47% of Americans don't pay tax...and for good reason!

Remember when Mitt Romney was running around saying that 47% of Americans don't pay tax? The remark got him in a lot of trouble and it probably cost him the election.

That number, 47%, is a very misleading number. It's arrived at by subtracting the labor force (157 million) from the population (300 million). That leaves 143 million not in the labor force. When you divide 143 million by 300 milllion it gives you 47%. So Romney is assuming that if 47% of the population is not in the labor force they're probably not paying any tax. Actually, these days, the number is more like 50% because the population is closer to 320 million.

For starters, Romney's claim is wrong because people still pay sales tax throughout most of the country whether or not they are employed.

More importantly, however, there's the fact that a big chunk of those 47% are babies, old people, sick people, kids, and others who are just not going to be employed. They can't be.

So is Romney saying that as a society we should be making babies pay tax? Or kids and elderly folks? It's ridiculous.

What about robots that are not employed? (Sitting in a warehouse.) Should they have to pay a tax, too? How about when they are working?

The fact is, 80% ($2.07 trillion) of the $2.6 trillion taken in by the Federal Gov't is withheld income and employment taxes. That's Social Security and FICA and stuff like that. That's taken from people working for a paycheck and those people are primarily middle class and working poor.

Corporate taxes amount to $345 billion--only 16%--and individual income taxes (what many wealthy pay) amounts to $72 billion or, 3.4%. By the way, gift and estate taxes (inheritance taxes) only come to a measly, $685 million (three one hundredths of a percent.) but the rich cry and whine about that like crazy.

Here's the data from the Treasury. It's Table IV from the Daily Treasury Statement. All figures are in millions so please read it correctly.

Nate Silver — In Silicon Valley, Technology Talent Gap Threatens G.O.P. Campaigns

Nate investigates why the president had such an overwhelming tech advantage.

Even without the Bay Area’s vote, Democrats would still be favored to win California by solid margins. So why does any of this matter? 

The reason is that Democrats’ strength in the region is hard to separate out from the growth of its core industry — information technology – and the advantage that having access to the most talented individuals working in the field could provide to Democratic campaigns.

Companies like Google and Apple do not have their own precincts on Election Day. However, it is possible to make some inferences about just how overwhelmingly Democratic employees at these companies are based on fund-raising data. (The Federal Election Commission requires that donors to presidential campaigns disclose their employer when they make a campaign contribution.)

Among employees who work for Google, Mr. Obama raised about $720,000 in itemized contributions this year, against only $25,000 for Mr. Romney. That means that Mr. Obama took almost 97 percent of the money between the two major candidates.

Apple employees gave 91 percent of their dollars to Mr. Obama. At eBay, Mr. Obama took 89 percent of the money from employees.

Over all, among the 10 American-based information technology companies on the Fortune’s list of “most admired companies,” Mr. Obama raised 83 percent of the funds between the two major party candidates.

Mr. Obama’s popularity among the staff at these companies holds even for those which are not headquartered in California. About 81 percent of contributions at Microsoft, which is headquartered in Redmond, Wash., went to Mr. Obama. So did 77 percent of those at I.B.M., which is based in Armonk, N.Y.

It does not require an algorithm to deduce that the sort of employees who might be willing to donate substantial money to a political campaign might also be those who would consider working for it.

The New York Times | FiveThirtyEight

In Silicon Valley, Technology Talent Gap Threatens G.O.P. Campaigns

Nate Silver

There he goes again!! Obama, minutes after victory, says he will reach out to the losers to see how they can work together !@#$%^&*

What is wrong with Obama? He did it his first term, when he had a mandate, yet he quickly handed the entire policymaking agenda to the loser Republicans.

Now the American electorate has given him a second term (questionable whether it's deserved or not) and they brought him some great allies in the Senate (Elizabeth Warren, for example) and the first thing he says is that he's going to SIT DOWN WITH LOSER ROMNEY TO SEE HOW THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER???

Obama also said he is willing to meet Romney in the next several weeks to discuss how they can work together to help the country.

No sooner does he get elected by the very people whose hopes he dashed the first time, than he turns around and does the same, stupid, thing!! Mr. President...YOU WON! SHOW NO MERCY! TAKE NO PRISONERS!!!

Obama crashing on Intrade now

Obama's nosedive on Intrade is accelerating. There's only about a 10 point difference separating him and Romney with less than two weeks to go. And his lead in the electoral vote count has pretty much evaporated.

I know a lot of you will say, "yeah, but he's still in the lead," however, it could be the trend that counts and his trend is definitely down, while Romney's is surging upward.

Full video and transcript of leaked Romney fundraiser remarks

It gets curiouser & curiouser.

RM Mitchell thinks Romney's off his rocker. Can Obama be far behind?

I can't stand them both

Obaman, Romney...what's the difference? Two clueless idiots. That's it, I'm done watching debates. I think next time I'll watch Honey Boo Boo.