The table above has these entries. Post entries with just one line for Reach were not boosted. Boosted posts have two lines for Reach and several other items. The upper line reflects all interactions, the bottom line just those resulting from paid ads.
========== Who decides who is elected to Congress in 2018? In the aftermath of the special elections in Virginia and Alabama, people have begun to realize that it's mostly a waste of time to worry about unemployed rural white male high school grads - the ones that still support Trump always will, because they like his style, not because he's going to do anything to objectively improve their lot. Instead, many voters that can be turned are suburban middle class educated women. Some of those that supported Trump because they agreed with him on some ideological issues have changed their minds, primarily because they can't stand his droit-du-seigneur style and alliance with Roy Moore and his ilk. Every woman has had unpleasant experiences with men like these and for many, far worse than unpleasant. In a roundabout way, Democrats can thank Harvey Weinstein for being the straw that broke the camel's back/last brick in the load. We may never know why Weinstein was the predator that broke the dam - as opposed to the predator before or the predator after. But the dam has broken and any male candidate that equivocates on these issues is going to be in trouble in a swing district. Jennifer Rubin wrote this the day after the Alabama election: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/12/08/journalists-forget-the-rust-belt-diners-head-for-the-suburban-yoga-classes/ and Martin and Burns followed a few days later: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/18/us/politics/house-control-2018-suburbs-trump-republicans-democrats.html ===== comments 5 impact 6926 impactrate 0 likeimpress 17 negative 0 posted 2017-12-28 ratio 8 react 312 reactrate 0 shares 2 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 288 title Who decides who is elected to Congress in 2018? topic other wordrate 0 words 222 ID 556514674693056 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556514674693056 audclicks 289 audreach 254 bimpress 2527 blikeimpress 6 blikeusers 6 breach 2487 commentsimpress 5 commentsusers 3 engaged 269 impress 2795 likeclickusers 6 likeimpress 17 likeuimpress 63 likeusers 17 likeuusers 23 matchedlinkclicks 86 matchedotherclicks 202 oimpress 268 oreach 195 posted "12/28/2017 09:02:07 PM" postlinkclicks 73 postotherclicks 192 reach 2591 sharesimpress 2 sharesusers 2 type Link budget 20 budgettype Lifetime cadname "Post: ""Who decides who is elected to Congress in 2018?""" ccleantitle Who decides who is elected to Congress in 2018? cclicksall 519 cclickslink 79 ccpcall 0.03853565 ccpclink 0.25316456 cdelivery archived cend 2018-06-30 cimpressions 2527 clicksunique 78 conversionrank - cost 0.25316455696203 cpm 7.91452315 creach 2459 cstart 2018-04-01 ctrall 20.53818757 ctrlink 3.1262366442422 ecomments 2 ecpclink 0.25316456 ends 2018-04-13 engagedrank - ereact 9 frequency 1.0276535176901 indicator actions:link_click qualityrank - results 79 spent 20 ========== Getting to 60 in 2018 The Senate requires 60 votes to pass most legislation - the recent tax bill was passed with 51 votes under a process called reconciliation which imposes quite a few limits on what can be passed. The website get-to-sixty.net argues that the Senate should have started over on the tax bill and worked to get at least 30 Republican and 30 Democratic votes. Too late for that now, but what's next for the period Jan 3 - Nov 6 2018? Here's some suggestions: Continuing resolutions are required to keep the government running when Congress can't pass a budget, which is most of the time. No good purpose is served by unpredictable temporary shutdowns and restarts of government services. As a general principle of good government, continuing resolutions should not address any other matters. Republicans and Democrats alike are fond of using continuing resolutions as leverage for other matters, but it's bad government when the Republicans do it and bad government when the Democrats do it. So don't do it. Less frequently, resolutions are required to raise the Federal debt limit. No good purpose is served by veering toward default on US Government obligations. As a general principle of good government, debt ceiling resolutions should not address any other matters. Republicans and Democrats alike are fond of using debt ceiling resolutions as leverage for other matters, but it's bad government when the Republicans do it and bad government when the Democrats do it. So don't do it. So for these two categories, Democrats and Republicans alike should vote for clean resolutions and against those bundled with other issues. What about everything else? The Democratic Senate caucus should strive toward bipartisan solutions by declining to vote for any legislative initiatives that have less than 30 Democratic votes. The Republican strategy will be to try to pick off the nine Democratic votes they need to get to sixty, basically by bribes or threats. Don't let them do that! Let the Republicans who want to solve problems find common ground with the Democrats that want to solve problems. Ignore the President and those Senators of both parties that just want to create problems rather than solve them. In particular, the Republicans now own tax law and Obamacare. It's up to them to come up with solutions that appeal to 30 Democrats when they need them. PAYGO: Republican Congressional leadership planned for Trump to sign the tax bill early in January, rather than late in December, to avoid triggering something called PAYGO in 2018 before elections, rather than afterward in 2019. But Trump had promised to sign a tax bill before Christmas, so he did. Congressional Democrats apparently went along with a continuing resolution that waived PAYGO with respect to the tax bill. Trump signed the continuing resolution the same day as the tax bill. I wonder if the Democrats threw away a potential point of leverage there. Don't vote for continuing resolutions with other matters tacked on! What's PAYGO? http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-paygo https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/policy-basics-the-pay-as-you-go-budget-rule It's a system for keeping deficits under control. It was thought to be a factor in timing the signing of the tax bill: http://www.businessinsider.com/when-will-trump-sign-tax-reform-bill-paygo-medicare-2017-12 But in the end, the Democrats went along: https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/after-passing-tax-overhaul-gop-returns-to-infighting-as-shutdown-deadline-looms/2017/12/21/dfad1890-e659-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html ===== comments 1 hideall 2 impact 848 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 2 posted 2017-12-28 ratio 4 react 16 reactrate 0 shares 3 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 9 title Getting to 60 in 2018 topic other wordrate 0 words 530 ID 556498241361366 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556498241361366 audclicks 9 audreach 5 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 8 hideallclicks 2 hideallclicksusers 2 impress 116 likeclickusers 5 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 56 likeusers 1 likeuusers 28 matchedotherclicks 9 negclicks 2 negusers 2 oimpress 116 oreach 69 posted "12/28/2017 07:57:30 PM" postotherclicks 5 reach 69 sharesimpress 3 sharesusers 3 type Link ========== Evolution of Tax Reform into Billionaire Tax Relief What Trump campaigned on: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-original-trump-campaign-tax-plan-is-the-right-one/2017/11/15/a612a302-c97b-11e7-8321-481fd63f174d_story.html Deductions and credits were limited to $150,000, so taxes on the wealthy went up, to pay for working and middle-class tax reductions in a revenue-neutral way. What Trump proposed in April - the first two are the critical points: https://www.vox.com/2017/4/26/15438404/trump-tax-plan-april-mnuchin-cohn-changes 1) Corporate tax rate 15% - there are actually some good reasons for lowering the corporate tax rate, but not that much. 2) Flow-through tax rate 15% - so business owners like Trump only pay 15% instead of the maximum personal tax bracket 39.6%. 3) Eliminate alternative minimum tax - so business owners like Trump don't have to worry about the maximum AMT personal tax rate of 28%. 4) Eliminate estate tax - so wealthy individuals like Trump can leave all their accumulated fortunes to their heirs. 5) Window dressing - small cuts to deceive the masses into thinking it's all about them, despite that almost all W-2 wage earners get nothing from the four points listed above. What the Republicans proposed in September - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/09/27/the-gop-tax-plan-explained-in-simplest-possible-terms/ 1) Corporate tax rate 20% - instead of Trump's 15% 2) Flow-through tax rate 25% - instead of Trump's 15% 3) Eliminate alternative minimum tax - 4) Eliminate estate tax - 5) Window dressing - slightly different from Trump's window dressing, but still almost all W-2 wage earners get nothing from the four points listed above. What Trump signed in December: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/22/congress-votes-on-tax-bill-what-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-means-for.amp.html 1) Corporate tax rate 21% - instead of 20% 2) Flow-through tax rate reduced - the details are impenetrable: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3089423 but the motivation is obvious: http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/republican-senators-will-save-millions-special-real-estate-tax-break-2630037 3a) Eliminate corporate alternative minimum tax - 3b) Reduce personal alternative minimum tax - higher zero brackets mean fewer people subject to it, but reducing the highest tax bracket on regular tax means more people subject to it 4) Reduce estate tax - the zero brackets are doubled 5) Window dressing - slightly different from previous window dressing, but still almost all W-2 wage earners get nothing from the four points listed above. 6) Repeals individual mandate of Obamacare - as young healthy people drop out, tax subsidies will decline, but insurance rates will increase, so tax subsidies will increase 7) Opens Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling - that's certainly germane to tax reform! Items 1-4) were modified from the September plan in order to get through the Senate under reconciliation (50 votes) instead of regular order (60 votes). Interestingly, Trump signed the bill in 2017 instead of waiting a couple of weeks until 2018, which had been the plan of the Congressional leadership, in order to avoid triggering PAYGO Medicare cuts until after the 2018 election. http://www.businessinsider.com/when-will-trump-sign-tax-reform-bill-paygo-medicare-2017-12 Now there is going to be an interesting and quite likely stalemated negotiation involving liberal Democrats in the Senate and Freedom Caucus in the House. If it goes badly, Trump will blame the Congressional leadership. The Trump Philosophy: SAYING: What does my shrinking base want to hear? DOING: What's good for billionaires like me? At least he's consistent! ===== impact 349 impactrate 0 likeimpress 2 negative 0 posted 2017-12-28 ratio 10 react 7 reactrate 0 shares 1 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 4 title Evolution of Tax Reform into Billionaire Tax Relief topic other wordrate 0 words 498 ID 556413984703125 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556413984703125 audclicks 4 audreach 3 engaged 4 impress 114 likeclickusers 2 likeimpress 2 likeuimpress 39 likeusers 2 likeuusers 18 matchedlinkclicks 1 matchedotherclicks 3 oimpress 114 oreach 76 posted "12/28/2017 02:59:21 PM" postlinkclicks 1 postotherclicks 3 reach 76 sharesimpress 1 sharesusers 1 type Status ========== Need a Last Minute Charitable Deduction? Most political contributions are not tax deductible. But several organizations have tax-deductible educational affiliates that you might consider supporting before the end of 2017. http://www.fairvote.org/ FairVote retire winner-take-all Congressional representation in favor of multi-district preferential balloting http://www.democracy21.org/ Democracy 21 Education Fund retire "one-dollar-one-vote" by legislation and judicial action https://bipartisanpolicy.org/ Bipartisan Policy Center actively seeking bipartisan solutions to problems https://www.concordcoalition.org/ Concord Coalition for control of Federal deficit https://itep.org/ Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy ensure that policy makers, media, and advocates know the impact that tax changes have on people of different income levels http://www.equalrightsnow.org/ We the People Project voting rights for residents of Federal territories ===== impact 33 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-12-28 ratio 7 react 4 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 4 title Need a Last Minute Charitable Deduction? topic other wordrate 0 words 83 ID 556367304707793 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556367304707793 audclicks 4 audreach 3 engaged 3 impress 53 likeclickusers 3 likeuimpress 52 likeuusers 28 matchedotherclicks 4 oimpress 53 oreach 29 posted "12/28/2017 12:18:19 PM" postotherclicks 3 reach 29 type Status ========== Discretionary Income What is discretionary income? It's a concept of economics - the amount of wealth that you have that you can spend as you choose - thus excluding the cost of staying alive and the cost of producing income (e.g. the cost of driving to work). It's the part of your income that rewards you for your labor. In principle, a fair taxation system might take a fixed percentage of all your discretionary income, regardless of source. People who are barely getting by have no discretionary income and shouldn't be taxed. Since we have evolved beyond letting the poor and sick and disabled die in the streets, we accept that there are some people who will be subsidized by others, and we have assigned the bulk of this task to government, to be paid by taxes. For businesses, it's easy to equate discretionary income to gross receipts less the ordinary and necessary business expenses required to produce the gross receipts. The net profit is the discretionary income to be taxed. For individuals, it's not so easy, which is why discretionary income is not mentioned in any tax return instructions. Instead there are adjustments and deductions and exemptions and credits - different for the Federal government and for each state - some of which are intended to remove the non-discretionary income from the amount you pay tax on. But many of these are so complicated and obscure that most ordinary W-2 wage earners have no idea what they are about, and rightly conclude that the system is rigged against them. It's not enough for a tax system to be fair if it's too complicated for the majority of the taxpayers to see that it's fair. Or, since most people who don't want to study the matter will suppose that it's unfair anyway, better for the tax system to make its unfairness explicit instead of hidden in obscurity. For a gold-plated example of the latter, just consider the treatment of pass-through taxation in the new tax law: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3089423 Your eyes will glaze over, because it's irrelevant to W-2 wage earners, but it's critical for retaining and increasing the fortunes of certain kinds of business owners... particularly real estate investors. It's all about making sure that such individuals get taxed at the lower corporate rate rather than the higher individual rate, while trying to make sure that most W-2 earners can't get the same benefit. So the one-flat-tax.net idea is a single flat tax on all sources of discretionary income. To keep it simple, there might be one zero bracket amount (varying with family size) for all taxpayers, reflecting the cost of staying alive and in employable condition, and another deduction for W-2 wage earners to reflect the cost of earning income; these amounts would not be subject to tax. The "flat" part intends to remove the incentive for fancy tax-motivated transactions to move income from high rates to low rates; the "one" part intends to remove the regressive payroll, sales, and property taxes as sources of general government funding. ===== impact 304 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-12-28 ratio 4 react 6 reactrate 0 shares 1 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 4 title Discretionary Income topic other wordrate 0 words 507 ID 556365264707997 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556365264707997 audclicks 4 audreach 4 engaged 6 impress 50 likeclickusers 6 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 43 likeusers 1 likeuusers 22 matchedotherclicks 4 oimpress 50 oreach 27 posted "12/28/2017 12:09:00 PM" postotherclicks 4 reach 27 sharesimpress 1 sharesusers 1 type Link ========== Let us now praise famous men and our fathers that begat us "Let us now praise famous men" is a verse from the Wisdom of Sirach, recognized as canonical scripture by some and not others. The phrase has been associated with a choral work by Ralph Vaughan Williams and a book by Agee and Evans. I first heard the phrase in a church service about 1970 when the congregation was supposed to sing a hymn by that name - with music by Vaughan Williams. It was chromatic and challenging and by the end of the second line the congregation has given up and the choir had to carry on to the end with faint praise. Famous men have not been doing so well lately, even to the extent of faint praise, as the shortcomings of living men, particularly in relationship to women, have become much more common knowledge, and the shortcomings of those long gone have become more widely examined, particularly in relationship to slavery. How should we evaluate them? The Army can revoke your medals if it wouldn't have awarded them knowing what it now knows. But it seems to me that just as somebody's good accomplishments do not negate bad ones, it follows that bad accomplishments do not negate good ones. Thus LBJ had lots of faults, but he was the southerner who finally broke the back of segregation by getting the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts passed. His political muscle nicely complemented Martin Luther King's moral muscle to accomplish what neither could do alone - and television journalism came along at just the right time to provide an essential technological boost. Thus Theodore Roosevelt was a racist imperialist, but he was also the first president to understand that monopoly power was anti-democratic, and that natural and historic resources should be preserved even when Congress won't act, and more than that, he took action to both those ends. And so on - with Martin Luther, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, even Warren Harding - even Garrison Keillor - great and good things accomplished by people who also believed and did other things that embarrass us today. It seems that good and bad have to be borne in mind together. Mindless beatification and mindless demonization are both destructive. In particular, idolatry of great people, to the extent of denying their flaws, sets them apart from ordinary people, and gives ordinary people an excuse: "I'll never be as good as them so why bother?" But every good accomplishment was accomplished by a sinner. For some the sins were commensurate with the good, and for others not, but all are under the same sentences of original sin/evolutionary competition, and eventually death, so there is always a fearful and greedy motivation to accomplish whatever one intends, for good or ill, while one still can. Christians at least are called to forgiveness, particularly if the offender repents. Thus a crippled George Wallace repented near the end of his life, sought forgiveness from black Alabamans, and received it: "joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance." That does not mean that sex offenders get access to children at church, nor embezzlers to money at church. But maybe one can relax a bit about embezzlers coaching sports and sex offenders keeping the books. Trust, and verify. In a way, it's not unlike other kinds of discrimination: reducing the applicant pool for a particular job, for reasons that have no bearing on the job, is just putting the employer at a disadvantage relative to his competitors. Including applicants in the pool for a particular job, for reasons that have no bearing on the job - and ignoring reasons that do have bearing on the job - is even worse. So in the end, maybe the name of the hymn needs to be "Let us now praise famous good deeds." Hate the bad deed, but still love the sinner and the good deed. ===== comments 1 hide 1 impact 3786 impactrate 0 likeimpress 41 negative 1 posted 2017-12-28 ratio 6 react 56 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 13 title Let us now praise famous men and our fathers that begat us topic other wordrate 0 words 676 ID 556364348041422 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556364348041422 audclicks 13 audreach 11 bimpress 346 blikeimpress 15 blikeusers 13 breach 330 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 49 hideclicks 1 hideclicksusers 1 impress 415 likeclickusers 3 likeimpress 41 likeuimpress 76 likeusers 39 likeuusers 41 matchedotherclicks 13 negclicks 1 negusers 1 oimpress 69 oreach 33 posted "12/28/2017 12:05:42 PM" postotherclicks 11 reach 362 type Status budget 20 budgettype Lifetime cadname "Post: ""Let us now praise famous men and our fathers that...""" ccleantitle Let us now praise famous men and our fathers that cclicksall 48 ccpcall 0.41666667 cdelivery not_delivering cend 2018-06-30 cimpressions 346 conversionrank - cost 0.52631578947368 cpm 57.80346821 creach 330 cstart 2018-04-01 ctrall 13.87283237 ecomments 1 ends 2018-06-03 engagedrank - epagelikes 1 ereact 37 frequency 1.0484848484848 indicator actions:post_engagement qualityrank - results 38 spent 20 ========== The Political Scrapbook The domain political-scrapbook.net started as a morale-boosting exercise after the November 2016 election - writing down opinions about what to do next, from a retired Silicon Valley technologist with no particular credentials. Although subdivided into various topics, the details got too big, and eventually some of the guiding principles were split off into the shorter list of political-theses.net. Over time various ideas seemed large enough to warrant their own dedicated websites: no-confidence-vote.net, one-flat-tax.net, liberty-and-justice.net, get-to-sixty.net, approve-or-expel.net. A few people read them and fewer commented. A well-worth-reading article, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/02/magazine/how-facebooks-oracular-algorithm-determines-the-fates-of-start-ups.html, led to a two-month trial of Facebook advertising, from 5 Nov 2017 to 5 Jan 2018. Since that trial began, the visitor count on no-confidence-vote has increased from 94 to 783, and political-scrapbook.net from 13 to 376. A Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet lists the political scrapbook websites and has occasional posts about them. So far it has engendered 401 likes and 409 follows. Each $1-$2 in advertising expense generates a website visit or a Facebook page like. It's an expensive hobby, but helpful perhaps to some of those who read these writings and become inspired to action. There is nothing to buy or do on these websites, but if you find them worth reading, then please feel free to pass them on to others who might find them helpful. For those who are inspired to do even more, the websites contain links to organizations that welcome your support of time or money. ===== impact 24 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-12-28 ratio 16 react 1 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title The Political Scrapbook topic other wordrate 0 words 238 ID 556363528041504 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556363528041504 engaged 1 impress 39 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 37 likeusers 1 likeuusers 15 oimpress 39 oreach 16 posted "12/28/2017 12:02:05 PM" reach 16 type Link ========== 's cover photo ===== impact 6 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-12-20 ratio 0 react 19 reactrate 0 shares 2 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 16 title 's cover photo topic other wordrate 0 words 3 ID 552882275056296 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/552882275056296 audclicks 16 audreach 11 engaged 11 impress 39 likeclickusers 4 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 30 likeusers 1 likeuusers 12 matchedphotoview 16 oimpress 39 oreach 15 posted "12/20/2017 08:43:30 AM" postphotoview 11 reach 15 sharesimpress 2 sharesusers 1 type Photo ========== The no-confidence-vote website is now rewritten to discuss Biennial Affirmation or Rejection of Elected Federal Officials ===== impact 3 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-12-05 ratio 7 react 2 reactrate 0 shares 1 sharesrate 0 title The no-confidence-vote website is now rewritten to topic other wordrate 0 words 16 ID 546194499058407 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/546194499058407 engaged 1 impress 28 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 17 likeuusers 4 oimpress 28 oreach 14 posted "12/05/2017 04:43:05 PM" reach 14 sharesimpress 1 sharesusers 1 type Status ========== get-to-sixty.net is now up. Call, write, or email your Senators and Representative to start over and find a way to 30 Republican and 30 Democratic Senate votes for a revenue-neutral income tax relief bill benefiting all working and middle-class Americans. ===== impact 12 impactrate 0 likeimpress 3 negative 0 posted 2017-12-05 ratio 3 react 3 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title get-to-sixty.net is now up. Call, write, or email your topic other wordrate 0 words 40 ID 546153965729127 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/546153965729127 engaged 2 impress 22 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 3 likeuimpress 21 likeusers 2 likeuusers 8 oimpress 22 oreach 9 posted "12/05/2017 02:24:36 PM" reach 9 type Status ========== 's cover photo ===== impact 2 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-12-05 ratio 1 react 5 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 4 title 's cover photo topic other wordrate 0 words 3 ID 546153355729188 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/546153355729188 audclicks 4 audreach 3 engaged 3 impress 19 likeclickusers 2 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 14 likeusers 1 likeuusers 7 matchedphotoview 4 oimpress 19 oreach 8 posted "12/05/2017 02:22:26 PM" postphotoview 3 reach 8 type Photo ========== Getting to 60 on Tax Reform It's hard to believe that the Republicans think voters will thank them for their billionaire tax relief bill, no matter how they slice and dice the House and Senate versions to come up with a conference version. If the Republicans are right, then it's a reminder that people get the government they deserve. It brings to mind a recent Simpsons episode set in feudal times where Homer talks about how much he enjoys being a feudal serf for his feudal lord. But ordinary Republican W-2 earner voters don't seem to be buying the Republican leadership lines; they accept it's just another scheme to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Lots of them still support Trump anyway, presumably for other reasons. Actually it's not clear that even the major Republican donors that bought and paid for the Republican tax plan will be happy; Trump in April and the congressional leadership in September promised that the estate tax, alternative minimum tax, and pass-through taxation would be completely and immediately repealed - and instead there are a bunch of complicated partial measures phasing in and out. Tax simplification always seems to make the tax code longer somehow, but this is worse than usual. That's because the Republicans have been desperately trying to get to 50 votes so they can get their bill through the Senate under reconciliation with no Democratic support. Instead of aiming for 50 votes for a bill that will embarrass everybody that supported it for the rest of their careers, why didn't they aim for 60 votes for something they could be proud of? It wouldn't be that hard to find 30 Republican and 30 Democratic votes for revenue-neutral tax relief for working and middle class families. That's what Republicans and Democrats are SUPPOSED to be doing. That's what Republicans and Democrats SAY they are doing. Government for the People, you know? But instead it got Trumped by Government for the Billionaires. Well why not - billionaires are people too, just like you and me - except they have more money. Lots more money. Perhaps there needs to be another website in this collection - get-to-sixty.net - just in case the Republican tax bill conference effort runs off the tracks and produces something that can't pass both houses. Start over, take your time, and get to sixty votes. Maybe it will be good enough that the Democrats won't immediately repeal it as soon as they get control of Congress during the next bear market. ===== comments 1 hide 1 impact 253 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 1 posted 2017-12-04 ratio 1 react 6 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 3 title Getting to 60 on Tax Reform topic other wordrate 0 words 422 ID 545789985765525 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/545789985765525 audclicks 3 audreach 1 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 3 hideclicks 1 hideclicksusers 1 impress 22 likeclickusers 2 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 19 likeusers 1 likeuusers 8 matchedotherclicks 3 negclicks 1 negusers 1 oimpress 22 oreach 9 posted "12/04/2017 10:11:15 PM" postotherclicks 1 reach 9 type Status ========== Biennial Affirmation of Elected Federal Officials Considering the lack of mechanism for recalling elected Federal officials and the barely-better-than-nothing mechanism of no confidence resolutions discussed in no-confidence-vote.net, perhaps there is a better way of providing relatively quick removal of grossly unsatisfactory officials. Federal elections occur in November of even-numbered years. How about a re-affirmation vote in November of odd-numbered years? Within each state, For each Federal office - president, vice-president, both senators, all representatives - there is a ballot question: vote either AFFIRM: The people of California AFFIRM the competence of XYZ as United States Representative. or REJECT: The people of California REJECT the competence of XYZ as United States Representative, and the Secretary of State, in accordance with California law, shall direct the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives to initiate expulsion of XYZ from that House. For Senators, the California Secretary of State shall direct the President of the United States Senate (that's the US VP). For President and Vice-President, the direction is to the Speaker of the House to initiate impeachment. The California law would be that a 2/3 REJECT vote is required for the California Secretary of State to direct the Feds. "Direct" is perhaps too strong; "urge" would be more realistic. But each House of Congress has the power to "with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member." One would expect Congress to act after a 2/3 rejection from the state's voters; that means that the rejectee who presumably had won with at least 50% had lost at least a third of his supporters. It's 2/3 to avoid electing somebody with 51% one year and rejecting them with 49% the next year and perhaps returning them to office with 51% the following year. 2/3 majorities are pretty uncommon in general elections; this would be a rare event, hard for the rejectee to recover from politically, and hence more likely to be acted on by Congress. There's no necessary implication of wrong-doing; simple incompetence is a good enough reason if it's egregious enough to 2/3 of the voters. But anybody losing by 2/3 had probably committed financial or moral corruption far beyond simple incompetence. The rejectee would not be disqualified for running for office again if he thought he could recover his lost support. What would happen if the Senate or House did expel a member? As with other vacancies, in most states the governor would appoint a temporary substitute and schedule a special election to elect a successor to finish the term of the rejectee. Candidates to succeed the rejectee do not launch campaigns until the rejectee is expelled and the special election scheduled. The House would not initiate impeachment proceedings of the President or VP on the basis of one state's rejection. But if enough states rejected, it would be a cumulative vote of no confidence that might spur the House to act. Then the constitutional impeachment process would proceed through the House and Senate. Having the affirm/reject vote on every elected Federal official on every odd year, during an election which is already scheduled to decide state offices and issues, avoids the expense of a signature gathering process and a special election. Note that it's important for the President and VP to be on the odd-year ballot; turnout for other offices and issues is better when voters can express their support or unsupport for the President. No amendment to the Federal Constitution is required; the necessary state rules could be authorized by statute of each state legislature. Note that this is different from the current California recall process for elected state officials; there is a slate of one of more replacement candidates to be chosen from if the recall succeeds; the recall and replacement occur in the same election. That's because recall elections are pretty rare and often succeed. In contrast, the mechanism outlined above for Federal elected officials would happen every two years but seldom result in a rejection. ===== impact 0 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-12-04 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title Biennial Affirmation of Elected Federal Officials topic other wordrate 0 words 660 ID 545783922432798 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/545783922432798 impress 19 likeuimpress 19 likeuusers 9 oimpress 19 oreach 9 posted "12/04/2017 09:44:47 PM" reach 9 type Status ========== Comment: "I suggest recalls from the State level." The Constitution has no provision for recall of elected legislators. Instead either house may "with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member." So either or both houses might adopt a resolution promising to expel any member properly recalled under the laws of that state. That wouldn't require a constitutional amendment, but would break down the first time the majority party refused to expel one of its properly recalled members. One could easily imagine that happening. There are a couple of issues with recall worth considering. First, the reforms of initiative, referendum, and recall were originally populist ideas to restore the power of the people against interests entrenched in the legislature. But nowadays it's been exactly reversed; ballot measures are often used by various special interests to avoid dealing with the legislature. That's due to the power of money in politics. The ultimate solution to that is to limit all political contributions to registered voters, with all contributions publicly and promptly tabulated so voters can see who's buying what. Note in particular no political contributions from foreign sources, nor from organizations, except organizations like PACs that would pass through individual contributions, retaining the identity of the donor. americanpromise.net is working on a less extreme version of that. Barring that, a more specific restriction would simply bar any kind of payment to persons soliciting signatures for ballot measures. Or at least, a requirement that such solicitors sign under oath whether they have received or will accept any compensation for their efforts, and on the final ballot the secretary of state state what percentage of qualifying signatures was obtained by paid circulators. A final consideration is multi-member elections with preferential balloting. It's an idea promoted by fairvote.org to increase centrism and decrease extremism; it would make it possible to have e.g. one Republican senator from California and one Democratic senator from Texas, both of which are pretty unlikely unless both senators from a state are elected in the same multi-member election with preferential balloting. The problem with recall is that everybody in the same multi-member district would have to be recalled at once, otherwise selective recall would be used to undo minority representation. ===== impact 74 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-12-03 ratio 4 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 2 title Comment: "I suggest recalls from the State topic other wordrate 0 words 369 ID 545174529160404 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/545174529160404 audclicks 2 audreach 2 engaged 2 impress 21 likeclickusers 2 likeuimpress 19 likeuusers 7 matchedotherclicks 2 oimpress 21 oreach 8 posted "12/03/2017 01:53:00 PM" postotherclicks 2 reach 8 type Status ========== What happens next on the Republican tax bill? It's past midnight in DC and there's no news that the Republican tax bill has passed in the Senate, nor that the Senate has adjourned. Guessing that a vote will be taken and the bill will pass 51-49 as expected sometime in the wee hours, what next? It might be a good idea for the House to swallow its pride and just pass the Senate bill exactly as it passed the Senate and send it on to the President to sign Monday afternoon - assuming there is at least one legible copy of the bill available for the House to pass and another for Trump to sign. The bill that passed the Senate was marked up by hand at one point. "Speed kills" is not the way Republicans were thinking about it - "delay kills" is more like it. So if the House insists on a conference committee, it risks trying to come up with a compromise between the House and Senate versions, which might lose two votes in the Senate and become impassable, or if they delay past the Alabama election on Dec 12 there will be another lost vote, or the anxiety from the Russian investigation might distract Trump and lead him to say something unhelpful, or the longer the bill sits unpassed, the more peculiar provisions will come to light and to the attention of the public and special interests, so that a senator or two might become convinced that the future is brighter without passing this particular bill. Light is not good for this bill; it was produced in the dark very quickly and has a very short shelf life. Like beer without preservatives, "keep cold and dark and consume promptly." ===== impact 59 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-12-01 ratio 4 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 2 title What happens next on the Republican tax bill? topic other wordrate 0 words 293 ID 544393405905183 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/544393405905183 audclicks 2 audreach 2 engaged 2 impress 23 likeclickusers 2 likeuimpress 18 likeuusers 8 matchedotherclicks 2 oimpress 23 oreach 9 posted "12/01/2017 10:06:17 PM" postotherclicks 2 reach 9 type Status ========== Taxation of Principal Residences There's a lot of tax law provisions to encourage home ownership in various ways. The one-flat-tax scheme eliminates two: the deduction for mortgage interest and property taxes on real estate not used for business. That's partly compensated since the zero bracket amount is intended to cover basic housing costs, Keep America Great Accounts provide ample low-cost funds for principal residences, and property taxes to fund general government are repealed and replaced by the Federal collection allocated for state income tax. That still leaves special-purpose property taxes and capital gains on sale of principal residences as sources of concern, particularly to senior citizens on fixed incomes who fear being taxed out of their homes, on the one hand, and having to pay capital gains on the sale if they want to relocate to a smaller house or a lower-cost-of-living locale. So many states have mechanisms to defer property taxes to some extent, and Federal and most state tax laws allow deferral of capital gains on sale of a principal residence to some extent. Why not keep it simple: allow deferral of property taxes and capital gains on principal residence until death. The first is a matter of state law though the Federal government could facilitate matters by paying deferred property taxes for principal residences to the states and collecting at death. Under one-flat-tax, capital gains is strictly a Federal matter, that could be deferred until death. The deferred property tax and capital gain are a debt to the Federal government which becomes due at death of the owner(s) or a year after sale if no replacement principal residence is purchased - if a replacement principal residence is purchased, the debt rolls over to the replacement principal residence. Principal residences only, excluding any part of the property used for commercial purposes, and only one principal residence at a time. Divorce settlements would have to specify how the debt is divided. At death, after the deferred property tax and capital gain tax are paid, the basis of the property steps up to its current market value and the principal residence is excluded from estate tax. Altogether that seems to be an adequate incentive for home ownership. Dollar limits could be placed on any of these benefits, but simpler is usually better. ===== impact 0 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-12-01 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title Taxation of Principal Residences topic other wordrate 0 words 382 ID 544385532572637 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/544385532572637 impress 12 likeuimpress 12 likeuusers 4 oimpress 12 oreach 4 posted "12/01/2017 09:37:27 PM" reach 4 type Status ========== Some things never change... 1896: "There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that, if you will only legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea, however, has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous, their prosperity will find its way up through every class which rests upon them. ... You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns; you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold." 2017: Bimetallism has lost its political punch but now we have "tax reform" today and "entitlement reform" tomorrow, or maybe the day after the 2018 election: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/12/01/gop-eyes-post-tax-cut-changes-to-welfare-medicare-and-social-security/ ===== impact 12 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-12-01 ratio 3 react 1 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title Some things never change... topic other wordrate 0 words 115 ID 544241749253682 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/544241749253682 engaged 1 impress 12 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 12 likeusers 1 likeuusers 3 oimpress 12 oreach 3 posted "12/01/2017 11:52:39 AM" reach 3 type Status ========== If the Republican tax bill gets signed into law, express your thanks! Even in advance! It is looking more likely that the Republicans will find the price of 50 votes to pass a tax reform bill in the Senate, and then it is highly likely that some compromise will pass both houses and be signed by Trump. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/11/29/those-republicans-who-are-undecided-on-the-tax-bill-dont-believe-them-for-a-minute/ If your Representative or Senators vote for it, you should take the opportunity to congratulate them; if they've already promised to vote for whatever comes out of conference, you can even congratulate them in advance: Well done, good and faithful servants, enter into the joy of your donors! W-2 workers, retirees, students, unemployed, disabled join together today in praise of the Republican tax bill. We're proud to be able to stand up on our own two feet so that hard-working billionaire donors can relax. When billionaire donors can relax, then Senators and Representatives can relax about the 2018 primaries! And since runaway deficit financing might undermine the billionaires' hard-won gains, we also endorse your next big step, as soon as you're past the 2018 election - welfare reform - reducing Federal expenditures like medicaid, medicare, social security, ... that keep expanding the deficit and don't do a thing to help our hard-pressed billionaires. ===== impact 105 impactrate 0 likeimpress 2 negative 0 posted 2017-11-29 ratio 2 react 5 reactrate 0 shares 1 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 2 title If the Republican tax bill gets signed into law, express topic other wordrate 0 words 210 ID 543350196009504 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/543350196009504 audclicks 2 audreach 1 engaged 2 impress 28 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 2 likeuimpress 21 likeusers 1 likeuusers 8 matchedotherclicks 2 oimpress 28 oreach 12 posted "11/29/2017 11:08:36 AM" postotherclicks 1 reach 12 sharesimpress 1 sharesusers 1 type Link ========== Political Scrapbook This Facebook page is advertised to people who Facebook thinks are interested in the Democratic Party. == The following related websites contain political observations; they offer nothing to sell and nothing to join. But please tell other people who might find them interesting. http://www.no-confidence-vote.net/ what can be done now about Trump and his Congressional enablers? http://www.one-flat-tax.net/ true tax reform is one flat tax on discretionary income http://www.liberty-and-justice.net/ preserve the center of western democracy - reject domestic and foreign extremism http://www.political-scrapbook.net contains discursive commentary on many topics http://www.political-theses.net abstract principles underlying many of the specific ideas in the scrapbook http://www.political-scrapbook.net/trump.html what should be done about Trump? http://www.political-scrapbook.net/democracy.html improving the quality of American democracy http://www.political-scrapbook.net/controversial.html controversial topics http://www.political-scrapbook.net/theory.html political theory topics http://www.political-scrapbook.net/journalism.html journalism http://www.political-scrapbook.net/non-political.html nominally non-political topics == If you want to DO something, here are some suggestions for places that you might like to donate time or money. If you prefer centrist, bipartisan, or nonpartisan approaches, consider these: https://www.nolabels.org/ restore centrist bipartisanship http://www.centristproject.org/ practical effective government http://www.standuprepublic.com/ restore norms of democratic republican behavior http://lwv.org/ League of Women Voters protecting and educating voters https://bipartisanpolicy.org/ actively seeking bipartisan solutions to problems == For specific issues: http://www.americanpromise.net/ retire "one-dollar-one-vote" and "human rights for corporations" by constitutional amendment http://www.democracy21.org/ retire "one-dollar-one-vote" by legislation and judicial action http://www.fairvote.org/ retire winner-take-all Congressional representation in favor of multi-district preferential balloting http://www.equalrightsnow.org/ We the People Project voting rights for residents of Federal territories http://www.ctj.org/ Citizens for Tax Justice https://taxmarch.org/ Fight for a Fair Economy https://notonepenny.org/ Not One Penny in tax cuts for millionaires, billionaires, and wealthy corporations == If you prefer partisan Democratic Party campaigns: http://democraticredistricting.com/ National Democratic Redistricting Committee http://dccc.org/ Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee http://dscc.org/ Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee https://www.ca7project.com/ California 7 Project - retire seven worthy California Congressional Representatives http://www.pfaw.org/ People for the American Way == Don't waste energy responding to trolls here or elsewhere. They thrive on your energy. Ignore them and they go away. ===== comments 1 impact 169 impactrate 0 likeimpress 3 negative 0 posted 2017-11-28 ratio 5 react 8 reactrate 0 shares 1 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 3 title Political Scrapbook topic other wordrate 0 words 211 ID 543119052699285 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/543119052699285 audclicks 3 audreach 3 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 6 impress 67 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 3 likeuimpress 12 likeusers 3 likeuusers 5 matchedotherclicks 3 oimpress 67 oreach 43 posted "11/28/2017 10:50:12 PM" postotherclicks 3 reach 43 sharesimpress 1 sharesusers 1 type Status ========== Craft Beer and Taxes - an object lesson I like craft beer pretty well - there's an entry in the political-scrapbook website. So as far as I could tell, the idea of Sen Portman, R-OH, https://www.brewbound.com/news/proposed-senate-tax-bill-benefit-brewers, to give craft brewers a break, seemed reasonable enough. He added it to the Republican Senate tax reform bill. But what about the next break for somebody else? And the ten more after that, and then another hundred, and then a thousand? Pretty soon you've got a whole internal revenue code full of special breaks for special people, groups, businesses, or industries, and if you are not one of them, you might justifiably conclude that the whole deck is stacked against you. It isn't enough to be fair - laws should be perceivably fair. And so I conclude that if a tax break isn't important enough to pass Congress on its own, then it shouldn't pass Congress as a barnacle on something bigger. ===== comments 1 hideall 1 impact 63 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 1 posted 2017-11-27 ratio 5 react 4 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 1 title Craft Beer and Taxes - an object lesson topic other wordrate 0 words 158 ID 542572066087317 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/542572066087317 audclicks 1 audreach 1 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 2 hideallclicks 1 hideallclicksusers 1 impress 55 likeclickusers 2 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 11 likeusers 1 likeuusers 5 matchedotherclicks 1 negclicks 1 negusers 1 oimpress 55 oreach 23 posted "11/27/2017 03:02:07 PM" postotherclicks 1 reach 23 type Status ========== Reasons to dislike the one-flat-tax framework Compared to the current Federal tax system, or compared to what the Republicans are proposing in Congress, what billionaires might find most objectionable about the one-flat-tax framework is that there is no legal escape from the flat tax rate: no escape by income shifting to lower tax years no escape by income shifting to long term capital gains no escape by investing in municipal bonds no escape by establishing residence in a low-income-tax state no escape by taxing the future There's also: no escape from the estate tax Most ordinary voter/W-2 taxpayers don't know about any of these escapes because they aren't available to them or wouldn't help. An essential part of the framework is to balance the budget within a few years and pay off the national debt in a generation or two. There's no built-in bias for a large or a small government - just a bias that whatever is voted for gets paid for, and the only way to reduce the tax rate is to reduce expenditure. Surveys in California at least indicate most voters favor specific government benefits - social security, medicare, medicaid, veterans - and many favor a strong defense as well. If, however, the same inquiry is posed as a question about which taxes to raise in order to pay for those things - the answer is usually "somebody else's." This intellectual disconnect is honed by politicians who know better but don't act better. That needs to change. The experience of other western democracies is that government tends to have a larger role over time, and voters gripe about paying for it but are loathe to give up any benefits. So the ultimate objection from billionaires would probably be no escape from a slowly increasing flat tax rate - until it becomes painful to the average voter/taxpayer ===== impact 0 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-27 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title Reasons to dislike the one-flat-tax framework topic other wordrate 0 words 309 ID 542525962758594 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/542525962758594 impress 10 likeuimpress 10 likeuusers 5 oimpress 10 oreach 5 posted "11/27/2017 11:49:29 AM" reach 5 type Status ========== Roy Moore or Doug Jones? It's a hard choice for Democrats - win one now or win more later? It's almost enough to make one feel sorry for Mitch McConnell - if Doug Jones wins, it will be that much harder to pass any strictly partisan bills, but at least Jones might vote for bipartisan bills. If Moore wins, then he will probably vote against anything McConnell is for, partisan or not, unless he can insert an amendment like carving the ten commandments on the Washington Monument or requiring deportation of Muslims and LGBT people or reducing the age of consent to 12 or failing that, Moore will keep the Senate in such turmoil that the Republicans lose a lot more than one seat next year. I don't know why Trump thinks he can count on Moore on the tax bill, or judicial nominations, or anything else. Moore would be Bannon's present to Democrats that just keeps on giving. Merry Christmas! ===== comments 1 impact 16 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-27 ratio 7 react 1 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title Roy Moore or Doug Jones? topic other wordrate 0 words 161 ID 542506166093907 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/542506166093907 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 1 impress 14 likeuimpress 11 likeuusers 6 oimpress 14 oreach 7 posted "11/27/2017 10:36:34 AM" reach 7 type Status ========== Bypassing progressive income tax by unrecaptured section 1250 gain That's a catchy title! But what it means is, that if you can afford to invest in commercial real estate, you can keep your maximum tax rate at 25% instead of 39.6%. If you buy a car or a computer for your business, you are not usually allowed to deduct it all in one year. Instead you deduct a part of the cost over several years, thereby reducing your income taxable at the usual rates up to 39.6%. This makes sense; your car or computer started losing value the day you took it home. If you at some point sell the car or computer for more than its depreciated value, the excess depreciation is recaptured and taxed at ordinary income rates. You've managed to defer some of your taxes for several years, but you eventually pay at the same rate. Real estate is different. That's why it's such a popular investment, if you can afford it. You are allowed to depreciate real estate buildings (but not land), even though real estate doesn't depreciate in urban California and many other parts of the country - it continues to go up in value even if you let it go to wrack and ruin. After all, some social media gazillionaire might want to buy your real estate (and some of your neighbors) just for the lots, so the lots can be combined to make room to build a palace. Better yet, when you do sell, the imaginary depreciation that you deducted against ordinary income at rates up to 39.6% - is recaptured at capital gains rates of up to 25%. So you not only get to defer taxes, you get taxed at a lower rate. (Prior to 1986, this worked even for passive investors in limited partnerships. Now it's mostly available to active real estate investors. It also used to be possible to take accelerated depreciation on real estate, though perhaps subject to AMT.) If all income were taxed at the same rate - as one-flat-tax.net proposes - then commercial real estate might not be quite as attractive an investment. You'd still get to defer taxation - but when you sold, it would be at the flat tax rate in effect then, which might be higher or lower than that on the income you deferred, but most likely will not be much different. Commercial real estate might decline a little in value without that tax break. That sounds like a bad thing for investors. But what if you are a would-be owner-occupied homeowner tired of competing with investors outbidding you for single-family residential property that they want for rentals? If some of those investors get discouraged and single-family residential property becomes less expensive, that sounds like a good thing for prospective homeowners. But there will still be plenty of other would-be homeowners competing, so don't expect too much of a drop in real estate prices. How does depreciation work in a one-flat-tax scheme? It could work somewhat at present, with depreciation taken over the life of the asset and recaptured at about the same rate on disposal of the asset. But does it make sense to grant even the tax deferral benefit when there is no actual cash expense? Perhaps it's better, and certainly simpler, for all assets, to allow deductions of the actual amount spent in the years spent, and tax the actual amount gained, if any, in the year of disposal. You get a tax deferral benefit according to the actual cash spent, but no conversion from ordinary income rates to capital gain rates, because they are the same. ===== impact 121 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-27 ratio 4 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 2 title Bypassing progressive income tax by unrecaptured section topic other wordrate 0 words 607 ID 542499116094612 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/542499116094612 audclicks 2 audreach 1 engaged 1 impress 16 likeclickusers 1 likeuimpress 14 likeuusers 8 matchedotherclicks 2 oimpress 16 oreach 8 posted "11/27/2017 10:10:25 AM" postotherclicks 1 reach 8 type Status ========== Double Taxation of Dividends Comment: "Let's say I have a couple million dollars. With dividends being tax free I can buy dividend paying stocks and live on 75 to 80 thousand a year tax-free! Cool. All the people earning wages of 75 to 80 thousand will owe income tax, but not me! People with money really make out with this tax bill. People that live on wages, not so much." Federal tax law has generally had some provision to avoid double taxation of dividends. To see why, suppose that you were the owner of all the stock of the corporation and you decided that all net profits would be returned as dividends to the shareholders, namely yourself. Those dividends might be taxed at the corporate level and be tax free to the recipient, or tax-free at the corporate level and taxed to the recipient. If the corporate and personal tax rate were the same, there would be no difference. You end up paying the same tax at one level or the other. If instead you are only a small shareholder in a large corporation, you don't get to decide how much of earnings is returned to shareholders. But none the less the value of your shares is reduced by the amount paid as tax at the corporate level. Taxing at the corporate level rather than the recipient level has the property that all corporate dividends are taxed. But if dividends are taxable to the recipient, then non-taxable entities will pay no tax. Some people might view this as a feature, others as a bug. ===== comments 1 impact 53 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-20 ratio 3 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 1 title Double Taxation of Dividends topic other wordrate 0 words 264 ID 539647763046414 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/539647763046414 audclicks 1 audreach 1 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 2 impress 17 likeclickusers 1 likeuimpress 15 likeuusers 7 matchedotherclicks 1 oimpress 17 oreach 7 posted "11/20/2017 04:25:35 PM" postotherclicks 1 reach 7 type Status ========== How do you tax Discretionary Income? Discretionary income is the income that you have some choice about how you spend. For an individual, it means what's left over after you provide the necessities of life and the costs of generating income - for most people, the costs of qualifying for a job and getting to a job and performing a job. For a business, it's what's left of your sales receipts after you have paid for the all the costs of producing or providing what you sold: "ordinary and necessary expenses" of the particular business you're in. So is a lawyer or a dentist, a business or a job? What about an venture capital company with one owner? Those are questions at the heart of the arguments about pass-through income treatment in the Republican tax proposals. From the point of view of taxation, to avoid non-economic shifting of income between business and personal income, one would like to have the same tax rate on discretionary income, whether generated as a business or a job. A flat tax rate accomplishes that. But what about the ordinary and necessary expenses of a business vs the ordinary and necessary expenses of having a job? You can't have a job without eating enough to stay alive, a place to stay when you're not working, transportation to the job, suitable clothing and equipment for the job. Of course, basic food/clothing/shelter are things you need anyway whether you have a job or not. They are ordinary and necessary expenses of staying alive. So if we want taxation to be fair between business owners and employees, how do we figure what's discretionary? The way Federal income tax works now, there are some adjustments, deductions, and credits for various expenses associated with producing personal income. There is a zero bracket - an amount of income which is not taxed, built into the standard deduction and the personal exemptions. Perhaps this is intended to cover the cost of staying alive. So businesses should get no zero bracket, but deduct all ordinary and necessary business expenses. Individuals get a zero bracket, but can't deduct ordinary and necessary staying-alive expenses. Which is fairer? One could have a complicated system in which individuals deducted ordinary and necessary staying-alive expenses. But in a three-bedroom house for two people, which part of the rent or mortgage is going toward staying alive and which is a choice about spending discretionary income? If both work and need reliable transportation, is three unreliable cars to have backup a necessity, but three new reliable cars at least 1/3 discretionary income? In politics, fairness has to be perceived. A system that is so complicated that most voters can't understand it will be perceived to be unfair - and often that perception will be correct. So perhaps it would be perceptibly fairer for personal income tax to have a much larger zero bracket than now for basic living expenses to cover staying alive, and perhaps an additional zero bracket for persons with earned income to cover going go work, but no explicit adjustments, deductions, or credits. Of course, larger zero brackets mean the flat tax rate would be higher. Fixed zero brackets without deductions is less fair than the current system in that there is less consideration of individual circumstances, but more fair in that everybody can understand how it works and can have confidence that there aren't any intentionally obscure exceptions. ===== impact 0 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-20 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title How do you tax Discretionary Income? topic other wordrate 0 words 572 ID 539591233052067 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/539591233052067 impress 13 likeuimpress 13 likeuusers 6 oimpress 13 oreach 6 posted "11/20/2017 12:19:44 PM" reach 6 type Status ========== 's cover photo ===== impact 1 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-17 ratio 3 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 2 title 's cover photo topic other wordrate 0 words 3 ID 538229093188281 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/538229093188281 audclicks 2 audreach 2 engaged 2 impress 13 likeuimpress 12 likeuusers 6 matchedphotoview 2 oimpress 13 oreach 6 posted "11/17/2017 08:42:46 AM" postphotoview 2 reach 6 type Photo ========== Liberty, Equality, Fraternity... One of the ideas that might astonish one in freshman political science is that a lot of democratic political conflict turned out to be between liberty and equality... society needs both, but in balance, and there's a lot of difference of opinion about where the right balance lies. You can find a lot of books on Amazon and a lot of websites that discuss the issue. Indeed economic liberty might be the big-tent principle that unites Republicans, and economic justice for Democrats, including all the ramifications from these basic principles. More on this at http://www.political-scrapbook.net/theory.html#liberty%20and%20equality ===== impact 19 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-11-17 ratio 4 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 1 title Liberty, Equality, Fraternity... topic other wordrate 0 words 97 ID 538225896521934 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/538225896521934 audclicks 1 audreach 1 engaged 1 impress 16 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 15 likeusers 1 likeuusers 9 matchedotherclicks 1 oimpress 16 oreach 9 posted "11/17/2017 08:33:17 AM" postotherclicks 1 reach 9 type Link ========== Getting Sick of Winning: by disruption or by legislation? Trump might not be criminal enough to be impeached nor mentally deficient enough for the 25th Amendment. His biggest flaw as president has been unwillingness or inability to expand his base of support, so that it is contracting toward its hard core of those who feel he empowers them to ignore truth, logic, civility, and other traditional virtues. If Trump's intent were disruption, as Bannonites urged, then Trump could call that success. If Trump's intent were winning, as Trump often said, then Trump might have wanted to pay more attention to McConnell and Ryan about how to work with a narrow and unstable majority in the Senate that has to do its work via what's called "reconciliation" since they refuse to actually reconcile with bipartisanship and produce bills that can attract 60 votes. Right after the 2016 election, donations to the Democratic Redistricting and House committees seemed to be in order, but not the Senate, because it seemed a lost cause in 2018 due to luck of the draw of which seats would be contested. Perhaps the Republican leadership thought that their initial setbacks would be rectifiable after the 2018 election fortified their chances. Donations to the Democratic Senate committee make sense now, because... How Roy Moore has changed things! No matter what happens now, Republican chances of getting anything passed after December 12 have got to be even less than they are now. If the Bannonites' goal were to pass legislation that would count as wins for somebody, this would be a disaster. But since the Bannonite goal is to sow disruption and prove that American democracy doesn't work, Moore is exactly the man for the job. Moore is the Bannonites' biggest win, not their biggest mistake. Democrats will make sure that Republicans get sick of hearing about that win. Moore is the best thing for Democratic electoral mobilization since Trump himself. Though if somehow the Republicans enact their Billionaire Tax Relief and Democratic State Punishment bill, that's a win they are going to get sick of hearing about too. So where does that leave Trump? He can continue to win at disruption, or he can try to win at legislation. That would involve staying focussed and on message, never speaking ill of anybody who might be able to help, looking for staff whose primary loyalty is to the Constitution rather than Trump (or themselves), looking for ways in which Democrats could win some too... Could he do it? Would he even want to? ===== impact 85 impactrate 0 likeimpress 1 negative 0 posted 2017-11-17 ratio 6 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 1 title Getting Sick of Winning: by disruption or by legislation? topic other wordrate 0 words 424 ID 538219329855924 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/538219329855924 audclicks 1 audreach 1 engaged 2 impress 24 likeclickusers 2 likeimpress 1 likeuimpress 22 likeusers 1 likeuusers 12 matchedotherclicks 1 oimpress 24 oreach 13 posted "11/17/2017 08:07:54 AM" postotherclicks 1 reach 13 type Status ========== Which California Representatives voted against the Billionaire Tax Relief and Democratic State Punishment Act on November 16? All the Democrats and (surprise!) three Republicans: California 4: Tom McClintock (R) (since 2009) California 48: Dana Rohrabacher (R) (since 1989) California 49: Darrell Issa (R) (since 2001) http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/16/politics/house-republicans-vote-no-tax-bill/index.html The rest of the California Republicans should be recalled, but since we can't, we can only censure and vote better in 2018. The first five are part of the California 7 Project: California 10: Jeff Denham (R) (since 2011) California 21: David Valadao (R) (since 2013) California 25: Steve Knight (R) (since 2015) California 39: Ed Royce (R) (since 1993) California 45: Mimi Walters (R) (since 2015) California 1: Doug LaMalfa (R) (since 2013) California 8: Paul Cook (R) (since 2013) California 22: Devin Nunes (R) (since 2003) California 23: Kevin McCarthy (R) (since 2007) California 42: Ken Calvert (R) (since 1993) California 50: Duncan D. Hunter (R) (since 2009) https://www.ca7project.com/ ===== impact 16 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-17 ratio 6 react 1 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 1 title Which California Representatives voted against the topic other wordrate 0 words 155 ID 538203993190791 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/538203993190791 audclicks 1 audreach 1 engaged 1 impress 14 likeclickusers 1 likeuimpress 12 likeuusers 5 matchedotherclicks 1 oimpress 14 oreach 6 posted "11/17/2017 07:29:11 AM" postotherclicks 1 reach 6 type Link ========== The evolutionary competition that was often helpful when it was man against predatory animal, became less often helpful when it became man against man of another tribe, and has become completely unhelpful - in fact insanely disastrous - when one man can wipe out his whole species. That's one of the points made in the book The Chalice and the Blade. And it's part of the thesis of the liberty-and-justice.net site: some degree of cooperation had better supplant competition before everybody has the means and motivation to blow everybody else up. ===== comments 1 impact 18 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-14 ratio 2 react 2 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 1 title The evolutionary competition that was often helpful when topic other wordrate 0 words 91 ID 537231469954710 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/537231469954710 audclicks 1 audreach 1 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 2 impress 23 likeclickusers 1 likeuimpress 9 likeuusers 3 matchedotherclicks 1 oimpress 23 oreach 5 posted "11/14/2017 08:38:47 PM" postotherclicks 1 reach 5 type Status ========== If you're a troll, don't forget to collect 200 rubles when you pass GO-rky park. If you're going to do the KGB's work, you might as well accept the KGB's pay. If you're not a troll, don't waste your energy by engaging with them, here or elsewhere. Do that and your energy that might have been productively spent elsewhere just energizes the trolls. One wonders how history might have been different if Alexander Hamilton had been able to resist the temptation to engage with the trolls of his time. Aaron Burr, on the other hand, would have been happy to sign on to the Trump campaign in hope of a fast track to fame and fortune. ===== comments 1 impact 35 impactrate 0 likeimpress 2 negative 0 posted 2017-11-11 ratio 1 react 3 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 title If you're a troll, don't forget to collect 200 rubles when topic other wordrate 0 words 116 ID 536032320074625 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/536032320074625 commentsimpress 1 commentsusers 1 engaged 1 impress 14 likeclickusers 1 likeimpress 2 likeuimpress 10 likeusers 1 likeuusers 2 oimpress 14 oreach 4 posted "11/11/2017 07:56:18 PM" reach 4 type Status ========== The websites linked in the previous post here have nothing to sell and nothing to join. If you want to DO something, here are some ideas. Remember that money is the mother's milk of politics. If you prefer centrist, bipartisan, or nonpartisan approaches, consider these: http://www.americanpromise.net/ retire "one-dollar-one-vote" and "human rights for corporations" by constitutional amendment http://www.democracy21.org/ retire "one-dollar-one-vote" by legislation and judicial action https://www.nolabels.org/ restore centrist bipartisanship http://www.centristproject.org/ practical effective government http://www.standuprepublic.com/ restore norms of democratic republican behavior http://lwv.org/ League of Women Voters protecting and educating voters http://www.fairvote.org/ retire winner-take-all Congressional representation in favor of multi-district preferential balloting http://www.equalrightsnow.org/ We the People Project voting rights for residents of Federal territories https://bipartisanpolicy.org/ actively seeking bipartisan solutions to problems If you prefer partisan Democratic Party campaigns: http://democraticredistricting.com/ National Democratic Redistricting Committee http://dccc.org/ Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee http://dscc.org/ Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee https://www.ca7project.com/ California 7 Project - retire seven worthy California Congressional Representatives Don't waste energy responding to trolls here or elsewhere. They thrive on your energy. ===== impact 11 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-10 ratio 2 react 1 reactrate 0 shares 1 sharesrate 0 title The websites linked in the previous post here have topic other wordrate 0 words 112 ID 535551830122674 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/535551830122674 engaged 1 impress 11 likeuimpress 10 likeuusers 1 oimpress 11 oreach 2 posted "11/10/2017 04:54:42 PM" reach 2 sharesimpress 1 sharesusers 1 type Link ========== This Facebook page links to a number of websites of political observations. http://www.no-confidence-vote.net/ what can be done now about Trump and his Congressional enablers? http://www.one-flat-tax.net/ true tax reform is one flat tax on discretionary income http://www.liberty-and-justice.net/ preserve the center of western democracy - reject domestic and foreign extremism http://www.political-scrapbook.net contains discursive commentary on many topics http://www.political-theses.net contains some of the more abstract principles underlying many of the specific ideas http://www.political-scrapbook.net/trump.html what should be done about Trump? http://www.political-scrapbook.net/democracy.html improving the quality of American democracy http://www.political-scrapbook.net/controversial.html controversial topics http://www.political-scrapbook.net/theory.html political theory topics http://www.political-scrapbook.net/journalism.html journalism http://www.political-scrapbook.net/non-political.html nominally non-political topics ===== impact 6 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-09 ratio 0 react 1 reactrate 0 shares 1 sharesrate 0 title This Facebook page links to a number of websites of topic other wordrate 0 words 60 ID 535182426826281 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/535182426826281 posted "11/09/2017 07:20:18 PM" sharesimpress 1 type Status ========== Political scrapbook ===== impact 1 impactrate 0 likeimpress 3 negative 0 posted 2017-11-09 ratio 0 react 6 reactrate 0 shares 3 sharesrate 0 title Political scrapbook topic other wordrate 0 words 2 ID 535179873493203 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/535179903493200:0 likeimpress 3 posted "11/09/2017 07:06:17 PM" sharesimpress 3 type Photo ========== 's cover photo ===== impact 1 impactrate 0 negative 0 posted 2017-11-09 ratio 0 react 3 reactrate 0 sharesrate 0 sumclicks 3 title 's cover photo topic other wordrate 0 words 3 ID 535179583493232 URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/535179583493232 audclicks 3 audreach 3 engaged 3 impress 10 likeclickusers 1 likeuimpress 7 likeuusers 1 matchedphotoview 3 oimpress 10 oreach 1 posted "11/09/2017 07:05:17 PM" postphotoview 3 reach 1 type Photo