As you can see, the top 1 percent of earners shoulder 38 percent of the personal federal income taxes and make only 20 percent of income. The top 5 percent of income earners pay almost 60 percent of income taxes and make almost 35 percent of all personal income.
Here are some other data points that I find interesting:
Of the top 1 percent of income earners, only 23 percent are millionaires.
A household income above $380,000 puts you in the top 1 percent of income earners.
Of the top 10 percent of income earners, only 2 percent are millionaires.
A household income above $114,000 puts you in the top 10 percent of income earners. That means that a cop making $60K married to a teacher making $60K make it into the top 10 percent.
Please send other suggestions for charts and data. I appreciate your input....
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265367/more-tax-redistribution-veronique-de-rugy
Obama and the Democrats keep talking about paying your fair share. Now I don’t know anyone who would say if you earn a bigger percent of the income than the percentage of taxes you pay that you are paying your fair share. But the rich (top 1%) earn 20 percent of income and pay 38% of the income taxes. What sounds fair to you?
Obama's Likability Gap
If it is true, as Michelle Obama said in February, that her husband isn't smoking anymore, maybe HE'D BETTER START MELLOWING OUT WITH THE CIGS AGAIN BEFORE IT COSTS HIM THE PRESIDENCY.
The Barack Obama we've been seeing lately is a different personality than the one that made a miracle run to the White House in 2008.
Obama.2008 was engaging, patient, open, optimistic and a self-identified conciliator.
OBAMA.2011 HAS BEEN SOMETHING ELSE—TESTY, PETULANT, IMPATIENT, ARROGANT AND INCREASINGLY A DIVIDER.
Never forget: That historic 2008 victory came with 52.9% of the total vote and 52% of independent voters. David Axelrod recently noted "how small the margin for error is."
Presidential personality is well inside the margin of error for 2012, but THE ONE ON DISPLAY RECENTLY HAS NOT BEEN ATTRACTIVE. AND IT'S HAPPENING A LOT….
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704658704576275061542909404.html
I saw him on the news being sincere and talking with potential supporters. He sounded almost churlish as he seemed to be saying “woe is me.”
Democrats Join Threat to Hold Up Debt Ceiling Vote Without Spending Cuts
PRESIDENT OBAMA IS STARTING TO FEEL PRESSURE FROM HIS OWN PARTY TO TIE SPENDING CUTS TO A VOTE TO RAISE THE DEBT LIMIT, even as the administration expresses confidence that Congress will ultimately raise the cap.
The latest moderate Democrat to draw a line in the sand is Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., who told members of a local political group Wednesday THAT HE'LL NEED TO SEE A COMMITMENT TO CUT SPENDING AND OVERHAUL THE TAX CODE IN ORDER TO VOTE TO RAISE THE $14.3 TRILLION CAP. The government is expected to reach that ceiling by mid-May.
"What I've told anyone who will listen to me in Washington, including my leadership, is that I'm not going to vote for that unless there is a real and meaningful commitment to debt reduction," Pryor told the Political Animals Club at its monthly meeting at the governor's mansion.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/21/democratic-sen-pryor-debt-ceiling-hike-spending-tax-code-fixes/
It appears the much maligned TEA Party has not only changed the makeup of the Congress, but has realigned the discussion. Written off by the MSM and many political pundits as “astro-turf” and nuts, they are now calling the tune.
Blame Game
….Instead, the climate push was … a total flop. By late 2010, the main cap-and-trade bill had fizzled out in the Senate; not a single Republican would agree to vote for it. GREENS ENDED UP WINNING ZILCH FROM CONGRESS, NOT EVEN MINOR LEGISLATION TO BOOST RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY OR ENERGY EFFICIENCY. Worse, after the 2010 midterms, the House GOP became overrun with climate deniers, while voters turned apathetic about global warming. All those flashy eco-ads and all that tireless eco-lobbying only got us even further from solving climate change than we were in 2008.
So now greens are in the post-mortem stage, and, not shockingly, it’s a sensitive subject. On Tuesday, Matthew Nisbet, a communications professor at American University, released a hefty 84-page report trying to figure out why climate activism flopped so miserably in the past few years. Nisbet’s report is already causing controversy: Among other things, he argues that, CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELIEF, GREENS WEREN’T BADLY OUTSPENT BY INDUSTRY GROUPS AND THAT MEDIA COVERAGE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE WASN’T REALLY A PROBLEM. And he raises questions about whether greens have been backing the wrong policy measures all along. Is he right? Have environmentalists been fundamentally misguided all this while? Or were they just unlucky?...
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/87140/environmental-green-movement-al-gore-nesbit?page=0,1
This is an interesting article. It shows you the thinking of the green left. Looking over what went wrong, the one thing you don’t see is any question that they were correct in their basic assessment or that those who oppose them might just possibly be right. The AGW theory does have one actual hallmark, the hot spot. So far there is no sign of it, but that doesn’t seem to bother true believers.
Troubles to left and troubles to the right
At first glance, President Obama's partisan speech last week attacking GOP budget proposals WAS PRECISELY WHAT AN INCUMBENT RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION SHOULDN'T DO. It was not a speech designed to appeal to independent voters, a group Mr. Obama has suffered serious erosion with.
But MR. OBAMA'S TONE MAKES MORE SENSE WHEN ONE REALIZES THAT HIS SINKING POLL NUMBERS ALSO INDICATE AN EROSION IN SUPPORT WITH HIS LIBERAL BASE. Only about three-quarters of self-identified liberals approve of his job performance, a number that has drifted downward since Mr. Obama compromised on tax cuts and decided to keep Guantanamo open. His latest budget deal with House Republicans only further confused his base. "I have been very disappointed in the administration to the point where I'M EMBARRASSED THAT I ENDORSED HIM," ONE SENIOR DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKER told the Daily Beast last week….
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704570704576275022988451268.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLESecond
Obama is in a dilemma. The liberal base feels he hasn’t gone far enough and this is disappointment enough to hold down their numbers at the polls in 2012. In the meantime the rest of the country thinks he has gone much too far and isn’t focusing on what’s important. In fact, the main issue in the coming election will most likely be the deficit and this issue belongs to Obama and the Democrats (they can’t credibly blame Bush).
Obama’s mistakes: At least from his point of view
Seven years ago, in April 2004, PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH HELD A FORMAL NEWS CONFERENCE IN WHICH HE WAS ASKED, "WHAT WOULD YOUR BIGGEST MISTAKE BE…and what lessons have you learned from it?" Bush's hemming and hawing answer -- in several minutes of flailing about, HE NEVER MANAGED TO COME UP WITH A SINGLE MISTAKE TO CITE -- WAS WIDELY CRITICIZED IN THE DAYS THAT FOLLOWED.
On Wednesday, President Obama held a town hall at the headquarters of Facebook in Palo Alto, California, during which he was asked, "If you had to do anything differently during your first four years, what would it be?" OBAMA, IT TURNS OUT, IS NO BETTER AT ANALYZING HIS OWN MISSTEPS THAN BUSH.
The president began his response haltingly, pointing out that he has actually been in office just two and a half years, and "I'm sure I'll make more mistakes in the next year and a half." But what mistakes has he already made? "There are all sorts of day-to-day issues where I say to myself, oh, I didn't say that right, or I didn't explain this clearly enough," Obama said, "or maybe if I had sequenced this plan first as opposed to that one, maybe it would have gotten done quicker."
BUT THE PRESIDENT MENTIONED NO ACTUAL MISTAKES.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/04/obama-mistakes-cant-think-any#ixzz1KAt24epY
I actually have a bit of sympathy for Obama on this question. It’s one of those that you can’t win on. It’s like asking someone if they stopped beating their wife. It wasn’t fair to Bush and it isn’t fair to Obama. More revealing would be to ask what he’s most proud of and why.
Stripped of Dignity
A young computer programmer on his way to a pheasant-hunting trip last November offered a cri de coeur about government groping.
“IF YOU TOUCH MY JUNK,” HE TOLD THE T.S.A. AGENT AT THE SAN DIEGO AIRPORT JUST BEFORE HE ABANDONED HIS TRIP, “I’LL HAVE YOU ARRESTED…..”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/20/opinion/20dowd.html?_r=1
The noise about this has died down since the Thanksgiving holidays, but the issue remains. How do we provide security and still conform to the Constitution. I believe we need to be profiling at the airports. Rather than look at everyone as if we are all potential terrorists, we should be profiling behavior as they do in Israel.
The tolerant left: an oxymoron?
One thing you have to say about the Left: THEY NEVER MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LET THE MASK OF HATRED SLIP. IT’S PRACTICALLY PAVLOVIAN; they are so invested in the myth of their own righteousness that their “tolerance” fetish goes right out the window whenever they suffer the slightest affront to their delusional notion of how the world works.
Truly, these folks have the self-esteem of an abused pit bull. From the Iowa Republican:
A University of Iowa professor felt the need to reply to a blast email by the College Republicans on Monday morning. ELLEN LEWIN, A PROFESSOR OF ANTHROPOLOGY AND GENDER, WOMEN’S & SEXUALITY STUDIES in the Department of Gender, Women’s & Sexuality Studies, sent a vulgar response to a College Republican email about the group’s, “Conservative Coming Out Week.”
The College Republican email, which was sent to the entire University of Iowa Community, had been approved by a number of university officials before being sent out.
LEWIN RESPONDED TO EMAIL BY WRITING, “#*@% [F-WORD] YOU, REPUBLICANS” FROM HER OFFICIAL UNIVERSITY EMAIL ACCOUNT.
This is why pushing back against them is so important: Like President Obama, they’re not used to real opposition. THEY’RE UNUSED TO BEING QUESTIONED. THEY CONSIDER ANY CHALLENGE TO THEIR BOGUS “MORAL AUTHORITY” (BASED ON WHAT, ONE MIGHT ASK?) TO BE TANTAMOUNT TO TREASON….
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265303/tolerant-left-michael-walsh
Lefties don’t do well to opposition and seem to go crazy when they are caught in a lie. They are the epitome of bigots (the definition is “One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ”) yet they love to use the word to describe conservatives.
Obama the Hun
Pres. Obama wanted a campaign finance bill that would take the teeth out of the Citizens United ruling before the 2010 election. Congressional Democrats wrote such a bill, and then watched it slip into a coma. But that wasn’t the end of it. According to a leaked White House memo, Obama plans to create new campaign finance rules via fiat by signing an executive order.http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/20/obama-crafts-an-executive-order-to-get-around-the-citizens-united-ruling/#ixzz1K9oJZH29
As the Washington Examiner reported yesterday, the EO “would require all companies that sign contracts with the federal government to report on the personal political activities of their officers and directors.”
And by “political activities,” Obama means: “all contributions or expenditures to or on behalf of federal candidates, parties or party committees made by the bidding entity, its directors or officers, or any affiliates within its control; and any contributions made to third party entities with the intention or reasonable expectation that parties would use those contributions to make independent expenditures or electioneering communications.”
All of that information must be disclosed, according to the leaked executive order, so that the government can “ensure that its contracting decisions are merit-based in order to deliver the best value for the taxpayer.” While that may sound like the order is intended to expose sweetheart deals, it’ll also make it that much easier for federal agencies to deny contracts to firms that donated big bucks to Republican candidates.
This is clearly unconstitutional. It is an unwarranted limitation of freedom of speech and even the Democrats should realize it. They don’t like Citizen United because it gave the power to contribute to corporations. But this order goes beyond corporate donations to directors or officers of a company. Bad move by Obama but nothing surprising.
Wisconsin: The Unions paid the Democrats to flee the state
The Indiana Democratic Party’s first quarter campaign finance report was filed last Friday and CONFIRMS WHAT EVERYONE ALREADY SUSPECTED BUT DEMOCRATS DENIED: THEIR “WE ARE INDIANA” WALKOUT WAS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR NATIONAL UNIONS. Read the report here:
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/32622
During the period of the walkout that began on February 22 and ended on March 28, DEMOCRAT-BACKED UNIONS CONTRIBUTED NEARLY $140,000 TO THE INDIANA DEMOCRATIC PARTY. Their goal: stop the legislative session in its tracks, kill anti-union bills, and pay whatever it took to keep Democrats holed up in an Illinois hotel. THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S LARGEST BENEFACTOR WAS THE COMFORT INN URBANA, WHICH RECEIVED $84,953.70 BY APRIL 6 TO PAY FOR HOTEL ROOMS OCCUPIED BY DEMOCRAT LEGISLATORS. Because the Indiana Democratic Party began the year with a measly $40,000 in the bank, they needed help from the deep pockets of national unions to pay the hefty hotel bill. And that’s exactly what they got
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/32622
Wisconsin has turned into a disaster for the Unions and in return a disaster for the Democrats. It not only has been bad publicity for the Democrats, but it also has weakened the unions a major supporter of the Dems.
Charlie Sheen or Charlie Manson: You make the call
This calls to mind the parlor game back in the 1990s, when folks noted the similarities between Al Gore’s Earth in the Balance and the Unabomber’s manifesto (the late Tony Snow first came up with this comparison), and THE OBVIOUS UPDATE TODAY WOULD BE CHARLIE MANSON AS A WARM-UP ACT FOR CHARLIE SHEEN’S NIGHTCLUB ACT, currently bombing at a city near you. SO HERE’S THE QUIZ: WHICH CHARLIE SAID WHAT? (Answers at the bottom.)
1. “I probably took more drugs than anyone could survive. I was banging seven-gram rocks, because that’s how I roll. I have one speed, I have one gear: Go.”
2. “I live in the underworld. I don’t tell people what to do. They know what to do.”
3. “I’m in the bullring. I run in the bullring with the heart of the world.”
4. “That’s how I roll. And if it’s too gnarly for people, then buh-bye.”
5. “If you’re a part of my family, I will love you violently.”
6. “We are all martyrs. Love is a martyr… I am a martyr. But I am also a victim. And I’m a performer. And a dam. I’m both. I am everything.”
7. “You have the right to kill me, but you do not have the right to judge me.”
8. “I think Obama is an idiot for doing what he’s doing. They’re playing with him.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/265132/charlie-sheen-or-charlie-manson-you-make-call-steven-f-hayward
I didn’t do too well either. Here are the answers (Answers: Manson, 2, 3, 6, and 8. Sheen: 1, 4, 5, and 7)
No comments:
Post a Comment