WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
Name | Published |
OVERVIEW | Dec. 28, 2010 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 1 | Dec. 30, 2010 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 2 | Jan. 10, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 3 | Jan. 17, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 4 | Jan. 24, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 5 | Jan. 31, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 6 | Feb. 07, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 7 | Feb. 14, 2011 |
SPECIAL ISSUE | Feb. 18, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 8 | Feb. 21, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 9 | Mar. 01, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 10 | Mar. 07, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 1 | Mar. 14, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 1A | Mar. 21, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 2 | Mar. 25, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 3 | Mar. 29, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 4 | Apr. 04, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 5 | Apr. 11, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 6 | Apr. 18, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 7 | Apr. 25, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 7A | Apr. 29, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 8 | May 02, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 9 | May 09, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 10 | May 16, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 11 | May 24, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 12 | Jun. 06, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 13 | Jun. 20, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 14 | JULY 05,2011 |
SS & MORE PART 14A | JULY 18, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 15 | JULY 19, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 16 | AUG. 03, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 17 | AUG. 15, 2011 |
SS & MORE PART 18 | Aug. 29, 2011 |
SOCIAL SECURITY & MORE PART 18
IN THIS ISSUE
1. OBOF 2012 Election Team.
2. President Obama.
3. Example: Republican irresponsibility.
4. How things can change _ Town Hall meetings.
5. Good news for women.
6. Interesting poll information.
7. Warren Buffett - "I've been coddled long enough."
Don't miss this one.
8. Concerns for Social Security.
9. Contract for the American Dream and it's problem.
You know, in Congress, they use terms like committees, commissions, and gangs. As a rule, it seems, none of those work out very well. So, I am going to refer to all of us as the
"OBOF 2012 ELECTION TEAM"
"VOTE AN EDUCATED VOTE."
THE PURPOSE OF THE OBOF ELECTION TEAM
My purpose is to try to provide, to the members of the Team, information that will help when talking to people, as to the reasons they should vote Democratic and, particularly, for President Obama.
The purpose of the Team is to use any information that they feel will help them in their conversations with people relative to electing Democrats and, particularly, President Obama.
In the process of fulfilling our purpose, anytime any member of the Team has any suggestions as to how I might improve my part, I will not only welcome them, I want them.
PRESIDENT OBAMA
In case you may have forgotten, I am a proud Progressive Democrat, not an ULTRA Progressive, but a Progressive, never the less. The 2012 Presidential fight, from the Democratic side, is just about to get underway.
The President has now gotten the biggest problem out of the way. He could not do anything about 2012 until the possibility of default no longer existed. While there is one more step to complete the plan, it will not affect the possibility of default. So, while he still has a lot of problems, such as jobs, on his plate, he is going to be more free than he has been, to start showing what he has been doing for this country.
We are now seeing, from the Republican candidates, the kind of misrepresentations and straight out lies that have already started. The Republicans are going to stop at nothing to reach their goal, which is to hurt and defeat President Obama, over and above, what's good for the Country.
Congress is in recess, so little could be accomplished at this moment, other than White House planning. They have announced an "ALL NEW AND REFRESHING" jobs plan that will be forthcoming early in September.
So, it is a good time for the President to take a few days off. He has been working day and night for months on the debt ceiling debate. BUT, what do you hear from the Republicans and particularly from Donald Trump? It's how this President takes more vacations than any other President.
FACTS
President Obama, as of Aug. 18th, has taken 38 days vacation and 32 days at Camp David , for a total of 70 days.
President Geo. W. Bush, at this same time in his presidency, had taken 102 days at his ranch in Texas and 123 days at Camp David , for a total of 225 days.
Now I don't know about other Presidents, but this is enough to show that Mr. Trump is out in left field, as usual. This shows that at least, one President that has taken a lot more days than President Obama.
EXAMPLE: REPUBLICAN IRRESPONSIBILITY!
This one takes the cake. As hurricane Irene hits the U.S.
This, from a man who voted for the Bush tax cuts for the rich without them being paid for, and voted for the Iraq and Afghanistan
How un-American can you get. This man is one of the worst that has ever been in Congress. This isn't the first time he has shown such stupidity. Surely, we as Democrats can fine some good person to replace this man in 2012.
HOW THINGS CAN CHANGE!
TOWN HALL MEETINGS.
In my last posting, I devoted the entire posting to Senator Tom Coburn M.D. and his $9 trillion deficit reduction plan entitled "Back In Black." I have never done that before, and probably will never do it again. Looking back at it, I provided a fairly favorable picture of the document and Senator Coburn. I still feel that it was a tremendous undertaking and I don't think anything like it has ever been produced before.
You know, in life, one thing looks one way at one stage and then something happens that makes it look some what, or even a lot, different. When that happens, you should, or must, take a different position than before. Such is the case with my comments in the last posting, and in some other postings, with regard to Senator Coburn, not so much with the "Back In Black", but with Senator Coburn, himself.
Ever since Senator Coburn was the only one that said, on the floor of the Senate, that Congresses and Presidents had "STOLEN" all the Social Security Trust Fund, I have been impressed with him. However, during the 9 Town Hall Meetings he held two week ago, when Congress was in recess, he was a different man. There is a lot I could write about those meetings, but I am just going to give you some of the statements he made. You can judge for yourself.
In an interview before the meeting in Tulsa
With regard to Medicare he said "Show me where in the Constitution the federal government is responsible for your health care?"
In the Preamble to the Constitution and in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution it states that the government will "promote and provide for the general Welfare of the United States
He has said the same thing about Social Security, which, in view of a statement I have from his Washington
At one point, he placed blame for the country's financial problems on Congress, (which I think is correct) and said that his colleagues are "a class of career elitists" and "cowards." He also was talking about his frustrations and said "It's just a good thing I can't pack a gun on the Senate floor." To me, this is as bad as it can get. To refer to guns on the Senate floor is as bad as Palin "Load your guns."
In response to a question "Does Obama want to destroy America
The above shows me a different man than what I had seen before. I am truly disappointed. I apologize to you readers for misleading you in the past. I think Senator Coburn longs for a country of many years ago. Times have changed and needs have changed since the Constitution was written. He talked about families meeting health needs and that often times doctors were not paid or were paid with chickens or baked goods. Does he really want those days back? Those days are gone and I don't think they will return nor do I want them to return.
GOOD NEWS FOR WOMEN
The following information was taken from the
Publisher & Editor ~ Ann Kent
The Obama administration has announced historic new guidelines that ensure that women can receive a wide range of preventative health services at no additional cost. That means that, by August of next year. HIV screenings, breastfeeding support, domestic violence screening, and other services must be available under all new insurance plans -- without a co-payment or deductible - under the Affordable Care Act.
These new rules are a huge step forward, building on measures already in place that will reduce costs for patients and make sure people get the care they need. It has been said that "The Affordable Care Act helps stop health problems before they start."
President Obama and millions of Americans joined the fight for health reform to bring about exactly these kinds of changes - - but the other side thinks they can score political points by threatening to roll back progress like this, using it as a wedge issue to divide this country. Affordable, preventative health services should never be politicized. And the more people who know the facts, the less likely it is that this kind of politics will work. It's up to all of us to make sure this news is shared.
INTERESTING POLL INFO
I don't put to much stock in polls, but sometimes they do give, at least, an idea of general feelings in the country. The following provides some such ideas, that I think are worth taking a look at.
So, read and get that feeling.
By MICHAEL COOPER and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
updated 8/4/2011 8:54:17 PM ET 2011-08-05T00:54:17
WASHINGTON — The debate over raising the debt ceiling, which brought the nation to the brink of default, has sent disapproval of Congress to its highest level on record and left most Americans saying that creating jobs should now take priority over cutting spending, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll.
A record 82 percent of Americans now disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job — the most since The Times first began asking the question in 1977, and even more than after another political stalemate led to a shutdown of the federal government in 1995.
More than four out of five people surveyed said that the recent debt-ceiling debate was more about gaining political advantage than about doing what is best for the country. Nearly three-quarters said that the debate had harmed the image of the United States
Republicans in Congress shoulder more of the blame for the difficulties in reaching a debt-ceiling agreement than President Obama and the Democrats, the poll found.
The Republicans compromised too little, a majority of those polled said. All told, 72 percent disapproved of the way Republicans in Congress handled the negotiations, while 66 percent disapproved of the way Democrats in Congress handled negotiations.
The public was more evenly divided about how President Obama handled the debt ceiling negotiations: 47 percent disapproved and 46 percent approved.
The public's opinion of the Tea Party movement has soured in the wake of the debt-ceiling debate. The Tea Party is now viewed unfavorably by 40 percent of the public and favorably by just 20 percent, according to the poll. In mid-April 29 percent of those polled viewed the movement unfavorably, while 26 percent viewed it favorably. And 43 percent of Americans now think the Tea Party has too much influence on the Republican Party, up from 27 percent in mid-April.
"I'm real disappointed in Congress," Ron Raggio", 54, a florist from Vicksburg, Miss., said in a follow-up interview. "They can’t sit down and agree about what's best for America
There were signs that the repeated Republican calls for more spending cuts were resonating with the public: 44 percent of those polled said the cuts in the debt-ceiling agreement did not go far enough, 29 percent said they were about right, and only 15 percent said they went too far. More than a quarter of the Democrats polled said that the cuts in the agreement did not go far enough.
Jobs are first priority. But by a ratio of more than two to one, Americans feel that creating jobs should be a higher priority for the nation right now than cutting spending.
Though Republicans prevented tax increases from being included in the debt-ceiling deal, half of those polled said the agreement should have included increased tax revenue, while 44 percent said it should have relied on cuts alone. That issue is likely to be revisited soon: Congress is preparing to appoint a special committee to recommend ways to reduce the deficit. Sixty-three percent of those polled said that they supported raising taxes on households that earn more than $250,000 a year, as President Obama has sought to do — including majorities of Democrats (80 percent), independents (61 percent) and Republicans (52 percent).
There were signs that President Obama was emerging from the crisis less bruised than the Republicans in Congress.
The president's overall job approval rating remained relatively stable, with 48 percent approving of the way he handles his job as president and 47 percent disapproving — down from the bump up he received in the spring after the killing of Osama bin Laden, but in line with how he has been viewed for nearly a year. By contrast, Speaker John A. Boehner, an Ohio
Warren Buffett said
"My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress."
By Josh Voorhees | Posted Monday, Aug. 15, 2011.
Billionaire investor Warren Buffett thinks he and his “mega-rich” friends should pay more taxes.
“My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress,” Buffett writes in a New York Times op-ed Monday. “It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.”
In the op-ed, the so-called Oracle of Omaha calls on Congress to immediately raise the tax rate for households with taxable incomes of more than $1 million, with an additional hike for those making $10 million more.
Buffett also threw cold water on the idea that higher taxes would discourage the rich from investing, saying that “potential taxes have never scared them off” in the past.
OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.
While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan
These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.
Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.
If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.
To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.
I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain.
People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.
Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.
The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)
I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America
Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.
Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America
But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
Warren E. Buffett is the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.
CONCERNED STATUS OF
SOCIAL SECURITY
There are more and more Republicans trying to tell the people that Social Security is unconstitutional. What is your answer to that statement? It is no more unconstitutional than many other things that the government has programs for. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about subsidizing producers of oil or to farmers for letting some land stay idle. It's like I have said before, times change and needs change since the Constitution was written.
Being the tremendous document that it is, the Constitution allows for those changes. Clear back then our founding fathers realized that as the country progressed there would need to be a number of laws that deal with specifics in more detail than in the Constitution. Therefore, in their wisdom, they stated that one thing the Government was responsible for was the "General Welfare" of the Country. That accounts for a lot programs being Constitutional.
ANOTHER PROBLEM
As one way to stimulate the economy, President Obama has, in the past and wants to again, reduce the amount of FICA, pay roll tax, so that working people will have more money to spend. The problem with that is, that once again the government is steeling from the Social Security program.
By doing so there is less money coming in to make the Social Security payments, so this will actually add to the deficit when they have to make up the difference to make payments. Before this, when the government was having to provide money to meet payments, it my position that that was not adding to the deficit, because that was simply a payment on the $2.6 trillion that the government had already stolen from the Trust Fund.
By reducing the amount of FICA it simply is robbing Peter to pay Paul and makes no sense, in my opinion.
The most important thing that we constantly need to remember, and point out in any conversations we have with people, is the background of Social Security and what lead to the stealing of the $2.6 trillion from the Social Security Trust Fund.
In my next posting, I am going to go into some detail about how successful SS has been and about the future of Social Security. You don't want to miss that. IT IS IMPORTANT TO EVERY AMERICAN, REGARDLESS OF AGE.
CONTRACT FOR THE AMERICAN DREAM
AND IT'S PROBLEM
The organization MoveOn, has been conducting a nationwide campaign "Rebuild The American Dream." In the process, they have been asking for suggestions to build a Contract to fix our economy.
Over the past month more than a quarter million people have endorsed the Contract for the American Dream. That's a big deal. Progressives are uniting behind a set of real solutions for fixing our broken economy.
I. Invest in America
II. Create 21st Century Energy Jobs
III. Invest in Public Education
IV. Offer Medicare for All
V. Make Work Pay
VI. Secure Social Security
VII. Return to Fairer Tax Rates
VIII. End the Wars and Invest at Home
IX. Tax Wall Street Speculation
X. Strengthen Democracy
II. Create 21st Century Energy Jobs
III. Invest in Public Education
IV. Offer Medicare for All
V. Make Work Pay
VI. Secure Social Security
VII. Return to Fairer Tax Rates
VIII. End the Wars and Invest at Home
IX. Tax Wall Street Speculation
X. Strengthen Democracy
This is a great effort, BUT every one of the ten listed above have been said many times over. They are right, EXCEPT they tell you nothing as to HOW to accomplish any of these ten. That is the problem. Finding headings of what we would need to have done is not difficult. Finding ways to get them done is a whole different story. And, in my opinion, until we get rid of the plain stupid Republicans in the House of Representatives, we don't have any chance of getting any of those ten accomplished.
What we have to do first, is (1) Re-elect President Obama, (2) Replace as many as possible of the House Republicans, particularly, those of the Tea Party and (3) Strengthen the majority in the Senate. If we do these three things, the ten will follow. VOTE AN EDUCATED VOTE.
I believe that will do it, until the next time, which will be September 12, 2011. God Bless you all.
Floyd
