Wednesday, February 3, 2010
From the Drudge Report.
Full Acquisition Here.
"The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) intends to purchase sixty Remington Model 870 Police RAMAC #24587 12 gauge pump-action shotguns for the Criminal Investigation Division. The Remington parkerized shotguns, with fourteen inch barrel, modified choke, Wilson Combat Ghost Ring rear sight and XS4 Contour Bead front sight, Knoxx Reduced Recoil Adjustable Stock, and Speedfeed ribbed black forend, are designated as the only shotguns authorized for IRS duty based on compatibility with IRS existing shotgun inventory, certified armorer and combat training and protocol, maintenance, and parts."
This reminded me of something that then candidate Obama said in an interview, "I believe in people's second amendment rights. But, you're not gonna tell me you need an AK-47 to defend your home against burglars.."
It's not a verbatim quote, but the essence of it is spot-on.
Obama is right, by the way. we don't need an AK-47 to defend ourselves from burglars. We need them to protect ourselves from IRS agents with Remington Model 870 Police 12 gauge pump-action shotguns.
That is all.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Think the Obama tax plan will only affect the evil, greedy rich folks making a combined income of $250,000/yr or more? Think again:
"Obama administration aides appealed to the Reuters White House reporting team to kill a story by another reporter of the news service that suggested the president's new budget blueprint included "backdoor" tax hikes."
~Read the whole story at TPM Livewrire.
Here is the original Reuters article shelved per the Obama Admin:
"By Terri Cullen
NEW YORK (Reuters.com) —The Obama administration's plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.
In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year — effectively a tax hike by stealth.
While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.
The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration's Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.
If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated. (Italics added by Philo)
Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 — though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.
Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a "patch" that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.
Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year's levels, the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy — the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.
Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:
* Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;
* The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;
* The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses;
* Individuals who don't itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;
* The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free." (Italics added by Philo)
This revelation is brought to us by the patriots over at the National Review Online
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Some time ago I wrote about a federal plan to shrink large metro areas that suffer from urban blight. The idea in a nut shell is to move the inhabitants on the outskirts of the cities into empty housing closer to the urban center, then level the outlaying area and turn it into parks or farmland or some other such thing.
Now, the trial application of the "shrink to survive" plan is going to be implemented down the road in good Ole' Flint Michigan.
According to an article in the Flint paper, 277 empty houses so far have been marked for demolition. The article also stated that no one who remained in the areas would be forced to relocate.
What's missing are finer details regarding infrastructure and whether those residents who choose to remain will still have access to the city water, sewer, police, etc. Will the city still be responsible for maintaining a road where only one or two inhabited structures remain? What will the tax rates be after the "shrinkage" is over? Will these residents even belong to Flint proper anymore? How will this effect redistricting? Who is footing the bill for the housing in the center of town for residents willing to relocate?
These are the vital issues which need to be, and have yet to be resolved. Whatever the plans, if the national "shrink to survive" plan is birthed in Flintsville, you can bet that it will be an ugly, expensive, lagging process.s