Gender: Do not display
Home country: US
Member since: Sat Jun 4, 2005, 09:56 AM
Number of posts: 13,680
Home country: US
Member since: Sat Jun 4, 2005, 09:56 AM
Number of posts: 13,680
Some lowlights (each following bullet point is a direct quote from the article text):
* triple what his campaign identifies as the personal deduction that parents can claim for their children.
* eliminate both the Alternative Minimum Tax and the estate tax.
* he would reduce the capital gains rate from 15% to 12%.
* cut the corporate income tax rate in half to 17.5% and eliminate it entirely for manufacturers.
But at the same time he proposes to keep on the books many of the largest and most popular deductions, such as those for health insurance, retirement savings and mortgage interest.
Santorum also emphasizes his desire to use the tax code to support the family -- which he calls the "first economy."
There's been no formal third-party analysis of Santorum's plan so far. But his proposal to boost tax breaks for families may run counter to at least one oft-stated Republican beef: the number of households that end up having no federal income tax liability because of all the tax breaks they're entitled to.
"Interestingly, by using tax expenditures to support these families, Santorum would likely add significantly to the number of households that pay no income tax," wrote Urban Institute resident fellow Howard Gleckman in the blog TaxVox.
What's more, Gleckman noted, "because cuts rates significantly but does not eliminate tax preferences -- and even expands a few -- it would very likely add trillions of dollars to the federal deficit."
Has Santorum had anything to say about the federal debt? Because his tax plan would make it skyrocket.
Posted by MH1 | Sat Jan 7, 2012, 09:50 AM (15 replies)
This story was on NPR's Living on Earth program this morning.
Tiger Sharks Dine on Migrating Birds
GELLERMAN: Something very strange is happening near oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. On dark and overcast nights, migratory birds become stuck in the cones of light from the powerful beacons on the drilling rigs. The birds swoop and circle overhead - flying round and round - until, exhausted - they drop into the sea.
Environmental reporter Ben Raines has written about the unusual and often deadly phenomenon for the Mobile, Alabama, Press-Register:
RAINES: You have to imagine what the platforms are down here. I mean, we’ve got 5,000 in the Gulf, and they’re out there over a formerly dark ocean, and each one is lit up with several hundred bright, bright flood lights - think of streetlights. They’re like these beacons out on the horizon. If you’ve ever been close to a bright light outside like a lantern, you look away from it and you can’t see anything and it’s the same phenomenon on these platforms.
GELLERMAN: So how does that affect the birds?
RAINES: Well, on cloudy nights in particular, where the stars are obscured, birds migrating across the Gulf, which is a long trip - a couple hundred miles, takes 20 to 30 hours - will fly and they’ll become sort of disoriented and bamboozled by the lights on the platforms, thinking that those are, you know, navigation cues like stars because they can’t see the stars.
And, so, they just start flying in a circle around these platforms, and you have to remember the platforms - some of them are very big. I mean - you know, the top deck might be the size of a football field.
GELLERMAN: So what happens to the birds? They fall onto the platform?
RAINES: Well, some fall onto the platform, some are eaten by migrating raptors - you know, hawks and things, and some are eaten by sharks. We had some scientists here that work out of the Dauphin Island Sea Lab who began dissecting sharks - tiger sharks in particular - and finding a lot of songbirds in them. Brown thrashers, scarlet tanagers, you know, birds you would associate with the woods that could only be out there - 20 and 50 miles offshore - because they are migrating.
(more at link)
Audio is here (scroll down for just this topic): http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.html?programID=12-P13-00001
A light bulb has been developed that gives off green light and doesn't seem to disturb the birds. (See picture at link.) But it is not yet in use in the Gulf of Mexico.
For those who saw the astroturf anti-wind power article posted in LBN yesterday (since locked since it turns out to not even be current), consider this a bit of a counter. Global warming and other problems from hydrocarbon fuel production and use are more of a problem, overall, for birds than wind power. Although again, where potential problems can be mitigated, they should be - in any energy production scenario.
Posted by MH1 | Sat Jan 7, 2012, 08:49 AM (3 replies)
(this is not about Gingrich claiming to be swift boated, but a differently erroneous use of the term)
I happen to really enjoy the writings of Charlie Pierce. (THAT Charlie Pierce, for NPR fans.) This is a short piece but I love the emphatic statement.
The Truth Inside Romney's Swift Boat Moment
By Charles P. Pierce
DES MOINES — Over on Liberal MSNBC, I just heard Mark Murray, who is a deputy political director at NBC News, chatting with Martin Bashir over the possible political effectiveness of using what happened to an Indiana company when it fell under the gentle ministrations of Willard Romney and his pals at Bain Capital. (In 1994, Ted Kennedy made a dog's breakfast out of Willard in their Senate race by bringing some laid-off employees of the company to Massachusetts. ...
This went along swimmingly until Bashir and Murray compared the use of the displaced workers against Romney to the Swift Boat campaign against John Kerry in 2004.
The Swift Boat campaign was completely a lie.
Bain Capital did gain control of that factory in Indiana. The company did lay these people off.
Nothing the Swifties said about John Kerry was true.
Please go give Charlie some love in the comments section, if you feel so inclined.
Posted by MH1 | Tue Jan 3, 2012, 01:14 PM (4 replies)
After all, who profited the most from that war?
Whose children did NOT have to go fight in it, possibly losing life, limbs, or sanity?
WHY are we suddenly told the federal budget has to be balanced by raiding other programs, programs that help the poor and middle-class - those who gave their children to the war - when
the Iraq war was never paid for?
Posted by MH1 | Sat Dec 17, 2011, 10:13 AM (32 replies)
(I love the way Charlie writes. I just do.)
Hey, Sportin' Life, I got 50 cents here that says your $10,000 dumbassery is going to go down in political history almost as fast as you do.
Of course, if it wasn't for Willard Romney's attempt to slap Governor Goodhair silly with his wallet, there really wouldn't be much to be said of Saturday night's festivities, the 9,876th of 11,980 scheduled Republican debates. It was a strange, disjointed affair among strange, disjointed people dealing in strange, disjointed metaphors. Michele Bachmann talked about there being nothing in the federal treasury but "moths and feathers," giving the federal treasury something in common with her own head. Rick Perry is now functioning, I believe, as the guy in Duck Soup with the peanut stand that eventually catches on fire. And, within about 12 words, Willard described President Obama's payroll tax cut as both a "Band-Aid" and as "gasoline" on a "fire" and/or on "embers." If he'd had two more minutes, he probably would have described the president's policy as a floormat, a window cleaner, a garden tool, and a species of trout. Give him three more of these debates, and he'll be talking in Klingon.
Otherwise, it was a mess. Much of this can be attributed to the presence of George Stephanopoulos and Diane Sawyer as moderators, especially the former It Girl of San Clemente. Sawyer apparently believes that these folks have spent the last several months riding Higgins boats onto heavily fortified beaches. She began the debate by sucking up unashamedly to this plucky band of American titans. And she proceeded to ask questions so convoluted and weird that you'd look to see if Rick Perry's lips were moving. (It is also entirely possible that she actually asked a single question, divided up into 120 parts, over the course of the two hours.) She also had a tendency, particularly late in the game, to refine the question between candidates, so that La Bachmann, say, would be answering a different question than Rick Santorum had answered minutes earlier. Those people at home still conscious while playing the Willard Drinking Game — take a shot every time he says "private sector" — must have been completely bumfuzzled by this.
(Kudos, however, to ABC for introducing us to the ABC Rewind, in which, after coming out of commercial, you got to see the highlights of the portion of the debate that had preceded the ad, in case you forgot that Michele Bachmann was a conservative or that Ron Paul was for freedom. It was particularly telling because we got to see Willard offer to bet Goodhair 10 large again, the first of what I am sure will be 2,389,710 replays of it that we'll see before the caucuses actually happen.)
And, of course, all the answers you heard were pure boilerplate. Repeal Obamacare. Drill for oil and gas. Don't make the "job creators" cry. Jesus, these guys can talk about the staggering economy for 15 minutes and never once use the word "demand," but they'll hammer each other to death over who wants to cut the corporate tax rate to minus-23 percent or something. There was one point in which they were asked to come up with the toughest economic times in their lives, and Rick Perry pivoted to "putting America back to work" and Rick Santorum pivoted to "strengthening the family," and Ron Paul somehow brought the whole thing around to "monetary policy." They have stopped being actual human beings at this point. I think they're all running for mayor of Stepford.
More excellent prose at: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/gop-debate-iowa-december-6614342?click=pp
(edited to add some quote marks because while the pretty gray box shows up in preview, for some reason it doesn't show after posting. Hmm.)
Posted by MH1 | Sun Dec 11, 2011, 09:09 PM (2 replies)