Abolishing the IRS and income tax - a racial as well as a financial question?

 

Millions of Americans receive what's known as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) every year.  This means that, even if they paid no income tax at all, they receive money from the IRS, credited to them as if they'd overpaid taxes and were receiving a refund.  (The small print in IRS definitions doesn't put it that way, but that's what it amounts to, IMHO.)

The sums involved are huge.  In 1999, 19.3 million Americans received a total of $31.9 billion in EITC payments, for an average of about $1,693 per recipient.  In 2022, the latest year for which figures are available, 23 million Americans received a total of $57 billion in EITC funds, for an average of $2,478 per recipient.

If, as President Trump has suggested, the Internal Revenue Service is to be abolished, along with income tax as we know it today, who would calculate and pay out EITC every year?

I've seen many arguments that the EITC appears to be nothing more or less than a (thinly disguised) attempt to implement "reparations for slavery" by tying them to a complex financial calculation that just happens to benefit a very large proportion of black Americans, while leaving most taxpayers from other racial groups out in the cold.  (The IRS isn't very helpful in providing a racial breakdown of who gets what, and who is denied what, so that's a speculative analysis based on what information is available.)  If anyone disagrees with the purported link between the EITC and reparations, please share your thoughts with us in Comments.  I'm sure the topic will be controversial.

My position on reparations for slavery, a topic beloved of left-wing and progressive politicians, is that I'll support them for two groups of persons only:

• Those who were themselves slaves, and are now free;
• Those who were born with living ancestors (parents, grandparents, whatever) who were or had been slaves, and who can thus claim that their immediate family was affected by slavery.

If someone was never a slave, and never had a living ancestor who was a slave, then in my opinion they have not earned, and should not get, reparations for slavery.  Fuzzy generational boundaries serve only to confuse and obfuscate the issue.  After all, if we're going to allow generations-old long-deceased relatives to qualify their currently living descendants for "reparations", what about the hundreds of thousands of Union troops who died during the US Civil War to free the slaves?  Surely they, and all of their relatives and descendants down to the present generation, should also qualify for such reparations, for being the instruments of the freedom that former slaves and their descendants attained through their sacrifice?

At any rate, if there is a link between reparations and the EITC, and the former is off the table, then I see no reason for the EITC (as currently constituted and calculated) to continue.  Let it be abolished, along with the IRS and income tax in general.

What say you, readers?

Peter

A duel with a weird result and a happy ending (sort of)

 

As part of my research for a forthcoming book, I've been reading up about the history of dueling in New Orleans during the 18th and 19th centuries.  I came across this very unusual account.

M. Augustin ... who afterward became a district judge and general of the Louisiana Legion, was the victor in several ... encounters in which the temper of the period caused him to be engaged. One in particular is noteworthy on account of the part it played in an extraordinary freak of fortune.  Alexander Grailhe was the offending party, though the insult (or rather provocation, for gentlemen seldom insulted) would in this day be of scant concern. But some cause of action was present, and each was sure that a deadly meeting would certainly follow. They rode together in a carriage with ladies, who, after the duel, commented on their mutual affability during the entire trip, which only serves to show how delicately adjusted was the code of etiquette—especially in the presence of ladies.

They fought at The Oaks, and as soon as the weapons had been crossed and the impressive “Allez, Messieurs,” pronounced, Grailhe, who was high-strung and hot-blooded—doubly so under the stress of what he regarded as a grievous provocation—lost his temper and furiously charged his antagonist.  Augustin, on the contrary, was cool, collected, and agile, parrying each savage thrust, until by a temps d’arrêt (sudden pause), judiciously interpolated into a vicious lunge of Grailhe’s, he pierced him through the chest.  Grailhe, with one of his lungs perforated, remained for a long time hovering between life and death, and when at last he did come out of his room, he was bowed like an octogenarian.

It was now only a question of time for the wounded man, as an internal abscess had formed where it could not be reached, —surgery then was not what it is now,— and the doctors despaired of saving him. Some time after he had been up and about, a quarrel with Col. Mandeville de Marigny resulted in his challenging that distinguished citizen.  This duel was also fought at The Oaks, but as Grailhe was too weak to do himself justice with a sword, the weapons chosen were pistols at fifteen paces, each to have two shots, advance five paces, and fire at will. At the first shot, fired simultaneously, the unfortunate man fell forward, pierced by his adversary’s bullet, which had entered the exact place of his former and yet unhealed wound.  Marigny, with pistol in hand and as placid as a marble statue, advanced to the utmost limit marked out, when Grailhe, who was suffering greatly, exclaimed: “Fire again; you have another shot.”

With grave dignity Marigny raised his pistol above his head and fired into the air, saying with frigid politeness: “I never strike a fallen foe.”

More dead than alive, the stricken duelist was carried home by his friends and consigned to the care of his physician; but instead of sinking rapidly, as was expected, he really began to mend, and by the following morning was much improved.  The ball had penetrated to the abscess which had threatened his life, and made an exit for its poisonous accumulations. Some time afterward he walked out of his room as erect as ever, and soon regained his health and stately bearing.

There's more at the link about the extensive history of New Orleans dueling.

That's one of the most remarkably fortuitous injuries I've ever encountered.  A wound that saved the life of the injured man?  I can't help but wonder how many - or, rather, how few - times in history that's happened!

Peter

Will the veil finally be lifted on US-Ukraine corruption?

 

In mid-2022 I published an article titled "Corruption in Ukraine, and its links to Washington DC".  It looks as if the scale of the corruption we hinted at, two and a half years ago, may be very much larger.

Ukraine did not receive as much foreign aid as claimed by the administration of US President Joe Biden, and whatever help it did get was largely embezzled, a former Polish deputy minister has claimed. Up to a half of the funds that reached Kiev was stolen by Ukrainian officials, Piotr Kulpa has alleged.

The political commentator previously held several posts in the Polish government, serving as deputy labor minister in the mid-2000s, and is currently a regular contributor on Ukrainian online shows.

“Everyone understands that war-related corruption is linked not only with Ukraine, but also the supplier nation,” he said. “Who would ever believe that the US burned through $2 trillion in Afghanistan? It’s delusional!”

US aid programs are a mechanism to “write off large sums of money that finance shady systems under the Democratic Party’s control,” he alleged. The incoming Trump administration could review government finances and discover the truth that “Ukraine got very little” compared to the amounts mentioned in public statements, Kulpa claimed.

“But they will also find something else: that a huge portion of the funds was stolen in Ukraine. From 30% to 50%, regardless of the nature of the aid,” he added.

If Kiev were to recover all the embezzled money for the Ukrainian budget, the country would have enough for a year, Kulpa said.

There's more at the link.

Of course, US corrupt dealings with Ukraine go back further than the war, as President Biden effectively admitted when he short-circuited a prosecutor investigating the matter.  Remember this, from 2018, referring to events in 2016?

One does look forward to seeing what comes out in the wash, so to speak.  If money flows from Ukraine to US politicians can be proved, we may hope to see some of the most corrupt players in Washington D.C. get their come-uppance . . . but they wield great influence, and may be able to get the investigation derailed.  I guess time will tell.

Peter

Unspeakable tragedy - but it's not the first time

 

News of a police shooting in Missouri has shocked many readers.

Chilling body camera footage captures a Missouri mom holding her baby as she lunges with a huge kitchen knife at cops who then shoot them both dead.

The newly released footage shows officers — called to a reported family assault — initially talking calmly to mom Maria Pike, 34, as she holds her 2-month-old daughter Destinii Hope while standing inside a closet at her home in Independence.

Eleven minutes into the footage, Pike can be seen suddenly grabbing a large knife from a bedside table and lunging toward an officer.

There's more at the link, including video footage.

I'm sure the police officers are just as traumatized by what happened as the deceased lady's husband.  Sadly, they had no time to think, no time to plan - particularly for a situation like that.  They could only react, and defend their own lives.

It's not the first time I've come across something like that.  I've mentioned before on this blog an incident in South Africa, one where I was an eye-witness.

I was present when a vehicle-mounted patrol was passing through a very volatile area.  A woman rushed out from behind a hut, with a baby strapped to her chest in the typical African manner.  She charged the lead vehicle, holding a Molotov cocktail in either hand, their fuses lit.  The soldiers on the vehicle had a very simple binary choice.  Shoot her - which meant snap-shooting, probably through the baby on her chest, because there was no time to take careful aim and avoid it - or be immolated when the gasoline bombs exploded inside the load bed of the patrol vehicle.  You can imagine their feelings . . . but they were left with no other options.  She, and her baby, died.  Whose fault was that baby's death?  Not the soldiers', I would argue.

Again, more at the link.

What causes a mother to "snap" like that?  How can she even think of endangering her own child in order to attack others?  I don't know . . . for that matter, I don't suppose anyone knows.  For the deceased mother's sake, I can only hope that there was some sort of mental illness or aberration involved - because I can't imagine any mother making a sane, rational choice to act like that.  It's beyond comprehension.

Say a prayer, if you'll be so kind, for the souls of that mother and her child - and for the sanity of her husband, who had to watch that happen.  I don't know if he'll ever be the same man again.  Also, of course, pray for the officers involved, who have to be carrying all sorts of emotional guilt, even though they must know intellectually that she left them with no choice.  Believe me when I say that, even if one hasn't pulled a trigger, the emotional guilt of such an experience takes decades to subside, and is never completely forgotten.

Peter

The Biden pardon

 

As my readers are doubtless aware, yesterday President Biden pardoned his son Hunter for any and all offenses against US law from 2014 until 2024.  In case you were wondering about the ten-year period, that's when Ukraine became the focus of US money-laundering and jiggey-pokery by our politicians.  Effectively, Hunter Biden was the bagman for certain corrupt US interests (some would call it the Biden crime family) during the whole of that period.

The pardon comes after President Biden repeatedly promised he would not pardon his son for his crimes.  There again, promises seldom (if ever) mean anything to crooked politicians, so we need not be surprised that the President broke them yet again.

I'm curious about the timing of the pardon.  I'd expected it, but figured it would more likely come as President Biden's term of office ended in January 2025, a last-minute "up yours!" to his political opponents and the American people.  I suppose it was brought forward to forestall a guilty verdict in the charges Hunter Biden was facing over tax evasion and other crimes.  The message conveyed by the pardon to the American electorate is, of course, the same.

I doubt we'll ever see President Biden and/or his family called to account for their crimes and misdemeanors while in office.  However, there are many politicians who "made hay while the sun shone", taking advantage of his protection to enrich themselves and get away with all sorts of shenanigans.  One hopes the incoming Trump administration will shine a light into the dark corners of American politics, uncovering those machinations and holding the guilty accountable.  That may be a pipe-dream - politicians tend to cover for each other, even their opponents, because so many of them are guilty of the same crimes - but we may hope.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 238

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.