Obama signs $18 Billion Unemployment Extension as New Jobless Claims Rise for Second Week

The jobless rate remains above 9% nationwide, with a projected 17% of the U.S. populace either unemployed or underemployed, and is expected to remain at that level through November. On ThursdayObama signed a bill that extended unemployment benefits to (according to the AP) “several hundred thousand” people whose benefits have expired. They will be receiving payments retroactively. In the same week, new jobless claims rose for a second straight week, boosting the “seasonally adjusted” rise in claims to 484,000. Although there are some indicators that the economy has inched towards recovery, with consumer spending up with factory production, these are modest gains which are setback by the continual layoffs.

As the tax base further erodes, (current estimates are that 47% of the tax base pay no taxes at all, and with the Earned Income Credit (those making less than $48,000 annually) are able to receive refunds that allow for an additional $3,000 to $5,000 “bonus”. Add to that the 9.7% nationwide average of those receiving unemployment benefits (and not counting those who have fallen off the “roll”), the number of those not paying taxes into the system (tractable) rises to 56.7%, leaving the balance of taxpayer to attempt to foot the bill. The word “unsustainable” is appropriate in this case, as with recovery uncertain, this percentage of those paying taxes, will further decline.
Unless and until government spending is brought under control and incentives to larger corporations as well as small businesses to once again invest in the United States are instituted, this trend should continue unabated. The solution that has worked in the past, from Kennedy to Reagan to George W. Bush – tax cuts across the board, must be reintroduced in order to provide such incentive to both those that employee and the consumer. Dolling out earned income credits once a year to almost half of the population will indeed, see consumer spending spike temporarily, however, this is spending based on monies from the Federal pocketbook, rather than sustained earnings from the private sector.

The options before the American public are clear, as the path grows increasingly uncertain – exercise the privilege of voting in November and research the candidate to be sure that individual is a true fiscal conservative, and one that is not so far vested in their political party (so-called Blue Dog Democrats that almost to a man(or woman) voted for the Budget Reconciliation Act that brought the Health Care Reform Bill and the takeover of the Student Loan Industry to fruition in one fell swoop) that they will not fear bucking the status quo by voting down increased spending, voting for tax cuts, and pledging to their constituents that “pork projects” will be put on hold indefinitely. The addition of a pledge to attempt to overhaul the IRS, cut the fat, and make the code “simple” and fair across the board would be another test of sanity in a prospective office holder. (Additionally, those in favor of sending the Health Care Reform Bill back to the drawing board, to make sure it includes specific real cost savings measures such as tort reform and allowing citizens to purchase coverage across state lines – are worth more at the ballot box). Unless and until voters are willing to send a strong message, and choose candidates that will deliver, this situation will continue unabated. How to research: Simply

Google who is running for (name your congressional district, and or state house or senate district,) in 2010, should that not produce any results, go to the Federal Election Commission website to find out who is running in your state. Another useful tool is Open Secrets.org a site which allows one to research where a candidates money is coming from. This information allows one to better understand who their Representative is most popular with, the people or the special interest groups. Further, to research how a member votes, merely visit: Thomas Library of Congress

Massachusetts – High Court rejects $5.00 “fee” on inmates’ allowance – Ruling: “Taxing Inmates Unlawful”

The Man behind the Tax on Mass. Inmates Taxpayer Funded Allowance - Sheriff Hodgson - image sheriffhodgson.com

From :WWLP.com, Springfield, MA. One rarely finds a tax or fee in Massachusetts one can actually agree with, however, in the interest of fairness, there is one set of “fees” that may be worth putting on the books. As Massachusetts taxes everything from your dogs to pre-paid cell phone usage, to your Dish TV, to cover the costs of the massive entitlement programs the Bay State is known for, one tax that appears to rub the wrong way is a tax on certain items and services for inmates at the State’s correctional centers. Thomas Hodgson, a Bristol County sheriff, had charged inmates a $5.00 per day fee for services such as haircuts to offset the Burdon on the taxpayer. The Massachusetts Supreme Court decided that it was “unlawful” to tax the incarcerated. Sheriff Hodgson disagrees.
He has askedthe State Legislature to take up a bill by State Rep. Elizabeth Poirier, an Attleboro Republican, which would allow for such charges. According to Hodgson, the state is losing millions of dollars each year by not assessing a charge on inmates who receive an allowance from the State. The premise is twofold, increase state revenue and teach fiscal responsibility to those who are incarcerated.

Hodgson’s logic:

“We’ve gotten to the point in the commonwealth where we need to start looking at alternatives, and one that is particularly important to me, and I think most of the people in the commonwealth, is the issue of charging inmates fees for their cost of care,” Hodgson said. “You talk about raising taxes on candy and soda, so now you’re taking from kids’ allowance to help pay for government to run these institutions like prisons by taxing, basically, their allowance. But these people that are stealing their computers and bikes and commit crimes in their neighborhoods continue to come to prison with no responsibility.”

From 2002 to 2004, Hodgson collected $375,000 per year in inmate “taxes” before the court stepped in noting he had overstepped his authority. On the one hand, the excessive taxes levied on the inmates (residents) of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts bears scrutiny, especially with the Federal government poised to add a VAT (Value Added Tax) to the plethora of Federal taxes in place. A VAT would place taxes across the board and affect every level of income. A Fair Tax, or Consumption tax on its own is a legitimate alternative to the income tax, however, with our Federal Government on a growth spree, the introduction of a VAT would not replace any taxes, rather necessitate the hiring of more IRS agents to oversee the collection (similar to the 16,000 being hired to collect fees on those not complying with the Federally Mandated Health Care Reform Act – Massachusetts DOR is the Commonwealths “arm” for levying and collecting fees on those Massachusetts citizens who do not have proof of health insurance coverage attached to their tax returns.) Therefore, all things being equal, the state and federal deficit growing in leaps and bounds, why not tax those who are using tax dollars as income? One can understand the growing frustration of the middle income taxpayers, as those paying taxes represent approximately 50% of the population.

In fact, the several state and IRS videos are available that encourage those who earn less than (now 48,000) to file for the Earned Income Tax Credit Must See Video (embed disabled) here The premise of these Public Service Announcements which play during the tax season, suggests that even those who do not pay taxes could receive an additional $5,000 from the Federal government. The end of the suggested video (Must See) notes “You Earned It!”.

Therefore, if the Federal and State Governments hand money out tax over fist to those who may not necessarily have “earned” it, and take it away from those who have, it makes perfect sense that the Commonwealths Court felt inclined to slap the wrist of the Sheriff who suggested that inmates learn fiscal responsibility by paying a $5.00 fee (tax). It goes to the mentality of the lunatics who believe that tax dollars are similar to monopoly money.

As we watch our income shrink due to higher taxes on fuel and a rise in the cost per barrel of crude, as we watch the price of hamburger and other food items increase 26% over last year (one must save receipts and compare it is astounding), (Note: This increase is due to rising costs of food delivery, and other state and federally mandated programs on grocery stores employers and union contracts - the cost of which are added to that gallon of milk), it is no wonder that the individual who is working and paying taxes to the Commonwealth and the Federal Government (State, Federal, Medicaid and Social Security Taxes) might resent others who do not pay taxes. Of those who receive an allowance for committing crimes (taxpayer funded), one has to wonder, if these individuals also file taxes and are eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit (which would not surprise).

Although generally and vehemently opposed to taxes, this one appears to be as fair a tax as any, and the Sheriff deserves a round of applause from the Citizens of the Commonwealth. One cannot expect, however, the Massachusetts legislature to follow through on any bill that would impose this particular tax.
Even the States Jump in – Get your Earned Income Tax Credit