WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
&
THINGS
YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)
YEAR ONE
YEAR TWO
YEAR THREE
YEAR FOUR
OBOF YEAR FOUR INDEX
|
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-01
|
Jan. 02, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-02
|
Jan. 09, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-03
|
Jan. 15, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-04
|
Jan. 24, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-05
|
JAN 30, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-06
|
Feb. 06, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-06 EXTRA
|
Feb. 09, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-07
|
Feb. 13, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-08
|
Feb. 21, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-09
|
Feb. 27, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-10
|
Mar. 08, 2014
|
OBOF TYMHM PART 14-11
|
Mar. 13, 2014
|
Agenda
1. Thoughts from Floyd
2. The White House 2015 Budget.
3. The Farm Bill. $56 billion for environmental
& conservation needs.
4. Obama nominates SOPA lobbyist for TPP
trade post.
5. Hurray for the GOP Tax Plan.
6. Heard the one about Obama denouncing
a breach of International Law?
7. The real job killer.
8. How the Rich became dependent on
Government Welfare.
Thoughts from Floyd
Hi everyone!
You can tell from the agenda, that I have recovered. There really is more and I plan to post an
EXTRA on Saturday the 15th. It will be
about two subjects. It will be long, but
very interesting particularly if you are concerned about the Fukushima Japan
nuclear melt down, which occurred 3 years ago March 11. There are three reports, on that subject, that
really uncovers what happened during the past three years, starting with a very
candid interview with the man who was
Prime Minister on March 11 and what it may mean for, not only Japan, but
much of the World in that area of the Globe.
The second, concerns the Government Investigation
of another Government Investigation. It
would be laughable if it wasn't so serious.
FROM A FAITHFUL READER.
After last weeks posting, a faithful reader wrote
me to see if he could be of some assistance to me. That in itself cheered me up a great deal and
I answered him with thanks and suggested that if he had some thoughts about our
country and what is taking place, it could help. So, maybe, in the future we will have some
articles from him. I would be very
grateful if that would come about and the same to any others of you who are my
faithful readers. Thanks so much Howell.
~~~
The White House Budget:
A View From
the Left
Richard (RJ) Eskow
Campaign for America's Future / Op-Ed
Published: Tuesday 11 March 2014
Republican House
Speaker John Boehner calls President Obama’s new budget “irresponsible. A New
York Times headline calls it a “populist wish list.”
But it’s neither of those things. The
White House’s fiscal proposal is a cautious foray out of the president’s
reflexive “compromise” mode.
Unfortunately, it also repeats and reinforces the
deficit-reduction rhetoric which has misdirected the political debate for the
last four years. It is limited in its
scope and overly cautious in its sweep.
The nation is still in an economic crisis – a crisis of
jobs, social mobility, wages and growth. We need to start focusing more on the lives
that are being devastated by this crisis, and less on the artificial crisis of
“debt reduction.” President Obama’s
budget does too little, both rhetorically and economically, to address this
crisis. At the same time, it contains
changes that demonstrate populism’s growing power and influence, and it’s good
to see that the President finally recognizes that the GOP will reject anything
he proposes – even their own ideas.
How should the independent left respond? Unaligned
populists and progressives must not lose sight of the need for a more
transformative economic vision. The
Democratic Party, and especially President Obama’s wing of it, must not define
the leftmost boundary of political debate. If we are to see a “dream budget,” we need to
dream bigger than this.
But it’s self-defeating for the left to ignore the
victories that come its way, whether small or large. We
should acknowledge these growing signs of populist influence and
capitalize upon them as we work to effect change that is real and not merely
rhetorical.
“Ideal World”
On issue after issue, this budget is an improvement from
previous years, and on issue, after issue, it falls short.
A case in point: The president’s proposal to expand the Earned
Income Tax Credit for households without children, together with an expansion
of child- and dependent-care tax credits, is clearly a good thing for suffering
lower- and middle-income American. But
there is no proposal for addressing the source of that suffering, for
healing an economy that is increasingly skewed in favor of the wealthy as most
Americans fall further behind. Measures like these won’t save the middle
class – or the American economy – unless we address the top 0.01 percent’s
hijacking of our national income.
The $302 billion earmarked
for infrastructure repair is a good thing. But it’s less than one-tenth of the $3.6 trillion in
repairs that the American Society of Civil Engineers tell
us is needed in the next six years.
Similarly, the
“Buffett rule” is a step in the right direction. But a society in which a billionaire like
Warren Buffett pays the same tax rate as his secretary is a still society with
an un-progressive and unjust system of taxation. We shouldn’t just bring
billionaires’ taxes up to their secretaries’ level. We should double them.
The Buffett rule, and the President’s other proposed
changes in high-earner taxation, could make sense as part of a short-term
compromise (were such a thing possible with today’s Reublican Party). But they
fall far short as an “ideal world” solution.
The
End of Austerity?
It’s disappointing
at best to hear the White House say that these new revenues are earmarked for deficit reduction, especially
given the White House sources who said that this
budget would mark “the end of the era of austerity” for President Obama.
Apparently not. Deficit figures have plunged, but wages remain
stagnant (at best) and long-term unemployment figures are devastating. This
budget is a hypothetical exercise. As
such, it’s also a statement of values and priorities – and our highest priority
should be millions of struggling human beings, not tweaking better percentages
out of already-improving balance sheet numbers.
When it comes to corporate taxation, there’s no question
that the system is broken and needs to be fixed. But to do so in a way that would be “revenue
neutral,” as the president has promised to do, is a tragic mistake at this
point in our economic history – a time when tens of millions of Americans are
struggling, corporate profits are at record highs, and actual corporate tax rates
are at or near record lows.
It’s worth celebrating the decision to drop the “chained
CPI” cut to Social Security benefits (although the White House confirms the
president still supports it in principle and would be willing to include it in
a “grand bargain”).
But, as Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles
What’s
Next?
Republican Rep. Paul
Ryan says that President Obama’s new budget is a “campaign brochure.” He’s right about that – and that isn’t a bad
thing. While the White House may have
not produced a “populist wish list,” that’s what the public clearly
wants. As the Populist Majority website documents,
voters across the political spectrum are seeking “left” solutions. Some
examples:
·
73 percent say they are dissatisfied with the current
state of the economy.
·
72 percent think the state of our economy is “not so
good” or “poor.”
·
65 percent think the recovery is weak.
·
81 percent are concerned that their income isn’t keeping
up with the cost of living. (They’re right.)
·
43 percent say employment or “the economy” is our biggest
problem.
This budget doesn’t do nearly enough for the Americans –
Democrats, Republicans, and independents – who hold these views. But it’s a substantial improvement over
previous years, and that’s an auspicious sign of the populist movement’s
growing influence.
It’s also why victories like the chained CPI shouldn’t be
taken lightly. Sure, the president could
still include it in some future deal. But it just became less likely, thanks to a
lot of hard work on the left. If that
keeps millions of disabled and older Americans from seeing a $50 or $80 or $100
cut in their monthly benefit someday, that’s a victory worth savoring –
and building upon.
ABOUT Richard (RJ) Eskow
Richard (RJ) Eskow is a well-known blogger and writer, a
and a former musician. He has experience in health former Wall Street
executive, an experienced consultant, insurance and economics, occupational
health, benefits, risk management, finance, and information technology.
~~~
Farm Bill: $56 Billion to Go Toward Environmental
and Conservation Aspects
Elizabeth Renter
Natural Society / News Report
Published: Monday 10 March 2014
Of the $956.4
billion doled out in The Agricultural Act of 2014 (better known as the “Farm Bill”),
$56 billion will go to conservation programs over the next decade, according
to Northwest Public Radio. These dollars go
to some important energy and conservation programs, though some
previously-funded ones will be eliminated. Note this is just one aspect of the farm bill,
but read on.
According to Kevin Morse of The Nature Conservancy, one
of the goals of the farm bill is to bring food production and conservation into
harmony. After all, this is an ecology,
you can’t affect one aspect of the environment without affecting others.
“We’ve got to find a way
to harmonize our food production system with our conservation system, so we can
feed people. And so we still have clean water for people to drink, and clean
water to support our fisheries industry and our recreational
industries,” says Morse.
One of the ways the farm bill does this is by setting
aside easement land and habitat programs to protect wildlife and endangered
species. Protecting waterways and
streams is another.
The farm bill encourages this conservation by tying some
of it to the availability of crop insurance. Farmers will need to make strides to conserve
land and protect it from erosion if they want coverage.
Another incentive, farmers can be paid to not plant
on certain sensitive landscapes, like where erosion is possible or where
protected species may find refuge.
“It tries to compensate
them for taking the cost of that land out of production,” explains Stephanie
Page of the Oregon Department of Agriculture.
Finally, the bill
protects virgin soil. Subsidies for
farmers who choose to plant on previously un-planted land will be cut in half
according to CNN.com.
Though programs like this are carried-over from years
passed, they have been cut significantly in the 2014 version—by about $6
billion.
Not only conserving land, the bill also promotes
sustainable energy, by putting $881 million into programs like solar and
wind-generated power. The funding is
mandatory, meaning the farmers will go through the application and planning
processes knowing there’s a light at the other end. In years passed, this
wasn’t the case.
COMMENT
•
I guess there is some good news here. However, as long as we continue to give a free
pass to GMO seeds/plants/contamination...I am not that impressed. Also, it's not as much money as it sounds like. Spread over a decade, it's a pittance. Compare
that to the Pentagon budget to put things in perspective and to see the real
priorities of the US
~~~
Lee Fang
Republic
Report / News Report
Published: Saturday 1 March 2014
This morning,
President Obama nominated Robert Holleyman as deputy U.S. U.S.
Notably, Holleyman
is a former lobbyist who led efforts to pass the Stop Online
Piracy Act legislation, better known as SOPA, when he was leader of the
Business Software Alliance
Critics have
pointed out, the leaked TPP documents relating to TPP negotiations reveal that the U.S. is seeking to
resurrect portions of the SOPA bill through the TPP, namely, holding Internet
Service Providers liable for hosting copyright infringement and extending the
copyright life of certain corporate-owned copyrights. As Washington
Post blogger Henry Farrell noted, the proposed TPP provisions suggest the
deal will advance intellectual property rules that “could not [be] achieved
through an open democratic process.”
During the SOPA debate,
Holleyman was chief executive of the Business Software Alliance
If the Senate approves Holleyman as the next deputy trade
representative, he will have another opportunity to advance SOPA-style policy.
Last week, Republic Report broke several
stories regarding the TPP, including bonuses paid by CitiGroup and
Bank of America
~~~
Hurray for GOP Tax Plan
Froma Harrop
NationofChange
/ Op-Ed
Published: Tuesday 4 March 2014
A Republican leader is doing something right ... and
good. He is Rep. David Camp of Michigan House Ways
Reforming the 70,000-page abomination that is our tax
laws — and making them fairer — has long been a stated goal of both parties. But it is a notoriously unpleasant job because
it involves doing away with tax loopholes that have vocal and deep-pocketed
supporters.
Many Republicans don't want to touch tax reform now for
the same reason they don't want to do immigration reform now. The midterms are in November.
Rather than grapple with tough controversies, GOP
political strategists prefer stirring up the voters with vile tales of
Obamacare.
Repealing the
health reforms is not on the table these days, and public support for them
continues to grow. But that does not
seem to deter determined demagogues.
Shame on them. And
shame on Democrats reportedly gleeful that Republicans may have to fight one
another over a bunch of controversial tax proposals right before an election. Is it too much for our representatives in Washington
"I'm for the concept
of tax reform, but many of us have concerns about releasing a plan, considering
the likelihood of enacting it this year," Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C.,
told Politico.
Right, like tax reform is going to be enacted next year,
when the presidential candidates are scurrying around trying to please their
bases. Remember the 2012 presidential
election, when no Republican would name a single tax loophole he or she would
close?
Responsible conservatives have long endorsed cutting the
top rates and making up for the resulting loss of revenues by doing away with
special tax deals for those with friends in Washington.
That could work.
Camp's plan would shrink the number of individual tax
brackets from seven to two — 10 percent and 25 percent. Some liberals won't cotton to the idea of
lowering the tax bracket for the rich. (The top tax rate is now 39.6 percent.)
But there's a lot in the proposal that courtiers for the
"1 percent" won't like at all. First off, it would add a 10 percent surtax on
individual incomes over $450,000.
It would require big banks to pay new taxes on their
assets. And it would subject
private-equity magnates to the same tax rate on their wage-type income that the
police guarding their estates pay. (Private-equity managers now get away with
paying the lower investment-income tax rate.)
The proposal would cut the maximum deduction for home
mortgages from $1 million to $500,000. Should the rest of us be subsidizing mortgages
on mega-mansions? Most would say no, but
the real estate industry will fight like tigers to keep this boondoggle going
for its richest homebuyers.
Looking at all the numbers, the congressional Joint
Committee on Taxation believes the streamlined tax code would "grow"
the economy by $3.4 trillion over the next decade, creating almost 2 million
new jobs. Importantly, it would increase federal revenues by $700 billion.
One doesn't have to cheer every detail in the plan — or
those missing from it. For example, an
unwarranted special tax deal for oil and gas companies would remain in place.
But here is a serious proposal deserving a respectful
look. The time for tax reform is now and
now. Otherwise, it becomes never or never.
ABOUT Froma Harrop
Froma Harrop’s nationally
syndicated column appears in over 150 newspapers, including The Dallas Morning
News, Houston Chronicle, Seattle Times, Denver Los Angeles New York New
England Associated Press News Executives Association has named her
for five awards.
~~~
Heard the One About Obama
Denouncing a Breach of International Law?
Norman Solomon
Norman Solomon / Op-Ed
Published: Tuesday 4 March 2014
International law is suddenly very popular in Washington Russia Russia
Unfortunately, during the last five years, no world
leader has done more to undermine international law than Barack Obama. He
treats it with rhetorical adulation and behavioral contempt, helping to further
normalize a might-makes-right approach to global affairs that is the antithesis
of international law.
Fifty years ago, another former law professor, Senator
Wayne Morse, condemned such arrogance of power. “I don’t know why we think, just because we’re
mighty, that we have the right to try to substitute might for right,” Morse
said on national TV in 1964. “And that’s the American policy in Southeast Asia
-- just as unsound when we do it as when Russia
Today, Uncle Sam continues to preen as the globe’s big sheriff on the side
of international law even while functioning as the world’s biggest outlaw.
Rather than striving for
an evenhanded assessment of how “international law” has become so much coin of
the hypocrisy realm, mainline U.S.
On Sunday night, the top
of the New York Times home
page reported: “Russian President Vladimir V. Putin has pursued his strategy
with subterfuge, propaganda and brazen military threat, taking aim as much at
the United States and Europe
as Ukraine
Following close
behind, a Times editorial appeared in print Monday morning,
headlined “Russia ’s
Aggression,” condemning “Putin’s cynical and outrageous exploitation of the
Ukrainian crisis to seize control of Crimea .”
The liberal newspaper’s editorial board said that the United States
Such demands are righteous -- but lack integrity and
credibility when the same standards are not applied to President Obama, whose
continuation of the Bush “war on terror” under revamped rhetoric has bypassed
international law as well as “civilized behavior.”
In these circumstances, major U.S.
For instance, last
October the McClatchy news service reported that “the Obama administration
violated international law with top-secret targeted-killing operations that claimed
dozens of civilian lives in Yemen and Pakistan,” according to reports released
by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
Last week, just
before Obama leapt to high dudgeon with condemnation of Putin for his “breach
of international law,” the Los Angeles
Times published an op-ed piece that provided illuminating context
for such presidential righteousness.
“Despite the president's insistence on placing limits on
war, and on the defense budget, his brand of warfare has helped lay the basis
for a permanent state of global warfare via ‘low footprint’ drone campaigns and
special forces operations aimed at an ever-morphing enemy usually identified as
some form of Al Qaeda,” wrote Karen J. Greenberg, director of the Center on
National Security at Fordham University’s law school.
Greenberg went on to indicate the scope of the U.S. government’s ongoing contempt for international
law: “According to Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the Obama
administration has killed 4,700 individuals in numerous countries, including Pakistan , Yemen
and Somalia
But especially in times of crisis, as with the current Ukraine
Norman Solomon
is an American journalist, media critic, antiwar
activist, and losing candidate in 2012 for the United States
~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment