TAX CUTS
Reagan and Bush I also did tax cuts on the rich, also believing it would stimulate the economy. By the end of the Bush I administration, the deficit was of 300 billion dollars: a recession. Clinton, on the other hand, raised taxes on the wealthy and lowered them on the poor. People predicted another even greater recession, But between 1992 and 2000, the U.S had the greatest economical growth in it’s history. More than 18 million new jobs. The defecit became the largest surplus in history, 236 billion dollars.
Bush II did like his father, and in one term, managed to transform the 236 billion dollars of surplus into the largest deficit in U.S history, 500 billion dollars. The wealthy prosper like never before, but this makes healthcare costs go up, social security funds go down, and debt pile up.
Bush blames the “Clinton recession�, Al qaeda, and the war in Iraq. Whose fault is it? In his first days in office, Bush took most of the surplus to give it back to the rich. This did little to boost the economy. In addition, Bush had promised not to touch the 2.5 trillion reserved for Social Security in the future. Within 1 year, he had broken his promise.
Within another, it was all gone. Hello deficit. I can see conservatives saying “this all went to the wars we fought to liberate Iraq�. The cost of the tax cuts is estimated at three times the cost of the war. The second wave of tax cuts in 2003 were even worse and the former secretary of treasury Paul O’Neil said it could have been spent better (guess why he’s out of a job). Spending increased almost twice as much as with Clinton. And now, silly programs like missions to mars and missile defence are really helping to slow down the spending (sarcasm).
Ultimately, the middle class is paying off the debts with the soaring health care costs, depleted retirement funds, lower salaries and record unemployement. So it will leave you with 5.6 trillion dollars of extra debt, to be paid off in the future. Nice legacy.
THE ESTATE TAX
The estate tax is a tax you have to pay when you inherit something. It has been repealed by Bush, with the argument that farmers could be obliged to sell their farms just to pay the tax. But basically, it only affected the richest 2% of the population, because you only paid it if your estate was worth more than 1.5 million dollars. This will reduce the revenue of the goverment by over 928 billion in the next years. So that money can stay in the hands of rich inheritors. Oh yeah, this will save the Bush family 10- 15 million dollars, Dick Cheney’s family 9-40 million, Donald Rumsfeld’s family 30 to a 120 million, and other members of the bush cabinet 23 to 111 million dollars. And Bush’s friends like Ken Lay (59 million dollars) Martha Stewart (324 million), Bernie Ebbers ( 254 million) would all save too. But the real thing is...
... no farmer in the history of the united states has ever had to sell his farm in order to pay off the Estate tax. It had special exemptions to prevent this... In the end, it would save the rich 2400 estates, whose worth equals that of 142 million of the poorest americans. It was all a grand scheme. Oh, yes.
THE TAX CUTS, PART 2:
Here’s how the 2001 1.3 trillion tax cut was distributed among the American people.
41 % of it went to the richest 20 % (of it 7 % to 1 % of the polulation).
Not “too� bad, eh? How about 2003?
71% went to the richest 20 % (of it 38 percent to the 1 % of the population). You call this fair? It’s the perfect plan: tricking the poor into thinking they’re benifitting from little tax breaks when it truth the money buys Bush political influence and campaings contributions. Woo hoo!
And at the end of the 10 year plan...
By 2010, 68 % of the tax breaks will have gone to the richest 20 %, and OF IT 51 % OF IT TO 1% OF AMERICANS!!!! When 1/3 of americans can’t even afford healthcare, the social security system was fucked by Bush, thus denying safe retirement to midddle class, Bush gives more money to the rich than he has to education!
Bush says that the rich, after receiving money, create jobs and help stimulate the economy. The facts: the economy has been improving as of may 2004. This is a good thing. However, everyone knows that cutting taxes when the economy is plummeting is going to help the economy. If you borrow trillions of dollars against the deficit and throw it at the most resilient economy in the world, some growth is guaranteed. It’s a short-term economy stimulis! But former secretary of treasury Paul O’Neil (appointed by Bush), did not agree with the tax cuts because all of the money given was money that could be trickled back into the pockets of the rich over the next ten years instead of immediately providing a stimulis to shock the economy back into shape. On the other hand, giving the money to middle-class americans would have provided a boost in economy that would truly last. This was proved by Clinton. Even Bush was appaled by the 2003 tax cuts. It truly isn’t HIS work, but that of manipulators such as Cheney and Rove. Billions were thus wasted, borrowed straight against the deficit, and it was overall, a just plain stupid investement that could have been used so much better.
THE MAN WHO SOLD THE WHITE HOUSE (I coined this one)
Kenneth Lay, CEO of the energy company Enron, created one of the greateast corporate bankruptcies in US history, leaving thousands of employees jobless, decimating employee retirement savings, and devastating thousands of small investors. Corporal officials forced employees to hold onto the stock as its value went down drastically, Executives meanwhile distributed 100 million dollars in bonus on the eve of declaring the bankruptcy. Enron was one of Bush’s greateast financial contributor throughout his career; in the 2000 election, Lay and Enron gave more than 2 million dollars to Bush’s election efforts.
Five out of seven of Bush’s contributors had strong ties with Enron. Enron was the only energy company given the privilege to meet alone with Dick Cheney during secret meetings relating new energy policies. In exchage for contributions and profits from outside business deals with Enron, Bush helped Lay kill laws designed to protect the consumers. Where was the FERC? The federal energy regulatory commision is supposed to stop these kind of things. Let’s see...
In 2001, Curtis Hebert Jr was chairman of the FERC, the committee that made laws for companies like Enron. He had barely received his new job when he was asked by Ken Lay to pass legislation that would essentially grant Enron greater power and freedom to exploit consumers and drive up energy costs. Disgusted, Hebert refused to comply. Then, Lay got Bush to fire Hebert and replaced him with Pat Wood, who was totally under Lay’s control. Great job of defending our interest, Bush. Weird that a committee supposed to ensure fair prices is headed by the friend of the CEO of an energy company... this is one of the hundreds of examples of how the White House was bought. This proves that...
Bush is not in power for being a great leader, but instead he has been boosted into the presidency to serve as a money-making tool for the wealthy, the elite, the powerful, and the corporations, all while hiding under a criminal veil of secrecy and denial.
TAX SHELTERS
What a great place America is. If you have a company, but just don’t want to pay taxes, don’t! Put up a mailbox in the Bermudas and you’ll no longer be held accountable by your shareholders. Example: Enron had 881 subsidiaries in Bermuda, and thus avoided paying any taxes for their four last years! TYCO stole 1 billion dollars by setting up a mailbox in 1997! But don’t worry, Bush did it when he was head of Harken energy, and the secretary of treasury, Paul Snow, does it also. But the most blatant example of how good the Bush cabinet is...
Halliburton hasn’t paid any taxes since 1999. In fact, in that year, they got an 85 million dollars tax rebate! Woo hoo! So Cheney’s company now enjoys 23 billion tax-free dollars of contracts every year for tapping into Iraq alone! Good for them! To be fair, Halliburton did have to pay a 2 million dollar fine for this, but can still do it. Accidents happen!
All in all, the islands save corporations and cost americans 70 billion dollars every year! By the way, don’t vote for JOHN KERRY, who will eliminate these offshore tax heavens when he’s elected, and make big companies pay their dues. Just when Bush preaches patriotism, corporations express more of it towards the Bermudas...
THE ENVIRONNEMENT: Simple. Owned by the coal, utility and mining industries, it’s of no surprise that the actual goverment is called the worst environmental adminstration of the U.S. No more clean air act, kyoto protocol, more drilling in environmental refuges and over 200 environmental laws rolled back. 30 years of environmental policy trashed to save a few bucks.
HEALTHCARE, JOBS, AND WHY YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR KERRY
You still live in a country where is so many ways there are 2 seperate Americas. One for the people with positions with privilege, and one for the others. You have two health care systems; one for those who can afford the best healthcare, and one for everybody else- rationed out by insurance companies and HMOs. Two public school systems: one for the affluent communities, and one for everybody else. Two tax systems, one for those who have lawyers and accountants who take care of every tax loophole and every tax advantage, and one for the others. Two economies; one for all those families that have everything they need inculding security for their kids and grandkids, and one for all the families that go from paycheck to paycheck, saving nothing and going deeper into debt. 35 million americans live everyday in poverty. Today in america, the average CEO earns more in one day than the average employee in one year. In 1980, the acerage CEO made 41 times the salary of the average empleyee. In 1990, 85 times. In the U-K, it’s 14. But today, the average CEO MAKES 531 TIMES THE SALARY OF AN AVERAGE EMPLOYEE. At a time when the minimum wage is only 5.15 an hour and that salaries have only gone up 1 or 2 %, CEOs’ salaries do not stop going up, and up, as well as receive record tax relief. In the meantime, 2 million workers lost their health insurance last year, and workers who still had coverage faced skyrocketing costs and larger co-payments. 40 million americans have no form of health insurance. The cost of drugs has skyrocketted due to the fact that the Bush administration is in the pocket of several drug companies who donated millions to his campaign.
And even if Bush applauds himself for giving mild tax relief, the rise in healthcare costs has cancelled out any of these tax cuts. Bush said: “My economic security plan can be summed up in one word: JOBS�. As of March 2004, the Bush administration has lost 63 000 jobs for month. The U.S needs to create about 150 000 jobs per month to keep up with population growth. About 2 million jobs have dissapeared since March 2001. The only president to lose more jobs during his administration was Herbert Hoover, during the Great Depression. The Bush administration points out that productivity is at an all time high and that the hiring of new employees isn’t happening because the present employees are doing a good job. But what it really means is that employees are working harder and longer than ever before for little money and fewer benefits. Americans now work nine weeks longer than Europeans. Americans also work the equivalent of five hours more a week than in 1973- about 200 extra hours a year. Worker productivity is up because it’s in the interests of companies to work one worker 60/80 hours a week rather than two workers 30-40 hours a week each. This is because healthcare costs for companies are so high, it’s more cost effective to stretch one worker to the bone than hire more workers and have to pay for more healthcare and retirement plans. So how do we ease the burden and create new jobs? What is the point of this particular rant?
To prove why you should vote for Kerry. First, he’ll roll back all of Bush’s tax cuts to the rich, and use this money to create tax incentives for companies to create new jobs and introduce health care reform to make basic health care available for all people of all income levels. He’ll also pass laws that prevent CEO’s from exporting jobs and exploiting their workers and making off them exorbitant amounts of money.
RELIGION, OSAMA and FOREIGN POLICY
God is on our side. We are good, they are evil. If you’re not with us, you’re terrorists. Let’s remember that Christianity’s first message is to love thy neighbor and thyne enemy. Preaching that God hates homosexuality, among others, is fundamentally not a christian virtue, no matter what the Bible says. Bush is a perfect example of how any fool in error can distort religious scripture to justify hatred and violence... the rethoric “in the name of God� is the same terrorists use... Many people Bush is the only one with enough “guts� to protect the country from terrorists. This is not true. First of all, it is of utmost importance that we recognize Osama Ben Laden as more of a man, he is a MINDSET. Every time America starts a war such as the war in Iraq, whether it is justified or not, the Muslim blood that is spilled will plant seeds of Ben Laden in the minds of Muslims who have become angry, and dishounoured by America. While some Bush supporters might argue that hunting down terrorists is all there is to be done to get rid of them, this is not the solution. THE SOLUTION IS TO STOP GIVING THEM REASON TO HATE AMERICA. The sympathy gained after the 9-11 attacks was quickly smothered by your arrogance, and inability to work as an international community. Half of the people in America may like you, but 90% of the world doesen’t. This is the work of one man. Bush was naive enough to think that getting rid of Saddam Hussein would bring peace and love in Iraq, and is still naive enough to think that hunting down Ben Laden will change anything. You are not safer now than you were before 9/11. People all over the world hate you more than ever. America needs a president who has a plan to work with the international community, who will not start wars based on shoddy evidence and lies, a president who has a plan to restore America the image of hope, prosperity and freedom, and defeat the new image of being imperialistic, greedy, arrogant, stupid war bent!
“If Ben Laden could vote, would he vote for Bush or Kerry?� If Osama Ben Laden could vote, he would vote for Bush, and he would thank you for spreading the Ben Laden gospel of Anti-americanism like never before!
IRAQ
I think all of you know this by now. Based on lies, your country went to war, bla bla bla. So if you care to reread this a millionth time, I took another article and pasted it. Let's get this straight right now: the war in Iraq has NOTHING TO DO with the war on terror. al-Qaeda is unrelated to Saddam Hussein. The destruction of downtown Manhattan and the lost lives of thousands of New Yorkers are unconnected with any persons, groups, or events that have transpired in Iraq. Simply stated, these are two different issues.
Why then would we actively pursue Iraq with the greater issue of terrorism still at hand? Because President Bush knew that he could. With a soaring popularity unlike any president has seen in years, the unconditional support of the majority of Americans gave him the green-light to pursue this longstanding interest. All he had to do was set the ball rolling. Allow me, for a moment, to take a stroll down memory lane…
On February 5th, 2003, Colin Powell presented to the United Nations “undeniable evidence� that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction, evading UN weapons inspectors, and actively developing a nuclear weapons program. Using as-of-then recently declassified intelligence, including satellite imagery and bits of intercepted phone calls, Powell did his best to prove to the UN that Iraq was blatantly refusing to disarm, and even producing new weapons in the meantime. He also called on UN Resolution 1441 to give the Iraqi government one last chance to completely yield to weapons inspectors or prepare for “serious consequences�.
The general reaction to this presentation was not favorable of Powell's implications. Naturally, the Iraqi delegate denied all the charges against his country. Other delegates almost immediately took sides on the issue, with only Britain and Spain backing the US. Nearly all other countries were in favor of a peaceful solution to this problem.
As it became increasingly clear that war was at hand, the world rallied against it. On February 15th, 2003, the largest protest in the history of the world was held. Estimates of the number of protesters demonstrating range from 6 to 15 million. Converging in immeasurable crowds in cities across the globe, these people came together to convey a single idea: don't go to war with Iraq. (Consider that these are just the people who were willing to give up a day from their lives to express their views. One can only assume that the number of non-protesters with similar views was exponential in comparison.)
To make things official, Bush declared war on Iraq on March 19th, 2003. Despite the peace protests. Against the urgings of the greater part of the United Nations. To hell with all of it, let's get that Saddam.
The problem here is, in my opinion, when declaring war in the name of international policy, it would be a good idea to have international support. It seems entirely hypocritical to advance into battle using a United Nations resolution as reason and justification without the consent or approval of the United Nations itself. The foreign policy that justifies this rationale is irresponsible, dangerous, and, as suggested by congressman Dr. Ron Paul, even unconstitutional.
As the fighting raged and cities fell, no weapons were found. Even traces of the ghosts of weapons past were hard to come by. On May 1st, 2003, Bush declared an end to “major combat operations in Iraq� after making a dramatic entrance by Navy surveillance jet onto the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. He later gave a speech to the sailors and the world under a banner declaring “Mission Accomplished�. Some have since argued that this banner was not placed under the direction of the Bush administration, but rather by the soldiers on board the aircraft carrier. Even if these allegations are true and the banner was indeed a mistake for which Bush was not accountable, his words on that day still marched to the beat of the same drum. 'In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed' was the exact phrase used. That was over a year ago.
The number of US soldiers who have lost their lives as a direct result of this war is over 500 and counting, with more than 100 of these deaths in April alone.
As of this writing, we are still in Iraq, with plans to “hand over control� on June 30th. As the deadline looms, a major question still remains to be answered by Bush and friends: who exactly are we turning power over to, and how do they plan to govern and control a post-Saddam Iraq? It is all but clear that when the official occupation ends in June, an unofficial occupation of similar magnitude will be needed in July, lest Iraq collapse into complete and utter chaos.
Because we have acted with haste, and alienated most potential allies in the process, we find ourselves in quite the precarious situation. It is obvious that the Iraqi people will refuse any government established by US forces. Even if an international team is assembled to remedy the situation, it will most certainly call for heavy US backing in the way of military support. Either way, our armed forces have a long fight ahead of them with no certain end in sight.
In the meantime, President Bush has been cracking jokes about those wacky WMDs. The worst part of all of this is that we still have a war on terror to fight. Saddam Hussein may have been captured as a result of all of this, but the man responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks is still at large. The fact that we put aside our efforts to destroy al-Qaeda in favor of a war which was largely unnecessary is deeply disturbing. Even more troubling is the lack of international support we will have, if and when this anti-terror effort is resumed, as a direct result of our global disregard for the opinions of our former allies. It was a dangerous gamble that Bush took in leading us into Iraq, and we’re already paying the price for it.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
