Via TPM, a new study from the Congressional Research Service (pdf) strongly suggests what most non-Republicans have known to be true for decades. Namely, that the supply-side argument for reducing tax rates is utter horsepuckey, as there is no discernible effect of even greatly reduced tax burdens on economic indicators.
Throughout the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it is 35%. Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the 1970s; today it is 15%. The real GDP growth rate averaged 4.2% and real per capita GDP increased annually by 2.4% in the 1950s. In the 2000s, the average real GDP growth rate was 1.7% and real per capita GDP increased annually by less than 1%. There is not conclusive evidence, however, to substantiate a clear relationship between the 65-year steady reduction in the top tax rates and economic growth. Analysis of such data suggests the reduction in the top tax rates have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth.
You could knock me over with a feather.
There is one highly significant correlation CRS found in its study, however. The massive reductions in top marginal tax rates since 1950 had no discernible effect on GDP or productivity growth, meaning they didn't grow the size of the economic pie. What they did do, however, is greatly alter how the pie is divided...
The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie.
However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities.
So there you have it. I suppose supply-siders are going to have to come up with some glorious new market-based argument for why having enormous and rapidly increasing income disparities are signs of a healthy economy. I can't wait to hear it.
We probably won't spend much of a diary talking Voodoo Economics, so let's call this an open thread.
No they won't
(#290131)Reality doesn't matter, because the idea that reducing tax rates leads to economic growth is an article of faith with the repubs. All you need is faith Jordan and you don't have it.
"Something I think most liberals don't understand is exactly how stupid many conservative leaders are." - Matt Yglesias
A flat tax keeps everyone honest
(#290134)that's the biggest reason I support it.
If people can vote to take away other people's money and give it to themselves...they will. There must be some incentive to stop them from taking 100% of the rich's money. Right now, the only thing stopping that is the goodness of people's hearts and right-wing economic lies.
How do you create a disincentive? By taking away their freedom to spend the money as they see fit...tax them at the same rate.
If what you say is true: then the poor/middle class will still be better off because they will be getting their money AND the rich's money back, in the form of government projects/programs that will benefit them.
It is better to get what you want than it is to be right. -me
Flat taxes hose middle class families compared to now
(#290135)That's unless the standard deduction was very generous.
Are you advocating the factoring in of payroll taxes, local, state, cost of living etc into this "flat tax"? If not, it's more regressive and the flat tax could be like a vote to take away certain people's money and allow the people with the most, to keep relatively even more.
"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."
Major Kong
I'm advocating anything that de-incentivizes people from voting
(#290140)to take more money from other people to give to themselves.
I mean...its common sense. If you allow people to vote to raise taxes on other people to pay for stuff they want....they will.
How to you stop that from happening?
It is better to get what you want than it is to be right. -me
It's not a one way street
(#290143)my googlefu is horrible so IIRC poor people are less likely to vote and middle class families total tax burden (all taxes, not just federal income taxes) is probably a lot higher than you might think and those middle class families will get hammered by a flat tax if they're aren't generous standard deductions for dependents.
I'll reiterate that federal income taxes aren't the only tax and the poverty level is the cost of living.
Income above the poverty level is in the black, if total income is below the poverty level their income is in the red.
Corporations don't get their income taxed if they're in the red. people shouldn't get their income taxed for money used to make the ends meet.
"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."
Major Kong
I'm open to other ideas
(#290145)But a flat-tax still seems the most fair.
I'm sympathetic to people at or near the poverty line...but, again, they have no incentive to not vote for the guy who will give them the most stuff.
Maybe we can have a standard "poverty-line" deduction, but people who are near that threshold don't get to vote or something.
Like I said, I'm open to changing my mind on this...
It is better to get what you want than it is to be right. -me
Restricting the franchise
(#290148)to those with a certain level of means is a well worn device.
A flat tax is actually regressive in pure economic terms.
(#290136)The law of diminishing marginal utility says that the incremental value of a good decreases as more of that good becomes available. A glass of water is worth something to a man with a swimming pool, and worth a lot more to a man lost in the desert.
So with money. 25% of $1 million is worth a great deal less than 25% of $38,000, or even 25% of $100,000. Contrariwise, 25% of $38,000 is a substantial burden, while 25% of $1 million is far less of a burden to the taxpayer in question.
Basic mark-to-market economics tells you that a flat tax imposes a greater burden on those with less income. It's regressive in real terms, even if not in nominal terms.
M Aurelius was probably right.
But the government is giving the money back to people
(#290142)by giving them stuff. Food, health care, section 8 housing, protection from Canadian invaders. They get a lot more than they give.
Isn't this the whole blue-states-give-more/red-states-take-more argument I always hear about?
It is better to get what you want than it is to be right. -me
why is it always about entitlements?
(#290146)It's a nasty little tell. The vast majority of government spending is on two things: Defense and insurance. There is also some infrastructure spending and regulatory bodies, but 50% of the budget is defense alone, entitlement spending is tiny by comparison.
--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
Irrelevant if we're talking about basic tax "fairness."
(#290147)You said you wanted a flat tax "to keep it honest." Actually, a flat tax is regressive from an economic/mathematical point of view. If you want everyone to pay their fair share, you have to account for the diminishing marginal value of the dollar.
How do you keep the majority from voting the money & resources owned by the wealthy into their own pockets? It's a good question I suppose, but purely academic given the link at the top of my diary (income and wealth disparities have been increasing exponentially for decades - this not according to some Soros-funded hacks®, but the Congressional Research Service).
The problem you're identifying, in other words, is not an actual problem currently facing the United States.
In fact, the actual problem facing the US in terms of tax structure today is more or less the opposite of the problem you're imagining: how do you keep the wealthy from capturing legislators & regulators and siphoning away an ever increasing share of GDP?
M Aurelius was probably right.
Name that tune...:)
(#290137)We continue to recognize the greater ability of some to earn more than others. But we do assert that the ambition of the individual to obtain for him a proper security is an ambition to be preferred to the appetite for great wealth and great power.
The overwhelming majority of Americans are possessed of two great qualities a sense of humor and a sense of proportion.
The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government.
We continue to recognize the greater ability of some to earn more than others. But we do assert that the ambition of the individual to obtain for him a proper security is an ambition to be preferred to the appetite for great wealth and great power.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.
In our personal ambitions we are individualists. But in our seeking for economic and political progress as a nation, we all go up or else all go down as one people.
Selfishness is the only real atheism; aspiration, unselfishness, the only real religion.
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much it is whether we provide enough for those who have little.
True individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
FDR....
Ask courageous questions. Do not be satisfied with superficial answers. Be open to wonder and at the same time subject all claims to knowledge, without exception, to intense skeptical scrutiny. Be aware of human fallibility. Cherish your species and yo
If people can vote to take
(#290151)If people can vote to take away other people's money and give it to themselves...they will.
And yet ... they haven't.
Maybe people are smarter than you think they are.
My modest proposal
(#290159)Probably 80% of household wouldn't have to file taxes at all. And the system would be far more efficient, both in terms of collection and preparation expenses, and in terms of not distorting incentives.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
Not a bad plan
(#290160)Wouldn't exempt rent, or at least not rents over $1K per month.
1K?
(#290188)In New York you get a shoe box for that. Remember he is talking about VAT, the landlord would still be paying income tax on the rental.
VAT is a consumption tax, hence regressive. I am against it. I would be for a resource tax, a broader version of the carbon tax, on finite resources. The market does not allocate correctly for finite resources while the resource is still available.
A resource tax can be like a consumption tax, but would not affect services or goods manufactured in a sustainable way, so it would not be regressive or discourage economic activity in general, like a VAT does.
I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.
A VAT with exemptions is not regressive
(#290224)A poor person spends far more of their income on food and rent than a rich person does... probably close to 70% or more, as opposed to 1% or less for the Mitt Romneys of the world.
Combine it with an income tax on high incomes, and importantly, and abolition of the truly regressive payroll tax, and you have a far more progressive tax regime, without far fewer costs and distortions.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
Don't get me wrong,
(#290229)I do like your scheme overall.
But VAT is regressive because it is a consumer tax, and the less wealthy you are, the more of your income you spend, as opposed to save.
You are also having homeowners subsidize renters, as they would pay VAT on a home, VAT on the interest rate, and VAT on bank service charges, realtor fees, and so on.
VAT with exemptions hits the middle class really, really hard.
A non-renewable resource tax hits resource users, and that would include individuals but also corporations. It would provide a strong incentive for closed cycle product lives.
I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.
Renters don't escape VAT
(#290231)it's part of the cost of the building, included in their rent.
I blame it all on the Internet
No
(#290232)If the rental property was built pre VAT, which for decades would be the case for the majority of properties, then renters do escape VAT.
Also, VAT does not apply to the land value, which in dense areas can be higher than the building cost. It thus favors landowners in expensive areas. Like I said, VAT is regressive.
I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.
Sure there are transitional effects
(#290233)but they'll disappear over time - unless you believe that entities will own buildings forever.
I blame it all on the Internet
Some actually do...
(#290301)But you conveniently skipped the land aspect, and that's key. The land value generates no VAT, even in a sale (by definition unimproved land has no value added), and in most VAT countries real estate transactions of used buildings pay no VAT, only new buildings do.
Regressive.
I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.
But they have capital gains taxes for real estate
(#290436)so of course they don't charge VAT on top of that. But there's nothing that would prohibit a VAT from charging for real estate in the absence of capital gains taxes.
I blame it all on the Internet
A feature not a bug
(#290258)It incentivates investment and savings, which creates jobs...
At the same time I'm taxing returns on investment at the same rate as labor.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
False
(#290275)Savings does not create jobs, spending does. There is currently a demand side problem.
--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
Currently that's true
(#290283)But we are in a historical anomaly, where there is a huge capital glut and a demand drought. Usually both sides matter... you need both capital and demand. If you have a great business concept and built-in demand, it won't matter if you can't get credit or investors.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
Captial is easy if there is demand
(#290288)You're getting very close to making a supply side economic argument which more or less refutes itself.
--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
That's ideology talking
(#290340)If capital costs 8% per annum, then it's only logical to fund projects that return 8% per annum.
If capital costs 4% per annum, then it's logical to fund a whole lot more projects, and hire a whole lot more workers.
The interest rate gets lower the more money there is in the pot. And fundamentals like tax levels affect that. I doubt there are many economists, left or right, who would deny these basic mechanisms.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
No, it's basic economics.
(#290357)You're making a trickle down argument whether you realize it or not. The cost of capital is largely irrelevant. Basic demand is much more important. If the demand for goods and services exists then the economy will expand to meet it. It doesn't work the other way around. The Laffer curve has never been proven to actually exist at anything other than the extreme endpoints which are trivial cases.
--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
Face slap
(#290408)I wish I could get that Marshall McLuhan moment in Annie Hall. Paul Krugman would come out from behind a sign and say "you know nothing about my work."
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
I don't think you'd get the result you'd expect from Krugman
(#290447)Edit: Deleting this comment pending additional research. I shouldn't post while multitasking at work....
Ok, having re-read the thread, I think we're talking past each other a bit. IS-LM is pretty simple, but away from the lower bound, that fact that some of it's assumptions aren't really true start to matter.
This is true, but the original discussion started about taxes. Marginal Tax rates are not shown to have much of an impact on growth rates (hence jobs) see the '50s and 90's for pertinent examples. You're claiming that a VAT will create jobs by promoting savings and investments, however the regressive nature of it will suppress demand. All other things being equal, you're right savings will increase investment and thus growth but the issue is that all other things aren't equal.
Edited to add marginal.
--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
Again...
(#290504)I won't concede that a VAT with exemptions for food and rent is regressive. As I said, a poor person would spend about 70% of their income on those items. I estimate that I spend about 30% (I have low rent for NYC standards.) Mitt Romney would spend less than 1% on those items.
By the way, here is a paper on VAT by Krugman and co-author Martin Feldstein:
Maybe this is my Marshall McLuhan moment after all.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
That's the sprit, never give up! :)
(#290533)I'm not sure why you would exempt rent but not other housing costs. I think your 70% estimates is off as well, but it's not really material to my argument. I suspect that your experience living in NYC is coloring your perspective.
The bulk of spending is done by the middle rather than lower classes. While a VAT will hurt both, I think that the demand suppression will largely come from the middle classes who have less disposable income and are now (by your argument) more inclined to save versus spend. That increase in investment/saving comes at the expense (so to speak) of economic activity that would otherwise grow the economy.
--- I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
Because poor people usually don't own
(#290671)I think 70% is quite reasonable. Most people spend about a third of their income on housing. Say you take home $300/week... that's about $100/week for groceries... not so easy to live for less.
Both supply and demand matter. Usually Americans err on the side of too much consumption rather than saving too much... it took a huge financial crisis to reverse that in our particular circumstance.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
The savings rate is nearly back to pre-recession levels ...
(#290673)in the low 4% range. And given that incomes have been mostly falling and sometimes flat for the past 4 yrs. it's not hard to understand why.
Meanwhile countries in the EU have a savings rate on average 10% higher than in the US. Somehow being more dependent on government makes citizens more self-reliant private savers. Many countries in Europe don't exist according to standard economic theory.
I think the moral is that if you want more private savings, it's probably best to not charge so much for education and health insurance, and to offer a better safety net so people don't have to borrow from credit card companies when they have e.g. unexpected unemployment or expenses.
That's how we got into trouble
(#290419)interest rates were held so low that questionable projects got greenlit. It's not as simple as low rates, there should be fiscal expansion (i.e., congress spending money on things) to increase demand. That's the only way to get long term organic growth.
I blame it all on the Internet
I'm open to that
(#290246)nt
Government is merely a servant – merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn’t. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.
If you and me were running the country
(#290259)We could get some business done.
"I don't want us to descend into a nation of bloggers." - Steve Jobs
This is bass ackward
(#290240)You're worried about poor people taking rich people's money and how there's basically nothing stopping them.
But what's stopping rich people from taking poor people's money? Why aren't you worried about that given that it's actually what's happening in 2012 America? In case you haven't heard, the economy has been growing the past 3 yrs., overall wealth has been increasing, but the vast majority of people's after-tax incomes have been falling.
Why don't you work on figuring out how to stop the very wealthy from stealing all the wealth the majority helped create?
Yeah, what that catchy guy said. -nt-
(#290247).
M Aurelius was probably right.
I know the whole Israel Palestine thing
(#290149)gets tiring and frustrating, but I thought that this piece was worthy of your attention:
http://www.bostonreview.net/BR37.4/oded_naaman_israeli_defense_forces_palestinians_occupation.php
It's not an easy read - written by an IDF soldier about running checkpoints in the occupied territories. It is interesting because it opens a window on the tactical intentions of the checkpoints, leads us through to understand how this enforces that they be run a certain way and draws out the psychological effects on the soldiers manning them.
Good article.
(#290164)-
literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it
It is a good article
(#290218)with an interesting viewpoint. But I fear it's part of an unfortunate Judeo-Christian tradition that agonizing over your wrongful actions is an adequate substitute for ceasing and desisting.
Ha
(#290438)hey, at least they're agonizing. Much more common is this reaction.
I blame it all on the Internet
I'll wait for Bernard Guererro's view on this tax thing. n/t
(#290152)-
literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it
Great thing about Bernard is, you already know the answer.
(#290155)A tax system is "good" to the degree it takes money from other people & benefits Bernard. A tax system is "bad" to the degree it takes money from Bernard to benefit other people.
M Aurelius was probably right.
Well, since he is a part of the 99%
(#290163)surely his interests align with theirs. Anyway, he's my financial oracle on this site.
literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it
How little you know Bernard
(#290167)he aspires to the 1%, and votes accordingly.
I blame it all on the Internet
Interestingly, There is a Nazi-Like Quality in the Control...
(#290157)...of the West Bank and the Palestinians.
I marveled at the oddness of Jews treating peoples like concentration camp inhabitants...very disconcerting the cognitive dissonance the obviousness of this engendered.
And yet, there are no suicide bombers in Jerusalem now, the Wall and the Checkpoints have effectively seen to this...And, it is a GOOD thing for all, Palestinians included.
On the other hand the Checkpoints are humiliating even to a tourist that likes soldiers such as myself...in the end, I got along well with the Checkpoints (except Jericho, see following) and soldiers who were happy to chat with a white boy from California.
Yet, at the King Hussein Bridge across the Jordan, because I didn't have a pass and was turned away and so went looking on my own for a way down to the banks of the Jordan River...Shabak (state security service) and Soldiers were not amused by my initiative...but even being held at gun point, I never felt afraid.
Jericho was different, though 30 or more yards away from a major checkpoint there was never any doubt with a cluster of three men pointing weapons at me to my left, and a single sniper (?) shooter to my right behind a barricade, that they would kill me, sweet me, at any careless move I might make.
I was afraid.
Likewise, when out hiking at night alone a desolate road along the Dead Sea, north of Mt. Sodom, I went to ground when a jeep full of Israel soldiers maybe spotted me. They left their fortified vehicle, search around a bit, but did not leave the road nearly as far off of it as I was hidden in the sage and small shrubs.
They did not seem to want to venture after an unseen me, disappeared in the far shadows...which was good.
Best Wishes, Traveller
Fascinating new blog.
(#290154)http://iceedge2012.wordpress.com/
literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it
Eyeblack Tourette's?
(#290166)This might just be a desperate attempt to get attention, but it's a weird one--and it will probably cost him some money.
The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.
The Last Stand Of Anti-Sabermetic Neanderthals
(#290175)Miguel Cabrera fans along with the dinosaurs who still think that RBI is the ONE TRUE STAT are throwing an unholy hissy fit at the idea that Mike Trout might beat Cabrera out for AL MVP. They will almost certainly get their way if Cabrera makes a late power surge and takes over the AL HR lead and ices the Triple Crown, Trout's historically awesome performance by modern sabermetric measurements notwithstanding.
The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.
Just give Trout all the awards.
(#290284)AL, NL, whatever. He's got so many WAR that he should get the Cy Young, too. I'm pretty sure he'll be in the running for next year's UEFA Ballon d'Or when all is said and done.
And would any of those RBI-fans care to take Ryan Howard's behemoth contract off the Phillies' hands?
A man must be orthodox upon most things, or he will never even have time to preach his own heresy.
Worth A Shot
(#290339)The RBI has the power to confuse and mislead the weak-minded, and might lead to some team with more money than sense deciding "Hey, it was just an injury year."
Looking at the wreckage of the Dodger roster, I find it darkly amusing that the one player I was sure I *didn't* want in that monster trade--Beckett--looks like the #1 guy on the rotation depth chart until Kershaw gets the all clear (which might be soon--he apparently doesn't need surgery just yet). This season has been quite a ride, and it certainly helps that no sane Dodger fan went into this season expecting a playoff run, even if they quickly looked like a world-beater until the injuries began to pile up.
The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.
Philosophy and unemployment
(#290276)Did they totally revamp the scoring of the GREs?
(#290281)I know they changed to Analytical Writing from the logic games section shortly after I took them, but did they shift to more LSAT-like scores, too?
Also: philosophy, f**k yeah!
A man must be orthodox upon most things, or he will never even have time to preach his own heresy.
Impressive quantitative score
(#293272)but what does it say for Com, Psych and Education majors that Physicists are better at categories 1 and 3 than they are?
http://xkcd.com/1052/
Interestingly, Business
(#290297)Interestingly, Business scores at or near the bottom, possibly only surpassed by Communications, if you normalize for all categories. These are the people who are tying to get MBAs, the future masters of the universe. What a crock. And this comes from a guy who has a BS in Business, possibly the most useless bachelors degree in existence.
Intersting...
(#290299)Computer Science, Business, and Communications get absolutely killed on this chart.
I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.
Oh, those are just the people who build everything
(#290303)and keep it running. No big wh- ... oh.
M Aurelius was probably right.
That's because most people are too busy working
(#290313)to get involved in this particular circle jerk.
I blame it all on the Internet
In my experience, Business
(#290316)In my experience, Business majors and Communications majors, including those with graduate degrees, are drunk/stoned/having sex when they should be studying or working.
Not That Unwise, Really
(#290319)Alcohol and sex lubricate so many business deals, they might as well train early in their careers.
I am not a pessimist. I am an incompetent optimist.
Actually, the older I get, the better it sounds.
(#290320)Party & have sex when you're young. Study and learn how to do boring crap when you're older. My new pedagogy.
M Aurelius was probably right.
I'll just point out
(#290350)that the numbers are for intended field. At lot of people apply to CS or MBA programs thinking to convert their BA in Whatever Studies into something that can earn a living, but they don't actually get in. catchy can tell us whether the same is true for Philosophy grad school.
Great new Toyota ad. Mildly NSFW.
(#290287)literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it
Wait, so...it's a car for
(#290305)transvestites? Or, like a transvestite, it's got great curves on the outside, but packs a real adam's apple under the hood? Or is it that it'll put a bulge in anyone's package? Auris will make a man out of you! How about, if you like this car, you might be more gay than you think?
Cool ad; but someone's a little confused.
M Aurelius was probably right.
I think its great that ads like this challenge
(#290315)Asian stereotypes.
The message might be a bit confused, agreed.
literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it
You know those advertising guys, er, people nt
(#290323).
I blame it all on the Internet
That ad confuses me
(#290362)in ways I haven't been confused since college.
A man must be orthodox upon most things, or he will never even have time to preach his own heresy.
"Gender is a construct. So is Auris."
(#290368)"Auris. Change everything."
"Auris convertible. Drop your top, get noticed."
"Auris. Surprising features."
"Auris. Ask about our package."
"Auris. Just go with it."
More:
"More than just a pretty front end. Auris."
"Whichever way you go, go Auris."
M Aurelius was probably right.
It's a woman Auris it a man nt
(#290512).
I blame it all on the Internet
Planning The Day
(#290333)"All right--five more minutes practicing the 'sad but determined' look, then off to chase that shady looking kitten next door." :
The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.
Did you get a puppy? nt
(#290336).
I blame it all on the Internet
Nope
(#290337)Just saw this picture and thought I would pass it on.
The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.
"Sorry Ismail--No Virgins For You"
(#290335)Getting killed by burning American flag fumes is pretty pitiful even by martyr standards. "Here--you get seventy-two clones of Beavis and Butthead feeding you from this bottomless bucket of. . .raisins. Yeah, they're raisins. Ignore the rabbit hutch in the corner."
The universe may well have been created without a point--that doesn't imply that we can't give it one.
Chick-Fil-A folded?
(#290349)All you sourthern types who insisted it wasn't hurtin' business none, maybe you were wrong
Fast & Furious Update: Not So Fast
(#290376)The IG's report is out today, and Darrell Issa's must be going around Capitol Hill like Kevin Sorbo.
M Aurelius was probably right.
Most significant Taliban raid for 12 years
(#290381)single largest number of aircraft lost since Gulf War 1.
From the comments
The reconquista of Afghanistan by the Taliban will inevitably be blamed on Mr Obama.
literally anything can become right or wrong if the dominant class of the moment so wills it
If only we'd sent more troops
(#290382)and let them shoot more locals, then we could've won the war.
M Aurelius was probably right.
Terms secured by the teacher's strike - positives for the CTU
(#290393)Just a run-down of how the Chicago teachers managed to do:
• Arts, music and physical education teachers: Over 600 additional teachers will be hired permanently under the agreement. The city didn’t want to increase staff at all. In addition, more support staff may come in the form of additional social workers and nurses, contingent on state revenue.
• Special Ed. The issue of special education teachers having oversized workloads moves to a committee tasked with finding “solutions,” which probably doesn’t mean too much but you never know. But there is $500,000 per year toward hiring additional special education professionals to reduce caseload.
• Health care. This was, as I understand it, the big sticking point in the compensation negotiations. The city wanted to increase premiums on teachers by 40% and increase co-pays for ER visits. The contract instead freezes health care premiums and co-pays at current rates. That’s a huge win for the union.
• Office supplies: Teachers used to have to purchase their own office supplies and print out their own materials. They will now have access to those supplies. They will get $250 in supply money, more than the $100 the city offered. And textbook will be provided to students on Day 1. Before, students had to wait weeks for textbooks, delaying valuable learning time.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/09/19/a-look-at-the-deal-that-ended-the...
great news
(#290394)I went to CPS a long time ago, and lived through three teachers' strikes. Came out OK.
Screw rahm. I have no idea why anyone would vote for him... he's the priviliged son of the ritzy north shore suburbs, and keeps his kids in a private school. He is not from Chicago. Brizard is an out of town grifter, and his spokesperson... SPOKESPERSON... has no education experience (well, she went to school) and is collecting a cool $165,000/yr on the city's dime. Oh, and one of her last gigs was working for rod blagojevich.
But teachers are greedy?
Front Page Question
(#290403)I just noticed none of the last 16 diaries have made it to the front page. Most recent FP diary is a week old. All but one of the FP diaries are "necro" in that discussions have mostly moved on, never to return.
We happy with the turnover here? If people aren't in a voting mood, it might not be a bad idea for the mods to hand out a few salutary promotions for wholesome material. At the very least, open threads should get published to the FP.
What say you?
M Aurelius was probably right.
Is that a serious question,
(#290406)Auris something else bothering you?
You don't want to hear my Saab story.
(#290409)Better I keep it tucked away.
M Aurelius was probably right.
There. Are you happy?
(#290410).
In the medical community, death is known as Chuck Norris Syndrome.
Yes! It was all about my dead diffenbachia. -nt-
(#290413).
M Aurelius was probably right.
Everybody sucks
(#290418)readers don't vote and mods are asleep at the switch. We need a better class of everyone.
I blame it all on the Internet
This is true
(#290496)I hardly have the time to log in and get pissed about you and BD anymore.
The Constitution does not vest in Congress the authority to protect society from every bad act that might befall it. -- Clarence Thomas
This is why people don't like GMO food
(#290428)First Peer Reviewed Lifetime Feeding Trial Finds "Safe" Levels Of GM Maize And Roundup Can Cause Tumors And Multiple Organ Damage
I guess they're not irrational after all.
I blame it all on the Internet
Isn't it the Roundup?
(#290432)n/t
"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."
Major Kong
RTFA
(#290434)It was both... Roundup and GM Maize dosed rats died early and GM Maize dosed rats died early.
Regular maize dosed rats died per usual.
Weird byline... PR Newswire.
1: The summary is by a journalist 2: was published in Elsevier
(#290439)I know Elsevier had a little trouble not too long ago of publishing anything it could make a short term profit on.
I'm waiting on whether the GM corn that "wasn't" sprayed wasn't accidentally watered with roundup water.
I had to go to the researchers site to maybe answer my question.
I still don't know if they grew their own GM corn and just didnt get their commercial GM corn from a field next to where it was sprayed or if the controls to make sure it was just GM corn grown in a green house and that there were controls to make sure only uncontaminated water was used.
I don't know of Sustainable Food Trust and I don't know for sure if peer reviewed studies normally trumpet that they're "peer reviewed studies."
"I’m to believe that North Korea is so dangerously unhinged that they would attack without warning – yet so meek and easily cowed that they will sit quietly and not retaliate when we start bombing them."
Major Kong
Partially
(#290440)but that's the whole point of roundup resistant plants, you can use roundup on the fields to kill non resistant weeds. That will result in roundup residue in the best of conditions, and we know from experience that not every farmer will use best practices.
I blame it all on the Internet
Also in the news recently
(#290523)http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/05/superweeds-a-long-predicted-problem-for-gm-crops-has-arrived/257187/
GM crops and the once predicted now widespread and spreading phenomenon of super weeds. The industry's answer is of course "more". More chemical herbicides, more GM crops, more profit. The problems linked to in your article will be magnified by this trend and of course, weed resistance to herbicides will keep pace with developments.
Who Instilled the Doctrine of Separation of Church & State?
(#290473)Was it the 1787 Convention that drafted what became the founding document of our country?
Or was it, maybe... Satan?
M Aurelius was probably right.
mainstream republican
(#290476)talk. the gop is completely nuts, and there is no parallel level of nuts on the democratic side.
for today's gop there is no separation of church and state. This guy isn't some low level dog catcher, he was a serious contender for presidential nominee. Hard to believe? not for me anymore, at least. Here's a link to a site with transcript:
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/perry-christian-warriors-spiritual...