Enjoy the holidays.
See you at the January 17th Meeting.
Monday, December 17, 2012
Sunday, December 16, 2012
"I am sharing this story because I am Adam Lanza's mother. I am Dylan Klebold's and Eric Harris's mother. I am Jason Holmes's mother. I am Jared Loughner's mother. I am Seung-Hui Cho's mother. And these boys—and their mothers—need help. In the wake of another horrific national tragedy, it's easy to talk about guns. But it's time to talk about mental illness."
◼ I Am Adam Lanza’s Mother - Liza Long/Gawker
Labels:
Today's MUST READ,
tragedy
According to a Reuters source, Boehner agreed to a tax rate hike of an unspecified size on high earners – a term the source left undefined. The source said that Obama thought that the offer represented “progress.”
◼ REPORT: BOEHNER OFFERS TAX HIKE TO OBAMA ON FISCAL CLIFF
Late Saturday evening, a source from the White House said the Speaker of the House John Boehner had put tax rate hikes on the table in fiscal cliff negotiations. The White House promptly rejected the offer, since Boehner also wanted entitlement reform as a compromise. But the announcement is likely to exacerbate the war within the Republican Party with regard to tax policy in the run-up to the fiscal cliff.
According to a Reuters source, Boehner agreed to a tax rate hike of an unspecified size on high earners – a term the source left undefined. The source said that Obama thought that the offer represented “progress.”
Politico reports that Boehner wants to raise taxes for those earning upward of $1 million beginning January 1. Obama and Boehner also talked on Friday, but sources told Politico (the White House's favorite outlet) that the deal isn't close yet. Boehner refused to extend federal unemployment benefits again in his offer. He also reportedly refused to raise the debt ceiling; Obama continues to maintain that he be given unilateral authority to raise the debt ceiling.
Multiple House Republicans have already stated that should Boehner cave on tax increases, his job as speaker would be put in jeopardy.
Late Saturday evening, a source from the White House said the Speaker of the House John Boehner had put tax rate hikes on the table in fiscal cliff negotiations. The White House promptly rejected the offer, since Boehner also wanted entitlement reform as a compromise. But the announcement is likely to exacerbate the war within the Republican Party with regard to tax policy in the run-up to the fiscal cliff.
According to a Reuters source, Boehner agreed to a tax rate hike of an unspecified size on high earners – a term the source left undefined. The source said that Obama thought that the offer represented “progress.”
Politico reports that Boehner wants to raise taxes for those earning upward of $1 million beginning January 1. Obama and Boehner also talked on Friday, but sources told Politico (the White House's favorite outlet) that the deal isn't close yet. Boehner refused to extend federal unemployment benefits again in his offer. He also reportedly refused to raise the debt ceiling; Obama continues to maintain that he be given unilateral authority to raise the debt ceiling.
Multiple House Republicans have already stated that should Boehner cave on tax increases, his job as speaker would be put in jeopardy.
The big news is that the Fed is now doubling the amount of money it is printing.
◼ No Way Out - Peter Schiff/europac.net; cross-posted with ◼ Doug Ross
By upping the ante once again in its gamble to revive the lethargic economy through monetary action, the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee is now compelling the rest of us to buy into a game that we may not be able to afford. At his press conference this week, Fed Chairman Bernanke explained how the easiest policy stance in Fed history has just gotten that much easier. First it gave us zero interest rates, then QEs I and II, Operation Twist, and finally "unlimited" QE3.
Now that those moves have failed to deliver economic health, the Fed has doubled the size of its open-ended money printing and has announced a program of data flexibility that virtually insures that they will never bump into limitations, until it's too late....
To cloak these shockingly accommodative moves in the garb of moderation, the Fed announced that future policy decisions will be put on automatic pilot by pegging liquidity withdrawal to two sets of economic data. By committing to tightening policy if either unemployment falls below 6.5% or if inflation goes higher than 2.5%, Bernanke is likely looking to silence fears that the Fed will stay too loose for too long. While these statistical benchmarks would be too accommodative even if they were rigidly enforced, the goalposts have been specifically designed to be completely movable, and hence essentially meaningless....
But perhaps the most absurd statement in Bernanke's press conference was his contention that the Fed is not engaged in debt monetization because it intends to sell the debt once the economy improves. This is like a thief claiming that he is not stealing your car, because he intends to return it when he no longer needs it. To make the analogy more accurate, there could not be any other cars on the road for him to steal....
In order to generate phony economic growth and to "pay" our country's debts in the most dishonest manner possible, the Federal Reserve is 100% committed to the destruction of the dollar. Anyone with wealth in the U.S. dollar should be concerned that economic leadership is firmly in the hands of irresponsible bureaucrats who are committed to an ivory tower version of reality that bears no resemblance to the world as it really is.
By upping the ante once again in its gamble to revive the lethargic economy through monetary action, the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee is now compelling the rest of us to buy into a game that we may not be able to afford. At his press conference this week, Fed Chairman Bernanke explained how the easiest policy stance in Fed history has just gotten that much easier. First it gave us zero interest rates, then QEs I and II, Operation Twist, and finally "unlimited" QE3.
Now that those moves have failed to deliver economic health, the Fed has doubled the size of its open-ended money printing and has announced a program of data flexibility that virtually insures that they will never bump into limitations, until it's too late....
To cloak these shockingly accommodative moves in the garb of moderation, the Fed announced that future policy decisions will be put on automatic pilot by pegging liquidity withdrawal to two sets of economic data. By committing to tightening policy if either unemployment falls below 6.5% or if inflation goes higher than 2.5%, Bernanke is likely looking to silence fears that the Fed will stay too loose for too long. While these statistical benchmarks would be too accommodative even if they were rigidly enforced, the goalposts have been specifically designed to be completely movable, and hence essentially meaningless....
But perhaps the most absurd statement in Bernanke's press conference was his contention that the Fed is not engaged in debt monetization because it intends to sell the debt once the economy improves. This is like a thief claiming that he is not stealing your car, because he intends to return it when he no longer needs it. To make the analogy more accurate, there could not be any other cars on the road for him to steal....
In order to generate phony economic growth and to "pay" our country's debts in the most dishonest manner possible, the Federal Reserve is 100% committed to the destruction of the dollar. Anyone with wealth in the U.S. dollar should be concerned that economic leadership is firmly in the hands of irresponsible bureaucrats who are committed to an ivory tower version of reality that bears no resemblance to the world as it really is.
Labels:
Bernanke,
Debt,
Economy,
Federal Reserve,
Fiscal Cliff,
Fiscal Responsibility,
Spending
New Evidence Shows States with No Income Tax Grow Faster and Create More Jobs
◼ One Fish, Two Fish, High Tax, Low Tax - Dan Mitchell
Why is it that some of the states with the biggest fiscal problems have the highest individual state income tax rates, such as New York and California, while some of the states with the least fiscal problems have no state income tax at all?
◼ What’s the Best Way of Achieving Good Fiscal Policy?
The half-joking response to the question in the title of this post is that policymakers should look at what’s happening in poorly run jurisdictions such as California, France, Illinois, and Greece – and then do just the opposite.
In other words, steer clear of punitive class-warfare tax rates and make sure to control the burden of government spending.
But there’s an even simpler rule that is very correlated with good fiscal policy, at least at the state level. Governments should not impose income taxes.
If you look at this map from the Tax Foundation, you’ll notice that there is a heavy overlap between the 10 states with the lowest overall tax burdens and the 9 states (Alaska, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wyoming) that don’t have income taxes.
More specifically, 7 of the non-income tax states are among the 10 states with the lowest tax burdens. Only Florida and Washington are outside the top 10.
It’s also worth noting that some of the states with the most “progressive” income tax systems are well represented on the list of the 10-worst states – including California, New York, New Jersey, Maine, and Rhode Island.
◼ The more important question is whether this approach leads to better economic performance. The evidence is pretty clear that zero-income-tax states grow faster and create more jobs. - Dan Mitchell
◼ Comparing Obamanomics with Reaganomics, Looking at Evidence from the States - Dan Mitchell
◼ We'll never see this kind of reform in California. Quite the reverse, if the last election is an indication of a trend. Statists never get that, the more one raises tax rates, the more wealth-generating taxpayers will choose to leave and economic performance stagnates. - Public Secrets
Why is it that some of the states with the biggest fiscal problems have the highest individual state income tax rates, such as New York and California, while some of the states with the least fiscal problems have no state income tax at all?
◼ What’s the Best Way of Achieving Good Fiscal Policy?
The half-joking response to the question in the title of this post is that policymakers should look at what’s happening in poorly run jurisdictions such as California, France, Illinois, and Greece – and then do just the opposite.
In other words, steer clear of punitive class-warfare tax rates and make sure to control the burden of government spending.
But there’s an even simpler rule that is very correlated with good fiscal policy, at least at the state level. Governments should not impose income taxes.
If you look at this map from the Tax Foundation, you’ll notice that there is a heavy overlap between the 10 states with the lowest overall tax burdens and the 9 states (Alaska, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wyoming) that don’t have income taxes.
More specifically, 7 of the non-income tax states are among the 10 states with the lowest tax burdens. Only Florida and Washington are outside the top 10.
It’s also worth noting that some of the states with the most “progressive” income tax systems are well represented on the list of the 10-worst states – including California, New York, New Jersey, Maine, and Rhode Island.
◼ The more important question is whether this approach leads to better economic performance. The evidence is pretty clear that zero-income-tax states grow faster and create more jobs. - Dan Mitchell
◼ Comparing Obamanomics with Reaganomics, Looking at Evidence from the States - Dan Mitchell
◼ We'll never see this kind of reform in California. Quite the reverse, if the last election is an indication of a trend. Statists never get that, the more one raises tax rates, the more wealth-generating taxpayers will choose to leave and economic performance stagnates. - Public Secrets
Labels:
Business,
Economy,
State's Rights,
Taxes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)