Well, I'm not going to hold me breath for an apology from global warming alarmists for comparing people who prefer non-agenda driven, junk science to Holocaust deniers.
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
Apparently CO2 doesn't contribute to a greenhouse effect on the planet.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
7 Untruths of the President's July 25, 2011 Speech
Falsehood #1: In the year 2000, the government had a budget surplus, but instead of using it to pay off our debt, the money was used to pay off new tax cuts.
Why it's false: After tax cuts in 2003, from 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. (Even with the recession, 2008 revenues exceeded 2000 revenues by $1T.)
Falsehood #2: The recession meant less money was coming in, and it required us to spend more.
Why it's false: The government spent $278K per job created. In March, 2009 US underemployment stood at 15.6%. In July of 2011, US underemployment stands at 18.7%. This outcome does not substantiate this need.
Falsehood #3: ...if nothing is asked of the top of the income scale.
Why it's false: The top 1% income earners pay greater than 40% of total US government revenue. The bottom 95% pay less than 60% of the total US government revenue.
Falsehood #4:Republicans in the house are insisting on a cuts-only approach.
Why it's false: The House of Representatives passed a bill entitled Cut, Cap, and Balance. It raises the debt ceiling by $2.4T, as requested by the Democrats.
Falsehood #5: Most Americans don't understand how we can ask a Senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare benefits before we ask a corporate jet owner or the oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don't get.
Why it's false: The oil companies benefit from a $4B per year tax credit. Eliminating the corporate jet loophole would increase government revenue by $3B over the next decade. The federal debt is >$14T. If the US government collected 100% of income earned above $250K/year, 100% of all fortune 500 company profits, and 100% of the assets owned by individuals worth $1M or more, the US government could only pay for January through August of the 2011 budget. Loopholes aside, the rich pay their fair share.
Falsehood #6: If [a spending cuts only approach] happens and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills, bills that include monthly social security checks.
Why it's false: Social security has a trust fund and revenues capable of funding all social security checks through the end of President Obama's current term. A prioritization of loan payments avoids a default of any kind, which the government has sufficient revenue to pay without a debt ceiling increase.
Falsehood #7: Our AAA rating would be downgraded. Interest rates would skyrocket.
Why it's false: See answer to falsehood #6. Side Note: The US risks a loss of it's AAA rating and skyrocketing interest rates with an increase of it's debt to GDP ratio, which a debt ceiling increase will cause.
Why it's false: After tax cuts in 2003, from 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. (Even with the recession, 2008 revenues exceeded 2000 revenues by $1T.)
Falsehood #2: The recession meant less money was coming in, and it required us to spend more.
Why it's false: The government spent $278K per job created. In March, 2009 US underemployment stood at 15.6%. In July of 2011, US underemployment stands at 18.7%. This outcome does not substantiate this need.
Falsehood #3: ...if nothing is asked of the top of the income scale.
Why it's false: The top 1% income earners pay greater than 40% of total US government revenue. The bottom 95% pay less than 60% of the total US government revenue.
Falsehood #4:Republicans in the house are insisting on a cuts-only approach.
Why it's false: The House of Representatives passed a bill entitled Cut, Cap, and Balance. It raises the debt ceiling by $2.4T, as requested by the Democrats.
Falsehood #5: Most Americans don't understand how we can ask a Senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare benefits before we ask a corporate jet owner or the oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don't get.
Why it's false: The oil companies benefit from a $4B per year tax credit. Eliminating the corporate jet loophole would increase government revenue by $3B over the next decade. The federal debt is >$14T. If the US government collected 100% of income earned above $250K/year, 100% of all fortune 500 company profits, and 100% of the assets owned by individuals worth $1M or more, the US government could only pay for January through August of the 2011 budget. Loopholes aside, the rich pay their fair share.
Falsehood #6: If [a spending cuts only approach] happens and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills, bills that include monthly social security checks.
Why it's false: Social security has a trust fund and revenues capable of funding all social security checks through the end of President Obama's current term. A prioritization of loan payments avoids a default of any kind, which the government has sufficient revenue to pay without a debt ceiling increase.
Falsehood #7: Our AAA rating would be downgraded. Interest rates would skyrocket.
Why it's false: See answer to falsehood #6. Side Note: The US risks a loss of it's AAA rating and skyrocketing interest rates with an increase of it's debt to GDP ratio, which a debt ceiling increase will cause.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Making a Case for Federalism
On 7/24, a story ran about Dodd-Frank where Amy Friend illustrates pigs feeding at the troughs, even the very ones they’ve built.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/07/dodd-franks-winners-revolving-door-regulators
This story addresses the same issue at a macro level. American public loves to rail against lobbying while hailing the regulations that enable it. There’s no coincidence lobbying escalated over the past decade and regulations such as Sarbanes-Oxley, Obamacare, and Dodd-Frank passed. During the dot com boom, tech industry focused more of its investment in products and personnel. After the Microsoft anit-trust trials, they now spend on lobbying. Tax dollars leave states to the federal government, and the states have to grovel to get those dollars back. State legislators even have lobbying representation! These circumstances call for state to do more while the federal government does less with respect to taxing and regulating. This also has a role in solving our debt crisis because states can’t print money. They have to balance their budgets. This way, conservative locales could have the regulations and taxing they want while liberal locales could respectively have the same, and we could all happily coexists with less lobbying related gridlock in
Washington.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/07/dodd-franks-winners-revolving-door-regulators
This story addresses the same issue at a macro level. American public loves to rail against lobbying while hailing the regulations that enable it. There’s no coincidence lobbying escalated over the past decade and regulations such as Sarbanes-Oxley, Obamacare, and Dodd-Frank passed. During the dot com boom, tech industry focused more of its investment in products and personnel. After the Microsoft anit-trust trials, they now spend on lobbying. Tax dollars leave states to the federal government, and the states have to grovel to get those dollars back. State legislators even have lobbying representation! These circumstances call for state to do more while the federal government does less with respect to taxing and regulating. This also has a role in solving our debt crisis because states can’t print money. They have to balance their budgets. This way, conservative locales could have the regulations and taxing they want while liberal locales could respectively have the same, and we could all happily coexists with less lobbying related gridlock in
Washington.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)