Member since: Tue Nov 30, 2004, 06:22 PM
Number of posts: 13,211
Number of posts: 13,211
Posted by FogerRox | Fri May 10, 2013, 04:12 PM (0 replies)
A return to New Deal infrastructure spending: 6% of GDP-900 billion, would create about 23 million jobs (22.5).
26 million under employed or unemployed, U6 is at 21.5 million. Fudge it: 23 million.
The CBO scoring of the 75 yr SS shortfall is .6% of GDP, which would equal 23 million jobs at 31.5k producing 89.3 billion in FICA. 15 trillion dollar economy, .6% is 90 billion.
Posted by FogerRox | Wed Apr 10, 2013, 09:59 PM (11 replies)
Most understand that the Chained CPI will hurt seniors, especially woman who earned less during their working days and live a little longer than their spouses while facing their last years living alone.
But what may not be well known is that Chained CPI would be used not just for calculating Social Security and Veterans Benefits..... If the Government adopts Chained CPI for adjusting Income Tax Brackets, & wages grow more than the Chained CPI, your income rises faster than the Income tax brackets would. Over time many families would be bumped into the next income tax bracket. Currently the Income Tax Brackets are adjusted to CPI-U.
According to Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation, if individual income taxes were indexed to the Chained CPI starting in January 2013, by 2021, 69 percent of the gains in revenue would come from taxpayers with incomes below $100,000, while those in the highest income brackets would barely be affected. For example, workers with incomes between $10,000 and $20,000 would experience an increased tax burden of 14.5 percent, while those with incomes over $1,000,000 would just see an increase of 0.1 percent.
Seniors dont have the same buying patterns as working wage earners and clerical workers, which is what CPI-W is tracking. CPI-W can't possibly represent Seniors buying habits.
Please sign and share the White House Petition telling President Obama no Social Security cuts will be tolerated.
Seniors spend more on housing and medical care than people still in the workforce who maybe decades younger and in the prime of their health. Substituting Medical care may be impossible in some situations, and I can't imagine how one can substitute a Nursing Home. 2 out of 5 seniors rely on Social Security as 90% of their retirement income, while in 2012 the average Social Security benefit for those 65 and older was less than $15,000.
In addition, there are fewer opportunities for substitution in these areas of consumption. Also, because the elderly are a less mobile population, they may find it more difficult to change their consumption patterns. If accuracy is the main concern to be addressed by altering the Social Security cost of living adjustment, then the BLS could construct a full elderly index that more accurately tracks the consumption patterns of the elderly. There is no basis for assuming that a Chained CPI more accurately measures the rate of inflation experienced by the elderly than the current measure,however there is no doubt that it will lead to a reduction in benefits.
The best thing for Social Security is a growing economy, creating jobs and raising the minimum wage regularly can go a long way to seeing Social Security thru to 2045 when 50% of Boomers born in 1964 will be dead. Once The Social Security Trust Fund gets past this point, assets will grow slowly and by 2062 assets will grow quickly.
As you can see once the Boomers are dead, the number of workers supporting a retiree will vastly improve.
Please sign and share the White House Petition telling President Obama no Social Security cuts will be tolerated.
Posted by FogerRox | Sat Apr 6, 2013, 12:08 PM (7 replies)
#HandsOffMySocialSecurity Well a crap load of you Kossacks and Democrats in Washington DC are talking about SS as if there is something wrong with it, and it needs to be fixed. If you advocate for leaving SS alone, cool. IF not its time to come to terms with what Democrats are saying that enables the GOP long term plan to destroy Social Security.
The only thing wrong with Social Security is the economy. In fact the Social Security Trustees tells us that. Of course for those of you who have never read any actual Trustees report, and continue to repeat this falsehood that the Social Security Trust Fund will be depleted in 20 or so years, and just buying a load of GOP crap.
Stop it. Take your hands off my Social Security. You're not being responsible, I don't trust you, go home, lock the door and turn off the internet. Just stop it.
Lets create jobs, raise the minimum wage, and watch the FICA roll in. Heres a screen cap of the Trustees 2012 report, look very carefully for the footnotes.....
Look at the OASDI column.
Have you never heard this information before? than I excuse you. IF you have heard this information before, and you choose to ignore it, and you still predict 20 more years of recession, well friends, in light of the Sequester and the debt limit talks that could happen this month and things horribly worse....
This diary and its lack of respect is for you.
Chained CPI and Superlative CPI both mean 130 billion in cuts:
Job creation and raising the min wage go a long way to making Social Security solvent thru 2090. Don't comment here, call up DC and give them an earful. Tell them:
Remember there are Democrats who seem to settle for no real jobs programs and Chained CPI, I know, thats some crazy shit, but its true. 25 million Americans would take a full time year round job if offered, do you have our unemployed backs, or is chained CPI or Superlative CPI ok with you?
If it comes to this trade off, Raise the SS cap, or 25 million jobs and the GOP is only letting you pick one..... which is it going to be?
If it comes to this trade off, SS benefit cuts, or raising the minimum wage and the GOP is only letting you pick one..... which is it going to be?
Make the call, call Congress and tell you representative this:
Roger Fox told me the Social Security Trustees said if we create lots of jobs and keep raising the minimum wage over 20 years, then my Social Security is good thru 2090.
Dont wait for the grand bargain to hit you, draw a line in the sand right now, get on the phone, email your friends and relatives and make sure they know whats at risk, whats going on this week & the rest of this month and make sure they know what to do & say about it.
Join me and the Social Security Defenders Twitter team #HandsOffMySocialSecurity I'm at https://twitter.com/RDanaFox
EDIT: 57 recs in under 2 hours, thanks for your support.
Posted by FogerRox | Tue Mar 12, 2013, 08:49 PM (211 replies)
If I recall correctly in 2011 the CBO scored the Social Security shortfall over 75 years as .6% of GDP. To illustrate this point, I'm going to do a little math on my droid calculator. In a 15 trillion dollar economy .6% equals 90 billion. If we create 20 million jobs, at $36,000 per year, thats $4464 in FICA each person will pay, each year. $4464 times 20 million is 89.2 billion dollars. Nearly a match.
If we do nothing but create jobs for those who are looking for full time year round work, we will help to see Social Security solvent thru 2090. The Boomers will be long dead around 2050-2060, so they won't be collecting benefits in 2090.
Again, there is nothing wrong with Social Security that a good economy wont fix. When I say good economy I mean one with lessening income disparity, wage growth equal to or better than inflation. A good economy means keeping unemployment low, 4-5%. I mean raising the minimum wage in a timely fashion.
Elad might have the DU Social Security/Medicare group all set up before the Daily Kos Social Security Defenders blogathon March 25-29, if so, both groups can participate: Please share these graphics on Facebook and Twitter:
Posted by FogerRox | Tue Mar 12, 2013, 08:02 PM (15 replies)
SO has John Boehner.
And we're picking on Susan Rice because of what..... ?
Come on William Rivers Pitt, whadiya say to that?
According to Open Secrets, John Kerry has invested between 200k and 500k in Devon Energy. According to Muckity Devon Energy Chairman J. Larry Nichols donated 47k to Mitt Romney, while Devon Chief Executive John Richels said in an interview with Dow Jones newswires:
Though he said he believes Keystone XL will eventually be approved by the U.S., he said Devon would be forced to consider other alternatives for its oil-- including a Canadian west-coast pipeline option--if Keystone is rejected by the U.S
Senator Kerry also has a relatively small investment in ABB, noted producers of HVDC marine grid systems of the type that support offshore wind turbines.
Kerry also owns a small piece of Alliant Energy Corporation. According to wiki:
Alliant Energy Corporation is a public utility holding company headquartered in Madison, Wisconsin. Alliant Energy's two regulated utilities include Interstate Power and Light Company (IPL) and Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WPL)
Kerry also owns pieces of 6 different Bain Capitals, AOL, AT&T and no more than 17k fo BP.
But I've become sidetracked, I'll stick to energy investments.
No more than 31k of Cenovus Energy. Cenovus currently has two producing projects in the Alberta oil sands – Foster Creek and Christina Lake.
No more than 1k of Consol Energy. In 2010 Kerry sold at least 200k but no more than 500k of Consol. Consol is a major Coal producer based in Pennsylvania.
No more than 500k of Devon Energy as noted above. Devon has 2 projects in the Tar Sands area Jackfish & Pike.
Slightly over 1 million invested with 2 different versions of Kayne Anderson Energy Fund. Not a lot of info available on Kayne.
About 1 million in Noble Energy a Houston based oil and gas company.
No more than 750k in Suncor Energy, they specialize in making syncrude from Tar Sands. Syncrude is the number one product from the Alberta Tar Sands, as I reported last year.
No more than 15k in Wisconsin Energy Corp.
So.... John Kerry has no more than 1.3 million invested in Tar Sands projects, Susan Rice has about the same invested.
SO let me ask you a question, why are we worried about Susan Rices investment in the Tar Sands?
In fact my fellow Democrats, shouldn't we be looking at how John Boehner invests his money? SO I did some inital legwork for you, John has made 8 separate investments totaling no more 365k in companies tied to the Keystone XL pipeline project:
BP, Occidental Petroleum Corp., Chevron, Connocophillips, Devon Energy, Exxon Mobil Corp., Canadian Natural Resources LTD., Emerson Electric Has A $9.4 Billion Contract For Oil Sands Development Support Services.
Boehner And His PAC Have Received At Least $27,500 From Marathon Oil Since 2008.
In 2007, Marathon Oil Purchased A Large Stake In The Athabasca Oil Sands Region. From Oil & Gas Journal:
Marathon Oil Corp., which is increasing capacities of its US refineries to handle heavy feedstocks, has agreed to buy Western Oil Sands Inc. for $6.5 billion (Can.) in a cash-and-stock deal that gives it a strong position in the Athabasca oil sands of northern Alberta.
Western holds a 20% interest in the Athabasca Oil Sands Project (AOSP), a joint venture operated by Shell Canada, with a 60% interest, and including Chevron Canada, 20%.
Marathon will gain interests in more than 300,000 gross acres, of which an area of over 200,000 acres is expected to be developed by mining. The other acreage holds potential for in situ development.
Boehner Has Received At Least $25,000 From Chevron Corp. Since 2008.
Boehner Has Received At Least $24,500 From Exxon Mobil Since 2008.
Boehner Has Received At Least $10,000 From ConocoPhillips Since 2008.
Boehner Has Received At Least $10,000 From BP Since 2008.
Boehner Has Received At Least $7,500 From Occidental Petroleum Since 2008.
Boehner Received $5,000 From Devon Energy During The 2010 Election Cycle.
But its not like we didn't know John Boehner was a scum bag. Is there any real reason we need to drag Democrats into the same scum that Boehner wallows in? Boehner takes donations from the companies he invests in....
SO how far do we dig? When do we stop digging? Wealthy people have investments, Pharma, energy, blue chips. Some Politicians are very wealthy, so when do we find the perfect nominee for Secretary of State?
At what point do character and brains matter more than mud slinging?
Posted by FogerRox | Thu Nov 29, 2012, 01:43 AM (28 replies)
From the Congressional Research Service:
However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. The share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession.
SO the tax breaks for the rich didnt create jobs and did put more money in the pockets of the 1%, or actually the top .3%, er ah top .1%..... Heres the pdf
From concluding remarks
Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities.
Posted by FogerRox | Sat Oct 6, 2012, 04:38 PM (2 replies)
Now get in there and Occupy that dinner table.
Posted by FogerRox | Wed Dec 21, 2011, 08:17 PM (3 replies)
High tax rates on Corporations, Capital gains, Estate and Income tax were not about any Robin Hood scheme. Those tax rates were about assembling a policy structure that encouraged a stable society, where working and middle class families were engaged in the economy, and were better able to take care of their own.
There was no redistribution of wealth from the rich to working and middle class families. We earned it. We worked for it. And then came the PATCO strike, our right to collective bargaining was under attack, the right for Labor to sit at the table as an equal to Capital. The major part of the Reagan tax changes were not the rich getting huge tax breaks, the biggest change from those days was the corporate tax breaks. The corporate share of the federal revenue pie shrunk.
As corporate tax rates dropped and later, as the global economy spread, tax revenues from US corporations declined. President Obama recently advocated for reducing Corporate taxes. I disagree, the Corporate top rate should be increased and half the revenue gained should go back to corporations who invest in emerging markets and technology, like Solar, wind, renewable storage, and supergrid developments and HVDC.
But I digress.
High mariginal rates reward smarter investment.
When the top marginal rate were 90%+ the effective rates were 40-45%, when the top rate was 70% the effective rates were 32-34%. Yes we took huge sums from the uber rich, and gave large portions back to the uber rich. The rich that took their private capital and built factories and business's here in the US got a huge tax break for that smart community oriented investment. We gave huge tax deductions for investing in emerging tech and markets, to incentivize US job creation. To incentivize US innovation.
Todays effective rates on income are about 20-23% roughly the same they were back in the 1970's. Gone are the deductions and exemptions that spurred US job creation and innovation, rates are at historically low points. All those incentives to create jobs in America are gone. Incentives to innovate, incentives to foster leading edge technological developments. Are you sick yet?
Do you see a pattern yet? ...Let me continue...
Lets say you are a billionaire....why should you build a factory to make solar panels or wind turbines for a 5 to 10% return, when you can make (20, 25, 30%) far more speculating on commodities?
The picture I'm trying to paint is one of incentives to the flow of capital...
High taxes should not be about punishing the rich. Hi taxes in the past were about creating a stable society, where smarter investments are rewarded. Those exemptions and deductions are a great way to make capital flow where we want it to, instead of willy nilly everywhere, or not at all, like we see now. The right wing likes low taxes with fewer exemptions and deductions to "level the playing field". But what that does is make currency and commodities speculation more profitable than say building factories that produce solar panels and create US jobs...... This is what the 1986 Tax Reform Act did to our country, it removed tax incentives to reward the rich for doing the right thing, investing in the US. And instead we have incentives to outsource jobs.
These high rates also allowed for less of a tax burden on working and middle class families, engaging working and middle class families in the economy, and these families were better able to take care of their own. Nowadays, the tax burden on working and middle class families have taxed them out of the economy.
The level playing field... is really crooked
The right wing "Market ideologists" dont like to pick winners and losers in a market, so the "level playing field" becomes this alter that some grovel before. And how much profit a corporation makes in the next fiscal year becomes more important than long term visionary thinking, like industrial and energy policy looking forward 20 or 30 years. Higher taxes also means less money goes into speculation, so less money goes into speculative bubbles, so recessions arent as broad or deep.
Without incentives for emerging markets like solar and wind, older, mature large markets will dominate, become hard to control, steer, and tend towards senescence and receive legislative favoritism. Emerging markets are overwhelmed. And until the regulatory and tax policies are changed, this will continue.
The path out of the woods.
Right now we have 6 tax brackets, there is no way a progressive tax can be truly progressive in its effect with only 6 brackets. One should not describe a geometric curve with 6 straight lines. Adding more brackets for a total of 12 or 15 can better describe that geometric curve.The Peoples Budget adds 5 brackets, with a top rate of 49%, I would go to at least 70% and add exemptions and deductions targeting emerging tech and markets (like solar and wind). Capital gains goes back to 28%. Corporate top rate goes up. Taxing gains from currency, commodities and derivative speculation, deincentivizes those activities, while tax breaks for emerging tech and markets incentivizes capital to flow to US jobs and business activity. This is pretty much what Sidney Hillman called Industrial Policy back in the Depression... the one in the 1930's....
So we've raised taxes, how do we create jobs?
A recent NYT article quoted many business people who expressed very little or no interest in a Corporate tax cut, instead opinion overwhelmingly spoke to lack of demand and they would not hire or expand until the had reason to meet increased business. Keynesian Economics is sometimes called demand side economics.
The next generation of Infrastructure: Transportation and Energy.
According to the US Dept of Energy there 2 main reasons why renewable energy technologies offer an economic advantage, 1) They are labor intensive, so they generally create more jobs per dollar invested than conventional electricity technologies and 2) they use primarily indigenous resources, so most of the energy dollars can be kept at home.
Nearly the same can be said of infrastructure, heavy construction equipment, labor intensive, and domestic resource intensive. Jobs created in these sectors tend to pay well, 40 to 75k, so there is better than average secondary job creation. The US manufacturing sector gets a big boost because of the nature of renewable energy development. Cheap practical renewable energy is good for US businesses trying to hold the line on energy costs.
I estimate during the New Deal we spent about 5% of GNP on stimulus. I've been advocating for spending 10% of GDP on jobs . The US spends 2% of GDP on infrastructure, the Eurozone spends 5-6%. In a 15 trillion dollar economy we should be spending 5% of GDP, 1.5 trillion on infrastructure. Another 5% should be spent on energy and other vital sectors.
Job creation breakdown by sector
Importance of the Supergrid to Renewables
More on the Supergrid, HVDC and Solar and Wind Power, looking to 2022.
The 1% have stolen our future, and the time has arrived to take it back, we need 20 million jobs. COngress is gridlocked and the log jam has to be broken. It is no longer adequate to talk about payroll tax holidays, 100 billion for infrastructure or any other piece meal approaches.
We need to focus on the nexus of power that is the log jam in Congress and make it clear... we NEED 20 million jobs.
GOPers not down with job creation, reinstating Glass Steagall II see ya, blue dogs you still want to enable the GOP destroying our economy, our future? See ya.
Take our jobs....
Take our Homes.....
Give it all to the 1%.....
Whats left to loose?
Are you down with the 99%?
Are you down with Occupy?
Are you willing to Occupy the Washington DC Mall on March 30th?
Posted by FogerRox | Tue Dec 20, 2011, 11:33 PM (5 replies)
The US economic system used to be stable, banks didn't fail and jobs were created for those wishing to work.
A system that destroys 20 million jobs for over 3 years is broken.
A system that cant keep its banks afloat is broken.
A political system on auction to the highest bidder is broken.
A system that steals our future is broken.
A system that destroys families is broken.
A system that increases income and wealth disparity is broken.
A system that economically oppresses people is broken.
Whats fair is an economic system thats stable.
Whats fair is to take the big money out of politics.
Whats fair is tax policy that creates a stable economy.
Whats fair is regulations like Glass Steagal that creates a stable banking community.
Whats fair is not stealing our future.
Posted by FogerRox | Sat Dec 10, 2011, 09:10 PM (0 replies)
Go to Page: 1