Thom Hartmann: Follow The French On The Millionaire Tax

Source:PLYT-

Source:The New Democrat 

You want everyone paying their fair share of taxes at all economic levels. Which is one of the reasons why I’m in favor of what I call the Progressive Consumption Tax. Which would accomplish most of that especially by eliminating all the wasteful tax loopholes in the tax system, including corporate welfare. But you don’t want taxes so high on anyone that it discourages people to be productive and successful. And gets them asking the question, “why should I work hard and be productive when Uncle Sam takes most of the money that I make anyway?”We do not want taxes so high to that point which is what we saw in the late 1950s and early 1960s, with a recession, followed by weak economic and job growth. Similar to what we’ve grown through the last five years. And even though the Great Recession wasn’t a result of taxes being too high, taxes that are too high can play a role in creating recessions with people not having enough money to spend to create strong economic growth. And what we saw as a result in the mid 1960s was a Progressive Democratic president in Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress with Conservative Republican help, is cut taxes across the board for everyone. Which contributed to an economic boom of the mid and late 1960s.
Source:Thom Hartmann

NBC Sports: MLB 1979-All Star Game-National League @ American League: Full Game

Source:The New Democrat

Playing an all-star baseball game at a football stadium. The Kingdome despite being fairly close to the action for baseball and a very loud stadium for both baseball and football, was basically a football stadium, because of its size, sixty-five thousand seats for football. And in the high fifty-thousands for baseball, but this was a great game. Where Pittsburgh Pirates outfielder Dave Parker who was a five- tool player up until the mid 1980s, throws out a baserunner from the outfield wall unassisted. Perhaps the best defensive play in MLB All Star game history.

For all the talk about this game being a slugfest with the lineups that both teams had and the stadium they were playing at, this game could’ve been played at Shea Stadium in New York, or Busch Stadium in St. Louis, Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles, Kaufmann Stadium in Kansas City. Because this was a pitchers duel with the Americans beating the Nationals 7-6. Which is a high score, but not that high compared with who was hitting for both teams and where they were playing. Goes to show you that great pitching, especially when that great pitching throws hard with control, will beat great hitting. Especially if those great hitters are expecting a big game because of the ballpark that they are playing at.

Thom Hartmann: We Are Subsidizing Low Wage Employers!

Source:The New Democrat. 

Here’s an idea. Instead of having taxpayers who mostly work in the middle class be forced to subsidize low-income workers for their food, housing and health care, instead penalize employers who pay their employees so low, that they need to collect public assistance from taxpayers in order to survive. Eat, housing, health care and so-forth, instead of subsidizing low-wages in this country. And tell employers the money we are now paying for Food Assistance, Public Housing and health insurance, they can get that back if they train their low-income workers so they can get a better job even in their company. Or somewhere else and not have to collect from public assistance at all.  

What taxpayers are doing now and again mostly in the middle class, is being forced to make up the difference in income that employers do not pay their low-income workforce. Because these low-income workers whether they work or at Wal-Mart, or for a fast food chain, do not make enough money to cover their housing, groceries and health insurance. They have to get that money from taxpayers instead of their employer so they have what they need to survive. Along with the corporate welfare and paying corporations to send their jobs oversees. When these employers have more than enough resources to pay their employees what they need for the basic necessities. Not so they are rich or even middle class, but so they can afford their rent, their groceries and their health insurance.

Thom Hartmann: 'It's Time to go 'Nuclear' on the Filibuster!'

Source:Thom Hartmann- U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (Republican, Texas) Chairman of the Talk Your Head Off Until You Have To Go To The Bathroom Caucus. No, not really.

"Thom Hartmann says it's time for Senate Democrats to change the filibuster rule in order to approve President Obama's judicial nominees." 

From Thom Hartmann 

As a Liberal Democrat (meaning someone who believes in liberal democracy, not so much the Democratic Party) I'm a strong believer in checks and balances, protecting minority rights, etc. But not to the point that it basically puts the opposition party, at least in the Senate, where Republicans are both the opposition and minority party over there, basically in charge of everything. 

Under current rules, under Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans get to decide for themselves what gets debated, what comes up for a floor vote, what nominees get voted on, even though Barack Obama was reelected President of the United States last year, Senate Democrats picked up 2 seats and now have a bigger majority in the Senate, than they did last last year, in the last Congress. 

There even needs to be a check on minority rights, otherwise the opposition whether it's 45% of the vote, which is what Republicans have now in the Senate, or whatever the number would be in the future, will always be in charged, even though they lost and aren't supposed to be in charge under the U.S. Constitution, if American democracy means anything. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Democrats, need to end the filibuster on all executive nominations, as well as the motion to precede rule. And this is something that Mitch McConnell, or whoever the next Republican Senate Majority Leader is, could use to their advantage in future Congress's, when they have a Republican President and Senate, and even a Republican President and united Republican Congress (House and Senate) to their advantage) because American elections have to have consequences, if they're to mean anything.

The Globalist: Bill Hunphrey: ;The Problem With Billionaires'

Source:The New Democrat

This idea that what America needs to do is just tax the hell out of millionaires and billionaires and use that money to spend more on War on Poverty programs to help the poor, as if fifty-years later that has worked very well, because the ultra-right as Bill Humphrey likes to say, has so much money that they don’t know what to do with that money, but government can come in and spend that money better than the people, and if we just do that we can solve our economic problems, forgetting about the seventeen-trillion dollar national debt and six-hundred billion dollar budget deficit, simply doesn’t work.

But of course if you are a so-called Progressive of today, debt and deficits do not matter. But if that is the case, than why do we need to have such huge tax hikes to fix our economy. Why not just continue to borrow and spend to address our economic problems. I’ve already answered my own question, because debt and deficits do matter. Otherwise this proposal to raise taxes to pay for new government spending, because our beloved U.S. Government knows how to spend this money better than the people, I mean come on who are you trying to fool. Unless the real reason for this huge tax hike is because you just want government to have a lot more money to spend on behalf of the people.

I agree that if you include all the tax breaks, the wealthy in America are under taxed, especially compared with the middle class. But if that is the concern and not just raise new money for the government, you would be interested in tax reform that eliminates most of the tax breaks for the wealthy. And go to a Progressive Consumption Tax system or PCT Progressive Consumption Tax to replace the income tax. And everyone would be able to keep all the money they make except the money that they spend.

A PCT would benefit everyone including low-income people, because you could still keep the Earned Income Tax Credit and this system would be progressive. Lower taxes on basic necessities needed in life. Like food, health care, housing to use as examples. but higher taxes on luxury items. Luxury and sports cars, second homes, yachts, vacations to use as examples. We would tax people based on what they takeout of society including the wealthy. Instead of taxing people based on what they produce for society.

If the idea is to have a country with as many successful people as possible and with as few lets say low-income people as possible, knowing we’ll never have a country that is completely free of poverty, which is just an annoying fact, than you don’t tax people so high that is discourages them to be successful. And instead tax everyone based on what they take out of society. Especially the wealthy who spend a lot of money on things they do not need. And instead of just spending more money on social programs, design those programs so they empower people to be independent and live in freedom. So they do not need public assistance at all to pay their bills.

NBC Sports: MLB 1984-GOW-Detroit Tigers @ Chicago White Sox: Jack Morris No Hitter

Source:The New Democrat

Here’s one example of why Jack Morris should be in the MLB Hall of Fame. Because when he was on, he could be very dominant, because he threw hard and then throw in his devastating forkball and he could fool you. One of the last pitchers especially of his era that you wanted to fall behind, because of his forkball and he wouldn’t need to throw strikes to get you out. The 1984 Detroit Tigers are about as a complete and great baseball team that MLB has had. At least since 1969 when divisional play started. They were very good defensively, had a very good, deep and all around lineup offensively. And had very good pitching, both starting and in the bullpen. And Jack Morris was a big part of that and should get more credit for it.

Mike Koncsal: Given the Myth of Ownership, is the Idea of Redistribution Coherent? | Next New Deal

Source:The New Democrat

We need to get past the idea of whether or not wealth redistribution is a good or bad thing. And just define it instead and layout exactly what wealth redistribution is. Because if we do that, we’ll all know what it is and what it is for and realize that most of us as Americans are actually in favor of wealth redistribution at least in certain forms. And it would be an issue that could bring most of the country together and leave us with at least one issue. That we are united on and lessen some of the political division in the country.

Here’s an example where Progressive economist, professor and blogger Robert Reich and I actually agree on something. Wealth redistribution is anything that government does for the people through taxation. All the roads it pays for is wealth redistribution, the law enforcement it provides the national security it provides, the hospitals it builds, the social insurance programs, everything that it does to benefit the country as a whole is a form of redistribution of wealth.

And to give you an example, the Federal Government taxes Joe and Mary from Buffalo, New York, to build a road in Atlanta, Georgia that benefits Bob and Sally and others in the Atlanta area. Or taxes people in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to expand, renovate and build a new military base in Dallas, Texas. That is wealth redistribution and of course Medicare and Social Security are wealth redistribution programs, because they tax today’s workers to benefit today’s retirees. And these are the two most popular things that government does that any politician risks their careers when they talk about changing those programs.

I just gave you the good versions of wealth redistribution that an overwhelming majority of the country supports. With only factions of the Tea Party movement and the Libertarian movement would oppose. And I’ll give you another popular form of wealth redistribution as well that gets to social insurance. You use taxpayer funds to not only help people in need get by in the short-term who for whatever reasons aren’t able to support and take care of themselves because they are out of work. Or lack the skills necessary to get a good job and you use those taxpayer funds to finance a real social insurance system that empowers people in need to get on their two feet. And be able to take care of themselves through education, job training, job experience and finally job placement into a good job. Sort of like property insurance when your home is hit with a disaster and you need money to repair the home. Or buy a new home and you collect from the insurance in order to do that.

Redistribution is sort of an unpopular term in America because thanks to the right-wing and Social Democrats on the Left-Wing, it tends to be viewed in socialistic terms. “You take money from the successful to give to government to take care of the economically unsuccessful. People in America who aren’t for whatever reasons able to take care of themselves. Encouraging people to be dependent on government, while discouraging people to be successful”. That is how right-wingers have successfully stereotyped wealth redistribution in America. And Social Democrats on the Left who actually believe in this form of wealth redistribution have helped the Right out on this by actually being in favor of this.

NBC Sports: MLB 1979- ALCS Game 3- Baltimore Orioles @ Anaheim Angels: Full Game

Source:MLB Home Video- former Los Angeles Dodgers and San Diego 1B Steve Garvey.

Source:The New Democrat 

"Steve Garvey is the host of Baseball's Greatest Games, a weekly cable TV show from the early 90's.  Some innings were edited out to make time for a 2-hour broadcast.  

To order other classic games like this one on DVD, contact Joe at:AA Classic Sports." 

From Joey D B Ball 

Game 3 of the 1979 ALCS being played at Anaheim Stadium. And if you guessed Anaheim Stadium is located in Anaheim, California, you have a solid grasp of the obvious. 

It's ironic that 1979 would be the season that the Anaheim Angels would finally make to postseason play, since this was the last season before the converted what was a beautiful baseball park, to what would become another artificial, multipurpose stadium, with the Los Angeles Rams moving to Anaheim in 1980 and becoming the Anaheim Rams. But pre-football, Anaheim was similar to Royals Stadium in Kansas City, except Anaheim has always had grass. It was a beautiful ballpark.

Brave New Foundation: Beyond Bars

Source:Brave New Films- a man being interviewed for this documentary.

"Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) is the country's biggest for-profit prison company and calls human beings in lock-up a "revenue stream." Don't let them profit off imprisoning even more. ACLU  

This video is part of the Prison Profiteers series produced by Brave New Foundation's Beyond Bars campaign in partnership with the ACLU and The Nation. Narration by Henry Rollins. Research help provided by Prison Legal News." 

From Brave New Films

I like this approach because rehabilitation is sort of like learning a different language. The earlier in life you do that, the easier it will be and once someone is already part of the criminal justice system, it's hard to get them out and prevent them from going back in. 

But if you can prevent so called risk at youth from going into the criminal justice system, through what's called crime prevention which targets risk at youth, making sure they are getting the education that they need, with things like extra tutoring that they may need or after school programs, again so, they can get extra help, supporting their parents so they can do the best job possible in raising their own kids, helping them get a job or a better job through job training, so they don't have to live in high crime neighborhoods with high poverty, we can prevent risk at youth from having to go into the criminal justice system in the first place.

The Daily Beast: Peter Beinart- 'Brown University's Campus Leftists vs. Free Speech'

Source:The Daily Beast- "They may think shutting down NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly's speech was standing up for their principles, but protecting respectful dialogue is as important as ever." From The Daily Beast.

Source:FreeState MD

"Tell that to Ray Kelly. Yesterday the New York City police chief was prevented from speaking on Paxson’s campus by students angered by the NYPD’s racial profiling. Those students have good reason to be angry. Unfortunately, they’re the latest in a long line of campus activists who believe their anger trumps other people’s free speech. 

Netanyahu from speaking at Montreal’s Concordia University. In 2009, activists at the University of North Carolina shut down a planned speech by anti-immigration congressman Tom Tancredo.

There’s something deeper going on here. On the surface, campuses like Brown’s seem hegemonically liberal. But in my experience, that apparent consensus conceals a crucial gulf between students and faculty who hold left of center opinions but accept basic norms of fair play and students who consider freedom of speech a scam employed by the powers that be to perpetuate their racism/sexism/classism/imperialism/homophobia. Convinced that freedom of speech is an illusion denied them outside the university gates, they take revenge in the one arena where the balance of forces tilt their way. And they thus inject into their own campuses the totalitarian spirit they believe characterizes society at large. It’s no surprise that such activists targeted Ray Kelly, and that for years they tried to bar military recruiters. What better way to deny your government’s basic legitimacy than to turn the people it deputizes to protect you into pariahs." 

From The Daily Beast 

"A Disgraceful Decision by NPR" O'Reilly

Fired National Public Radio analyst breaks down events following Muslim comments on 'The O'Reilly Factor'" 

Source:The State of The Union- Juan Williams on The O'Reilly Factor in 2010, talking about being fired by taxpayer funded National Public Radio.

From The State of The Union 

I hate the term "campus liberals" to refer to people are supposed to be Liberals even though they aren’t and sound more like Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez supporting and admiring Neo-Communists, than they do Liberals. I’ll get to what I mean by that later, because you simply can’t be a Liberal if you do not believe in free speech period. It would like someone whose a Conservative who doesn’t believe in private enterprise or capitalism. Or a Libertarian whose against the right to privacy and in favor of the War on Drugs. There’s a big reason the first amendment is the first amendment because it is the most important amendment we have and the most important freedom that we as people have.

Take free speech away and you might as well take away democracy and the freedom to assemble and the right to privacy, because one doesn’t work without the other with people being able to organize and speak their minds even if it offends people on the fascist Left or fascist Right. People who believe they are God (even if they are Atheists) and have all the answers and are right about everything to the point they believe they shouldn’t have any opposition. 

So if you believe in censorship as a policy and that free speech only applies to people who you agree with, then you are not a Liberal. Just like someone whose against capitalism and wants the economy to be nationalized is not a Conservative. Or someone whose against the right to privacy and against freedom of choice is not a Libertarian.  

My main response to Peter Beinart is that people who oppose right-wingers that they dislike right to free speech in America, aren't Liberals because free speech is as liberal a value that exists anywhere in the world. But instead these young folks for the most part are left-wing fascists, or acting left-wing fascists. It's Communists or Neo-Communists who are on the Far-Left perhaps everywhere in the world outside of Cuba and North Korea, who oppose free speech. Not Liberals because Liberals believe in liberal democracy. And free speech is as liberal as any value that you have in a liberal democracy.