NY Times Offers Well Thought Out Plan To GOP Corporate Tax Cuts That Soaks Everyone

The NY Times Editorial Board actually provides a rational, well researched, well thought out plan, and offers some facts, figures, and likely outcome on corporate taxes. Is it workable, though? What it does do is get money grabby

The Right Way to Cut Corporate Taxes

Republicans are right about the corporate tax system being broken, but wrong about why it’s failing and how to fix it.

The EB says that lowering it from 35% to 20% is the wrong way to go about this. They note that, on average, American companies actually pay an average effective federal-state rate of 18.1 percent, per a 2016 report, which they say is lower than many other 1st World nations (which is a little disingenuous, since this is a combination of taxes, while Trump is talking about the federal rate being the highest in the developed world). They note all the tax schemes “cooked up” by all sorts of different people, embedded in law, which means that the corporate share of tax revenue is just 1.6% of GDP, when it was 4% in 1967. Still a bit shoddy of a stat, since things have changed quite a bit since 1967. But, this isn’t really the point of the editorial.

They also try to show that trickle down from corporate tax cuts didn’t work in either the 1980’s corporate tax cut nor from Britain’s same in recent years. Here’s what the Times offers

So what would true reform look like? First, it would not blow a $1.7 trillion hole in the budget over the next decade, which is what the House plan would do, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Second, it would make the system fairer and more efficient. If Republicans worked with Democrats, they could reach a compromise to lower the top corporate tax rate to between 25 percent and 28 percent, eliminate loopholes and reduce the incentive businesses have to take on debt, rather than to use equity to expand. Under current law, interest is deductible for tax purposes while dividends are not.

Suddenly, the Democrats at the NY Times are worried about debt. They never seem to wonder if perhaps Los Federales should spend less, and, get this, spend wisely. Don’t spend $500 on hammers (which tend to get lost quite a bit) when you can get a really good one for less than a $100 on a Craftsman or Stanley with lifetime guarantees. Don’t spend money on fish on treadmill studies. Don’t pay $2 million for a road that should cost $100,000 for real. And so forth. Regardless, would this work? The point of the GOP plan is to attempt to keep companies in the United States, so that the money stays here. And the jobs stay here.

Real reform would also include a minimum tax on profits earned abroad by American corporations in the year those profits are earned, minus a credit for taxes paid to other countries. Businesses can now defer taxes on such profits indefinitely, as long as they do not bring the money back to the United States. Big companies like Apple, General Electric and Microsoft have kept an astonishing $2.6 trillion in profits offshore, hoping Congress will lower the tax rate or give them a tax holiday to repatriate the money at ultralow rates. The House bill would let companies bring those profits home at 7 percent (for money invested in hard-to-sell assets) or 14 percent (for cash). A plausible compromise would let businesses repatriate all past profits accumulated overseas at a somewhat discounted rate, say 15 percent to 16 percent. All of this money could be used to rebuild America’s dilapidated infrastructure.

Good? Bad? Would companies repatriate for 15% or 16%? Or say “nope”? Of course, the Times is happy to put yet another tax on companies. I wonder if they keep their own profits earned overseas overseas. And here’s another

While the outlined changes would solve an immediate problem, Congress also needs to consider longer-term obstacles to tax avoidance by multinational companies. One smart idea that deserves more study is a proposal by economists like Kimberly Clausing, a professor at Reed College. She argues that the United States and other countries ought to tax profits that corporations earn from sales inside their borders, similar to the way American states now tax corporate profits. Each country would control its tax rates, deductions and credits. But companies would lose the ability to game the system by booking profits through subsidiaries registered in zero- or low-tax countries like Bermuda and Luxembourg, where they might be making few sales.

The NYTEB is all about increasing taxes.

Eventually, Congress will need to do more than just patch the tax system. Even without the Republican tax cut plans, the Congressional Budget Office expects the federal deficit to grow to 5.2 percent of gross domestic product in 2027, up from 3.2 percent in 2016, thanks in part to the Bush tax cuts and the Iraq war. Lawmakers will need to consider new sources of revenue, including a value-added tax, a carbon tax and a financial transactions tax. Each would broaden the tax base and achieve important policy goals, like encouraging savings, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reducing risks in the financial system.

Apparently, Obama’s proliferation Stimulus plans and massive spending, which almost doubled the US deficit in 8 years, isn’t even considered as a big deal by the EB. But, of course, they want more and more taxes, regardless of what it does to consumers and economic activity negatively.

The Republican proposals do none of these things. They do, however, reward the wealthy. Among the worst offenders is the proposed corporate tax cut, which is larger than needed and does nothing to make the system more efficient. The victims here are the economy as a whole and the workers and ordinary folk to whom Mr. Trump promised relief.

Right. Because no one would be victims of a far left tax increase on almost everything. We’ll all be equally poor. The question with the GOP plan is “will it keep corporate profits here, and will it stimulate companies to stay in the U.S. and hire employees”?

The GOP should take a page from the NYTEB and cut any loopholes that effect newspapers. Let’s see what the Times thinks then.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Offers Well Thought Out Plan To GOP Corporate Tax Cuts That Soaks Everyone »

NY Times Decides Racism Against Whites Is Awesome

From the Department Of Imagine Had This Substituted Black For White

From the article

My oldest son, wrestling with a 4-year-old’s happy struggles, is trying to clarify how many people can be his best friend. “My best friends are you and Mama and my brother and …” But even a child’s joy is not immune to this ominous political period. This summer’s images of violence in Charlottesville, Va., prompted an array of questions. “Some people hate others because they are different,” I offer, lamely. A childish but distinct panic enters his voice. “But I’m not different.”

It is impossible to convey the mixture of heartbreak and fear I feel for him. Donald Trump’s election has made it clear that I will teach my boys the lesson generations old, one that I for the most part nearly escaped. I will teach them to be cautious, I will teach them suspicion, and I will teach them distrust. Much sooner than I thought I would, I will have to discuss with my boys whether they can truly be friends with white people.

Here’s a suggestion: teach them respect. Teach them that someone “disrespecting you” is not an occasion to become violent. Teach them to obey commands from law enforcement. You can always complain up the ladder and/or get council in a secure, controlled facility. Teach them that learning is a good thing.

History has provided little reason for people of color to trust white people in this way, and these recent months have put in the starkest relief the contempt with which the country measures the value of racial minorities.

Let me point out that the people who were rioting and destroying Black neighborhoods and such were Black people. But, hey, let’s teach Blacks to hate Whites. It’ll work our well, eh?

Read: NY Times Decides Racism Against Whites Is Awesome »

If All You See…

…is an evil fossil fueled airplane, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jihad Watch, with a post on Allahu Akbar problems on the streets of Paris.

It’s flying week, in honor of the thousands and thousands of Warmists who took fossil fueled flights to Bonn for a ‘climate change’ conference.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another great Fall day here in America. The Sun is shining, the birds are singing, and, thank goodness, my NY Giants are not on TV here in Raleigh today. This pinup is by Greg Hildebrandt, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogophere? The Fine 15

  1. 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny notes what the Washington Post is accused of when it comes to Roy Moore
  2. Adrienne’s Corner has the one thing you need to read on Veteran’s Day
  3. BizzBlog covers the U.S. reduction in CO2 without Paris
  4. Chicks On The Right has Sandra Bullock’s next silly pink sneaker movie
  5. Creeping Sharia notes thousands of children reported in the UK for terror ties
  6. Gay Patriot covers The Difference
  7. Happy 13th Blogoversary to House Of Eratosthenes!
  8. Jihad Watch has Muslims being super peaceful in Bangladesh
  9. Moonbattery checks in on how well moonbats are doing one year later
  10. neo-neocon explain corroborating witnesses
  11. Pacific Pundit notes that a man with dirt on Hillary has disappeared
  12. Patterico’s Pontifications covers what Trump wrote about Kim Jong Un
  13. Powerline discusses the presumption of guilt
  14. The Daley Gator unpacks HillarySpeak
  15. And last, but not least, The Last Refuge has interesting info on that 2016 FBI Russian meddling report

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Warmist Bloomberg: There’s Nothing Washington Can Do To Stop Us On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

It’s always great when people who take long fossil fueled flights (and you know darned well they took a private jet) yammer on about Doing Something when it comes to anthropogenic climate change

US cities, states defy Trump, still back Paris climate deal

A group of U.S. states, cities, businesses and universities said Saturday they are still committed to curbing global warming even as U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration is walking away from the Paris climate accord.

But the alliance, which has an economy larger than Japan and Germany combined, says it won’t be able to achieve the necessary cut in greenhouse gas emissions without some efforts at the federal level.

“It is important for the world to know, the American government may have pulled out of the Paris agreement, but the American people are committed to its goals, and there is nothing Washington can do to stop us,” former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg said at a global climate meeting in Bonn, Germany.

First off, it’s doubtful that Trump even cares. Defying? Really? These same people took fossil fueled trips that put out a higher carbon footprint that the average of most citizens of the world to head to Bonn, Germany, to complain about stuff regarding ‘climate change.’ Trump has never once made a statement that citizens, municipalities, and states shouldn’t take action if they wanted. He’s said that Washington will not be part of an executive agreement that takes our money and sends it elsewhere for some mythical solution.

Second, along those same lines, neither Trump nor Washington has never said they wanted to stop the Warmists from doing their own thing in states, cities, and citizen action.

Gov. Jerry Brown of California echoed those comments.

“In the United States, we have a federal system, and states have real power as do cities. And when cities and states combine together, and then join with powerful corporations, that’s how we get stuff done,” he said.

Stuff like taking long fossil fueled flights and artificially increasing the cost of living in California with a carbon tax that isn’t working?

The group calling itself “America’s Pledge” said states, cities and private groups have been taking considerable steps to reduce emissions by promoting renewable energy use and climate-friendly transportation systems.

“This is a pledge, and it’s a pledge that you can cash, because it’s real,” Brown said. “We are doing real stuff in California.”

I guess they flew on solar powered planes or used dirigibles to get to Bonn? These same people often sue to stop big renewable projects like wind, solar, and especially nuclear and hydrothermal. But, um, see, there’s a problem with the whole “nothing Washington can do” and “we’re totally acting on our own” memes

In a report, however, the group said that “we cannot underscore strongly enough the critical nature of federal engagement to achieve the deep decarbonization goals the U.S. must undertake after 2025.”

Oh, so they do need the federal government. Of course, the question is “why”, and the answer is to force citizens across the country to comply with the mandates from Cult of Climastrology, the same mandates that the CoC members refuse to honor in their own lives. It’s all about power and money, because even the hardcore Warmists admit that the Paris agreement really does very little.

I’m wondering when all these Warmists, and their cities and states, will redistribute their own money to 3rd World shitholes developing nations, which is a primary point of the Paris Climate Agreement.

Regardless, at the end of the day, Warmists are simply pushing policies of governmental power, taking more money from citizens, and looking to control them. More climate friendly transportation is about limiting and controlling movement. Call it Stateism, Marxism, Progressivism, whatever. Power, control, money.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Warmist Bloomberg: There’s Nothing Washington Can Do To Stop Us On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

If All You See…

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle causing extreme sea rise, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on a racism claim due to no french fries.

Read: If All You See… »

The Fight Against Hotcoldwetdry Can Only Succeed If All Citizens Are Forced To Comply

OK, that’s not quite the specific quote, but, that’s the meaning

(EESC) “The fight against climate change can only succeed if all citizens are included. But it is not enough to convince people that we need to change our lifestyles: it is also important to give them the necessary support,” said President Georges Dassis at the start of a side event on “Just transition to low-carbon economy” organised jointly by the EESC, King’s College London, Foundation for European Progressive Studies and Fondation Jean-Jaurès during the COP23 in Bonn on 8 November. “The transition towards a zero-emission society must be designed in a way that does not aggravate inequalities or create social fractures, but instead helps to balance differences. In calling for a fair transition, the EESC has always refused to play employment off against environmental protection. These two objectives are closely linked and should be pursued with equal determination.”

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) used this event to present its opinion on Climate Justice. The concept of “climate justice” frames global climate change as a political and ethical issue and not just an environmental one. It recognises that the poorest and most vulnerable in society often have to suffer the greatest impact from climate change. Climate justice has been traditionally dealt with as an issue of emerging economies. The EESC wants to apply these principles also to the EU Member States. Therefore the EESC calls for a debate on an EU Bill of Climate Rights that encapsulates the rights of EU citizens and those of nature in the context of the challenges of the global climate change crisis. “We call on institutions and governments to ensure climate justice at all levels – global, EU, national, regional and community level, in this way we can make climate policy more human centered,” said Cillian Lohan, rapporteur of the opinion.

Notice a few things. First, the only way this occurs is for people to be forced to comply.

Second, the mask slipped a bit when they started saying that this really isn’t about the environment, it’s about far left Progressive (nice Fascist) political beliefs. Frame it however you want, be it Marxist, Communist, Socialist, Progressive, Statism, whatever, it’s all about increasing the power and scope of the Government, forced adherence to the State, control of economies, people, and energy by the state, controlling food, travel, you name it, all while increasing taxes and fees. They throw this under the banner of “climate justice.”

Read: The Fight Against Hotcoldwetdry Can Only Succeed If All Citizens Are Forced To Comply »

Good News: Many Liberal Cities Are Providing Free Legal Help To Illegal Aliens

Remember this one?

To the editor: Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and County Supervisor Hilda Solis in December announced the creation of a $10-million legal aid fund to “hire lawyers to defend local immigrants without legal status.” (“A $10-million fund will help immigrants fight deportations. But should it help those with violent criminal convictions?” April 17)

My street hasn’t been swept for years. When I tried to find out why, I was told that my area is not “on the list” because there are no longer enough machines and people to drive them. Services that I continue to pay for have been stopped.

If there is enough money around to help illegal immigrants, surely there is enough to begin sweeping my dirty street again. Shouldn’t citizens come before illegal residents?

No, sorry letter writer Arline, illegals do come before legal citizens

Immigrants Fighting Off Deportation Just Got a Huge Boost in These 11 Cities and Counties

Eleven cities and counties across the United States announced on Thursday that they will provide free legal representation to immigrants facing deportation, part of a new initiative called the Safety and Fairness for Everyone (SAFE) Cities Network. The initiative, launched in collaboration with the Vera Institute of Justice, a national nonprofit and research organization, helps cities with funding and resources to help train legal service providers and share best practices.

Unlike in criminal court cases, immigrants generally do not have the right to a free court-appointed attorney during removal proceedings, and often have to bear the costs on their own. Nationally, only 37 percent of immigrants facing deportation proceedings get access to a lawyer, and only 14 percent of immigrants in detention do, according to a report from the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit and advocacy group. As Mother Jones has reported previously, studies have shown that access to legal representation can drastically improve an immigrant’s chances of winning relief from deportation or release from detention. Without it, often immigrants and families are quickly deported.

Realistically, the vast majority should have zero shots at winning relief when the answer to the question “is this person unlawfully present in the United States?” is “yes.”

Vera started soliciting competitive applications from cities and counties to be part of the network earlier this summer. Local governments had to commit some public cash, which Vera would then supplement with additional funding. Atlanta, GA, Austin and San Antonio, TX, Baltimore and Prince George’s County, MD; Chicago, IL; Columbus, OH; Dane County, WI, and Oakland/Alameda County, Sacramento, and Santa Ana, CA were selected.

So, they’re getting some sweet, sweet taxpayer cash to protect people who shouldn’t be in the country to start with, which means less cash to deal with things like cleaning streets. Or dealing with all the violence, especially in places like Atlanta, Baltimore, and Chicago. According to Neigborhood Scout, Baltimore ranks a 2, with 100 being the safest. Surprisingly, Chicago is an 11 (it’s very big, and the reported crime is confined within small areas). Atlanta is a 2. The other cities aren’t exactly great, either, excepting Santa Ana, which is a 24. That means that 76% of cities are safer. Some are more about property crime, some are more about violent crime, some are both.

Anyhow, this adds to the money already being appropriated by many cities to provide legal council to illegal aliens, meaning less money for law abiding/legal citizens. Let’s go back to the first article and another letter

To the editor: So-called sanctuary cities and the state of California say they do not want to spend their precious resources on enforcing federal immigration laws because it is not the function of local government to do so.

Now for the irony: Both the city and the county of Los Angeles will spend millions of taxpayer dollars to defend people in federal immigration courts where the only action is a right to residency or potential deportation. In these cases, state laws are not at issue.

Either immigration is solely a federal function or it is not. It can’t be both depending on politics.

Lots of money and lots of irony.

Read: Good News: Many Liberal Cities Are Providing Free Legal Help To Illegal Aliens »

Surprise: FBI Database Missing Millions Of Records For Gun Purchases

According to the Democrat gun grabbers, we’re supposed to pass a whole raft of new “gun control” laws in order to stop gun violence which the Government will administer, yet, they can’t deal with the ones currently on the books

FBI database for gun buyers missing millions of records

The FBI’s background-check system is missing millions of records of criminal convictions, mental illness diagnoses and other flags that would keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands, a gap that contributed to the shooting deaths of 26 people in a Texas church this week.

Experts who study the data say government agencies responsible for maintaining such records have long failed to forward them into federal databases used for gun background checks — systemic breakdowns that have lingered for decades as officials decided they were too costly and time-consuming to fix. (snip)

The FBI said it doesn’t know the scope of the problem, but the National Rifle Association says about 7 million records are absent from the system, based on a 2013 report by the nonprofit National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics. That report determined that “at least 25% of felony convictions . . . are not available” to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System maintained by the FBI.

Of course, some Big Government supporters claim the NRA figure is inflated, because of course they do.

The government funded a four-year effort beginning in 2008 to try to estimate how many records existed of people who should be barred under federal law from buying a gun but aren’t flagged in the FBI system. That effort was abandoned in 2012 because of the cost.

That’s weird: suddenly, government is concerned about cost when it’s a study that would show that government is incompetent.

The National Rifle Association has complained that the federal database is inadequate. The powerful gun rights lobbying group opposes calls for more restrictions on gun buying, arguing that the government should focus instead on making its current background-check system fully functional.

“The shortcomings of the system have been identified, there just seems to be a lack of will to address them,’’ said Louis Dekmar, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

If this system is not being used correctly, why would new gun grabbing laws work?

A large number of people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence — who also are prohibited from buying guns — are absent from the FBI database as well, particularly in states that don’t require fingerprints for such convictions, according to people involved in the work.

The article is unclear as to whether this applies to the Air Force, the military in general, or all. As to the first two, let’s remember that it has been shown that both have been seriously negligent in reporting the information to the firearms database.

Moreover, many convicted domestic abusers who buy guns do so not through a gun store, as Kelley did, but online or from gun shows, advocates say. In the case of such private sales, sellers are not obligated to run buyers’ names through the federal database.

Here we go again. The vast majority of online and gun show purchases are made from sellers who a required to do a background check, and do so.

“We know when these records are in the system that it’s effective,” said Monica McLaughlin, director of public policy for the National Network to End Domestic Violence. “It bars batterers from obtaining weapons. It’s a really effective tool that exists in federal law that we have created, but compliance is inconsistent at best and incredibly lackluster.”

When the records make it to the system. But, none of this matters: gun grabbers want to grab guns.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: FBI Database Missing Millions Of Records For Gun Purchases »

We’ve Met The Global Warming Enemy And It’s Us Or Something

It’s a perfect time for Don Paul to drop this unhinged Warmist screed at the Buffalo News. They’ve had off and on lake effect snow, which will continue. Today’s high was forecast to be 24F, when their average high is 50F. The low will be 21F, when the average is 36F. Obviously, we get

Don Paul: We have met the global warming enemy and it is us

A long-awaited document was released last week by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/NOAA administered U.S. Global Change Research Program. This is one of the most encyclopedic compendiums of its kind, and it was issued despite some indications of hostility toward its findings by the current administration. The research project has roots which precede this presidency, and could not readily be snuffed out if that were anyone’s intention in the administration due to approved funding and congressional mandate.

Climate Matters, a private organization in Princeton, saved me the trouble of reading the entire exhaustive report, but here are the top 10 findings within this first volume: (snip through those 10)

Item 4 is an especially key finding, and I’ve written of this in past articles. There is overwhelming evidence human activity is responsible for the ongoing average global warming, and no real evidence of natural warming would be occurring without our activity and the increase in the atmosphere’s greenhouse effect linked to that activity. In fact, at an American Meteorological Society conference held in the National Center for Atmospheric Research, climate scientists demonstrated to me and many colleagues climate models initialized with the carbon dioxide levels we had around the year 1900, even with natural warming agents such as solar forcing maxed up, demonstrate the world would have been slightly cooling since 1900. There is no explanation for the warming other than “us” and what we have added to the air.

Don goes on this and that, even trotting out the old “the oceans ate my warming” meme. He Blames the wildfires out west, which were declared to be arson in many cases, on Hotcoldwetdry.

The climate models which began to proliferate numerically and dramatically improve in quality during the 1980s have done pretty well, with more warming impacts being slightly greater in scope than lesser. They should never be confused with meteorological models, because climate models are designed to filter out the “noise” of day-to-day fluctuations and operate on a smoothed timescale.

The same models that consistently fail, and do not even work when applied to past warming.

So, the notion “we/meteorologists have trouble with a seventh day in the 7-day outlook, so why should anyone believe climate predictions a century out?” is a red herring and irrelevant.

And that’s his whole point: the models can’t accurately predict 7 days out, but we should totes trust them for 50-100 years out. I wonder how much he would freak if I asked him if he’s taken responsibility and given up his own use of fossil fuels and made his life carbon neutral? Good luck with that during a frigid Buffalo winter.

Read: We’ve Met The Global Warming Enemy And It’s Us Or Something »

Pirate's Cove