I will be on vacation for a few days.
Ponder this point about our great nation, if you dare.
From the IRS data I've used before, the first 51 percent of all taxpayers have an average income of $14,985 before taxes.
The last one percent?
They have an average income before taxes of $1.667 million.
[Notes: I've used raw data on all income, taxable and non-taxable as presented by the IRS for 2005 on the file named 05in11si.xls. The link is available on this blog. For the first 51 percent, I've slightly overstated income. For the last one percent, I've understated income. I didn't want to wind up having some idiot claim I doctored the numbers to make this distribution look more skewed.]
Monday, March 24, 2008
More from today's frustrated conservative
Let's take another look at how my conservative friend thinks the national debt is going to be paid OFF!
News flash!
The $9.3 trillion dollars in debt will soon vanish in a puff of smoke when the Bush Tax cuts expire as required. ---Bullshit---
No, the Democrats didn't end the tax cuts. The original legislation had a sunset clause that mandated the tax cuts as temporary and set an expiration date. Tough luck for the wealthy. But, good news for the working class.
No, the massive hole in the federal budget can not be healed by letting the sunset clause kick in as per law.
Nor, could a 25 percent across the board increase in all personal taxes pay off the federal debt at the current interest rates within 30 years.
No way.
If ending the Bush tax cuts would pay off the debt anytime, that would be the best argument for the sunshine clause.
Let the law work the way it was written.
Now, for the idea that my children should pay off my debts...
Maybe that is the way Republicans treat family, but that's not the way I treat my family.
Those are not Democratic family values. Democrats have far better family values than the Republicans, based on that asinine idea.
But, it is exactly what will happen.
The money Bush borrowed from China, France, and the European Union will be paid off by children, children not yet born.
Will it be the children of the uberwealthy whose fathers got an obscene increase in take home pay in exchange for that debt?
Think again.
Conservative ideology is dead. Too bad it killed our nation before it died.
You say they have just raised the debt. Okay. Maybe so. But somebody has to pay that debt off. And a large chunk of that debt is going to be paid off by those very same rich people or their rich children, especially if the Bush tax cuts expire.The debt is going to be paid off...if the Bush tax cuts expire...
News flash!
The $9.3 trillion dollars in debt will soon vanish in a puff of smoke when the Bush Tax cuts expire as required. ---Bullshit---
No, the Democrats didn't end the tax cuts. The original legislation had a sunset clause that mandated the tax cuts as temporary and set an expiration date. Tough luck for the wealthy. But, good news for the working class.
No, the massive hole in the federal budget can not be healed by letting the sunset clause kick in as per law.
Nor, could a 25 percent across the board increase in all personal taxes pay off the federal debt at the current interest rates within 30 years.
No way.
If ending the Bush tax cuts would pay off the debt anytime, that would be the best argument for the sunshine clause.
Let the law work the way it was written.
Now, for the idea that my children should pay off my debts...
Maybe that is the way Republicans treat family, but that's not the way I treat my family.
Those are not Democratic family values. Democrats have far better family values than the Republicans, based on that asinine idea.
But, it is exactly what will happen.
The money Bush borrowed from China, France, and the European Union will be paid off by children, children not yet born.
Will it be the children of the uberwealthy whose fathers got an obscene increase in take home pay in exchange for that debt?
Think again.
Conservative ideology is dead. Too bad it killed our nation before it died.
Bush Tax Cuts and todays frustrated conservative.
More inane comments from today's frustrated conservative.
1. I don't make these comments up just to increase readership or hits on my blog. There really is someone this stupid.
2. I almost never post a comment unless I like it. It is my blog.
3. I wish I could make up stuff this funny.
From our favorite frustrated conservative:
I said, "that very fortunate group got all the benefits of the Bush tax exchange." The word benefit being the key to the sentence.
The less fortunate taxpayers saw their share of the federal debt increase by an amount greater than the 'tax benefit' given. As the debt has risen, the dollar has fallen. A cheaper dollar means a huge increase in imported goods, like oil.
For someone making $7.50 to $12.00 an hour, a huge increase in utility bills and gasoline prices easily offsets the itsy bitsy 'tax benefit.'
As recently as December 2001, gasoline was under a $1.10 for the national average pump price. Link to recent gas prices.
The average value of the euro to the dollar for 2001 was $1.11. That means it took 1.11 euros to equal a dollar.
In 2007, it only took an average of .75 euros to equal a dollar.
Today, it takes only .64 euros to equal a dollar.
That's roughly a 42% decline. So, I won't say all the increase in gasoline prices came from a falling dollar, or that all the decrease in the dollars value came from the record federal debt.
I am saying oil could be bought for $20 per barrel in 1996 to as recently as 2002. Now, oil is $110 per barrel. Gasoline was a $1.10 and now it's $3.28 and going up.
I am saying the increases in the debt from the Bush tax cuts hurt much more for the middle class family living on $20,00 a year.
If we assume two wage earners commuting in two cars and only a dollar increase at the pump, gasoline cost the family a $1000 more a year. Assuming the two cars get an average of 24 miles to the gallon. Not very likely on $20,000 per year.
How much did the average family get per year under the Bush plan since 2002? Is there anyone jumping up and down to tell me the average family got $6000 since 2002?
And that is only an analysis of direct gasoline prices. Gasoline prices increased the transportation costs on all goods. Corn has tripled in price with the increased demand for alternative fuels. What did that do to the price of bread?
Who got the benefits?
Not the middle class.
More to come.
1. I don't make these comments up just to increase readership or hits on my blog. There really is someone this stupid.
2. I almost never post a comment unless I like it. It is my blog.
3. I wish I could make up stuff this funny.
From our favorite frustrated conservative:
Also…it’s interesting … you say that the Bush tax cuts only went to the rich. Okay. Maybe so. But then you say they have just raised the debt. Okay. Maybe so. But somebody has to pay that debt off. And a large chunk of that debt is going to be paid off by those very same rich people or their rich children, especially if the Bush tax cuts expire.No, I didn't say the cuts went only to the rich. Typical disinformation attempt from the frustrated pundit.
I said, "that very fortunate group got all the benefits of the Bush tax exchange." The word benefit being the key to the sentence.
The less fortunate taxpayers saw their share of the federal debt increase by an amount greater than the 'tax benefit' given. As the debt has risen, the dollar has fallen. A cheaper dollar means a huge increase in imported goods, like oil.
For someone making $7.50 to $12.00 an hour, a huge increase in utility bills and gasoline prices easily offsets the itsy bitsy 'tax benefit.'
As recently as December 2001, gasoline was under a $1.10 for the national average pump price. Link to recent gas prices.
The average value of the euro to the dollar for 2001 was $1.11. That means it took 1.11 euros to equal a dollar.
In 2007, it only took an average of .75 euros to equal a dollar.
Today, it takes only .64 euros to equal a dollar.
That's roughly a 42% decline. So, I won't say all the increase in gasoline prices came from a falling dollar, or that all the decrease in the dollars value came from the record federal debt.
I am saying oil could be bought for $20 per barrel in 1996 to as recently as 2002. Now, oil is $110 per barrel. Gasoline was a $1.10 and now it's $3.28 and going up.
I am saying the increases in the debt from the Bush tax cuts hurt much more for the middle class family living on $20,00 a year.
If we assume two wage earners commuting in two cars and only a dollar increase at the pump, gasoline cost the family a $1000 more a year. Assuming the two cars get an average of 24 miles to the gallon. Not very likely on $20,000 per year.
How much did the average family get per year under the Bush plan since 2002? Is there anyone jumping up and down to tell me the average family got $6000 since 2002?
And that is only an analysis of direct gasoline prices. Gasoline prices increased the transportation costs on all goods. Corn has tripled in price with the increased demand for alternative fuels. What did that do to the price of bread?
Who got the benefits?
Not the middle class.
More to come.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
More Raw Income Tax Data
The personal income tax isn’t enough money to fund the entire federal government. In 2005, it was enough to pay the budgeted defense spending and the off budget spending in Iraq and Afghanistan. The left over after national defense couldn’t pay the interest on the debt.
In our country, the most powerful nation in the world, 67 percent of all taxpayers live on an average income of $21,000 before taxes. That totals about $1.8 trillion dollars for 67 percent of our country. The richest 2.7 percent of taxpayers have to make it through a year with just $2.1 trillion dollars . That’s an average of over $600,000 per taxpayer. After taxes that same group has just about as much spending money as the ‘other’ 67 percent of Americans.
In our country, the most powerful nation in the world, 67 percent of all taxpayers live on an average income of $21,000 before taxes. That totals about $1.8 trillion dollars for 67 percent of our country. The richest 2.7 percent of taxpayers have to make it through a year with just $2.1 trillion dollars . That’s an average of over $600,000 per taxpayer. After taxes that same group has just about as much spending money as the ‘other’ 67 percent of Americans.
Professional Misinformation Idiot strikes again!
Ah, the sweet smell of an internet flame job.
My stalker made some more inane comments.
Let's share some of those.
Look at the information released by the Treasury Department. The Treasury has to write the checks and balance the books.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis is under the Department of Commerce. The Commerce people are like the Wal-Mart of the federal government.
If the Treasury Department figures at link are correct, and I'm pretty dang sure they are, then in five months, the federal government has paid $198 billion dollars for interest on the debt. In five months.
In December 2007, actual interest expense was $106 billion dollars. Last year's expenses were $429 billion dollars. We haven't paid as little as $300 billion on the debt since 1996, some 12 years ago when the debt was $5.3 trillion dollars.
Where does this stalker get his information?
For his defense spending, Herr Agent would have us all believe the federal government only spends $660 billion on defense!
Not that far off from the real world figures. But, still short of real defense spending.
We should add the defense-related parts of the Department of Energy budget --- $16.6 billion. The Department of Homeland Security --- $69.1 billion. The Department of State and international assistance programs --- $25.3 billion for defense purposes either directly or indirectly. The Department of Veterans Affairs --- $69.8 billion. The Department of the Treasury, which pays military retirement known as the Military Retirement Fund, --- $38.5 billion. Some parts of NASA are defense spending, if only indirectly so. Total --- $728.2 billion.
For 2008, the House passed a $696 billion defense bill on January 16, 2008. We can only guess at the 'emergency appropriations that will be added later by Bush. Bush has run both the Iran invasion and the Afghanistan campaigns with 'emergency supplemental appropriations.
What are 'emergency' or supplemental appropriations?
From the Background Brief: Supplemental Appropriations, March 2007 (OMB)
The 'emergency' appropriation for 2008? $154 billion.
So the minimum 'defense spending' for 2008 will be the $696 billion appropriated by the House, plus the $154 billion in 'emergency' appropriations.
That will be over $850 billion for 2008. Not including any 'defense spending' hidden in other departments besides the DOD aka the Pentagon.
$850 billion+$196 billion( only five months of fiscal 2008)=$1.046 trillion which equals ... "barely enough left over to pay the current interest on the debt for six months."
EVEN if the IRS (the IRS does not have final public figures for 2006 or 2007. The 2007 tax filing season is not yet over) collects the BEA figure of $1.162 trillion, which my dear friend loves, our personal income taxes will not be enough to pay the interest on the debt and defense spending for the current fiscal year. I calculate we will be short at the end of March when the quarterly checks for accrued interest are sent out. (Just like in December when payments were over $100 billion, certain debt instruments get quarterly checks while other instruments get monthly checks. March should see another $100 billion paid out by the Treasury.
Our agent smells from being flamed, as the saying goes on the internet.
I will acknowledge that our friend says, "IF you will look at BEA data ... "
There's no reason to look at estimated figures from the Department of Commerce when primary source information from the IRS and the Treasury are equally easy to obtain.
My stalker made some more inane comments.
Let's share some of those.
"As for your income tax/defense budget statement, that too is incorrect. If you look at BEA data, personal income taxes in 2007 were $1.162 trillion. Defense expenditures (incl. investment) was $660.2 billion. Interest payments were $302.4 billion, meaning 1/2 was $151.2 billion.The BEA data is not the best source of information, my dear friend.
So in fact, in 2007, we could pay the entire defense expenditures, all interest payments, and still have about $200 billion left. That's far beyond your "barely enough left over to pay the current interest on the debt for six months" comment."
Look at the information released by the Treasury Department. The Treasury has to write the checks and balance the books.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis is under the Department of Commerce. The Commerce people are like the Wal-Mart of the federal government.
If the Treasury Department figures at link are correct, and I'm pretty dang sure they are, then in five months, the federal government has paid $198 billion dollars for interest on the debt. In five months.
In December 2007, actual interest expense was $106 billion dollars. Last year's expenses were $429 billion dollars. We haven't paid as little as $300 billion on the debt since 1996, some 12 years ago when the debt was $5.3 trillion dollars.
Where does this stalker get his information?
For his defense spending, Herr Agent would have us all believe the federal government only spends $660 billion on defense!
Not that far off from the real world figures. But, still short of real defense spending.
We should add the defense-related parts of the Department of Energy budget --- $16.6 billion. The Department of Homeland Security --- $69.1 billion. The Department of State and international assistance programs --- $25.3 billion for defense purposes either directly or indirectly. The Department of Veterans Affairs --- $69.8 billion. The Department of the Treasury, which pays military retirement known as the Military Retirement Fund, --- $38.5 billion. Some parts of NASA are defense spending, if only indirectly so. Total --- $728.2 billion.
For 2008, the House passed a $696 billion defense bill on January 16, 2008. We can only guess at the 'emergency appropriations that will be added later by Bush. Bush has run both the Iran invasion and the Afghanistan campaigns with 'emergency supplemental appropriations.
What are 'emergency' or supplemental appropriations?
From the Background Brief: Supplemental Appropriations, March 2007 (OMB)
A “supplemental” appropriation is spending legislation, generally but not exclusively requested by the president, intended to address a need not known or foreseen when the annual budget for the given fiscal year was drawn up. Requests generally lack the level of detail used to justify the government’s annual budget requests. In both houses of Congress, supplemental spending legislation is uniformly referred to the Appropriations Committee, where it is marked-up shortly thereafter, usually without a preliminary hearing. If reported favorably, it is sent to the floor for debate, amendment, and vote. As with other legislation, identical versions must be approved by both houses and signed by the president to be enacted. The result frequently is legislation that passes Congress with perfunctory review, often bearing items that would not survive the normal budgetary review process.As if the $696 billion passed by the House in January wasn't enough. Bush requested over $90 billion for Iraq in March 2007. By July, Bush had been given about $124 billion. By using 'emergency' or supplemental appropriations, this money is not included in the 'defense' budget for 2007.
This practice has survived the 2002 expiration of the BEA, and, since then, supplemental spending – “emergency” spending – has, in effect become a way for the federal government to evade annual budget limits and fiscal responsibility controls while increasing spending.
Because emergency supplementals are introduced following submission of a fiscal year’s budget, they are not subject to OMB’s budget accounting rules, and therefore not included in deficit and debt projections (Under its own rules, however, CBO does project all discretionary appropriations into future years, regardless of the purpose of the appropriation).
The 'emergency' appropriation for 2008? $154 billion.
So the minimum 'defense spending' for 2008 will be the $696 billion appropriated by the House, plus the $154 billion in 'emergency' appropriations.
That will be over $850 billion for 2008. Not including any 'defense spending' hidden in other departments besides the DOD aka the Pentagon.
$850 billion+$196 billion( only five months of fiscal 2008)=$1.046 trillion which equals ... "barely enough left over to pay the current interest on the debt for six months."
EVEN if the IRS (the IRS does not have final public figures for 2006 or 2007. The 2007 tax filing season is not yet over) collects the BEA figure of $1.162 trillion, which my dear friend loves, our personal income taxes will not be enough to pay the interest on the debt and defense spending for the current fiscal year. I calculate we will be short at the end of March when the quarterly checks for accrued interest are sent out. (Just like in December when payments were over $100 billion, certain debt instruments get quarterly checks while other instruments get monthly checks. March should see another $100 billion paid out by the Treasury.
Our agent smells from being flamed, as the saying goes on the internet.
I will acknowledge that our friend says, "IF you will look at BEA data ... "
There's no reason to look at estimated figures from the Department of Commerce when primary source information from the IRS and the Treasury are equally easy to obtain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
