Moral Side

The Protestors Who Claim to Represent the "99%" Are Funded by One of the 0.0000001%

The "Occupy Wall Street" protestors claim to represent the 99% who alledgedly do not control the wealth of the USA. Really, the one's whom they do represent are the 47% who do not pay taxes against the 53% who do. Who is funding these protests?

There has been much speculation over who is financing the disparate protest, which has spread to cities across America and lasted nearly four weeks. One name that keeps coming up is investor George Soros, who in September debuted in the top 10 list of wealthiest Americans (one of the top 0.0000001%). Conservative critics contend the movement is a Trojan horse for a secret Soros agenda.

Soros and the protesters deny any connection. But Reuters did find indirect financial links between Soros and Adbusters, an anti-capitalist group in Canada (yes, that is correct, CANADA!) that started the protests with an inventive marketing campaign aimed at sparking an Arab Spring type uprising against Wall Street. Moreover, Soros and the protesters share some ideological ground.

"I can understand their sentiment," Soros told reporters last week at the United Nations about the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, which are expected to spur solidarity marches globally on Saturday. Pressed further for his views on the movement and the protesters, Soros refused to be drawn in.

Soros, 81, is No. 7 on the Forbes 400 list with a fortune of $22 billion, which has ballooned in recent years as he deftly responded to financial market turmoil. He has pledged to give away all his wealth, half of it while he earns it and the rest when he dies.

Like the protesters, Soros is no fan of the 2008 bank bailouts and subsequent government purchase of the toxic sub-prime mortgage assets they amassed in the property bubble.

The protesters say the Wall Street bank bailouts in 2008 left banks enjoying huge profits while average Americans suffered under high unemployment and job insecurity with little help from Washington. They contend that the richest 1 percent of Americans have amassed vast fortunes while being taxed at a lower rate than most people.

BANKING LIFE SUPPORT

Soros in 2009 wrote in an editorial that the purchase of toxic bank assets would, "provide artificial life support for the banks at considerable expense to the taxpayer." He urged the Obama administration either to recapitalize or to nationalize the banks and force them to lend at attractive rates. His advice went unheeded.

The Hungarian-American was an early supporter of the 2008 election campaign of Barack Obama, who will seek a second term as president in the November, 2012, election. He has long backed liberal causes - the Open Society Institute, the foreign policy think tank Council on Foreign Relations and Human Rights Watch, the Tides Center, and MoveOn.org.

According to disclosure documents from 2007-2009, Soros' Open Society gave grants of $3.5 million to the Tides Center, a San Francisco-based group that acts almost like a clearing house for other donors, directing their contributions to liberal non-profit groups. Among others the Tides Center has partnered with are the Ford Foundation and the Gates Foundation. Disclosure documents also show Tides, which declined comment, gave Adbusters grants of $185,000 from 2001-2010, including nearly $26,000 between 2007-2009.

The Vancouver-based Adbusters, which publishes a magazine and runs such campaigns as "Digital Detox Week" and "Buy Nothing Day," says it wants to "change the way corporations wield power" and its goal is "to topple existing power structures."

SLOW START

Adbusters, whose magazine has a circulation of 120,000 and which is known for its spoofs of popular advertisements, came up with the Occupy Wall Street idea after Arab Spring protests toppled governments in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, said Kalle Lasn, 69, Adbusters co-founder. "It came out of these brainstorming sessions we have at Adbusters," Lasn told Reuters, adding they began promoting it online on July 13. "We were inspired by what happened in Tunisia and Egypt and we had this feeling that America was ripe for a Tahrir moment. We felt there was a real rage building up in America, and we thought that we would like to create a spark which would give expression for this rage."

Lasn said Adbusters is 95 percent funded by subscribers paying for the magazine. "George Soros's ideas are quite good, many of them. I wish he would give Adbusters some money, we sorely need it," he said. "He's never given us a penny."

Other support for Occupy Wall Street has come from online funding website Kickstarter, where more than $75,000 has been pledged, deliveries of food and from cash dropped in a bucket at the park. Liberal film maker Michael Moore (easily one of the top 1% in wealth) has also pledged to donate money.

The protests began in earnest on September 17, triggered by an Adbusters campaign featuring a provocative poster showing a ballerina dancing atop the famous bronze bull in New York's financial district as a crowd of protesters wearing gas masks approach behind her.

Dressed in anarchist black, the battle-ready mob is shrouded in a fog suggestive of tear gas or fires burning. Some are wearing gas masks, others wielding sticks. The poster's message seems to be a heady combination of sexuality, violence, excitement and adventure.

Adbusters' co-founder Lasn dismisses that, reeling off specific demands: a tax on the richest 1 percent, a tax on currency trades and a tax on all financial transactions. "Down the road, there will be crystal clear demands coming out of this movement," he said. "But this first phase of the movement is messy and leaderless and demandless."

Meet America‘s ’53%’ – And They Have a Message for the ‘99%’ Protesters

Meet The 53%. Who are they? The term 53% refers to the people who are actually parying taxes for themselves and for the rest of the country.  Click here for some of their stories.

An astonishing 43.4 percent of Americans now pay zero or "negative" federal income taxes (they have credits that allow them to receive income tax refunds without having any income). The number of single or jointly-filing "taxpayers" - the word must be applied sparingly - who pay no taxes or receive government handouts has reached 65.6 million, out of a total of 151 million.

Those numbers come from an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. Neither is a low-tax or conservative advocacy group; the Urban Institute was created under the Johnson administration during the Great Society era, and it receives most of its funding from the federal government.

"You've got a larger and larger share of people paying less and less for the services provided by the federal government," says Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center. "The concern is that the majority can say, 'Let's have more benefits, spend more,' if they're not paying for it. It's 'free.' That's not a good thing to have."

By historic standards, today's situation is an aberration. Between 1950 and 1990, the number of owe-no-money federal tax returns averaged 21 percent, dipping to 18 percent in 1986, according to a 2009 analysis of then candidates Obama and McCain's tax plans by the Tax Foundation (click here). In the 1990s, the owe-no-money percentage hovered around 25 percent of taxpayers.  But then politicians began another round of tinkering with the tax code, adding reams of new pages to an already incomprehensible set of rules.

Democrats wanted to lower taxes on the least affluent, while Republicans wanted to lower taxes on everyone. The result was bipartisan enthusiasm for tax credits aimed at everything from children and college students  to hybrid cars and homebuyers. Many of these credits dole out cash to people even if they report no income, making them mere government handouts.

"There's no difference at all in terms of the effects on the federal deficit," says Williams of the Tax Policy Center. "It's perfectly equivalent. It's just easier to say, 'I cut your taxes' as opposed to 'I created a new federal program to send money to people.'"

Of course, this posting refers only to federal income taxes, not other taxes like Social Security, Medicare, state income taxes, sales taxes, or car registration taxes, some of which are extracted through payroll deductions. The owe-no-money crowd tends to get hit by at least some of those.  The perils of today's situation should be obvious. The United States is close to a tipping point - where most people can skip the post office run on April 15 to mail a check because they're expecting one from the government instead.

"It is somewhat odd that you have a decreasing number of folks paying into the federal income tax system, a decreasing number of folks who have a stake in what the government pays for," says Matt Moon of the non-partisan Tax Foundation in Washington, D.C.  It then becomes tempting to vote for politicians promising more and more handouts, paid for by money forcibly extracted from an ever-shrinking number of their neighbors. In addition to being immoral, it's poor public policy: people who pay no taxes but nevertheless get benefits are less likely to be careful overseers of their elected representatives.

"At some point people become less and less invested in making sure their government is accountable and frugal," says Peter Seep, vice president for policy and communications at the National Taxpayers Union, a lower-tax advocacy group. "If you pay very little for getting all kinds of government benefits, you might view those programs as a bargain, even though they may waste tens of billions of dollars a year."

As a candidate, President Obama promised still more tax credits, including ones aimed at child care, "clean cars," and savings accounts. As the Wall Street Journal explained at the time: "You can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer - a federal check - from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this 'welfare,' or in George McGovern's 1972 campaign a 'Demogrant.'"

Click here for the main resource for this post.

President Obama's Tax Pledge and the Tax Increase on Cigarettes in 2009

"I can make a firm pledge ... no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase." - President Barak Obama, Dover, New Hampshire, September 12, 2008

The Facts

In February 2009 President Obama signed into law the first tax increase of his administration with the aid of both houses of Congress that were controlled by the Democrats.  The law was implemented on April Fools Day (April 1) 2009.

The federal tax on cigarettes was increased from $.39 per pack to $1.01 per pack.  The President estimated that the increase would bring and additional $39,000,000,000 of revenue per year.

The Poor

The President's first tax increase targeted the poor.  According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, only one in five Americans smokes, so the excise targets a minority - and over half of all smokers are low income, and one of four are officially classified as poor.

This tax increase is a part of a greater "smoke-and-mirrors" political magic act.  The President prefers to tout his tax cuts for low-income households; but his Make Work Pay tax cut gets dribbled out at $8-$10 per week per average household for a limited time. A pack-a-day smoker will pay half of that back in higher cigarette taxes. Smokers getting welfare, unemployment or disability checks instead of paychecks won't get as much in tax cuts, but they will still pay the whole cigarette tax increase. Anyone concerned about widening income inequality should have second thoughts about this distribution of the tax burden.

Impact on States

State governments rely on their own cigarette excise taxes for significant revenue streams. In 2008, according to the National Tax Foundation, state governments took in $15.4 billion in cigarette taxes. Michigan, Pennsylvania, and California (states facing serious economic challenges) each collected more than $1 billion; New York and Texas took in $1.5 billion each.

Higher taxes discourage cigarette sales. A 10% increase in price causes an 8% decline in unit sales. The President's tax hike translates into a 13.3% increase in the average pack price. That implies a 10.6% decline in unit sales that the National Tax Foundation has calculated adds up to an annual $1 billion overall revenue loss for hard-pressed states.

The Southern Strategy

Because Southern states have low tax rates (most less than 40 cents per pack), the federal tax hike raises their cigarette prices by a larger percentage and thus cuts deeper into their unit sales. New York, by contrast, has the highest state taxes ($2.75 a pack) and prices, so it gets hit less in percentage terms. The Tax Foundation estimates a 12.6% revenue loss for South Carolina this coming fiscal year, and a 6.7% loss for New York.  In short, the "red" states that did not support the President during the 2008 election are punished more.

Loss of Jobs

Consumers and state governments are already having a tough time making ends meet. Burdening them with a new $38 billion tax and a $1 billion cut in revenues isn't going to help create jobs. Estimates by the National Association of Tobacco Outlets of the job losses in cigarette manufacturing and distribution alone exceed 100,000.

Behavior Modification through Taxation

If you don't smoke, maybe you don't care. Maybe you even think a higher "sin tax" is a good thing. A tax on cigarettes does discourage smoking - or at least the legal purchase of cigarettes.  

Maybe you will accept the micro- and macro-economic impact in order to have the government make people to modify their behavior and quit smoking. 

If so, you will eventually succeed.  Smoking will decrease, but so will the tax revenue!

There is political question, however.  Do we tax to raise revenue or to decrease a behavior that a majority decides is "wrong?"

Legislating Moral Values

There is also a moral question.  Should we use our laws a tax structure to enforce a particular moral view.  I would agree that consuming tobacco in any form is a poor choice, but it is not immoral.

Others disagree and say that tobacco use is immoral.  Should we use our system of taxation to enforce a particular moral view, or does taxation of a particular activity imply government approval of that activity.  (Would the proponents of abortion accept a tax on abortions?)

Learning from This Tax Increase

Let us learn from the increased tax on cigarettes.  Let us learn how President Obama seeks to hide tax increases.  Let us learn how liberals do not think through the full impact of their policies.

Let us learn something else.  Increased taxation does decrease the activity taxed.  Is this not one of the benefits touted in the increase on cigarettes?

What does an increase on income tax cause?  Should we use taxation to collect revenue?  If so we need to structure taxes to optimze revenue...not to punish the accumulation of wealth.

Counting the National Debt for the United States

Watch the national debt for the United States grow at US Debt Clock.  You can also watch your state's debt grow.  Here is the clock for my state, Kentucky.  Find a lot of useful information related to government expenditures and taxation.  You may also follow the national debt for other countries at World Debt. 

Top Five Issues for 2011

What are the issues facing our communities, nation, and world in 2011.  I have identified five areas that shall be at the forefront in 2011.  The overarching theme for these five issues is the continuing assault on Western culture, values, and democracy.  I welcome your comments.

1. The Assault on the Foundational Values of the American Nation.  The values of the American Nation are threefold:  "Liberty," "E Pluribus Unum," and "In God We Trust."  If these sound familiar, they are printed on our coins.  These values are under assault.  Liberty, or equality of opportunity, is being replaced as a primary value by Equality, or the guaranteed equal outcome.  E Pluribus Unum (out of many, one), is being replaced by political correctness and divisive diversity.  In God We Trust, or faith in God, is being replaced by trust in government and an anything-goes I-can-co-what-I-want approach to morality.  Issues within this general area will be family, abortion, protection of children, education, marriage, drug-abuse, and religion in society.
2. The Conflict with Middle Eastern Fascism and Asian Communism.  Western Democracy has always opposed and been in conflict with systems that enslave and diminish human beings.  Western Democracy has defeated European Imperialism, European Fascism, European Communism, and Middle Eastern Imperialism in the Twentieth Century.  The conflicts for 2011 and for the Twenty-First Century are Middle Eastern Fascism (e.g., Iran), Asian Fascism (North Korea), and Asian Communism (China).
3. Border Security and Related Issues.  Illegal immigration, the smuggling of drugs and human beings across the border, protection against terrorists, cyber-terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and the current administrations lethargic and clumbsy response to these problems are a major area of concern for 2011.  One of the primary tasks of the federal government is protection of its citizens.
4. Economic Strains in the US and Western Europe.  This area includes the collapse of Western European socialism.  In the US there are the continuing conflicts over health care, taxation, national and individual debt, unemployment, and bailouts of large companies and state and local governments.  The uncertainties of the housing and financial markets are adding to the problems.  No longer will we be able to assume (or hope) that governments will be able to take care of every problem.
5. Transformation of the Christian Church.  I list this area of interest not because it is the least.  Indeed, it is the most significant, but will occur over a long period of time.  I list it last because it is something we can see God at work and join Him.  It is the NewReformation.  Mainline denominations (including Roman Catholicism) are collapsing under the weight of their bureaucracies.  Those organizations who focus on survival of the institution instead of continuation of the mission are fading.  Just as the Reformation of the 1500s and 1600s brought new life and new understanding of the Church and was fueled by new technology (the printing press); so too will this New Reformation bring new life and new understanding fueled by the Internet.  Denominational "brand names" will become less important.  The focus will shift from social issues to witnessing.  Organizations and ministry will become decentralized and local.  Mid-sized churches will disappear.  Small fellowships, para-church organizations, and mega-churches with satellites (mini-denominations) will flourish.

The Top Ten Events of 2010

What is your list of the top ten events of 2010.  Here is my top ten list.  Many "events" in my list are multiple events - but events that are related.

This is not a list of the top ten most covered news stories of 2010.  I invite your comments.

1. The Earthquakes in Haiti (January), Chile (February), and Indonesia (October) -  The destructive power of nature was shown in these massive earthquakes and the aftermath of these disasters.  The earthquake in Haiti caused the greatest suffering.  Once again Americans responded with concern and generosity.  The funds raised by celebrities, however, have often times not reached those in need.  These tragedies have faded from the mainstream view.  Christians were there before, during, and after the quake in Haiti.  How true we find the words of Paul in Romans 8.20-23 to be:  "For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to son-ship, the redemption of our bodies."
2. The Collapsing Western European Socialist Economy as exemplified most drastically in the bailout of Greece (April) and Ireland (November) - Margaret Thatcher was correct:  "Eventually you run out of other people's money."  The economic collapse will have far-reaching effects in all of Europe and the different countries attempt to prop up each other and save themselves.  No longer can the governments provide everything to their citizens.
3. The Local, State, and National Elections in the United States (November) - This mid-term correction at the national level provides hope for a return to fiscal responsibility and reaches far down into state legislatures and governorships, as well as local governing bodies.  Fueled by the "Taxed Enough Already" people and groups, this historic change is a reaction to the economic and political trends.  It gives energy to the attempt to repeal the national health care legislation and has already had an impact on federal income taxes.
4. The Arizona Immigration Law(SB 1070 signed into law in April) - This law focused the frustration of the American people on illegal immigration and the apathy of the federal government.  The Arizona Law and the challenge to it by the federal government sets up a constitutional conflict that will be resolved in 2011.
5. The Enactment of Health Care Legislation(March) - This new legislation will have far reaching consequences -intended and unintended, foreseen and unforeseen.  The legislation does nothing to improve medical care, but it will have serious impacts on the economy, the medical profession, and the health of individuals.  Challenges to the legislation will continue into 2011 in the judicial and political areas.
6. The Wiki-Leaks Information Dump (July and November) - The leaks and the lethargic response of the US government are alarming.  Publicly the US government has not been damaged, but embarrassed.  The leaks make diplomacy and the war more difficult.
7. The Aggression of North Korea as exemplified in the attack of the South Korean Navy ship (March) and the artillery shelling of the South Korean island (November) - North Korea has always been an unstable rogue nation.  The upcoming change in leadership and North Korea's development of a deliverable nuclear weapon will cause greater instability in Asia.
8. The British Petroleum Oil Spill (April) - This spill certainly had immediate economic and natural consequences.  The negative results of the spill were exacerbated by the slow immediate response of the Obama Administration and the long term response of the administration that has blocked much of the oil production in the Gulf of Mexico.
9. The Floods from the Monsoon in Pakistan (July) - This devastating natural disaster caused great suffering to that struggling nation.  The devastation reminds one of the Haitian earthquake.  Again I am reminded of Romans 8.20-23.
10. The Eruption of the Volcano in Iceland (Aptil) - Though this event had no great loss of life, the eruption and the spread of volcanic ash through the atmosphere brought air travel in Europe to a standstill for about two weeks.  Once again saw the power of Creation over human endeavors, and once again I was reminded of Romans 8.20-23.

The "Feel Good" story of 2010 was the rescue of the mine workers in Chile.  This event was over-covered by the news media.  It's lasting effect will be the high number of sermon illustrations that grew from it.

How to Raise Your Own Taxes

Before any of us support raising taxes on others, should we not raise our own taxes first?  Would not those who seek to raise the taxes on the top 5% of Americans taxpayers who pay more taxes than the other 95% of us or the top 1% of the taxpayers who support 40% of our collective federal budget have more credibility if they raised their own taxes?  Here are some suggestions:

1. Encourage everyone to be a stakeholder in our federal budget.  Encourage a minimum tax of $1 per week for every adult regardless of income.
2. Stop claiming your own income tax deductions.  Fewer deduction would raise your own income tax.
3. Donate to the US government general fund.  Go to the Financial Management Service to donate to the general fund.
4. Donate to a specific Federal Agency.  Go to Treasury Direct for more information.
5. Donate to reduce the national debt.  Go to Treasury Direct for more information.