Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Explaining The Bar Bill By Tax Rules and Simple Mathematics Crazy Maxine. Vladimir. Comey Should Have Been Fired.

Aren't you women lucky:
This explanation of our tax/bar bill was sent to me by one of my dearest friends and faithful memo reader.

Once you begin to mix those who pay no taxes with those who pay high taxes and then a tax change occurs that rewards the one paying the highest tax in regard to those who pay nothing problems occur and attitudes begin to change. (See 1 below.)
Rep. Maxine Waters is nuts. (See 2 below.)
In the March 2017, Volume 46, Number 3, The Issue of Imprimis, a  publication of Hillsdale College, has an article by Christopher Caldwell, Senior Editor of The Weekly Standard, explaining Putin, his rise, his accomplishments and what motivated him to rebuild Russia after the Oligarchs, financed by Capitalist Banks, plundered  the nation.

It is not a sympathetic article but it does help explain how to think about him.  I commend the article because it provides keen insight into understanding Putin and why he has such antipathy towards America and The West.

The missile game heats up. (See 3 below.)
Trump should have fired Comey but now he is stuck with him.  He is the most political FBI Chief since Hoover.

Furthermore, it is possible Obama's crowd did 'surveil' Trump during the campaign and Trump, perhaps,overstated his building being wiretapped.  He needs to get back on the page where what he says is verifiable. (See 4 below.)
1)The tax system Explained in Beer 

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100... If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12.The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.  "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". 

 Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80. 

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected.  They would still drink for free.  But what about the other six men?  How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33.  But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So,the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay. And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100%saving). 

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3... (33% saving). The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7... (28% saving). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12... (25% saving). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18... (22% saving). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59... (16% saving).  Each of the six was better off than before.  And the first four continued to drink for free. 

But,once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings."I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man.  He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he received ten times more benefit than me!" "That's true!" shouted the seventh man.  "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2?  The wealthy get all the breaks!"  Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" 

The nine men surrounded the tenth man and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him.  But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.  They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! 

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works.  The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.  In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. 

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

CRAZY Maxine Waters Is At It Again 

Maxine Waters really hates Donald Trump and has been looking for any excuse to scream IMPEACH! The aging California Representative is now doubling down on her calls for impeachment of President Trump on Twitter:

Waters said earlier this month:
“The only thing that I am focused on is credible investigations to bring out the facts. … If the facts are there, then I think we should move very quickly to do something about it. And if there was collusion, and any support for undermining our democracy, I think the president should be impeached,” “I’ve said that, and that’s where I stand.”
3)In Japan, Russia and China Find Common Ground

For the first time in three years, Russia and Japan have revived an avenue of negotiation that had stalled in the face of enduring tension between the two nations. Foreign and defense ministers from both countries met in Tokyo on Monday to hold 2+2 talks on security issues in the Asia-Pacific region. As expected, Japan took the opportunity to question Russia's recent attempts to bolster its defenses on the southern Kuril Islands, to which Tokyo has long laid claim. Russia fired back with its own objections to Japan's desire to build up its ballistic missile defenses as North Korea pushes ahead with its nuclear program.
For the Russians, not to mention Pyongyang's Chinese backers, the deployment of U.S. antiballistic missile (ABM) technology around the world is becoming a bigger and bigger concern. The Kremlin's anxiety, on clear display in Europe over the past few years, has more recently come to include the Asia-Pacific as the United States wraps up its delivery of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system to South Korea. That these systems will extend the coverage of missile defense radars operated by U.S. allies to include Chinese and Russian territory is an obvious concern to Beijing and Moscow, since the systems will enable Washington to better track missile flights and tests in both countries. But their fears go far beyond these immediate consequences.
The recent progress Washington has made in developing more precise nuclear weapons — and faster, hardier delivery vehicles to carry them — has only added to Russia and China's growing unease. On March 1, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists issued a report on the United States' pursuit of a new capability called "super-fuzing." This technology replaces the traditional fixed-height fuse of the W76-1 nuclear warhead with a variable, self-measuring fuse that greatly enhances a warhead's ability to explode exactly at the optimal height over its target. Coupled with sturdier and speedier delivery vehicles, more precise nuclear weapons would give the United States room to reduce the number of warheads it would need to send to destroy each Chinese or Russian missile in the event of an attack.Instead, Russia and China worry that the United States' devotion to investing in ABM technology could severely undermine their nuclear deterrents in the long run. After all, the latest generation of ABM systems — which are fairly scarce as it is — are woefully inadequate for defending against the two countries' vast nuclear arsenals at present. But neither Moscow nor Beijing can afford to assume that it will stay this way forever. For one, ABM technology could easily continue to mature and spread worldwide. More important, however, ABM systems do not exist in a vacuum. Rather, they complement the United States' strike capability. Russia and China fear that if the United States continues to simultaneously improve its ABM and strike capabilities, it could gain the ability to withstand a Russian or Chinese nuclear response in the wake of a crippling initial U.S. blow.
Taken together, these strides in weapons technology could give Washington greater confidence in its ability to land the first blow in a nuclear war with China or Russia. In theory, a more devastating first strike on the United States' part would leave fewer Chinese or Russian missiles available for a reprisal attack. And that's where ABM systems come in: The more advanced Washington's ABM network, the better positioned it will be to act as a shield against the Chinese or Russian weapons that survive. Clearly, the concept of mutually assured destruction that has proved true of nuclear war doctrine for decades may not hold for much longer.
Of course, most of this scenario is based on events that may never unfold. There is no reason to assume, for example, that Washington would want to launch a first strike against Russia or China, a move with global economic and environmental ramifications that would be devastating to the United States itself. Moreover, Moscow and Beijing have also both invested heavily in technology that they hope will prevent the United States from pulling too far ahead in the nuclear arms race. To that end, they have worked to re-evaluate arms control treaties, design more powerful and robust missiles, and fund hypersonic missile research.
Still, neither Russia nor China will take any chances when it comes to preserving the credibility of their nuclear deterrents. And as Washington works to hone its nuclear capabilities, Moscow and Beijing can be expected to find common cause in stopping the United States from extending its ABM network's reach.

A President’s Credibility

Trump’s falsehoods are eroding public trust, at home and abroad.

If President Trump announces that North Korea launched a missile that landed within 100 miles of Hawaii, would most Americans believe him? Would the rest of the world? We’re not sure, which speaks to the damage that Mr. Trump is doing to his Presidency with his seemingly endless stream of exaggerations, evidence-free accusations, implausible denials and other falsehoods.

The latest example is Mr. Trump’s refusal to back off his Saturday morning tweet of three weeks ago that he had “found out that [Barack] Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory” on Election Day. He has offered no evidence for his claim, and a parade of intelligence officials, senior Republicans and Democrats have since said they have seen no such evidence.

Yet the President clings to his assertion like a drunk to an empty gin bottle, rolling out his press spokesman to make more dubious claims. Sean Spicer—who doesn’t deserve this treatment—was dispatched last week to repeat an assertion by a Fox News commentator that perhaps the Obama Administration had subcontracted the wiretap to British intelligence.

That bungle led to a public denial from the British Government Communications Headquarters, and British news reports said the U.S. apologized. But then the White House claimed there was no apology. For the sake of grasping for any evidence to back up his original tweet, and the sin of pride in not admitting error, Mr. Trump had his spokesman repeat an unchecked TV claim that insulted an ally.
The wiretap tweet is also costing Mr. Trump politically as he hands his opponents a sword. Mr. Trump has a legitimate question about why the U.S. was listening to his former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and who leaked news of his meeting with the Russian ambassador. But that question never gets a hearing because the near-daily repudiation of his false tweet is a bigger media story.

FBI director James Comey also took revenge on Monday by joining the queue of those saying the bureau has no evidence to back up the wiretap tweet. Mr. Comey even took the unusual step of confirming that the FBI is investigating ties between the Trump election campaign and Russia.

Mr. Comey said he could make such a public admission only in “unusual circumstances,” but why now? Could the wiretap tweet have made Mr. Comey angry because it implied the FBI was involved in illegal surveillance? Mr. Trump blundered in keeping Mr. Comey in the job after the election, but now the President can’t fire the man leading an investigation into his campaign even if he wants to.

All of this continues the pattern from the campaign that Mr. Trump is his own worst political enemy. He survived his many false claims as a candidate because his core supporters treated it as mere hyperbole and his opponent was untrustworthy Hillary Clinton. But now he’s President, and he needs support beyond the Breitbart cheering section that will excuse anything. As he is learning with the health-care bill, Mr. Trump needs partners in his own party to pass his agenda. He also needs friends abroad who are willing to trust him when he asks for support, not least in a crisis.

This week should be dominated by the smooth political sailing for Mr. Trump’s Supreme Court nominee and the progress of health-care reform on Capitol Hill. These are historic events, and success will show he can deliver on his promises. But instead the week has been dominated by the news that he was repudiated by his own FBI director.

Two months into his Presidency, Gallup has Mr. Trump’s approval rating at 39%. No doubt Mr. Trump considers that fake news, but if he doesn’t show more respect for the truth most Americans may conclude he’s a fake President.

No comments: