« | Home | Recent Comments | Categories | »

Farmer’s gallows sales attacked

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 16:24 by John Sinteur in category: News


[Quote:]

A farmer who builds gallows and has sold them to African countries with poor human rights records has been condemned by Amnesty International.

David Lucas, of Mildenhall, Suffolk, said he had been selling execution equipment to countries including Zimbabwe for about 10 years.

Amnesty said the export of gallows, which will be made illegal by an EC regulation in July, was “appalling”.

[..]

“There have been gaping loopholes in the regulations concerning execution equipment for years and it makes a mockery of the UK’s efforts to oppose the death penalty around the world if right under its nose a British company is sending hanging equipment abroad.”

No word on the ban of sales of injection needles to the USA..


Write a comment

Comments:

  1. Or electricity :-)

Measure calls for picture security

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 16:14 by John Sinteur in category: ¿ʞɔnɟ ǝɥʇ ʇɐɥʍ, Security, What were they thinking?

[Quote:]

The state Senate Law and Public Safety Committee is expected to discuss a bill today which would make it a crime — punishable by up to 18 months in jail — to photograph, videotape or otherwise record for an extended period of time a power generation, waste treatment, public sewage, water treatment, public water, nuclear or flammable liquid storage facility, as well as any airport in the state.

At the very least, it will allow law enforcement officials across the state to detain the individual or confiscate any recorded materials to further their investigation, according to state Sen. Fred Madden, D-4 of Turnersville, who is the bill’s sponsor.

Opponents of the bill said it “makes no sense” and is “awful.”

“If you have someone who lives in Gloucester County who looks at a plant and notices there are toxic fumes emanating from the plant, it’s in the public’s interest for that individual to get out a video camera and document it and give that to the (Department of Environmental Protection),” said Rick Engler, director of New Jersey Work Environment Council. “This bill will stop individuals from protecting the environment and will do nothing to thwart terrorism.”


Write a comment

New security glitch found in Diebold system

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 14:42 by John Sinteur in category: News

[Quote:]

Elections officials in several states are scrambling to understand and limit the risk from a “dangerous” security hole found in Diebold Election Systems Inc.’s ATM-like touch-screen voting machines.

The hole is considered more worrisome than most security problems discovered on modern voting machines, such as weak encryption, easily pickable locks and use of the same, weak password nationwide.

Armed with a little basic knowledge of Diebold voting systems and a standard component available at any computer store, someone with a minute or two of access to a Diebold touch screen could load virtually any software into the machine and disable it, redistribute votes or alter its performance in myriad ways.

That “standard component” sounds like “a USB flash drive” to me.

California, Pennsylvania and Iowa are issuing emergency notices to local elections officials, generally telling them to “sequester” their Diebold touch screens and reprogram them with “trusted” software issued by the state capital. Then elections officials are to keep the machines sealed with tamper-resistant tape until Election Day.

“Install and sequester”. The word “test” is nowhere to be found. How do you garantuee that the “patch” doesn’t contain the preferred election results? As Stalin said, it’s not the people who vote that count. It’s the people who count the votes.

update: The redacted report is available.


Write a comment

Cartoons

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 11:09 by John Sinteur in category: Cartoon

imggif1.gif

cole.jpg

lester.jpg

nq060511.gif

stein.gif


Write a comment

Tax Policy Center Estimates

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 9:31 by John Sinteur in category: News

Check this table.

Income/year Tax cut
$10-20,000   $3
$20-30,000   $10
$30-40,000   $17
$40-50,000   $47
$50-70,000   $112
$75-100,000  $406
$100-200,000 $1,395
$200-500,000 $4,527
$500-1,000,000 $5,656
More than $1,000,000 $42,766

In essence, those making $50,000 or less per year, who make up over 60% of the American population will receive a tax cut that at most will buy them a cup of joe or two at Starbucks while the millionaires of the country can buy another Lexus.

I was recently told I could make the postings here more interesting to read if I added more pictures. So, here we go.

For the 60% bottom earners — here is your tax cut

For the top 0.02% of earners — here is your taxcut:


Write a comment

Comments:

  1. Wow! Thanks to the pictures this was the first entry I looked at. But how about eliminating the text? And while your at it, remove that coffee image and enlarge that RX400h image!

  2. Ummm, yes, but check the table just below the one you reference. The ‘screw the rich’ mentality shows pretty clearly, and the tax breaks mentioned in the first table are revealed as an attempt toward tax fairness. Those getting the ‘Lexus’ refund make up two-tenths of one percent of the population, yet pay 16 percent of all Federal taxes. Using $100,000 in income as a break point, 13.7 percent of the population pays 63.6 percent of all Federal taxes. Fair ? No. Confiscatory Socialism ? Yep.

  3. To fairly compare “percentage of all federal taxes” you’d also have to look at “percentage of pre-tax income income”, showing you that that same 13.7 percent of the population earns a whopping 51.4 percent of all income. Any “fair” system takes basic living costs (such as food and clothing) into account, and will ease the tax burden of the first, say, 10,000$ earned so that everybody can actually buy enough food and clothing to live. That’s actually shown in the table, the lowest 12.9% of the population pays significantly less tax, percentage-wise. If you’d tax all other income groups to recoup that money, and do it more or less evenly, you’d explain at least part of the gap between between “earning 51.4 % of all income but paying 63.6% of all taxes”. That “socialism” you talk about just isn’t there, or at least not in the size you try to paint it.

  4. or are you trying to tell us that the group earning 51.4 percent of all income should only pay 13.7 percent of all taxes?

  5. What would be fair: all income past a set minimum amount (say, as in your example, $10k) taxed at the same rate; the tax code not used to reward or punish any sub-group; no loopholes or deductions or depreciation or other gimmicks. Flat tax only. Then the group earning 51.4 percent of all income would pay very close to 51.4 percent of all taxes, if this were extended down through the local level. The fact that one person makes more money than another should be an incentive for those with lower income to make efforts to move up the ladder, not a reason to punish those who have made the effort to put themselves into a position to command a higher wage.

  6. Flat tax has a couple of interesting advantages, I agree with that – but don’t expect too much from it: the very fact that the first $10K is fully exempt by definition means that the group earning 51.4% will pay more than 51.4%, and in the current system the first $10K is not fully exempt. I would not be surprised at all if you 51.4% group would pay more than 60% in such a system, just like they do right now. How much more? That would depend on the details… There would be other advantages to the flat tax: less paperwork, less overhead, less tax accountants, less IRS employees, less loopholes, no deductables. In fact, the “less loopholes, no deductables” bit would probably result in the top incomes paying more taxes than they do right now. I assume you’d still call that fair?

  7. Yes ! In a fair flat tax system, absolutely. And I’m not postulating in the abstract – I’m just into the 51.4 percent range. The current system is virtually impossible for the average person to comprehent. That leads to distrust and suspicion, feeding into class envy and anger. And I firmly believe that levelling the playing field in a visible and comprehensible way would allow that currently misspent energy to be channelled into more productive avenues. If I have no one to blame for my econimic situation (which is where my head is at) I take responsibility for moving myself up the economic ladder (which I’ve done). MLK most famous statement hit the mark precisely, but that movement has devolved to the point of sustaining and promoting a perpetual victim/entitlement mentality, which leaves far too many of those who have the opportunities for self-empowerment and self-improvement without the understanding or belief that they have that option.

  8. btw, I couldn’t initially see the pics in this post. Outside of my workplace firewall the pics came through. Big sigh of relief – I’d hate to miss the pics from Carnival :-)

  9. You do realize that social mobility is far greater here in “socialist” Europe? The chance of “making it” over here, when starting at the lowest social levels, is far greater than in the USA. The “American Dream” hasn’t been american for quite some time now..

  10. (1) $23.50 per cup of coffee in Starbucks (you imply) for the guy on $50K? … well, maybe you should look into that again.

    (2) In ANY tax system, including a flat tax system, it’s inevitable that you end up with a few high-earners paying a lot of tax and a lot of low earners paying little tax. The reasons are to do with home-makes who don’t earn; saleries rising as people get promoted; some people investing money and gertting income from that later whole other just piss it away, etc., etc. etc.

    In fact, the same sort of thing would happen even if everybody got paid exactly the same, including under Socialism. Suggestion: learn to live with what is effectively an inevitable ‘law of nature’.

  11. As a belated also-ran comment, I think it would’ve made much more sense to list the tax cut as a % of gross and taxable income rather than as an absolute amount.

Meanwhile….

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 9:15 by John Sinteur in category: News

source

After close to nine months, this is what the 9th ward in Louisiana looks like. Next time somebody claims the USA is “the richest country in the world”, point them to this:

1e427341.jpg

3f279c18.jpg

397435f2.jpg


Write a comment

Geenstijl.nl – Bolletjesofficier op Limewire

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 8:10 by John Sinteur in category: Nederland is Gek!

[Quote:]

We kunnen u natuurlijk de vertrouwelijke documenten tonen, de klachten van de KLM, vermoedens van corruptie op Bonaire, de drugsproblemen, de bolletjesslikkers, de evaluatie van het Flamingoteam (goede jongens, maar te weinig mankracht). Ja, we kunnen veel, heel veel informatie op internet plempen afkomstig van de shared LimeWire harddisk van Ernst Wesselius. Dé bolletjesofficier van de Antillen. Maar dat doen we dus mooi niet. Even geen zin in een DNA-test zeg maar.

38ff73cd_eelijkdelen.jpg


Write a comment

Pensioen? Nooit.

Posted on May 12th, 2006 at 8:04 by John Sinteur in category: Nederland is Gek!

[Quote:]

President Nout Wellink van De Nederlandsche Bank schuwt fiscalisering van de ouderdomswet AOW niet. Volgens de toezichthouder is een geleidelijke fiscalisering het overwegen waard. Samen met een verhoging van de pensioenleeftijd kan dat helpen om de gevolgen van de vergrijzing op te vangen.

Dat heeft Wellink donderdag gezegd bij de presentatie van het jaarverslag van DNB. Hij waarschuwt dat er voldoende mankracht op de arbeidsmarkt beschikbaar moet zijn om de gevolgen van schaarste te voorkomen.

Fiscalisering houdt in dat de oudedagsvoorziening niet langer uit premies wordt betaald, maar uit belastingopbrengsten. Dat betekent dat rijkere 65-plussers ook moeten meebetalen aan de AOW. Nu hoeven zij dat nog niet.

[Quote:]

Volgens DNB-president Nout Wellink is het logisch als de pensioenleeftijd eerst in 2015 met één jaar wordt verhoogd en tien jaar later met nog een jaar, tot 67 jaar. “Deze stappen verdienen serieuze overweging en zijn logisch omdat de levensverwachting en de individuele welvaart stijgen.”

Ik weet me nog goed te herinneren dat een (potentiele) werkgever me trots vertelde over de pensioenvoorziening in zijn bedrijf. Toen ik ‘m vroeg hoe hij het afhouden van de pensioenpremie van m’n salaris dacht te gaan compenseren kreeg ik alleen een verbaasde blik. De twee bovenstaande berichten bewijzen helaas mijn gelijk: pensioen zal later uitgekeerd worden, en volledig worden afgeroomd door hogere belastingen, en het niet meer in aanmerking komen voor “kortingen” – als in “nee, u heeft een pensioen bovenop uw aow, dus u krijgt het hogere tarief”. Oftewel – iedereen die jaren gespaard heeft mag betalen voor iedereen die het nu over de balk heeft gegood. Ik denk dat ik wel weet wat ik nu met m’n geld doe.

Intussen stuurt het pensioenfonds van KPN me nog steeds optimistische berekeningen over de bedragen die ik zou krijgen als ik met m’n 63e stop met werken.

Yeah.

Right.


Write a comment