• Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for July 20th on 18:05

    These are my links for July 20th from 18:05 to 19:23:

    • Dilbert July 20, 2011 – Shame | Flap’s Blog – FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blog – Dilbert July 20, 2011 – Shame #tcot #catcot
    • Flap’s Dentistry Blog: Video: Dentistry of the Mujahideen – Video: Dentistry of the Mujahideen
    • Flap’s Dentistry Blog: Fighting a Parking Ticket Like Doing Your Own Dentistry? – Fighting a Parking Ticket Like Doing Your Own Dentistry?
    • Just Say No to the Gang of Six Proposal/Fraud/Sell Out – The new Gang of Six proposal brewing in the Senate is a total sellout which promises to usher in a vast new round of new taxes. Not just closing of loopholes, but real live taxes we will all have to pay.

      The proposal is based on the recommendations of the Bowles-Simpson Deficit Reduction Commission as modified by the "Gang of Six" US Senators. It plans to raise $1 trillion in new tax revenues. While the gang is vague on the details of the new taxes, the Bowles-Simpson Commission was quite clear – it proposes the virtual elimination of all tax deductions, certainly for taxpayers with joint incomes of over $200,000 and possibly for everyone. The revenues it would generate from eliminating or sharply curtailing the mortgage interest, charitable, and state and local tax deductions are set to generate $1 trillion of new revenues over ten years and to finance a vague and unspecified hoped for cut in the top tax bracket.

      The elimination or significant curtailment of these deductions would have a ruinous economic impact.

      Cutting out the mortgage interest deduction would cost American taxpayers almost $100 billion a year. It would decimate the already moribund real estate sector and would make their current homes unaffordable for millions of homeowners by changing the financial rules in the middle of the game.

      Restricting or eliminating the state and local tax deduction is, in effect, to levy a 25-35 percent surcharge on state and local taxes – income and property – hammering people who live in high tax states. The cost in jobs and state revenues are likely to be staggering.

      ======

      Read it all

  • Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for July 13th on 16:06

    These are my links for July 13th from 16:06 to 16:22:

    • Coburn may return to Senate’s ‘Gang of 6’ – Sen. Tom Coburn said Wednesday that he may rejoin the so-called Gang of Six, the bipartisan band of senators seeking to reach agreement on a big deficit-cutting deal that would blend spending cuts with a tax code overhaul.
      The Oklahoma Republican dropped out of the group two months ago saying Democrats weren't willing to cut enough spending from programs like Medicare. He says he may rejoin the group depending on how it responds to ideas he's sent over. The closely watched group has been working for months in hopes of a bipartisan deficit-cutting deal that might gain momentum despite the partisanship consuming Capitol Hill.
      Asked about rumors he's thinking of rejoining the group, Coburn said: "They're not rumors." But he said he doesn't know whether he will in fact return and that it would depend on how the group reacts to some ideas he's sent over.
      "We'll see" about rejoining the group, Coburn said. "I floated a couple of things. Let's see how they're responded to."
    • How are those debt talks going? – Badly – There are, I think, three likely outcomes. One is that Obama blinks on taxes, as he did in last year’s lame duck session. I rate the chances of that happening as slim. The second is that we hit “default” and everyone scrambles for a few days to, yes, get the Social Security checks out. Everyone is shaken and there is that “grand compromise.” I put the likelihood of that at close to zero. And finally, there is some other variation (McConnell’s or another backup plan) that avoids a default and does not force Republicans to vote for tax hikes. That seems the most likely for now.

      The real solution is for the voters to participate in a great referendum. More government and tax hikes or less government and no tax hikes? That’s what the 2012 election will be about.

      ======

      The GOP House should pass a 3 or 6 month all cuts budget deal raising the debt ceiling and force the Senate to filibuster or Obama to veto it.

    • Amazon Tax Referendum Filed – With the state budget not yet two weeks old, the first of what could be multiple challenges to its underpinning policies has been issued: a petition for the voters to overturn the new law requiring sales tax collection from online purchases.
      A formal request for a referendum on ABx 28 was filed with the office of Attorney General Kamala Harris on Friday afternoon by lobbyist Charles Halnan.

      Halnan lobbies for, among other companies, Amazon.

      The state constitution requires backers of a referendum to gather, within 90 days, voter signatures equaling five percent of the total vote in the most recent gubernatorial election. That looks to be about 504,000 signatures once the petition is cleared by the AG.

      Of course, one question raised during last year's debate over Proposition 25 was whether a budget-related bill like this one is eligible for a referendum. Before Prop 25, budget-related bills were generally seen as not eligible, given that they were approved by a supermajority and given that they took effect immediately. For those who would construe that to be synonymous with an "urgency" statute, the constitution would seem to say it's not eligible. But others will no doubt say that these aren't synonymous. A clarification by the courts may be needed on this one.

    • New GOP honcho Carly Fiorina is "focused on 2012,” but on future run for office? "Never say never" – Among the topics she addressed in conversation with the Chronicle:

      *On Republicans' shot at taking back control of the Senate:"It's a very achievable goal. It's one we have to work hard towards. The Democrats have more seats to defend than we do..and many of the seats in 2012 cycle are in states Barack Obama lost." While Republicans "have challenges,'' Democrats have more challenges, she said.

      *On the GOP anti-tax agenda, in California and nationally: "I think Republicans are on very solid ground to say that tax increases are bad for job creation. Everyone agreed with that just six months ago. President Obama was against raising taxes; the Democrats were…Bill Clinton has said the corporate tax rate was too high.'' The bottom line: "You can't raise taxes in the middle of an economic recession….there are only two things you can do during a budget crisis — cut spending, and grow the economy."

      *On raising the debt ceiling: "It's important that the U.S. government not default on its obligation. It's equally important that we put in place a set of longterm solutions that restore accountability and fiscal responsibility in Washington and that create the environment where businesses can grow."

      *On the "stark" differences between the messages of the two parties: "The Republican agenda is fundamentally different from the Democratic agenda…first, Republicans want to decentralize power, Democrats want to centralize it and they want to centralize it in Washington. Republicans generally will put their faith in the individual; Democrats will put it in an institution. Republicans will favor job creators and Democrats will favor government agencies."

      *On her own future in politics: "I'm focused on 2012 and helping other people win….(but) never say never….I've said from the moment that (my) campaign finished, I enjoyed every minute of it. I don't have a bad taste in my mouth. I had a wonderful experience, and I'm proud of the campaign we ran."

  • Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for July 13th on 14:50

    These are my links for July 13th from 14:50 to 14:52:

    • Another possible contingency plan in the debt limit fight – Having blasted the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's "last resort" proposal, I thought I'd offer an alternative contingency plan. The way I see it, members of Congress have an obligation to raise the debt ceiling to accommodate future deficit spending that they already voted for, but nothing beyond that. That would mean, since Congress already approved a 2011 budget that includes deficit spending as part of the  deal to avert a government shut down, they should pass a clean debt limit increase that would take us through the end of the fiscal year, on Sept. 30. If and when Republicans eventually reach a deal on the fiscal 2012 budget, they should then vote to increase the debt limit by the amount of deficit spending that the Congressional Budget Office projects for that year.

      Admittedly, there are a number of obstacles to this plan. The most obvious being that it isn't clear if there would be enough votes in Congress, and President Obama has publicly ruled out any short-term deals. Yet as things stand, the McConnell approach has been deemed "dead on arrival" in the House. So if we're talking about "last resort" contingency plans, it's hard to see why this approach would be any less plausible.

      If Republicans favor this plan and it encounters opposition from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Obama, that would do several things. It could make Obama start to look intransigent and it would be another opportunity to highlight the fact that the Democratic Senate hasn't even formally released a 2012 budget while the Republican House has done its job and passed one. If there's no agreement about 2012 deficit levels and we don't even have details on Democrats' opening bid, why should Republicans agree to increase the debt limit past the end of this fiscal year? Compared to the McConnell plan, which hinges on arcane Congressional procedure to disguise the fact that Republicans would effectively be voting for a debt limit increase, this would have the advantage of being a clear, transparent, stance that's easy to explain to voters.

    • Home ownership declines in California – The last decade saw a major housing boom, followed by a cataclysmic bust, and the net result was a declining rate of home ownership in California, according to a new analysis of 2010 census data by University of Southern California demographer Dowell Myers.

      Beyond the raw numbers, says Myers, the census data revealed a generational and ethnic transfer between an aging white population and a relatively young Latino population. During the last decade, white home ownership dropped by 157,877 units while Latino-owned homes increased by 383,778 with the latter group accounting for more than three-quarters of ownership growth in the state.

      The overall increase in owner-occupied homes, just under a half-million during the decade, was less than half the numerical increase in the 1980s and the state's overall home ownership rate, 55.9 percent, is one percentage point lower than it was in 2000 and the second lowest rate in the nation, just ahead of New York.

      Within California, home ownership rates vary widely from a low of 35.8 percent in densely populated San Francisco to well over 70 percent in foothill and mountain counties.

      The slowing incidence of home ownership, Myers noted, lessens upward pressure on home prices in the supply-demand equation.

  • Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for July 13th on 08:26

    These are my links for July 13th from 08:26 to 08:32:

    • Can President Obama keep paying Social Security benefits even if the debt ceiling is reached? – The president obviously does not want to show all of his cards in this high-stakes game of poker. Raising the specter of not issuing Social Security checks is designed to raise pressure on Republicans, but could also cause angst among the elderly.

      At this point the answer is unclear but we become suspicious when politicians begin to use “may,” rather than speak in definitive sentences. If Treasury has the ability to keep paying Social Security benefits, even if the debt limit is reached, the Obama administration should make that clear. The Treasury Department’s new statement begins to add some clarity. We will keep watching how the president speaks about this issue.

      ========

      Answer is perhaps….

      Read it all

    • The McConnell Plan’s Pitfalls – Shortly after Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell unveiled his “contingency” plan for a debt limit increase, the Associated Press bulletin read: “GOP Leader McConnell proposes giving Obama new power for automatic debt limit increase.”

      It’s surely not the headline McConnell wanted, but unlike much of the media coverage of the debt fight, it’s accurate. And that’s a problem.

      It is not, however, the main problem with the McConnell plan. Far worse, in my view, is that the plan isolates House Republicans, it undercuts their (tentative) plan to offer an aggressive debt limit proposal of their own, it turns their principled intransigence from a possible strength to a certain liability, and it virtually ensures that, in the event of default, Republicans – not the White House – will be blamed.

      McConnell’s plan gives the president the ability to raise the debt ceiling through 2012, in three separate increments, by requiring Obama to propose spending cuts greater than each request. Its main virtue is that these hikes would have to pass largely with Democratic support – something that McConnell and others believe will redound to Republicans’ benefit heading into the 2012 election cycle. And, the theory goes, if President Obama offers phony spending cuts, as he almost certain to do, his posturing as the “adult in the room” on entitlements and spending will be exposed as unserious.

      But there’s the catch, too: the spending cuts do not have to be real or even implemented in order for the president to get his debt ceiling increases. McConnell acknowledged this at the press conference to announce the plan Tuesday afternoon. ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked: “Does it guarantee you’ll get your spending cuts or not?” McConnell responded: “No, it doesn’t.”

      ======

      Read it all

      A different perspective than the Wall Street Journal

    • Debt-Limit Harakiri or Why McConnell’s Plan is Not So Bad – The tea party/talk-radio expectations for what Republicans can accomplish over the debt-limit showdown have always been unrealistic. As former Senator Phil Gramm once told us, never take a hostage you're not prepared to shoot. Republicans aren't prepared to stop a debt-limit increase because the political costs are unbearable. Republicans might have played this game better, but the truth is that Mr. Obama has more cards to play.

      The entitlement state can't be reformed by one house of Congress in one year against a determined President and Senate held by the other party. It requires more than one election. The Obama Democrats have staged a spending blowout to 24% of GDP and rising, and now they want to find a way to finance it to make it permanent. Those are the real stakes of 2012.

      Even if Mr. Obama gets his debt-limit increase without any spending cuts, he will pay a price for the privilege. He'll have reinforced his well-earned reputation as a spender with no modern peer. He'll own the record deficits and fast-rising debt. And he'll own the U.S. credit-rating downgrade to AA if Standard & Poor's so decides.

      We'd far prefer a bipartisan deal to cut spending and reform entitlements without a tax increase. But if Mr. Obama won't go along, there's no reason Republicans should help him dodge the political consequences by committing debt-limit harakiri.

      ======

      Read it all…..

      An interesting perspective…..