Posts by James Bremner
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Presentation and Reality, in reply to Tom Semmens,
You think you have it bad? The cult of Obama would have to be the worst ever. As far as the main stream media is concerned, Obama's shit smells of roses. They didn't ask a single searching question or do any digging into his background prior to the election and haven't given him a tough interview since then. And to disagree with Obama and his policies is to be a crank and a racist.
-
OnPoint: Transcription of new Rick Perry…, in reply to Russell Brown,
His ratings have slipped in the past six months, to about where Reagan was at the same point in his presidency, but he still beats a generic Republican candidate, and seems likely to beat anyone from the utter freakshow that is the Republican lineup. Given that he took office at the beginning of the US’s most severe financial crisis since the 1930s, he was always going to face challenges on the economic front.
Sweet dreams. In the year before the 84 election the US economy was growing strongly and unemployment was coming down significantly. That ain't going to happen here because Obama's policy setting are the opposite of Reagan's. Volker was operating a strong dollar monetary policy, Bernake is printing money like toilet paper, Reagan cut taxes on job creators, Obama wants to increase them, Reagan was reducing economic growth stifling regulations, Obama is increasing them at an amazing rate, Reagan wanted to cut govt expenditure (he didn't thanks to a Dem congress) Obama has increased govt expenditure faster and to a higher level than at any time outside war. As a result of the diametrically different policy settings, Reagan and Obama's political trajectories are also heading in opposite directions.
In many ways we should thank Obama. He has conducted a full throated Keynesian/Progressive experiment, and it has been an absolute bust. It will be interesting to see who can and who can’t absorb the lessons of Obama’s great Keynesian experiment.This is actually the problem – as you unwittingly implied above. The US revenue system is borked, to the point where there simply is not the revenue base available to fund the kind of superpower Americans perceive their country to be
Wrong. With the right economic policies (i.e. not what Obama is doing) economic growth will return quickly increasing tax revenues. Cut out all the crap Obama has added to the budget, or just adopt Ryan's spending plan and the budget would get back into shape much sooner then many expect.
You are wrong about Bush's tax cuts, as you can see from the linked graph (I know, it is from Heritage, sorry about that, but they used to have this graph at the CBO but I can't find it anymore. It is the same info, there is nothing controversial about this graph)
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/federal-government-revenues
You can see that revenues dropped sharply after 2000, due to the dot com bubble bursting, the impact of 9/11 and yes, Bush's tax cuts. The tax cuts were only one factor in that drop. But look how sharply revenues increased after the 2003 cap gains cuts and the reduction of double taxation on dividends. When Bush left office, revenues were higher than when he arrived. Sure they were trending down thanks to the GFC, but that wasn't his fault.
Note the 15% top rate on dividend income.
A common mistake, you are in good company on that one. There are many screwed up things about the US tax code, one of the more destructive is double taxation of dividends. Corporate income is taxed at 35%, and distributions of dividends post corp tax income are then taxed again at 15% at the individual level, for a combined effective tax rate of 47.5% (35% + ($65*15%)). Hardly a low level of taxation and prior to being cut in 2003 the effective taxation of corp income would have been as high as 60% (with a 39% personal income tax rate.
Just about every other country in the world, including NZ, gives you credit for corp income tax paid on dividends, so they aren't double taxed.
This double taxation is really destructive, it drives a lot of marginal M&A activity, as company's can't pass excess cash to shareholders without punitive taxation, so they try to drive stock price by buying companies. Most M&A doesn’t not create more value than it costs. This is also why so many US corps have huge piles of cash sitting on their balance sheets doing nothing useful.
And remember when you are talking about cap gains and dividend income, you are not just talking about rich wankers that lefties love to hate, you are talking about the majority of Americans who have their retirement, education and life savings in stocks and mutual funds. They are the people who suffer the most from bad tax policy. It doesn’t matter how high tax rates get, Warren Buffet and his other insufferable rich liberals will not feel an iota of pain. Everyone else will.Regarding state taxes, 8.97% really is a long way away from 10% isn't it? Massive difference, LOL. My point was that in some states such as CA and NY (I forgot to include NJ) Fed plus State plus local taxes (paid out of income) get north of 50%. 35% (39% if Bush's cuts expire) + 8.97%, plus local and state sales taxes, + property taxes get north of 50%. Deductions for children and mortgage interest etc get used up pretty quick. You only get to deduct $3,000 a year for stock market losses. Deducting a loss from an LLC would impact taxes paid and the effective rate. But you only get to make that deduction if your company or a company you have invested in makes a loss. Unless it is in the startup phase, that is a loss you don't want!! And if it is a start up, isn't that what we want? Wealthy people spending money creating companies and jobs?
-
OnPoint: Transcription of new Rick Perry…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Craig, you are exactly right, it is a different kind of Repub party than the party of Delay and the compassionate conservative, Bush. Compassionate conservatism must have actually meant "spend like a drunken sailor conservatism" (which therefore isn't actually conservatism).
Contrary to much popular belief, the sentiment that drives the Tea party was born under Bush and Delay, not under Obama. The extreme frustration and disgust of many Repubs, independents and mod Dems at the pork party and fiscal flatulence of 2000 to 2006. Of course the only problem the Dems had with Bush's spending was that it wasn't enough, when Bush spent 400b on his prescription bill, the Dems were screaming that it neeeded to be at least 1 trillion!!
That anger at spending was only compounded by the concerns of the GFC, and when Obama went of a wild spending spree with his absurd stimulus and across the board big budget increases, that existing concern and anger at excessive govt spending burst out into a wild fire. That is why it got so big so quickly. Sure their was some organization and money involved (just like the Iraq war protests), but no amount of money or organization is going to get your average joe or jane out to a protest if he or she isn't really pissed about something.
The desire for spending restraint really is real, if the Repubs don't deliver on spending cuts, you will see a lot of Repub Congressmen and Senators being primaried before 2014. -
OnPoint: Transcription of new Rick Perry…, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
Lucy,
There are a number of states such as NY or CA where the combined Fed, State income and various local taxes get north of 50% of annual income. Sure there are deductions, which is why a lot of low and middle income taxpayers don’t pay much if any income tax, but if you are on a big income, those deductions disappear in the rear vision mirror pretty quickly.
Long term capital gains are taxed at 15%, if that is what you are getting at. There is no shortage of taxes, and an enormous amount of taxation paid in the US, and the well off pay most of it. That is just a simple, well known and easily researchable fact.
I have a fairly sound understanding of the tax system. But based on your post, I have my doubts about your understanding. -
OnPoint: Transcription of new Rick Perry…, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
Very large majorities of Americans support raising taxes on the rich
Oh really?
The US needs spending cuts and increased tax revenues (not rates) generated by eliminating deductions and loop holes and lowering rates. A comprehensive corporate tax reform deal was on the table earlier in the year and has support from both Repubs and Dems in both Houses of Congress and is exactly the kind of economic and political circuit breaker Obama needs. This kind of tax reform would get the economy moving again and generate a whole lot of tax revenue, much much more then increase rates.
He could get that deal anytime he wants to, but Obama keeps killing the the deal by insisting on raising tax rates as well, probably to pander to his base. Dumb economics and super dumb politics. Obama really is no JFK, Reagan or Clinton. Not even close. Any of those guys could have made progress in the current situation.
Obama is 14 months out from an election, dead in the water, no mojo, no momentum, he is in the really dangerous political space where the phone is just about off the hook, and all he can do is insult the pols whose votes he needs to do anything, and offer up the same tired old crap about the rich paying their fair share. Apparently he is too clueless to know himself, or no one has told him that the rich pay just about all the tax that gets paid, which is the obvious outcome of a the progressive tax structure the US has.
The top 1% of tax payers now pay more than the bottom 95% of taxpayers. And this doesn't fit his definition of fair? I mean what else does he want? Blood?
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/24955.html -
OnPoint: Transcription of new Rick Perry…, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Steve,
No doubt the US has some very real and serious problems that it needs to face, the biggest of which is out of control Govt spending driving trillion dollar plus deficits and debt accumulation as far as the eye can see. Obama's ten year budget's lowest deficit was 800b in year 8 before going back up to over a trillion. Crazy. He made no attempt to even begin to address the budget problems
Bush added about 1 trillion to annual base line govt expenditure over his 8 years, and yes a chunk, but a minority chunk, of that increase was military spending. Obama has added another trillion to annual baseline spending in only a few years.
The good news is that the public now has a real appetite to see the kind of spending cuts and reforms to entitlement programs that are required to get things back on a sounder footing.
Obama is no JFK, as I think many of his most devoted admirers are having to admit to themselves. It is increasingly obvious that rather than some once in a lifetime demi-God, Obama is the most over hyped nothing burger ever to be inflicted on the US political scene. He really is just a former community organizer and a politician with no worthwhile experience or professional or legislative accomplishments whatsoever to his name. As Obama said about himself, "people see in me what they want to see", and a lot of people got very carried away. I quite understand why people voted for Obama, McCain was hardly inspiring, but to think Obama was going to be great, that really took some self delusion.
The Tea party didn't do Obama in, there is nothing nefarious or underhand or unfair about Obama's on going fall from grace. His spending terrified a populous already unhappy with Bush's spending habits and shell-shocked by the GFC, and his policies such as the stimulus did not produce the results he claimed they would. And no one believes that Obamacare will produce the results he claims it will, in fact people are anticipating paying more for worse healthcare. With this track record, is it not the least bit surprising that Obama is deep in the mire. -
OnPoint: Transcription of new Rick Perry…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Craig, so Obama isn't left of center? As a former community organizer, I think he would take umbrage at that!! As an example, Obama is further left than Helen Clark. Clark, worked hard to get a free trade agreement with China. In contrast there have been 3 free trade agreements (Panama Colombia and South Korea) sitting on Obama's desk for several years, that were even reworked to address some Dem concerns. Obama wont sign them.
All Obama can do at the moment is talk about tax increase for people who already pay between 50 and 60c on the dollar in tax (35c Fed, 10c State, plus numerous local sales & property taxes etc). That is not very centrist.
Obama, Pelosi and Reid are all from the more progressive section of the Dem party. Bill Clinton was from the more centrist section of the Dem party. The Dem party of today is very definitely not the party of Bill Clinton, which is a big part of their problem. -
Danielle, it's been too long....
Well, how do you think Obama has been doing and what do you think of his chances next year? A lot of Dems are not too happy right now. -
Don't worry Keith, I don't think you will have to transcribe too many more Perry ads, with two lousy debate performances and some strange/changing positions (e.g. social security is unconstitutional- no it isn't, paying the tuition of the children of illegal immigrants - the state of TX doesn't do that for the children of born and bred Texans), I think his goose is cooked. Didn't take long, talk about a shooting star.
Romney will be the Repub nominee and looking at polls in battleground states, Obama is in deep shit. He is low 40s in lots of critical states, and I don't see anything that is going to change the economy or job creation in his favor before the election.
Unless Obama does a 180 and reduces rather increases uncertainty by stopping talking about tax increases, actually seriously starts cutting Fed govt expenditure, making the NLRB and the EPA pull their head in and doing something to reduce the uncertainty and costs surrounding the imapct of Obamacare, companies are not going to start hiring. But none of that is going to happen. Barry is a committed leftie, he really believes he is doing the right thing, despite the obvious failure of his policies.
It has been amazing watching Obama's trajectory. From demi God to putz in a few short years. I guess Habitat for Humanity will get another loser ex president to help them build houses. -
And this just in. Apparently the artic ice pack is not going to reach a tipping point afterall!! Thank goodness for that, I will be able to sleep tonight afterall!!
Honestly, with all these predictions of one type of doom or another that have been made over the last 20 years that never transpire, why does anyone take this shite seriously anymore?