Apple Inc. AAPL +2.18% paid no corporate income tax to any national government on tens of billions of dollars in overseas income over the past four years, Senate investigators found, a revelation that fuels the debate over whether the U.S. tax code needs an overhaul.
The disclosure follows a lengthy examination of the technology giant's tax practices by the U.S. Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which is expected to air its findings at a hearing on Tuesday. Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook is preparing to testify at the hearing, and is expected to propose changes to a tax code that provides American companies strong incentives to keep overseas earnings bottled up at foreign subsidiaries. read more
The very next day after her White House meeting with the President, according to the Treasury Department's Inspector General's Report, IRS employees -- the same employees who belong to the NTEU -- set to work in earnest targeting the Tea Party and conservative groups around America. read more
Peggy Noonan: What happened at the IRS is the government's essential business. The IRS case deserves and calls out for an independent counsel, fully armed with all that position's powers. Only then will stables that badly need to be cleaned, be cleaned. Everyone involved in this abuse of power should pay a price, because if they don't, the politicization of the IRS will continue -- forever. ... And it would be shameful and shallow for any Republican operative or operator to make this scandal into a commercial and turn it into a mere partisan arguing point and part of the game. It's not part of the game. This is not about the usual partisan slugfest. This is about the integrity of our system of government and our ability to trust, which is to say our ability to function. read more
When two Swedish economists set out to examine whether economic freedom made people any more or less racist, they knew how they would gauge economic freedom, but they needed to find a way to measure a country's level of racial tolerance. So they turned to something called the World Values Survey, which has been measuring global attitudes and opinions for decades.
Contrarily, I will likely come into the DHS's purview only if I do something wrong, if they target the wrong person, or if the security services cast too wide a net. When they next expire in 2015, the more worrying components of the PATRIOT Act should certainly be revisited and expunged. But, while they should not be on the statute books, it remains true that these components have almost never been used. The IRS, meanwhile, abuses its power daily. Where is the conniption? read more
Reagan declared: "There is a leadership gap, and a morality and decency gap, in Sacramento. And there is no better illustration of that than what has been perpetrated … at the University of California at Berkeley, where a small minority of beatniks, radicals and filthy speech advocates have brought such shame to … a great university." - F Docs Article
Was he wrong?
Did you read what was going on in 1963? Lets return to that is that what you are asking for? I am all in.
IF we can get back to that, I would be happy to pay more property tax.
But lets get back to the real world....regarding the UC system. Wake up... today we pay more than just tuition... bunch of targeters..
A closer look at UC's "tuition-free golden past" and who's financially hurting today
"California students with parent income under $60K don't pay tuition/fees. (There are holes in this at the level of 2-3% of those students, though; see mention of undocumented students above.) Back in the Golden Past of the 60′s & 70′s, they would have paid $120/$240/$540 depending on year, which corresponds to $860/$1520/$2756 now, but they don't pay tuition/fees now. So for those students, roughly half of all UC students, the situation is better now that the "tuition free" Golden Past. It's actually much better now, because most of those students are getting money for living expenses, books, etc, from the federal government, state of California and UC. We write checks of up to $8K to students for their living expenses."
blogs.berkeley.edu
"And this is why no one in the government wanted to extend Stevens protection, and wanted to assure that his messy death was spilled in the headlines for a solid year following."
Oh Zed, seriously..... No one wanted to extend protection? Stevens declined it, no need to attract unwanted attention.
Did you see the movie "Clear and Present Danger", this is very similar, but with media attention, and no Jack Ryan... Someone that feels responsible enough to do something to help the ambassador/special ops out, when the government cuts them loose....
My guess they don't even have stinger missiles.
The question is why a video to blame? Why that guy?