The week was dominated by two stories, the Republican tax cut efforts; and the variations on the sexual harassment theme by men in positions of power.
Letâs talk about sexual predation by men. We shouldnât be pushing all predators to the front of the same firing squad. Without diminishing or excusing what any of these scumbag politicians have done (Al Franken, Bill Clinton) pedophiles are in a detestable class all by themselves. We are now in the middle of a teachable moment, where publicizing how badly men have treated women in our society might bring about real behavioral change. This is solely due to those many, if not most, women who are saying that they arenât going to take it anymore. This tsunami of accusations and personal testimony will bring down some of the worst of the predators. In this case, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
The GOP wrote the bill. Now, weâll see who votes for it:
The elephant will always protect his best constituents:
Using the Pot/Kettle meme brings risk:
Mitch has selective beliefs when women tell their truth:
The sexual predator issue focuses the thinking of Republicans:
Trump chose Jeff Sessions for Attorney General in part because Alabama would be a lock to elect another Republican. Weâll see in 3 weeks if that works out as planned.
Bonus Republican hypocrisy: Do these people ever hear themselves?
Sunrise at Mesa Arch, Canyonlands National Park, Utah
Itâs Saturday, and the dominant issue should be the Republicansâ efforts to enact a tax cut, now that the House has passed its version of the legislation. The plan distills Republican economic philosophy perfectly: Take lots of money and give it to the people at the top, while pretending that doing so will help everyone else.
This plan is for the middle-class families in this country who deserve a break. It is for the families who are out there living paycheck to paycheck, who just keep getting squeezed… The Tax Cut and Jobs Act will deliver real relief for people in the middle, people who are also striving to get there.
Amazingly, the bill…would increase taxes, on net, for families that have at least one child and make less than $100,000. That conclusion comes from a rigorous independent analysis of the bill, released yesterday afternoon by the Tax Policy Center.
The elevator version of the Republican plan is to add $1.5 trillion to the deficit in order to give permanent tax cuts to corporations. Since that sounds terrible, the GOP proposes holding down the billâs total cost by raising taxes on middle-class and poor families. More from Leonhardt:
A big reason is that personal exemptions â the $4,000 in income, per person, that families can write off â would disappear. The bill would increase standard deductions that all taxpayers can take, but the increase isnât large enough for many families to make up for the disappearance of per-person exemptions…
OTOH, households making at least $5 million would receive an ANNUAL tax cut of almost $300,000 once the bill is fully phased in.
The cynicism is spectacular: Congressional leaders want to raise taxes on most of the middle and lower classes, while claiming that the bill does just the opposite. Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, said:
At the end of the day, nobody in the middle class is going to get a tax increase.
Worse, if the GOP tax bill becomes law, and we look a few moves ahead, we know that Republicans will once again pose as deficit hawks and look to gut Medicare and Medicaid.
On our backs. Happy Thanksgiving!
Our Republican friends plan to fund a permanent tax cut for their beloved constituents, American corporations. For decades Americans have been against increased taxes. We bought the idea that cutting taxes would give people an incentive to work harder and thus make the American economy flourish. The GOP tells us this as they try to roll back corporate taxes, as they plan to eliminate the estate tax, and as they continually work to prevent the government from taking action against offshore tax havens.
We endure potholes, we live in fear of collapsing highway bridges because our leaders want their special constituents to have more. Our kids sit in underfunded schools so that a handful of wealthy individuals can sit in gated communities or on their own private beaches.
Think of what we might do with the sums we will lose to this GOP âtax reformâ over our lifetimes. Think about the crumbling infrastructure that could be fixed. Think of all the young people saddled with student-loan debt: We could make that unnecessary, rather than give more to corporations by denying students the deductibility of the interest on their loans. Think of the drug-addicted people all over America: With these tax cuts, we will never help them.
Until the words “discredited trickle down tax plan” come out of the mouth of every single Democratic politician, we wonât have a great chance of killing the Republicanâs tax plan.
Enough! Itâs Saturday, and time to let the mind wander. So grab a Vente cup of Unionâs Hand-Roasted Coffee, Brewerâs El Topacio Microlot, El Salvador (just ÂŁ8 for 200g). Now sit near a big window and watch the last days of fall, while listening to Beethovenâs âViolin Concerto in D major Op, 61â here performed in 1959 by violinist David Oistrakh with the French National Radio Orchestra, directed by Andre Cluytens.
Listen to the sound of a Stradivarius played by one of the giants on 20th Century violin:
Floating Village in Lan Ha Bay, North Vietnam – photo by Son Tong
Nobody knows what the final shape of the GOP tax plan will be, but we can see the financial implications of the current bill. Jill Schlesinger has a handy quick and dirty look at who benefits from the proposed cuts posted on her web site. Of the expected $1.5 trillion in tax cuts, only 15.2% will be for individuals. Schlesingerâs conclusion is that Republicans mainly want to help corporations:
$1 trillion will accrue to Corporations and Pass-through businesses
$228 billion accrues to Individuals
$172 billion accrues to Estates
Of the GOPâs $1.5 trillion government handout, corporations get two-thirds. Pass-through businesses are S-Corporations, LLCs, partnerships and sole proprietors. About 95% of businesses fall into this category. Many of these are professional service organizations (lawyers, doctors, accountants, consultants and architects) who otherwise are wealthy individuals, and those infamous hedge funds.
Think about that: 5000 individuals will split up $172 billion in tax relief due to Trumpâs largesse!! In 2000, 52,000 estates had to pay the tax. Now it is down to 5,000.
Households with annual incomes over $1 million would see their after-tax incomes increase by 3.2%, 16 times the percentage increase for any income group in the bottom half of the income distribution. . . . (The disparity in average tax cuts measured in dollars would be even larger.)
About 45% of cost of the billâs tax cuts would go to households with incomes above $500,000 (fewer than 1% of filers). About 38% of the billâs cost would go to tax cuts for households with incomes over $1 million (about 3 out of every 1,000 filers).
What should the response of Democrats be? Democrats are correct in saying that the Republican plan is tilted too much toward the ultra-wealthy. They propose tilting it more toward the middle class.
Bruce Bartlett was a domestic policy adviser to Ronald Reagan and a Treasury official under George H. W. Bush. Bartlett says that Dems:
Should counter with a $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan and no tax cuts for anyone.
Bartlett points out that since the Clinton administration, Dems have tried to show fiscal responsibility, supporting tax increases and spending cuts. Meanwhile, Republicans abandoned any pretense of concern for the deficit, as their new budget shows.
Bartlett argues that a big infrastructure program will provide a payback for decades to come, just as Eisenhowerâs highway program did. Importantly, he points out that building infrastructure will create vastly more jobs than any kind of tax cut, especially given the Republican proposal that largely benefits the wealthy, while providing no incentives for job creation or investment.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has routinely provided estimates to Congress showing that direct spending by government on infrastructure has a bigger multiplier effect on economic growth than any tax cut. Their February 2015 report showed that purchases of goods and services by the federal government raises GDP by as much as $2.50 for every $1 spent.
The report also says that a temporary tax cut for the wealthy, such as Republicans are now proposing, would create at most 60 cents of GDP for every $1 of foregone revenue. Corporate tax cuts are the worst, creating 40 cents of GDP for every $1 of revenue loss.
Our government is starved for revenue. This is not the time to even consider a tax cut for the wealthiest.
A true conservative tax policy would raise taxes to balance the budget, reduce deficits and debt, while investing in basic infrastructure, education, job training, research, technology and other drivers of growth.
That is the kind of conservatism we should get behind.
Fall at the Statehouse in Augusta, Maine â photo by Robert F. Bukaty
Welcome to what we may start to call Robert Mueller Monday. Ray Dalio, the founder of the Bridgewater Associates, the worldâs largest hedge fund has serious concerns about the uneven recovery of the US economy.
In a LinkedIn post, Dalio said that if politicians and business people look only at the economyâs average statistics about how Americans are doing, they could easily make âdangerous miscalculationsâ because the averages mask deep differences in how people in various income segments are doing.
Dalio divides the economy into two sections: the top 40%, and the bottom 60%. He then shows how the economy for the bottom 60% of the population, (thatâs three in five Americans for you English majors), has been much less successful than for those in the top bracket.
For example, Dalio notes that since 1980, real incomes have been flat or down for the average household in the bottom 60%. Those in the top 40% now have 10 times as much wealth as households in the bottom 60%, up from six times as much in 1980.
Dalio says that only about one-third of people in the bottom 60% (20% overall) save any of their income. Only a similar number have any retirement savings. These three in five Americans are experiencing increasing rates of premature death. They spend about four times less on education than those in the top 40%. Those in the 60% without a college education have lower income levels, and higher divorce rates.
Dalio believes these problems will intensify in the next five to ten years. The inequality problem is caused by our politics and our fiscal policies, not by the Fedâs monetary policies.
OTOH, Dalioâs concerns arenât a surprise to anyone who follows the political economy. In fact, it isnât a surprise to anyone who has walked through any mid-sized American city, or driven through any small town in the heartland.
The problem is not low wage growth.
The problem is not long-term unemployment, as degrading and humiliating as that is.
The problem is that the US economy has been restructured over the past 30 years as an underemployment, low-wage economy in which most new jobs created are temporary jobs (whether you are a laborer, a technician, a service worker or a professional) with no job security, low wages and few benefits.
The real question is can we solve the problem? Many old lefties argue for a Universal Basic Income, (UBI), but Wrongo thinks thatâs, er, wrong. If the UBI were high enough to provide even a subsistence living for every American, it would be massively inflationary. And it would merely allow businesses to pay lower wages, which is why some wealthy business people, like Peter Thiel, support a UBI.
Wrongo thinks we should support guaranteed work, not guaranteed income. Most people need and want to work in order to keep their place in our society. Getting a check just isnât sufficient. If people matter at all, and if 95% of them lack the means to live without working, society must strive to employ all of those who have been deemed redundant by the private sector.
And there is plenty to do around America. Start with the 5,000+ bridges and dams that need replacing, or the 104 nuclear power plants that are falling apart.
We need real tax reform that can’t be loopholed. Corporations must pay more, not less. Stop the move to give corporations incentives to repatriate offshore earnings by lowering their effective tax rates. That only compromises our future tax stream. Corporations have to pay more in taxes, and agree to increase the wages of average workers.
Economically, we are in a pretty scary place. People across party lines and socio-economic levels are frightened for their financial security. We need a jobs guarantee, not a UBI.
So, wake up America! Letting corporations and the rich dictate our investment in human capital or infrastructure has us on the road to eclipse as a country. To help you wake up, here is Todd Snider performing “Conservative Christian, Right Wing, Republican, Straight, White American Male“, live at Farm Aid 2014 in Raleigh, North Carolina in September, 2014:
Why arenât the Dixie Chicks singing harmony on this?
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
The occupational projections suggest faster growth in urban areas than in suburbs, and slowest in rural areas. The two sectors projected to have no or negative growth â production and agriculture â are more concentrated in small towns and rural areas. Many technical, scientific, legal, financial, and healthcare jobs are clustered in big, dense cities.
The fastest growing occupations are projected to be in clean energy: solar photo-voltaic installers and wind turbine service technician jobs are expected to double. Four of the 10 fastest growing occupations pay at least $100,000 a year, according to the BLS: physician assistants, nurse practitioners, software developers, and mathematicians.
Indeed combined the BLS projections with 2016 US Census Bureauâs American Community Survey data to show where the faster-growing occupations will be located. That suggests faster growth will be in coastal urban areas, and slowest growth will be in rural areas:
Indeed then overlaid voting patterns on the BLS job growth projections. It is clear that Blue America has a more favorable forecast for future jobs growth than Red America:
So what does this chart tell us? In places that voted for Trump by a 20-point margin, 16% of workers are in occupations projected to shrink, versus 13.2% of workers in places that voted for Hillary Clinton by a similar 20-point margin.
The next decadeâs jobs growth could also increase inequality. The fastest growing jobs include several with the highest average wages, including healthcare, computer, and mathematics occupations. Occupations with the lowest average wages are also projected to grow fast, such as home health aides and personal care aides. Middle-wage job growth is projected to lag, at about half the rate of the highest- and lowest-wage jobs.
It seems that a big slice of Trumpâs supporters will be losers when it comes to jobs and income growth over the next 10 years. Will they stick with the Republican Party when the job situation gets even worse for them? Of course!
Now, here comes the weekend!
This week we watched Jeff (Iâm not a) Flake give a valedictory speech that excoriated the leader of his party. Catalonia succeeded from Spain, and the GOP pushed their tax cut agenda forward. The Trump administration tried to deny a young illegal immigrant woman an abortion, and Hillary Clinton was implicated in paying for the Steele Dossier.
Plenty of hits to the system for a single week, so itâs time to take a break from the reality known as Trumpmerica.
Time to brew a very large mug of Celestial Seasons Bengal Spice tea, put your feet up, and put on the Bluetooth headphones. Now listen to Aaron Coplandâs âQuiet Cityâ from the 1989 album âWorks by Husa, Copland, Vaughan Williams, and Hindemithâ, performed by Wynton Marsalis with Phillip Koch on English Horn along with the Eastern Wind Ensemble.
Copland said the piece was an attempt to mirror the troubled main character of an Irwin Shaw play, who had abandoned his religion and his poetry in order to pursue material success. He Anglicized his name, married a rich socialite, and became president of a department store. But he continually returns to his guilty conscience whenever he hears the haunting sound of his brother’s trumpet.
See if Marsalis can take you inside your conscience:
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
Autumn at Lake McDonald, Glacier National Park – photo by Jack Bell
Wrongo wonders where we went wrong. Was it the 2016 election, or were things heading towards the cliff for many years? Is there a way back from our national free-fall?
Another week when Trump dominates the news cycle by making it all about him. The federal response to the Puerto Rican disaster? A 10. Which president calls the next of kin of GIs killed in the line of duty? Trump, not the black guy. Who was for the bi-partisan insurance fix for Obamacare before he was against it? His Orangeness.
There was a notable softness in commentary on what Trump and the GOP are doing that is making America win. And the news from overseas is worse. Fridayâs NYT speaks about how our Syrian and Kurdish proxies have taken Raqqa, the headquarters of the ISIS Caliphate. It says that now that our guys have won, we have no idea who/how to fill the political vacuum we just created: (emphasis by the Wrongologist)
Trump administration officials acknowledge privately that the military campaign in Syria has by far outstripped the diplomatic campaign, to the point now where there is no real plan for what to do in a post-Islamic State Syria.
We attacked ISIS in Syria because that was popular with American voters, and doing what the neo-cons really wanted, attacking Assad in Syria, wasnât something the American public would accept. Now, ISIS is fading into the woodwork, and we will soon be face-to-face with the Syrians, Russians and Iranians. Certainly, Syria expects it will control Raqqa. Whatâs the Administrationâs plan?
This is depressingly similar to what Wrongo has written this week about Iraq and Iran. Lots of energy, but no plan. Certainly, nothing that can be legitimately called âstrategyâ.
Itâs Saturday, time to downshift, and find a calm place. Today, Wrongo suggests a Vente cup of Sakona Coffee Roasterâs Jaizlibel Blend, (âŹ28.00/Kilo). Note that Sakona roasts to order, so youâll need to plan ahead. Then, find your Bluetooth over the ear headphones, get comfortable, and watch the leaves fall on this October day.
Now, listen to Martha Argerich. The NYT reports that Martha Argerich, the 76-year old Argentinian pianist, and one of the worldâs greats, played in NYC on Friday night at Carnegie Hall. Sheâs one of the last remaining old masters. Once she’s gone, much of what we hear will sound like what everyone else is playing. She rarely visits the US, but there is a large YouTube library of her work. Here is Argerich playing Chopinâs Scherzo No. 2 in B-flat minor, Op. 31 written in 1837. The video is from 1966, when Argerich was 24:
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
Weinstein. Why do Conservatives (and quite a few Democrats think) the Dâs have a âHarvey Problem“?
Is it a surprise that Democrats took money from someone who turned out to be despicable? Yes. But isnât the real question what the Democrats did with the money?
Conservatives want you to believe that Democratic political contributions are like holy water, where one unsanctified drop spoils the whole font. There is no excusing Weinstein, and if the D’s were doing helpful things for this scumbag, thatâs inexcusable. But there is nothing inherently wrong with taking/using Weinsteinâs money before they found out how deplorable he is:
Trump thinks the press writes disgusting things. His friends agree:
The GOP believes in a few things, more or less:
Iran, DACA, ACA, EPA. Trumpâs plans are working just perfectly:
When the dog lies about his previous sheep-herding experience
A new set of tax policies have been proposed by the White House and the GOP. They involve both tax cuts, and some tax reforms. Here are the bullet points of the GOPâs sales pitch:
The tax cut wonât help the rich, and wonât help Donald Trump personally
The tax cut will generate enough growth to pay for itself
Most of the benefits of the tax cut will go to the middle class
Here are the NYTâs calculations on Trump not gaining anything:
Trump could save more than $1 billion under his new tax plan
And here is the Tax Policy Centerâs take on the benefits to the wealthy:
The top 1 percent of households (those with incomes above $730,000) would get about 53% of the frameworkâs net tax cuts, or roughly $130,000 a year on average.
The top 0.1 percent of households (those with incomes above $3.4 million) would get roughly 30% of the frameworkâs net tax cuts, or about $720,000 a year, on average.
Turning to the statement that âtax cuts will pay for themselvesâ, Trump claimed in a talk with House Ways and Means Committee a few days ago, that his tax plan will produce more than 6% growth.
An economist once said that you donât need to look at the details of a Republican tax plan. The higher the Republican growth forecast, the worse the actual deficit in their plan. Thatâs because they need greater revenue growth to cover the deficit hole they are creating. Given Trumpâs 6% growth forecast, you just know the tax plan is going to be a budget buster.
We have learned from past GOP tax cuts that they wonât reduce deficits or balance budgets. Want proof?
The George W. Bush tax cuts made the deficit larger, while doing little or nothing to stimulate the economy
The income-tax cuts in Kansas caused the state’s deficit to accelerate significantly, while economic growth lagged the contiguous states
Regarding the point that most of the cuts will go to the middle class, it wonât happen. Since 83% of the plan’s cuts are going to the top brackets, thereâs not much left for the middle class.
What they donât talk about is their plan to get rid of personal exemptions, which is a key deduction for middle class families, especially those who itemize deductions. To determine whether middle-class families get a cut or an increase under the new plan, you need to calculate if the higher standard deduction, plus the proposed expansion in the child tax credit, (no details about that yet), is greater than the loss of personal exemptions.
Josh Barro at Business Insider crunched the numbers, and his conclusion is: (emphasis by the Wrongologist)
While there are still a lot of details to be filled in, the information we have available suggests the new Republican tax proposal would raise income taxes on many families who make just a bit more than the national average.
They are promising to eliminate the âalternative minimum taxâ, (AMT) a tax provision designed to ensure that wealthy taxpayers (who can have accountants find deductions) would pay some modicum of taxes rather than get off scott-free. In fact, the GOP has it backwards: People who owe the AMT should be paying more tax than they would pay with the AMT. It serves its intended purpose. Elimination of the AMT is another tax break for the wealthy:Â For example, Trump has had to pay the AMT, as have most real estate developers.
Now, ask yourself why should personal tax rates be less progressive in 2017 than they were in 1963? Shouldnât progress towards a more equal society mean our rates would be MORE progressive, not less? Itâs not as if we have less inequality, we have more.
The reason we should want to tax the rich (till it hurts) is to reduce their power and overwhelming choke hold on policy.
When will the GOP engage in an honest discussion about their tax plan?
Not soon. Maybe not ever.
Hereâs First Aid Kit doing a cover of Simon & Garfunkelâs âAmericaâ, from 2014:
We all need to look for America, its getting very hard to find.
Those who read the Wrongologist in email can view the video here.
Using the Pot/Kettle meme brings risk:
