Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, October 19, 2011
And this is what it's come to, folks... celebrating the lifestyle of a serial adulterer, predator, and accused rapist.
Is it a catchy tune? Sure! Does that detract from the larger message that the American culture which once shone as a beacon for the world now more closely resembles a red light signifying a whorehouse?
Folks... all too often nowadays I'm literally ashamed to be an American. Right now is one of those times.
Oh... and by the way... as I was lay in bed this morning listening to Imus In The Morning prior to getting up... Don Imus called the Pope a Nazi.
Will he be fired? No. I doubt it. Indeed I wonder if it'll even become an issue... even get noted by the mainstream media.
Folks... we're losing our country in so many ways. I swear I can't decide what's worth, the ongoing economic decline of the United States or the ongoing cultural decline of the United States.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204346104576637310315367804.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
* BY ART LAFFER
It used to be that the sole purpose of the tax code was to raise the necessary funds to run government. But in today's world the tax mandate has many more facets. These include income redistribution, encouraging favored industries, and discouraging unfavorable behavior.
* ALL OF WHICH IS WRONG!
To make matters worse there are millions and millions of taxpayers who are highly motivated to reduce their tax liabilities. And, as those taxpayers finagle and connive to find ways around the tax code, government responds by propagating new rules, new interpretations of the code, and new taxes in a never-ending chase. In the process, we create ever-more arcane tax codes that do a poor job of achieving any of their mandates.
* CAN ANYONE DENY THE TRUTH OF THE ABOVE STATEMENT? I KNOW I CAN'T!
Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's now famous "9-9-9" plan is his explicit proposal to right the wrongs of our federal tax code. He proposes a 9% flat-rate personal income tax with no deductions except for donations to charity; a 9% flat-rate tax on net business profits; and a new 9% national tax on retail sales.
* AND I'D REMOVE THE CHARITABLE DEDUCTION! IF ONE IS ASSUME TO "OWE" A CERTAIN SHARE OF HIS OR HER INCOME TO GOVERNMENT SO THAT GOVERNMENT CAN EXIST THAN THAT'S THAT! WHAT YOU DECIDE TO DO WITH YOUR MONEY THAT REMAINS AFTER TAXES... THAT'S YOUR BUSINESS AND YOUR RESPONSIBILITY; YOU SHOULD BE NEITHER REWARDED NOR PUNISHED FOR HOW YOU DECIDE TO SPEND YOUR OWN MONEY!
Mr. Cain's 9-9-9 plan was designed to be what economists call "static revenue neutral," which means that if people didn't change what they do under his plan, total tax revenues would be the same as they are under our current tax code. I believe his plan would indeed be static revenue neutral, and with the boost it would give to economic growth it would bring in even more revenue than expected.
* AGAIN... THE "I" IN THE ABOVE STATEMENT IS ART LAFFER - AS IN "THE LAFFER CURVE"... AS IN ONE OF RONALD REAGAN'S GO-TO GUYS. I TAKE WHAT HE HAS TO SAY QUITE SERIOUSLY.
* To be continued...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
In the recent past, federal tax revenues from the personal and business income taxes, all payroll taxes, and the capital gains, gift and estate taxes have averaged $2.3 trillion, while gross domestic product has averaged about $14.5 trillion. The total revenue from these taxes as a share of gross domestic product averages around 16%. Sometimes it's a good deal higher, as in the boom of the late 1990s, and sometimes its lower, as in today's "Great Recession." But a number in the 16%-19% range is as good as you'll get under our current tax code.
* REMEMBER, FOLKS... THAT'S JUST FEDERAL TAXES. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAKES 16%-19% OF THE NATION'S WEALTH - THAT'S SEPARATE FROM WHAT STATES AND LOCALITIES TAKE. ASK YOURSELVES... HOW MUCH MONEY DOES "GOVERNMENT" IN ITS TOTALITY HAVE A "RIGHT" TO TAKE FROM A FREE CITIZEN?
By contrast, the three tax bases for Mr. Cain's 9-9-9 plan add up to about $33 trillion. But the plan exempts from any tax people below the poverty line. Using poverty tables, this exemption reduces each tax base by roughly $2.5 trillion. Thus, Mr. Cain's 9-9-9 tax base for his business tax is $9.5 trillion, for his income tax $7.7 trillion, and for his sales tax $8.3 trillion. And there you have it! Three federal taxes at 9% that would raise roughly $2.3 trillion and replace the current income tax, corporate tax, payroll tax (employer and employee), capital gains tax and estate tax.
* WELL... I'M NOT SURE IF $33 TRILLION IS A TYPO OR NOT (MEANING MIGHT IT BE $3.3 TRILLION RATHER THAN $33 TRILLION?) BUT BESIDES THAT QUESTION, THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT LAFFER IS SAYING CAIN'S PLAN IS INDEED REVENUE NEUTRAL. (THAT SAID... I OPPOSE "EXEMPTING" INCOME BELOW THE POVERTY LINE FROM INCOME TAX. INCOME IS INCOME AND EVEN "THE POOR" SHOULD PAY A TOKEN 1%-2% SO AS TO HAVE SKIN IN THE GAME.
* THE REAL QUESTION IS... SHOULD THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LAY CLAIM UPON SO LARGE A PERCENTAGE OF THE NATION'S WEALTH OR SHOULD FEDERAL TAXES BE FAR LESS THAN LOCAL AND STATE TAXES? (BTW... I BELIEVE THEY SHOULD BE.)
The whole purpose of a flat tax, à la 9-9-9, is to lower marginal tax rates and simplify the tax code. With lower marginal tax rates (and boy will marginal tax rates be lower with the 9-9-9 plan), both the demand for and the supply of labor and capital will increase. Output will soar, as will jobs. Tax revenues will also increase enormously - not because tax rates have increased, but because marginal tax rates have decreased.
By making the tax codes a lot simpler, we'd allow individuals and businesses to spend a lot less on maintaining tax records; filing taxes; hiring lawyers, accountants and tax-deferral experts; and lobbying Congress. [F]or every dollar of business and personal income taxes paid, some 30 cents in out-of-pocket expenses also were paid to comply with the tax code. Under 9-9-9, these expenses would plummet without a penny being lost to the U.S. Treasury. It's a win-win.
* MAKES SENSE TO ME!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204346104576637061152676584.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Here's some investment advice: When looking for tips on green technology plays, steer clear of the stock pickers located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
* IF ONLY WE COULD! DAMN GEORGE W. BUSH AND DOUBLE-DAMN BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA! DAMN THE DEMPUBLICANS AND DAMN THE REPUBLICRATS!
Following on Solyndra's great "success" comes Ener1 Inc., a lithium-ion battery maker also promoted by the White House.
(*BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL*)
President Obama gave the company's subsidiary, EnerDel, a shout out in August 2009, in a speech in which he announced $2.4 billion in grants "to develop the next generation of fuel-efficient cars and trucks powered by the next generation of battery technologies."
(*WISHING I WAS BANGING PRESIDENT OBAMA'S HEAD AGAINST THE WALL*)
EnerDel snagged a $118 million grant, and Vice President Joe Biden toured one of its two Indianapolis-area factories as recently as January, citing it as proof that government isn't "just creating new jobs - but sparking whole new industries."
* I'LL REFRAIN FROM SHARING MY FEELINGS CONCERNING VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN; AFTER ALL, I DON'T REALLY WANT THE SECRET SERVICE KNOCKING ON MY DOOR... (*SMIRK*)
He didn't say profitable industries.
(*BACK TO BANGING MY OWN HEAD AGAINST THE WALL*)
Ener1 was founded in 2002, went public in 2008 and has never turned a profit.
* ONE... MORE... TIME...
"...and has never turned a profit."
(*GNASHING MY TEETH*)
In August, it restated its earnings for fiscal 2010 at a $165 million loss - nearly $100 million more than previously reported.
* CUTE, HUH?! HOW'BOUT THIS: LET'S ALL OF US TRY TO "RESTATE" OUR LAST YEAR EARNINGS ON THIS YEAR'S TAX RETURN AND SEE HOW THE IRS TREATS US. (*SMIRK*)
On September 27 it ousted its CEO, and its share price yesterday was 27 cents - a 95% decline from its 52-week high of $5.95 in January.
Nasdaq is threatening to delist the stock, and Ener1 disclosed in a mid-August filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that it is "in the process of determining whether the company has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations."
* AGAIN, FOLKS... THIS WAS AN OBAMA-BIDEN "TOP INVESTMENT PICK" - "INVESTING" WITH OUR MONEY AND NOT THEIR OWN OF COURSE... (*GRITTING MY TEETH*)
* FOLKS... USE THE LINK PROVIDED UP ABOVE TO READ THE FULL PIECE. IF IT DOESN'T CONNECT YOU, SIMPLE GOOGLE "Your Cash for Their Clunkers" AND YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE PIECE THAT WAY.
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204346104576635033336992122.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
* BY JON HUNTSMAN (WHOM, BTW... WHILE I'M NOT A GENERAL FAN... ON THIS ONE HE'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!)
Is Dodd-Frank an appropriate regulatory response to the 2007 financial crisis?
Tragically, no.
That legislation ignores the government's pervasive role in causing the crisis, assures future transfers from taxpayers to bankers by institutionalizing a government backstop for "too big to fail" firms, and imposes massive new regulations and unreasonable compliance costs on smaller banks. As a result, lending to small businesses from small banks suffers.
(*PURSED LIPS*) (*NOD*)
The government helped bring on the recession by distorting the housing market through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, touching off financial bubbles driven by excessive credit creation by the Federal Reserve, granting a privileged position to toothless rating agencies, and allowing the capture of regulatory agencies by the biggest Wall Street players. The largest banks were pushing hard to take more risk at taxpayers' expense.
* TRUE. EVERY SINGLE WORD! TRUE!
Today we can already see the outlines of the next financial crisis and bailouts. Mitt Romney admitted as much at last week's debate in New Hampshire. While he gave lip service to opposing bailouts, when asked how we would avoid bailouts he offered no solutions other than implying he would participate in a bailout of Greece.
(*SIGH*)
The Obama and Romney plan appears to be to cross our fingers and hope no "too big to fail" banks fail on their watch.
* FOLKS... WE'RE IN DEEP, DEEP, DEEP, DEEP SHIT.
* To be continued...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
More than three years after the crisis and the accompanying bailouts, the six largest American financial institutions are significantly bigger than they were before the crisis, having been encouraged to snap up Bear Stearns and other competitors at bargain prices.
(*HEADACHE*)
These banks now have assets worth over 66% of gross domestic product - at least $9.4 trillion, up from 20% of GDP in the 1990s. There is no evidence that institutions of this size add sufficient value to offset the systemic risk they pose.
(*NOD*)
The major banks' too-big-to-fail status gives them a comparative advantage in borrowing over their competitors thanks to the federal bailout backstop. This funding subsidy amounts to roughly 50 basis points, or one-half of a percentage point in today's market.
* CRONY CAPITALISM... (*PURSED LIPS*)
We need a level playing field, in which all banks on both sides of the Atlantic achieve solid footing without relying on the implicit guarantee of a government bailout. Experts agree that small and medium-size businesses would benefit if their lenders faced lower regulatory burdens and fair competition with the too-big-to-fail firms.
[E]liminate Dodd-Frank's backstop[!]
Congress should explore reforms now being considered by the U.K. to make the unwinding of its biggest banks less risky for the broader economy. It could impose a fee on banks whose size exceeds a certain percentage of the GDP to cover the cost they would impose on taxpayers in a bailout, thus eliminating the implicit subsidy of their too-big-to-fail status. Congress could also implement tax reform that eliminates the deduction for interest payments that gives a preference to debt over equity, thus ending subsidies for excess leverage.
* YES! YES! YES! (AND BTW... IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH IS SAYING... IT JUST GOES TO PROVE MY POINT THAT THE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IS A FRIGG'N JOKE!)
Eliminating subsidies would encourage the affected institutions to downsize by selling off certain operations or face having to pay the real costs of bailouts. We need banks that are small and simple enough to fail, not financial public utilities.
Once too-big-to-fail is fixed, we could then more easily repeal the law's unguided regulatory missiles, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
* HEAR! HEAR!
American banks provide advice and access to capital to the entrepreneurs and small business owners who have always been our economic center of gravity. We need a banking sector that is able to serve that critical role again. Otherwise the sector's endgame will be continental Europe - an unsustainable socialist state and the death of entrepreneurship.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204479504576637582056938182.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop
Amtrak announced last week to great media fanfare that the national train service carried a record 30 million passengers last year.
Here's what Amtrak didn't trumpet: It lost a near-record amount of money in fiscal 2011, with some $560 million from the feds required to cover its operating deficit.
* AGAIN... IF VIOLENCE ISN'T THE ANSWER... THEN WHAT IS THE ANSWER?
The curse of Amtrak is that its operating costs are so high on most routes, and its fares so inadequate to cover those costs, that even as more people hop on board it still can't cut its losses. It currently loses about $54.50 per passenger, and the Sunset Limited line between New Orleans and Los Angeles loses $390 per ticket, according to the House Transportation Committee.
Since Richard Nixon nationalized passenger rail service in 1971, Amtrak hasn't made money in a single year.
* SOCIALISM... DOESN'T... WORK...!
Oh, and those 2011 operating subsidies are only a portion of Amtrak's line of taxpayer credit.
* DO TELL!
The House Budget Committee says the railroad also received nearly $1 billion in capital subsidies, $52 million in debt restructuring relief (which climbs to $125 million in fiscal 2012), and access to a $562.9 million low-interest loan with the Department of Transportation.
Amtrak's management has also requested $117 billion over the next 20 years to modernize the nation's tracks for 150 mph bullet trains.
* AGAIN, FOLKS... GIVEN THE CHOICE, ISN'T HOMICIDE PREFERABLE TO SUICIDE? (*CROOKED SMILE*)
Even the 30 million passenger trips on Amtrak are hardly a transportation milestone. Planes carry roughly two million passengers a day, or about as many passengers every two weeks as Amtrak carries in a year. For every person who rides Amtrak, more than 100 drive their cars from one city to another. Beyond the Washington-Boston corridor, trains account for 0.5% of all intercity trips, meaning that in most parts of the country Amtrak is an inconsequential and anachronistic mode of intercity travel. Building more lanes on the most congested interstate highways would be a far more efficient way to move Americans than continuing to fund Amtrak at $1.5 billion a year - or spending $20 billion on high-speed rail, as President Obama wants to do.
* AGAIN... I VOTE FOR HOMICIDE! (*WINK*)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203658804576637633052916922.html?mod=rss_com_mostcommentart
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul on Monday laid out an economic plan that would lower corporate and individual taxes and cut federal spending by $1 trillion during his first year in office, achieved partly by eliminating five cabinet-level departments.
* AND YET... (*SHRUG*)... I'D BE SURPRISED IF MORE THAN A FEW MILLION - IF THAT MANY - AMERICANS ARE AWARE OF THE PROPOSAL, LET ALONE FAMILIAR WITH THE DETAILS. AND WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY THE MEDIA, THE DEMPUBLICANS, AND THE REPUBLICRATS WANT IT.
Mr. Paul, a longtime Texas congressman, said he would close the departments of Education, Energy, Commerce, Interior and Housing and Urban Development, as part of a broader plan to cut federal spending. The federal work force would be cut by 10%. Mr. Paul also called for stopping foreign aid and "ending foreign wars.''
* I SUPPORT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE PROPOSALS!
Mr. Paul has [also] said he would support amending the Constitution to abolish the income tax, though that does not come up in his economic plan.
* YOU FOLKS KNOW MY VIEWS ON TAXES... (*SHRUG*) (ANY QUESTIONS? ASK!)
The corporate tax rate would fall under Mr. Paul's plan, to 15% from the current 35%, and corporations would be allowed to repatriate capital without paying additional U.S. taxes.
(*DOUBLE THUMBS UP*) ACTUALLY... CORPORATE TAXES ARE A MISNOMER. THEY SHOULD BE TOTALLY DONE AWAY WITH... ONLY INDIVIDUAL INCOME SHOULD BE TAXED. (AGAIN, I CAN'T BEGIN TO COUNT THE NUMBERS OF TIMES I'VE LAID OUT MY IDEAS ON CREATING A FLATTER, FAIRER TAX SYSTEM.)
Paul's "Plan to Restore America'' would end the estate tax and taxes on personal savings, "allowing families to build a nest egg.''
* I WOULD LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF INHERITANCE SUBJECT TO TAX, BUT I WOULD NOT END THE ESTATE TAX. (ANY QUESTIONS AS TO HOW I SEE THE PROBLEM - JUST ASK!)
Congressman Paul would extend tax cuts on personal income, capital gains and dividends that were enacted under former President George W. Bush.
* AGAIN... I HAVE VERY SPECIFIC IDEAS CONCERNING TAXATION. (*SHRUG*)
The congressman also pledged to limit his presidential salary to $39,336, which his campaign says is "approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker."
* I'M SURE HE'S SINCERE, BUT STILL... WE DON'T NEED GIMMICKS LIKE THAT. I WOULD PROPOSE TYING THE PRESIDENTIAL SALARY TO FOUR TIMES THE AMERICAN INDIVIDUAL MEDIAN INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204485304576641243706208966.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLESecond
The Associated Press said that this week's presidential road trip "focused heavily on political swing states" and described Barack Obama as "in campaign mode."
Reuters called it "a campaign-style bus tour across states vital to his 2012 re-election chances."
The New York Times reported that the trip was "ostensibly focused on promoting his jobs bill but equally intended to shore up a crucial segment of his electoral map."
[Citizens] might therefore wonder how much money the Obama 2012 campaign is chipping in to support this week's swing through North Carolina and Virginia.
The answer is zero.
* Z-E-R-O...!!! YEP! N-A-D-A...!!! Z-I-L-C-H...!!! Z-I-P...!
The White House insists that the President is on official business, which means that taxpayers pick up the entire tab.
* HAVE OTHER PRESIDENTS - BOTH DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN - PULLED THE SAME STUNT TO A LESSER EXTENT? SURE. BUT OBAMA ORIGINALLY CAMPAIGNED ON "HOPE," ON "CHANGE." TO CALL OBAMA A PHONY AND A HYPOCRITE IS NOTHING LESS THAN THE TRUTH.
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/5-Stabbed-at-Jail-Release-Welcome-Home-Party-132135833.html
* READ AND WEEP!
* NOTICE... NO PHOTOS.
(*SMIRK*)
* NOTICE... NO... er... DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION.
* CIVILIZATION HAS LARGELY COLLAPSED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF LARGE SEGMENTS OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA AND...
(*SHRUG*)
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/188443-reid-says-public-sector-jobs-must-take-priority-over-private-sector-jobs
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Wednesday indicated Congress needs to worry about government jobs more than private-sector jobs, and that this is why Senate Democrats are pushing a bill aimed at shoring up teachers and first-responders.
(*JUST...JUST...JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
"It's very clear that private-sector jobs have been doing just fine; it's the public-sector jobs where we've lost huge numbers, and that's what this legislation is all about," Reid said on the Senate floor.
* THIS MAN... HARRY REID... IS THE SECOND MOST POWERFUL DEMOCRAT OFFICEHOLDER IN THE NATION - RIGHT BEHIND PRESIDENT BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA. AND HE'S OBVIOUSLY LOST ALL GRIP ON REALITY!
Reid reiterated his emphasis on creating government jobs by saying Democrats are looking to "put hundreds of thousands of people back to work..."
* HE'S TALKING ADDING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO THE PAYROLL OF A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHICH ALREADY BORROWS 43-CENTS OUT OF EVERY DOLLAR SPENT... A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT CAN'T COME CLOSE TO MEETING EVEN ORDINARY OPERATING EXPENSES...
* FOLKS... IF YOU DON'T SEE... IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE DELIBERATELY TRYING TO "BREAK" AMERICA... I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU. THIS IS INSANITY! THEY DON'T EVEN TRY TO HIDE IT! THEY ACTUALLY BRAG ABOUT IT...!!!
http://www.cnbc.com/id/44962589
Think life is not as good as it used to be, at least in terms of your wallet?
You'd be right about that.
The standard of living for Americans has fallen longer and more steeply over the past three years than at any time since the US government began recording it five decades ago.
* HMM... LET'S SEE... 2011 MINUS THREE... THAT WOULD BE 2008... THAT WOULD BE THE SECOND YEAR OF DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS... (YEP... REMEMBER... REPUBLICANS DEFEATED 2006 - PELOSI AND REID TOOK OVER IN JANUARY OF 2007.)
Bottom line: The average individual now has $1,315 less in disposable income than he or she did three years ago...
* OH, YEAH! HOW'S THAT "CHANGE" WORKING OUT FOR YOU?!
That means less money to spend at the spa or the movies, less for vacations, new carpeting for the house, or dinner at a restaurant.
* HOW MANY VACATIONS HAVE MICHELLE AND BARAK OBAMA TAKEN SINCE HE TOOK THE OATH OF OFFICE... HOW MANY SEPARATE TRIPS AS WELL AS JOINT... er... "WORKING" VACATIONS?
* YOU FOLKS KNOW HOW MUCH NANCY PELOSI AND HER HUSBAND ARE WORTH? HOW'BOUT HARRY REID WHO LIVES IN A FIVE-STAR HOTEL...? (*SNORT*)
In short, it means a less vibrant economy, with more Americans spending primarily on necessities.
* WHILE FOR RICH POLITICIANS... THE GRAVY TRAIN ROLLS ON AND ON...
What has led to the most dramatic drop in the US standard of living since at least 1960?
* BESIDES PUTTING DEMOCRATS IN POSITIONS OF POWER, YOU MEAN...???
One factor is stagnant incomes: Real median income is down 9.8% since the start of the recession through this June, according to Sentier Research in Annapolis, Md., citing census bureau data. Another is falling net worth - think about the value of your home and, if you have one, your retirement portfolio. A third is rising consumer prices, with inflation eroding people's buying power by 3.25% since mid-2008.
* AND, FOLKS... COM'ON... WE'VE BEEN OVER THIS BEFORE; THE GOVERNMENT DELIBERATELY MISSTATES TRUE INFLATION VIA A METHODOLOGY THAT FAILS TO ACCOUNT FOR "LITTLE THINGS" LIKE... er... FOOD AND FUEL. (*SMIRK*) THE TRUE SITUATION IS MUCH WORTH THAT THIS REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES.
The so-called misery index, another measure of economic well-being of American households, echoes the finding on the slipping standard of living. The index, a combination of the unemployment rate and inflation, is now at its highest point since 1983...
* AGAIN, FOLKS... THIS IS MISLEADING BECAUSE THE "NEW" METHODOLOGY DOWNPLAYS INFLATION. IF INFLATION WAS MEASURED AS IT WAS BACK IN THE CARTER YEARS, INFLATION WOULD NOW BE WELL OVER 10%.
"Maybe it's the evolution of the economy, but it appears large segments of the workforce have moved permanently into lower-paying positions," says Joel Naroff of Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland, Pa. "The economy can't grow at 4% per year when the middle class becomes the lower middle class."
* DAMN STRAIGHT! (AND YET... NONE OF THIS WAS BROUGHT UP DURING LAST NIGHT'S DEBATE HOSTED BY CNN...) (*SMIRK*)
Since 2007, Americans' collective net worth has fallen about $5.5 trillion, or more than 8.6 percent, according to the Federal Reserve.
* HMM... 2007... THE FIRST YEAR DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS...
* FOLKS... IN ALL SERIOUSNESS... THE DEMOCRATS ARE DESTROYING AMERICA.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-19/beltway-earnings-make-u-s-capital-richer-than-silicon-valley.html
Federal employees whose compensation averages more than $126,000 and the nation’s greatest concentration of lawyers helped Washington edge out San Jose as the wealthiest U.S. metropolitan area, government data show.
(*SARCASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)
* WELL, WELL... AT LEAST SOMEONE IS DOING WELL IN THE AGE OF OBAMA!
Total compensation for federal workers, including health care and other benefits, last year averaged $126,369, compared with $122,697 in 2009, according to Bloomberg News calculations of Commerce Department data.
(*MORE SARCASTIC CLAPPING*)
* FOLKS... SERIOUSLY... TELL ME ONE MORE TIME WHY VIOLENCE ISN'T THE ANSWER?
In recent years Washington has attracted more lobbyists and firms with an interest in the health-care overhaul and financial regulations signed into law by President Barack Obama, according to local business leaders.
(*SMIRK*)
* "RECENT" YEARS... AS IN... SAY... 2007... 2008... 2009... 2010... 2011...??? THE PELOSI YEARS? THE REID YEARS? THE AGE OF OBAMA...???
“Wall Street has moved to K Street,” said Barbara Lang, president and chief executive officer of the DC Chamber of Commerce, referring to the Washington street that’s home to prominent lobbying firms. “Those two industries clearly have grown in our city.”
* FOLKS... THESE PEOPLE ARE DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY. PERIOD.
Federal government spending for programs excluding Social Security and Medicare in fiscal year 2011, which ended on Sept. 30, rose to $2.38 trillion from $2.3 trillion the previous year.
* LIKE I KEEP SAYING... THESE PEOPLE ARE BOUND AND DETERMINED TO "BREAK" AMERICA. (AND THEY'RE SUCCEEDING!)
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46925
* BY PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
John Hope Franklin, the famed black historian at Duke University, once told the incoming freshmen, "The new America in the 21st century will be primarily non-white, a place George Washington would not recognize."
In his June 1998 commencement address at Portland State, President Clinton affirmed it: "In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States."
* AND...
The graduates cheered.
(*SIGH*)
The Census Bureau has now fixed at 2041 the year when whites become a minority...
What are the seemingly inevitable consequences of an America where whites are a shrinking minority? First, the end of a national Republican Party that routinely gets 90% of its presidential votes from white America.
(California is the harbinger of what is to come. Carried by Richard Nixon in all five presidential elections when he was on the ticket and by Ronald Reagan all four times he ran, California, where whites are now a shrinking minority, is a state where the GOP faces extinction. John McCain's share of the California vote was down to the Barry Goldwater level of 1964.)
* AND HOW'S CALIFORNIA DOING, FOLKS? HMM? IT'S AN ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL BASKET CASE!
When Texas, where two-thirds of the newborns and half the schoolchildren are Hispanic, goes the way of California, it is the end for the GOP.
Arizona, Colorado and Nevada, also critical to any victorious GOP coalition, are Hispanicizing as rapidly as Texas.
In every presidential election since Bush I in 1992, Hispanics have given 60% to70% of their votes to the Democratic ticket. For Hispanics, largely poor and working class, are beneficiaries of a cornucopia of government goods from free education to food stamps to free health care. Few pay federal income taxes. Why would they not vote for the Party of Government?
* WHY NOT INDEED... (*SIGH*)
* To be continued...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
[T]he economic crisis of California, brought on by an outflow of taxpayers and a huge influx of tax consumers - i.e., millions of immigrants, legal and illegal - will be mirrored nationally.
(*JUST CLOSING MY EYES*)
[T]hough the majority of immigrants and illegals comes to work, and work hard, most now come from Third World countries and do not bring the academic or professional skills of European-Americans.
* AND THEN THERE ARE THE CULTURAL DIFFERENCES... (*SIGH*)
* FOLKS... THERE'S A REASON WHY WHITE ANGLO-SAXON PROTESTANT AMERICA BECAME AMERICA WHILE MEXICO BECAME... er... MEXICO... AND CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA BECAME... er... CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA.
[T]he decline in academic test scores here at home and in international competition is likely to continue, as more and more of the children taking those tests will be African-American and Hispanic. For though we have spent trillions over four decades, we have failed to close the racial gap in education. White and Asian children continue to outscore black and Hispanic children.
* IN PLAIN ENGLISH... WE'LL HAVE A LESS INTELLIGENT POPULATION. (*SHRUG*) REMEMBER... THAT'S WHAT THE TEST MEASURE... KNOWLEDGE AND INTELLIGENCE.
(Can the test-score gap be closed? With the Hispanic illegitimacy rate at 51% and the black rate having risen to 71%, how can their children conceivably arrive at school ready to compete?)
* HOW INDEED... (*SIGH*)
Should this continue for three decades, what will it mean for America if Asians and whites occupy the knowledge-industry jobs, while scores of millions of black and Hispanic workers are relegated to low-paying service-sector jobs? Will that make for social tranquility?
Sociologist Robert Putnam, author of "Bowling Alone," has also found that the greater the racial and ethnic diversity in a community, the less social capital there is - i.e., people in diverse settings are far less disposed to cooperate for social goals. They retreat into enclaves of their own kind. Putnam found social capital at the lowest level he ever measured in Los Angeles, the most diverse community on earth. Yet, by 2042, the demography of every American city will approximate that of L.A. What is happening to America is happening across the West.
Can Western civilization survive the passing of the European peoples whose ancestors created it and their replacement by Third World immigrants? Probably not...
* AGREED.
Post a Comment