IRS Outsourcing Its Archives? Your Shredder Might Be Useless

4 Replies

I found this interesting little item via Boing Boing.  Supposedly the writer works for the IRS in the document retention unit and allegedly they were just out-bid (low balled) for the work by a private company.

What with all the security breaches that have occured lately I’m not sure I like this.  Of course the government has had its own share of breaches, but still this would make me a whole lot more nervous.  Nervouser even.

Now if the contractor lets out our personal data can we sue it?  If so then that would be more attractive than suing the IRS itself.  See, there’s a silver lining to every dark cloud.

An Argument for Keeping the AMT

1 Reply

An economist from the University of Maryland has written a piece in the Washington Post that argues for keeping the alternative minimum tax (AMT).  His argument, in a nutshell, is that if the AMT is allowed to stay in place, and if the temporary raise in the standard exemption is allowed to return to $45,000 for a couples and $33,750 for individuals (the new tax bill raises the standard exemption to $62,550 and $42,500 respectively for one year) with inflation there will eventually be a flat tax in place.  So for once we would have gradual tax reform without Congress having to do anything. The result:

If the present AMT rates were applied as a universal flat tax — and especially if the AMT exemption were reduced and certain remaining AMT exclusions eliminated — the resulting federal revenue might even come to exceed current expenditure levels. The solution would then be to reduce the flat tax rate (the AMT rate) so that revenue and expenditures were brought back into balance.

In the longer run, the AMT could open the way to more radical reforms that might even change the basic nature of Washington spending habits. One option would be as follows: Each year the president would submit his budget proposal, and Congress, in response, would enact final appropriations. A neutral expert commission would then estimate the resulting federal revenue requirements, and a new flat tax rate, calculated to balance the budget, would be set for the forthcoming tax year. If Congress wanted to go on a spending spree, taxpayers would see the consequences directly and immediately in their pocketbooks.

The Social Security system is another area in which the AMT might facilitate radical change. Social Security taxes could be abolished and the flat tax adjusted upward to compensate for the lost revenue. The Social Security trust fund is largely an accounting fiction, and it is time to integrate the Social Security tax with the income tax system. Alternatively, Social Security tax payments could become a deductible credit from the required AMT payment.

Vernon’s Gotten the Attention of Farkers

3 Replies

Well, there’s notoriety and then there’s notoriety.  Vernon Robinson has earned the “Dumbass” tag on Fark.com and about 250 comments that include some slams on him, but also veer into interesting and Fark-esque political debate.  Not that he should care, but it is interesting since a lot of those folks would normally be considered conservative (i.e. Republican) who take exception to his approach.  I think he’ll find a lot of moderate Republican and Democratic voters who feel the same way in the 13th District, which is why I think he’ll dominate the far-right vote and top out at about 30% in November.

Here’s a link to the article that started the discussion and here’s a link to the page with the radio spot they all found a little ridiculous. It’s called “Brad Miller’s Mariachi Party.”

How to Pervert the Course of Justice

Leave a reply

God, I love the British.  Here’s a story about a guy in England who had already lost his license so in a bid to make lemonade with a few lemons he took cash in exchange for pleading guilty for other peoples’ driving violations.  When someone would get caught speeding by one of the gazillion traffic cameras in England they would pay this dude to take the rap for them.  He got caught after pleading guilty fifty times over six months.

My favorite part of the story is that the people who paid him have been pleading guilty to charges of “attempting to pervert the course of justice.”  I guarantee you that if this had happened here in the states the charges wouldn’t have sounded nearly so, well, perverse.

Someone Did a Research Paper on the F-Bomb; Who Said Higher Ed Has Gone to Hell?

Leave a reply

If I’d known you could get away with this kind of exercise in academia I might have tried a little harder to stay between the ivied walls.  I don’t know if I’m more impressed with the fact that the author of the paper could get credit for exploring the implications of the f-bomb or that he could get away with a four letter title: Fuc- (I’ll let you guess the fourth letter).  Following is the abstract for the piece (please note that since this a family blog and I never cuss I’ve edited out the offending word…okay, I admit it’s just because I don’t want to get inundated with a bunch of porn related comment spam):

Abstract:     


This Article is as simple and provocative as its title suggests: it
explores the legal implications of the word f—. The intersection of
the word f— and the law is examined in four major areas: First
Amendment, broadcast regulation, sexual harassment, and education. The
legal implications from the use of f— vary greatly with the context.
To fully understand the legal power of f—, the nonlegal sources of
its power are tapped. Drawing upon the research of etymologists,
linguists, lexicographers, psychoanalysts, and other social scientists,
the visceral reaction to f— can be explained by cultural taboo. F—
is a taboo word. The taboo is so strong that it compels many to engage
in self-censorship. This process of silence then enables small segments
of the population to manipulate our rights under the guise of
reflecting a greater community. Taboo is then institutionalized through
law, yet at the same time is in tension with other identifiable legal
rights. Understanding this relationship between law and taboo
ultimately yields f— jurisprudence.

Who knew you could write a sentence that ends with the phrase “f— jurispudence”?

Should We Have to Pay Taxes if Government Doesn’t Deliver the Basics?

Leave a reply

An elderly woman in England is refusing to pay taxes until the city (Derby) gets the prostitutes and drug dealers out of her neighborhood.  In thinking about it I wondered what your legal standing would be if you refused to pay taxes if you could prove that the government did not deliver on the basics.  I’m not talking entitlements here; I’m talking about basic health, safety and infrastructure.

For instance what if I could prove that my water service was inadequate and had been for a year, even after I complained?  Or that the police did not provide enough services to my neighborhood as compared to comparably sized neighborhoods across town?  Or that the roads and sewers were not maintained properly leading to polluted waterways, flooded roads, roads that caused severe damage to vehicles, etc.?

Can the government be held responsible for not providing basic services?  Can we refuse payment until said services are delivered?  Or, if after paying can we petition (i.e. sue) to get a refund?

Just wondering.

Apparently I’m Healthy, but That Doesn’t Mean There’s Nothing Wrong With Me

2 Replies

So I’m closing in on 40 and apparently that fact has caused me to jettison my normal attitude of indifference towards my health.  The result is that I’ve had my first physical in years and I’ve begun to listen to my wife about my supposed issues which led me to voluntarily participate in a sleep study on Monday night.  Here’s what I’ve learned, first from my physical:

  • God has blessed me with a good ticker.  My resting heart rate is 47 beats per minute.
  • Having a hairy chest is not conducive to the pain-free administration of an EKG. Taking those little bastard electrodes off does NOT tickle.
  • I’m a wuss.  When they went to draw blood and missed the first six times I almost passed out.  My doctor assured me that it had something to do with my miraculously low heart rate but I think he was just trying to soften the blow to my manhood.
  • The little rubber hammer thingy doesn’t have any effect when it is used to repeatedly strike me in the knee. Apparently my wife was correct in her assessment that I am insensitive.

This is what I learned from my sleep study:

  • It is quite difficult to sleep comfortably with electrodes stuck all over your face and scalp.
  • For some reason they also stick electrodes to your knees; I believe it is to make it difficult to pee in the morning, which it is.
  • It is considered normal to wake up 1-5 times per hour due to changes in breathing, but it is a mild case of sleep apnea to do so 6-15 times per hour and severe apnea to do so 16-30 times.
  • I wake up an average of six times per hour.  Funny enough I wake up once an hour if I’m sleeping on my side and 12 times per hour if I’m sleeping on my back.  I spend equal amounts of time on my back and on my side.
  • The prescription they have for me is to learn to sleep on my side at all times.  Their suggestion is for me to sew a pocket on the back of a t-shirt and insert a tennis ball so that I can’t lie on my back comfortably.  They figure it should only take 4-5 months for me to be properly trained.  This smells suspiciously like common sense to me, which of course makes me instantly suspicious.  Where’s my magic pill?
  • My heart rate when I’m sleeping is 45 beats per minute and my oxygen level stays above 90% which is apparently good.
  • I still snore loud as hell. They couldn’t prescribe anything to help my wife with that.
  • In the world of the sleep study folks I’m considered a moderate snorer; I feel for anyone who has to live with someone considered a truly loud snorer on their spectrum.

I wish I’d taken a camera with me to have my picture taken with all the stuff plastered on my head.  I looked like something out of a bad 70s sci-fi movie. 

The final analysis is that it looks like I’m healthy as a horse which is a good thing. Knock on wood.  Luckily no one has looked into my mental fitness…yet.

Executive Pay

Leave a reply

Malcolm Gladwell has a short post about executive pay that is interesting in and of itself, but the comments on the post contain the most interesting information.  A PERFECT example of how the blog platform can be so effective for sharing information.

Here’s what Gladwell posted:

After
reading the article in the New York Times yesterday on the hundreds of
millions of dollars in compensation given over the past few years to
the CEO of Home Depot, I ran across this: in 1949, the highest paid CEO
in America was Charlie Wilson of General Motors, who earned $586,100 in
salary, bonus and stock. That’s roughly equivalent to what some of the
better-compensated CEO’s are making today.

But what did Wilson pay in taxes? $430,350.

Times have changed.

Some commenters were questioning whether the tax rate could really have been seventy-something percent and others pointed out in1949 the top tax rate was indeed 82.13% and it went up to 92% a couple of years later.  Yikes!

The commenters also debate whether or not CEOs should make so much more than the average worker, why the US was so economically well off in the post-WWII era, and a few other interesting tid-bits.