In a prominent editorial this past Sunday, the New York Times once again advocated the adoption of a carbon tax. While the theory of a carbon tax makes perfect sense, its lack of practicality makes it the unicorn of energy politics.
This is a striking example of how big media like the New York Times can try to enforce their own limits on debate by asserting without evidence that certain ideas and therefore the people who espouse them are not mainstream.
The big drought has Californians worried. There are major controversies over Governor Jerry Brown's order to cut water consumption by 25 percent, not to mention some furious to-and-froing on climate change and demands for tax hikes and tax cuts.
Giving is the fourth pillar of Arianna Huffington's Third Metric. It provides numerous advantages in terms of health and well being. For U. S. citizens, it also provides significant fiscal advantages for individuals - including those who are nearing retirement.
This is actually even what the richest should want, because although they would pay more in taxes for universal basic income, leaving them a slightly thinner although still very thick slice of the overall pie, the slice of the pie itself would grow, leaving even them better off as well.
Voting to give corporations a huge tax cut without closing loopholes to pay for it is the height of hypocrisy. It represents an egregious double standard by conservatives: They increase the deficit by providing hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to corporations while they slash $5 trillion in spending that primarily benefits working Americans in order to reduce the deficit.
This plan's advertised price cost is $10.00 and yet the actual costs to the customer are $32.00, hiding a whopping 220% above this advertised price. Is this 'fair and reasonable'? Is this deceptive advertising? Where are the savings for buying this 'slim package'?
On May 17, Democrats in the Illinois House approved a property tax freeze bill that Republicans protested as a stunt. And the conservative Americans For Prosperity-Illinois has made tamping down property taxes a major cause this spring.
I was in a coffee shop, having breakfast with my daughter, Angela Luhys, on a week when my weight loss had reached the 90 pound mark since November. While sharing this great milestone with Angela, the guy in the booth behind me was trying to sell an annuity.
If we want to encourage autos that are more fuel efficient, and ultimately cars that rely on renewable energy, we need to start with the factors that influence consumer choice.
In my more than two decades of work on runaway executive pay, sparking public outrage has never been the problem. The real challenge has been persuading the public there's something we can do about it.
With Tax Day now behind us, it's time to recognize Lisa and the thousands of New Yorkers who are now on their way to building a healthier financial future and identity, thanks to one of the nation's most successful anti-poverty measures -- the Earned Income Tax Credit.
For all the frantic, often chaotic political engagement swirling about us these days involving taxes, gun rights, religious liberty and foreign policy, Americans may well be overlooking an even bigger problem: Have we unconsciously consigned the American Dream to the proverbial dustbin?
Regardless of how you choose to spend your tax refund, the most critical tip is that you make a conscious decision about how to use that money.
In the coming weeks you could be one of the many Americans receiving what the IRS has quoted as the average tax refund of $3,120. And it's precisely why we thought it was high time to take a look at the common ways people make poor decisions when it comes to tax refunds.