House GOP sacrifices progress for purity

Yes ………….. Obama by his MERE PRESENCE AS PRESIDENT causes many business men to hold back on investing as they could. They don’t trust him and don’t want to risk their investments in that manner.

You libs. fail to see (or acknowledge) this about your messiah. He can do no wrong in your eyes.

What blind hypocrisy.

• Link
• Report this comment

Shhhhhh ……………. whispering ………………

Hey conservative friends:

Check out Jay’s 12:01 post. He has been ignoring me for weeks (I really nailed him hard on something awhile back) and he didn’t mention me by name but he did respond to one of my posts about Steve Wynn. I guess he just couldn’t stand it.

shhhhhhhhh ……………………………

• Link
• Report this comment

UsinUK: considering the physical attributes of most bimbos, wouldn’t flotation device be more appropriate???

Not in the particular case under discussion. In Mrs. Murdochs case we can safely assume she has NEVER had implants……….

• Link
• Report this comment

Leg Lamp

are you seriously saying that because someone can afford a $20 microwave, their rich? or a refrigerator? or a VCR/DVD player (have you checked their prices, lately??) Same with a mobile phone – before a had a quad-band, I bought a Virgin pay as you go for $25 for my visits to the states. and color TV /= 50″ flat screen.

internet access? dishwasher?

dude.

seriously.

and I love how you gloss over “For example, over a quarter of poor households have cell phones and telephone answering machines, but, at the other extreme, approximately onetenth have no phone at all. While the majority of poor households do not experience significant material problems, roughly a third do experience at least one problem such as overcrowding, temporary hunger, or difficulty getting medical care.”

and to think that all poor people should live in Victorian conditions is inhuman “By contrast, social reformer Jacob Riis, writing on tenement living conditions around 1890 in New York City, described crowded families living with four or five persons per room and some 20 square feet of living space per person”

wow. so people aren’t living in tenemant buildings with no running water … that means they’re RICH!!!

good flippin’ grief.

• Link
• Report this comment

Headline: “RUPERT MURDOCH ATTACKED AT HEARING”

…………….. so much for British security.

• Link
• Report this comment

They are grilling Ms. Brooks now if anyone is interested in listening in as they blog:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14193124

BTW: Is BBC liberal or conservative or (God Forbid) neutral?

• Link
• Report this comment

“sorry I don’t have a study done showing the work ethic of someone on welfare,”

Jay got a pretty good earfull about the work ethic of our “less fortunate” from the restaurant owner he talked to about his employment of illegals, but he won’t print the man’s opinions here becuase he doesn’t want anybody to know the truth about why these people never progress beyond minimum wage. If any of you have ever tried to employ this class of people, you also know exactly what I’m talking about. You’d have to hire 4 people to get a full weeks work from one person. You’ve never seen so many dead grandmothers in your life!!

• Link
• Report this comment

“I call ‘em like I see ‘em:

Hummmmmm …………. if this is true, there goes any chance at a presidency ! You can’t have the “president” in the hospital for headaches every couple of weeks !

THE END.

HEADLINE: “GOP presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann suffers from migraines that have landed her in the hospital, according to a report in The Daily Caller.

The story, quoting unnamed “witnesses,” says Bachmann’s migraines are stress-induced, occur about once a week and can “incapacitate” the Minnesota congresswoman. Bachmann campaign spokesw0man Alice Stewart says that characterization is “incorrect.”

Of course she would say that.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinner

Not that it would require a response, but I addressed one of the quotes in the Heritage study addressing that at 12:29, and got nothing but crickets…

• Link
• Report this comment

Headline: Scout is WAY behind on the “headlines”

LOL Scout we talked about that for 2 or three pages. Also i posted a link for the video.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fly-on-the-wall :

I’m sorry you feel that way. This is the only blog I debate on and I find it entertaining.

Is there something you wish to debate or are you just into name calling of other posters ?

• Link
• Report this comment

“I’m pretty sure that by knowingly renting to people who were engaging in welfare fraud, your friend might ”

What is the matter, JM – you can’t read? There IS no fraud. There is nothing illegal about sitting around drinking and smoking and collecting up to 30 grand a year. And drug use (the only thing that I could “report” and that to the police – not agency itself) only disqualifies you in some states. Now, instead of chasing some red herring, why don’t YOU tell all of us if it is okay in your book for possibly millions of people to receive that kind of money without working. We are not talking about the elderly, the disabled or infirm here.

• Link
• Report this comment

he won’t print the man’s opinions here becuase he doesn’t want anybody to know the truth

RB, how much do you charge for your mind-reading services? Because I think that’d come in handy for a little business project of mine.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Income taxes are based on the ability to pay, that said what you pay you can afford to pay, the point if there is one is just because you can afford it don’t mean you want to pay it, but you can still afford it.”

Then why don’t we get rid of the Progressive Income Tax, and just tax based off of consumption…like the fair tax idea

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK
July 19th, 2011
12:57 pm

Riiiight. Nice try at projection.

Off for the day. Take care everyone.

• Link
• Report this comment

Please tell me that you rabid Republicans are STILL not waiting to be trickled-on!

Is that why you so slavishly and spinelessly grovel before the super-rich?

In the desperate hope they’ll send a few pieces of silver your way?

Wake up guppies. They ain’t remotely interested in you or your family or your neighborhood. The plutocracy grows stronger and more emboldened every day. Every fact confirms it. And though you are paying for it and getting nothing much in return, you grin, thinking these are the good guys who are gonna give you a handup. You adore their status and enable their hyper-corruption.

Hysterical.

Three decades of this crappola and unfortunately it will be three more until you rubes die off. Only then can the hundreds of millions of disaffected Americans begin fully fighting back in the War on the Middle Class…

• Link
• Report this comment

Neon Frog @11:15 am “If only those 1% paid 35%, then maybe we could make a dent in the debt.”

According to the CBO [www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/taxdistribution.cfm], the top 1% pay over 30% for their “Total Effective Federal Tax Rate” (31.2% in 2006, the last year for which data is available). This includes all income, payroll, corporate, and excise taxes. Their effective income tax rate is 19.0% (again 2006).

The CBO puts out a nice paper every year. It starts with data from 1979 and runs up to 2006 (the last year for which I have data, 2005 for the top 0.01%).

Total Effective Federal Tax Rate (income+payroll+excise+corporate)
* the lowest quintile rate was 8.0% in 1979 and 4.3% in 2006
* percentile 96-99 rate was 27.7% in 1979 and 25.7% in 2006
* top 1% percentile rate was 37.0% in 1979 and 31.2% in 2006
* top 0.01% percentile rate was 42.9% in 1979 and 31.5% in 2005

Effective Income Tax Rate
* the lowest quintile rate was 0.0% in 1979 and -6.6% (negative 6.6 percent) in 2006
* the second quintile rate was 4.1% in 1979 and -1.0% (negative 1.0 percent) in 2006
* percentile 96-99 rate was 16.7% in 1979 and 15.2% in 2006
* top 1% rate was 21.8% in 1979 and 19.0% in 2006
* top 0.01% percentile rate was 21.0% in 1979 and 17.0% in 2005

Share of Total Federal Tax Liabilities
* the lowest quintile paid 2.1% of all taxes collected in 1979 and 0.8% in 2006
* percentile 96-99 paid 14.2% of all taxes collected in 1979 and 16.3% in 2006
* top 1 percentile paid 15.4% of all taxes collected in 1979 and 27.6% in 2006
* top 0.01% percentile paid 2.7% of all taxes collected in 1979 and 6.5% in 2005

Share of Pre-Tax Income
* the lowest quintile earned 5.8% in 1979 and 3.9% in 2006
* percentile 96-99 earned 11.4% in 1979 and 13.1% in 2006
* top 1 percentile earned 9.3% in 1979 and 18.8% in 2006
* top 0.01 percentile earned 1.4% in 1979 and 4.2% in 2006

In 1979, the 96-99 percentile was 3.408M households earning an average of $162,400.
In 2006, the 96-99 percentile was 4.672M households earning an average of $269,800.

In 1979, the top 0.01% was 9,000 households, earning an average pretax income of $7.33M.
In 2006, the top 0.01% was 11,000 households earning an average of pretax income $35.47M.

The top 5% may be rich, but they are not in the same ballpark as the uber-rich (top 0.01%).

In 2006, the total income of the uber-rich was $390B. Even if you taxed them at 100%, you still don’t come close to covering the deficit.

• Link
• Report this comment

From listening to this “hearing” i think they are going to draw and quarter Rebekah Brooks. She’s not holding up very well……….

• Link
• Report this comment

“Even though they held control of only one legislative chamber, they had backed President Obama into proposing a $4 trillion deficit-reduction package, including more than $3 trillion in spending reductions over the next decade. Enacted into law, it would have easily been the largest budget-cutting package in U.S. history. All they had to do was say yes.”

And if it were a serious proposal submitted months ago, they might have.

As it was, it was neither serious, nor timely, rendering the above analysis moot.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, well – hopefully all the hand wringing we’ve been doing will be for naught:

Gang of Six Back Together – Trying to Score Debt Reduction Deal

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/07/19/gang-six-back-together-trying-score-debt-reduction-deal

• Link
• Report this comment

Ya’ll aint seen poor till you’ve been to Haiti !

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, I need some “trade” information.

Listening to this grilling of Ms. Brooks they are discussing the use of PI’s. Is it customary for media to use PI’s? I thought that’s what reporters did, did out the info needed………….

• Link
• Report this comment

dig out the info I mean

• Link
• Report this comment

“RB, how much do you charge for your mind-reading services? Because I think that’d come in handy for a little business project of mine.”

I’ve pushed Jay on that issue several times. If it weren’t true, in Jay’s usual form, he would have said so.

And everybody who’s hired minimum wage adults knows it.

BTW, my business is growing. I’ve added 5 full time employees in the last 3 weeks. God forbid I should actually make some money for you leechees to get your hands on for all the work going into it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Oops! Lingering slanties.

• Link
• Report this comment

@AmVet

Taxing the rich is a economic decision. This has nothing to do with loving the super rich. That statement is so unrealistic. Do you actually think that Republicans sit around and think about the super rich all day long? LOL

Let me ask you this, how will taxing the rich more kick start this economy? Taxing more or less is a topic that is discussed to see which way is better for the overall economy. You can whine and moan all you want about the rich, but please help me understand how taxing the rich more is better for our economy and will help produce more jobs and fix housing for that matter?

• Link
• Report this comment

“And I’m saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime.”

I deal with small businesses owners every day and this statement is absolutely true. 99 out of every 100 I talk to feel this way.

Right or wrong…….it’s reality.

• Link
• Report this comment

About Michelle Bachmann’s allegedly debilitating migraines, and pardon me if it’s been asked upthread already, but a hypothetical question:

if she found that electroshock therapy cured these headaches, would she be able to acknowledge having had such therapy and remain a viable candidate?

I’m just thinking about what poor Thomas Eagleton had to go through, back in the day…

• Link
• Report this comment

This guy speaks the truth. This economy will not recover until this European socialist is out of the White House.

Ooooooo This was verrry close – however he said “European” socialist instead of “Kenyan” Socialist so no points for that. Great try though!

RB: Most likely with the help of Section 8 funds. But they’re entitled to it aren’t they DDR??? I mean, isn’t everybody who finishes 6th grade and goes to work 27 days per year entitled to a house with all those amenities at the expense of all those people who work 14 hour days?

RB I honestly think you are either (a) crazy or (b) going through male menopause! You make the most asinine and ridiculous statements, even more ridiculous than K71, Scout and Numbers (and that’s saying something).

RB have you ever considered that in today’s America, mostly 90% of ALL rentals comes with a refrigerator, a stove, A/C etc? And to say that most poor renting are getting Section 8 is not only disingenious but dishonest too! If that were the case, then there wouldn’t be slums in America — only beautifully maintained Section 8 domiciles!

And that ” I mean, isn’t everybody who finishes 6th grade and goes to work 27 days per year entitled to a house” statement puts you at the top of the list for “Most Bizarre Statement On A Blog EVAH!”. Have you ever considered if it wasn’t for Section 8, a lot of Home Owners who couldn’t sell their houses would be stuck with two or three mortgages or even worse FORECLOSURE? By renting to Section 8 recipients, they are in a win-win situation. They can meet their obligations AND give someone adequate rental housing to boot.

RB: You’re a communitst, Debbie. You and freedom can’t co-exist.

Dude, honestly, go see the doctor, your minister, a movie or a h##ker – you are in desperate need of some attention.

• Link
• Report this comment

I deal with small businesses owners every day and this statement is absolutely true. 99 out of every 100 I talk to feel this way.

Right or wrong…….it’s reality.

surrrre it is.

• Link
• Report this comment

SKH — “I ask you a simple question and you divert attention from it”

You ask me a “have you stopped beating your wife” question and you expect me to take you *seriously?* (pointing, laughing)

“and then ask more questions.”

Actually, I asked you to show me where I had claimed such a thing was okay.

“Were did you learn to do that – here on this forum or elsewhere?”

I am pretty sure I recall your recounting of your friend’s ‘dilemma,’ and I think you’re being dishonest in your description of your treatment in the wake of it. Several people here made it quite clear that they thought your friend was being a dirtbag for taking money that he believed to have been fraudulently obtained, but I can’t recally anyone excoriating YOU. Yet you describe the situation as lefties ‘coming down on’ you.

Please.

• Link
• Report this comment

kayaker 71 @11:27 am “Many of the very wealthy in this country pay so little in taxes because their earnings are so small. You only pay federal income tax on earnings, not total assets. ”

Because that’s the way the Constitution was amended to provide for non-apportioned taxes.

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

If you want to tax assets, pass a new amendment.

• Link
• Report this comment

WOODSTOCK MIKE:

You can whine and moan all you want about the rich, but please help me understand how taxing the rich more is better for our economy and will help produce more jobs and fix housing for that matter?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well we did the cut their taxes thing and that didn’t work and didn’t get more revenue. SO let’s try something else eh?

You keep focusing on ONE of the two steps needed. We have to cut spending also. The plan Jay referenced both significantly cut spending as well as raised taxes.

What’s so hard to understand about that?

• Link
• Report this comment

“You ask me a “have you stopped beating your wife” question and you expect me to take you *seriously?* (pointing, laughing)”

I would like to here you say unequivocally that you do NOT think it is right that hundreds of thousands or possible millions of able bodied people are receiving up to $30,000 a year without having to work (unless, of course, you think that is quite alright). Is that a wife-beating question to you? I honestly don’t know where you (or a number of other posters here) stand on this question. It would be good to hear.

• Link
• Report this comment

sfd

“if she found that electroshock therapy cured these headaches, would she be able to acknowledge having had such therapy and remain a viable candidate?”

Probably not. This country views diseases that arise in the mind much differently than diseases that arise in the body. Strange, but that’s the way it is.

• Link
• Report this comment

“About Michelle Bachmann’s allegedly debilitating migraines,”

Ah, I bet she is on Topomax.

It slowing down the brain process and makes you dumber.

Fact.

• Link
• Report this comment

1811/1801 – 0311/0317

July 19th, 2011
1:12 pm
This is about as laughable as it gets:

Headline: “Ga. execution drug unsafe, attorneys say”

“In an appeal filed in federal court, the lawyers referenced the execution last month of Roy Blankenship and reports that the Savannah murderer moved and appeared to mutter as the drugs were going into his veins.”

I say reverse it and give hime a new trial!

• Link
• Report this comment

db: Also, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

LOL I’ll bet that goes completely over his head.

• Link
• Report this comment

stands for decibles:

I like Bauchmann a lot and support about 90% of her policies.

However, if that is true ……. she is done and should be done. The American Disabilities Act does not apply to the FBI, the NFL or the President of the United States. You must be avaiable 27/4 !

If you are incapacitated by migraines (the drugs used to treat it are also are a problem), have a heart problem or are a man and cry during the campaing ………………. well ………………….. find another job !

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK

Those donations…! We get a slough of computers, etc, every year some from the business community, some from private individuals “for y’all’s kids..” There’s even a “committee” of parents who get them ready to pass on…ever so often we get a microwave or two…

• Link
• Report this comment

“Do you actually think that Republicans sit around and think about the super rich all day long?”

On this blog, they certainly do.

And your entire second paragraph is nonsense, and for several reasons.

The first is that I have never posited the notion that taxing the rich more will “…help produce more jobs and fix housing…” I have no clue where you guys even come up with that drivel.

I advocate for economic JUSTICE. How can Warren Buffett pay a SMALLER effective tax rate than his secretary? Even though he “makes” 767 times the annual money she does.

How can 485,000 Americans who “make” between $100,000 and $500,000 per year pay no federal income tax?

How can 18,000 Americans who “make” more than $500,000 per year pay NO federal income tax?

This is a travesty and unacceptable.

And you plutocrat-enablers don’t find that problematic, whatsoever do you? You don’t find that anathema to economic justice at all.

Yet you complain endlessly about the poor slobs who make next to nothing in that very same boat.

Absurd with a capital A.

As for the subject of individual welfare, every president since Reagan has worked to pare the roles. Yet at the same time every one of those men worked relentlessly to INCREASE corporate welfare.

Which now dwarfs all individual welfare.

Those are the facts. And I have posted a plethora of incontrovertible other facts to prove their is a War on the Middle Class.

And while it rolls merrily along, you whistle Dixie…

• Link
• Report this comment

AmVet:

Why does a lady on welfare with six kids pay a 7% tax on a hamburger and so does a millionaire ………….. 7% on the same burger?

• Link
• Report this comment

Okay, look at that $30,000 in “hand outs.” How much of it goes back into the free enterprise economy…you know, to the property owner, to the grocery store, to Dr. Jones,’ etc. At the end of the day, aren’t THEY the ones getting the welfare you speak of?

• Link
• Report this comment

AmVet:

Ansewer:

Because he (or or she) contributes to society in hundreds of other massive ways including but not limited to (sales tax on yachts, property taxes, estate taxes, charity giving, etc., etc., etc.)

Those same people who “pay no income taxes” (per the laws passed by the U.S. Congress) contribute in similar ways.

• Link
• Report this comment

heading home.

night all

• Link
• Report this comment

“What’s so hard to understand about that?”

Listen, it’s understood that cutting spending is the larger piece of this puzzle. We all know that right? My point is simple, the whole argument of raising taxes on the rich is nothing less than political grandstanding by the Democrats. Raising taxes by 3-5% on the rich does virtually nothing, yeah it generates a few more bucks for the govt, but in the big picture it doesn’t do hardly anything. So I am asking why is it playing such a big role in the discussions? Easy answer, the Dems just want to save some kind of face after agreeing to all the spending cuts.

• Link
• Report this comment

Left wing management @11:30 am “Tax receipts are at all time lows while corporate profits are at all-time highs, with CEO pay spiraling at stratospheric levels.”

One untrue statement and one non sequitur.

Tax receipts are not at all-time historic lows [www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200] In absolute terms, the revenues are comparable to the monies taken in in 2004 and 2005, for example. As a percentage of GDP, they are low compared to more recent levels, but are not at *all-time* lows (1949 and 1950, for example, had lower levels, as did 1940-1943). On the other hand spending levels are at an all-time high in absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP are higher than any spending levels since WW II spending consumed more than 40%.

As an aside, Collections were low in 1950 were quite low–as percentage of GDP only 14.4%–despite having a 91% marginal tax rate on incomes over $200,000. Of course, that was accompanied by a 20% tax on incomes between $0 and $2000.

The pay for CEOs is matter for the shareholders and customers. But force a pay cut on them, and you will certainly reduce the taxes collected from them (as evidenced by the lower taxes collected from TARP-controlled bank CEOs).

• Link
• Report this comment

“How can 485,000 Americans who “make” between $100,000 and $500,000 per year pay no federal income tax?

How can 18,000 Americans who “make” more than $500,000 per year pay NO federal income tax?”

Answer – Simple, they go by the laws that were created by both Democrats and Republicans.

• Link
• Report this comment

advocate for economic JUSTICE. How can Warren Buffett pay a SMALLER effective tax rate than his secretary? Even though he “makes” 767 times the annual money she does.

How can 485,000 Americans who “make” between $100,000 and $500,000 per year pay no federal income tax?

How can 18,000 Americans who “make” more than $500,000 per year pay NO federal income tax?

Uh- because it is not true- kind of like me saying how can donkey’s fly?

You may want to tone down the outrage and understand that if I (or you for that matter) go create a company that sells stuff- it may “make” 500k but have employees and other expenses that cost 520k. This happens more than the far left would like to believe. In this very common scenario the taxpayer actually has a net loss for that particular year.

As to our wonderful friend Warren Buffett he may own a gazillion $’s of Berskhire. Berkshire may go up in value 40% and Buffett not sale any shares. Guess what- no tax.

The far left will then love when he and other gazillionaires donate half their net worth to charity. Guess what- billions of estate tax just went poof and the net worth can now grow fully tax free under the auspices of a chairtable trust or a private foundation.

Anyway- why bother with the facts- just be mad.

• Link
• Report this comment