Give ’em hell, Arizona

Nathan:

If leftists keep boycotting Arizona, it might become a reasonable place to retire.

...or at least for a vacation.

And (building on Nathan’s post)...  Oh, by the way, can you say “No tax dollars to professional sports?”

Related:

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 18:04:54 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 2 kb.

Maybe we should start taking screenshots?

Instapundit:

I had linked the original WaPo version of this below, but, strangely, that link now goes to a completely different story.  So here it is again.  Thanks to reader Joseph Nunke for pointing out this odd behavior at the Post, and for sending the new link.  We saw similar behavior from The New York Times with a critical story about the Administration the other day.  Hmm.  Anybody at the WaPo or the NYT want to explain this?  ‘Cause it looks pretty bad.

The MSM’s online versions have always had problems with disappearing archives/link rot.  Now we have story substitution.  It’s like they’re afraid someone might hold them accountable for what they said yesterday.

Posted by: Old Grouch in The Press at 15:51:00 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 2 kb.

10 years is a long time...

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 23:31:03 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.

ObamaCare Easter Egg: Paperwork explosion!

Warren Meyer:

A little noticed provision in the recently passed health care reform bill will require every payment to corporations over $600 to be reported on a Form 1099 to the IRS, including payments for the purchase of merchandise and services.  This provision takes effect in 2012.

The current law requires a Form 1099 to be submitted to the IRS when your business pays more than $600 for rent, interest, dividends, and non-employee services if the payments are made to entities other than corporations.  Currently, payments made to a corporation and payments for merchandise are not required to be reported.

To file the required 1099, a business will have to obtain and keep track of a Taxpayer Information Number (TIN) from every vendor before submitting the 1099 to that business and the IRS.  Under current tax law, one copy of the form is sent to the IRS, and another copy is sent to the person to whom the business made the payments.

This is an horrible additional burden for any business, as for most businesses the only 1099s filed are for payments of dividends.  My own (micro) company, for example, typically issues two or three 1099s each year. In 2012, that number will grow to probably 100.

Warren continues:

My small business has over a thousand vendors.  I would have to hire someone full time for a month to do this.

And there’s another little catch: If 1099-requiring payments are made to someone who fails to supply either a TIN or a Social Security number^[1], the payer must reduce that payment by a “backup withholding” amount, and forward that difference to the IRS.

So let’s see: Track every vendor.  If their payments cross $600, obtain a TID.  Otherwise, start withholding taxes.  Prepare and mail a 1099 every year (and don’t forget those copies for the government!).

None of which makes any contribution to the bottom line.  And all of which will affect every business.

And the government gets far more information, in far more detail than it ever has had before, about the commercial activities of the citizens.

Chris Edwards at Cato@Liberty says:

I’m stunned that there wasn’t a broader debate before such a costly mandate was enacted...

And I’m shocked that there might be gambling going on over there at Rick’s, too. (spit!)

As I’ve said before, I’m over giving those weasels any benefit of the doubt.  There are hundreds of lawyers in Congress: There’s no reason they shouldn’t have known exactly what they were doing.

Finally this note, from one of Warren’s commenters:

I can’t believe the several blogs and news sites where I’ve read of this, no one, not even the commenters, recognize what’s going on with this new requirement.  It most certainly is the basic framework data collection that would be required to enforce a VAT.  Now does it’s insertion into ObamaCare make sense?

LATER (100506 20:15), elsewhere:
-----

Posted by: Old Grouch in Rants at 21:55:56 GMT | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 527 words, total size 6 kb.

Third Anniversary Indy BlogMeet - May 16th

Most likely at Brugge, but add your thoughts to the discussion.
Seems amazing that we’ve been doing these for a full two.years now.

UPDATE (100507 16:15):

I blame Alzheimer’s.  Either that or fencepost error.


Elsewhere, related:

Posted by: Old Grouch in Meta at 15:11:07 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 84 words, total size 2 kb.

Look for the “UAULWIE” label

LATER (100505 03:00):

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 20:36:19 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 2 kb.

More reasons that Congress==a bunch of weasels

Alliance for Natural Health (HT: Bill Quick):

The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173), recently passed in the House of Representatives, includes language going far beyond finance inserted by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA).  This language could be used for an end run around the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), the legislation that governs dietary supplement regulation by the FDA [by expanding powers of the FTC].

Washington Post (via Ed, via: Insty):

The Federal Trade Commission could become a more powerful watchdog for Internet users under a little-known provision in financial overhaul legislation that would expand the agency’s ability to create rules.
...
The version of regulatory overhaul legislation passed by the House would allow the FTC to issue rules on a fast track and permit the agency to impose civil penalties on [internet service providers] that hurt consumers.^[1]

Reason One:  Instead of forthrightly passing regulations that might be unpopular, “enabling” their implementation by unelected agencies.

Reason Two:  Burying the “enabling” in unrelated legislation, in hope no one will notice.

And then there’s this:

Remember all that scorn in Congress about evil shortsellers betting against America and bringing the country down?

Well, it turns out Congress-people did it, too.  And they used derivatives to do it, which they now say they abhor.

Via Instapundit, who quotes reader George Poletes:

A member of Congress purchasing bearish exchange-traded funds is analogous to a professional baseball [player] betting against his own team.

-----

Posted by: Old Grouch in In Passing at 16:19:51 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 256 words, total size 4 kb.

Flowery tree, blue sky

Posted by: Old Grouch in Dear Diary... at 15:19:39 GMT | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 4 words, total size 1 kb.

“Did I ever tell you about…

(You KNOW you’ve gotta follow this one!)

Posted by: Old Grouch in Linkage at 00:06:08 GMT | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.