Tag Archives: morality

Taxes and Widows and Orphans

Posted on by
Reply

Included in President Barack Obama’s demand to raise tax rates on those Americans he hates so much is a raise in tax rates on dividends, unless the Republicans pay Obama’s price.  Obama’s ransom, after all, is simple: raise the rates on the Evil Rich, or the rates will go up for everyone.  Nice economy you got there….

Here’s what happens to dividends if Obama gets either one of his choices.

Presently, qualified dividends (which are most of the dividends about which you and I care) are taxed at a 15% rate for stockholders who are in a 25% or higher income tax bracket, and at a 5% rate for those investors in a lower bracket.  If Obama gets his way on tax rates generally, those rates will rise to ordinary income rates: those in the 39.6% bracket, for instance, will pay 39.6% on their dividend income (not 15%), those in the 15% bracket (which will reappear if Obama holds out for his ransom and the Republicans refuse to fold) will pay 15% on their dividends (not 5%).  Notice that: if Obama gets his way, the poor will get the highest tax bump.

Think the poor don’t invest?  Where are the savings of the retired, and of the stereotypical widows and orphans?  In safe, stable, income-producing vehicles—mutual funds that invest heavily in dividend-paying  stocks funds (or interest-paying bond funds).  These folks—on fixed incomes—are going to see a significant bump in their tax bill because a significant share of their income is dividend income.

Two top dividend mutual funds currently have a yield, courtesy of their dividend-paying stock holdings, of between 2% and 3%.  That’s not a lot of margin on which a retiree—or a widow or an orphan—can afford to see a tripling of his tax bite.

Of course, these folks could switch entirely to funds that pay interest rather than dividends, but with the Fed artificially suppressing interest rates, where’s the value in that?

Republicans need to find some courage.  The House needs to pass, this session, a budget (again) that includes lower rates across the board and spending cuts in the amount necessary to bring Federal spending to less than Federal revenues, with the difference mandated to paying down the debt.  Let the Democrats, led by our President, defend their refusal to pass this bill in the Senate and sign it into law; let them explain why they prefer the catastrophe of the Obama tax increases and sequestration.

And Republicans need to get serious about taking their message to all Americans.

The Obama Ransom

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal described the broad reach of President Barack Obama’s tax increases, which are set to occur in six weeks unless Republicans pay the ransom on the 98% of Americans which he’s demanding.  Here’s the effect on lower income Americans.

A married couple making between $20,000 and $30,000 a year would go from receiving, on average, a $15 tax credit to owing $1,408, according to research by the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute.

The situation of an individual from the higher end of that range makes manifest that impact.

Traci Petty, 42, [is] a single mother…studying for a master’s in business administration in Danville, VA, while earning about $30,000 a year working part-time at a nonprofit.

Ms Petty would be hit by the shrinking of the child credit to $500 from $1,000, the higher payroll taxes and the elimination of the Bush-era 10% tax bracket.  Altogether, she would face at least a $1,500 cut in the $4,000 or so tax refund she gets each year.  She counts on the refund to pay bills.

But then, we’ve seen no evidence Obama even cares about these folks; his rhetoric focuses on “helping” the middle class and abusing those Americans at the upper end of the economic scale whom he hates so much.

A “Cease Fire”

Posted on by
Reply

Here are some thoughts on the cease fire just…negotiated…between Israel and Hamas.  These thoughts come against the backdrop of two concerns.  For one, how is it possible to negotiate with terrorists?  Their behavior makes them fundamentally untrustworthy.  This is illustrated by Hamas’ own behavior in the past: every cease fire to which they’ve pretended to agree has been broken by their own terrorism, most often by a simple renewal of rocket attacks against Israeli civilians and their children.  For another, I listened to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech announcing to his country the current cease fire.  His diction and tone of voice were that of a defeated man.  He knows Israel lost this latest overt war.

Now let’s read between the lines of Jennifer Griffin’s article for Fox News.

…Hamas spokesmen had leaked to the press that the cease-fire would begin at 9 pm local time on Tuesday, but that was before [Secretary of State Hillary] Clinton had landed in Jerusalem.  It would take another 24 hours for the deal to be finalized.

Not even Hamas’ MFWIC, Ismail Haniyah, would have been foolish enough to make such a claim in the absence of an agreement.  Doing so, far from pressuring Israel, would have been seen for the blatant desperation that an empty claim would have been.  There was a cease fire agreement in place; its announcement and implementation were delayed for 24 hours—and for one more Hamas act of terrorism, a bus bombing in Tel Aviv—so that our own Secretary of State could arrive in country [emphasis added]:

In the official statement released by the White House Wednesday

The President commended the Prime Minister [of Israel] for agreeing to the Egyptian cease-fire proposal—which the President recommended the Prime Minister do.

Moreover, the Israelis were prevented from responding to the bus bombing, even to the extent of delaying for another day or two implementation of the cease fire.  Instead, the US pushed Israel into agreeing just hours after that atrocity.  This was a cessation of fighting for which Israel was not ready and which Israel was pressured to accept, hence Netanyahu’s air of defeat.

What came out of this foisted cease fire?

There was no talk of disarming Hamas or preventing the re-arming of Hamas….

And

The deal elevates Iranian proxy groups such as Islamic Jihad and Popular Resistance Committees who can serve as spoilers and decide to fire more rockets into Israel.

And

…this truce really elevates Hamas as a power player as opposed to an underground terror movement.

On a practical level, Hamas is left with some 8,000 rockets and associated launch facilities intact, its Command and Control facilities and personnel damaged but functional, and its cottage industry of in-Gaza rocket and launcher manufactury still functional.  The Israeli goal of crippling Hamas’ war fighting capacity was cut off midgame.

On the other hand,

“The goal must be a durable outcome that promotes regional stability and advances the security and legitimate aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians alike,” Clinton said in Cairo.  “We appreciate President Morsi’s personal leadership and Egypt’s efforts thus far.

Egypt’s president, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, now will be held accountable if Hamas or anyone else fires rockets from Gaza into Israel.  On the line is $1.5 billion dollars in U.S. aid to Egypt.

But what is the value of such an accountability and of this particular example of moral equivalence?  Islamic governments have a long and venerable history of putting their own interests above those of their people: we’ll cut off Egypt’s aid?  Pssh.  On the other hand, this “accountability” of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi Isa El-Ayyat can work to his favor.  With the Muslim Brotherhood universally and lethally anti-Israel (if there’s one thing these guys agree with Persian mullahs about, it’s that Israel must be destroyed), the rearming and refitting of Hamas through the Sinai and the Egyptian border with Gaza will simply make Morsi look good in the shower where it counts, the anti-Israel community.

On top of this, as Spiegel Online International reports, the Israelis were forced to elevate Morsi themselves in the eyes of anti-Israeli terrorists for helping the Israelis with Hamas:

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman saw it necessary to thank Morsi for his role in bringing about a truce.

And the US now accepts Israel and terrorists on the same plane.

So again, what has come out of this cease fire?  Increased danger to Israel, with an increasingly uncertain ally standing near it.

Fairness

Posted on by
Reply

Columbia College Chicago Professor of Philosophy Stephen T Asma is quoted in a recent Wall Street Journal:

Our contemporary hunger for equality can border on the comical.  When my six-year-old son came home from first grade with a fancy winner’s ribbon, I was filled with pride to discover that he had won a footrace.  … “No, it wasn’t just me,” he explained.  “We all won the race!” …. Everyone who ran the race was told that they had won, and they were all given the same ribbon.

More troubling than the institutional enforcement of this strange fairness is the fact that such protective “lessons” ill-equip kids for the realities of later life. … The focus on equality of outcome may produce a generation that is burdened with an indignant sense of entitlement.

Oh, wait….

News Flash

Posted on by
Reply

President Barack Obama has some words of cautious wisdom for the Israelis during Hamas’ renewed terrorist rocket assault from Gaza.

Israel has every right to expect that it does not have missiles fired into its territory.

If that can be accomplished without a ramping up of military activity in Gaza, that’s preferable.  It’s not just preferable for the people of Gaza.  It’s also preferable for Israelis, because if Israeli troops are in Gaza, they’re much more at risk of incurring fatalities or being wounded.

Here’s a news flash, Ace, in case you’ve missed the data flowing out of that conflict: the Israelis already are at serious risk of incurring “fatalities or being wounded” from those rockets being fired at civilian targets where children live.  That’s the point of Hamas’ fire.  And the purpose of any military establishment: to protect those civilians and their children, even if those military forces risk “incurring fatalities or being wounded.”

Try to keep up.