CNBC anchor, or a Washington Post columnist with a seat at the Council on Foreign Relations, or a dentist, and you managed to cobble together $350,000 a year in income. You're doing quite well. If you subtract deductions for state and property taxes, mortgage interest and charitable deductions, and other deductions, the amount on which tax rates are calculated might total $300,000. What would happen if the marginal rate on the portion of your income above $250,000 were to rise from 33 percent to 36 percent? Under the old regime, you'd pay $16,500 in federal taxes on that amount. Under the new one, you'd pay $18,000. The difference is $1,500 per year, or $4.10 per day. Obviously, the numbers rise as you make more. But is $4.10 a day bleeding the rich, a war on the wealthy, a killer of innovation and enterprise? That dentist eager to slash her income from $320,000 to $250,000 would avoid the pain of paying an extra $2,100 in federal taxes. But she'd also deprive herself of an additional $70,000 in income!
Via.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
Amazing--
...there has been a near total absence of discussion of what higher rates will mean in the real world. Say you're a CNBC anchor, or a Washington Post columnist with a seat at the Council on Foreign Relations, or a dentist, and you managed to cobble together $350,000 a year in income. You're doing quite well. If you subtract deductions for state and property taxes, mortgage interest and charitable deductions, and other deductions, the amount on which tax rates are calculated might total $300,000. What would happen if the marginal rate on the portion of your income above $250,000 were to rise from 33 percent to 36 percent? Under the old regime, you'd pay $16,500 in federal taxes on that amount. Under the new one, you'd pay $18,000. The difference is $1,500 per year, or $4.10 per day. Obviously, the numbers rise as you make more. But is $4.10 a day bleeding the rich, a war on the wealthy, a killer of innovation and enterprise? That dentist eager to slash her income from $320,000 to $250,000 would avoid the pain of paying an extra $2,100 in federal taxes. But she'd also deprive herself of an additional $70,000 in income!
Via.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Hard Time on the River
A long but thoroughly engrossing story in Mother Jones about the Angola 3, two of whom are still in solitary confinement while they await a retrial (Robert King was released from prison in 2001.)
Additional information here.
You can come to your own conclusions regarding their case; however, one thing I'll note is that a number of years ago I went to the Prison Rodeo and Crafts Show, and while there, bought a prisoner-made board game. If I remember right, it was called something like Doing Hard Time on the River, and seemed like an earnest effort on the part of the inmate-inventor to steer particularly kids away from a life of crime. That said, it became instantly apparent that playing the game itself would have required an immense time investment...something inmates have an abundance of...but the rest of us, maybe not so much.
If you're wondering, I split the $20 or so cost with my sister...guess it sits in a closet if it hasn't been disposed of...
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
A long but thoroughly engrossing story in Mother Jones about the Angola 3, two of whom are still in solitary confinement while they await a retrial (Robert King was released from prison in 2001.)
Additional information here.
You can come to your own conclusions regarding their case; however, one thing I'll note is that a number of years ago I went to the Prison Rodeo and Crafts Show, and while there, bought a prisoner-made board game. If I remember right, it was called something like Doing Hard Time on the River, and seemed like an earnest effort on the part of the inmate-inventor to steer particularly kids away from a life of crime. That said, it became instantly apparent that playing the game itself would have required an immense time investment...something inmates have an abundance of...but the rest of us, maybe not so much.
If you're wondering, I split the $20 or so cost with my sister...guess it sits in a closet if it hasn't been disposed of...
The Zach Wamp Health Plan
Health care is a privilege.
Well, points for honesty, but What. An. Asshole. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if he justifies this almost absurd degree of selfish, sadistic ugliness by invoking "strong Christian beliefs."
Because nothing says "Christian Community" quite like "claim denied," or, better yet, no health insurance at all. Besides, if Jesus had had health care, he might've survived his ordeal on the cross, right?
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
Health care is a privilege.
Well, points for honesty, but What. An. Asshole. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if he justifies this almost absurd degree of selfish, sadistic ugliness by invoking "strong Christian beliefs."
Because nothing says "Christian Community" quite like "claim denied," or, better yet, no health insurance at all. Besides, if Jesus had had health care, he might've survived his ordeal on the cross, right?
Kiss the Ring
Steve Benen:
Boehner's argument is kind of silly. For one thing, Democrats aren't responsible -- at least not solely responsible -- for elevating Limbaugh into the role of de facto Republican leader. It's the result of a combination of factors, including his gift of self-promotion and the GOP's interest in kissing his ring.
More importantly, though, I don't think Boehner fully appreciates the point of "diversionary tactics." As the Minority Leader sees it, Democrats don't want to talk about their economic policies, so they're talking about Limbaugh.
But here's the follow-up question: why would Democrats be reluctant to talk about their economic policies? Americans like the Democrats' economic policies. The policies make sense, especially when compared to Republican rhetoric about spending freezes, tax cuts, deficit reduction, and a balanced-budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Put it this way: with Democrats enjoying a huge advantage on economic policy in the midst of an economic crisis, and with the GOP's economic agenda coming straight out of the Hoover playbook, what possible incentive does the majority party have in mulling "diversionary tactics"? Why engage in a "change-the-subject campaign" when your side is winning the most important economic debate in generations?
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
Steve Benen:
Boehner's argument is kind of silly. For one thing, Democrats aren't responsible -- at least not solely responsible -- for elevating Limbaugh into the role of de facto Republican leader. It's the result of a combination of factors, including his gift of self-promotion and the GOP's interest in kissing his ring.
More importantly, though, I don't think Boehner fully appreciates the point of "diversionary tactics." As the Minority Leader sees it, Democrats don't want to talk about their economic policies, so they're talking about Limbaugh.
But here's the follow-up question: why would Democrats be reluctant to talk about their economic policies? Americans like the Democrats' economic policies. The policies make sense, especially when compared to Republican rhetoric about spending freezes, tax cuts, deficit reduction, and a balanced-budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Put it this way: with Democrats enjoying a huge advantage on economic policy in the midst of an economic crisis, and with the GOP's economic agenda coming straight out of the Hoover playbook, what possible incentive does the majority party have in mulling "diversionary tactics"? Why engage in a "change-the-subject campaign" when your side is winning the most important economic debate in generations?
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Lost, GOP
Nate Silver:
The Republicans' problem is not that they don't have a leader, but that they don't have a direction. The House Republicans aren't on the same page as the Senate Republicans, who aren't on the same page as the Red State Governors, who aren't on the same page as the Purple State Governors, who aren't on the same page as the Beltway Elites, who aren't on the same page as the Media Elites. Nobody is happy with their statition in life. Nobody, except maybe Newt Gingrich and John Huntsman, is in anything other than survival mode. Nobody (including Steele, the RNC Chairman) is willing to put the best interests of their party ahead of their desire to mark their territory and increase their personal sphere of influence.
This is not the sign of a healthy party -- but Rush Limbaugh is the least of the Republicans' problems.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
Nate Silver:
The Republicans' problem is not that they don't have a leader, but that they don't have a direction. The House Republicans aren't on the same page as the Senate Republicans, who aren't on the same page as the Red State Governors, who aren't on the same page as the Purple State Governors, who aren't on the same page as the Beltway Elites, who aren't on the same page as the Media Elites. Nobody is happy with their statition in life. Nobody, except maybe Newt Gingrich and John Huntsman, is in anything other than survival mode. Nobody (including Steele, the RNC Chairman) is willing to put the best interests of their party ahead of their desire to mark their territory and increase their personal sphere of influence.
This is not the sign of a healthy party -- but Rush Limbaugh is the least of the Republicans' problems.
Boss Limbaugh
I don't know what's more pathetic--the soulless cringing and sucking up to a rotund, tone deaf, actual deaf brought about from his actual addiction to an actual narcotic which he purchased illegally, idiot...an idiot who "panders to the depraved imagination"...or the phony and factually incorrect concern trolling on the part of "free press" (see especially the link to the simpering David Von Drehle.)
Gag.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
I don't know what's more pathetic--the soulless cringing and sucking up to a rotund, tone deaf, actual deaf brought about from his actual addiction to an actual narcotic which he purchased illegally, idiot...an idiot who "panders to the depraved imagination"...or the phony and factually incorrect concern trolling on the part of "free press" (see especially the link to the simpering David Von Drehle.)
Gag.
He Just Can't Help Himself...
I dunno, maybe it's because he was forced to abruptly end his preferred leisure activity of whoring, but lately Vitter seems to publicly glom onto pretty much any and every batshit insane wingnut position with the zeal of a confirmed addict huffing spray paint by the aerosol can. First ACORN, now Planned Parenthood...the ACLU's gotta be next.
Vitter's betting on the "there's a sucker born every minute" approach to getting re-elected. Sadly, it just might work.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
I dunno, maybe it's because he was forced to abruptly end his preferred leisure activity of whoring, but lately Vitter seems to publicly glom onto pretty much any and every batshit insane wingnut position with the zeal of a confirmed addict huffing spray paint by the aerosol can. First ACORN, now Planned Parenthood...the ACLU's gotta be next.
Vitter's betting on the "there's a sucker born every minute" approach to getting re-elected. Sadly, it just might work.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
The New White Whine From Minnesota
It's called "We Wanna a New Election NOW!" --a product of the Norm Coleman Whinery.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
It's called "We Wanna a New Election NOW!" --a product of the Norm Coleman Whinery.
Bring Rush On
The degree to which the Rethugs are becoming unhinged can be assessed by their zeal in clinging to someone with even worse approval ratings than Shrub.
Hey, if that's who they want, let 'em have him.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
The degree to which the Rethugs are becoming unhinged can be assessed by their zeal in clinging to someone with even worse approval ratings than Shrub.
Hey, if that's who they want, let 'em have him.
Understanding Marginal Taxation Rate FAIL
Sigh--yet another example of the issue being less left versus right and more adult versus child's level of understanding:
I've seen a lot of dumb news reports in my life, but I'm not sure anything can quite match this one from ABC News. The premise of the report is this: Barack Obama plans to raise taxes on people who make more than $250,000, so the reporter has gone and found people who earn a little more than that sum who plan to decrease their income so that they come in underneath the magic line.
Now, the obvious objection here is that the tax code doesn't work that way. A tax increase affects the marginal dollar that a person gains. That's means only every dollar over $250,000 is taxed at a higher rate. Obama is not proposing a tax system whereby somebody who goes from $249,999 to $250,000 suddenly becomes poorer. Nobody has ever enacted a tax hike like that in the history of the United States.
Obama himself tried to explain this to Joe/Sam(not)the Plumber last fall, who you could see didn't quite get it. And it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of folks didn't really grasp the concept (which might explain why there's more support than there should be for a flat tax.)
What's kind of sad is that it's not all that difficult to explain (as Obama did to Joe/Sam.) What's interesting is that I don't think I've seen a single story, report, or explanation of this pretty easy-to-explain concept from our media.
And that speaks volumes.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
Sigh--yet another example of the issue being less left versus right and more adult versus child's level of understanding:
I've seen a lot of dumb news reports in my life, but I'm not sure anything can quite match this one from ABC News. The premise of the report is this: Barack Obama plans to raise taxes on people who make more than $250,000, so the reporter has gone and found people who earn a little more than that sum who plan to decrease their income so that they come in underneath the magic line.
Now, the obvious objection here is that the tax code doesn't work that way. A tax increase affects the marginal dollar that a person gains. That's means only every dollar over $250,000 is taxed at a higher rate. Obama is not proposing a tax system whereby somebody who goes from $249,999 to $250,000 suddenly becomes poorer. Nobody has ever enacted a tax hike like that in the history of the United States.
Obama himself tried to explain this to Joe/Sam(not)the Plumber last fall, who you could see didn't quite get it. And it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of folks didn't really grasp the concept (which might explain why there's more support than there should be for a flat tax.)
What's kind of sad is that it's not all that difficult to explain (as Obama did to Joe/Sam.) What's interesting is that I don't think I've seen a single story, report, or explanation of this pretty easy-to-explain concept from our media.
And that speaks volumes.
Not Necessarily Shorter Michael Steele
I was a willing subject of Goldstein's influence.
I was stubborn and egocentric...
I read and memorized Goldstein's book.
For years, I have plotted to bring down the Party.
I was sick in mind and body.
etc., etc.
I don't know what's more pathetic: Lamebone as de facto leader of the Republican party, or the sniveling membership that dares not cross this ugly rotund drug addict who destroyed his own hearing with his Oxycontin habit.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
I was a willing subject of Goldstein's influence.
I was stubborn and egocentric...
I read and memorized Goldstein's book.
For years, I have plotted to bring down the Party.
I was sick in mind and body.
etc., etc.
I don't know what's more pathetic: Lamebone as de facto leader of the Republican party, or the sniveling membership that dares not cross this ugly rotund drug addict who destroyed his own hearing with his Oxycontin habit.
Monday, March 02, 2009
Number 1 in the Nation...
...in locking people up, that is:
One out of every 55 Louisiana residents is behind bars, a higher incarceration rate than any other state, according to research released today by a Washington, D.C., nonprofit group.
One in 26 Louisiana adults is under correctional control, if probation and parole are included, the group found.
The Pew Center for the States study of 2007 U.S. Census data found that Louisiana's incarceration rate spiked by 272 percent since 1982. That rate of increase is far from the nation's highest of 357 percent in North Dakota, and not far from Mississippi's 256 percent increase. Neighbor states Texas and Arkansas have seen increases around 200 percent.
And it's not like things are getting any safer...
|
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
...in locking people up, that is:
One out of every 55 Louisiana residents is behind bars, a higher incarceration rate than any other state, according to research released today by a Washington, D.C., nonprofit group.
One in 26 Louisiana adults is under correctional control, if probation and parole are included, the group found.
The Pew Center for the States study of 2007 U.S. Census data found that Louisiana's incarceration rate spiked by 272 percent since 1982. That rate of increase is far from the nation's highest of 357 percent in North Dakota, and not far from Mississippi's 256 percent increase. Neighbor states Texas and Arkansas have seen increases around 200 percent.
And it's not like things are getting any safer...
Founding Document Fail
We hold this truth to be self-evident: Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
We hold this truth to be self-evident: Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot.
No Pun Intended, But...
...this gets filed in the "You've Gotta Be Shitting Me" folder:
Former Rep. John Cooksey (R-La.) is in the process of putting together a primary challenge to Sen. David Vitter in 2010, according to a prominent Louisiana political website.
BayouBuzz.com reported Friday that Cooksey’s backers have arranged a drafting movement to encourage him to get in...
[Cooksey's] 2002 [Senatorial] campaign was doomed by a remark he made comparing terrorists’ turbans to diapers attached with fan belts.
A creep with diaper fetishist...a creep who compares keffiyehs to diapers...a creep who runs Family Research Council...hmmm...
In comparison, a porn star seems pretty reasonable.
 |
| From 2Millionth Web Log |
...this gets filed in the "You've Gotta Be Shitting Me" folder:
Former Rep. John Cooksey (R-La.) is in the process of putting together a primary challenge to Sen. David Vitter in 2010, according to a prominent Louisiana political website.
BayouBuzz.com reported Friday that Cooksey’s backers have arranged a drafting movement to encourage him to get in...
[Cooksey's] 2002 [Senatorial] campaign was doomed by a remark he made comparing terrorists’ turbans to diapers attached with fan belts.
A creep with diaper fetishist...a creep who compares keffiyehs to diapers...a creep who runs Family Research Council...hmmm...
In comparison, a porn star seems pretty reasonable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)