Fox News finds new ways of being disturbing while also getting better at the old ways of being disturbing.

I’ll try to do this as succinctly as possible. Head over to Youtube for this clip from Fox and Friends in which Steve Doocy and Stuart Varney talk some bullshit. My commentary:

0:12 - Doocy makes his “yeah, right” face which I think we should call “a doocy.”

0:48 - Doocy, allegedly a journalist, states some numbers that he “read somewhere.” He doesn’t site a source, which would’ve knocked off some points if this were something more formal like a 5th grade social studies report.

0:59 - Varney calls Doocy’s pre-school cost estimates “probably accurate.” He qualifies this by saying he “doesn’t have the precise figures.” I don’t know why he didn’t just make something up because he’s about to make up all kinds of things.

1:28 - Varney on what Obama is doing: “Raise taxes on the rich and offer all kinds of free stuff to people who will vote for you in the future.” Varney pulls the “raise taxes” thing out of thin air. It has no relevance to anything that’s being discussed but he knows its a talking point he has to sneak in someplace. This was as good as any.

The big disturbance for me, is the insistence that education equates to “free stuff” and not vital programs for the country, which is what I tend to think of education as. I’m also not sure how well Varney’s accusation of Obama “buying votes” will work, since people are never going to have a chance to vote for Obama again, unless he goes on American Idol post-presidency. 

1:55 - After admitting a few times that Obama hasn’t said how he’ll pay for the program, Varney continues to accuse Obama of doing things the president has only done in Varney’s own imagination, including “forcing big government on the states.” This is how Fox News gets it done: Speculation presented as analysis. Everything Varney says in this beat is 100% made up but everything about his delivery would suggest that it might be real. 

2:18 - Doocy’s continued insistence on having read things is starting to sound like overcompensation, like he’s the kid in class who won’t admit to not having read the assignment, even though he didn’t know that Johnny Tremaine totally can’t use his other hand.

Doocy goes on the claim preschool doesn’t really help kids in the long run, something Jon Stewart did a fine job of debunking in the middle of this clip from The Daily Show. The same study that Doocy keeps claiming to have read, actually says that preschool education shows a correlation with “graduation rates, lower crime rates, increased college attendance, [and] income.” Which makes me think Doocy just read the first chapter and skimmed the rest. (Incidentally, the whole clip from the Daily Show is quite good).

3:05 - Varney calls Obama’s plan to give every kid a shot at preschool “an entitlement.” Because I think we’ve all had enough of 4 year olds leaching off the system, haven’t we?

All of this is worth watching. Promise.

(Source: thenakedbusinessman)

"

A small nonpartisan research center operated by professed “geeks” has found itself at the center of a rancorous $5 trillion debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney.

No white paper or policy manifesto put out during the presidential campaign has proved more controversial than an August study by the Washington-based Tax Policy Center, a respected nonprofit that issues studiously detailed tax analyses.

That study found, in short, that Mr. Romney could not keep all of the promises he had made on individual tax reform: including cutting marginal tax rates by 20 percent, keeping protections for investment income, not widening the deficit and not increasing the tax burden on the poor or middle class. It concluded that Mr. Romney’s plan, on its face, would cut taxes for rich families and raise them for everyone else.

The detailed paper proved kindling for a political firestorm. Mr. Romney criticized the center as performing a “garbage-in, garbage-out” analysis and his campaign accused it of partisan bias. The Obama campaign used the center’s numbers to argue that Mr. Romney had proposed a $5 trillion tax cut. Economists jumped on the bandwagon too, flinging analyses back and forth and picking apart the projections and assumptions in the report.

At the Tax Policy Center itself, responses ranged from irritation at the partisan nature of some attacks to incredulity over the political hysteria. “There was this résumé-hunting, White-House-visitor-log” searching feel to the response, said the center’s director, Donald Marron, a former Bush administration economist. “That was unanticipated,” he added dryly.

In many ways the report did just what the center was created to do: inject some solid numbers into a shifty, accusatory, raucous political debate. The decade-old center — a joint project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, two nonpartisan grandes dames of the Washington world — was founded precisely to “fill that niche,” Mr. Marron said.

“A lot of tax policy discussions are — how to describe them? — people yelling at each other,” he said. “We believe that good information leads to better policy discussions and ultimately better policy outcomes.”

"

— The New York Times, “Tax Policy Center in Spotlight for Its Romney Study” (via inothernews)

abaldwin360:

VERY good point.

abaldwin360:

VERY good point.

(Source: lafaux, via inothernews)

inothernews:

jasencomstock:

election:

zainyk:

Map showing where Americans not paying income tax live.
The 47%, y’all.

Amercia.

Amercia

Amercia!

America.

inothernews:

jasencomstock:

election:

zainyk:

Map showing where Americans not paying income tax live.

The 47%, y’all.

Amercia.

Amercia

Amercia!

America.

theatlantic:

Mitt Romney Would Pay 0.82 Percent in Taxes Under Paul Ryan’s Plan

In 2010 — the only year we have seen a full return from him — Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82 percent under the Ryan plan, rather than the 13.9 percent he actually did. How would someone with more than $21 million in taxable income pay so little? Well, the vast majority of Romney’s income came from capital gains, interest, and dividends. And Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends. 

Read more.[Image: Reuters]

theatlantic:

Mitt Romney Would Pay 0.82 Percent in Taxes Under Paul Ryan’s Plan

In 2010 — the only year we have seen a full return from him — Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82 percent under the Ryan plan, rather than the 13.9 percent he actually did. How would someone with more than $21 million in taxable income pay so little? Well, the vast majority of Romney’s income came from capital gains, interest, and dividends. And Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends. 

Read more.[Image: Reuters]

(via inothernews)

gq:

The Truth about Income Inequality in America
Guess what, compatriots? The gap between the richest and the poorest among us is now wider than it has been since we all nose-dived into the Great Depression. So GQ sent Jon Ronson on a journey into the secret financial lives of six different people on the ladder, from a guy washing dishes for 200 bucks a week in Miami to a self-storage gazillionaire. What he found are some surprising truths about class, money, and making it in America.

gq:

The Truth about Income Inequality in America

Guess what, compatriots? The gap between the richest and the poorest among us is now wider than it has been since we all nose-dived into the Great Depression. So GQ sent Jon Ronson on a journey into the secret financial lives of six different people on the ladder, from a guy washing dishes for 200 bucks a week in Miami to a self-storage gazillionaire. What he found are some surprising truths about class, money, and making it in America.

What are we doing to fix this?

What are we doing to fix this?

(via thebsblogger)

nefariousnewt:


—George Carlin

Unvarnished truth.

nefariousnewt:

George Carlin

Unvarnished truth.

(via standupportal)

(Source: inothernews)

kateoplis:

America has what is arguably the world’s most complex tax code. The federal code plus IRS rulings is now 70,000 pages long. The code itself is 16,000 pages. The statist French, for example, have a tax code of only 1,909 pages - only 12% as long as ours. And then there are countries like Russia, the Czech Republic, Estonia that have innovated and moved to a flat tax, with considerable success.

You have to understand, complexity equals corruption.

When John McCain was still a raging reformer, he used to point out that the tax code was the foundation for the corruption of American politics. Special interests pay politicians vast amounts of cash for their campaigns and in return they get favorable exemptions, credits or loopholes in the tax code.

In other countries this sort of bribery takes place underneath bridges and with cash in brown envelopes. In America it is institutionalized and legal but it is the same thing: Cash to politicians in return for favorable treatment from the government.

The U.S. tax system is not simply corrupt, it is corrupt in a deceptive manner that has degraded the entire system of American government. Congress is able to funnel vast sums of money in perpetuity to its favored funders through the tax code without anyone realizing it. For those who despair at the role of money in politics, the simplest way to get the corruption out of Washington is to remove the prize that members of Congress give away - preferential tax treatment. A flatter tax code with almost no exemptions does that.

The simplest fix to our tax code would be to lower the income tax dramatically, lower the corporate tax, and instead raise revenues through a national sales tax, or a value-added tax (VAT).

The U.S. is the only rich country in the world without a national sales tax. Germany has one at 19%, Britain at 20%, Korea at 10%.

What’s the appeal of a consumption tax?

First, it is efficient. Most studies, including one by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), suggest that the federal government loses several hundred billion dollars a year to tax fraud. This is much tougher to pull off with a consumption tax. Second, it provides the government with a more stable form of revenue than income taxes. Income taxes fluctuate greatly between boom and bust years. Third, American’s consume too much, often using credit and leverage to do so. A consumption tax would moderate this behavior. Government will always get less of a behavior it taxes and more of what it subsidies. […]

But the best thing about tax reform is that it kills corruption. So if you ask me what kind of tax code I am in favor of, I am in favor of almost any new tax code that fulfils one requirement: It should fit on two pages.”

Slate.com is killing it with this.

kateoplis:

The Corporations that Occupy Congress | Reuters

Last month Citizens for Tax Justice and an affiliate issued “Corporate Taxpayers and Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10″. It showed that 30 brand-name companies paid a federal income tax rate of minus 6.7 percent on $160 billion of profit from 2008 through 2010 compared to a going corporate tax rate of 35 percent. All but one of those 30 companies reported lobbying expenses in Washington.
Another report, by Public Campaign, shows that 29 of those companies spent nearly half a billion dollars over those three years lobbying in Washington for laws and rules that favor their interests.

kateoplis:

The Corporations that Occupy Congress | Reuters

Last month Citizens for Tax Justice and an affiliate issued “Corporate Taxpayers and Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10″. It showed that 30 brand-name companies paid a federal income tax rate of minus 6.7 percent on $160 billion of profit from 2008 through 2010 compared to a going corporate tax rate of 35 percent. All but one of those 30 companies reported lobbying expenses in Washington.

Another report, by Public Campaign, shows that 29 of those companies spent nearly half a billion dollars over those three years lobbying in Washington for laws and rules that favor their interests.

inothernews:

aatombomb:

Ok!

When asked for comment, all Republicans went to brunch.

Well look at that.

(Source: particleb0red)

kateoplis:

I’ve already gone off on this more than once, but it bears repeating. Bankers on Wall Street pay lower tax rates than most car mechanics. […]

Goldman, Sachs in 2008 – this was the same year the bank reported $2.9 billion in profits, and paid out over $10 billion in compensation — paid just…