Strollerderby : tax policy

Utility Shut-Offs Surge for Middle-Class in PA, MI, CA, Elsewhere

Shannon LC Cate — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:29:00 GMT

The mortgage crisis is affecting even more people than the 1%+ of U.S. households currently in some stage of foreclosure. People scraping to pay their mortgages are having to let other bills slide, and it looks like utilities are one place folks are slipping behind.

Not that it's worse when it happens to people who aren't used to it, but another new trend aspect of the problem is that increasingly, shut-offs are happening to middle-class households who have never experienced them before. This is cause for alarm, as it shows that more segments of society are getting into desperate financial territory than have been there in a long time.

According to the Wall Street Journal, PPL Corp. of Pennsylvania increased shutoffs by 78% in the first three quarters of 2008 compared with the same period in 2007. George Lewis, a spokesman for PPL, based in Allentown, Pa., said the utility had decided to "prevent people from getting further in debt" by cutting them off sooner now than in the past.

That's one way to put it. I'm not sure how helpful families will find it to have their utilities cut off just as winter is beginning.

Yet more bad news is that as power companies install new "smart meters" they are able to shut customers off remotely, saving them the cost of a crew going house-to-house, and enabling them to cut power when customers are only slightly behind for a slight amount. One company in California shuts off customers only $30 behind and plans to lower that figure as soon as their wireless technology is installed in enough homes to make it cost-effective.

While shutting off power may indeed prevent people from getting further behind, it doesn't do much to truly solve the problem of more and more families in financial crisis in the United States. Whatever the country decides tomorrow, let's hope the fiscal policies of the next president will do more for people than leave them in cold, dark houses, wondering how much longer they can keep the roof over their heads.

Breaking News: Joe Not Really a Plumber; Not Really Joe; Would Gain under Obama's Tax Plan

Shannon LC Cate — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:00:00 GMT

From the New York Times:

Thomas Joseph, the business manager of Local 50 of the United Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters and Service Mechanics, based in Toledo, said Thursday that Mr. Wurzelbacher had never held a plumber’s license, which is required in Toledo and several surrounding municipalities. He also never completed an apprenticeship and does not belong to the plumber’s union, which has endorsed Mr. Obama. On Thursday, he acknowledged that he does plumbing work even though he does not have a license.

His full name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher. And he owes back taxes, too, public records show. The premise of his complaint to Mr. Obama about taxes may also be flawed, according to tax analysts. Contrary to what Mr. Wurzelbacher asserted and Mr. McCain echoed, neither his personal taxes nor those of the business where he works are likely to rise if Mr. Obama’s tax plan were to go into effect, they said.

So Joe is neither Joe, nor a plumber. He is, in fact, practicing plumbing illegally! In other words, he's taking business from legitimate plumbers who paid for the education and training and union dues to be plumbers. (He is in fact "Sam-the-Scab" if you will.) His tax problems are not so much what he'll owe if Obama becomes president, but what he still owes from when GW Bush was president.

Again with the lie now, correct later GOP strategy.

But the fact is, this tax disagreement isn't about facts. It's about greed and selfishness. Let's pretend for a moment (okay, several more moments) that Joe the Plumber is actually a real guy. There's bound to be a guy who actually fits Sam-the-illegally-practicing-not-plumber's scenario somewhere in the United States, right?--a guy who really did start a small business as a hard-working plumber and really did work his way up to an income of $250K or above (and keep in mind, in 2007, the median household income in the United States was about $50,000).

Much as it ticks me off that the party claiming to be the party of "values" (presumeably virtuous values) is so keen on lying as a political strategy, the real values issue here is that I think (and Obama thinks, and the plumbers union thinks) that Joe, having taken advantage of the opportunities his nation offers to start a buiness, work hard and succeed in it, in fact, does owe soemthing in return once he is so far above the median. With greater wealth comes greater responsibility. And when you make so much more money than the average "Joe" living on your block, you can afford to pay a little more (Obama is talking about a mere 3% increase--from 36%, to 39%--as this video makes repeatedly clear).

So which do you believe? That people who make 450% of the median household income (in an inexpensive place like Ohio, for heaven's sake) should or should not pitch in a bit more to help those who are struggling to make ends meet--working just as hard, or harder?

I'm absolutely partisan. I'm not objective. My values say that those with more than they need ought to help those with less than they need and the government, for the common good of the nation and its economy, ought to support that.

Cough it up, Joe. You'll still be more than fine.

What Did Obama Actually Tell 'Joe the Plumber'?

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 19:26:00 GMT

"Joe the Plumber" (AKA Joe Wurzelbacher from Ohio) has been plunged into instant fame by asking Barack Obama a question about his tax policy. Since this interaction became the cornerstone of last night's debate, I thought I'd share a video of the actual interaction Obama had with Wurzelbacher, in which he clearly and concisely explains how his tax policy will affect working Americans.

Photo: BBC