Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Somali Pirates Say They Are Subsidiary of Goldman Sachs

NORFOLK, VIRGINIA (The Borowitz Report) – Eleven indicted Somali pirates dropped a bombshell in a U.S. court today, revealing that their entire piracy operation is a subsidiary of banking giant Goldman Sachs.

There was an audible gasp in the courtroom when the leader of the pirates announced, “We are doing God’s work.  We work for Lloyd Blankfein.”

The pirate, who said he earned a bonus of

$48 million in dubloons last year, elaborated on the nature of the Somalis’ work for Goldman, explaining that the pirates forcibly attacked ships that Goldman had already shorted.

“We were functioning as investment bankers, only every day was casual Friday,” the pirate said.

The pirate acknowledged that they merged their operations with Goldman in late 2008 to take advantage of the more relaxed regulations governing bankers as opposed to pirates, “plus to get our share of the bailout money.”

In the aftermath of the shocking revelations, government prosecutors were scrambling to see if they still had a case against the Somali pirates, who would now be treated as bankers in the eyes of the law.

“There are lots of laws that could bring these guys down if they were, in fact, pirates,” one government source said.  “But if they’re bankers, our hands are tied.”

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Vote No On Arizona Proposition 100

Requested post for John Karam

I just voted NO (by early ballot) on Proposition 100.  It proposes an
increase in Arizona state sales tax by 1% per dollar for three years.


My reasons are as follows:
1. Two-thirds of the monies will go to the already huge, greedy, and self-centered educational lobby in this state.
2. The grade school that I attended 45 years ago (Royal Palm @ 19th Ave & Butler) was recently remodeled.
It is  now a luxury institution looking far more upscale than it ever did when I attended school there.
3. That grade school is now 58.6% Hispanic!


Most of the Hispanic children

at that school are the children of citizens of Mexico.
Here are words from the Mexican Constitution (Chapter II, Article 30) :
"Those born in a foreign country of Mexican parents are citizens of Mexico".


Where is the nation of Mexico in this equation?
Is it any wonder that Arizona schools need more of your money?


I strongly encourage you to go to http://www.schoolmatters.com and look up schools that you might be familiar with.
Until then, here are some High School statistics from that source:


Sunnyslope High School  41.5% Hispanic,
Central High School  62.7% Hispanic,
Tempe High School  52.6% Hispanic,
Dobson High School  25.4% Hispanic,
North High School  71.3% Hispanic,
Tolleson High School  71.7% Hispanic,


Do you see where our nation is going?
If that doesn't alarm you, then look at your ballot before you vote.  It is written in English and in Spanish -but not Dutch,
not French, not Chinese, not Arabic.  What happened to our diverse melting pot?


Face it.  The human diversity that drove this nation to greatness changed dramatically while on our watch.
Those who changed it did so illegally and with decided arrogance.
While you are reading this email, citizens of foreign nations, in our country illegally, are marching on our state capitol
and flying the Mexican flag.  Did you even notice?




John D. Karam
P.S.: Feel free to forward this link or copy and paste as email.  I am not afraid.  I am not afraid

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Obama's disregard for media reaches new heights at nuclear summit

By Dana Milbank

Wednesday, April 14, 2010; A02





World leaders arriving in Washington for President Obama's Nuclear Security Summit must have felt for a moment that they had instead been transported to Soviet-era Moscow.

They entered a capital that had become a military encampment, with camo-wearing military police in Humvees and enough Army vehicles to make it look like a May Day parade on New York Avenue, where a bicyclist was killed Monday by a National Guard truck.



In the middle of it all was Obama -- occupant of an office once informally known as "leader of the free world" -- putting on a clinic for some of the world's greatest dictators in how to circumvent a free press.



The only part of the summit, other than a post-meeting news conference, that was visible to the public was Obama's eight-minute opening statement, which ended with the words: "I'm going to ask that we take a few moments to allow the press to exit before our first session."

Reporters for foreign outlets, admitted for the first time to the White House press pool, got the impression that the vaunted American freedoms are not all they're cracked up to be.

Yasmeen Alamiri from the Saudi Press Agency got this lesson in press freedom when trying to cover Obama's opening remarks as part of that limited pool: "The foreign reporters/cameramen were escorted out in under two minutes, just as the leaders were about to begin, and Obama was going to make remarks. . . . Sorry, it is what it is."



Alamiri's counterparts from around the world wrote of similar experiences in their pool reports. Arabic-language MBC TV's Nadia Bilbassy had this to say of Obama's meeting with the Jordanian king: "We were there for around 30 seconds, not enough even to notice the color of tie of both presidents. I think blue for the king."



The Press Trust of India, at Obama's meeting with the Pakistani prime minister, reported, "In less than a minute, the pool was asked to leave." The Yomiuri Shimbun correspondent found that she was "ushered out about 30 seconds" after arriving for Obama's meeting with the Malaysian prime minister. A reporter with Turkey's TRT-Turk went to Obama's meeting with the president of Armenia, but "we had to leave the room again after less than 40 seconds."



Even the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, was more talkative with the press than Obama. Michelle Jamrisko, with Japan's Kyodo News, noted in her pool report that Hu, at his session with Obama, spoke to the Chinese media in Chinese, while Obama limited himself mostly to "say hello to the cameras" and "thank you everybody."



Obama's official schedule for Tuesday would have pleased China's Central Committee. Excerpts: "The President will attend the Heads of Delegation working lunch. This lunch is closed press. . . . The President will meet with Prime Minster Erdogan of Turkey. This meeting is closed press. . . . The President will attend Plenary Session II of the Nuclear Security Summit. This session is closed press."



Reporters, even those on the White House beat for two decades, said these were the most restricted such meetings they had ever seen. They complained to both the administration and White House Correspondents' Association, which will discuss the matter Thursday with White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.



The restrictions have become a common practice for the Obama White House. When Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu came to the White House a couple of weeks ago, reporters were kept away. Soon after that, Obama signed an executive order on abortion, again without any coverage.

Over the weekend, Obama broke with years of protocol and slipped off to a soccer game without the "protective" pool that is always in the vicinity of the president in case the unthinkable occurs. Obama joked about it later to Pakistan's prime minister, saying reporters "were very upset."



In "bilateral" meetings with foreign leaders, presidents usually take questions, or at least trade statements. But at most of Obama's, there were only written "readouts." Canada: "The president and the prime minister noted the enduring strength of our bilateral partnership." India: "The two leaders vowed to continue to strengthen the robust relationship between the people of their countries." Pakistan: "President Obama began by noting that he is very fond of Pakistan."



Finally, away from other leaders, Obama took reporters' questions for 20 minutes. They were tough and skeptical questions that punctured the banal readouts: pointing out that the nonproliferation agreements weren't binding, noting China's equivocation on sanctions against Iran, and pressing Obama on the failure to curb North Korea's weapons. The Post's Scott Wilson asked Obama if he would call on Israel, which skipped the summit, to declare its nuclear weapons.



"I'm not going to comment on their program," Obama said.

Not surprising. But it's still important that the questions are asked.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

America's European Style Tax System

Pure Redistributon



Far be it from me to defend taxation, and I certainly am not one to tout government as the chosen tool to ensure fairness except in treatment by the law, but this is a bit ridiculous wouldn’t you say?

About 47 percent [of US housholds] will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That’s according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.




Liberals like to go on and on about a “progressive tax system” (so do Marxists, but that’s another story).  But my understanding of a progressive system is that everyone pays, just that those on the bottom end of the income scale pay less than those on the top.  But in reality, in this “progressive system” most of the bottom end of the income scale are paying nothing.

So that explains all the calls to insurance agents, doctors and human resources offices asking “where can I get me some of that free Obamacare?”  We’ve established a defacto welfare class through the “progressive tax system”:

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

“We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing,” said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
Ironically, when it comes to health care, the “fairness” argument from the Democrats and “progressives” requires an individual mandate since they claim that without everyone paying into the system costs can’t come down (even though that won’t cut costs either, that’s their argument).

But this goes to a bigger problem – a mindset of entitlement.  And that is a mindset that favors the status quo (or its expansion) since it is to the advantage of those who benefit and, one would assume, they find no reason to challenge any program which may expand it.  ObamaCare is simply the latest.

Since they have no skin in the game, it costs them nothing to be complacent and they’re not likely to stir themselves to save that portion of Americans paying taxes from having to pay more to fund the redistribution of income from which they benefit via the “progressive” tax code.  Loot the rich is good where they’re sitting.

Taxes, at best, are a necessary evil with which we fund the necessities of government.  What taxation isn’t, or certainly what our founders never intended it to be, was a vast system of redistribution of income.  The tax system we have is an abomination -  it isn’t “fair”, it’s isn’t “progressive” and it violates the function of taxation as described by our founders.

But it is certainly a handy tool for big government progressives with which to grow their constituency and pad their vote counts.  It must surprise them somewhat that some of those on this plantation they’ve been building for years are, for some unknown reason, attending Tea Parties and protesting the direction of the country.  Even some of those who benefit from the redistributionist status quo understand that it’s just not right and certainly not a principle upon which this nation was founded.

~McQ



Source Gando

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Nearly half of US households escape fed income tax

, On Wednesday April 7, 2010, 5:38 pm 

Recession, new tax credits have nearly half of US households paying no federal income tax

 
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Tax Day is a dreaded deadline for millions, but for nearly half of U.S. households it's simply somebody else's problem.

About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.



Most people still are required to file returns by the April 15 deadline. The penalty for skipping it is limited to the amount of taxes owed, but it's still almost always better to file: That's the only way to get a refund of all the income taxes withheld by employers.

In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.

Tax cuts enacted in the past decade have been generous to wealthy taxpayers, too, making them a target for President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress. Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year.

The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners -- households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 -- paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline, aviation, alcohol and cigarettes. Many also pay state or local taxes on sales, income and property.

That helps explain the country's aversion to taxes, said Clint Stretch, a tax policy expert Deloitte Tax. He said many people simply look at the difference between their gross pay and their take-home pay and blame the government for the disparity.

"It's not uncommon for people to think that their Social Security taxes, their 401(k) contributions, their share of employer health premiums, all of that stuff in their mind gets lumped into income taxes," Stretch said.

The federal income tax is the government's largest source of revenue, raising more than $900 billion -- or a little less than half of all government receipts -- in the budget year that ended last Sept. 30. But with deductions and credits, especially for families with children, there have long been people who don't pay it, mainly lower-income families.

The number of households that don't pay federal income taxes increased substantially in 2008, when the poor economy reduced incomes and Congress cut taxes in an attempt to help recovery.

In 2007, about 38 percent of households paid no federal income tax, a figure that jumped to 49 percent in 2008, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center.

In 2008, President George W. Bush signed a law providing most families with rebate checks of $300 to $1,200. Last year, Obama signed the economic recovery law that expanded some tax credits and created others. Most targeted low- and middle-income families.

Obama's Making Work Pay credit provides as much as $800 to couples and $400 to individuals. The expanded child tax credit provides $1,000 for each child under 17. The Earned Income Tax Credit provides up to $5,657 to low-income families with at least three children.

There are also tax credits for college expenses, buying a new home and upgrading an existing home with energy-efficient doors, windows, furnaces and other appliances. Many of the credits are refundable, meaning if the credits exceed the amount of income taxes owed, the taxpayer gets a payment from the government for the difference.

"All these things are ways the government says, if you do this, we'll reduce your tax bill by some amount," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

The government could provide the same benefits through spending programs, with the same effect on the federal budget, Williams said. But it sounds better for politicians to say they cut taxes rather than they started a new spending program, he added.

Obama has pushed tax cuts for low- and middle-income families and tax increases for the wealthy, arguing that wealthier taxpayers fared well in the past decade, so it's time to pay up. The nation's wealthiest taxpayers did get big tax breaks under Bush, with the top marginal tax rate reduced from 39.6 percent to 35 percent, and the second-highest rate reduced from 36 percent to 33 percent.

But income tax rates were lowered at every income level. The changes made it relatively easy for families of four making $50,000 to eliminate their income tax liability.

Here's how they did it, according to Deloitte Tax:

The family was entitled to a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650 apiece, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The federal income tax on $24,000 is $2,769.

With two children younger than 17, the family qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. Its Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly.

The $2,800 in credits exceeds the $2,769 in taxes, so the family makes a $31 profit from the federal income tax. That ought to take the sting out of April 15.

Internal Revenue Service: http://www.irs.gov

Tax Policy Center: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

IRS to Target High Wealth Individuals

Tuesday, April 06, 2010>

By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer



(CNSNews.com) - The Internal Revenue Service has launched a new global program to target what it calls “high wealth individuals,” IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman said Monday.



“Through our new global high wealth operating unit we are taking a unified look at the entire web of business and economic entities controlled by high wealth individuals so we can better assess the risk such arrangements pose to tax compliance,” Shulman said at the National Press Club on Monday.





Shulman said the IRS is using “our robust and evolving enforcement program that ensures that everyone pays what they owe.”







The IRS initiated its Global High Wealth Industry group in the fall.  Schulman told an October 26 meeting of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants that it would be part of “the globalization of tax administration,” which he called a “game changing trend” in tax enforcement.



“This brings me to another important development--a game-changing trend--the globalization of tax administration,” said Shulman.



“While we are in the early stages of this work, this new unit will centralize and focus IRS compliance expertise involving high-wealth individuals and their related entities – which can often have an international component,” Shulman said. “Tax agencies around the world, including those in Japan, Germany, the UK, Canada and Australia, have also formed high wealth groups.



“Now, high wealth individuals are not your typical Form 1040 filers with a W-2, some 1099 income, and maybe a Schedule C enclosed with their return,” Shulman said. “And you cannot assess compliance among the nation’s wealthiest individuals by looking only at their 1040s. Their tax picture is much more complicated than this.



“For a variety of reasons – including valid business reasons – many high wealth individuals make use of sophisticated financial, business, and investment arrangements with complicated legal structures and tax consequences,” Shulman said. “Many of these arrangements are entirely above board. Others mask aggressive tax strategies.”



Shulman also mentioned the program at the George Washington University International Tax Conference in December.



“So what’s our game plan here?” Shulman said. “At least initially, we will be looking at individuals with tens of millions of dollars of assets or income. Going forward, we will take a unified look at the entire web of business entities controlled by a high wealth individual, which will enable us to better assess the risk such arrangements pose to tax compliance and the integrity of our tax system.



“We want to better understand the entire economic picture of the enterprise controlled by the wealthy individual and to assess the tax compliance of that overall enterprise,” he said. “We cannot do this by continuing to approach each tax return in the enterprise as a single and separate entity. We must understand and analyze the entire picture.



“Over the past few months, we have begun hiring some agents and specialists, such as flow-through specialists and international examiners, to conduct examinations of high wealth individuals and their related enterprises,” Shulman said.



“In due course, we will grow the new unit by adding examination agents and individuals with specialized skills and expertise, such as economists to identify economic trends, appraisal experts to advise on valuation issues, and technical advisors to provide industry or specialized tax expertise,” Shulman said. “We will also build new risk assessment techniques to identify high income and high wealth individuals and their related enterprises that should be reviewed holistically.”



At the press club event, Shulman also touted the IRS amnesty program that has allowed U.S. citizens with untaxed assets abroad to come forward, pay back taxes and fines, but not face jail time. He said some 15,000 people have come forward to admit they have not paid taxes on accounts and other assets in other countries.




Like this story? Then sign up to receive our free daily E-Brief newsletter





Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.






Showing 1-10 of 42
  Comments
 
buddy9 (1 hour ago)      Hey Cubbies, ever watch the movie "Indiana Jones?" Well, if not, Hitler had his thugs all over the world seeking out to take from the rich and give to the motherland!! Only for the good of the motherland did these riches go and in turn went to the people of Germany!!! Now you have the same idea with this FASIST ilk going arround the world and seeking out the rich to take from them and give to the people of the "Newly created Underclass." You know they are either going to cause a total coop, or the people of this country will rise up and vote these VERY, VERY DANGEROUS people out of office. AND AMERICA, I HOPE YOU HAVE LEARNED A LESSON FROM THIS, AND NEVER, NEVER, NEVER TAKE YOUR FREEDOM AND LIBERTY FOR GRANTED AGIN!!!

Monday, April 5, 2010

U.S. seeks maximum civil penalty against Toyota



Here's an article that came from the Washington Post. Please read the last paragraph, which I simply find amazing.
Washington Post Staff Writer

Monday, April 5, 2010; 4:37 PM


The United States is seeking the maximum civil penalty of $16.375 million against Toyota for failing to notify safety regulators of its "sticky pedal" defect for at least four months, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced Monday.

Roughly 2.3 million Toyotas have been recalled for the sticky pedal defect. Millions more have been recalled for a defect that causes the floor mats to become entrapped.

"We now have proof that Toyota failed to live up to its legal obligations," LaHood said. "Worse yet, they knowingly hid a dangerous defect for months from U.S. officials and did not take action to protect millions of drivers and their families. For those reasons, we are seeking the maximum penalty possible under current laws."

Although the proposed civil penalty is the largest permitted, it is small relative to the size of the automaker's business in the United States. Some safety advocates have called for legislation that would raise the financial penalties and criminal sanctions.