OPINOINS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
&
THINGS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)
YEAR ONE
YEAR TWO
YEAR THREE
YEAR FOUR
YEAR FIVE
|
OBOF YEAR FIVE INDEX
|
|
|
OBOF TYMHM
|
Jan. 07, 2015
|
|
OBOF TYMHM Vol 15 - No 1
|
Jan. 19, 2015
|
Agenda
1.
Hello: from Floyd.
2.
Day One - - GOP fires shot at SS.
3.
2015 is the year to build - together/
4.
Obama's budget and State of the Union
address
Tuesday 1-20-15.
HELLO
from
FLOYD
Hi, to all who are
still with me. I know that it is hard
for you to stick with a blog that isn't on a regular schedule, but I am
grateful to those who have stayed the course.
To those that haven't, if you happen to look at this one, let me say
that I am going to try harder to provide you information that I think you need
to know.
Now, I guess that
sounds opinionated and I guess it is, because I am deciding for you what I
think you need to know, which, I guess, is will almost always be slanted toward
what I think is so important to all of us.
If any of you disagree with me, all you have to do is give me a shot at
the end of any posting.
From a personal
standpoint, I have been having a real rough time every since Thanksgiving. I think I am starting to improve and I will
try to be a little more reliable.
~~~
New GOP Congress Fires Shot At Social Security
On Day One
ith a little-noticed proposal, Republicans took aim at Social Security on
the very first day of the 114th Congress.
The incoming GOP majority approved late Tuesday a new rule that experts say
could provoke an unprecedented crisis that conservatives could use as leverage
in upcoming debates over entitlement reform.
The largely overlooked change puts a new restriction on the routine
transfer of tax revenues between the traditional Social Security retirement
trust fund and the Social Security disability program. The transfers, known as reallocation, had
historically been routine; the liberal Center for Budget and Policy Priorities said
Tuesday that they had been made 11 times. The CBPP added that the disability insurance
program "isn't broken," but the program has been strained by
demographic trends that the reallocations are intended to address.
The House GOP's rule change would still allow for a reallocation from the
retirement fund to shore up the disability fund -- but only if an accompanying
proposal "improves the overall financial health of the combined Social
Security Trust Funds," per the rule, expected to be passed on Tuesday. While that language is vague, experts say it
would likely mean any reallocation would have to be balanced by new revenues or
benefit cuts.
House Democrats are sounding the alarm.
In a memo circulated to their allies Tuesday, Democratic staffers said
that that would mean "either new revenues or benefit cuts for current or
future beneficiaries." New revenues
are highly unlikely to be approved by the deeply tax-averse Republican-led
Congress, leaving benefit cuts as the obvious alternative.
The Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees estimated
last year that the disability insurance program would run short of money to pay
all benefits some time in late 2016. Without a new reallocation, disability
insurance beneficiaries could face up to 20 percent cuts in their Social
Security payments in late 2016 -- a chit that would be of use to Republicans
pushing for conservative entitlement reforms.
"The rule change would prohibit a simple reallocation! It will require more significant and complex
changes to Social Security," Social Security Works, an advocacy group,
said in a statement Tuesday. "In
other words, the Republican rule will allow Social Security to be held
hostage."
Policy wonks who follow Social Security saw the GOP rule change as a play
for leverage.
"Everybody's been talking about entitlement reform. Mr. Boehner and
President Obama were pretty close to coming up with some kind of grand bargain,
which ultimately fell apart," Tom Hungerford, senior economist at the
liberal Economic Policy Institute, told TPM. "Maybe this could be used as a hostage to
try to get back to something like that."
For their part, congressional Republicans were fairly transparent about
their thinking. Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY),
who has been outspoken on the disability program, co-sponsored the rule
amendment. The disability program has
been a favored target for the GOP; members were warning last month that the program could be
vulnerable to fraud.
"My intention by doing this is to force us to look for a long term
solution for SSDI rather than raiding Social Security to bail out a failing
federal program," Reed said in a statement. "Retired taxpayers who have paid into the
system for years deserve no less.”
Liberal analysts counter, however, that the retirement fund, which pays out
$672.1 billion in benefits per year versus $140.1 billion for the disability
fund, is more than healthy enough to allow for a reallocation, as has
historically been done. CBPP's Kathy
Ruffing wrote that, if a transfer was made before the 2016
deadline, both funds would be solvent until 2033.
From Floyd:
This doesn't make any kind of sense at all, as far as I can see. I want to look more into the claims that are
being made here. I have been following the
status of SS for the past six years along with Dr. Allen W. Smith, who has
spent the past 14 years of his life and about $50,000 of his own money trying
to bring the truth about SS to the public.
He has written 4 books on the subject.
I put my trust in him.
The Republican angle in preventing that move then seems obvious.
"By barring the House from approving a 'clean' reallocation in 2016, the rule will strengthen the hand of lawmakers who seek to attach harsh conditions (such as sharp cuts in eligibility or benefit amounts) to such a measure," Ruffing wrote.
About The
Author
Dylan Scott is a reporter for Talking Points Memo. He previously reported for Governing magazine
in Washington , D.C. ,
and the Las Vegas Ohio
~~~
2015: The
Year We Build Power Together
Published: January 3, 2015
| Authors: Kevin Zeese Margaret Flowers
| Popular Resistance | Op-Ed
The major
task for the social movement: 2015 the Year We Build Power Together.
In 2014
we saw tremendous growth of the movement across
numerous fronts of struggle – worker rights and the wages, racism and policing, climate, the environment and extreme
energy extraction, building a new economy
and so much more. We also saw how uniting and working
in solidarity is essential for success.
“Building
power together” means working together as a movement of movements to build on
the progress of 2014 when people created a larger and bolder
movement. We build together because our
issues are all connected and unified power is when we are strongest.
We have
an immediate challenge in 2015 that threatens
our progress. Obama and Congress are pushing to finalize the
Trans-Pacific Partnership. If we don’t
stop it, our struggles will be set back and social, economic and environmental
justice will be more difficult to achieve. But we can defeat the corporate powers that
exploit our communities if we unite and work together and doing so will
strengthen us greatly.
Our Struggles Are
Connected
The "#Black
Lives Matter" movement, while focused on the urgent issues of police abuse
and institutional racism, is also recognizing that economic injustice in black communities is pervasive.
The wealth divide between the top 1% and
the rest of us is stark enough; but the wealth divide between African Americans
and Caucasian Americans is extreme and growing rather than shrinking.
Whites have much greater wealth, with white median wealth at $142,000 to blacks
at $13,700.
Black unemployment has been double white unemployment for 50 years, throughout that time black unemployment rates have averaged recession levels, 11.5%. Also, during that time whites Americans have earned $20,000 per year more than blacks. Poverty has been rising in the black community for 15 years. Police are needed to keep unfairly treated communities in check.
Black unemployment has been double white unemployment for 50 years, throughout that time black unemployment rates have averaged recession levels, 11.5%. Also, during that time whites Americans have earned $20,000 per year more than blacks. Poverty has been rising in the black community for 15 years. Police are needed to keep unfairly treated communities in check.
When the bottom drops out of
the economy or when wages are lowered, it is communities of color who feel the
impact first and deepest. That is why
issues like global trade rigged for big business interests will most adversely
impact these poorer communities. Global trade seems distant but it has impacts
at the local level.
Communities
will experience lost jobs and lower income, an expanding wealth and income
divide. They will find themselves
competing with people in Vietnam
where the average annual income is under $2,000 per year or Peru
In St.Louis
some are recognizing the need for a new economy where focus is put
on black-owned businesses, cooperative businesses owned by workers and putting
in place a solidarity economy. However, trade pacts will make it more difficult for local
governments to put in place a new economy. Transnational
corporations will be required to be given greater access to local markets. Practices like purchasing local or buying
green will be seen as trade barriers and will be prevented.
The same
is true for the climate justice movement. It will become impossible to ban
extreme energy extraction in our communities because this will be a threat to
corporate profits. The global corporate
trade agreements are pushing for more fracked gas and off-shore oil. Europeans want the US
to be exporting these climate-destroying fuels to lower their energy costs and
diversify from their reliance on Russia
We Can Win the First
Big Challenge of 2015
President
Obama and the Republican leadership in Congress have made it clear – their top
priority is passing fast track trade promotion authority early this year. Fast track is essentially Congress giving up
its constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause “to regulate commerce
with foreign nations.” It gives almost
all of their power to the president. Obama
will be able to sign trade agreements without Congress ever seeing them, and
then Congress has to quickly vote – up or down, with no amendments – on these
agreements that contain thousands of pages of complex legal language. This is the only way that horrendous
agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trans-Atlantic
Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP, known as TAFTA) can become law.
When you
see the first sentence above – Obama and the Republican leadership making this
a priority – do not assume we cannot stop them, we can. There is widespread opposition in both the
Senate and House against fast track. Democrats realize that these trade
agreements will hurt their base.
And,
Republicans, like Democrats, oppose fast track for several reasons. First, they know that it undermines their
constitutional responsibility to regulate trade. Second, these agreements undermine the
sovereignty of the US
The
Congress is right not to trust the President on corporate trade agreements.
Leaks have shown that the Obama administration is extremely pro-corporate when
it comes to their proposals. Documents show the main reason why countries
have been unable to reach agreement is because the
administration’s positions are distant from those of every other country who do not support such broad
corporate power. Further, the leaks also show that enforcement of environmental protections is even weaker in
these agreements than they were in Bush-era trade agreements.
All of the
big Washington
The fight
over fast track is shaping up to be a fight between people power and
transnational corporate power. This is
going to be a huge battle. Opposition in
Congress cracks open a door for the people, but if we do not force it open,
corporate lobbyists will easily close it.
Stopping
fast track will require all of us. There is a path to victory but it will require the people –
from all fronts of struggle – to mobilize, show our unity and stop the
corporations. You can join that fight by taking the solidarity, action pledge
and sharing it.
We should
all engage in this fight because the stakes are high. Every issue people are
working on will be hurt by these agreements. But, on the other side, if the people mobilize
and stop fast track, corporate trade will be dead for the remainder of
President Obama’s term in office.
If the people defeat transnational corporate power
in the first big confrontation of 2015, we will be on our way to making 2015
the year we built our power together. We will be freed
to create the world in which we want to live and one that increases the chances
of a livable future.
Kevin
Zeese and Margaret Flowers are co-directors of Popular
Resistance. This article is
based on their weekly newsletter.
~~~
Obama’s budget proposal
will take aim at the wealthy
By Steven Mufson and Juliet Eilperin
January 17 at 11:16 PM
President
Obama plans to propose raising $320 billion over the next 10 years in new taxes
targeting wealthy individuals and big financial institutions to pay for new
programs designed to help lower- and middle-income families, senior
administration officials said Saturday.
In his State of the Union address Tuesday
night, Obama will propose raising the capital gains and dividend tax rates to
28 percent for high earners; imposing a fee on the liabilities of about 100 big
financial institutions; and greatly broadening the amount of inherited money
subject to taxes.
Obama will also seek to boost private
retirement savings by requiring employers without 401(k) plans to make it
easier for full-time and part-time workers to save in individual retirement
accounts, which could assist as many as 30 million people. The administration would provide small
employers tax credits to cover costs.
Senior administration officials said that the
package would highlight the president’s desire to boost taxes on the nation’s
wealthy households and help lower- and middle-class families. New tax credits
would help those in need of child care and households with two earners, they
said, while other proposals — such as covering community college tuition —
would help students.
The moves would “eliminate the biggest tax
loopholes and use the savings to let the middle class get ahead,” said one of
the senior administration officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity
during a conference call with reporters to describe the plan before the
president’s speech. This person also
said that 99 percent of the impact of the tax increases would fall on the top
1 percent of earners.
The ambitious — and controversial — proposals
demonstrate the White House’s increasing confidence about the trajectory of the
U.S.
But the plan drew immediate fire from
Republican — and could face criticism from some Democrats — who have in the
past increased the amount of money exempt from inheritance taxes they branded
“death taxes.” Most Republicans have
long opposed increases in capital gains rates, and many favor eliminating the
tax altogether.
“This is not a serious proposal,” wrote Brendan
Buck, a spokesman for House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan
(R-Wis.) in an e-mail late Saturday. “We
lift families up and grow the economy with a simpler, flatter tax code, not big
tax increases to pay for more Washington
“Slapping American small businesses, savers,
and investors with more tax hikes only negates the benefits of the tax policies
that have been successful in helping to expand the economy, promote savings,
and create jobs,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah)
said in a statement Saturday night.
“The president needs to stop listening to his
liberal allies who want to raise taxes at all costs and start working with
Congress to fix our broken tax code.”
The administration tried to head off some of
that attack by asserting that elements of the package resembled proposals
endorsed by Republicans. Officials also
said that the capital gains tax rate was 28 percent during President Ronald
Reagan’s terms in office. The Obama administration would also seek to limit the
impact of the tax increases by saying the higher capital gains and dividend
rates would apply only to couples earning more than $500,000 a year.
Officials said that the relatively low capital
gains tax rate with a top rate of 20 percent has enabled the 400
highest-earning taxpayers — with $139 million or more of income — to pay an
average rate of 17 percent when the top income tax rate is 35 percent.
The proposal to impose a 7 basis point fee on
financial institutions with assets of more than $50 billion will also run smack
into opposition from big banks and insurance companies. The administration
compared the fee with a proposal by former House Ways
One of the senior administration officials
Saturday said that the goal of the proposed fee from the White House was to
discourage big financial institutions from excessive borrowing. He said that
despite banking revisions after the 2008-2009 financial crisis, highly
leveraged financial institutions “still pose risks to the broader economy,”
adding that “this fee is designed to make that activity more costly.”
The economic recovery has freed the president
to push for more ambitious domestic policies, many designed to help those in
the poor and middle class who are still lagging behind. In the past week alone, Obama has announced
new proposals on paid sick leave, free community college tuition
and expanded broadband access. And while
he might have trouble pushing those through the GOP-controlled Congress, Obama
could still end up defining key issues for the elections in 2016.
“The battle for the next American agenda is
already on,” said Donald A. Baer, chief executive of Burson-Marsteller and
formerly chief speechwriter for President Bill Clinton. “There’s this effort to define a new growth and share agenda — growth but not
only growth alone, and sharing the growth but not just sharing the wealth.” He said
Obama’s college and broadband access are examples of proposals that could add
to growth and give poor and middle-class people the tools to increase their
share in it.
But Obama has to balance his rhetoric — between
optimism and caution — by talking up the strong recovery while acknowledging
that wage growth remains weak.
“There’s always been a tension between things
are in fact getting better and people are not feeling great,” said Wade
Randlett, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur and
major Democratic donor. “One is economic
fact, and the other is polling, which always catches up over time.”
Now the president is so comfortable with the
idea of talking up the economic recovery that his advisers have branded it — “America
In bragging about performance, Obama
administration officials point to factors including the best streak of job
growth since the 1990s, a recovery in the housing market and healthier balance
sheets for households, companies and the federal government. And they have
contrasted that performance with the anemic economies of Europe and Japan as evidence that the United States has regained its global economic
dominance in what Obama has called a “breakthrough year for America
But wages have been a stubborn reminder of the
recovery’s shortcomings. In November,
average hourly private-sector nominal wages inched up 6 cents, but in December,
they fell 5 cents. After adjusting for
inflation, wages for the entire year crawled up 0.7 percent, a modest amount in
an economic recovery. It is a point that
has been featured prominently in comments by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.),
who has emerged as a leader of the Democratic Party’s liberal wing.
“I’m feeling better about the economy, but I
don’t think we have in place a set of policies that will assure that this
recovery will be either sustained or fully inclusive,” said Lawrence H.
Summers, a former top adviser to Obama, former Treasury secretary and now a
professor at Harvard University. “That’s
why I think more needs to be done.”
The White House typically aims its messages
directly at the middle class, but, partly in response to Warren
“We’re on offense on minimum wage and the
environment,”
Randlett said. “That’s the kind you only do when you have the
leash of good economics.”
Steven Mufson covers the White House. Since joining The Post, he has covered
economics, China
Juliet Eilperin is a White House correspondent for The Washington Post,
covering domestic and foreign policy as well as the culture of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
If the good Lord is willing and the
creek don't rise, I'll talk with you again, hopefully, next week. I am trying to get back to some schedule, but
I have been having a pretty rough time health wise.
God Bless You All
&
God Bless the United States of America
Floyd
resident
Obama on Friday said building the Keystone oil pipeline would “not even have a
nominal benefit” to consumers, pushing back at claims it would lower gas prices
further.