Drive-Bys

Update: My first blogging Instalanche, and I'm out at a networking event without a clue that so many people have boarded the Omnibus. Sheesh.

THANK YOU, Glenn Reynolds! (Come back again. I've always got something interesting to say.)

_____

This story has been "withdrawn" by Reuters:

The Obama administration's plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.

In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year -- effectively a tax hike by stealth.

While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

Those income tax cuts he talked about in the SOTU Address?

Now, as we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible, and help Americans who had become unemployed.

That's why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for more than 18 million Americans; made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA; and passed 25 different tax cuts.

Now, let me repeat: We cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. (Applause.) We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college.

Just a smokescreen for these backdoor taxes... which will in all likelihood cost us more than we would have paid in the first place, and many of which have already been instituted.

We need to make sure consumers and middle-class families have the information they need to make financial decisions.

Right. That's why the Reuters article has been recalled. So we can make informed financial decisions.

Bend over and grab your ankles, America.

Update: According to NeoNeocon, the article contained major errors. We'll see.

Update II: This may indeed be true, but it seems to me that there were a ton of hidden costs built into Obama Care that would have been required of middle class tax payers and up, had that particularly nasty piece of excrement passed.

Maybe it's not yet time to be bending over to grab your ankles, but I'd still advise you to watch your back. Taxes on soft drinks. Sin taxes. Taxes on salty/fatty snack foods. Taxes on anything that tastes good, is way too much fun or somebody thinks is bad for you. I'm telling you, those backdoor taxes are there. Sneaky, but there.

Update III: According to Tax Prof, I was correct about those hidden costs in Obama Care. So there!

Update IV: They're coming for your retirement funds, too.

_____

Thinking about attending BlogHer 2010? Go here to find out how to win one of five scholarships.
_____

Geeze! If I'd known it's so easy to become an A-List Blogger, I'd have done it years ago.


According to Joanie, "The more of us who filch the Golden Seal of Enlightenment & Accolades, the more the Blogosphere will be confused and disorganized! What'll they do with their oh-so-special lists then? Chaos, people. No one will know who is socially acceptable to read and soon, folks will find themselves blushing at eff bombs and quizzically wondering at alarming stories of Wal-Martians before they know where they are."

Never let it be said that I cared about being socially acceptable. (Now... join the revolutions, will you?)
_____

And just to prove I'm more trouble-maker than Mother Teresa, I really, really want both of these gizmos...



... and...

... to stash in my desk drawer at work. Yes. I really, really, really need to stay away from The Awesomer.
_____

As a Kindle owner, in response to all the hoo-ha about Amazon taking Macmillan titles off their website and then putting them back on, let me just say this: Let Macmillan set unreasonable prices for their ebooks. If I don't like the price, I don't have to buy the book.

I recently got an email from Random House advertising some of their new best sellers, and they were charging the same price for their ebooks as they were for their hard cover books.

I shot off an email to them telling them that I so resented being charged the same price for either that I would buy no books from them.

Yes, there are publishing costs associated with both ebooks and hard copies; however, once you get past the typesetting, design, copy editing and proof reading, that's where the costs to produce diverge wildly. And I shouldn't get dinged for printing, handling and warehousing something I'm not buying.

I appreciate that Amazon is actually trying to keep the cost of purchasing ebooks down, while still benefiting the authors, even self-published authors.

But to Amazon, Macmillan, Random House and the rest I say go ahead and charge whatever you want. When it's cheaper to buy a hard cover book used and have it shipped than it is to buy it on my Kindle, guess what I'm going to do? Then none of you benefit.

_____

Why isn't anyone in the media paying attention to the fact that Massachusetts's top election official has followed through on his threat and is delaying the seating of Scott Brown? Barney Frank lashed out when it was intimated this would happen... but you're sure not hearing a peep out of him now, are you?

I asked it before and I'll ask it again: Why is that Kennedy stooge still voting?

_____

Suzette says:

I guess when the White House said “they were going to draw a line in the sand” to enforce some discipline in government spending , they meant the sand on the beaches of those oceans of diamonds on Neptune.

Personally, I think the White House meant that Chicken Little gets the leather corset, high heeled boots and riding crop, and the rest of us get the ball gag and restraints.

The crappy part of all of this? The American public doesn't get a safeword. We just get the f....... You know what I mean.