Sickening – and now they want to spend (Republicans: over 1 Trillion) and (Democrats over 3 Trillion!). Stop “helping” us and just let us go back to work 100%. If we keep this up, we will crash the Dollar, and all loose huge amounts of our savings and spending power – terrifying!!! Dee Sams
Subject:: MISSING: 96%!
Read it and weep!
www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/748/text
Text – H.R.748 – 116th Congress (2019-2020): CARES Act | Congress.gov – Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Text for H.R.748 – 116th Congress (2019-2020): CARES Act
MISSING: 96%!
Hard to believe, but look it up on Congress website for HR 748 from 116th Congress.
American population: 330,483,530
Stimulus bill: $2,000,000,000,000
Dividing the cost by every person in America is $6,051.74
The government could have given every person over $6,000, but instead will give $1,200 to each adult under a certain income.
Want to know where the missing 96% of your tax dollars went?
$300,000,000 for Migrant and Refugee Assistance pg 147 (a Democrat political plumb required for Pelosi to agree to support the bill)
$10,000 per person for student loan bailout (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$100,000,000 to NASA, because, who knows why
$20,000,000,000 to the USPS, because why the hell not
$300,000,000 to the Endowment for the Arts – because of it (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$300,000,000 for the Endowment for the Humanities/ because no one even knew that was a thing (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$15,000,000 for Veterans Employment Training
$435,000,000 for mental health support
$30,000,000,000 for the Department of Education stabilization fund/ because that will keep people employed (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$200,000,000 to Safe Schools Emergency Response to Violence Program (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$300,000,000 to Public Broadcasting / NPR has to be bought by the Dems (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$500,000,000 to Museums and Libraries / Who the hell knows how we are going to use it (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$720,000,000 to Social Security Admin / but get this only 200,000,000 is to help people. The rest is for admin costs
$25,000,000 for Cleaning supplies for the Capitol Building / it’s on page 136
$7,500,000 to the Smithsonian for additional salaries
$75,000,000 to the JFK Center for performing Arts – It then gave $25,000,000 to the DNC (Another Pelosi political plumb)
$25,000,000 for additional salary for House of Representatives – Democrats fought any increase in social security, but give themselves a nice fat raise (Another Pelosi political plumb)
CHAPEL HILL — A lecture on government spending, which highlights the high cost of progressive programs, will be taking place next month as part of the ICON Lecture series.
Adam Michel, a senior policy analyst on tax and debt with the Heritage Foundation, will be giving a talk titled “The progressive roadmap to soak the middle class.”
The Heritage Foundation is a conservative D.C. think tank that advocates for limited government, free-market economics and expanded individual opportunity.
The lecture comes along just as socialist Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has gained steam towards becoming the Democratic Party’s nominee
“The progressive agenda, as it is articulated by any of the prominent Democrats and some on the left — taken in whole or in segments — is an incredible departure from fiscal sanity,” Michel told NSJ.
“It is arithmetically impossible to fund the progressive agenda with taxes on the rich alone,” said Michel.
Sanders’ recent publication of a fact sheet on how he plans to fund his agenda items is largely a list of steep tax increases. Michel saw this coming and warns that taxes on the rich will not be nearly enough to pay for Sanders’ wish list.
“If you were to confiscate every dollar earned by every taxpayer with incomes over $200,000 a year, you would only pay for about half of what is being promised by the progressive, left agenda,” said Michel.
Michel warns that if corrective actions aren’t taken, government expenditures will require much larger tax increases on middle-class Americans and even higher taxes on a much larger number of taxpayers.
She’s the candidate with a plan for everything: That’s Elizabeth Warren’s brand. But even that sells her ambitions short, as we discovered after a tour of her 60-some policy papers. Ms. Warren is proposing a transformation of American government, business and life that exceeds what the socialist dreamers of a century ago imagined.
Her standing in the polls has fallen after missteps over Medicare, but she is still in the top candidate tier. Her ideas deserve to be taken seriously because they show where the American left wants to go:
• Wealth tax: Tax net worth over $50 million at 2% a year, and 6% above $1 billion. To prevent the rich from yachting off, add a 40% “exit tax” on assets over $50 million upon renouncing U.S. citizenship. Estimated revenue: $3.75 trillion over a decade from 75,000 households. Most economists, including many Democrats, call that number a fantasy. Courts might also find the tax unconstitutional.
• Medicare for All tax:Charge companies with at least 50 workers an “Employer Medicare Contribution,” equal to 98% of their recent outlays on health care, while adjusting for inflation and changes in staff size. These varying fees “would be gradually shifted to converge at the average health care cost-per-employee nationally.” Estimated revenue: $8.8 trillion over a decade. If receipts fall short, add a “supplemental” tax on “big companies with extremely high executive compensation and stock buyback rates.”
• Global corporate tax: Raise the top business rate to 35%. Apply this as a world-wide minimum on overseas earnings by U.S. companies. Businesses would “pay the difference between the minimum tax and the rate in the countries where they book their profits.” Apply a similar minimum tax to foreign companies, prorated by the share of their sales made in the U.S. Estimated revenue: $1.65 trillion over a decade.
• Corporate surtax: Tax profit over $100 million at a new 7% rate, without exemptions. This would go atop the regular corporate rate. Estimated revenue: $1 trillion over a decade from 1,200 public companies.
• Slower expensing: “Our current tax system lets companies deduct the cost of certain investments they make in assets faster than those assets actually lose value.” Closing this “loophole,” she says, would raise $1.25 trillion over a decade.
• Higher capital gains taxes: Tax the investment gains of the wealthiest 1% as ordinary income, meaning rates near 40% instead of today’s 23.8%. Apply the tax annually on gains via a “mark to market” system, even if the asset hasn’t been sold. Estimated revenue: $2 trillion over a decade.
Never in American history has the debate over income inequality so dominated the public square, with Democratic presidential candidates and congressional leaders calling for massive tax increases and federal expenditures to redistribute the nation’s income. Unfortunately, official measures of income inequality, the numbers being debated, are profoundly distorted by what the Census Bureau chooses to count as household income.
The published census data for 2017 portray the top quintile of households as having almost 17 times as much income as the bottom quintile. But this picture is false. The measure fails to account for the one-third of all household income paid in federal, state and local taxes. Since households in the top income quintile pay almost two-thirds of all taxes, ignoring the earned income lost to taxes substantially overstates inequality.
HEALTH CARECOMMENTARY
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., was recently on comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s late night show to discuss, among other items on his agenda, his vision for health care in America.
In one interesting statement, Sanders described the rollout of his plan: “I want to expand Medicare to include dental care, hearing aids, and eyeglasses, and then what I want to do is lower the eligibility age the first year from 65 down to 55, then to 45, then to 35, then we cover everybody.”
There is a sleight of hand here.
What Sanders seems to be describing is the gradual expansion of the existing Medicare program, which currently covers Americans 65 and over, to include everyone eventually. In reality, Sanders’ signature bill, “Medicare for All,” is anything but Medicare.
The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>
Medicare comes in several forms, including Parts A and B, which pay for inpatient and outpatient visits along a fee schedule with premiums and deductibles, and Part C, also known as Medicare Advantage.
This is the system that covers 60 million Americans and enjoys high satisfaction ratings.
Medicare for All would scrap all of this.
One of the most misleading aspects of Medicare for All is that it is not Medicare at all.
Written by Alex Newman
Under the guise of keeping America “competitive” in the looming high-tech future, the globalist Council on Foreign Relations is urging policymakers at all levels to dramatically expand the size and scope of government. The bloated welfare states in Sweden and Denmark are cited as examples of the “advantages” of massive government programs to take care for people. Without the sort of fundamental transformation of America envisioned by the CFR, the nation will supposedly be left behind in the emerging new paradigm, the organization claimed. Critics, though, blasted that idea.
In its new report, dubbed “The Work Ahead: Machines, Skills, and U.S. Leadership in the Twenty-First Century,” the CFR Task Force offered a broad array of policy recommendations for federal, state, and local officials. These range from ever more immigration and a greater role for government in various facets of the economy, to a dramatic expansion of the welfare state modeled on Big Government schemes from Northern Europe. The CFR’s demands regarding education, which are a key component of the report, will be covered in an upcoming article.
Some of the leaders involved in creating the CFR report told The New American that without implementing the sought-after changes, America would be left behind as the world moves toward a globalized future of fast-moving technological progress. But experts and legislators invited to participate in the scheme who spoke to The New American sounded the alarm about the CFR’s vision. Among other concerns, they warned that the controversial CFR report and outreach efforts selling it to policymakers reveal a hidden plan to push a dangerous agenda and bring state and local officials into the establishment’s globalist orbit.
One reason why the CFR’s pronouncements are so important is because of the key role they play setting policy. Indeed, looking at its membership and influence, many analysts consider the CFR to be a key Deep State hub in America. The late U.S. Admiral Chester Ward, a CFR member for almost 20 years before defecting and blowing the whistle, explained that this enormous power is used for neferious purposes. In fact, Ward said, the main objective of the organization is to undermine U.S. sovereignty and facilitate the merger of the United States into what he described as an “all-powerful one-world government.”
The way it advances its objectives was explained by Admiral Ward, too. “Once the ruling members of CFR have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of CFR are put to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition,” he said. “The most articulate theoreticians and ideologists prepare related articles, aided by the research, to sell the new policy and to make it appear inevitable and irresistible.”
“By following the evolution of this propaganda in the most prestigious scholarly journal in the world, [CFR mouthpiece] Foreign Affairs, anyone can determine years in advance what the future defense and foreign policies of the United States will be,” the respected admiral warned after ditching his membership at the CFR. “If a certain proposition is repeated often enough in that journal, then the U.S. Administration in power — be it Republican or Democratic — begins to act as if that proposition or assumption were an established fact.”
While that may not be true in the Trump era, when voters and their president have openly rejected globalism, it certainly has been true for decades, if not generations, regardless of the party formally in power. Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted publicly that the CFR told her what she should be doing and how she should be thinking about the future. Former Vice President Joe Biden, meanwhile, joked that he worked for CFR boss Richard Haass. Even many top “Republicans” are involved.
Of course, the latest CFR agenda starts with a kernel of truth. As anybody with common sense can see, the economy is changing and will be undergoing further changes in the years ahead. As a result of technological developments, the future of work will look very different in 30 or 40 years than it does today. Many Americans will lose their jobs. All that is true. Of course, it would be difficult to sell enormous policy changes if the entire premise behind them was nothing but fiction, obviously.
But the agenda being pushed is another matter. Under the pretext of responding to the obvious changes coming in the years ahead, the CFR — a leading Deep State institution in America that has dominated foreign policy for generations — is pushing what critics warned was a dangerous scheme to expand the power of government. The plan also advances globalism at every level of society, a key goal of the CFR dating back to its founding. In short, it is a massive and dangerous power grab that should be resisted, critics told The New American.
Policy Proposals