U.S. Posts Biggest Monthly Budget Surplus in Seven Years, A Simple Math Lesson

The boost in receipts narrowed the U.S. budget deficit for the previous 12 months to $460 billion, from $510 billion in March and $499 billion in the prior year. It was the lowest annual deficit since last November and the second lowest since September 2008.

Over the past 12 months, revenues are running 9% above their year-earlier level while spending is running 7% higher.

The figures illustrate how, despite growing unease over income inequality, the taxes that America’s rich are paying on their rising incomes are yielding a windfall for the U.S. Treasury. Payroll taxes rose 6% from a year earlier in April, while other individual taxes, including those on capital gains and self-employment incomes, were up 18%.

via U.S. Posts Biggest Monthly Budget Surplus in Seven Years – WSJ.

So…again…real world results.

If the question is “How do we deal with massive deficits?”, the answer now shown to be a resoundingly good one, “Raise taxes on the wealthy”.

We’ve got quite a bit more room to go on both of these before the problem is solved, as it were, but we know now this is a solid strategy.

Democrats introduce bill to end gerrymandering

The cumulative effect over time has resulted in a U.S. House where today only about two dozen of the 435 seats are considered competitive by non-partisan election analysts, and Republicans — who controlled more state legislatures in 2012 when the current maps were approved — are favored to maintain control of the House until the next reapportionment round ahead of the 2022 congressional elections.

via Democrats introduce bill to end gerrymandering.

And there you have it.  More stats and data on this (hopefully) soon.

WooHoo A New PPM Record for CO2

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says in March, the global monthly average for carbon dioxide hit 400.83 parts per million. That is the first month in modern records that the entire globe broke 400 ppm, reaching levels that haven’t been seen in about 2 million years.

“It’s both disturbing and daunting,” said NOAA chief greenhouse gas scientist Pieter Tans. “Daunting from the standpoint on how hard it is to slow this down.”

And somewhat disturbing is that the political party that legislates stuff (like funding for NOAA) completely and utterly denies this basic scientific fact.

In fact, they go beyond denying this fact, and call anyone who *does* delusional. They do this over and over and over again, with the backing of many of the richest people on the planet (who make money off selling the stuff causing the rise in CO2).

So that’s where we are at…a place no human civilization has ever been.

And rising.

The great thing about this is that the GOP, which controls funding for these agencies, in planning to gut it in order to not get any more reports like this one.

Chain of Life Firmed Up on Chemical Grounds

More of that “here’s how it happened” style evidence/explanation/chemistry re: panspermia.

Anyway…what someone figured out *this time* is that certain basic compounds, when exposed to various other compounds and/or heat/light combinations, create other compounds than allow for the basic coding of genetic information.

What we have *here* specifically, is an actual compound that works as the pre-cursor, which they have previously been trying to to match to other known compounds (which failed). Now there is a “intermediate molecule” that acts as the stepping stone to the RNA model without the need for separate “sugar” and “base” molecules.

Great stuff, and hopefully in school in 20 years, the first five years of science in school will be a long, empirical and experimental proof on how life came into being (and curiously without the need for a supernatural being, just a series of chemical reactions over *to those students* an impossibly long time).

Researchers are nearing a better understanding of the chemical reactions that created life on the young planet.
NYTIMES.COM|BY NICHOLAS WADE

Clinton Stakes Immigration Ground as GOP calls out “Rats and Roaches”

She’s married to one of the greatest political minds of the 20th century, so this type (expert level) of triangulation is to be expected. Or maybe he’s the one that is married to one of the greatest political minds of the (young) 21st century .

Regardless, if it runs that way, I think she’ll make a wonderful President to our many new citizens (with whom we’ve been living for a generation).

This week, Hillary Clinton called for a broad path to citizenship for many of the 12 million people in the United States illegally. Doing so opens Clinton up to charges of…
WWW.NPR.ORG

—-

And here you have the GOP’s response….

The mother-in-law of Citizens United president David Bossie compares immigrants to rats and roaches [to wild cheers].

http://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?c4537174

On Sanders the Socialist

Ya know…there’s a quick and easy conventional wisdom on the Presidential campaign of one Bernard Sanders, and it’s simply this….there’s no way a socialist can win a national election.

Oh, that’s also proceeded by, “I love the guy, don’t disagree with much he does, he’s honest, and does what he says he does.”

Also, he was born in 1941 and will have *just turned* 75 in the months leading up to the 2016 election.

We actually have a socialist running for President of the United States. A real one.  A “self-avowed” one, if you will.

This is going to have a number of interesting effects. First and foremost, in the primary season…folks are going to get to see *WHAT AN ACTUAL UNAPOLOGETIC SOCIALIST* sounds like.

And it’s going to be a crotchety, 75-year old man that thinks the system is unfair to young people and workers.

And knows how that system works.

It’s not going to be scary. It’s not going to be Stalin. Socialism, through the curious lens of American culture, is going to be cool again.

This will likely go down as (another) of the great mistakes of the GOP. You see, having cast *Obama* as a socialist, the GOP has already broken that ice. The latest 3 generations of Americans weren’t as programmed as the Boomers (and above) to hate the very notion of the sound of the word of “socialism”, so they see *and feel* the term much differently.

Particularly those who have spent their sentient years under the rule of a “socialist dictator” as so many on the right think of Obama (I’m not joking, this is a common comment on the President).

To see *an actual* socialist in campaign mode will no doubt be good for the country, as we get a chance to re-engage a term that is not actually political poison in the rest of the world, but simply a general term for a system of government that trends opposite of our current oligarchy, for better or worse as such trends dictate*

Do I think Sanders can win the upset campaign? I’m not so sure, if only because he’s waited so long to really start.

Going on the Sunday shows was not the strategy to lay the groundwork for a successful Presidential campaign at 75. Doing it at 63, and 67, and 71 was, as RON PAUL did for his own “ism” of the liberte variety.

I’m looking forward to seeing how Sanders fairs with the grueling pace of the campaign, and how he looks under the lights and the contrast he allows for Clinton. Where and how they disagree will be useful, if only as a lesson as to what words mean.

Like “socialism”, which we are about to get a solid dose of, one way or another.

* to be clear, I think income/wealth inequality is our biggest societal challenge, about to be made *MUCH WORSE* by automation, and as such, a healthy dose of socialism is exactly what we need to prevent (or merely push back) societal collapse.**

**. I say with my usual comic over/understatement.