taxes

Saturday Reads Around the Internets - It Pays to Do Your Homework

Submitted by on

shocknews Welcome to the weekly roundup of great articles, facts and figures. These are the weekly finds that made our eyes pop.

 

Whole Foods - Made in China

Spending $8 bucks a pound for organic grapes? Think again. This video report shows Grocery chain Whole Foods so called organic foods are actually imported from China. Check out what happens with organic inspection and certification when food is imported.

Stupid Corporate Welfare Tricks

Submitted by on

corp welfareGood Jobs First has released a new study which shows most state's corporate tax incentives and subsidies don't work to create jobs and pay living wages. Corporations are getting subsidies and tax breaks and instead of requirements to support the State's labor force, 43% of these subsidies are glorified corporate welfare. State corporate subsidies cost $11 billion a year and $7 billion worth of them do not require job creation and living wages. From the report, Job Creation and Job Quality Standards in State Economic Development Subsidy Programs:

  • Fewer than half (98) of the 238 programs impose a wage requirement on subsidized employers, and only 53 of those wage standards are tied to labor market rates, which are a more effective benchmark for economic development than fixed amounts that can stagnate in the manner of the federal minimum wage.
  • Only 11 of the wage requirements serve to raise overall wage levels by mandating rates that are somewhat above existing market averages for the geographic area or industry sector.
  • Wage requirements, which can be found in 42 states, vary enormously—from just above the federal minimum wage to more than $40 an hour in certain circumstances for a handful of programs. Using the lower end for those with ranges, the average of the hourly wage requirements is $14.76; the median is $11.82.

Corporate Profits Soaring Thanks to Record Unemployment

In a January 2009 ABC interview with George Stephanopoulos, then President-elect Barack Obama said fixing the economy required shared sacrifice, "Everybody’s going to have to give. Everybody’s going to have to have some skin in the game." (1)
For the past two years, American workers submitted to the President’s appeal—taking steep pay cuts despite hectic productivity growth. By contrast, corporate executives have extracted record profits by sabotaging the recovery on every front—eliminating employees, repressing wages, withholding investment, and shirking federal taxes.

The global recession increased unemployment in every country, but the American experience is unparalleled. According to a July OECD report, the U.S. accounted for half of all job losses among the 31 richest countries from 2007 to mid-2010. (2) The rise of U.S. unemployment greatly exceeded the fall in economic output. Aside from Canada, U.S. GDP actually declined less than any other rich country, from mid-2008 to mid 2010. (3)

Washington’s embrace of labor market flexibility ensured companies encountered little resistance when they launched their brutal recovery plans. Leading into the recession, the US had the weakest worker protections against individual and collective dismissals in the world, according to a 2008 OECD study. (4) Blackrock’s Robert Doll explains, “When the markets faltered in 2008 and revenue growth stalled, U.S. companies moved decisively to cut costs—unlike their European and Japanese counterparts.” (5) The U.S. now has the highest unemployment rate among the ten major developed countries. (6).

Fiscal Policy By Dummies: Looking at the Deficit Plans from a Progressive Standpoint

Note: this is a cross-post from The Realignment Project. Follow us on Facebook!

 

Introduction:

Following the on-going drama of the Deficit Commission - which just adjourned without even voting on its own proposal, and which never came close to getting the necessary votes to trigger an up-or-down vote in the Senate - has been rather painful. Especially in light of the Republican takeover of the House and the ongoing dispute over extending the Bush tax cuts and raising the debt ceiling, the grip of austerity thinking seems paradoxically strong and weak at the same time, pervasive enough to be omnipresent within the media yet not actually persuasive enough to get anyone to vote for anything they dislike.

However, there is one point that needs to be cleared up - behind the banalities of "living within our means" and other balanced-budget platitudes, there is ideology at work. The budget is not just a technical issue, but a moral document - it is a choice between a high road or a low road to the future.

Tax Cuts for the Rich Do Not Generate Jobs

Submitted by on

Earlier this week the Huffington Post proclaimed Obama caved on giving tax cuts to the rich. Previously Economist Alan Blinder declared extending Bush tax cuts will not create jobs.

President Barack Obama's top adviser suggested to The Huffington Post late Wednesday that the administration is ready to accept an across-the-board, temporary continuation of steep Bush-era tax cuts, including those for the wealthiest taxpayers.

The infamous Bush tax cuts, what are they exactly? Below are the tax rates for 2010.

Benedict Arnold Senators Refuse to Vote for American Jobs

Submitted by on

Our Congress sucks.  I think all will agree with this statement.  That said, is there anyone, anyone at all who is a working stiff in the United States, be they conservative, liberal, green, purple, red, blue who thinks it's a great idea to give tax rebates to corporations when they offshore outsource their job?  Do you think it's just swank when you must train your cheap labor replacement before being fired?  Do you think about increasing corporate profits by using cheap labor when you cannot pay your mortgage because your job was offshore outsourced?

I didn't think so.

No one who works for a living in the United States thinks offshore outsourcing our jobs is a great idea. Yet our Congress, once again, blocked the bill that would help curtail offshore outsourcing. The block was all of the Republican Senators plus these Democrats:

  • Warner (D-VA)
  • Tester (D-MT)
  • Nelson (D-NE)
  • Baucus (D-MT)

Joe Lieberman, now an independent, owned by multinational corporations, acting as a U.S. Chamber of Commerce, demanding their cheap India and China labor, also voted against the bill.

Creating Budget-Neutral Jobs Policy in an Era of Irrational Austerity

Note: this is a cross-post from The Realignment Project.

Introduction:

Recently, the Senate attempted for the second time to pass a small jobs bill. The American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010 – which would provide for an extension of Unemployment Insurance, COBRA health insurance subsidies, $24 billion in aid to states’ Medicaid programs to prevent deficit-driven layoffs, partially paid for through closing loopholes that benefit the wealthy – already passed the House three months ago, but is stalled in the Senate. The fact that the bill failed with 56 senators voting in the affirmative not only sharpens the ironies of the anti-democratic nature of the Senate, but also shows that we’re stuck in the middle of a full-blown austerity craze.

Hence Senator Hatch’s call for the unemployed to be drugs tested - for Unemployment Insurance that they have paid for through years and years of contributions – and even supposedly liberal Senators like Dianne Feinstein suggesting that “people just don’t go back to work at all” if UI eligibility is extended beyond 99 weeks. On the simplest level, this is insanity – there are about thirty million unemployed (including both official and unofficial) and only three million job openings. Drugs tested or not, the 27 million left over don’t have a choice of whether to go back to work.

Unfortunately, to paraphrase Keynes, politics can stay irrational longer than the unemployed can stay solvent. Austerity is in full political swing, and unlikely to improve, except in the improbable scenario that Congress remains Democratic in the midterm elections and the Senate Democratic Caucus follows through on their threats to reform the filibuster. A public policy that can only work in optimal circumstances isn’t worth much, though, and there are still ways to move forward on jobs despite being lumbered by irrational budget-neutral burdens.

A Defense of Public Sector Unionism - Part the Second

In part 1 of "In Defense of Public Sector Unions," I concentrated mostly on the ideological side of public sector unions - both why the existence of public sector unions is troubling to some progressives, and why ideologically progressives should support public sector unions. However, in the comments on the various sites where part 1 was cross-posted, one of the frequent themes of discussion was a request for some hard numbers to prove that public sector union workers aren't the goldbricking, featherbedding "thugs" they're made out to be.

So let's talk numbers.

Pages

Instapopulist

Related Content

Recent comments

more
The Real Economy, Long-Term Employment, and Four-Inch Stilettos - 9157 reads
US oil supplies at a 36½ year low, SPR at a 39 year low; oil+products supplies at an 18½ year low - 186712 reads
Global oil production was 1,680,000 barrels per day less than demand in October - 70187 reads
Exchange system approved for Credit Default Swap mess - 33659 reads
March global oil surplus at 17.7 million barrels per day; 2nd qtr surplus to be at 6.2 million bpd despite OPEC-led cuts - 85213 reads
US oil exports at a record high, oil supplies at a 18 year low, SPR at a 37 year low - 107477 reads
Global oil production exceeded demand by 1,490,000 barrels per day in June - 102188 reads
US oil supplies at a 13½ year low; total oil + products supplies at a 95 mo low - 85094 reads
From couples to copulas, David Li was an actuary! - 43707 reads
Third Estimate of 2nd Quarter GDP & Revisions From 2019 to Present - 4258 reads
.
Marginal Tax Rate Single Married Filing Jointly or Qualified Widow(er) Married Filing Separately Head of Household
10% $0 – $8,375 $0 – $16,750 $0 – $8,375 $0 – $11,950
15% $8,376 – $34,000 $16,751 – $68,000 $8,376 – $34,000 $11,951 – $45,550
25% $34,001 – $82,400 $68,001 – $137,300 $34,001 – $68,650 $45,551 – $117,650
28% $82,401 – $171,850 $137,301 – $209,250 $68,651 – $104,625 $117,651 – $190,550
33% $171,851 – $373,650 $209,251 – $373,650