I find it funny that the Republicans are turning themselves inside out regarding the Obama administration's proposal to roll back tax cuts for people who make over a quarter of a million dollars to the level they were at during the Clinton administration. My, my... they've worked so hard to protect their wealthy friends all these years, and here come along those pesky Democrats who might want to actually cut their tax break a teensy bit! Never mind that they've had a break for 8 years that they never should have had in the first place.
I thought it would be interesting to take a look at just who's making what. Just who are those folks that might actually be getting to keep their little pittance of a break compared to those people who might have to fork over a little bit more (assuming their tax accountants can't fit it under some tax shelter or another)? So here's a list of a few folks who are overpaid, and a list of a few who are underpaid:
Overpaid: Albert Haynesworth, Washington Redskins, 7-yr contract, $100,000,000
Underpaid: police officer, $47,500
Overpaid: Rush Limbaugh, 8-year contract, $400,000,000
Underpaid: paramedic, $36,000
Overpaid: Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis, $1,500,000 (2008), $20,400,000 (2007)
Underpaid: social worker, $40,000
Overpaid: GM CEO Rick Wagoner, $2,200,000 (2008 base salary)
Underpaid: President of the United States, $400,000
Overpaid: Tiger Woods: $115,000,000
Underpaid: teacher, $46,000
Overpaid: Alex Rodriguez, $28,000,000
Underpaid: librarian, $53,000 (with Master's)
I think it's obvious where our priorities have been in this country and I think it's also obvious that they have been pretty screwed up.
There is NO ONE worth $115,000,000 a year, I don't care who they are or what they do. Take a look at what the people do who are overpaid vs. those who are underpaid, and just think about the responsibilities that the people in the last class have vs. those who have ridiculously high salaries. Sorry, Republicans, I guess I can't drum up a lot of sympathy here for your "base."
Friday, February 27, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Obama's speech and the Republican response
"Nobody messes with Joe." My favorite line of the night, but then I loves me some Joe Biden!
Obama gave a great speech, focusing on the economy as well as energy, education and health care. He continues to stress that we need to become energy independent, that our education vs. other countries is lagging behind, and that if we don't fix the health care mess our economy will continue to struggle no matter what else we do.
Health care costs are the largest reason for bankruptcies, and I know that even those of us who have good health care through our employers make less money every year because our health care premiums go up, and the employers are not eating that -- they are passing those cost increases along to the employees. So bravo to Obama for finally taking this on. Unlike what Gov. Bobby Jindal said in his bizarre Republican response to Obama's speech, this does not mean "universal, government-sponsored health care." It does mean, though, that we have to get a handle on this, and pronto.
I'm also glad to hear that Obama is going to keep his campaign promise about energy independence. This is so crucial not only to creating new industries and employment in this country, but to curbing climate change, which if allowed to run amuck could eventually cost this country dearly in more ways than one.
A lot of pundits have complained about a lack of detail, but if he had given us details on all that we would have been there for three hours. I think what he did lay out was the basics of what he intended to do, and I'm sure the details will come in future days.
As far as Bobby Jindal's response, I found it absolutely inexplicable. In the first place, he sounded like he thought he was talking to 5th graders. I would say that if the Republicans think this guy is their big hope for the future they have another think coming. He called for more of that Republican cure-all, tax cuts, when we know that Bush's tax cuts and rebates did butkus for the economy. Tax cuts don't mean a lot to someone who doesn't have a job in the first place. He criticized a non-existent "magnetic levitation line between Las Vegas and Disneyland" supposedly in the stimulus plan (there has been some money set aside for transportation but no details or locations have been decided upon). He thought it laughable to put $140 million (a teeny percentage of the total) into "volcano monitoring," but considering the natural disaster Louisiana went through just a few short years ago he might want to rethink the wisdom of taking some precautions to prevent such things. On top of that, he tells us we can't trust the federal government. Okey dokey. Well, my guess is Sarah Palin is feeling a little better today about whether this guy is competition for her for the title of Republican sacrificial lamb in 2012. But then, if Gov. Jindal refuses the stimulus money for Louisiana as he has said he will, I don't think he'll even have to worry about getting reelected down there, much less going on to higher office.
So, I thought Obama gave a good speech, I think he's on the right track, and I found myself thinking that I was just glad that after the last eight years we finally have a president who has some common sense!
Obama gave a great speech, focusing on the economy as well as energy, education and health care. He continues to stress that we need to become energy independent, that our education vs. other countries is lagging behind, and that if we don't fix the health care mess our economy will continue to struggle no matter what else we do.
Health care costs are the largest reason for bankruptcies, and I know that even those of us who have good health care through our employers make less money every year because our health care premiums go up, and the employers are not eating that -- they are passing those cost increases along to the employees. So bravo to Obama for finally taking this on. Unlike what Gov. Bobby Jindal said in his bizarre Republican response to Obama's speech, this does not mean "universal, government-sponsored health care." It does mean, though, that we have to get a handle on this, and pronto.
I'm also glad to hear that Obama is going to keep his campaign promise about energy independence. This is so crucial not only to creating new industries and employment in this country, but to curbing climate change, which if allowed to run amuck could eventually cost this country dearly in more ways than one.
A lot of pundits have complained about a lack of detail, but if he had given us details on all that we would have been there for three hours. I think what he did lay out was the basics of what he intended to do, and I'm sure the details will come in future days.
As far as Bobby Jindal's response, I found it absolutely inexplicable. In the first place, he sounded like he thought he was talking to 5th graders. I would say that if the Republicans think this guy is their big hope for the future they have another think coming. He called for more of that Republican cure-all, tax cuts, when we know that Bush's tax cuts and rebates did butkus for the economy. Tax cuts don't mean a lot to someone who doesn't have a job in the first place. He criticized a non-existent "magnetic levitation line between Las Vegas and Disneyland" supposedly in the stimulus plan (there has been some money set aside for transportation but no details or locations have been decided upon). He thought it laughable to put $140 million (a teeny percentage of the total) into "volcano monitoring," but considering the natural disaster Louisiana went through just a few short years ago he might want to rethink the wisdom of taking some precautions to prevent such things. On top of that, he tells us we can't trust the federal government. Okey dokey. Well, my guess is Sarah Palin is feeling a little better today about whether this guy is competition for her for the title of Republican sacrificial lamb in 2012. But then, if Gov. Jindal refuses the stimulus money for Louisiana as he has said he will, I don't think he'll even have to worry about getting reelected down there, much less going on to higher office.
So, I thought Obama gave a good speech, I think he's on the right track, and I found myself thinking that I was just glad that after the last eight years we finally have a president who has some common sense!
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Stimulus Stuff
Well, it looks like the stimulus package passed, with all of 3 Republican Senators voting for it, and no Republican House members. Looks like John Boehner & Co. have rounded up the troops and given them their marching orders, eh?
As I've said before on this blog, I think there are good parts and bad parts to this package. There are waaaay too many tax cuts in there, which were put in in order to get the votes of -- guess who -- Republicans! Well, that didn't work so hot... so we may as well have taken them out. Not that I wouldn't like a tax cut as much as the next guy, but let's face it, there isn't a tax cut coming that is going to make enough of a difference that I can go out and buy a new frig. Isn't giving us a tax cut somewhat like what the bankers have been doing by doling out bonuses when the bank is drowning in bad loans and borrowing from the feds to stay afloat? We're getting money from the federal treasury, which is trillions of dollars in debt and borrowing money from China to stay afloat. Ergo our tax cuts are being borrowed from China. I'd just as soon let them keep the extra $13 or whatever it is.
All I hear from John Boehner is that the Republicans had a better plan, that it would create more jobs for less money, yadda yadda yadda... but he never actually says what the plan IS. Gee, if it was that good, you'd think he'd let the rest of us in on it so we could e-mail our Congressman to get him to go for it.
The Republicans have decided to make a political play out of this. They're playing for 2010, banking on the economy to stay in trouble until the next Congressional races. In other words, they want this plan to fail and they're betting their seats on it. That's why Boehner and his compadre in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, put the strong arm on the Republicans in both houses. I also think this is why Judd Gregg pulled out of the Commerce Secretary position. They want to be able to blame the Democrats and the Democrats alone if the economy hasn't pulled out of the mess it's in by 2010.
Personally, I think the economy will perk up, although it probably will take time. We have to be close to a bottom. The Republicans are playing a very dangerous game; we have a popular Democratic President, and if the economy starts to tilt up by mid-2010, their party will become more and more marginalized. Hey, in the meantime, they can just go home and let the Democrats run the whole show. We don't need 'em.
As I've said before on this blog, I think there are good parts and bad parts to this package. There are waaaay too many tax cuts in there, which were put in in order to get the votes of -- guess who -- Republicans! Well, that didn't work so hot... so we may as well have taken them out. Not that I wouldn't like a tax cut as much as the next guy, but let's face it, there isn't a tax cut coming that is going to make enough of a difference that I can go out and buy a new frig. Isn't giving us a tax cut somewhat like what the bankers have been doing by doling out bonuses when the bank is drowning in bad loans and borrowing from the feds to stay afloat? We're getting money from the federal treasury, which is trillions of dollars in debt and borrowing money from China to stay afloat. Ergo our tax cuts are being borrowed from China. I'd just as soon let them keep the extra $13 or whatever it is.
All I hear from John Boehner is that the Republicans had a better plan, that it would create more jobs for less money, yadda yadda yadda... but he never actually says what the plan IS. Gee, if it was that good, you'd think he'd let the rest of us in on it so we could e-mail our Congressman to get him to go for it.
The Republicans have decided to make a political play out of this. They're playing for 2010, banking on the economy to stay in trouble until the next Congressional races. In other words, they want this plan to fail and they're betting their seats on it. That's why Boehner and his compadre in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, put the strong arm on the Republicans in both houses. I also think this is why Judd Gregg pulled out of the Commerce Secretary position. They want to be able to blame the Democrats and the Democrats alone if the economy hasn't pulled out of the mess it's in by 2010.
Personally, I think the economy will perk up, although it probably will take time. We have to be close to a bottom. The Republicans are playing a very dangerous game; we have a popular Democratic President, and if the economy starts to tilt up by mid-2010, their party will become more and more marginalized. Hey, in the meantime, they can just go home and let the Democrats run the whole show. We don't need 'em.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Republicans threaten food supply
That's a pretty provocative title there, but it's true. There are some Republican Senators out there, for instance Jon Kyl, who have been going around on news shows listing things in the Obama stimulus package that should be removed because they think they're ridiculous, and they love to mention that it includes help for honeybees.
Obviously these people need some education on the subject. For the last few years we have had an explosion in Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), causing the U.S. to lose more than a third of its honeybee population. We need honeybees to pollinate 1/3rd of our crops, such as fruit, nuts, soybeans, vegetables, cotton, etc. etc. So, no honeybees means no pollination means no crops means a threat to our food supply. This is simple enough to understand if the Republican Senators who are threatening this provision would bother to Google some information about it. This has been on the news for at least the last couple of years, even. Does anybody on that side of the aisle have a clue? Anybody at all???
Scientists still do not understand why we have such a huge die-off in honeybees, however, their research suggests that the use of genetically modified crops and/or chemicals and insecticides that have been banned in Europe but not here (another duh) may be to blame. This kind of thing makes me even more determined to grow some of my own food and buy as much organic as possible. We've been messing with nature way too much, and it is coming back to bite us on the butt.
Obviously these people need some education on the subject. For the last few years we have had an explosion in Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), causing the U.S. to lose more than a third of its honeybee population. We need honeybees to pollinate 1/3rd of our crops, such as fruit, nuts, soybeans, vegetables, cotton, etc. etc. So, no honeybees means no pollination means no crops means a threat to our food supply. This is simple enough to understand if the Republican Senators who are threatening this provision would bother to Google some information about it. This has been on the news for at least the last couple of years, even. Does anybody on that side of the aisle have a clue? Anybody at all???
Scientists still do not understand why we have such a huge die-off in honeybees, however, their research suggests that the use of genetically modified crops and/or chemicals and insecticides that have been banned in Europe but not here (another duh) may be to blame. This kind of thing makes me even more determined to grow some of my own food and buy as much organic as possible. We've been messing with nature way too much, and it is coming back to bite us on the butt.
Fortunately, it looks like due to changes in the way beekeepers manage their hives colonies have lost fewer bees in recent months than in the previous few years. However, it's too soon to know what caused the die-off, whether the crisis is over or if it won't happen again.
I would encourage you to e-mail or call Republicans you see on the news who are disparaging the honeybee provision in the stimulus plan. While you couldn't directly call this a "stimulus," and while there are some provisions in that plan that should be removed (and some already are), the honeybees need help regardless of what bill it goes in.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)