In a country where the terms "crisis" and "bad governance" are synonymous with politics, Nicaragua is no stranger to near-catastrophic brinksmanship by power-crazed caudillos. But even by Nicaraguan standards, the latest political crisis caused by President Daniel Ortega's push to extend his time in office has kicked the country's tinny democracy precariously close to calamity.
Unlike past battles between Ortega's Sandinista Front and opposition forces - tribal skirmishes that were mostly self-contained and had a sporting feel to them - this time the fight has been mostly one-sided and has caused collateral damage. On Tuesday, a mob of several hundred Sandinista thugs, armed with hand-held mortars, fired homemade fragmentation bombs at Managua's Holiday Inn Select hotel. Inside the building, opposition lawmakers - whose various parties form the majority in the legislature but are rarely in agreement - were discussing how to counter Ortega's attempt to reelect his cronies, and eventually himself.
At the heart of the crisis is Ortega's effort to remain in power, even if it means sacrificing the budding democracy that the Sandinista Overthrow Revolution helped plant 20 years ago. After being voted out of power in 1990 following a decade of U.S.-sponsored counterrevolutionary war, it took Ortega 16 years and three elections to return to the presidency in 2007. He won with a twiggy victory of 38%, thanks to a divided opposition. Upon returning to the presidency, Ortega initially tried to make an effort to live up to his slogan of "Reconciliation and National Unity." One of Ortega's closest advisers told me the Sandinistas were in a "battle for legitimacy," both nationally and internationally.
But others who know Ortega warned even then that his quest for power would eventually trump his need for legitimacy. "The principal goal of Ortega is stay in power and he is going to do everything possible to do so," Ortega's former vice president Sergio Ramirez said in early 2008. Ramirez said people who think Ortega will play by the rules and step down after his term ends in 2012 are "being a bit innocent."
Posted by: ed ||
04/22/2010 18:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Hope and Change, rubes...
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama suggested Wednesday that a new value-added tax on Americans is still on the table, seeming to show more openness to the idea than his aides have expressed in recent days. Tipping point?
Before deciding what revenue options are best for dealing with the deficit and the economy, Obama said in an interview with CNBC, "I want to get a better picture of what our options are." Like how much can I screw this country before they finally all wake up? Y'know, stuff like that...
After Obama adviser Paul Volcker recently raised the prospect of a value-added tax, or VAT, the Senate voted 85-13 last week for a nonbinding "sense of the Senate" resolution that calls the such a tax "a massive tax increase that will cripple families on fixed income and only further push back America's economic recovery." Geez, if even those idiots realize it...
For days, White House spokesmen have said the president has not proposed and is not considering a VAT. "I think I directly answered this the other day by saying that it wasn't something that the president had under consideration," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters shortly before Obama spoke with CNBC. Well, you're either lying, Doughboy, or your boss just tucked it up your ass...
After the interview, White House deputy communications director Jen Psaki said nothing has changed and the White House is "not considering" a VAT. No no no...what he said is not what you think he said.
Many European countries impose a VAT, which taxes the value that is added at each stage of production of certain commodities. It could apply, for instance, to raw products delivered to a mill, the mill's production work and so on up the line to the retailer. And we all know how schmart them Europeans are...
In the CNBC interview, Obama said he was waiting for recommendations from a bipartisan fiscal advisory commission on ways to tackle the deficit and other problems. Ah, well...a bipartisan commission. Phew! I was worried there for a minute...
When asked if he could see a potential VAT in this nation, the president said: "I know that there's been a lot of talk around town lately about the value-added tax. That is something that has worked for some countries. It's something that would be novel for the United States. And before, you know, I start saying 'this makes sense or that makes sense,' I want to get a better picture of what our options are," Obama said. So y'all be cool. This is Obama speaking to you, baby...
He said his first priority "is to figure out how can we reduce wasteful spending so that, you know, we have a baseline of the core services that we need and the government should provide. And then we decide how do we pay for that." Maybe we could, I dunno, deactivate the armed forces, or sumthin. Maybe sell the country's naming rights to the Chinese. Y'know, like the big ballparks do....
Volcker has said taxes might have to be raised to slow the deficit's growth. He said a value-added tax "was not as toxic an idea" as it had been in the past. Like I said the other day, "not as toxic to who?"
Since then, some GOP lawmakers and conservative commentators have said the Obama administration is edging toward a VAT. But, as everyone knows, they're just haters and racists...
Investors' Business Daily sponsored a poll on this subject:
After hearing VAT opponents smeared as anti-government radicals and worse, we decided to poll Americans on the issue. What our IBD/TIPP poll found was surprising: Not only is the VAT unpopular, but it's unpopular across the board, regardless of political affiliation.
Overall, Americans oppose a VAT by 73% to 22%. Republicans, as might be expected, feel the strongest: 83% against, 14% for. But even Democrats oppose it 65% to 27%. Independents stand somewhere in between (see chart).
So, if President Obama pushes this through like he did the health care bill, he will anger the same people even more, and even more people on both issues. How To Make Friends And Influence People, writ large.
#1
Luckily, Obama promised that people (like me) who earn less than $250,000 won't have their taxes raised. So I will be exempt from the VAT, right? Right?
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
04/22/2010 0:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
How about SMALLER GOVERNMENT with NO CRONY CAPITALISM???
OBAMA?
#4
Rambler: I guess I should throw in the disclaimer that it doesn't count if you're a Democrat. If you're a Republican like George Bush I, then you better fasten your seat belt.
#6
He said his first priority "is to figure out how can we reduce wasteful spending
A VAT will certainly have an impact on spending, car sales and large ticket item purchases will definately tank. Of course he'll figure a way for the non-earners to get their VAT back via "Earned Income Tax Credit" welfare payments. You know, the wealth re-distro plan. Can a single day or week go by without this bastard or his cadre coming up with some communist, take-away SHI*?
#7
I guess the Mighty One thinks we should be more like the Euro_Peons. Thought we left Europe to get away from a tyrannical government, lack of freedom, an unrepresentive government, and unfair taxation?
Yeah, he can screw something up and rewrite the Constitution at the same time.
As for the VAT, in my experience that is a business-to-business kind of tax. If a business buys something from another business, they add the VAT to the sales price. Is this how it works, or is there a private VAT as well?
#12
That's how it works, a stealth sales tax. If we want to have a sales tax, and I do instead of, not in addition to an income tax, it should be explicit just like state sales taxes.
#13
What all this taxation will do is to accelerate the underground economy. IIRC, at the time of the fall of the USSR, 50% of the GDP was the *ahem* alternate economy.
Ultimately, in the tax and spend scenario, the govt gets everything and gives the serfs what the govt thinks they need.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/22/2010 10:53 Comments ||
Top||
#14
The sad truth is the US is in a terrible bind. Everyone talks about cutting "wasteful spending" or cutting "discretionary spending". But these areas are drops in the bucket compared to where the real expenditures are. Everyone needs to educate themselves on government spending. The big ones are obvious: defense, social security and Medicare. In that order. And those account for most of government spending, I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but probably >75%. How many here know that government spending already accounts for 50% of healthcare spending? How many know that 50% of Medicare costs are incurred by 5% of medicare recipients in the last 6 months of their lives? So what are we going to cut? Social Security? Medicare? Even if the government cuts those programs, that cost still exists. It doesn't go away, society still pays it in some form. The same with healthcare. Nobody wants "socialized" healthcare, but we already have it! What do you think insurance is other than socializing costs? The cost of people without healthcare is already socialized by higher charges and premiums. No, I'm not defending the obamacare abomination, it's horrible and will increase costs. No doubt. But people need to understand, if you actually want the US to get it's fiscal house in shape, then, at the appropriate times (booms) we NEED higher taxes. That is just basic economics. Our society, for the most part has decided that Social Security and Medicare are something we want to do. Check the polls, a majority want to keep these programs. So then how do we cut costs in a meaningful way? Most people have no clue about the economic and financial position of the US. It's not good. We need real solutions, not fantasies that cutting pork will save us.
#15
As for the VAT, in my experience that is a business-to-business kind of tax. If a business buys something from another business, they add the VAT to the sales price. Is this how it works, or is there a private VAT as well?
What that means is there is a tax levied at each transaction along the way, from raw materials production all the way to the consumer. And yes, VAT is levied on the final sale to the consumer as well. As I recall from my time in Germany, the VAT went well toward doubling the cost of the things I purchased, just as a housewife.
18-19% added to the price to the consumer in Germany?
We have a 9.25% sales tax in Knox County, TN. No income taxes in TN. However, that is not entirely true. There is an income tax on earnings from investments. Add another 19% and its looking bad. Add to that Federal income tax. Property taxes. Gasoline taxes. Telephone taxes. License plates taxes. Whatever other taxes BO has in mind for us such as that to pay off unions, pay for health care, pay for cap and trade, etc,. Throw in what was lost in the stock market debacle created by the government and Wall street. Starts to look a lot like living at the poverty level. My and Mrs. JOhnQC's plan for retirement is screwed. Not so easy to find work at age 71 with high blood pressure and "C" survivor. I guess there is Wal Mart greeter if they have any openings.
#18
Not only that buts its too damn easy to kick up the rate on a VAT because, as I understand it, the VAT rate depends on the commodity - as long as you don't piss of too many people at the same time you can raise it as much as you like.
Also people don't 'see' the VAT tax directly - only via higher prices. So they will blame the BUSINESS for passing on the cost and not the GOVERNMENT which is the root cause - not the rampant GOVERNMENT SPENDING on sh*t like bailouts for bankers, newspapers, etc... They don't 'see' that while they are getting something like healthcare - it is not 'free' - they are paying for it with additional hidden taxes - often at much higher cost (and much worse service) than insurance or pay-as-you-go.
Much like the old Telephony monopolies - they have a monopoly and thus don't care about service - they are guaranteed a return.
#19
So what are we going to cut? Social Security? Medicare?
Yep.
Look at it this way: Big Brother takes your money, says he's gonna give it back to you someday. You believe that? Maybe you get pennies on the dollar. Maybe, if you live long enough, you get all your money back and then some. Who pays for the "then some"? The ones who croaked early or the ones who are still working? Either way it's not fair. I WANT MY MONEY BACK, DAMMIT!!!
I WANT IT NOW!!!
#20
With AllahHateMe on this one. If we want to avoid becoming Argentina, and refuse to make deep cuts in Social Security and Medicare, then we need higher tax revenues, end of story.
My preference would be for huge tax increases on energy consumption, across the board,, balanced by a reduction in payroll taxes + an end to all bans on offshore drilling, including southern California and all along the coast of Alaska.
This would greatly reduce the amount of cash we ship each year to Oogo, the Saudis and GazPutin; move us closer to energy self-sufficiency; stimulate domestic industries focused on smart energy usage / energy efficiency; and make us as a nation far less wasteful and more focused on the one area where huge advances in technology can actually help us restore lost manufacturing jobs and rebuild our industrial base.
Does that make me a "socialist"? I couldn't care less if it does. We need to be realistic about our situation and do whatever works before this nation's finances resembles California's. No time for ideology now.
#21
AllahHateMe - There are PRAGMATIC SOLUTIONS...
But, everybody in the US seems to be a believer in some theory, way of life, moral structure or something....
Let me propose some out of the the box non-acceptable to most Americans views of our society that an alien from outer space might see..
Lets start with parasites...
In the long telephoto view of things.... everybody not engaged in farming is a parasite on the products of farms. They need to invent reasons farmers need them ... therefore .. goods for farmers... protection from predation from other humans ... etc...
Now using the same analogy... there are two fuels in society that have become running sores engaging millions of people in remediation efforts and the fuel production and use... They are 1) Drugs 2) Oil.
Both are enabling gateways to huge criminal and warfare sinkholes...
So... before anything...
1) drill drill drill for oil at home and look for replacements..
2) Drugs need to be made legal and so cheap that a) addicts can poison themselves quickly and cheaply with minimal crime and then exit the parasite pool for good..
b) Drugs need to become so cheap that criminal gangs and failed states/(non-state warriors) can get no enabling funds from them or oil.
c) Prisons can be emptied of drug users... - Its even cheaper to let them poison themselves in a flop house on some welfare then keep them in expensive prisons - with the huge parasitical prison industry that engenders - (What amount of useful production of anything comes from the billions of $ spent on prisons? Near nothing so it's a parasite on the taxpayer)
d) Drug rehab industry... it is parasitical too... let Darwin save the taxpayers some money... IF somebody really wants to reform... they can do it themselves... Really.. I am not kidding... and know folk who have... You have to hit rock bottom and decide to save yourself.. Nobody can to it for you...
e) Having so many minority men in jail... disturbs the male/female demographics in said communities causing dynamics that accelerate the destruction of stable families in said communities.. You can see the results of that when women in the worst hit groups have the highest levels of STDs in our society.. the prison induced demographics put them in that position....
Then Oil and others...
But, for some reason .... we can't talk about this stuff in our society and it just gets worse and worse..
#22
The basic way that the Federal government operates has to change. We are rapidly becoming an economy of government workers and special interests. Public employee unions and special interests are fueling this growth in government employment and governmental goodies. Congress can't just keep passing legislation that costs more and more. If we operated the way government does, someone would take away the credit cards and send us to a head shrinker. I'll take the money back that I paid into social security and medicare and that I continue to pay in. I am willing to manage it myself. Better yet just keep the money I paid in and get off my back. At the same time unplug the economy and let it grow so that it creates jobs. Get independent of oil in the mideast. Quit enshrining political correctness and global warming as the new state religion.
#24
Some good comments on this thread. I'd love to keep it going, but I have to go to class now. Graduate, not undergrad :-) I plan on revisiting this thread in the morning though. I have lots to say. Hope everyone has a good night.
#26
It's just the beginning: Nearly 4M people could pay without health coverage Nearly 4 million Americans the vast majority of them middle class will have to pay a penalty if they don't get insurance when President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law kicks in, according to congressional estimates released Thursday. The penalties will average a little more than $1,000 apiece in 2016, the Congressional Budget Office said in a report.
Millions face tax increases under Dems budget plan President Barack Obama's Democratic allies in the Senate promise to cut the deficit by almost two-thirds over the next five years,(rubes) but their budget plan could threaten about 30 million people with tax increases averaging $3,700 in 2012 and after because of the alternative minimum tax.
Posted by: ed ||
04/22/2010 18:01 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Hear hear WaltMan. Frankly, (!) we'd all be happier and there would be a shit load less violent crime. Instead of giving a hobo a quarter you could give him a packet of quality hoss and make sure he has a good blanket and a Whopper. That's a hell of a lot cheaper that having the state look after him 24-7.
#31
If they enact a VAT on goods, I'd recommend everyone buy nothing but food until its repealed.
No cars, tv's, boats or anything of the sort. School clothes for the kids and things like that would be hard to cut out, but I already have enough crap in my house to last me the rest of my life.
#32
The bottom line is that we cannot keep living this lifestyle without working smarter. The rate of govt spending is not supportable. If we do not reign in spending, we will collapse economically. Period. Everyone, including Chicoms go down.
To get all the goodies, you have to be more productive. We are talking quantum steps. People contribute. No able bodied freeloaders.
So we are talking fiscal and physical conservation, new methods, higher efficiencies, spending on basics that work, then work into new technologies as they are proven out.
We reform our house or our house collapses. Simple as that.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/22/2010 21:18 Comments ||
Top||
#33
I'd recommend everyone buy nothing but food until its repealed.
Isn't that what is happening involuntarily between replacing domestic labor w/ foreign workers and the oligarchs looting what remaining wealth is left?
Posted by: ed ||
04/22/2010 23:02 Comments ||
Top||
#34
The sad truth is the US is in a terrible bind. Everyone talks about cutting "wasteful spending" or cutting "discretionary spending". But these areas are drops in the bucket compared to where the real expenditures are. Everyone needs to educate themselves on government spending. The big ones are obvious: defense, social security and Medicare. In that order.
The government spends more on administration than anything else. Of course these administration costs are bundled into the costs of defense, health, etc. And this ignores the administration costs to business and indiduals of complying with government rules/laws.
Which is why VAT (GST) is a good tax. Its efficient (hard to cheat on) and cheap to administer. My GST return used to take me about 5 minutes every month.
BTW, in Canada paying GST is optional for small businesses, but over 90% voluntarily collect and pay the tax.
That's about all her face can do these days... and we have it on expert authority that interior emotions are triggered by physical expression, as well as vice versa. No expression means little emotion, regardless how valid the emotion would have been.
WASHINGTON -- Congressional investigators have questioned House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and aides to Speaker Nancy Pelosi as part of a probe into whether top Democrats covered up information that ex-Rep. Eric Massa sexually harassed male employees.
The FBI has also been drawn into the Massa case, apparently by reports last weekend about a $40,000 check from the former congressman's campaign fund to his former chief of staff, who has filed a sexual harassment complaint against Massa, said an attorney involved in the case.
The House Ethics Committee formally opened its investigation on Wednesday. A four-member panel of the evenly divided committee questioned Hoyer, the Maryland Democrat's office said. In February, Hoyer's staff learned of the allegations against Massa, and Hoyer demanded that Massa's aides take them to the ethics panel. Oh, well...the House Ethics Committee is on it. That'll put the fear of God in 'em. Well...not really.
Five months earlier, Massa's chief of staff met with an aide to Pelosi to complain about the conduct of Massa, D-N.Y. Pelosi aides have insisted that those discussions did not include the sexual harassment allegations. Ah, a fall guy middleman. She's no dummy...
"The speaker has made herself available to meet with ethics committee at their earliest convenience," said Nadeam Elshami, a spokesman for Pelosi. Elshami said members of Pelosi's staff have already met with and fully cooperated with the committee. So, begone, peasant...
#3
"Can you tell us if any ethics were violated?"
"..."
"Sir, we're waiting."
"..."
"Sir, please answer the question."
"Scuse please, looking for definition of this 'ethics' thingy."
Sorry, the phenomenom is already name the "Jimmy Carter Effect"
As approval ratings for Barack Obama decline at home, world opinion of the United States is rising steadily under his stewardship. In other words, the more Comrade Obama screws up the US economy, shackles the citizenry and emasculates the pursuit of national interest the better America's jealous rivals and enemies like it. I am shocked.
A new international survey by the British Broadcasting Company reveals that views of the U.S. around the world have "improved sharply" during the first year of the Obama presidency, with positive opinion outweighing negative for the first time since 2005, when the BBC first polled this question. May the next president return the favor and be supremely disinterested and unavailable the next time a crisis hits.
Posted by: ed ||
04/22/2010 18:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Too bad they won't be voting for him in 2012.
He'd be a shoe-in.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
