Davos Billionaires Lose Their Heads

During the Davos meeting of "the rich" there has been a lot of talk about a 70% marginal tax rate on the very rich. Naturally they don't like it. They say it would make the economy inefficient (whatever that is). I have a basic lesson about politics and wealth which they should all know.

1. If you have a well-running economy which benefits everyone pretty well (where more boats are raised by a rising tide), there will be no calls for  the rich to lose their heads (as during the French Revolution), a 70% marginal tax rate or even "free college". The system will handle it naturally.

2. When the system isn't working well the rabble start calling for change and social programs and free stuff and eventually the heads of those they perceive as being their enemies.

So, if the rise of Donald Trump (who promised to shake things up) on the Right and Bernie Sanders on the Left isn't warning enough, the 70% marginal tax rate discussion ought to be some kind of warning that the rabble, the 99%, aren't especially happy. There were some who voted for Barack Obama for president and they still weren't satisfied, even though he created Obamacare to help them afford healthcare insurance. So, they switched to supporting Donald Trump in 2016. It wasn't about the political party or greed, it was about changing the system to make sure they got what they needed. Has that changed? Apparently not. In 2018 the Left won a bunch of House seats with a few new members who are further to the political Left and who want to "shake things up".

Something's gotta give. The system has to be fixed/improved to distribute the new wealth of the country to more people and to pay for the government's requirements.

It may be that the rich no longer trust that government won't waste money (which the rich see as THEIR money), but that's our system. If our system is under assault by foreign powers and that makes the government work less than perfectly, then the rich should support our political system even more strongly. They have the resources to withstand more than the poor people can. They are the ones who should be arguing more strenuously for less gerrymandering. They are the ones who should campaign for more people to participate by voting. We have a Democracy "if we can keep it" and the rich have more resources to fight for it. At least that was the view of the Founders of this nation when they put their fortunes and lives on the line.

American Conservatives and Russians: The Connection

https://thinkprogress.org/americas-biggest-right-wing-homeschooling-group-has-been-networking-with-sanctioned-russians-1f2b5b5ad031/

https://thinkprogress.org/history-of-christian-fundamentalists-in-russia-and-the-us-a6bdd326841d/

https://thinkprogress.org/russia-elections-nra-observer-e7cfe4816869/

https://thinkprogress.org/new-documents-link-nra-and-russia-to-marsha-blackburn-ff68e923eb7e/

These links are all from the first article and they fill in various facets of the story. It only begins with home-schooling.

Davos Billionaires Speak about the 70% Tax Rate on Millionaires

https://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-ken-moelis-scott-minerd-bob-prince-weigh-in-on-proposed-70-marginal-tax-hike-2019-1

This is a bit more substantial than the first remarks reported (laughter), but it still doesn't get to any real solutions.

Several mention that if you tax millionaires making more than $10 million per year with a marginal tax rate of 70%, it wouldn't produce much money and those people might find some way to shelter their money to avoid taxes altogether. They also said you have to begin at the $250,000 - $350,000 income level to raise enough money to have an impact, but that the 70% rate would crush the economy. Fair enough. So, what tax rate would they suggest could help government eliminate the annual deficit without seriously hurting the economy? There aren't any suggestions mentioned in the article. Perhaps something was mentioned that didn't get reported.

The public won't wait forever for solutions. The Trump supporters are looking for real solutions and a lot of Democrats are looking for blood. It's time for some real substantial sound solutions or we may go off a cliff whether Donald Trump is president or not.

Distributed Denial of Secrets (DDoS) -- It's Out There...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/this-time-its-russias-emails-getting-leaked?ref=home

The Daily Beast is reporting that there are archivists who are collecting reports of governmental leaks from RUSSIA and they're going to publish the leaks with a database, so users can find information more easily. They aren't seeking new leaks, they're just collecting and publishing previous leaks. The advantage of having them all together is that researchers can save themselves a lot of time and effort and get their work done quicker.

It ought to produce some interesting results.

Trump v Nancy

It seems obvious that Donald Trump was angry at Nancy Pelosi for cancelling HIS State of the Union address at the House of Representatives. This is thought to be the reason he informed everyone that Pelosi was traveling to Kabul, Afghanistan unless she wanted to travel "commercial". But, there may be another reason and it goes beyond the interests of Trump or even the Republican Party. What if the recent announcement that Trump committed "obstruction of justice" by ordering Michael Cohen to lie to Congress has worried Trump (and beyond) that Trump and Pence will both be ousted and Pelosi (as 2nd in line to the presidency after Pence) would become president? What if the main person who is worried is a man known to support Trump and to dislike women of power (such as Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi)? I'm thinking of Vladimir Putin. What if he wanted Pelosi to be unsafe in Kabul, so an "accident" could happen.

Don't put such things past the Republicans who are tight with Trump. It's only one small step from him to Putin and some real anti-Democratic behavior.

Russians, the National Rifle Association (NRA), and U.S. Senate campaigns

Here are a few blog posts to read to see the connections.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/12/nra-leader-jack-abramoff-gop-operative-russian-spy-maria-butina-lobbying/

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/1/11/1825465/-NRA-illegally-coordinated-campaign-ads-with-Republican-Senate-candidates?utm_campaign=trending#comment_72552880

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/424878-three-gop-senate-candidates-nra-may-have-illegally-coordinated-ads-report

First, the story begins long ago, at least in the 1990s with Jack Abramoff. Then there is the NRA and illegally coordinated campaign advertising. Finally, there is the connection of Russian money to the NRA, and therefore to the senatorial campaigns. The connections are probably close to sufficient for legal cases. The conversion of Ms. Butina to a guilty plea probably guarantees that.