What's 1/16 Cherokee + 1/32 Cherokee?

Two complete nuts:

Ward LeRoy Churchill

Elizabeth Warren

Michigan Public Libraries Prefer Liberal Bill Press to Conservative Deneen Borelli

ranks 6637 at amazon

available from 8 libraries

ranks 1994 at amazon

available from 2 libraries

Irrational Exuberance in French Real Estate, as in USA, Began in Late 1990s

And a long, steady slide back down is in the cards.

So Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in the UK Telegraph, here:

The price-income ratio was stable from the 1960s to the late 1990s, before exploding over the past 12 years as a perfect storm of demographics, state sweetners and cheap credit led to a 12-year blow-off.

There are parallels with Spain and America but Mr Sabatier said the French twist is a replay of the early 1930s when investors fled stocks after 1929 and rotated into "safe" property. Hence the paradox of rising prices during the Depression. The strange boom did not end until premier Pierre Laval cut rent ceilings in 1935, triggering a long slide.

"Laval's policy change was the catalyst. The same could happen now as austerity forces brutal measures," he said. An array of market props are eroding, including tax relief on some mortages and certain capital gains. ...

A housing slump would hammer the economy just as long-delayed austerity begins in earnest. Property makes up 65pc of French household wealth, compared with 57pc in Germany, 39pc in Japan and 27pc in the US.

Under Obama 5.4 Million New Americans Take SSDI, Doubling Total to 10.8 Million

For the full story by John Merline and all the data, go here at Investors.com.

Nothing is said about the cost of this exodus to dependency, which other stories have said is $200 billion annually, but Merline does mention that the funds designated for the purpose of disability benefits will run out in 2018, six years from now.

80 Percent of Unemployment Rate Decline Due to Persons Leaving Labor Force

So says Peter Morici, quoted here by Elizabeth MacDonald at Fox Business:

“Some 80% of the reduction” in the unemployment rate from 10% hit in October 2009 to today’s 8.2% “has been from adults quitting the labor force,” says economist Peter Morici.

  

Morici adds the unemployment rate “rises to 14.5% if you factor back in those who’ve stopped looking for work but would re-enter if there were jobs, as well as part-time workers who would prefer full-time positions.” ...

The U.S. economy is creating jobs, but it is struggling, adding jobs at a rate of just 131,000 a month in 2011, which is not enough to reduce the unemployment rate.

Morici says the U.S. economy “must add 13 million jobs over the next three years -- 362,000 each month -- to bring unemployment down to 6%. GDP would have to increase at a 4% to 5% pace.”

So there you have it.

Since when does a nation’s labor force shrink during a recovery? It should not shrink, it should grow in a recovery.

Unemployment Falls to 8.1 Percent, 115K New Jobs

Consensus estimates had new jobs at 170K. Gee, they were off by only 55K this time.

Obama has been president for 39 full months, all of them with unemployment above 8 percent.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the anemic results for April 2012 here:

Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 115,000 in April, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 8.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment increased in professional and business services, retail trade, and health care, but declined in transportation and warehousing.

Unemployment in the US in the post-war period seems to get progressively worse only since America jettisoned strong dollar policy under Richard Nixon in 1971, as this graphic from The Wall Street Journal plainly illustrates.

And Obama wants us to go FORWARD with that, which means unemployment will only get worse over the long haul with the likes of him at the helm.

If only forward meant the past, like 1948-1968.

The Euro Area is Walking into Depression

So says The Economist, here:

"The euro area is walking, eyes wide open, into depression. Led by its periphery, which is already there."

How's Your Health Insurance? Mine's Up 25 Percent Since ObamaCare Passed

ObamaCare passed in March 2010, and since then my costs for health insurance for my family have gone up, and up again.

My first increase was effective in May of 2011, a 6.7 percent increase in the premium.

The second increase was effective just a few days ago on May 1, 2012, a whopping 17.2 percent rise in the cost.

Overall, my rates are up 25.1 percent for a plan that discounted a recent doctor-ordered 4 hour emergency room visit and follow-up care less than 23 percent.

Owie!

Between October 2006 and October 2011, US Real Estate is Down $7 Trillion

See here for the data.

The decline measured by the Federal Reserve's Z.1 Flow of Funds Release, B.100, shows the peak value of US real estate in October 2006 at $25 trillion. As of October 2011 the metric has fallen to $18.1 trillion.

Note the dramatic new uptrend in valuation which began in the late 1990s coincident with tax law changes permitting tax-free capital gains up to $500K in some circumstances to owners who occupied their homes for two years. Prior to that the gains were tax-free only once in a lifetime.

Call it housing commoditization.

Can you imagine returning to the trend line status quo ante? Hell to pay: at least another $2 trillion in declines coming.

Total Private Employment Today is at April 2000 Level

For the data, go here.

Peak private employment in America was reached in January 2008 under George W. Bush at 115.65 million. As of March 2012 the level is 4.85 million fewer, at 110.8 million.

Two Million German Women Violated By Stalin's Animals in 1945

An appalling story of human evil.

Here and here.

Norway is Anti-Semitic Because it Singles Out Israel for Opprobrium

So says Michael Sharnoff here, where he provides numerous examples dating from 2006 to the present:

Oslo’s recent behavior reveals a proclivity toward singling out Israel among all other nations for international opprobrium.

Norwegian leaders and officials attempt to justify their anti-Israel actions based on the narrative that Israel occupies Palestinian land. They typically avoid specifically targeting Jews, for fear of being labeled anti-Semitic, but their actions nonetheless exhibit traits of “genteel anti-Semitism.” ...

I would like to remind the Norwegian government and corporate CEOs of the European Union’s examples of the ways in which anti-Semitism manifests itself: “Claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor, applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded by any other democratic nation; and drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”

Sarkozy v. Hollande: Their Only Difference (Small) Is Height

UMPS!

As observed by a supporter of Le Pen, quoted here in The Christian Science Monitor:

In a fiery speech to thousands of supporters waving French flags, Le Pen slammed Sarkozy's rhetoric on the need to strengthen borders and maintain a clear national identity as pure theatrics and labelled him and Hollande as lackeys of the European Central Bank, IMF and European Commission.

"The French have started their emancipation," she said, scorning the mainstream parties, the UMP and PS, or Socialists, as an indistinguishable "UMPS" bloc.

"The UMPS will not succeed," she said. "All of their efforts cannot stop us growing and cannot block our path to power."

Mockery of the two remaining candidates was a common theme among Le Pen's supporters:

"Sarkozy and Hollande, they are exactly the same," said an 18-year-old who gave her name as Justine. "If there is a difference between the two it's their height."

Another Geezer Eruption From Climate Alarmist James Lovelock: 'Put Democracy On Hold For A While'

This one in, where else?, the UK Guardian in 2010, which I missed, but many others noticed:

We need a more authoritative world. We've become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It's all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can't do that. You've got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.

But it can't happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What's the alternative to democracy? There isn't one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.

James should have been more honest. What he really meant to say was, "We need a more authoritarian world."

Remind you of anyone?

Obama Was Dismissive Of The Financial Panic In March 2009

"I have more than enough to do without having to worry [about] the financial system."

-- Barack Obama, here, the day before the March 2009 stock market bottom 

Flashback March 2009: It Really Bugged Obama to be Called 'Socialist'

So much so, the new president called back to The New York Times after he was interviewed on Air Force One.

From Joe Curl, here:

President Obama was so concerned that he had appeared to dismiss a question from New York Times reporters about whether he was a socialist that he called the newspaper from the Oval Office to clarify his policies.

"It was hard for me to believe that you were entirely serious about that socialist question," he told reporters, who had interviewed the president aboard Air Force One on Friday.

Presidents don't call newspapers. Newspapers call the president.

Old Communist Slogan Adopted By Obama 2012 Campaign

Birds of a feather, flock together:

George Orwell's Black Vision of Total Surveillance Realized With Drones

So says Peter Popham for the UK Independent, here:

The use of drones for the surveillance purposes sketched by Gitlin takes us back to their original function. The critical weakness of the Nazi doodlebug was the lack of control: its only use was as a mechanical kamikaze. Once you had control of the thing, everything changed. George Orwell was the first to describe the possibilities, in his novel 1984. "In the far distance a helicopter skimmed down between the roofs, hovered for an instant like a bluebottle, and dashed away again with a curving flight," he wrote in the novel's first chapter. "It was the police patrol, snooping into people's windows...". ...

It is the snooping function foreseen by Orwell that is the most significant next step for drones in our societies: with our cities and public buildings already saturated with surveillance cameras, we may fondly suppose that the state's monitoring of our daily lives has gone as far as it can go. But we ain't seen nothing yet. ...

Orwell's black vision of total surveillance – "It was even conceivable," he wrote in 1984, "that [the Thought Police] watched everybody all the time" – is finally achieving its technological apotheosis. In a few weeks, the US Army is expected to deploy in Afghanistan its latest helicopter-style drone, the A160 Hummingbird, equipped with 1.8 gigapixel colour cameras. Able to hover, unlike current drones, it will have "unprecedented capability to track and monitor activity on the ground", the Army says. Able to track people and vehicles from above 20,000ft, and with a 65sq-mile field of view, it will have 65 steerable "windows" able to follow separate targets. More modest surveillance drones may be used to enhance police monitoring of London's Olympics.

We Lack Sustainable Streams of Real Income from Productive Activity

So says Jeffrey Snider, here:

Central banks can proclaim that banks and the economy are one and the same, but that does not make it true. Again, there was no real danger of deflation in the real economy as currency, as in the usage of money to transact, was never in short supply. What has been in short supply, and remains in short supply, are sustainable streams of real income due to productive activities - the kinds of activities that have a hard time flourishing under continuously dysfunctional monetary regimes.

Today's Gold to Oil Price Ratio is About 15.86

In other words, 15.86 barrels of oil buys one ounce of gold.

Oil could rise to about $111 per barrel from today's $104.93 to achieve the perfect balance of 15:1.

Or gold could descend to about $1,575 the ounce to achieve the same thing.

The dollar has been trading in a fairly steady range of 3 percent for much of 2012 to date.

World's Most Disastrous Oil Spills, Updated

(see here and here)

Buy and Hold Investors Since October 2007 are Down Over 2 Percent

(source)

Justice Stephen Breyer, Secular Humanist: We'll Decide What's Enduring

Man the measure of all things:

“Why would people want to live under the ‘dead hand’ of an eighteenth-century constitution that preserved not enduring values but specific eighteenth-century thoughts about how those values then applied?”

-- Justice Stephen Breyer, Bill "Depends on what the meaning of is is" Clinton appointee, quoted here

He might as well have said:

“Why would people want to live under the ‘dead hand’ of an eighteenth-century constitution archaic Hebrew narrative that preserved not enduring values but specific second millennium BC thoughts about how those values then applied?”

Hmm. Why would they?

TARP Will Cost Taxpayers $60 Billion, Says Special Inspector General

Here:

"After 3 1⁄2 years, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) continues to be an active and significant part of the Government’s response to the financial crisis. It is a widely held misconception that TARP will make a profit. The most recent cost estimate for TARP is a loss of $60 billion. Taxpayers are still owed $118.5 billion (including $14 billion written off or otherwise lost). But the analysis should not be focused alone on money in and money out. TARP’s costs and legacies involve far more than just dollars and cents. Using a microscope to narrowly focus on the profit or loss of TARP risks losing sight of the bigger picture of whether TARP has been successful in meeting its goals and whether lessons learned from the financial crisis have been adequately implemented so that Treasury, banking regulators, and Congress do not find themselves in the position of rushing out another massive bailout of the financial industry, i.e., TARP 2.0.

"While TARP and other Government responses to the financial crisis may have prevented the immediate collapse of our financial and auto manufacturing industries, and improved stability since 2008, the tradeoff is not without profound long-term consequences. A significant legacy of TARP is increased moral hazard and potentially disastrous consequences associated with institutions deemed “too big to fail.” TARP’s legacy also includes the impact on consumers and homeowners from the large banks’ failure to lend TARP funds. TARP continues to be subject to criticism that TARP helped large banks but not homeowners. In addition, after 3 1⁄2 years, community banks have an uphill battle to exit TARP because they cannot find new capital to replace TARP funds. Finally, TARP’s legacy includes white-collar crime that SIGTARP is uncovering and stopping."

-- Christy L. Romero, Quarterly Report to Congress, April 25, 2012

Moochelle's Spanish Vacation in 2010 Cost Taxpayers At Least $467K

As reported here:

The five day trip cost at least $467,585, according to Judicial Watch.

The total cost of flying Michelle Obama from Camp Andrews to Malaga and then to Mallorca and back to the United States was $199,323.75.

That tab is based on just 17 hours and 15 minutes of total flying time. ...

The 15-member flight crew stayed at Tryp Guadalmar, a nearby motel where group's lodging cost was $10,290.60 and car rental costs were $2,633.50.

In addition, their food cost was $876.30, which included an American indulgence of $57.68 for four bottles of maple syrup and a package of pancake mix.

Secret Service records, meanwhile, show that the costs to the agency for the vacation were $254,461.20.

This total includes $26,670.61 for a chauffeur tour of Costa del Sol and $50,078.78 for a travel planning company SET P&V, S.L.

Q1 2012 GDP Reported at 2.2 Percent, Q4 2011 at 3.0

I am the chief obstacle to growth.

From the Bureau of Economic Analysis, here:

Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 2.2 percent in the first quarter of 2012 (that is, from the fourth quarter to the first quarter), according to the "advance" estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth quarter of 2011, real GDP increased 3.0 percent.

Compared to Q1 2011 at 0.4, today's report at 2.2 looks pretty good, until you remember that Q1 2010 roared at 3.9 percent, Obama's best quarter so far but hardly what one would expect from an economy truly in recovery from the depths to which it sank in its little depression of 2008-2009. The post-war period in the United States saw average growth of 3.5 percent, so one lousy imprint of 3.9 does not a recovery make.

America is clearly not growing like it should, nor like it can. And the chief obstacle to that is spelled "Obama".

Here is the most recent statement of historical GDP from the release for the period 1996-2011:

A Little Thursday Night Dog Humor

h/t Sheik Yer Mami

Global Warming Alarmist James Lovelock, Now a Geezer of 92, Backs Off Predictions

Not that he wasn't a geezer already in 2006 when he was still thumping his global warming tub:

In 2006, in an article in the U.K.’s Independent newspaper, he wrote that “before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.” ...

Six years on he's singing a slightly different tune:

“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.

“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” he said.

“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time… it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising -- carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that,” he added.

He pointed to Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and Tim Flannery’s “The Weather Makers” as other examples of “alarmist” forecasts of the future.


More here.

The Depression in Peripheral Europe

In order of severity: Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain, and then even the 17 country Euro area itself, all with four years of sub-standard GDP relative to the 2008 peak.

(source)

Top 10 US States With Low State and Local Debt Burdens

(source)

US States are in a Heap of Debt Trouble: $8 Trillion Worth

In a less than $2 trillion budget world at the state level.

Because of promises to pay for pensions and healthcare for retired public employees out of future tax revenues, the big squeeze is on, according to Steven Malanga, here:

From 2008 through 2010 (the latest year data are available), state spending rose to $1.9 trillion, from $1.7 trillion. ... 

Several years ago, for instance, the treasurer of Cook County, Ill., Maria Pappas, demanded that all of Cook's municipalities report their debt to her. It wasn't easy. They began with bonded debt, then totaled up pension liabilities, then found they had lots more they'd promised to workers for health care. ...

We couldn't get a handle on just how much debt states and their municipalities have accumulated unless every county treasurer does what Pappas did. But just what we can estimate in bonded debt and unfunded pension and health care promises for retirees now totals about $8 trillion. That's a lot of future state and municipal tax revenues already accounted for.

What's that familiar refrain we keep hearing at the federal level, that a present Congress can't bind a future one?

So how can present municipal and county governments bind the taxpayers to pay in future for unfunded promises in the present, huh?

The UK is in a Depression, Not a Double-Dip Recession

The fact is, UK GDP has not recovered since the onset of troubles in 2008, despite the happy talk of "recovery" in Newspeak which must not call things what they really are, for example, here, at CNBC.com:

"Britain's economy contracted by 7.1 percent during its 2008-2009 recession and recovery since has been slow, with headwinds from the euro zone debt crisis, government spending cuts, high inflation and a damaged banking sector.

"Wednesday's data showed that output was still 4.3 percent below its peak in the first quarter of 2008, and the economy has only grown by 0.4 percent since the government came to power in the second quarter of 2010."

For the chart, the dark blue line in which shows the current decline in the UK since 2008 still 4 percent down more than three years on, see the UK Guardian here.

It's not a paler shade of gray, dammit. It's a faker form of black . . . on the Firth of effing Forth.

The United States of Moronica

We're even dumber than we look, and our stupid party is the smart one of the two.

From John Carney for NetNet:

"A recent study from the Pew Research Center found that 47 percent of Americans didn’t know which political party supports reducing the size and scope of the federal government. Forty-two percent didn’t know which party usually supports reducing military spending. Thirty-nine percent didn’t know which party generally favors restrictions on abortion. ...

"There’s a substantial ignorant minority on almost every issue. ...

"Forty-four percent of women, for example, did not know Nancy Pelosi is a Democrat (fewer men, 33 percent, got this wrong). Fifty percent of women didn’t know ... John Boehner’s party. ...

"People ages 50 and up are engaged by taxes and partisanship (70 percent correctly identified the party affiliation of Pelosi, 72 percent correctly identified which party is known as the G.O.P.). ..."

Read the rest HERE, if you're smart enough to find the link.

Jeffrey Goldberg Likes One Thing About Newt Gingrich

He wants to go "out there":

All at once, the passengers contorted themselves to get a view out of the starboard windows.

And there it was. The actual shuttle, the space shuttle Discovery, piggybacking a ride atop a Boeing 747, on the way to the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center at the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum, where it would be retired. A ripple of excitement -- boyish, unvarnished excitement -- moved through the cabin.

It was an entrancing sight, and completely improbable, especially to people like me, who still don’t quite understand how a 747 gets into the air, even without a space shuttle as carry-on luggage.

The 747 and the space shuttle made a pass over the Washington Monument and the capital’s other grand marble temples, all consecrated to the American idea. They gleamed in the sun as they received a salute from a spacecraft that represented the physical manifestation of American ingenuity and confidence.

Then the 747 left our view. We settled back into our seats, having been elevated for a moment by a magnificent and elegiac vision -- elegiac, because the end of the shuttle program marks the first time since the dawn of the Space Age that the U.S. government has no immediate plan to launch humans into space.

A few minutes later, while we were still parked on the tarmac, ... the plane’s steering seemed to be malfunctioning. ...

We returned to the terminal, and I watched on CNN as Discovery finished the journey to its nursing home in the Virginia countryside. Only then did the obvious thought cross my mind: Newt is right.

This isn’t a thought that has often crossed my mind, especially over the past several months, but on the matter of space exploration and the role it has played in teaching Americans that they are capable of performing exceptional acts of creativity and bravery, Newt Gingrich is exactly right.

Read the whole thing, here.

KIRK:  Ahead Warp One, Mr. Sulu.

DIFALCO: Heading, sir?

KIRK:    Out there. Thataway.

Domestic Drone Authorizations Are Set To Explode

Locations on this map in red are active.

Get the map here.

Government will soon have total information awareness about YOU.

The decision was bi-partisan and sailed through the so-called Tea Party US House of Representatives.

Thanks, Republicans. What good are you?

The New York Times Discusses Bi-Partisan Culpability For The Imperial Presidency

Here:

Mr. Obama's new approach puts him in the company of his recent predecessors. Mr. Bush, for example, failed to persuade Congress to pass a bill allowing religiously affiliated groups to receive taxpayer grants -- and then issued an executive order making the change.

President Bill Clinton increased White House involvement in agency rule making, using regulations and executive orders to show that he was getting things done despite opposition from a Republican Congress on matters like land conservation, gun control, tobacco advertising and treaties. (He was assisted by a White House lawyer, Elena Kagan, who later won tenure at Harvard based on scholarship analyzing such efforts and who is now on the Supreme Court.)

And both the Reagan and George Bush administrations increased their control over executive agencies to advance a deregulatory agenda, despite opposition from Democratic lawmakers, while also developing legal theories and tactics to increase executive power, like issuing signing statements more frequently.

The bipartisan history of executive aggrandizement in recent decades complicates Republican criticism.

Global Response To Debt Was To Triple Down On It

From Reuters, here:

The amount of money thrown at rescuing the world economy since the Great Recession began is truly staggering, probably more than $14 trillion, and the financial spigots are still open. ...

In 2009, the IMF calculated that official rescue efforts totaled nearly $12 trillion, and since then the Fed and the ECB have pumped more cash into the economies they oversee.

Poverty Thresholds 2011

As shown here.

Poverty Guidelines 2012

As shown here.

Partners in TARP Crime

The Most Important Thing About The Norway Terrorist

From Barry Rubin in The Jerusalem Post, here:

IF TERRORIST murders by Hamas and Islamists did not stop well-intentioned future leaders of Norway from considering them heroic underdogs, an evil local man could think his act of terrorism would gain sympathy and change Europe’s politics.

After all, it has already changed the Middle East, and even been sanctified by Western media, intellectuals and governments.

When Norway’s ambassador to Israel tries to distinguish between “bad” terrorism in Norway and “understandable” terrorism against Israelis, that opens the door to a man who thinks his country is “occupied” by leftists and Muslims.

In this sense, the most important thing about the Norway terrorist is not that he is right-wing or anti-Islam. The most important thing is that he believed terrorism would work on behalf of his cause.

Had he held all of the same beliefs but didn’t think murder was a good tactic, nobody would be dead from his actions.

Of course, he was mentally unbalanced, but had a material basis for his imaginings.

What he didn’t understand is that many Europeans will accept terrorism against Israelis or even Americans; very few will applaud terrorism against fellow Europeans.

Nevertheless, many people gave him the idea that terrorism would change minds, and bring victory. They weren’t those whose blogs he quoted a few times in a 1,500-page manifesto, and who explicitly rejected violence. It was the successful terrorists and their Western enablers who gave him the tactic he implemented.

The Atlantic's Lies About Tax Loss Expenditures

The latest lazy lies attacking the so-called privileges of the so-called middle class come from one Linda Killian at The Atlantic here:

"The three largest expenditures in the tax code are all things many middle-class Americans take advantage of -- tax-free employer-provided health insurance, the home mortgage interest deduction and tax-free 401(k) retirement accounts. ... The tax exemptions for home mortgage interest cost the government more than the entire budget of the Department of Housing and Urban Development according to Steuerle [an Urban Institute economist]."

These are NOT the three largest. They rank 1, 3 and 6, not 1, 2 and 3.

If Linda Killian had bothered to read the Joint Committee on Taxation's latest report on the subject, she would have known that.

Here are the top ten tax loss expenditures for 2011, according to this committee of the US Congress:

$109.3 billion  Employer provided health insurance and related

$ 90.5 billion  Reduced tax rates on dividends and capital gains

$ 77.6 billion  Owner-occupied mortgage interest deduction

$ 59.5 billion  Earned income credit

$ 56.4 billion  Credit for children under 17 aka Child Tax Credit

$ 48.4 billion  401K-type plans

$ 42.7 billion  Pension plans aka union retirement plans

$ 42.4 billion  State/local income, sales and property tax deduct.

$ 38.0 billion  Exclusion of capital gains at death

$ 31.0 billion  Exclusion of benefits under cafeteria plans

$ 31.0 billion  Exclusion of untaxed Social Security and RR benes.

Who benefits from the top three? It's hardly a middle class phenomenon . . . today.

Rich and poor and everyone in between gets health insurance when they are employed by an employer, not just the middle class. And they don't pay tax on that "income." But the size of this break is bound to decline dramatically in coming years, if ObamaCare is not struck down or repealed. Fewer employers will be providing coverage, choosing to pay lower fines instead. Other companies will deliberately downsize in order to escape the requirements under the law, making employer-provided insurance less common than it is today. The net effect may very well be that employer-provided health insurance becomes more and more an upper class phenomenon.

Reduced rates of taxation on dividends and capital gains primarily benefit the rich in America. Could that be why Killian overlooked it entirely? It certainly doesn't fit her narrative against the middle class, does it? But this category is the real number 2 in the list of tax loss expenditures.

Working class and middle class people who are lucky enough to have joined the investor class are investing primarily through tax-deferring vehicles like union pension plans and 401K plans, which rank number 7 and 6 in Congress' accounting of tax loss expenditures. It is questionable, however, for pensions and 401Ks to appear in this list of tax loss expenditures at all. Eventually the deferred money will become income, and it will be taxed.

But the more important point is that everyone in this bottom 66 percent of wage earners by definition makes less than $100,000 per year and by and large very few of them are playing around in the stock market, where fat cats like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett and Mitt Romney derive their unearned income, taxed at the non-permanent lower rates under the Bush tax legislation of 2001-2003. Were these rates permanent, however, this tax loss expenditure wouldn't even make the list.

Contrast that with something which is more or less permanent: the exclusion of income from Social Security taxation. The current income ceiling after which income is not so taxed is almost $107,000 per year. In 2010 just under $2 trillion in ordinary wages and salaries made by the rich escaped the Social Security tax. The tax loss expenditure of that? $125 billion, higher than anything in the Joint Commission's report. And it all went to the rich.

Third is the ever popular whipping boy of the tax reform crowd, the mortgage interest deduction. It should worry average Americans who struggle on the crumbs which fall from their masters' tables that our betters want to make it harder for us to own four walls and a little garden and a tree. 100 million out of 150 million wage earners in 2010 made less than $40,000 per year. Try buying a house on that.

Democrats and Republicans have successfully conspired to attack Social Security for the first time by de-funding it temporarily and haven't yet been electrocuted by the once-feared third rail of politics, so I fully expect them to keep trying on mortgage interest.

Four years ago the mortgage interest deduction was more like $88 billion, so with the collapse of housing we have witnessed a decline in the amount of mortgage interest being paid, and so deducted. $10 billion less. The reason for this is two-fold. One, fewer homeowners. Two, refinanced mortgages at lower rates. With home ownership already under severe stress, it is astonishing that liberals of both parties continue to attack it under the guise of tax fairness. What it really is, is statists greedily looking for more revenue.

I say they can all go to hell.