While the 99.9% Continue to Struggle the Wealthiest .01% Keep Getting Wealthier.

Why is it that while America is supposedly in crisis - or jobless "recovery" - the rich continue to increase their wealth at a rate that is creating staggering wealth inequality? The net worth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans grew by 13% in the past year to $1.7 trillion, as the gap between rich and poor continues to widen at a staggering rate.

Meanwhile, average workers' wages haven't budged over the last 40-years, and the real minimum wage--adjusted for inflation--has declined over the same period.  According to the  Congressional Budget Office (CBO), between 1979 and 2007, the top 1% of Americans income grew by 275%!  And between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. The CBO also found that between 1979 and 2005, after-tax income for middle-class Americans (adjusted for inflation) rose by 21% while the richest 0.1 per cent grew by 400%!.
How much longer can this obscene transfer of wealth to the privileged few from poor and hard-working Americans continue before most Americans become serfs if they're not already?

“We can have a democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.” US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (1846 – 1941)

“Men did not make the earth… It is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property… Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds.” — Thomas Paine

Read more...

California Deficit is a Big Lie

Clint Richardson, author of the Reality Blog, and producer of the documentary, Corporation Nation, which exposes the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) - the full accounting of government and its investments...the true source of financial auditing for government that's  never spoken about publicly -in his latest article, reports once again, on "the purposeful omission of massive amounts of wealth by your government". Specifically, Jerry Brown's big lie: that California's deficit is now "$15.7 billion, far greater than the original $9.2 billion estimate in January. (CNN, May 15, 2012)"

The Simple Truth

The State Government of California has $100′s of billions in liquid investments and assets, could easily pay off all of its debt tomorrow, and would have $100′s of billions left over.[...]

Richardson  explains and proves that over $577 billion in investment fund balances aren’t being reported by the California State, (California CAFR) contrary to what Jerry Brown claims in the government's latest propaganda video.

"So… is California in such a financial deficit, as the Governor and his proposed and revised budget plan so matter-of-factly states?

This is the question that we will be answering today. But in order to answer this question, we must go to the true source of financial auditing for government, the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). This report – the full accounting of government and its investments – is virtually never spoken of publicly. It is not mentioned on the nightly news. And it is not referred to when addressing the people about taxpayer issues and budgetary considerations and shortfalls. In short, this CAFR report is the Holy Grail of government accounting; very difficult to read and comprehend, and worse of all… it is hidden in plain sight."

Below, Brown addresses and purposefully lies to the people of California, threatening to cut school funding by multiple billions if the people of the State do not vote in favor of his new budget plan.

Now, the first thing that must be understood is the difference between the partial “budget report” as referred to above by the Governor, and that of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report – which is the full audit of the California government. The following paragraph is taken directly from the 2011 CAFR report, and explains this difference quite succinctly…

On page 200, the 2011 California State CAFR explains the following (emphasis mine):

“On a budgetary basis, the State’s funds are classified as either governmental cost funds or nongovernmental cost funds. The governmental cost funds include the General Fund, most of the funds that comprise the Transportation Fund, and many other funds that make up the nonmajor governmental funds reported in these financial statements. Governmental cost funds derive their revenue from taxes, licenses, and fees that support the general operations of the State. The appropriations of the budgetary basis governmental cost funds form the annual appropriated budget of the State.

Nongovernmental cost funds consist of funds that derive their receipts from sources other than general and special taxes, licenses, fees, or state revenues and mainly represent the proprietary and fiduciary funds reported in these financial statements. Expenditures of these funds do not represent a cost of government and most of the nongovernmental cost funds are not included in the annual appropriated budget…”

And so we can see that governments participate in many business activities; and we must first and foremost understand that a large portion of liquid investment assets are held within what the government calls “non-governmental” activities, including “Enterprise Operations”. These investment assets are usually kept in what are called “Investment Funds”.

But government is only obligated (by its own law) to report what it refers to as “governmental” or “taxpayer” activities to the citizenry on its “Budget/Appropriations Report”. Tax in… Tax out…

In short, the Governor of the great corporate State of California is lying to his taxpayers through the act of omission of these CAFR facts, by only referring to a hand selected portion of that CAFR, which is called the State’s annual budget report. While this should be tried as perjury, the laws of the State/Federal government protect him from this ever happening.

To help in your understanding, let’s say that you were to have a checking account with $1,000 and a savings account with $10,000 in two different banks, and that you only reported to the government that you had $1,000 dollars as your net worth because you don’t want to use your savings account to pay bills (taxpayer obligations) to government. You’d be audited and put in a federal debtor’s prison. But for government, the simple designation of “non-governmental” or “non-taxpayer” income and investment returns allows them to hide all of this wealth from the people and the “Budget Report”, while never mentioning the funds and wealth in the CAFR report. The only difference is that government does this legally – because government makes its own laws!

Why do they do this?

The answer is simple, really… TO JUSTIFY THE CONTINUATION OF, THE RAISING OF, AND CREATION OF NEW TAXES!!!

Read more...

Based on New Census Measure, Number of Americans in Poverty at Record High

As as a congressional super committee nears a November 23rd deadline to make more than $1 trillion in cuts to the federal budget, an experimental measure that takes geographic location into account yields highest-ever number of poor Americans. 49.1 million are poor, based on a new census measure that for the first time takes into account rising medical costs and other expenses.

Moreover, using the old supplemental poverty measure, one in fifteen - 6.7% of the population - are among America's poorest poor..  Data shows about 20.5 million Americans make up the poorest poor, defined as those at 50% or less of the official poverty level.

Poverty for Americans 65-years and older is on track to nearly double after factoring in rising out-of-pocket medical expenses.   Poverty increases are also anticipated for the working-age population because of commuting and child-care costs, while child poverty will dip partly due to the positive effect of food stamps...that's if those food stamps survive the cuts.

"There now really is no unaffected group, except maybe the very top income earners," said Robert Moffitt, a professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University. "Recessions are supposed to be temporary, and when it's over, everything returns to where it was before. But the worry now is that the downturn - which will end eventually - will have long-lasting effects on families who lose jobs, become worse off and can't recover."

Read more...

Democrats Offer to Triple Cuts in Social Spending While Tsunami of Inflation is Headed Our Way.

As "many workers are barely treading water as their wages fail to keep up with rising prices" the Obama administration and congressional Democrats have offered to triple the amount of cuts in social spending for 2011, from $10 billion to $30 billion, in order to appease congressional Republicans, who, after intense lobbying from the Tea Party, want to cut $61 billion,  before the April 8 deadline. These cuts "would mark the largest-ever federal budget cuts in social spending in a single year."

Despite the  criminal behavior of the ruling class, and, that throughout the bankster-created  crisis, their pay grew at pre-downturn clip, the extreme polarization of wealth, as productivity gains continue, and corporate profits surge, continues. It is not estimated that one in four American households have zero or less than zero net worth.

The modest wage growth appears to reflect lower expectations among the unemployed.

"There's a capitulation on the part of workers," said David Resler, chief economist at Nomura Securities. "They're increasingly willing to accept a lower wage than they might have thought they had to when the recession started. The fact that average hourly earnings are now weak or falling is an indication to me that the market is starting to clear."

This gives businesses an additional cushion at a time of higher commodity costs.

"Companies are in the dominant bargaining position," said Paul Ashworth, chief U.S. economist at Capital Economics, a consultancy. "They don't have the added problem of paying more for their wages as well."

And, if that's not depressing enough, according to the National Inflation Association a tsunami of inflation will hit the U.S. due to the Japan crisis.

Links:

It's the Inequality, Stupid

Greenspan Returns to De-Regulation

Read more...

Federal Reserve Releases 29,000 Pages of Bailout Loans that Includes Libya.

Late last week, the court ordered the Federal Reserve to release (see download zip archive link)  29,000  pages of documents that contain the complete contents of the Federal Reserve Discount Window data on loans, from August 8, 2007 to March 1 2010.  Many of these loans bail out foreign banks during the height of the financial crisis in 2008. Moreover, some of those banks are even controlled by "repressive dictators" such as Qaddafi (Arab Banking Corp, 59% owned by the Libyan central bank at the time, received 46 different loans).  That's right, the 100% Libyan owned central bank that those "ragtag bunch of rebels"  shut down so easily  in order to  immediately establish a brand new national central bank (not to mention, the brand new national oil company) received lots of  bailout money!  

Only one man, Sen. Bernie Sanders,  dared to question why billions of American taxpayer dollars bailed out a Libyan-owned bank.

Here is the emergency order that was issued by the Federal Reserve on Feb. 25, 2011, exempting the Arab Bank Corporation from the previous freeze order.

All transactions involving banks that are owned or controlled by the Govemment of Libya and organized under the laws of a country other than Libya are authorized...

So, let me get this straight. In our nation, poverty is escalating, our infrastructure is rapidly deteriorating, the middle-class is withering away to nothing, we're involved in three wars, yet, the only concern in Washington is balancing the budget on the backs of working families. Federal programs that provide suffering people basic needs and/or try to level the playing field, such as: early education, job training, post-secondary education, nutrition assistance for women and children, home heating programs for low-income people, planned parenthood, community health centers, e-gov, transportation, etc, will be slashed to the bone.

In the meantime, taxpayer subsidized banksters and corporate giants who are earning record breaking profits, continue to live off the dole. The pentagon continues to waste billions, not to mention, outright loses trillions of dollars ($2.3 trillion that Rumsfeld announced, went missing, 9/10/11).  Two-thirds of all US corporations pay no federal income tax, and almost all of the corporations continue to sit on trillions and trillions of dollars, refusing to hire, or invest any of that money back into the American economy. Despite this, slashing the corporate tax rate is top priority.

Links:

Download zip archive (129 MB)

Foreign Banks Tapped Fed’s Secret Lifeline Most at Crisis Peak

The biggest borrowers from the 97-year-old discount window as the program reached its crisis-era peak were foreign banks, accounting for at least 70 percent of the $110.7 billion borrowed during the week in October 2008 when use of the program surged to a record. The disclosures may stoke a reexamination of the risks posed to U.S. taxpayers by the central bank’s role in global financial markets.

Fed Releases Discount-Window Loan Records During Crisis Under Court Order

The Federal Reserve released thousands of pages of secret loan documents under court order, almost three years after Bloomberg LP first requested details of the central bank’s unprecedented support to banks during the financial crisis.

The records reveal for the first time the names of financial institutions that borrowed directly from the central bank through the so-called discount window. The Fed provided the documents after the U.S. Supreme Court this month rejected a banking industry group’s attempt to shield them from public view.

Read more...

Brutal Winter? Freeze the Poor, the Elderly, and the Sick!

Once again, those most effected by the actions of the soulless few at the top will pay the price.  As colder-than-normal temperatures continue across our nation, President Obama will propose cutting $2.5 billion from the government’s energy assistance fund for poor people.

“I’ve always supported serious efforts to restore fiscal sanity, but in the middle of a brutal, even historic, New England winter, home heating assistance is more critical than ever to the health and welfare of millions of Americans, especially senior citizens.” - Sen. John Kerry

How can a government that supposedly works for the people...serves the people, cut funding to the elderly, the sick and and the poor, for something as essential to maintaining life as heat? Death panels, anyone?

However, the GOP wanted to cut $5 billion from the energy assistance program, and now, they have increased spending cuts from the total budget from $74 billion to $100 billion.

In another victory for tea-party rebels in Congress, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers today scrapped his original plan for spending cuts and announced that he will seek to cut $100 billion from what President Obama had requested for this year.

Read more...

Resources For Our Troops

Since the current administration shows little interest in doing anything substantial to support our troops and veterans:

Citizen Soldier - GI Vetern's rights advocacy group founded during the Vietnam War.

GI Rights Hotline - who provide information to servicemembers about military discharges, grievance and complaint procedures, and other civil rights.

Military Law Task Force - assists those working on military law issues as well as military law counselors working directly with GIs.

National Gulf War Resource Center - help veterans of recent and current wars and operations.

National Institute Of Military Justice - to advance the fair administration of military justice and foster improved public understanding of the military justice system. NIMJ is not a government agency.

National Veterns Foundation - Lifeline for America's Veterns

National Veteran's Legal Services Program - ensuring that the U.S. government honors its commitment to our veterans by providing them the federal benefits they have earned through their service to our country.

Objector - supports and promotes individual and collective resistance to war and preparations for war.

Don't Ask Don't Tell:

ServiceMembers Legal Defense Network - a national, non-profit legal services, watchdog and policy organization dedicated to ending discrimination against and harassment of military personnel affected by "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and related forms of intolerance.

Soloman Response - a place to voice opposition to the military discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

############################################

Last year it was reported that the Bush Administration thought an additional $6/month was too much for our troops we better support.

The Bush Administration also strongly opposes:

• An additional $40 per month for widows of slain soldiers.
• An additional $100,000 death benefit for surviving family members of civilian employees who died supporting US forces in military operations.
• Price controls for prescription drugs under TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for military personnel and their dependents.

In addition, the administration does not want stricter accountability on contract employees, meaning the contractors doing the same or less work as the soldiers will get paid more than twice as much but we're going to look the other way.

Back in 2004 the Bush Administration's proposed budget cuts:

• Cut $1.5 billion from military family housing.
• Underfunded veterans' health care by $2 billion resulting in 200,000 United States veterans waiting more than six months for a medical visit because of health care shortages and 173,000 veterans across the country would be cut off from health care because enrollment fees and higher out-of-pocket costs.
• Opposed plan to give National Guard and Reserve Members access to health insurance.
• Cut $172 million allotted for educating the children of military personnel.
• Denied military families increase in child tax credit.

According to President Bush and friends, as long as America plasters "I Support the Troops" bumper stickers all over their gas-guzzling, road hogging, cup-holder happy Cadillac Escalades, tank-like Hummers, and Chevy Suburbans, United States citizens are doing their part.

Read more...

Asked About the Deficit, McCain Cites Reagan’s Example

From the NY Times Blog:

"When Senator John McCain was asked here this afternoon how he plans to balance the budget, he said that he hoped to do so by stimulating economic growth – and approvingly cited the example of President Ronald Reagan.

There was one thing he did not mention during his response: the deficit nearly tripled during the Reagan presidency, partly due to tax cuts and increases in military spending.

The exchange occurred at a town-hall-style meeting held in a tent outside Bridgewater Associates, an investment firm. A member of the audience stood up and asked Mr. McCain, who has called for balanced budgets, how he plans to do it.

“Basically, which is it?” the man asked Mr. McCain. “Straight talk: Do you want to raise taxes, cut entitlement spending, cut defense spending, or have a deficit?”

Mr. McCain did not explain how he plans to balance the budget, but spoke generally about hoping to stimulate the economy – and cited President Reagan.

“I don’t believe in a static economy,’’ Mr. McCain said. “I believe that when there’s stimulus for growth, when there’s opportunity, when people keep more of their money — and the government is the least efficient way to spend your money — that economies improve.’’

“When Ronald Reagan came to office,’’ he said, noting that few in the audience were old enough to remember, “we had 10 percent unemployment, 20 percent interest rates, and 10 percent inflation, if I’ve got those numbers right. That was when Ronald Reagan came to office in 1980. And so what did we do? We didn’t raise taxes, and we didn’t cut entitlements. What we did was we cut taxes and we put in governmental reductions in regulations, stimulus to the economy, and by the way, Jack Kennedy also did that as well – and so my answer to it is a growing economy. And I think you best grow the economy by the most efficient use of the tax dollar.’’

Mr. McCain – who has said that he wants to balance the budget while making the Bush tax cuts permanent, cutting additional taxes, and keeping troops in Iraq – said: “I believe we can grow this economy, and reduce this deficit.’’

He said that he expected expense in Iraq to decline as the Iraqis shoulder more of the burden, and he also hinted at some cuts in federal programs.

He noted his opposition to the expensive Medicare prescription drug benefit, which he voted against. “Now you are paying for my prescription drugs,’’ he said. “Why should that be? Why should that be? Why should that be?”

But he said he thinks the problems can be solved. “Is it going to be tough? Yes. It’s going to be very, very tough.’’

Earlier, when he was asked if he plans to resign from the Senate this summer to make it easier for a Republican to win the election to succeed him, Mr. McCain said: “No, I will not. I have every confidence that there are a number of Republicans who would be elected. I do not envision a scenario of resigning my seat.’’

But then, on reflection, he seemed to open the door to the idea at least a bit. “But I would go back and think about it, and think about the scenario that you just described,’’ he said. “Right now my intentions are to remain in the United States Senate. ‘’

Read more...

Estimated Cuts to Medicaid Over Five Years

Federal Medicaid payments to states will be reduced by more than $15 billion over the next five years.

Each state was supposed to submit a state-specific analysis of the impact of each of the regulations. 43 states and the District of Columbia responded, accounting for close to 95% of total Medicaid spending. This report analyzes these responses.

The report finds that the state estimates of the fiscal impacts of the regulatory changes are significantly higher than the $15 billion impact projected by the Administration. According to the states who responded to the Committee, the regulations would reduce federal payments to them by $49.7 billion over the next five years, more than three times the Administration's estimate. In the case of one regulation, the state estimates of lost federal funds are more than ten times the Administration's estimate.

Read more...

Bush's 2009 Budget Proposal Speaks Volumes.

All future historians will have to do is read through President George W. Bush's 2009 budget proposal and they will know all about his presidency, what kind of man he is, what he values and most importantly, if this proposal goes through, why the United States of America is a third-world country.

At a time when the U.S. economy is lagging, job growth is at an all time low, and the housing industry is in freefall, President George W. Bush's $3.1 trillion budget for the 2009 federal fiscal year proposes to cut approx. $15 billion in federal program spending while making his tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans permanent, saving them approx. $51 billion, not to mention his three-quarters of a trillion dollar defense budget.

According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities if the President's budget goes through, taxpayers who make over $1 million, 0.3% of the population, will save $51 billion. In 2009 alone, 0.3% of the population will gain $12 billion more than the entire bottom 60 percent of the U.S. income distribution, households that make $50,000 a year or less.

In addition, according to the CBPP, the nation's most affluent 1 percent, households currently making over $450,000 a year, would save $1.1 trillion over the next decade, if the Bush tax rates remain in effect, over $180 billion more in tax savings than the savings that would go to America's entire bottom 80 percent combined.

151 federal programs would be eliminated or reduced. President Bush wants to cut spending on anti-poverty, housing and social service programs and federal health programs. He wants to cut funding for teaching hospitals and freeze medical research. 47 programs from the Department of Education would be eliminated and he would reduce anti-terrorism grants for states and cities. Medicare would be cut by $12.1 billion and public broadcasting would be cut by 50 percent.

The Department of Labor, the federal agency in charge of administering and enforcing wage and hour laws, health and safety regulations, pension plan oversight, unemployment benefits, and job training, along with many other programs says the 2009 Bush Budget would leave America's workers behind

His proposed budget cuts would be a disaster for HIV AIDS,

"This budget shows an irresponsible neglect of our burgeoning domestic epidemic" (AHF release, 2/4). Gene Copello, executive director of the AIDS Institute, said, "While the President's FY 2009 budget carries good news for addressing the global pandemic, it is terribly inadequate to address the epidemic in our own backyard. Following a trend now for several years, this budget will only further destabilize the prevention of HIV and the care and treatment of people living with HIV/AIDS in our own country" -- Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation

The National Priorities Project reveals critical dangers for state budgets and working families by offering a state-by-state breakdown of how Bush's proposed budget cuts would impact on the states.

Effects of the Bush Tax Cuts through 2006 by Income Group.

Read more...

The Fear of Appearing Soft on Defense is What's Soft.

The pentagon’s budget this year, adjusted for inflation, is the highest it's been in 60 years. By the end of this year, the US will have spent ¾ of a trillion dollars on defense.

Despite huge military inefficiency, no one has ever lost an election by promising to "strengthen" our defense by spending more. On the other hand, if a political candidate tells the truth, and claims he can make keep our defense strong, possibly making it stronger by spending less on the defense budget, he appears "soft" on defense. Living with the constant fear of appearing soft on defense is what is soft, especially when that taxpayer money literally does nothing but waste time and money, building up the military industrial complex.

Let’s say one of the Bush twins bought $5,000 of Lockheed Martin stock - biggest defense contractor in America - on September 10, 2001; her initial investment would be worth over $20,000 today. Lockheed Martin, along with other defense contractors, bank on the US government spending most of its federal budget on military projects, some of which have turned out to be totally useless, and the amount spent could have easily funded universal health care a few times over.

Take the F22 Fighter jet program, the most expensive jet in history, with a $330 million price tag, originally designed to fight the Soviets. According to Government Accountability Office (GAO), the original plan scheduled the first aircraft to be operationally deployed in 1996. After 25 years of expensive development, this jet has finally reached what the US defense department calls “full operational capability", meaning it’s ready to go to war.

Well, it's a little late as we have not used the F-22 fighter jet and have no plans to do so further down the road. The best part of all is that F-22 Fighter Jet Program is still very much alive and kicking.

Why is the F-22 program, which has already cost taxpayers $65 billion dollars, still kicking? The answer, as is the answer to many programs we needlessly spend money on, is political clout.

"Lockheed Martin represents tens of thousands of employees in 45 out of 50 states. When you have political clout like that behind you, it’s pretty simple to convince members of congress that continuing a program like that is important to their constituencies. – Christopher Helman, an analyst at the Center for Arms Control

Winslow Wheeler, forced to step down as a staffer on the Senate budget committee after he published an article on bloated defense spending in 2002, reported the GAO recommended no further funding for the F-22 Program until the Department of Defense can provide relevant justification which it could not do.

Many budget analysts estimate big ticket items will drive and make up more than half of the pentagon's budget. However most of these big-ticket programs (missle defense, naval destroyer, submarines,) provide no real value for counter terrorism operations, so these big ticket security projects become priority when they don’t enhance our security.

I don't think anyone would refer to President Eisenhower as soft on defense, yet a few days after he was inaugurated, he promoted deep cuts to defense spending,

“To amass military power without regard to our economic capacity would be to defend ourselves against one kind of disaster by inviting another.“ – President Eisenhower in 1953

So, why is it that "we the people" equate military strength with dollars spent without demanding accountability for how that money is spent, and more importantly if all that money we hand over does make our military stronger?

Currently, with reports of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan lacking proper armor, equipment shortages, not to mention, shortage of troops overall; it's very obvious that higher defense dollars, does not equal a stronger defense.

Miriam Pemberton, a Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and Peace and Security Editor for Foreign Policy In Focus, after crunching the numbers, found that the Pentagon could easily fund troops, equipment, maintenance, modernization and even add money for diplomacy, humanitarian aid, and other measures of preventative security and cut the defense budget by 10%.

Read more...

Death and Taxes

"Death and Taxes" is a large representational graph of the federal budget. It contains over 400 programs and departments and almost every program that receives over 200 million dollars annually. The data is straight from the president's 2008 budget request and will be debated, amended, and approved by Congress to begin the fiscal year. All of the item circles are proportional in size to their spending totals and the percentage change from 2007 is included to spot trends and disproportion.

"Death and Taxes" is more than just numbers. It is a uniquely revealing look at our national priorities, that fluctuate yearly, according to the wishes of the President, the power of Congress, and the will of the people. Thousands of pages of raw data have been boiled down to one poster that provides the most open and accessible record of our nations' spending than ever seen before. If you pay taxes, then you have paid for a small part of everything in the poster. "Death and Taxes" is an essential poster for any responsible citizen or information junkie.

Read more...

Baseball, Steroids, War Funding and SCHIP...A Coincidence?

The coincidence of Mitchell releasing the Major Baseball League Steroids Report coming out at the same time the President may be claiming victory to gaining $70 billion dollars in war funding while, at the same time, vetoing State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) for the second time is striking.

Is it any surprise the media is focusing on the steroid story?

Read more...

Where Your Income Tax Money Really Goes

The Real Deal:



























The pie chart below is the government view of the budget. This is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. For a more accurate representation of how your Federal income tax dollar is really spent, see the large chart (top).

What the government wants you to believe:



















HOW THESE FIGURES WERE DETERMINED

Current military” includes Dept. of Defense ($585 billion), the military portion from other departments ($122 billion), and an unbudgetted estimate of supplemental appropriations ($20 billion). “Past military” represents veterans’ benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.*

The Government Deception

The pie chart below is the government view of the budget. This is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. For a more accurate representation of how your Federal income tax dollar is really spent, see the large chart (top).
the government's deceptive pie chart

These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the “Analytical Perspectives” book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2008. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 17, 2007, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller.

*Analysts differ on how much of the debt stems from the military; other groups estimate 50% to 60%. We use 80% because we believe if there had been no military spending most (if not all) of the national debt would have been eliminated. For further explanation, please see box at bottom of page.

Read more...

Bush Proposes Steep Cuts to PBS Funding

This, from a President, that wants “No Child Left Behind” and strongly promotes cleaning up what children are exposed to in the media. "No Child Left Behind" will leave many less fortunate children behind, because it encourages teachers to "teach the test" instead of providing a dynamic learning environment for young minds to flourish and prepare them for the ever changing world in which we now live.

Read more...

We are Sacrificing "Peace of Mind"?

Bush is going to ask for a quarter trillion to support the Iraq war yet is strongly opposed to raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. He would rather cut funding to programs set up to help the least wealthy Americans.

The only Americans sacrificing for this war are men and women serving in the voluntary military, many of whom give up life and limb serving our country, while the rest of us are sheltered from the effects of this war by a President who “worries” about our “peace of mind.”

Jim Lehrer (PBS Newshour) asked, “why hasn’t he called on Americans to sacrifice something to help our country in this time of war.”

Bush replied, “They sacrifice peace of mind when they see the terrible image of violence on TV every night. I mean, we’ve got a fantastic economy here in the United States, but yet, when you think about the psychology of the country, it is somewhat down because of this war.”

Read more...