John Stossel "Progressives want to raise taxes on individuals who make more than $200,000 a year because they say it's wrong for the rich to be "given" more money. Sunday's New York Times carries a cartoon showing Uncle Sam handing money to a fat cat. They just don't get it.
"As I've said before, a tax cut is not a handout. It simply means government steals less. What progressives want to do is take money from some -- by force -- and spend it on others. It sounds less noble when plainly stated."
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Part-Time, Partisan President to America: ‘Buck up!’
 |
| Mike Ramirez, Investors.com Pajamas Media " President Obama is quick to tell others how to think. The latest: In the face of polls showing Democrats vulnerable everywhere, the president is telling his liberal base to “buck up,” adding that their lack of enthusiasm for him and his record is “inexcusable.” " |
Policies Based on Illusion
Bruce S. Thornton "Yet for all of the efforts at a new beginning he made during his speech last year in Cairo, for all the “extended hands” and solicitous letters to Iranian leaders touting their religion and civilization, Obama has reaped little but contempt. Iran continues its march toward nuclear weapons. As it has in the past, the failure of diplomatic imagination has blinded us to our enemy’s motives, leading us, as Conquest warned, to “policies based on illusions” — and putting our national security at risk."
THE COST OF REGULATION
Neal Boortz An astounding 35% of national income is spent on federal tax and compliance costs. And like I said before, small businesses are faring marginally worse. A report from the Office of Advocacy of the US Small Business Administration found that small businesses pay a disproportionately large share of regulatory costs. The initial overall cost in 2008 was $8,086 per employee. But ... "these costs were not borne equally by businesses of all sizes. The regulatory cost per employee for businesses with fewer than 20 employees was $10,585, compared with $7,454 for medium sized firms (employing between 20 and 499 employees), and $7,755 for large firms."
The Regulation Tax Keeps Growing The annual cost of federal regulations in the United States increased to more than $1.75 trillion in 2008, a 3% real increase over five years, to about 14% of U.S. national income. This cost is in addition to the federal tax burden of 21%, for a combined cost of 35% of national income. One out of every three dollars earned in the U.S. goes to pay for or comply with federal laws and regulations, and new policies enacted in 2010 for health care and financial services will increase this burden.
Attempts have been made to estimate the costs of these laws and regulations, but the calculations are incomplete. In March, for example, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost and subsequent effect of health-care legislation on the federal budget deficit. These estimates did not consider the full compliance cost on businesses. The Regulatory Right to Know Act requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to submit a cost-benefit analysis of federal rules and paperwork "to the extent feasible." So-called "non-major" rules are excluded in their 2009 report, however, as are rules adopted more than 10 years ago. This means that thousands of costly federal mandates are not included in OMB's tally. Discouragingly, OMB ignored the distribution of the regulatory burden, which is uneven.
In a report released last week for the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration, we find that small businesses bear a disproportionately large share of regulatory costs. The portion of these costs that falls initially on businesses overall was $8,086 per employee in 2008. But these costs are not borne equally by businesses of all sizes. Larger firms benefit from economies of scale in compliance; small businesses do not have that advantage.
As a consequence, small businesses—those with fewer than 20 employees—incur regulatory costs 42% greater than firms with between 20 and 499 employees, and 36% greater than firms with more than 500 employees. The regulatory cost per employee for small businesses was $10,585, compared to $7,454 for medium firms and $7,755 for large firms.
The degree to which federal regulations disadvantage small businesses varies across the economy. In some sectors, such as manufacturing, the regulatory cost difference between small businesses and their larger counterparts is particularly acute.
Small manufacturers bear compliance costs that are 110% higher than those of medium-sized firms and 125% higher than large firms' costs. As much as it is fashionable to blame China for the demise of small manufacturing in America, the evidence suggests that looking for some reasons closer to home is warranted.
In no category do small businesses pay less in regulatory costs than both medium and large businesses. In retail and wholesale trade, small businesses pay 13% less than medium firms but 15% more than large firms. In services, small businesses pay 13% more than medium firms but 9% less than large firms. In health care and "other" (the biggest components of which are utilities and construction), small businesses pay 45% and 70% more than medium firms and 28% and 83% more than large firms.
This distribution of regulatory costs places small firms at a substantial competitive disadvantage. The cost disadvantage confronting small business is driven by environmental regulations, tax compliance, and occupational safety and homeland security rules.
In sum, individuals and businesses bear the burden of the $1.75 trillion cost of regulations, and small businesses bear a disproportionately large share of the compliance costs. Businesses must close, reallocate activity, absorb, or pass on the expense of complying with regulatory requirements.
In per-household terms, the combined federal burden of regulation and taxes is a remarkable $37,962. Increased transparency in both the cost and benefit side of the regulatory equation is necessary to determine whether what we spend is worth the 35% of national income that it costs, and whether the distribution of the burden is relatively efficient. This is particularly true now that the federal government is undertaking Herculean efforts to stimulate the economy while increasing regulations costly to businesses. Wall Street Journal article.
Ms. Crain and Mr. Crain are economics professors at Lafayette College, and the authors most recently of "The Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms," published this month by the Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration.
We have posted the entire article because all links take you to a mere excerpt.
The Regulation Tax Keeps Growing The annual cost of federal regulations in the United States increased to more than $1.75 trillion in 2008, a 3% real increase over five years, to about 14% of U.S. national income. This cost is in addition to the federal tax burden of 21%, for a combined cost of 35% of national income. One out of every three dollars earned in the U.S. goes to pay for or comply with federal laws and regulations, and new policies enacted in 2010 for health care and financial services will increase this burden.
Attempts have been made to estimate the costs of these laws and regulations, but the calculations are incomplete. In March, for example, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost and subsequent effect of health-care legislation on the federal budget deficit. These estimates did not consider the full compliance cost on businesses. The Regulatory Right to Know Act requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to submit a cost-benefit analysis of federal rules and paperwork "to the extent feasible." So-called "non-major" rules are excluded in their 2009 report, however, as are rules adopted more than 10 years ago. This means that thousands of costly federal mandates are not included in OMB's tally. Discouragingly, OMB ignored the distribution of the regulatory burden, which is uneven.
In a report released last week for the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration, we find that small businesses bear a disproportionately large share of regulatory costs. The portion of these costs that falls initially on businesses overall was $8,086 per employee in 2008. But these costs are not borne equally by businesses of all sizes. Larger firms benefit from economies of scale in compliance; small businesses do not have that advantage.
As a consequence, small businesses—those with fewer than 20 employees—incur regulatory costs 42% greater than firms with between 20 and 499 employees, and 36% greater than firms with more than 500 employees. The regulatory cost per employee for small businesses was $10,585, compared to $7,454 for medium firms and $7,755 for large firms.
The degree to which federal regulations disadvantage small businesses varies across the economy. In some sectors, such as manufacturing, the regulatory cost difference between small businesses and their larger counterparts is particularly acute.
Small manufacturers bear compliance costs that are 110% higher than those of medium-sized firms and 125% higher than large firms' costs. As much as it is fashionable to blame China for the demise of small manufacturing in America, the evidence suggests that looking for some reasons closer to home is warranted.
In no category do small businesses pay less in regulatory costs than both medium and large businesses. In retail and wholesale trade, small businesses pay 13% less than medium firms but 15% more than large firms. In services, small businesses pay 13% more than medium firms but 9% less than large firms. In health care and "other" (the biggest components of which are utilities and construction), small businesses pay 45% and 70% more than medium firms and 28% and 83% more than large firms.
This distribution of regulatory costs places small firms at a substantial competitive disadvantage. The cost disadvantage confronting small business is driven by environmental regulations, tax compliance, and occupational safety and homeland security rules.
In sum, individuals and businesses bear the burden of the $1.75 trillion cost of regulations, and small businesses bear a disproportionately large share of the compliance costs. Businesses must close, reallocate activity, absorb, or pass on the expense of complying with regulatory requirements.
In per-household terms, the combined federal burden of regulation and taxes is a remarkable $37,962. Increased transparency in both the cost and benefit side of the regulatory equation is necessary to determine whether what we spend is worth the 35% of national income that it costs, and whether the distribution of the burden is relatively efficient. This is particularly true now that the federal government is undertaking Herculean efforts to stimulate the economy while increasing regulations costly to businesses. Wall Street Journal article.
Ms. Crain and Mr. Crain are economics professors at Lafayette College, and the authors most recently of "The Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms," published this month by the Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration.
We have posted the entire article because all links take you to a mere excerpt.
Coates Exposes Intellectual Bankruptcy of MSM, Obama Admin. Defenders
"Are we to put a thumb on the scale for a black defendant like New Black Panther Jerry Jackson when he breaks the law? Should we allow evidence of the heroism of Rosa Parks and Medgar Evers to excuse the armed thug King Samir Shabazz?"
Investigate Racism in the Obama Justice Department "That’s not just politicization of the Justice Department. It is criminalization of the Justice Department. Under the Constitution, it is Congress’s obligation to stop it. The current Congress obviously won’t do its duty. Americans will strongly support congressional candidates who pledge to right that wrong."
FBI Raids Home of Obama Associate & AAAN Leader in Terrorism Sweep
Gateway Pundit " Last Friday FBI agents raided the homes of far left activists in Chicago and Minneapolis who are linked to the FARC and Islamic radicals as part of a terrorism investigation. The home of radical Hatem Abudayyeh in Chicago was raided."....
"In 2003 Barack Obama was an honored guest at a dinner sponsored by the AAAN for former PLO-operative Rashid Khalidi. During the dinner a video was taken that shows Barack Obama celebrating with members of this Palestinian group who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gave a toast to a Rashid Khalidi at this going away party. The LA Times will not release the video from this Jew-bashing dinner."
"In 2003 Barack Obama was an honored guest at a dinner sponsored by the AAAN for former PLO-operative Rashid Khalidi. During the dinner a video was taken that shows Barack Obama celebrating with members of this Palestinian group who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gave a toast to a Rashid Khalidi at this going away party. The LA Times will not release the video from this Jew-bashing dinner."
A strikeout on settlements: Why Obama's diplomacy is flailing
NY Daily News "The settlements issue is complicated but not unsolvable. Settlements are how Zionists settled Israel - and the Israel that mattered most to some nationalists and Orthodox Jews is not that Miami manque on the coast, Tel Aviv, but the West Bank areas of Judea and Samaria, the heart of biblical Israel."...."Obama, too, has to husband his credibility. He foolishly demanded something Israel could not yet give. It was bad diplomacy, recalling neither Metternich nor Kissinger but the Ol' Perfessor and his question about the inept Mets*. The answer, so far, is no."
* Casey Stengel, who once asked, "Can't anybody here play this game?"
* Casey Stengel, who once asked, "Can't anybody here play this game?"
Democrats to stuff 20 bills into post-election lame-duck session
The Hill "The array of bills competing for floor time shows the sense of urgency among Democratic lawmakers to act before the start of the 112th Congress, when Republicans are expected to control more seats in the Senate and House."
Monday, September 27, 2010
Searching for Bonhoeffer
Mike Adams "But the one thing that has started to change in the mega-church is the message. What once was a slightly watered-down seeker-friendly version of the Gospel is now a slightly Gospel-flavored bucket of water. And it’s not enough to quench the thirst of the masses."
The Democrats Melt Down (Updated)
William Kristol "It looks as if 2010 will be a bigger electoral landslide than 1994, and more significant as well. But the true significance of 2010 will be to lay the groundwork for an even bigger victory in 2012—a victory that would allow President Obama to follow the example of so many of his senior staff, and depart the White House sooner than he once expected."
I dunno; with all this hype, if the Republicans win by a narrower margin than expected, the Democrats will claim they got a new mandate from the voters.
I dunno; with all this hype, if the Republicans win by a narrower margin than expected, the Democrats will claim they got a new mandate from the voters.
 |
| World Magazine |
60 Minutes Does Fawning Profile of Ground Zero Mosque Backers, Bashes Opponents
60 Minutes on the Ground Zero Mosque " Rauf is mainstreaming the Sharia and the jihad ideology. And in suggesting that those of us defending American freedom and opposing his Ground Zero mosque are "extremists," he is trying to place 70% of Americans squarely on the same moral playing field as the Muslim terrorists who flew planes into buildings and have since committed close to 20,000 Islamic attacks of violent jihad across the world. The media and government fawning all over this subversive imam as he does this shows just how deeply we have been infiltrated by the enemy. "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)