Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (7785)	2/26/2009 7:08:54 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 103300

Re: "but can you blame her for that?" I donno, GZ! (Personally... I watch the naked lady weather cast from Russia. and [recreations] of "The Greatest Race" run over lava rocks on Easter Island... where the contestants get to ambush and brain each other with large tree branches anywhere before the finish line.... Now THAT'S Entertainment! <GGG>)

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (7785)	2/27/2009 6:16:53 AM
From: puborectalis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Krugman(Nobelist): ..........Right now the deficit is huge thanks to temporary factors (at least we hope they’re temporary): a severe economic slump is depressing revenues and large sums have to be allocated both to fiscal stimulus and to financial rescues. But if and when the crisis passes, the budget picture should improve dramatically. Bear in mind that from 2005 to 2007, that is, in the three years before the crisis, the federal deficit averaged only $243 billion a year. Now, during those years, revenues were inflated, to some degree, by the housing bubble. But it’s also true that we were spending more than $100 billion a year in Iraq. So if Mr. Obama gets us out of Iraq (without bogging us down in an equally expensive Afghan quagmire) and manages to engineer a solid economic recovery — two big ifs, to be sure — getting the deficit down to around $500 billion by 2013 shouldn’t be at all difficult. But won’t the deficit be swollen by interest on the debt run-up over the next few years? Not as much as you might think. Interest rates on long-term government debt are less than 4 percent, so even a trillion dollars of additional debt adds less than $40 billion a year to future deficits. And those interest costs are fully reflected in the budget documents. So we have good priorities and plausible projections. What’s not to like about this budget? Basically, the long run outlook remains worrying. According to the Obama administration’s budget projections, the ratio of federal debt to G.D.P., a widely used measure of the government’s financial position, will soar over the next few years, then more or less stabilize. But this stability will be achieved at a debt-to-G.D.P. ratio of around 60 percent. That wouldn’t be an extremely high debt level by international standards, but it would be the deepest in debt America has been since the years immediately following World War II. And it would leave us with considerably reduced room for maneuver if another crisis comes along. Furthermore, the Obama budget only tells us about the next 10 years. That’s an improvement on Bush-era budgets, which looked only 5 years ahead. But America’s really big fiscal problems lurk over that budget horizon: sooner or later we’re going to have to come to grips with the forces driving up long-run spending — above all, the ever-rising cost of health care. And even if fundamental health care reform brings costs under control, I at least find it hard to see how the federal government can meet its long-term obligations without some tax increases on the middle class. Whatever politicians may say now, there’s probably a value-added tax in our future. But I don’t blame Mr. Obama for leaving some big questions unanswered in this budget. There’s only so much long-run thinking the political system can handle in the midst of a severe crisis; he has probably taken on all he can, for now. And this budget looks very, very good.

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (7785)	2/27/2009 6:19:31 AM
From: puborectalis	Respond to of 103300

Ed: "All of the proposed increases apply to couples making more than $250,000 ($200,000 for single taxpayers) — about the top 3 percent of taxpayers. None are big enough to derail an economic recovery. And contrary to Republicans’ knee-jerk protests, they impose no outsize burden on small businesses: Most sole proprietors and other small-business owners do not make anywhere near a quarter-of-a-million dollars a year. To combat deficits, Mr. Obama proposes to let Mr. Bush’s high-end tax cuts expire in 2011, raising the top rate from 35 percent to as high as 39.6 percent. He would also impose a 20 percent rate on investment income, up from the current super-low 15 percent. And he would reinstate a tax provision enacted by the first President Bush, but undone by his son, that limited tax write-offs by high-income taxpayers for dependents and other expenses, like mortgage interest on vacation homes. The proposal also calls for taxing private equity partners just like the rest of us. Under current law, multimillionaire buyout mavens pay tax on much of their income at about the lowest rates in the tax code. Under the Obama budget, their earnings would lose favored status and be taxed as the ordinary income of ordinary mortals. No one who really believes in fiscal responsibility could object to the proposed tax increases. And yet, each one presages a political fight. At issue is not only the tax burden on the wealthiest Americans or election-year debates, but the real-life difficulty of weaning people hooked on unsustainable debt — whether it is unpaid-for tax breaks or over-leveraged buyouts or junk mortgages. It’s a challenge avoided for too long."

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (7785)	2/27/2009 6:22:02 AM
From: puborectalis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

How Obama's budget proposal affects California Zachary Coile, Chronicle Washington Bureau Friday, February 27, 2009 Copies of the Obama administration's 2010 budget go on sa... (02-27) 04:00 PST Washington - -- California will see a sweeping commitment to addressing climate change, a huge tax hit for its wealthiest taxpayers and a major benefit to Silicon Valley's tech industry in President Obama's first budget proposal. As in all presidents' budget plans, there are winners and losers. California college students could benefit from a proposal to tie increases in Pell Grants to inflation for the first time in the program's history. University of California President Mark Yudof said the plan could raise the maximum Pell Grant, intended to foster educational opportunity, by $200 next year, yielding an extra $10 million in aid for UC undergraduates. He said Obama's budget also would help students and their parents with an expanded $2,500 tax credit for college expenses. The plan "will help ease the economic burden for many students and families in California and across the nation," Yudof said. California's plans for a high-speed rail system could take another leap forward with Obama's pledge to add $5 billion for nationwide super-fast rail programs over five years on top of the $8 billion approved in the stimulus package. The state could get a big share because voters have approved $10 billion in state bonds for bullet trains between San Francisco and Los Angeles and from the Central Valley to the East Bay. Losers in Obama's budget include large-scale California farm operations. Farmers making more than $500,000 a year could face deep cuts in subsidies for rice, cotton and other commodity crops, part of Obama's effort to direct aid to smaller farms. The budget plan, totaling $3.55 trillion for 2010, represents the most detailed blueprint yet of Obama's priorities for the country. And for the most part, his budget implements the agenda that he ran on during last year's campaign. His tax proposal amounts to a reversal of President George W. Bush's policies: Obama's budget would allow the Bush tax cuts for the nation's wealthiest 2 percent to expire in 2011. Couples earning more than $250,000 a year would see their tax rate rise from 36 percent to 39.6 percent. Wealthy tax filers would also face new limits on what they can deduct for mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable donations - which could limit giving to nonprofits. Hedge fund managers and oil and gas firms would see major tax increases. The top capital gains tax rate climbs from 15 percent to 20 percent. Tilting the system Obama would tilt the tax system in favor of lower-paid workers, extending the payroll tax cuts approved in the stimulus bill - $400 for individuals making less than $75,000 a year and $800 for couples earning less than $150,000. Obama's budget also includes a provision dear to Silicon Valley: a proposed 10-year, $74 billion extension of the research and development tax credit. Tech companies say the credit gives them incentives to spend billions on research, creating jobs and motivating new technologies. Betsy Mullins, vice president for government and political affairs at TechNet, a trade group of tech CEOs, said she was also enthused about the president's proposal to triple the number of graduate student fellowships. "Think of all the things that have been done by graduate students - from Google to the work Marc Andreessen (founder of Netscape) did as a graduate student," Mullins said. Obama's budget also makes a firm commitment to fighting global warming, setting the goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 14 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent below by 2050. The president's plan is modeled on California's cap-and-trade program, capping emission levels and allowing power plants and other emitters to buy and sell credits to release carbon dioxide. Obama is counting on revenue, estimated at $645.7 billion over a decade, to fund investments in renewable energy and other programs. Critics call it a tax on energy firms, which could pass the added costs on to consumers. House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio said, "Let's just be honest and call it a carbon tax that will increase taxes on all Americans who drive a car, who have a job, who turn on a light switch." But California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger praised the proposal, saying it would spur economic growth by fostering the development of clean energy technologies. "In California, we know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand," he said. Farmers face impacts California farmers face a series of impacts from Obama's efforts to trim subsidies for agriculture. He's seeking to cut crop insurance subsidies, which would mostly affect Midwest farmers, but also California nut, citrus, avocado or raisin growers who insure against late-season freezes or unseasonable rain. Obama also would cut a program that shares the costs of promoting exports. Major nut growers, like Blue Diamond and Sunkist, use it to promote their almonds and pistachios in overseas markets, said Jack King, national affairs manager of the California Farm Bureau Federation. Bush attempted similar cuts to farm subsidies, only to be rebuffed by Congress. Obama, who voted for a farm bill last year that extended most crop subsidies, could face similar resistance. King said, "There will be lots of opposition from the farm community generally, and it will be bipartisan opposition." The blueprint for California interests President Obama's $3.55 trillion budget proposal for 2010 would have far-reaching implications for the state: Taxes Wealthy filers - couples making more than $250,000 a year - would see their tax rate rise from 36 percent to 39.6 percent and would see a cutback in their deductions for charitable giving. Climate change Obama's pledge to address climate change could make California's cap-and-trade plan to cut greenhouse gases a national model. High-speed rail The budget pledges $5 billion more for high-speed rail nationwide on top of the $8 billion approved in the stimulus package, which could speed plans for a network of bullet trains linking the Bay Area, the Central Valley and Los Angeles. Health care Obama's $634 billion, 10-year down payment for health care is likely to set off a fierce debate with profound effects for doctors, hospitals and the state's 6.6 million uninsured. Tech A plan to extend the research and development tax credit for 10 years could entice Silicon Valley companies to spend billions more on research. Agriculture Obama's plans to cut subsidies for farmers earning more than $500,000 a year could hurt big California rice, cotton and wheat growers. For a complete look at the budget, go to www.whitehouse.gov/omb Budget highlights: A look at some of the details of President Obama's proposed 2010 spending plan Health and Human Services Proposal: $821.7 billion Up 7.5% from 2009 estimate Highlights: Medicare and Medicaid would grow more slowly. Obama wants to squeeze Medicaid and Medicare spending to help create a 10-year, $634 billion "down payment" to provide coverage for all. EPA Proposal: $10.5 billion Up 34.6% from 2009 Highlights: Budget would give the biggest increase for the agency in eight years. It would nearly triple funding for states, local governments and tribes, allowing them to use the money to improve sewage treatment plants and drinking water systems. Starting in 2012, the budget proposes to invest $15 billion a year in clean energy. Education Proposal: $46.7 billion Up 12.8% from 2009 Highlights: Would tie the Pell Grant program to inflation for the first time. Also would end government-guaranteed loans and boost the government's own direct lending in an effort to insulate students from turmoil in financial markets. Agriculture Proposal: $26 billion Up 8.8% from 2009 Highlights: Big farms that receive large government subsidies would lose some of that money. Nutrition would get a boost, with $1 billion more each year to improve child nutrition programs and enhance the nutritional quality of school meals. Defense Proposal: $533.7 billion Up 4% from 2009 War spending (addition to annual budget): $130 billion for 2010, $75.5 billion for 2009 Highlights: Only a modest increase in defense spending for 2010; Obama's proposal of at least $533.7 billion is only a 4 percent increase from estimated 2009 spending. Also requested is a separate $205.5 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan between now and fall 2010. Veterans Affairs Proposal: $52.5 billion Up 10% from 2009 Highlights: The Veterans Affairs budget takes a step toward expanding health care access to nondisabled veterans whose incomes exceed about $30,000 annually. His budget also would provide extra funding for veterans who are homeless and those in rural areas. Homeland Security Proposal: $42.7 billion Up 1.2% from 2009 Highlights: Air travelers likely would have to pay more in three years to have their shoes inspected at airports; starting in 2012, the airlines would cover most of the costs of passenger and baggage screening through increased fees. Foreign affairs Proposal: $51.7 billion Up 9.5% from 2009 (Change is because $10.5 billion in supplemental nonmilitary funding for Afghanistan and Pakistan was added to the initial $36.7 billion 2009 estimate) Highlights: The proposal includes money to meet Obama's campaign pledge to double foreign aid and boost counter-terrorism and non-military assistance to Pakistan and Afghanistan. It would also retain President George W. Bush's hallmark global HIV/AIDS initiative.