Jordan Understands the Threat

Regarding the ISIS-held Jordanian pilot Lt Muath al-Kaseasbeh: in the aftermath of the Japanese journalists’ butcheries, Jordan’s King Abdullah II ibn al Hussein appears to be taking a hard line. Correctly so.

Elijah Magnier, chief international correspondent for Kuwait’s Al Rai newspaper, told MailOnline: “I have reliable contact in the Jordanian government who says a message has been passed to ISIS.

“It warns that if they kill the pilot they will implement the death sentences for Sajida and other ISIS prisoners as soon as possible.

“There are other prisoners in Jordan that ISIS would like to free.”

A thing that might color the King’s decision: Catherine Herridge of Fox News thinks the second Japanese journalist had already been butchered at the time of the “negotiations” for a swap. The pilot may already be dead, also.

I’m not sure al Hussein’s line would work in the United States; it would start us down a slippery slope to what for us would be a very dark place. But I’m not at all going to criticize the King of Jordan for taking such a step should he find it necessary.

 

h/t Belmont Club

Academic Apostasy

What are our post-high school academic institutions coming to?

Dartmouth Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences Mike Mastanduno said this:

More than I’d like to, I hear this: “It’s really hard to teach on Thursday morning because of what the students do on Wednesday night.” I hear that from faculty. What I never hear, and what I’d love to start hearing from students is, “It’s really hard to do what we want to do on Wednesday night because of what’s expected of us on Thursday morning.”

Dude—party, man. It’s what we’re here for.

Maybe things might change a little, though. Dartmouth President Phil Hanlon is looking to make changes.

He wants to reorganize the dormitory system into “house communities” in which students will tend to reside for their college career instead of moving around frequently. Shockingly, they will

have dedicated space for study and social interaction….

Say, what!? Dude, chill.

But wait—there’s more:

I am asking the faculty to consider a number of ways to increase the rigor of our curriculum—from curbing grade inflation, limiting lay ups, to not cancelling classes around celebration weekends, to earlier start times for classes on Tuesday and Thursday mornings.

Dude, hold up—don’t listen to that Dean….

 

Dude….

Higher Taxes

Because that’s the Democratic Party’s one size fits all solution to all of the nation’s problems. Because they Know Better how to spend a citizen’s money than does that citizen. Here, via Fox News, is an abbreviated list of tax increases President Barack Obama wants.

  • Limit deductions for top earners to 28% rate, even if income is taxed at 39.6%: $603.2 billion
  • Impose a 14% one-time tax on previously untaxed foreign income: $268.1 billion
  • Impose a 19% minimum tax on foreign income: $206 billion
  • Modify estate and gift tax provisions: $214.4 billion
  • Change the taxation of capital income: $207.9 billion
  • Other increases from reform of US international tax system: $135.8 billion
  • Impose a financial fee on large financial companies: $111.8 billion
  • Increase tobacco taxes and index for inflation: $95.1 billion
  • Repeal LIFO (Last In First Out) method of accounting for inventories: $76.1 billion
  • Conform SECA (Self Employed Contributions Act) taxes for professional service businesses: $74.6 billion
  • Other revenue changes and loophole closers: $47.9 billion
  • Eliminate oil and natural gas preferences: $45.5 billion [Note: don’t eliminate “green” energy tax breaks and other subsidies]
  • Implement the Buffett Rule by imposing a new “Fair Share Tax” (making millionaires pay at least 30% tax rate): $35.2 billion
  • Reform the treatment of financial and insurance industry products: $34.4 billion
  • Limit the total accrual of tax-favored retirement benefits: $26.0 billion
  • Other loophole closers: $24.3 billion
  • Reinstate Superfund taxes: $21.2 billion
  • Tax carried interests as ordinary income: $17.7 billion
  • Make unemployment insurance surtax permanent: $15.7 billion
  • Eliminate coal preferences: $4.3 billion [Note: see oil and gas preferences]
  • Reauthorize special assessment from domestic nuclear utilities: $2.3 billion [Note: see oil and gas preferences]
  • Increase and modify Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund financing: $1.6 billion
  • Repeal tax-exempt bond financing of professional sports facilities: $542.0 million

Notice that many of these tax increases are solely to raise taxes and have nothing at all to do with any real reform of our tax code or of anything else: LIFO elimination, for instance, and those financial and insurance “reforms.”

The total tax increase from these? Nearly $2.7 trillion. Think about how much that will hurt our economy by taking that much money out of it. That is, after all, 13.4% of our GDP, of our economy.

NYSE Auctions

In the bad old days of stock auction markets [sic], owners of shares of companies—companies nominally public by their status as a shareholder company—would meet in a crowd, face to face, and offer their shares for sale at a price or offer to buy another’s shares at a price. Bid prices and asking prices would converge, and sales would be executed.

Only the rich could play this game, though; Middle America (and Middle Netherlands where such auctions got an early start some hundreds of years ago, and Middle You-Pick-the-Nation) couldn’t afford to play. To be sure, Middle America (and the others) in those early days had little interest in playing, and the matter was a no harm, no foul situation. Then the broker industry developed, and brokers would act as middle men in these auctions, doing the mixing and matching of buys and sells—for a small remuneration, of course—and the shareholders didn’t need to meet in person. But those remunerations—commissions—kept Middle America priced out of the game.

Then discount brokers developed (think Charles Schwab), and Middle America (and Middle xyz) could play. The broader breadth of participation both increased stock prices themselves, and they gave companies all across the economy access to tons of additional money, from us little people, with which to do R&D, sales, production, etc. After all, little peoples’ nickels and dimes add up—it’s how the earlier Five and Dime stores prospered and how today’s deep discount stores prosper. It also gave us little people additional ways to save and to build our nest eggs.

Today, there are even brokerages that operate entirely online, for a song: typical remunerations for effecting a buy or sell today range from $5 to $10 per some number of thousands of shares traded (when Schwab was starting out, they charged $35 per hundred shares traded).

Now the New York Stock Exchange wants to

introduce a midday auction

ostensibly to

draw trading away from private venues such as dark pools….

Never mind that those dark pools are capitalist, free market responses to excessive interference in today’s financial industry (of which stock markets are only a part) by the Security & Exchange Commission and the myriad mechanisms spawned by Dodd-Frank.

The new NYSE auction would take place in the middle of the day, when trading is at its slowest. One draw of such auctions is they allow big investors to put in large orders without immediately moving the price of a stock[.]

Auctions work differently than continuous trading on markets, which match orders as they come in at an ultrafast pace. In an auction, buyers put in a maximum price and quantity they are seeking to fill and sellers put in a minimum price and size they are willing to sell over a period of time. At the end of the period, orders are filled at a price set by supply and demand for shares.

Just like those original bad, old days.

I’m not sure this isn’t a return to those bad old days when only the rich could play. I’m not sure it is, either; it’s something that needs to be watched very carefully—even by the SEC.

Return of the Excess Profits Tax

Excess profits taxes are taxes on profits that government decides for itself is too much. They were first tried in the US by individual states during our Civil War. They went national under Progressive governments during WWI and WWII and were not repealed until after WWII. Another Democratic administration revived them for the Korean War, and that one disappeared at the end of 1953—over 60 years ago.

Now another Progressive President, Barack Obama, wants to revive it, and without even war as justification: he just wants the money because he Knows Better the use of that money than do those companies that actually earned it. Under his 2016 Budget Proposal, Obama insists that companies

would be subject to a 14% tax on up to $2 trillion of overseas earnings they have already accumulated[.]

Obama claims he wants “more revenue” from our multinationals in order to help pay for infrastructure—you remember, all those shovel ready jobs he joked about not being so shovel ready after all.

Companies accumulate profits—earnings—for a number of reasons: saving for economic disaster or industry downturn, planned very expensive capital expansion, planned very expensive R&D, planned…whatever. They also simply hold onto funds during economic or regulatory climates that make it infeasible to spend the money.

The reasons, though, are none of the government’s business. Government has no place dictating to a private company what its purpose is in accumulating and retaining earnings. This impropriety plainly includes saying to a business, “You have too much cash on hand. Give it up.”

Here’s an alternative, albeit one inconceivable to Democrats: get more revenue from our multinationals, and get more revenue from our domestic companies and from us citizens, by cutting tax rates, reducing regulation, generally getting government out of our way. The resulting growing economic activity will generate lots more total revenue for government. Especially when tax reform makes it useful for companies to bring home the trillions of dollars they’re holding overseas.

They’re still holding all those trillions, after all, because there are no viable projects there, either, on which to spend the money.