According to the Wall St Journal writing about the tax bill currently in a House Senate reconciliation hassle, "It appears to prohibit mortgage-interest deductions for all second homes."
Appears??? This is a law. Things in law don't "appear". They are either legal or illegal. Sounds like the lawyers have laid on the legal gobble-de-gook so thick that nobody can understand it.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017
Tuesday, December 5, 2017
DACA
Delayed Action for Child something or other. Bad acronym. We are talking about people who were brought into America as children, who have grown up in America, and are still illegal immigrants pursued by Mr. Migra.
I have a lot of sympathy for these people. I'm willing to cut them a lot of slack. Those that have served in the armed forces ought to get citizenship right then and there. Those who have graduated high school and/or college, are gainfully employed, are paying taxes and are staying out of trouble with the law, we ought to let them stay in the country, and apply for citizenship. I'm sure plenty of other Americans agree with me.
It's a powerful issue. Congress ought to deal with it by passing a law. And, that law ought to stand on its own, for an up or down roll call vote so we voters can see where our Congress critters stand on the issue.
Right now they are talking about hitching a DACA bill onto a "must pass" bill like extending the federal budget. The idea being, that the must pass bill will drag the less popular DACA bill thru and offer cover to Congress critters who can say "I had to vote to pass the budget lest the government shut down"
I have a lot of sympathy for these people. I'm willing to cut them a lot of slack. Those that have served in the armed forces ought to get citizenship right then and there. Those who have graduated high school and/or college, are gainfully employed, are paying taxes and are staying out of trouble with the law, we ought to let them stay in the country, and apply for citizenship. I'm sure plenty of other Americans agree with me.
It's a powerful issue. Congress ought to deal with it by passing a law. And, that law ought to stand on its own, for an up or down roll call vote so we voters can see where our Congress critters stand on the issue.
Right now they are talking about hitching a DACA bill onto a "must pass" bill like extending the federal budget. The idea being, that the must pass bill will drag the less popular DACA bill thru and offer cover to Congress critters who can say "I had to vote to pass the budget lest the government shut down"
Monday, December 4, 2017
The Euro's are still bailing out the Greeks.
Small piece in the Wall St Journal today. The Greeks and the Euro's have reached a "preliminary agreement" on the austerity measures the Greeks must adopt in order to qualify for E5 billion handout next month. The Euro's keep insisting upon reduction of Greek government workers, and pension payments, and better tax collection. At one time 25% of the population of Greece was drawing pay from the Greek government. And humongous numbers of people were drawing pensions. Every time the Greeks make a move, or even a whisper in the papers, about accepting Euro austerity demands, they get riots in the streets.
The E5 billion is down from the old days. In past years the Greek bailouts were much higher, say E50 billion. The Euros think the money will let the Greeks make the payments due on Euro bonds and loans. Let's hope that works out. The Greeks are having trouble making payroll, and so Euro bail out money might be diverted into other things.
We think the Euro's are doing the handouts to prevent the Greeks from defaulting on their loans, which would impose serious losses on the Euro banks stupid enough to still be holding any Greek debt. So the idea is to dole out money to the Greeks to use to pay off their debts.
Smarter would be to tell the Greeks to suck it up. No more bailouts. Go ahead and default. You won't be able to borrow a plugged nickel anywhere in the world, and you will have to balance your budget.
Far as I can see, the bailouts just allow the Greeks to spend other people's money for no good reason.
The E5 billion is down from the old days. In past years the Greek bailouts were much higher, say E50 billion. The Euros think the money will let the Greeks make the payments due on Euro bonds and loans. Let's hope that works out. The Greeks are having trouble making payroll, and so Euro bail out money might be diverted into other things.
We think the Euro's are doing the handouts to prevent the Greeks from defaulting on their loans, which would impose serious losses on the Euro banks stupid enough to still be holding any Greek debt. So the idea is to dole out money to the Greeks to use to pay off their debts.
Smarter would be to tell the Greeks to suck it up. No more bailouts. Go ahead and default. You won't be able to borrow a plugged nickel anywhere in the world, and you will have to balance your budget.
Far as I can see, the bailouts just allow the Greeks to spend other people's money for no good reason.
Sunday, December 3, 2017
How far will we go to stop the NORKs?
From getting nukes that is. They are really really close to having nuclear tipped missiles that can reach the US. The last test flight showed enough range, and then some, to hit Washington and Boston. There are reports that the missile broke up on reentry, but they ought to be able to fix that. Then they need to build a nuke small enough to fit on the rocket, a nose cone that can withstand reentry, and a reliable fuse. I don't think any of these will take very long to do. The NORKs could have it all together within a year. After that, Katy bar the door.
The NORKs want missiles to keep us from doing regime change on them, the way we did on Saddam Hussein. As it is, they have enough conventional artillery within range of Seoul to deter damn near anyone, with nukes in their hands, they figure to deter even us.
And the NORKs are dead set on getting nukes. I cannot imagine Rocket Man backing off his nuclear program for anything less than the Chinese cutting off all trade with him. And the Chinese clearly don't want to do this, they like having the NORKs around as a buffer state, and as a semi tame attack dog to let out to bite the Americans every so often.
We could slap a good stiff trade killing tariff on Chinese exports to the US. That would hurt China, and it might get them to cut off the NORKs. The Chinese would not like it but we could do it. If we have the stones. Nobody knows if Trump would do this, and if the country and the Congress would back him up if he tried it. I have not seen any Gallup polling on this subject.
Or we could try straight forward military action, air strikes followed with ground forces. This amounts to starting up the Korean War all over again. Last time was bad. This time would probably be just as bad. And the South Koreans would take a lot of damage and casualties, something they certainly are not happy about.
Or we could do the paper tiger act, keep on snarling at the NORKs but not actually do anything. This would probably cause the Japanese, the South Koreans, and maybe even Viet Nam and Taiwan to go for their own nukes. Which is bad, but at least these countries are all US allies or friends. It would shake up the Chinese though.
The NORKs want missiles to keep us from doing regime change on them, the way we did on Saddam Hussein. As it is, they have enough conventional artillery within range of Seoul to deter damn near anyone, with nukes in their hands, they figure to deter even us.
And the NORKs are dead set on getting nukes. I cannot imagine Rocket Man backing off his nuclear program for anything less than the Chinese cutting off all trade with him. And the Chinese clearly don't want to do this, they like having the NORKs around as a buffer state, and as a semi tame attack dog to let out to bite the Americans every so often.
We could slap a good stiff trade killing tariff on Chinese exports to the US. That would hurt China, and it might get them to cut off the NORKs. The Chinese would not like it but we could do it. If we have the stones. Nobody knows if Trump would do this, and if the country and the Congress would back him up if he tried it. I have not seen any Gallup polling on this subject.
Or we could try straight forward military action, air strikes followed with ground forces. This amounts to starting up the Korean War all over again. Last time was bad. This time would probably be just as bad. And the South Koreans would take a lot of damage and casualties, something they certainly are not happy about.
Or we could do the paper tiger act, keep on snarling at the NORKs but not actually do anything. This would probably cause the Japanese, the South Koreans, and maybe even Viet Nam and Taiwan to go for their own nukes. Which is bad, but at least these countries are all US allies or friends. It would shake up the Chinese though.
Saturday, December 2, 2017
King Solomon's Mines 1985
Some how I missed this one back in 1985. It's a fun, lightweight African adventure story featuring Richard Chamberlain as Allan Quatermain, intrepid great white hunter, and Sharon Stone, American beauty searching for a father lost in darkest Africa. Also has John Rhys-Davies as villainous Turkish war lord. A lot of scenes put one in mind of/were ripped off from, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Lots of action, including funny scenes of African cannibals popping the lead characters into a giant cooking pot filled with water and sliced vegetables.
The title of the movie comes from an old H. Rider Haggard adventure story, published a hundred years ago. It was a best seller back then, it's been mentioned repeatedly in other fiction stories, but I have never read the book. I suspect the movie takes little from the novel other than the title and the names of the characters. There were older movies of this title, one from 1937 and one from 1950.
All in all, an enjoyable flick. Lightweight but fun.
The title of the movie comes from an old H. Rider Haggard adventure story, published a hundred years ago. It was a best seller back then, it's been mentioned repeatedly in other fiction stories, but I have never read the book. I suspect the movie takes little from the novel other than the title and the names of the characters. There were older movies of this title, one from 1937 and one from 1950.
All in all, an enjoyable flick. Lightweight but fun.
Friday, December 1, 2017
New Product Design, Winners and Losers
Maybe a dozen years ago Boeing and Airbus were casting around for an idea for a new aircraft. Airbus decided to build the largest plane that available engines could hoist off the runway, the A380. It was a double decker, four engines, seating 500 passengers. Boeing did some market research and decided that more modest aircraft, seating 250-280 passengers was about right for the market. After all it takes some doing to round up 500 paying passengers to fill an A380. The Boeing plane, the 787 has only two engines (engines are the most expensive part of an aircraft), a very high tech "composite" fuselage and lithium ion batteries which gave a lot of grief.
As of right now, Boeing has sold several hundred, and has a backlog of close to 1000 787's. They judged the market right. The A380 has only one customer, Emirates, who has an order for another 42 A380's. After which, the production line will shut down. And as things are, Airbus is loosing money on every one they build. Emirates (and no one else) is thinking about ordering some more, but they fear that Airbus might stop building A380's at a loss. So they have not committed to an order.
Looks like Boeing's marketeers called it right. The Airbus marketeers followed the Field of Dreams marketing plan (If we build it they will come). Airbus has taken a big hit on the A380. So big that they might not stay in business at all.
As of right now, Boeing has sold several hundred, and has a backlog of close to 1000 787's. They judged the market right. The A380 has only one customer, Emirates, who has an order for another 42 A380's. After which, the production line will shut down. And as things are, Airbus is loosing money on every one they build. Emirates (and no one else) is thinking about ordering some more, but they fear that Airbus might stop building A380's at a loss. So they have not committed to an order.
Looks like Boeing's marketeers called it right. The Airbus marketeers followed the Field of Dreams marketing plan (If we build it they will come). Airbus has taken a big hit on the A380. So big that they might not stay in business at all.
Thursday, November 30, 2017
CongressCritters want a tax hike without voting for it
New twist to the tax bill. A "snap back" clause that pops taxes back up if the deficit gets too large. "Too large" is not defined, so it can happen anytime. The effect is a tax hike but Congresscritters don't have to vote for it. Constituents don't like tax hikes which accounts for Congresscritters reluctance to stand up and vote for them. They like this trick better, where they can cancel the tax cuts, pretty much anytime they like, with out voting for it.
This should not be allowed. When Congress raises taxes, each member must take a vote, in public (rollcall) so we taxpayers can know which Congresscritters are taking our hardearned money.
Speaking of the tax bill, I have been noticing some TV ads denouncing the tax bill because it will raise the deficit. The ads don't have sponsors, I don't know for sure who is running them, but I suspect Democrats. Might be RINO's. I'm thinking we voters ought to ignore political ads that don't declare their sponsors. The deficit argument is kinda bogus too. It really means that Congress wants to keep on spending, that shutting down the gravy train is just too painful to think about.
The deficit could be reduced by better economic growth, and shutting down worthless programs. Start with shutting down the federal education department. Education from preK thru college is funded and controlled by state and local government and parents. The feds just draw their salaries, they don't actually educate anyone. Then shut down the federal Housing and Urban Development department. Let the state and local governments do the work.
Those few ideas will do good things for the deficit.
This should not be allowed. When Congress raises taxes, each member must take a vote, in public (rollcall) so we taxpayers can know which Congresscritters are taking our hardearned money.
Speaking of the tax bill, I have been noticing some TV ads denouncing the tax bill because it will raise the deficit. The ads don't have sponsors, I don't know for sure who is running them, but I suspect Democrats. Might be RINO's. I'm thinking we voters ought to ignore political ads that don't declare their sponsors. The deficit argument is kinda bogus too. It really means that Congress wants to keep on spending, that shutting down the gravy train is just too painful to think about.
The deficit could be reduced by better economic growth, and shutting down worthless programs. Start with shutting down the federal education department. Education from preK thru college is funded and controlled by state and local government and parents. The feds just draw their salaries, they don't actually educate anyone. Then shut down the federal Housing and Urban Development department. Let the state and local governments do the work.
Those few ideas will do good things for the deficit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)