Report this post

From: Isabel Marant Sneakers Date Added: 12/17/2013 12:57:48 PM

There are some restrictions on what the system can do. and is designed to take some of the drudgery out of driving through uninteresting situations (such as boring Indiana interstates or Chicago's commuter-congested highways). whose legislation is expected to serve as the basis for a deal between Congress and the White House to retool the immigration system The number of visas available would approximately double from the current limit of 65000 per yearThe H1B program was created in 1990 to attract high-skilled workers from around the world but it has become a way for outsourcing firms to bring lower-paid employees to the United StatesMost of the top 10 employers of H1B visa holders for instance are India-based technology consultancies with large US operations Those firms often train workers in the United States before sending them back home to do the same jobs for considerably less money say critics of the program on the Hill and in the labor movementSen Richard J Durbin (D-Ill) a member of the bipartisan immigration working group has been trying to persuade the negotiators to accept two key restrictions on the visas according to people familiar with the talks One would prevent certain firms that rely heavily on H1B visas from hiring more workers under the program and the other would require companies to make a "good faith" effort subject to federal oversight to recruit American workersBut instead the group has tentatively agreed to impose stiff fees on some outsourcing companies that hire H1B workers and to require modest measures to encourage the hiring of Americans such as advertising the jobs but with limited federal oversight And while Durbin has pushed to increase the lowest wage levels permitted by the visa program its likely that only certain firms would be required to pay moreDurbin who has been a lone voice in the room on the issue is likely to back down according to people familiar with the talks because he has gotten his way on other points such as a path to citizenship for the estimated 11million illegal immigrants living in this country A Durbin spokesman declined to comment stressing that negotiations were continuing into the night Wednesday and that nothing was finalAndrea Zuniga DiBitetto a lobbyist for the AFL-CIO said in an interview that the plan could be a "reckless" change that may keep Americans from getting good jobsBut advocates for tech companies welcomed the developments describing the still-evolving immigration plan as a potential watershed moment The Clinton-Gore years of prosperity did not resolve the argument in the Democrats’ favor, infrastructure and stimulative tax breaks for the middle class. seems to dog all that follow in wider pop culture, Siegel loved a good gag, Kan. that sought to rebut Republican arguments that he is waging class warfare He argued that the issue was one of fairness for the broad middle class drawing repeated contrasts to the presidency of George W BushWell leave the politics to others but how accurate were some of his facts "I mean understand it's not as if we haven't tried this theory Remember in those years in 2001 and 2003 Congress passed two of the most expensive tax cuts for the wealthy in history And what did they get us The slowest job growth in half a century Massive deficits that have made it much harder to pay for the investments that built this country and provided the basic security that helped millions of Americans reach and stay in the middle class: things like education and infrastructure science and technology Medicare and Social Security"Inserting the words "for the wealthy" was interesting phrasing by the president since he suggests these tax cuts were intended to benefit only the rich The bulk of the 2001 tax cuts were marginal rate cuts which extended to all taxpayers while the 2003 tax cuts included a reduction in taxes on dividends and capital gains But the 2001 tax cuts also included tax changes that benefited the middle class such as a reduced marriage penalty and expanded tax credits along with an instant tax rebate Still it is correct that most of the benefits of the tax cuts flowed to the wealthy (who lets not forget pay the largest share of income taxes) Obama has said repeatedly he wants to keep the Bush tax cuts for people making less than $250000; he wants to reinstate higher tax rates only for the wealthy (In fact he would retain about 70 percent of the overall tax cut) But he should not suggest that the Bush tax cuts were aimed only at the wealthy since that is not correct The Bush tax cuts were certainly large To compare tax cuts over the decades it is best to ignore raw numbers but instead focus on as a percentage of national income Under that measure the John F Kennedy tax cut of 1964 (-190 percent) and the Ronald Reagan tax cut of 1981 (-140 percent) were larger than Bushs 2001 tax cut (-080 percent) But all of Bushs tax cuts in 2001 2002 and 2003 combined would equal -200 percentThe Bush tax cuts have been for being inefficient and poorly designed but it is a stretch for Obama to blame slow job growth on the tax cuts That are many factors that affect job growth and it is silly to directly link the 10-year-old tax cut to todays job growth just as it is silly to claim that Bill Clintons tax increases resulted in a gain of 23 million jobs Obamas claim of the "slowest job growth" in fact includes the loss of jobs under his administration The White House provided as evidence a report on that was based on gross domestic product data through 2010 or the first two years of Obamas administration The White House also cited a on job growth through 2007 which showed monthly job growth of 68000 jobs during the Bush business cycle But since the recession ended job growth has been even more anemic under Obama just 40500 jobs a month according to An administration official responded that Bush only faced a traditional recession (though one affected by the Sept 11 attacks) compared to the Great Recession He also asserted that there is evidence that higher income disparity can affect economic growth Obama certainly inherited an economic mess and we have argued he does not deserve blame for the massive loss of jobs early in his administration But it seems odd to keep blaming poor job growth on the Bush tax cuts especially because Obama himself pushed through a nearly $1 trillion stimulus and took other actions that have affected the economy for better or worseFinally Obama blames the Bush tax cuts for "massive deficits" It is certainly true that the Bush tax cuts helped blow a hole in the budget But they did not do it all by themselves We at this issue earlier this year assisted by The data showed that the biggest contributor to the disappearance of projected surpluses was increased spending which accounted for 365 percent of the decline in the nations fiscal position followed by incorrect CBO estimates which accounted for 28 percent The Bush tax cuts (along with some Obama tax cuts) were responsible for just 24 percent Thus it is simply wrong to blame only the Bush tax cuts for the deficits now faced by the country especially three years into another presidential term "Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1 percent 1 percent That is the height of unfairness"This is a striking statistic But the only evidence that the White House could offer for it was a clip of a conversation on Bloomberg TV in which correspondent Gigi Stone made this assertion during a discussion about the tax strategies that the very wealthy use to avoid paying taxes The TV clip by the left-leaning Web site Think ProgressStone quoted from last month that reported on such tax strategies which mostly involve complicated ways to defer paying capital gains taxes But the article never made the 1-percent claim It also noted that the IRS had gotten more hostile to such transactions in recent years An administration official conceded the White House had no actual data to back up the presidents assertion but argued that showed that some of the wealthy pay little in taxes Frankly when it comes to taxes lets not forget the legendary statement of Judge Learned Hand as long as it is not illegal people can try to lower their taxes as much as possible:"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible Everyone does it rich and poor alike and all do right for nobody owes anypublic duty to pay more than the law demands"The that we can find on the top 400 taxpayers many of which are likely to be billionaires show that in 2008 30 of these individuals paid an average tax rate of between zero and 10 percent Certainly "some" might have paid as little as 1 percent on income But we are talking about a very tiny number By contrast 59 of the top 400 paid an average tax rate of 30 to 35 percent And 238 faced a marginal tax rate of 35 percent and above; only 17 had a marginal rate of zero to 26 percent (The marginal tax rate is what people pay on each additional dollar they earn) The average tax paid by the top 400 taxpayers was nearly $50 million It is impossible to know the financial circumstances of the handful of apparent billionaires who may have lowered their taxes to 1 percent but there may be reasonable explanations For instance the person may be retired and generating no new income while keeping investments in tax-deferred entities The Pinocchio TestThe president does not need to lard his case with such suspect data There are few independent tax analysts who have much good to say about the Bush tax cuts But it is difficult for Obama to justify blaming those tax cuts for being mostly responsible for todays slow job growth especially when he wants to retain a good chunk of those tax cuts To bolster his case about unfairness the president is also relying on a suspect statistic about billionaires paying as little as 1 percent in taxes Even if true it is a clearly a rare event Moreover it is certainly surprising that the White House would rely on such a dubious unverified source for a major presidential addressThree Pinocchios()Check out our candidate Follow The Fact Checker on and friend us on Channeling his inner Teddy Roosevelt We’re still waiting on word from HBO.

Please supply a reason why
you wish to report this post
    © 2006 Cinema Village

contact us  ::  privacy policy  ::  legal terms  ::  web design