Sanchez and Others Further Goals of Political Elites

Yesterday I was driving along to a Job site when I heard Rick Sanchez on the Radio talking about how Millionaires get away with only paying 10 and 15% in income taxes.  So I promptly called up WIOD and explained to him that he was mistaken, when people invest.... oops, he cut me off and hung up on me and proceeded to say "... In the Cayman Islands and other places to hide their money and keep from paying taxes".

Wow, I thought to myself.  Is this guy REALLY this misinformed or is he just trying to gain a Populist position to increase his ratings.  After all, he did just recently take up the 3PM to 6PM slot on WIOD.  I was heartened to hear that many of those calling tried to set him straight on how income earned ANYWHERE in the world, had to be paid by U.S. Citizens.  Even if that income was earned outside of this country and we are one of a very few countries that actually does this.  As an example, a French or British citizen living and earning money in the U.S. isn't subject to French or British taxes, but the reverse is not true!  We REALLY have one of the worst taxing structures in the country.  Back to the story though, next thing you know there was a guy that called and agreed with Rick.  He proclaimed that he worked for a Private Equity Fund, where the Millionaires did nothing but try to avoid taxation by "hiding" funds in other countries.

I tried calling back but of course they wouldn't take my calls anymore so I guess I'll have to rage against the machine here on MY format.

So here's what I would have said, if I had actually had a chance to talk.

First of all Rick, getting a paycheck is not the same as investing in a Private Equity Fund, Mutual Fund or any other kind of investment.  Why?  Because just as you didn't walk into WIOD and hand them over a Million dollars to invest in their operation, the average working stiff doesn't INVEST in his employer.  He's just there with his hand out at the end of the week asking to get paid for the time he put in.  You see Rick, once you get your paycheck and AFTER you've already paid your taxes on that paycheck (which for you probably averages around 30+ Percent) you can now choose to invest that leftover money in some sort of Mutual Fund or other investment that will hopefully create jobs somewhere.  Rick, are you telling me that we should tax that money which you are essentially GAMBLING in some sort of investment, at the same levels of taxation as regular income?  

Of course not, this is why we have preferential treatment for investments, because otherwise what's the point in taking a gamble, if when you win the Government is going to take half?  As for "Hiding" investments in other countries, I think that people are making business decisions based upon the confiscatory nature of our Federal Government.  If Norway is charging their companies HALF the taxes that we do, doesn't it make business sense to move some of your manufacturing there?  Ask the guys that made the two biggest cruise ships in the world, and they would probably tell you that they wouldn't be able to compete if they made those ships in the U.S. because of the tax and regulatory hurdles.  The same goes for almost any manufacturing operation.  Just look at what Canada is doing.  Even though their dollar has risen by almost 40% in the past 10 years, manufacturing in Canada is up.  Why?  They've lowered Corporate Rates to around 25% (15% Federal and around 10% Provincial).  Here's the kicker.  Even with the lowered rates, revenue is up from all the additional economic activity.  To top it off, even though we, their biggest trading partner have been mired in a deep recession, they've managed to maintain an unemployment rate of around 2% lower than we have, despite the fact that historically Canada has had an unemployment rate of around 3% HIGHER than we have!

Dial Back Spending to 2005 Levels and it will match our Revenues

So here's the thing, STOP empowering Politicians by repeating their claims as facts.  Corporate tax rates in the U.S. are higher than all G7 Nations, tax collection in the U.S. is projected to be 2.7 Trillion, a record, yet as usual they're spending a Trillion over that amount!  The real problem isn't tax collection, it's the insane levels of spending.  Does anyone even realize that since his first year in Office, Obama has spent nearly a Trillion dollars each and every year MORE than what Bush spent for 7 out of 8 years?  We RARELY see reporters talk about how cuts are NEVER cuts, the politicians create a baseline budget of 3 to 10% above the previous year and if the number is less than that it's called a cut, even though it's actually an increase.  The ONLY reason they're able to get away with this lie over and over again is because of people like Rick Sanchez and other media types that REPEAT the lie.

No Deal Pending on Sequestration, Because of the Opportunity it Presents

Joe Scarborough got it got it right, when he said that America won't remember the Sequester of 2013 "as some cataclysmic fiscal event", but when he goes on to say about the Republicans that "you would think its leadership would have taken to heart Mr. Obama’s warnings and struck a deal before their abysmal approval ratings sank even lower", he fails to see the point.  Obama had absolutely no intention of striking a deal.  These cuts after all, amount to a paltry 2% of PROJECTED spending (which is always a MINIMUM of 3% higher than the previous year).  As the former White House Chief of Staff to the President, Rahm Emanuel used to always say, "You never let a serious crisis go to waste".  This issue literally presents the President with yet another opportunity to slam the Republicans and get more public support for his programs, his methods, his tax increases and so on.  So what was Obama's end game?  Blow this up to an issue, even though he knew it's a non issue, then blame the Republicans!

 

Think about it, Joe himself reported on how the Republicans wanted to give the President control over exactly what would be cut, yet he refused?  Not only did he refuse, he actually threatened to VETO any bill that gave him that kind of authority and responsibility!  Why would he do this?  Simple, the President doesn't want ANY cuts whatsoever, no matter how small and no matter how much waste is pointed out, but more importantly he wants to have another issue to beat up the Republicans over.  The plan is to hype up the damage to the economy over the next year so the Republicans lose in the Midterm elections.  Obama ends up with Nancy Pelosi in charge of Congress again and he can go back to pushing things like his Climate Change agenda and other tax increases.

Here Comes Inflation, AGAIN!

Here we go again guys, the Fed is up to no good, and on a Rampage printing money as fast as it can run the presses.  I guess we learned nothing from the 70's and how Inflation got out of control with excessive Government spending.  With all this money flooding the system, Food, Gas and Energy prices, which are already at an all time high are going even higher!  This action will undoubtedly Further push down American's disposable income, which in turn will cause even more job losses!  I mean let's face it, if you're having to spend $100.00 in gas just to go to the restaurant, you probably can't afford to go to that restaurant anymore right?  As Investors business Daily says, 

The government's addition of $1 trillion a year to our nation's debt hangs over this economy like a dark cloud, keeping entrepreneurs and big businesses alike on the sideline. The "fiscal cliff" we're about to go over will sock Americans — especially entrepreneurs — with a tax hike of almost $1 trillion. That's why the economy's dead — not insufficient Fed money printing."

 But don't worry there's a bright side to all this money printing, I'm sure that within just a few years of the coming inflation, we could do like the Germans did in the 1920's and use all that extra cash as a heating source for our homes. Hey at least no one will freeze to death in the Winter of 2016!

Five Reasons the Government Shouldn't Spend Money

We all know it's true, government, especially the Federal Government wastes a ton of cash.  There's stories all over the media about how the government spends 3 to 5 times what the private sector spends to create equivalent Jobs, and how they overpay for... well EVERYTHING!

With all this evidence of government excess though, even the good folks at Fox News say that in a downturn, when no one else is spending, the government should step in and fill the gap, so to speak.

Here are 5 reasons why those voices are mistaken, and should not be listened to:

• Number One:  Taxation reduces available Capital.

This is probably the most obvious.  If a small business needs to pay the bare minimum 35%, not counting State taxes, it not only reduces capital available for expansion, but additionally neccesitates higher prices to the consumer, reducing available spending power of the consumer, thereby also reduces jobs in that there are less opportunities for the consumer to buy other products either from the same company, or any other company.  As an example, before elected, when Reagan was asked what he would do to reduce rampant inflation back in the late 70's, he said he believed that reducing taxation would stimulate economic development and lower prices. He believed that ordinary people, free to pursue their own goals without undue interference, would creatively shape a booming economy and he was right.

• Number Two:  Corporations Prefer Government Debt in uncertain times.

There's so much talk about corporations "sitting" on nearly 2 Trillion in cash.  They're not that dumb.  They're not going to sit on Cash, they're going to sit on tax free T-Bills.  Again, if that option wasn't available because the government wasn't spending so much and taking on so much debt, they might be more apt to move that cash back into growing their business or at least investing in something that creates jobs.

• Number Three:  Banks prefer government debt.

Why take a risk when you can go with tax free government guaranteed profit?  Again, why bother investing in the private Sector when the Government hands you all the tax free guaranteed profits you need?  There are THOUSANDS of small businesses around the country starved for credit, because the banks don't want to give them even a short term loan, required to buy some inventory.  Many of these businesses could readily increase sales and profitability with decent inventory levels, but credit is hard to come by.  Reduced government spending will have Banks actually LOOKING for business again, instead of lazily sitting back and pressing a couple of buttons to buy all the T-Bills they could possibly ever want to gobble up.

• Number Four:  Printing money depreciates savings.

The value of the Dollar, has been reduced by over 30%, just in the past 7 years.  Gasoline alone, costs over 30% more than a year ago.  The same can be said for basic food items, like Corn.  If the value of our money is devalued, then once again, it reduces what we're able to buy.  We then have less to spend at the corner store, the movies, vacations, cars and so on.  We have to keep things longer before replacing them.  This reduced spending on items causes companies like HP, to shut down whole divisions and lay off thousands.  This malaise spreads across the nation causing untold misery.  To put it bluntly, Printing money like they did in QE1 and QE2, is akin to stealing money from each and every one of us.

• Number Five:  Currency Manipulations causes Job Losses.

The President talks a lot about how China keeps manipulating their currency to keep Chinese currency on par with U.S. currency, right at their current levels.  What he never mentions is how they manage to pull this off.  Normally when a country's exports are greater than another country, the exporting country's currency rises to reflect the stronger economic position of that country.  It's what happened to the U.S. after World War One and Two.  We continued to exports massive amounts of products to the Europeans and so our currency rose dramatically.  Later, when the Japanese started their export machine, the U.S. Dollar lost ground to the Japanese, and their products became so expensive to export, that they moved many of their manufacturing plants here, thereby providing Jobs to U.S. Workers (who were the ones buying their products anyway).  The reason this hasn't worked out with the Chinese, is because as our money flowed to the Chinese State Run companies, their government ordered those companies to buy U.S. Bonds, thereby sending the cash right back to the U.S.  This allowed them to "get rid" of their U.S. reserves, which in turn kept the Chinese Dollar from rising vs the U.S. Dollar.  The Chinese Government then turned around and issued low cost loans back to these same companies, deflating the value of their money and keeping the standard of living of the average Chinese very low.  Unlike in Japan, where the average family saw real gains in their standard of living.  The average Chinese citizen barely see's their standard of living rise.  The U.S. thereby is not only subsidizing the destruction of manufacturing jobs here in the U.S.  They're also subsidizing the destruction of any sort of advancement opportunity for the standard of living of the average Chinese citizen.

If the U.S were to stop issuing new debt, it would rob the corrupt Chinese Government's ability to continue to so easily manipulate their currency as effectively as they have.  Sure they could resort to printing even more money, but not without the risk of hyper inflation  A risk the Chinese Government would not be willing to take.  Instead they would do as Japanese companies did back when their currency began to rise, they started buying U.S. companies and investing in the U.S.  The difference is that at least the latter created jobs for U.S. Workers.

So the next time you hear the politicians talk about "Investments" or any other spending, deficit or otherwise, you'll understand that by supporting any spending whatsoever, they are killing jobs one way or another.  This is the reason why the Government MUST remain small, and must only spend where it's absolutely necessary.

Why the United States Is Destroying Its Education System

Chris Hedges' Columns

 EMAIL     PRINT     SHARE

SHARE

30

Posted on Apr 10, 2011

Photo illustration by PZS based on an image by Lin Pernille Photography

By Chris Hedges

A nation that destroys its systems of education, degrades its public information, guts its public libraries and turns its airwaves into vehicles for cheap, mindless amusement becomes deaf, dumb and blind. It prizes test scores above critical thinking and literacy. It celebrates rote vocational training and the singular, amoral skill of making money. It churns out stunted human products, lacking the capacity and vocabulary to challenge the assumptions and structures of the corporate state. It funnels them into a caste system of drones and systems managers. It transforms a democratic state into a feudal system of corporate masters and serfs.

Teachers, their unions under attack, are becoming as replaceable as minimum-wage employees at Burger King. We spurn real teachers—those with the capacity to inspire children to think, those who help the young discover their gifts and potential—and replace them with instructors who teach to narrow, standardized tests. These instructors obey. They teach children to obey. And that is the point. The No Child Left Behind program, modeled on the “Texas Miracle,” is a fraud. It worked no better than our deregulated financial system. But when you shut out debate these dead ideas are self-perpetuating.

Passing bubble tests celebrates and rewards a peculiar form of analytical intelligence. This kind of intelligence is prized by money managers and corporations. They don’t want employees to ask uncomfortable questions or examine existing structures and assumptions. They want them to serve the system. These tests produce men and women who are just literate and numerate enough to perform basic functions and service jobs. The tests elevate those with the financial means to prepare for them. They reward those who obey the rules, memorize the formulas and pay deference to authority. Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, eccentrics and iconoclasts—those who march to the beat of their own drum—are weeded out.

“Imagine,” said a public school teacher in New York City, who asked that I not use his name, “going to work each day knowing a great deal of what you are doing is fraudulent, knowing in no way are you preparing your students for life in an ever more brutal world, knowing that if you don’t continue along your scripted test prep course and indeed get better at it you will be out of a job. Up until very recently, the principal of a school was something like the conductor of an orchestra: a person who had deep experience and knowledge of the part and place of every member and every instrument. In the past 10 years we’ve had the emergence of both [Mayor] Mike Bloomberg’s Leadership Academy and Eli Broad’s Superintendents Academy, both created exclusively to produce instant principals and superintendents who model themselves after CEOs. How is this kind of thing even legal? How are such ‘academies’ accredited? What quality of leader needs a ‘leadership academy’? What kind of society would allow such people to run their children’s schools? The high-stakes tests may be worthless as pedagogy but they are a brilliant mechanism for undermining the school systems, instilling fear and creating a rationale for corporate takeover. There is something grotesque about the fact the education reform is being led not by educators but by financers and speculators and billionaires.”

Teachers, under assault from every direction, are fleeing the profession. Even before the “reform” blitzkrieg we were losing half of all teachers within five years after they started work—and these were people who spent years in school and many thousands of dollars to become teachers. How does the country expect to retain dignified, trained professionals under the hostility of current conditions? I suspect that the hedge fund managers behind our charter schools system—whose primary concern is certainly not with education—are delighted to replace real teachers with nonunionized, poorly trained instructors. To truly teach is to instill the values and knowledge which promote the common good and protect a society from the folly of historical amnesia. The utilitarian, corporate ideology embraced by the system of standardized tests and leadership academies has no time for the nuances and moral ambiguities inherent in a liberal arts education. Corporatism is about the cult of the self. It is about personal enrichment and profit as the sole aim of human existence. And those who do not conform are pushed aside. 

Advertisement

“It is extremely dispiriting to realize that you are in effect lying to these kids by insinuating that this diet of corporate reading programs and standardized tests are preparing them for anything,” said this teacher, who feared he would suffer reprisals from school administrators if they knew he was speaking out. “It is even more dispiriting to know that your livelihood depends increasingly on maintaining this lie. You have to ask yourself why are hedge fund managers suddenly so interested in the education of the urban poor? The main purpose of the testing craze is not to grade the students but to grade the teacher.”

“I cannot say for certain—not with the certainty of a Bill Gates or a Mike Bloomberg who pontificate with utter certainty over a field in which they know absolutely nothing—but more and more I suspect that a major goal of the reform campaign is to make the work of a teacher so degrading and insulting that the dignified and the truly educated teachers will simply leave while they still retain a modicum of self-respect,” he added. “In less than a decade we been stripped of autonomy and are increasingly micromanaged. Students have been given the power to fire us by failing their tests. Teachers have been likened to pigs at a trough and blamed for the economic collapse of the United States. In New York, principals have been given every incentive, both financial and in terms of control, to replace experienced teachers with 22-year-old untenured rookies. They cost less. They know nothing. They are malleable and they are vulnerable to termination.”

1   2   NEXT PAGE >>>

Click here to check out Pulitzer Prize winner Chris Hedges’ new Truthdig book, “The World As It Is: Dispatches On the Myth of Human Progress.”

Keep up with Chris Hedges’ latest columns, interviews, tour dates and more atwww.truthdig.com/chris_hedges.

TAGS: chris hedges consciousness debate education education reform free thought history kant kids law media moralityphilosophy teachers

Related Entries

• April 10, 2011 Bolivia Set to Pass ‘Law of Mother Earth’
• April 8, 2011 Saudis Play Into Radical islam’s Hands
• April 6, 2011 One Guantanamo Trial That Will Be Held in New York
• April 5, 2011 Why Not Bachmann?
• April 4, 2011 Secret History of the Libyan Uprising

       

 Email to a friend

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: The End of Shutdowns

Next item: Demanding the Impossible

Smoking Gun - Freddie Mac Spared by Democrats

Here it is, the smoking gun we've been looking for. The proof that everyone needs to see the real cause of the Housing Crisis. How Democrats let bad loans spread like a cancer throughout the financial system bringing it to utter ruin. I've already written about how this all started, back in the Clinton Era, but here's just to show you that it wasn't something where no one knew what was going on, and people were clueless. There were willing and able accomplices to keep the scam on America going. Where's the coverage. Where's the spotlights. Where's CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and their Coverage?
I've seen some of the reviews on this video on YouTube and I was pretty shocked, there are some saying that Obama knew nothing of this and was clueless. First of all, the video shows his own economic adviser defending Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Second, who do you think was first put in charge of finding his VP? Third, Obama was the largest recipient of Political Contributions from these Organizations.

The Proof is clear. Democrats defended these guys so they could rake in their bonuses, then turn around and kick some cold hard cash back to them. Will anything be done about this? With Democrats in charge of congress I doubt it.
McCain knew about this 3 years ago, he led efforts to try to stop it, but with Democrats in charge of Congress, it was practically impossible. Fox News is the only network doing stories on this. Where is everyone else?

Does the U.S. Government Need More Taxes?

To hear Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama speak, you would think that the Federal Government is in Dire Straights. “The Rich need to pay their fair share” and “we need to invest Oil Profits”. Last year the federal government spent almost 2.8 Trillion Dollars. That figure is a just over a 13 fold increase since 1970. What you don’t hear, is that the government has also had an almost 13 fold increase in recipients as well. Think about this for a moment, in that same time span, the median household income in the U.S. has grown at only half that rate, and while the deficit has definitely gone up, to the tune over 300 Billion a year, it’s still relatively small compared to total inflows.

The reason the Government has been able to get away with this is simple, they utilize politics of class warfare and envy. While the bottom 50% of income earners share of taxes has gone down to a historic low of less than 4% of all personal taxes collected, the wealthy in this country, or at least those in the top 50% of income earners are paying over 96% of all personal income taxes collected, with the top 1% of income earners paying almost 40% of all personal income taxes collected. To top it off, Corporate taxes in the U.S. are at an all time high of 35 to 39%, the 3rd highest in the industrialized world. Only Japan and Germany are higher, and both of those companies have record numbers of factories moving overseas, so the next time people talk about NAFTA and China taking away jobs, we here in the U.S. make it very difficult for companies to make money, and then once they do make money, they have to hand over a third of it to the government. They then wonder why the companies want to move offshore? Most other countries throughout the world tax their corporations at anywhere from 12 to 25%! Ever since Ireland had adopted a low corporate tax of just 12.5%, it has seen an economic boom that has powered it's economy twice as fast as other European nations. Obviously, going the route that Clinton and Obama are espousing would cause more companies to take Intel and Dell's lead and move more operations to Ireland and other low corporate tax nations.

The chart below shows the overall budget between 1970 to 2007, 75&76 are a bit skewed because of accounting changes, but has you can clearly see the amount of cash being collected by the government is at an all time high. According to Pig Book, 17.2 Billion of the deficit spending, was attributed to Pork Barrel spending alone, both the Senate and theHouse are guilty of indulging their constituents.

On Nov. 7^th, 2006 voters across the country signaled their disgust for the system and the status quo with a mandate for the Democrats to clean house. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem that they’re listening. Spending between 2006 and 2007 is up by a 4%, adjusted to inflation a 1% increase, but no cuts. Considering the fact that the deficit is only 13% of the budget, a simply slowing spending to say, half of inflation coupled with eliminating Pork Barrel spending would have brought the deficit down by 8%, a few years like that and the entire deficit could be wiped out, without too much pain. The worst part is that we blew a golden opportunity between 2004 and 2007, while the economy was booming, receipts increased by an average of 11% a year, this would have been a perfect opportunity to balance the budget, but instead, spending each year, exceeded receipts. Bush, once again offered more of the same, instead of leadership on this issue, when he issues his proposed budget of 3.1 Trillion Dollars, that had 2.9 Trillion in spending.