Analysis confirms Gingrich tax plan a massive boon to the wealthy

A month ago, as Newt Gingrich began to rise in the polls, I did an informal assessment of his tax-cut plan, concluding that “every change that Gingrich proposes would overwhelmingly benefit those Americans who are already at the very top of the economic scale” and that it would produce significantly less revenue, forcing major reductions in Social Security, Medicare and other programs that are crucial to the middle class.

(In brief, the Gingrich plan would eliminate the capital gains tax, cut the corporate income tax to 12.5 percent, eliminate the estate tax and offer an optional flat-rate tax of 15 percent for those taxpayers who would benefit from it.)

The Tax Policy Center has now released a more detailed, in-depth assessment of those proposed changes. According to the TPC, 82.9 percent of the Gingrich tax cuts would indeed go to those making $119,546 or more. The top 1 percent — those making $622,809 or more — would collect 50 percent of the tax cut, enjoying an average tax reduction of more than $340,000.

Meanwhile, the 60 percent of American households making less than $69,074 would split 7.1 percent of the tax savings. (These numbers assume extension of the Bush tax cut, as per the Gingrich plan.) If those tax cuts are not extended, the savings at the top would be even more dramatic.)

Looked at another way, the average effective tax rate for the richest 0.1 percent (those with incomes above $2.9 million) would fall to 10.2 percent from the current 33.5 percent, a reduction of more than two-thirds. (See chart below) In fact, under President Gingrich, the richest 0.1 percent would pay lower effective tax rates than almost 60 percent of their fellow Americans. To Newt, the so-called “Buffett secretary problem” isn’t a problem at all, it is a goal.

Chart by Jay Bookman, data from Tax Policy Center

Chart by Jay Bookman, data from Tax Policy Center

Not surprisingly, cuts of that size would put a huge new hole in the budget. If the Bush tax cuts are extended, the Gingrich tax cuts would produce an additional deficit of $800 billion by 2015; if the cuts are not extended, the revenue loss would be $1.2 trillion.

Given that Gingrich is a strong advocate of a balanced budget amendment, that would require cutting the projected 2015 federal budget by 43 percent.

– Jay Bookman

438 comments Add your comment

Adam

December 13th, 2011
8:39 am

“Analysis confirms Gingrich tax plan a massive boon to the wealthy”

This is my shock and awe face :|

Adam

December 13th, 2011
8:41 am

What is funny, in a not humorous way, is just how much the party faithful really like the idea of slashing the federal budget indiscriminately. All the time, they don’t realize getting their wish would DRASTICALLY affect them too, not just the people they call the “dependent class.”

Ross Perot

December 13th, 2011
8:43 am

Time to cut the budget then.

carlosgvv

December 13th, 2011
8:44 am

Republicans are the Party of the rich and the dumbed down middle-class. So, it’s no supprise that Newt’s tax plan is a huge gift to the wealthy. Newt and all the other Republican big-wigs know that this is necessary to keep the cash flow coming for their election and re-election campaigns. They also know that with skillful lies the dumbed-down middle class will actually believe these tax cuts will benefit all Americans. It’s hard to predict the future but, it’s looking more and more like America’s best days are fading increasingly into the past.

finn mccool

December 13th, 2011
8:44 am

Gop base doesn’t understand this. If foxnews won’t explain it to them they won’t have a clue.

Adam

December 13th, 2011
8:45 am

Ross Perot: Time to cut the budget then.

Called it.

Brosephus

December 13th, 2011
8:45 am

Analysis confirms Gingrich tax plan a massive boon to the wealthy

Isn’t this one of those “No Sh*t Sherlock!!” moments???

Jay

Got a chart for you too, something that even you would be in awe of…

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/fox-newss-unemployment-chart-better-graphics/2011/12/12/gIQAUVgNqO_blog.html

USinUK

December 13th, 2011
8:46 am

“In brief, the Gingrich plan would eliminate the capital gains tax”

the holy grail of the GOP …

per yesterday’s conversation – who benefits the most? the CEOs who are already on multi-million salary+ bonus schemes who are then supplemented with multi-million stock schemes on top of it all

Normal

December 13th, 2011
8:46 am

“Analysis confirms Gingrich tax plan a massive boon to the wealthy”

Why does this surprise y’all? I thought we already knew that Newt was in it for Newt and damn the rest?
—————————————-

BOSCH,
From below , The wife and I figured out we have more than enough Grand Kids around who are old enough to help with the decorations for say, a “tree trimming party”. I knew we were “multiplying” for a reason… :D

Steve - USA

December 13th, 2011
8:46 am

If the Bush tax cuts are extended, the Gingrich tax cuts would produce an additional deficit of $800 billion by 2015; if the cuts are not extended, the revenue loss would be $1.2 trillion.

?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 13th, 2011
8:47 am

Why that is not class warfare….. its just good Republican tax policy. There is never a need to discuss the disparate benefit of tax cut impacts in favor of the extremely wealthy. It is only a concern to Republicans when you raise taxes and then only if those taxes are not in favor of the extremely wealthy. Why indeed when you think about tax rates historically, there really was no concern about being certain that tax cuts had equal impact, because they favored the extremely wealthy.

I am sure the bloated fat guy can tell us why this is a great idea.

Mick

December 13th, 2011
8:47 am

Here we go again….escape to singapore? Hell, I’ll take it a big step further, volunteering for moon colonization duty, this planet is getting spent…

USinUK

December 13th, 2011
8:47 am

Brocephus – 8:45 – do you believe me or your lyin’ eyes?

Jim163

December 13th, 2011
8:48 am

“dumbed down middle-class”

But if I vote for Obama..I won’t have to pay for my mortgage…my car payment will go away…

Gale

December 13th, 2011
8:50 am

I don’t want to vote for Obama, but the GOP sure is not giving me an option.

Jay

December 13th, 2011
8:51 am

In other words, Steve, if the Bush tax cuts are extended, that by itself would increase the 2015 deficit by $400 billion.

$400 billion Bush tax cut extension + $800 billion Gingrich tax cut = $1.2 trillion revenue loss.

Divide and Conquer

December 13th, 2011
8:51 am

I call it the Serfdom Now Plan.

No worries though, Gringich doesn’t have a chance, no matter had bad Obama is.

kayaker 71

December 13th, 2011
8:51 am

Another Newt rant? That’s at least one per day. Aren’t there some other issues that are more important than slamming Newt yet again? Geesh, Bookman, you ARE in a rut.

Butch Cassidy

December 13th, 2011
8:52 am

Jim163 – “dumbed down middle-class”

But if I vote for Obama..I won’t have to pay for my mortgage…my car payment will go away…”

Wow, you’ve discovered that there are idiots on both the Left and the Right. Kudos. Maybe you would like to share with us your discovery that trees are made of wood as well?

Joe The Plumber too.

December 13th, 2011
8:52 am

jay, your typo checker is sleeping on the job again, but I fixed it for you. Analysis confirms obama as President a massive mistake for America. No thanks needed, glad to help.

Adam

December 13th, 2011
8:52 am

Jim163: You have a 30 year campaign of dumbing down the American public, a concerted effort by the CONSERVATIVE media bias that is now most prevalent (look it up) to thank for that.

El Jefe

December 13th, 2011
8:54 am

My guess is that the rich have been paying a disproportionation amount in taxes to begin with. With the “progressive” plan, the middle pay their fair share and the rich pay more.

The rich have been taxed too much and we all should be shouldering the same load. A flat tax or a fair tax would be much superior to the present tax code.

A real boon would be a return to an Article 1 Section 2 tax code. For those in side the perimeter, each state would be assessed a tax based on population. If Georgia had 5% of the population of the US, then Georgia would pay 5% of the federal budget. It would be left up to Georgia to determine how the taxes would be collected or assessed.

Jay

December 13th, 2011
8:54 am

I know, Bro, I saw that.

And having made a few charts of my own, I can tell you that you have to TRY to make it that deceptive. That has to be your goal — the software doesn’t let you do that accidentally.

saywhat?

December 13th, 2011
8:54 am

Brosephus @ 8;45

Now THERE is a chart that follows the way wing nuts think. First, draw the conclusion you want to be true, then fill in with numbers that don’t back up your assertions, and insist that they do anyway.

In FOX news defense, maybe they thought the chart just looked more “balanced” the way they drew it.

philosopher

December 13th, 2011
8:54 am

kayaker 71: Another Newt rant?
No, not a Newt rant… it’s informing the public. Some of us like to look beyond the party name when we make a decision for whom to vote…you know, what the person plans to do, how it will affect us and other Americans….that stuff.

Adam

December 13th, 2011
8:56 am

Jay: I think this is what Steve was getting at:

“if the cuts are not extended, the revenue loss would be $1.2 trillion.”

I really really don’t like that I can’t delete my own posts, btw :(

kayaker 71

December 13th, 2011
8:57 am

How many of the of the whining liberals out there complaining about taxing capital gains are doing so because they don’t have any capital gains to declare?

Adam

December 13th, 2011
8:58 am

El Jefe: It would be left up to Georgia to determine how the taxes would be collected or assessed.

And wouldn’t that just be dandy. Way to be a UNITER and not a DIVIDER, d00d.

kayaker 71

December 13th, 2011
8:59 am

philosopher,

“Informing the public”? BWHAHAHAHAHAH

Peadawg

December 13th, 2011
8:59 am

“Analysis confirms Gingrich tax plan a massive boon to the wealthy”

Is anyone surprised by this?

Alan

December 13th, 2011
9:00 am

Why does no-one appear to understand basic economics. One approach is to reduce taxes, stimulate the economy and generate higher tax revenues due to higher employment and corporate revenues, reduce government (and hence regulation), encourage innovation and entrepreneurialism and bring back the competitive spirit that created the US. The other approach is to increase taxes, increase tax evasion and drive money out of the country, keep unemployment at historically high levels, stick our heads in the sand and watch China take over as the leading economy.

Jm

December 13th, 2011
9:00 am

Yes. Gingrich’s plan is insane.

So is the Obama plan.

Romney has the reasonable answers.

Jm

December 13th, 2011
9:01 am

Politico top headline: the south up for grabs

Fun read

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:01 am

Romney has the reasonable answers.

Wanna bet $10,000?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

saywhat?

December 13th, 2011
9:02 am

El Jefe @ 8:54

Given the republicans we have in Georgia, that would mean one of the most regressive tax structures in the nation. You couldn’t stop the flood of people leaving the state if that were to happen.

Steve - USA

December 13th, 2011
9:02 am

Jay,

Thanks, I must be drawing a blank today because I still don’t see why if the Bush cuts are NOT extended why that wouldn’t remove the $400 Billion loss. If the Bust tax cuts are not extended that would be an increase in revenue not a decrease.

Don’t worry about it, I have a headache, It must be a ME problem.

philosopher

December 13th, 2011
9:02 am

Dear yaker, thanks for the thought-provoking contribution.

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:03 am

Alan: The other approach is to increase taxes, increase tax evasion and drive money out of the country, keep unemployment at historically high levels, stick our heads in the sand and watch China take over as the leading economy.

So, given that taxes have NOT yet been raised and have, in fact, been lowered over Obama’s first term, why is unemployment still historically high? Since, you know, only high taxes do that.

RB from Gwinnett

December 13th, 2011
9:05 am

“if the Bush tax cuts are extended, that by itself would increase the 2015 deficit by $400 billion.”

Jay, you know darn well the Bush tax cuts expired already. At least have the honesty to call the current tax rates the Obama tax rates since he is the president who enacted them. If he wants to propose an across the board tax increase or merely a tax increase on the wealthy, he should write a proposal to do so.

Any tools like you should quit lying to people about it.

AmVet

December 13th, 2011
9:07 am

Faux News, aka the Neo-con News Network? Joseph McCarthy would have been a HUGE fan.

But they are so desperate that they have to falsify a chart by intentionally skewing that last figure upwards on the graph??

Too funny.

With that absurd slate of candidates that they have produced, it is little wonder. (Is anybody else missing $9.99 Herman yet?)

The vapid and vacuous Fox bimbos just have to bat their eyes while lying to the uneducated and uniformed Republirubes, and in reality, are little more than political porn for lonely and very angry old white guys…

Gretchen and Meagan shakin’ it as they lip sync to Don Henley…

Well, I could’ve been an actor, but I wound up here
I just have to look good, I don’t have to be clear
Come and whisper in my ear, give us dirty laundry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46bBWBG9r2o

Jm

December 13th, 2011
9:08 am

If republicans want smaller, cheaper, more efficient, and less corrupt government, Romney is the guy. Not newt.

carlosgvv

December 13th, 2011
9:08 am

Jm – “Romney has the reasonable answers”

Which Romney are you talking about? The one who honestly gives his views or the one who says what he thinks the Tea Party right wants to hear?

JKL2

December 13th, 2011
9:10 am

So the people who pay the most would get back the most when you do a flat rate cut? Now that’s just crazy talk. No wonder GA scores so low in education…

How much were they supposed to get back? What’s 15% of “I didn’t pay anything” again?

barking frog

December 13th, 2011
9:10 am

The Gingrich tax plan is something that you will never be faced with,
the Romney tax plan, slight possibility.

Butch Cassidy

December 13th, 2011
9:11 am

RB from Gwinnett – ” you know darn well the Bush tax cuts expired already. At least have the honesty to call the current tax rates the Obama tax rates since he is the president who enacted them.”

Nooooo….the Bush tax cuts were designed to expire in 2010. However, they becam a bargaining chip in order to extend the unemployment benefits. The compromise was that rather than let the tax cuts expire as planned, they would be EXTENDED for an additional time fram. Obama did nothing more than change the date of expiration. There is a substantial difference in ENACTING something and EXTENDING it. For the weak minded, think of it as extending the warranty on your car. Yo didn’t create a new warranty, you simply prolonged the one that was already in place.

Any questions?

lovelyliz

December 13th, 2011
9:12 am

“Analysis confirms Gingrich tax plan a massive boon to the wealthy”

Was there ever any doubt?

barking frog

December 13th, 2011
9:13 am

Will tax revenues being something other than taxes never go away?
And you cannot raise taxes by lowering taxes.

Jm

December 13th, 2011
9:14 am

If only we could have a “no tax” government. Eliminate all taxes save for a small consumption tax to pay for the military and courts…..

But alas, government knows only one direction for spending. Up

The ship is sinking one way or the other. Probably. But there is a small but shrinking chance to save it.

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:14 am

HEADLINE: Poll: Young people say they’re better off

Uh oh. Better suppress their vote! You can start with making it so they have to have ID, but student IDs don’t count. OH WAIT….

Steve - USA

December 13th, 2011
9:15 am

Butch,

LMAO. Do you even believe the BS you just wrote?

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:15 am

RB: Jay, you know darn well the Bush tax cuts expired already.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

In addition to the obvious nature of trying to blame someone ELSE for those tax cuts, I find it particularly funny when conservatives think this is a winning argument.

Mick

December 13th, 2011
9:15 am

butch

I guess its true, you see clearly where many are just wandering through the fog…

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:16 am

HEADLINE: Obama: Headed for a Landslide?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Y73sPHKxw

Paul

December 13th, 2011
9:18 am

More ammo for the debate. Gingrich puts out far-reaching policy changes and doesn’t seem to have a clue about their effects for how it contradicts with his previous positions. Deep-thinking philosopher or bar stool blatherer? Hmmm…..

Our friends on the Right are slipping. We’re way past due for “of course the rich get more money back. They have more money to begin with!”

Mr_B

December 13th, 2011
9:19 am

Alan

December 13th, 2011
9:00 am
Why does no-one appear to understand basic economics. One approach is to reduce taxes, stimulate the economy and generate higher tax revenues due to higher employment and corporate revenues, reduce government (and hence regulation), encourage innovation and entrepreneurialism and bring back the competitive spirit that created the US.

Butch Cassidy

December 13th, 2011
9:20 am

Steve – USA – “LMAO. Do you even believe the BS you just wrote?”

Actually I do, since it as an accurate and documented record of how the tax cuts were extended. If you have an alternate explaination, I’m happy to listen.

Mr_B

December 13th, 2011
9:21 am

Sorry: Meant to add to Alan’s:

And why does nobody understand that we tried exactly that perscription from 2000 to 2008 whit absolutely disasterous results.

Mudfoot

December 13th, 2011
9:23 am

I ask conservative-leaning posters this question; Is there a valid reason that non-hardcore republicans might buy that ALL income be taxed at the same rates? Why is income tax capped? Why are capital gains taxed at a lesser percentage than income? Please, btw, save the “job creator” BS; while your party still beats that dead horse relentlessly the trillions of dollars sitting stagnant in the coffers of these “job creators” while they continue to reap profit at levels never seen before paint a totally different picture. So, why is it that all income is not taxed consistently?

Butch Cassidy

December 13th, 2011
9:24 am

If you hear a loud noise, it will be the sound of RB’s head exploding:

In a display of compromise rarely seen during his time in office, President Obama has signed into law a $858 billion tax cut bill despite the misgivings of members of both parties.

“We are here with some good news for the American people this holiday season,” Mr. Obama said.

The bill, which was largely worked out earlier this month between the White House and Congressional Republicans, extends the Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans for two years, extends unemployment benefits for 13 months and includes a one-year Social Security tax cut.

Hope this helps you Steve. :)

Jm

December 13th, 2011
9:25 am

Republicans: do you want to beat Obama?

I do. Im not saying newt can’t. I just think Romney can, has a better chance, and would make a better president.

Mick

December 13th, 2011
9:26 am

**Im not saying newt can’t**

I’m saying he doesn’t have a prayer…

Finn McCool (Run Newt, run! You da man!)

December 13th, 2011
9:27 am

Under the Republican bill to extend a payroll tax holiday scheduled to be voted on in the House as early as Tuesday, those Americans with gross adjusted income over $1 million would no longer be eligible for food stamps or jobless pay, producing $20 million in savings to help pay for the tax cut for American workers.

nytimes.com

May I shed a tear?

Edward

December 13th, 2011
9:27 am

With corporate tax rates already at their lowest in decades, WHERE ARE THE JOBS? With the Job Creators already enjoying the lowest tax rates of any industrialized nation, WHERE ARE THE JOBS? If they are JOB CREATORS, why aren’t they CREATING JOBS?

The GOP and their puppetmasters want the US to become the next Vietnam or Cambodia, pushing the middle-class to extinction. The future? Who cares, all that matters is massive profits NOW. Screw the environment, screw the middle-class, MASSIVE PROFITS NOW is their mantra. They can then afford to buy purified water and air for themselves, let the masses suffer, they never mattered anyhow.

straitroad

December 13th, 2011
9:29 am

I did an informal assessment of Bookman’s presidential election vote for some guy who had served part of one Senate term. The results: Bookman contributed to record unemployment and budget deficits. Watching him stammer through speeches absent his teleprompter is pretty funny though, so you get high marks for that.

Jm

December 13th, 2011
9:29 am

I’m going to relieve you guys for a while. Headed to red state to find republicans. Not many here.

You can commence dancing and bloviating now.

stands for decibels

December 13th, 2011
9:29 am

Sigh.

Ya know, if y’all want to fight over why we should continue to believe in Trickle Down after 30-plus years have conclusively proven that one shouldn’t, have at it.

I gotta go produce goods and services of tangible value to others. Later, kids.

Butch Cassidy

December 13th, 2011
9:31 am

RB, are you out there? I’m still waiting on your version of the “tax cuts enacted by Obama”. Here’s another piece of the article written in December 2010. Forgive me if I can’t find anything closely relationg to Obamas tax cut legislation.

“Had Congress not acted to address the expiring Bush-era tax cuts, all Americans would have seen a tax increase on January 1st.”

Hmmmm….keeps referring to the “Bush-era tax cuts” I wonder why?

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

December 13th, 2011
9:32 am

I watched Bernie Marcus lambast Obama on CNBC today for his “record job killing regulations”.

But Bloomberg says Obama has imposed much LESS costly regulations than Reagan or either Bush.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-25/obama-wrote-5-fewer-rules-than-bush-while-costing-business.html

In Fact – far fewer regs than the GOP – Amazing.

Butch Cassidy

December 13th, 2011
9:33 am

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck – “In Fact – far fewer regs than the GOP – Amazing.”

Please, don’t confuse the sheep with facts. It just makes them cranky.

St Simons - we're on Island time

December 13th, 2011
9:36 am

Well, he’s a Uniter. Every Democrat is praying for Newt, too.

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:37 am

Jm: I’m going to relieve you guys for a while. Headed to red state to find republicans. Not many here.

I am SHOCKED that Jm visits RedState. But like I said before, he and other trolls missed their lesson of trying to play the moderate card before nudging the viewpoints to the right.

USinUK

December 13th, 2011
9:38 am

totally off topic … but why I like working with computer geeks:

there’s a small contingent in the kitchen watching the BBC’s coverage of the Hadron Collider experiment today (looking for the “god particle”). Football? no. Rugby? no. MTV? not even.

science.

mmmm … I just love me some geeks.

ragnar danneskjold

December 13th, 2011
9:39 am

Analysis confirms that leftism is doomed to failure failure wherever tried: creators.com/conservative/thomas-sowell.html

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:39 am

Funny how when asked to find millionaire “job creators,” Boehner’s office and Cantor’s office could not offer up a single one.

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:40 am

USinUK:

<—- Will move for work!

Adam

December 13th, 2011
9:41 am

ragnar: Analysis confirms that leftism is doomed to failure failure wherever tried

Not just failure, but FAILURE failure! Oh the humanity!

Also, ragnar’s statement: Not Intended to be a Factual Statement.

Mary Elizabeth

December 13th, 2011
9:41 am

I hope that readers will take the time to listen to the words of former AT&T CEO, Leo Hindery, on the link below. Hindery said that we cannot get people re-employed until we “back up from false measures of our economy, such as GDP.” He said that GDP is an aggregate number (adding income and spending) but it does not account for differentiation between income inequallity of middle and upper classes. We want GDP to rise, he says, but we must consider that the rise measured by GDP is limited. Not measured in GDP:
(1) the fact that there is more wealth inequality since 1928
(2) the fact that 90% of American Workers have had no real increase in wages since 1967
(3) the fact that “Trickle Down” Policy Does not work

Hindery said that he is now paying, at the end of his career, a lesser rate of tax than he was at the beginning of his career. That is not only unethical and immoral, said Hindery, but it is also economically unsound.

Here is the link to the interview on the Dylan Ratigan Show yesterday. Hit the side video called “Explaining Extractionism.” There is a commercial that precedes the interview, but it is worth the wait. Listen especially about 2/3rds of the way through for data I quoted above from Hindery.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31510813/ Dylan Ratigan Show, 12/12/11

Road Scholar

December 13th, 2011
9:41 am

What if we tax blonde hair coloring? The revenue bought in from the female commentators on FOX would balance the budget!!!!

Butch: There you go again using that accurate history thingee…

ty webb

December 13th, 2011
9:42 am

great analysis jay…looking for more of it regarding election 2012 and GOP candidates…it so beats the anal lingus of election 2008 and the democrat candidates.

Jay

December 13th, 2011
9:43 am

Attractive, informative chart now posted above.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 13th, 2011
9:44 am

USinUK: mmmm … I just love me some geeks.

I bet its the mass * acceleration = force to apply to the posterior requests. Talk about colliders! :D :D

Paul

December 13th, 2011
9:44 am

Off Topic:

I laughed several times during the Fox evening news show last night. First, when Brit Hume blasted Newt Gingrich’s attack on Romney, saying Newt sounds more like a farLeft anticapitalist than anything. Also how when he attacks he comes out swinging with the first thing he lays his hands on.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1324040125001/brit-humes-commentary-attack-strategy-in-gop-race/

(short ad at beginning)

Then at the roundtable discussion when Krauthammer also blasted Gingrich, saying “this kind of attack is what you’d expect of a socialist…it makes you wonder about the core ideology of Newt himself…Gingrich might have responded by saying what he did, which he didn’t do because it’s indefensible…”

Fox may not know how to make a chart, but they sure know how to put together some fun commentaries.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gwl1FemmNkU

scott

December 13th, 2011
9:44 am

We should cut the Federal budget. here is a program that we can start with even though our brilliant POTUS calls it “an outstanding program and a critical investment.” Kids having access to a machete? Really? This is one of those social programs that you libs support and ask everybody else to pay more and more for???

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/safety_violations_found_at_hea.html

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 13th, 2011
9:45 am

Why look… a bell curve…. surely that must be great for policy of progressive tax rates!….oh wait.

Jay

December 13th, 2011
9:45 am

“Failure failure” is a double-negative, Adam. It means a failure to fail, thus success. Ragnar is coming around.

cosby

December 13th, 2011
9:45 am

Yawn, tired of class war fare. The tax code is nothing more than a political ball for folks like Jay, Barry – aka Obama – can cry class war fare….the 16th amendment was never meant to fund the federal government. So Jay, how about investigate how corrupt the tax code is since you have so much time on you hands rather than promoting a division in the country.

Butch Cassidy

December 13th, 2011
9:46 am

Dammit, I keep going back to 2010 to find RB’s version of the Obama enacted tax bill. All I keep finding are things like this:

“It’s a shame and a disgrace,” said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland. “We know who’s going to pay. It’s going to be on the backs of low-income people, the working poor, communities of color. … The notion that we would go back and extend the Bush-era tax cuts, which created the deficits and unemployment, doesn’t make any sense to me.”

The White House sent two of its top economists to argue the opposite – that the package will goose the economy, aid the unemployed and workers, and block a giant tax increase Jan. 1.

The deal “is as strong a win for jobs and working families as anyone imagined,” said Gene Sperling, a former Clinton administration aide now at the Treasury Department. “The president was not going to take the risk of what the impact to this economy would be if over 150 million families woke up on Jan. 1″ facing an extra $3,000 tax bill.”

I’m still trying to help you RB, as referenced above, Obama is a menace and MUST BE REPLACED IN 2012!

Paul

December 13th, 2011
9:47 am

USinUK

BBC covers that live? Wow. Not even science channels do that here. No audience. Maybe if they announced “Hadron” was a special about some Bible guy they’d get enough viewers to broadcast it?

Paul

December 13th, 2011
9:48 am

Nice chart, Jay. Patriotic.

Halftrack

December 13th, 2011
9:49 am

Jay, let’s get real practical. Tell us how much you make and how much you would benefit or loose with this new tax plan? This will tell us the most.

Soothsayer

December 13th, 2011
9:50 am

USinUK

December 13th, 2011
9:55 am

Adam – we’re hiring! (even our Palo Alto office is hiring)

Paul – they’re doing some great coverage and analysis of the tests (Brits love them some science geeks, as well … helloooooooo Newton!)

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

December 13th, 2011
9:57 am

Well, I’m one person that likes old Newt’s tax plan. The only question I got is, how do I get my income to be capital gains? I’m sick of being bent over by the fed, paying SS and Medicare tax and then getting socked for income tax besides. I want alot of them capital gains so I wouldn’t get any of these taxes.

I don’t need no gobbledegook or a long book. Just tell me how the distributing co. can pay me in capital gains.

Impotent Rage Against the Obama Machine

December 13th, 2011
9:59 am

The BBC’s televisin the Hadron Collider experiment?

Well, lordy mercy, who’d wanna watch that when
we got WWE, Fox News & the Kardashians
‘Merka f**^ yeah USA-USA

ty webb

December 13th, 2011
9:59 am

“brits love them some science geeks…”

doesn’t Dentistry fall into some sort of science discipline?…sorry, USinUK, I couldn’t resist.

Soothsayer

December 13th, 2011
10:02 am

“Well, lordy mercy, who’d wanna watch that when
we got WWE, Fox News & the Kardashians
‘Merka f**^ yeah USA-USA”

Don’t furgit them tractor pulls and Okie noodlin’! Whoooo – eeeeeee!

Senior Citizen Kane

December 13th, 2011
10:03 am

I miss William F. Buckley:

Every night, ten men met at a restaurant for dinner. At the end of the meal, the bill would arrive. They owed $100 for the food that they shared. Every night they lined up in the same order at the cash register. The first four men paid nothing at all. The fifth, though he grumbled about the unfairness of the situation, paid $1. The sixth man, feeling generous, paid $3. The next three men paid $7, $12, and $18, respectively. The last man was required to pay the remaining balance of $59.

The ten men were quite settled into their routine when the restaurant threw them into chaos. It announced that it was cutting its prices: Now it would charge only $80 for dinner for the ten men. This reduction wouldn’t affect the first four men — they would continue to eat for free. The fifth person decided to forgo his $1 contribution to the pool, and the sixth contributed $2. The seventh man deducted $2 from his usual payment and now paid $5. The eighth man paid $9, the ninth, $12, leaving the last man with a bill of $52. Outside of the restaurant, the men compared their savings, and angry outbursts began to erupt. The sixth man yelled, “I got only $1 out of the total reduction of $20, and he” — pointing to the last man — “got $7.” The fifth man joined in the protest. “Yeah! I got only $1 too. It is unfair that he got seven times more than me.” The seventh man cried, “Why should he get a $7 reduction when I got only $2?” The first four men followed the lead of the others: “We didn’t get any of the $20 reduction. Where is our share?”

The nine men formed an outraged mob, surrounding the tenth man. The nine angry men carried the tenth man up to the top of a hill and lynched him. The next night, the nine remaining men met at the restaurant for dinner. But when the bill came, there was no one to pay it.

Soothsayer

December 13th, 2011
10:04 am

Redneck: it’s simple. You buy a bunch of them “suitcases,” hold ‘em for a year and sell ‘em at a higher price.

AmVet

December 13th, 2011
10:04 am

Lo, over the past few years of reading all of these failed failures of trite platitudes and sloganesque, say-nothing sound bites, it strikes me that the GOP should change it’s name to the Plate River Party. (Early settlers referred to the Platte as the river that was a mile wide and an inch deep.)

I’m tired of listening to you talking in rhymes
Twisting round to make me think you’re straight down the line
All you do to me is talk talk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqjttpl3peI&ob=av2n

Soothsayer

December 13th, 2011
10:05 am

Oh! no! not the restaurant (bar) analogy again! Let’s see: is that 10,000 times or 15,000 times we have seen that on this blog?