Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Maybe They Can Re-Imagine It As A Comedy Club | Main | Losing The Room »

September 20, 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e2014e8bb6aee3970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ObamaCare - Now They Tell Us (Ongoing...):

Comments

Army of Davids

a little anger from a poster at talking points memo. He is angry about Senate Democrats (Landreui, Nelson, Webb, co) who will not support the president on tax increases.


That's that then. Kick them out of the party. I'm not usually one to express this sentiment, but I've fucking had it with these asshats. Get fucking rid of them. I don't fucking want them and no self-respecting liberal or Democrat shoudl want them either. They are Republicans masquerading as Dems, plain and simple. They are not "moderates" as suggested by TPM. Not even int he fucking slightest. They are pandering to a voting demographic that is ANYTHING BUT "moderate"...ergo, they are not "moderate." They might as well cross the aisle and wear the correct label.


This will not go well for the president. Not well at all.

Army of Davids

ObamaCare a budget buster?

Nah...subsidizing the healthcare of some 30 million more people is bound to be revenue neutral.

And subsidizing more demand wouldn't cause increases in prices would it? I mean it doesn't do it for corn.

Buford Gooch

But, but, but, the gubmint prints money. Why do you all pretend it has to come from someone? Obama is gonna buy me a car and make my house payments. The new alternate green fuel will be gas passed by unicorns.

Army of Davids

At least the unfunded Medicaid mandates in ObamaCare will be easy for the states to absorb.

What's another $2 billion a year for California?

Benjamin Franklin

Some co's will bail. but many will keep their plans because it is good for their bottom line. The ONLY reason co's widely adopted employee plans was to keep good employees on board and recruit new ones.

Whatever keeps their ledgers in the black will be the strategy.

Tom  Maguire
The ONLY reason co's widely adopted employee plans was to keep good employees on board and recruit new ones.

For heaven's sake - during WWII companies weren't allowed to offer raises, so benefits like health insurance were offered instead. And health care still gets a huge tax break, since it is a deductible expense for the company when the company buys insurance for an employee but not deductible if the employee buys it out-of-pocket.

And lets have a Mad Men flashback. Back in the day of much higher personal tax rates, companies would offer cars, country club memberships, and expense accounts audited by an eighty year old with Alzheimers and a knack for losing his spectacles. All to provide non-taxable income/lifestyle enhancement.

Employer sponsored health insurance is one of the few holdovers from that era. Believe me (or just think about it) - if employers were allowed to offer auto insurance with the same tax treatment as health insurance, wouldn't employees (outside of NYC) flock to it? So why isn't if offered? (Hint - not legal.)

Further thought experiment - if employers *could* offer tax-subsidized auto insurance, the plans would cover periodic oil changes - why not let the feds help care for your car?

Danube of Thought

"Whatever keeps their ledgers in the black will be the strategy."

No shit, Dick Tracy. And those who can devise no such strategy will go belly up.

boris

"Employer sponsored health insurance is one of the few holdovers from that era."

As cathyf has pointed out it survives because it has an adaptive advantage for the company, the employee, and the insurance company. Perhaps it never would have come about on its own, but once in place the advantages kept it viable.

Danube of Thought

It only came about because of WWII wage and price controls, and the decision of a wise and benevolent congress to tinker around the edges of what it had wrought.

Another instance of a well-intentioned and irreversible governmental intervention in the marketplace, with unforeseen, disastrous and intractable consequences.

Threadkiller

You stumped him, TM. Or, it could be shift change.

Walter

Given that the penalty provisions don't kick in for employers with fewer than 50 employees, every small employer offering health care to a moderate-wage group of employees should drop coverage and increase wages to cover the nonsubsidized cost of higher income employees' purchases through the exchanges. Since qualified plans under the exchanges are more generous than average plans today (except for professional firms and unionized employers), many larger firms will find a similar approach worthwhile.

But I'm just restating the McKinsey results... None of this was forseeable before the legislation was passed.

rse

LUN is the photo confirming what we have all recognized for at least 3 years now. He is a self centered lightweight with no sense or background on how to behave.

daddy

A possible consequence of the Solyndra fiasco?

Begich urges state to consider loan guarantee for pipeline

Subhead: Senator says more federal money will be difficult to come by.

"Begich said it would be very difficult for the state's congressional delegation to get an increase in the federal loan guarantee anytime soon. Begich cited the recent push in Washington to cut federal spending, AS WELL AS INCREASED SCRUTINY ON LOAN GUARANTEES FOR ENERGY PROJECTS."

narciso

facepalm with a Cthluthu, daddy, does Begich ever stop embarassing us, rhetorical question.

Jack is Back!

rse,

Did you read the comments at your 7:21am link? One of the commenters suggested that someone asked "Who wants to see Obama re-elected?" and that is how the shot happened:)

pagar

5 new threads since I went to sleep. We'll have to put on a night shift if this keeps up.
--------------------------------------------
"and that is how the shot happened"
Only one world leader wants to see Obama reelected and that is Obama. He must not have gotten the rest of the world on his side, like he said he would.

Charlie (Colorado)

Some co's will bail. but many will keep their plans because it is good for their bottom line. The ONLY reason co's widely adopted employee plans was to keep good employees on board and recruit new ones.

Well, kinda. The current system worked that way when, in the post WWII period wages were still government controlled; Truman's administration pushed health insurance as a way to make wages more competitive, and as a step toward universal, British-style health care. It remains in the system because the cost is an expense, and therefore tax-deductible, for a business, which means what would be a dollar of compensation to an employee only costs the company some fraction of a dollar.

Make health care expensive enough, and it makes employee comp uneconomic, even if you're getting it at a discount.

Soylent Red

You know...two and a half years in and I still haven't gotten my house payments or car payments from this man's stash. And don't get me started about the magical Skittle sh*tting unicorn I should have already gotten.

I'm beginning to wonder if he's been telling me the troof.

Extraneus

Troofteller in Chief:

(From rse's link in whatever thread it was.)

Extraneus

Ah, it was this thread right here...

Janet

Hahahaha...Obama is unbelievable. The center of the photo wasn't good enough...he had to take out the guy next to him.

daddy

Ext,

Would be great to be able to do it as fast as in that video.

Yesterday was a 9 hour leg to Osaka over Siberia. Pretty most of the way, but very ugly coming into Osaka as there was/is a Typhoon scraping the east side of the nation. Paper says 80,000 evacuated from near Nagoya due to the storm. Blowing sideways like crazy and very heavy rains on landing. One of the very rare times when I actually felt like I earned my paycheck:) Was a 2 beer ride in the taxicab to the hotel, and that is a very rare occurrence as well, but we needed it.

And then TM hits me with 6 new threads and about a million comments. Gad!

Janet

Ya know how the queen's wave is sorta a right/left wrist action?...well an "Obama Wave" can be putting your hand in the other guy's face so only YOU get the attention!

It's a greeting & diss in one!

Extraneus

IBD: The Administration's Tangled Web

That giant sucking sound you hear is the Obama administration imploding under the weight of incompetent policies based on long-discredited progressive ideology and now a wave of scandals that involve gun-running, witness-tampering and political payoffs — and cover-ups of all of the above.
daddy

Who'd a thought after all these years of hearing about "The Ugly American", that he'd finally turn out to be an Indonesian/Kenyan/Hawaiian/Islamic/Nobel Prize Winning/Ivy League Black.

Melinda Romanoff

daddy-

Small bleg. I'm curious as to how many ghost fleets are swinging at anchor in the Pacific.

Can you keep an eye out as to whether they're bigger, smaller, or "just right" from your past observations?

Thankyouverymuch. And next time I see you, I might even join you in having that beer.

Chubby

LOL !! Janet

centralcal

heh, daddy. No kidding, but he sure fits the description perfectly.

Appalled

Um, this was the first thing most professionals in the benefits business noticed about Obamacare. It's part of what the CBO scoring (and the bending the cost curve propaganda) such a joke. If anything, the McKinsey report understates the issue, because once there is enough of a parade into the exchanges, companies will join the bandwagon out of the healthcare business, because staying in the business will put them at a competative disadvantage.

I assumed the intent of the design was to get more people on government care, and ease everyone into government care in a decade or so. Which made Obama's promises about "you'll get to keep your plan" a lie for most people. (Maybe the unions get to keep their plans.)

The one thing I regret about the political hullabaloo about the deficit is that it has caused the hullabaloo about Obamacare to die out, and I think the fibs used to sell that program need to come back and haunt this administration.

Melinda Romanoff

Appalled-

Excellent point, and I think the two dovetail nicely.

daddy

I'll keep my eyes peeled Melinda, but I think pretty much the view outside my window for the next month or so will be Europe and India and northern Asia, and not much of the oceanic parking garages of SouthEast Asia.

daddy

Here's a nice quick little piece on the importance of Blogs in getting Sherrod Wilson's wife, Columnist at the Cleveland Plain Dealer, to resign.

Captain Hate

O/T: There seems to be some problem with the WSJ online, but my dead tree has an outstanding pawnjob review of Flathead's newest book by Andrew Ferguson. Tommy Boy has a co-author to tighten up some of his mindless prose ("The first rule of holes is when you're in one, stop digging. When you're in three, bring a lot of shovels") but there's only so much pulling on the bit that he can do ("Average is over" and "war on math and physics"). To coin one of Ferguson's characterizations: Pointless alliteration + runaway metaphors = Friedmanism. Trees died for this tripe; WHY DO YOU HATE TREES, FLATHEAD?

Danube of Thought

Minus 20 at Raz today.

Captain Hate

That's Sherrod Brown, daddy. Yes, kudos to that blog for forcing the idiots at the Pain Squealer to do what they should've done 5 years ago, sending Connie's fat ass packing (her "resignation" was surely a mutually agreed upon decision that will leave the door open for her return after her "husband", who was supposedly second only to Celeste as far as being Clinton-north, is given the bum's rush next November). That they sent her to cover the Tea Party event where Mandell was speaking was a journalism felony at the very least; and that she didn't remind whoever assigned her to it that there was a massive conflict of interest speaks volumes of her integrity.

Melinda Romanoff

"Shovel Ready Shibboleths" is more than likely behind the paywall, Cap'n.

Dave (in MA)

Daddy, not only is there an abundance of new material, but Our Genial Host has also interacted with one of the trolls.

Captain Hate

It might be Mel but I was unable to even get to the site earlier; now it's ok and the comments on the review are hilarious. Flathead is such a knob.

Danube of Thought

" It remains in the system because the cost is an expense, and therefore tax-deductible, for a business"

And because the value of the benefit is not taxable to the employee.

MarkJ

Headline:

"Howard Dean: 'Employers will dump most employees into subsidized exchanges. YEAAAAARRRRGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!'"

Jane

Did we get Kadaffi and I missed it?

Obama is speaking at the UN (I think). He has become completely incomprehensible. He does say the war in Libya has been won and that is precisely how the international community is supposed to work.

Gee maybe they could draft him to run that country.

Now he is saying he changed the world.

Janet

The other people in that photo should just be glad Obama didn't have a bunch of paper bags.

Captain Hate

El JEFe giving a campaign speech at the UN? Maybe they can hire him.

MarkO

Jane, apart from the lack of substance, how can you listen to that sing-song delivery that has a rising inflection in odd spots, just like his total inablility to read a simple passage from the Bible. He's just too much for me to watch. I don't think I could watch him resign.

centralcal

He is a terrible speaker. And, he becomes worse with every attempt at it.

Extraneus

I don't think I could watch him resign.

I'd volunteer to take that one for the team.

Thomas Collins

If Obama resigns or doesn't run again, here is a summary of the speech:

"I'm too transcendent for you mortals."

There. Now noone has to listen to the speech if it occurs.

OldTimer

Had to mute the UN speech, the droning cadence raise BP and triggers hostile thoughts.

I wonder how many people switched the channel or turned off their TV's...

Jane

He's just too much for me to watch. I don't think I could watch him resign.

The trick is I never watch and it's all background noise (unless I'm snarkblogging). I'm a sucker for background noise and that just happens to be Fox.

I could definitely watch him resign. However between the cheering and laughter I might not hear him.

Thomas Collins

Old Timer, I haven't watched or listened to an Obama speech in a long time. I got my fill of dealing with and listening to overprivileged immature morons who thought they were Gaia's gift to the cosmos in college. I read the summaries of the latest economy killing policies of Obama.

Danube of Thought

Excerpt from Ferguson's priceless review:

Mr. Friedman can turn a phrase into cliché faster than any Madison Avenue jingle writer. He announces that "America declared war on math and physics." Three paragraphs later, we learn that we're "waging war on math and physics." Three sentences later: "We went to war against math and physics." And onto the next page: "We need a systemic response to both our math and physics challenges, not a war on both." Three sentences later: We must "reverse the damage we have done by making war on both math and physics," because, we learn two sentences later, soon the war on terror "won't seem nearly as important as the wars we waged against physics and math." He must think we're idiots.

Danube of Thought

Wow. I have no idea how that happened.

rse

OK-here's a mental image to go with that curious expression of cluelessness above.

BO is now referring to his own 2008 campaign as that hopeychangey thing.

I really do not think the HLR's rep will ever recover from his artless language.

LUN

Danube of Thought

Trying again.

Mr. Friedman can turn a phrase into cliché faster than any Madison Avenue jingle writer. He announces that "America declared war on math and physics." Three paragraphs later, we learn that we're "waging war on math and physics." Three sentences later: "We went to war against math and physics." And onto the next page: "We need a systemic response to both our math and physics challenges, not a war on both." Three sentences later: We must "reverse the damage we have done by making war on both math and physics," because, we learn two sentences later, soon the war on terror "won't seem nearly as important as the wars we waged against physics and math." He must think we're idiots.
Benjamin Franklin

I hope Holder is out of the Loop on this. The smaller his contribution, the better.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-21/u-s-investigation-of-news-corp-said-to-expand-from-hacking-to-bribery.html

News Corp. (NWSA), already facing three police inquiries in the U.K. as well as a Parliamentary probe of phone hacking by its .employees, now faces an investigation into three matters on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
U.S. prosecutors are examining whether employees of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. tried to access the voicemails of 9-11 victims, broke antitrust or related laws and, according to a person familiar with the probe, bribed U.K. police for information.
The third line of inquiry was disclosed yesterday with news of a U.S. letter to the company requesting information on any bribes paid by its News of the World unit, said the person, who declined to be identified because the matter isn’t public. The letter is part of a Justice Department effort to determine whether News Corp. violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, the person said.

Danube of Thought

Stephen Thomma can't quite bring himself to call it "lying":

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama got some of the major points wrong when he unveiled his plan to curb projected federal budget deficits.

Here's what he said Monday, and how it was wrong.

OBAMA: "Today, I'm releasing a plan that details how to pay for the jobs bill while also paying down our debt over time."

TRUTH: The national debt would increase every year under his plan.

Melinda Romanoff

DoT-

The first one was funnier.

Danube of Thought

More:

OBAMA: "It's a plan that reduces our debt by more than $4 trillion."

TRUTH: As noted, the plan doesn't reduce debt. Assuming that the president misspoke and meant to say the plan would cut projected DEFICITS by $4 trillion over 10 years, that's also wrong.

First, his plan totals $3.6 trillion in proposed tax increases, spending cuts and interest savings. To get to a figure of more than $4 trillion, he counts the $1.2 trillion in spending cuts already enacted over the summer.

Second, while he counts the $866 billion in added revenue from letting the Bush tax cuts expire for incomes above $200,000 as he proposes, he doesn't count the cost of extending the Bush tax cuts for incomes below $200,000, as he also proposes.

That would add about $2 trillion to the deficit over 10 years, according to an analysis last year by the Congressional Budget Office, and would cut his claim at least in half.

Danube of Thought

This guy doesn't hesitate:

A polite word for what President Obama is being with his claims about millionaires and taxes is “disingenuous.'' A more straightforward term would be lying.

Neither the Associated Press nor the Wall Street Journal called him that yesterday, but both reported the facts that the President is grossly and willfully distorting.

“Middle-class families shouldn't pay higher taxes than millionaires and billionaires,” Obama said Monday. “That's pretty straightforward. It's hard to argue against that.”

AP: “The data tell a different story. On average, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.''

narciso

He was as much of a hack as Friedman, for the Post, and we see why here:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/09/who-checks-the-fact-checkers.php

Chubby

"disingenuous" is worse than "lying" imo.

Many people repeat lies thinking they are telling the truth. They are lying but don't know it.

A disingenuous person knows full well he is telling a lie and perpetrates the fraud consciously and deliberately.

MayBee

You can repeat a lie and not know it, but I don't agree you can lie and not know it.

Melinda Romanoff

MayBee-

You haven't met my mother.

MarkO

Unexpectedly,

“It is fair to say we’ve entered a new phase,” said Dan Pfeiffer, Mr. Obama’s communications director. But he disputed what he called the conventional wisdom behind the president’s shift.
“The popular narrative is that we sought compromise in a quixotic quest for independent votes. We sought out compromise because a failure to get funding of the government last spring and then an extension of the debt ceiling in August would have been very bad for the economy and for the country,” Mr. Pfeiffer added. “We were in a position of legislative compromise by necessity. That phase is behind us.”
In this new phase, Mr. Obama must solidify support among Democrats by standing pat for progressive party principles, while trusting that a show of strong leadership for the policies he believes in will appeal to independents. Polls consistently suggest that perhaps the only thing that unites independents as much as their desire for compromise is their inclination toward leaders who signal strength by fighting for their beliefs. (Emphasis added.)*

MayBee

Ha, Mel!

Benjamin Franklin


Is a half-truth, in reality, a lie ?


http://www.tnr.com/blog/timothy-noah/95149/david-brooks-unwell

David Brooks has indigestion because President Barack Obama, whom Brooks rather likes, wants to raise taxes on the rich. "He repeated the old half-truth about millionaires not paying as much in taxes as their secretaries." Why is that a half-truth? Because "the top 10 percent of earners pay nearly 70 percent of all income taxes, according to the I.R.S."

Oh, please. The top 10 percent pays nearly 70 percent of all income taxes because the top 10 percent makes half the income--49.74 percent, including capital gains, before the recession and only slightly less now. (My source is the World Top Incomes Database, a fantastic Web resource put together by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, Facundo Alvaredo and Tony Atkinson. Share it with the class warrior in your life.) The relevant statistic isn't what proportion of the nation's taxes comes from the rich. It's what proportion of the rich's income gets paid in taxes.

MayBee

The top 10 percent pays nearly 70 percent of all income taxes because the top 10 percent makes half the income--49.74 percent, including capital gains, before the recession and only slightly less now.

Oh please indeed!

Rounding up, 50% is almost exactly 70%. That's just math.

Danube of Thought

What Mr. Noah doesn't mention is that the ratio of that 70% to that 49.74% is the highest in the world, according to the OECD. Higher than Sweden (where the ratio is 1.0). Higher than France. Higher than Belgium.

How high does he think it should be? He doesn't say. Neither does Dana. Neither does Obama, and he never will. No one will ever ask him.

narciso

That would not be considered a 'withering' question, Danube,

Captain Hate

The relevant statistic isn't what proportion of the nation's taxes comes from the rich. It's what proportion of the rich's income gets paid in taxes.

Given what Maybee quoted, there's some serious self pawnage in this statement; and the poor guy's too stupid to realize it. And that's just basic arithmetic.

Danube of Thought

Iran has released the hikers.

I was going to make the OECD comment to Noah yesterday, but it appears that commenting requires a paid subscription.

BB Key

He that is good for making excuses is seldom good for anything...Ben Franklin

Ignatz

--Oh, please. The top 10 percent pays nearly 70 percent of all income taxes because the top 10 percent makes half the income--49.74 percent, including capital gains, before the recession and only slightly less now. (My source is the World Top Incomes Database, a fantastic Web resource put together by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, Facundo Alvaredo and Tony Atkinson. Share it with the class warrior in your life.) The relevant statistic isn't what proportion of the nation's taxes comes from the rich. It's what proportion of the rich's income gets paid in taxes.--

If 70% of the taxes come from 50% of the income even the most blithering idiot would note that Obama's statement is not only not true as Noah implies nor a half truth as Brooks states, but is, on the whole and in almost every particular case a lie.
If it takes an idiot to write what Noah did what does it say about someone who thinks it worth linking?

Benjamin Franklin

I cheer for one of my 'colleagues'...*chuckle*

ttp://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/elizabeth-warren-leads-scott-brown-by-2-points-in-latest-poll.html#comments

"Elizabeth Warren Leads Scott Brown by 2 Points in Latest Poll
We continue to follow the Scott Brown reelection fight because the presumed Elizabeth Warren v Brown matchup will probably be the most closely watched Senate race in 2012.

Public Policy Polling released the results of its latest survey, which show that the press surrounding the Warren campaign launch has led to a big change in the results:

Elizabeth Warren has had an incredibly successful launch to her Senate campaign and actually leads Scott Brown now by a 46-44 margin, erasing what was a 15 point deficit the last time we polled the state in early June…."

Rob Crawford

How high does he think it should be? He doesn't say. Neither does Dana.

Except Dana *has* said. He has said we should reinstitute slavery. He wants to confiscate 100% of your labor for his benefit.

And, clearly, the "anarchist" is willing to use the government to get to that goal piece by piece.

Benjamin Franklin
Appalled

Mr. Franklin:

Quoting Timothy Noah to provide some context on the tax issue is not a good idea. Because Noah himself is playing some rhetorical games with the truth. Let's go to Noah:

David Brooks has indigestion because President Barack Obama, whom Brooks rather likes, wants to raise taxes on the rich. "He repeated the old half-truth about millionaires not paying as much in taxes as their secretaries." Why is that a half-truth? Because "the top 10 percent of earners pay nearly 70 percent of all income taxes, according to the I.R.S."

Now, let's goto what Brooks actually said:

He repeated the old half-truth about millionaires not paying as much in taxes as their secretaries. (In reality, the top 10 percent of earners pay nearly 70 percent of all income taxes, according to the I.R.S. People in the richest 1 percent pay 31 percent of their income to the federal government while the average worker pays less than 14 percent, according to the Congressional Budget Office.)

In other words, contra Noah, the reason that the secretary thing is a "half-truth" is because CBO figures say it's a whole untruth. The 31% thing, in Brooks argument, is an important point, but not one that goes to the truthiness of the half-truth.

Contra many folk here, Brooks is not really a liberal. He sort of status quo statist fellow, with a streak of high Broderism. I don't expect a real liberal like Noah to like Brooks. Nonetheless, I do expect him to actually respond to the argument he actually makes, not the straw man Mr. Noah prefers to thwack.

Chubby

((You can repeat a lie and not know it, but I don't agree you can lie and not know it.))

People don't know when they are lying to themselves LUN

((...Cheaters convince themselves that they succeed because of their own skill, and if other people agree, their capacity for conning themselves increases. Chance puts it mildly: “The fact that social recognition, which so often accompanies self-deception in the real world, enhances self-deception has troubling implications.”

This tells us a little about the mindset of people who fake their research, who build careers on plagiarised work or who wave around spurious credentials. There’s a tendency to think that these people know full well what they’re doing and go through life with a sort of Machiavellian glee. But the outlook from Chance’s study is subtler.

She showed that even though people know that they occasionally behave dishonestly, they don’t know that they can convincingly lie to themselves to gloss over these misdeeds. Their scam is so convincing that they don’t know that they’re doing it. As she writes, “Our findings show that people not only fail to judge themselves harshly for unethical behaviour, but can even use the positive results of such behaviour to see themselves as better than ever.”))


Benjamin Franklin

Appalled;

You skirt the issue..."The top 10 percent pays nearly 70 percent of all income taxes because the top 10 percent makes half the income--49.74 percent," is Noah's point. He's trying to get past the propaganda "Top incomes pay more than their share"

Factcheck repeats Noah's point: " The reason the most affluent 10 percent pay a greater share of taxes is that they are getting a greater share of all income." hence the percentage of income
is key to 'fair share'.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/07/fiscal-factcheck/

""That's a comprehensive figure, counting the income tax, payroll taxes, excise taxes and even the corporate income tax (borne by stockholders in the form of reduced dividends and appreciation). And perhaps surprisingly, the top 10 percent of earners pay a greater share of federal taxes now than they did before the Bush tax cuts, which Democrats constantly criticize as a giveaway to "the rich." The top 10 percent paid 50 percent of all federal taxes in 2001.

However, that comes in spite of lower tax rates at the top, not because of it. The reason the most affluent 10 percent pay a greater share of taxes is that they are getting a greater share of all income. Their share of all pre-tax income went from 37.5 percent in 2001 to 42 percent in 2007."

Ignatz

What percentage of income should be set for the top 10% to receive, how is that number arrived at, who decides it and how and by whom should it be enforced?

Benjamin Franklin

'Their scam is so convincing that they don’t know that they’re doing it. "

"Redemptive self-awareness" is like 'common-sense'...uncommon.

MayBee

Their share of all pre-tax income went from 37.5 percent in 2001 to 42 percent in 2007."

And what about their share of post-tax income?

MayBee

The people who want some top percentile of earners to pay more in taxes should just come out and say they want it because they want it. Stop trying to pretend there is some reason for it (fairness, disparity in income, paying down the deficit). The reason is you just want it. You just want them to pay more to the government. It would be so much easier to stop pretending anything else.

Rob Crawford

But, MayBee, then they wouldn't be able to wrap themselves in the Cloak of Sanctimony!

MayBee

The reason the "tax the rich more" people don't dare just say they want more of the rich people's money is because that would sound greedy. And of course, it is the rich who are greedy. The people who don't want to pay more in taxes- who are being targeted to pay more in taxes- are greedy for not wanting to do so. If you are not being targeted to pay more, but don't want to pay more, you are not greedy. If you want other people to pay more, you are not greedy.

Extraneus

Debate with Hillary: Obama: Raise Taxes, Capital Gains - "For Purposes of Fairness"

He brought up the tax rates of the secretaries, too.

Appalled

Ben:

I just don't have the time to get into a tax rate discussion with you. I'll just observe that the Buffett sort of wealthy have a lot more ability to control what types of income they receive, whether that income is taxable or not, and the jurisdiction where they earn income. The high rate is more likely to hit at people who are just starting to get rich and shareholders of s corporations (aka small businesses). In other words, you create a world where the rich stay rich, not as many people get rich, and small businesses get hosed. And, incidentally, you never realize quite the income you think you are going to.

ASnd I say this as someone who thinks that a deal ion the budget is going to have to increase taxes. Problem is, for the taxes to raise enough money, they have to be on everyone, and have to be matched with realhonest to gosh spending cuts -- not spending cuts that already happened earlier in the year.

Danube of Thought

What Noah (and Dana) continue to refrain from discussing is that the U.S. has the most progressive income tax in the world (and the highest corporate tax rate).

Here are the OECD data.

Danube of Thought

No one will answer your questions, Iggy.

Danube of Thought

The relevant statistic isn't what proportion of the nation's taxes comes from the rich. It's what proportion of the rich's income gets paid in taxes.

Well, since in the US that proportion is higher than anywhere else in the world, what, exactly, does Mr. Noah want to see?

Danube of Thought

National Journal:


The failure of federally backed solar energy startup Solyndra has cast a shadow over the renewable-energy industry, spurring congressional hearings and investigations by the FBI and Treasury Department. Some lawmakers are now asking whether the federal government should be backing energy projects at all when taxpayer money is ultimately at stake. Supporters of renewable energy have expressed concern over the fallout from the Solyndra bankruptcy, and National Journal’s Energy and Environment Insiders say they are rightfully worried. “The sheer malfeasance surrounding Solyndra will unfortunately create a very steep hill for subsequent renewable projects to climb,” one Insider said.

Legs.

Danube of Thought

Gallup:

For the first time since President Barack Obama took office, a majority of Americans believe he deserves at least some blame for the country’s economic troubles, a new poll Wednesday shows.

According to the USA Today/Gallup survey, 24 percent of Americans say Obama deserves “a great deal of blame” for the state of the economy – a 10 point jump since 2009. A majority of Americans, including six out of 10 independents, think the president deserves “a great deal or moderate” amount of blame.

MayBee

No one will answer your questions, Iggy.

That's right, DoT and Iggy.
They can't because there is no real goal there.

Danube of Thought

Looks like we may get the theater we were hoping for on Friday. Fred Upton:

Both Mr. Stover and Mr. Harrison will be sworn in under oath this Friday. We have many questions for Solyndra’s executives on their dealings with the Obama administration, their efforts to secure federal support for a project that appeared doomed from the outset, and why they made certain representations to Congress regarding their dire financial situation just two months ago. We would encourage Mr. Harrison and Mr. Stover to reconsider this effort to dodge questions under oath and hide the truth from those American taxpayers who are now on the hook for their $500 million bust.
Cecil Turner

I'm a bit worried some folks apparently can't figure out that, if those making 50% of total income pay 70% of total income tax, it means they pay income tax at a higher rate than everyone else (or that that is a bigger share of their income).

Benjamin Franklin

" I'll just observe that the Buffett sort of wealthy have a lot more ability to control what types of income they receive, whether that income is taxable or not, and the jurisdiction where they earn income."

How about the ability to control income for the Secretary? Let's assume she makes $52k AGI. 14% of that is $7280 is $606 per month out of her 4,333 monthly take home pay.

AGI for the millionaire is $1 mil.@ 35% marginal rate leaves $650,000 annual take home leaves him a paltry monthly paycheck of over $54,000.

Oh I see the Millionaire has a few more options for investment, savings..

Benjamin Franklin

"$606 per month *** of her 4,333 monthly take home pay."

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon





Traffic

Wilson/Plame