FIFA's rejection of America hosting World Cup prompts blunt memo from world sports organizations that America can host sports when a presidential pitch can reach home plate.
Pelosi trumps Reid with demands to call a vote to raise taxes on top 2%, thus causing greatest economic recovery ever the "Real Dream Act."
Obama accused of living in the past as bad policies being justified with "I won" start to sound like a dysfunctional game of BINGOAdd a comment
Ladies and gentlemen, from intellect as effervescent as a week old open can of Coke, I present to you for your rhetorical displeasure The Washington Post's own Ezra Klein...
...in all likelihood, what separates a tax cut bill that's "chicken crap" from a tax cut bill that's great is its treatment of the richest 1 percent of households in Boehner's district. And $700 billion slapped right onto the deficit. If Republicans win this debate despite the unpopularity of their position and its violent contradiction to their stated concern for the deficit, it'll be one of the most impressive coups in recent political memory.
I haven't been keeping score, so someone help me out here. Is this coup "Easy minded E" speaks of BIGGER than the vote for the STILL unpopular ObamaCare that cost Democrats their power?
This guy must keep rocks in his head to make sure he doesn't float away.
Watching liberals "argue" against the tax cuts is like watching a basketball game where one team keeps drawing fouls by falling on the ground and holding their shin when nobody even touched them in the first place. The key difference being these hypothetical players aren't also certifiably mentally retarded.
I understand why liberals think extending the tax cuts would automatically explode the deficit. They think the economy lives inside a thin sheen of a bubble that is made out of the government. Everything starts and ends with Uncle Sam's bank statement.
Even though they pay taxes too, liberals to too stupid to remember (or even understand in the first place) that the government's books hinge on the health of the economy, not the other way around. They are too stupid to understand that tax cuts wont add to the deficit in the long run as much as a tax hike fueled DOUBLE DIP RECESSION would.
You know what doesn't add to the deficit, Ezra? (I'm going to use this parenthetical statement as a pause to let him take the time to check the name written on his hand so he knows I'm talking about him, I think this is long enough) Adjusting spending in a way that realistically addresses revenue. To speak to taxes in terms of what the deficit is, or will be, is intellectually dishonest if a discussion about modifying govenrment spending isn't even on the table.
Yes, the government needs money to operate, but not as much as the American people need it to jump start the economy so jobs can recover, meaning more people are making money for the government. In a perfect world this would close the deficit liberals are suddenly so concerned with after becoming the Barry Bonds of debt stacking.
As long as liberals bow to the altar of Uncle Sam first they will never understand this truism. If Klein was so right on this then why did income tax receipts go from $347 billion in 1981 to $549 billion in 1989 AFTER Reagan sent the top marginal rate through the floor...or is this website part of the vast right-wing conspiracy too?Add a comment
I received this in an email years ago, now feels like now is the right time to dust this puppy off as a reminder to those on the left who argue that extending the Bush tax cuts for only some taxpayers (or none) is a REALLY bad idea. I could post column after column with empty rhetoric and zero evidence to support my position like liberal columnists and bloggers have been doing for the past few weeks. Or I can just play WWJD and deliver this parable.
Last I checked the real author of this remains a mystery, but I don't think that matters if you have an ounce of common sense to your name. So enjoy!
The TAX system explained IN SIMPLE TERMS!
Sometimes politicians, journalists and others exclaim; "It's just a tax cut for the rich!", and it is just accepted to be fact.
But what does that really mean?
Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, I hope the following will help.
Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner and the bill
for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."
Dinner for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected.
They would still eat for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers?
How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33.
But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat their meal.
So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100 savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33 savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28 savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25 savings)
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22 savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16 savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free.
But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison.
"We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the
nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay
the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have
enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
Someone gave it to me and said that if it will taste a lot better if I let it age 2 years. It gave me food poisoning! The culprit is below.
Seriously now, I'm trying to recover from a bout with real food poisoning, don't expect much from The Looking Spoon for the rest of the week, I was barely able to get this done.Add a comment
In an unusual move to avoid use of the dollar the U.S. is in talks to back an E.U. with something more stable in value, such as ivory from the horns of unicorns.
After botching the swearing in Senator Kirk aide tells Biden the hand that makes an "L" is the left hand, and that will be easier to remember when he learns to read.
Boehner's announcement to construct a women's bathroom next to House chambers is met with praise from women desperate for a place they can truly share with Democrat men.Add a comment