IT BEGINS: Economists Say Biden’s Proposed Tax Hikes Will Impact Americans Earning $200K

While campaigning Joe Biden said he would not tax anyone who is earning under $400k. Only people who earn above 400k would be taxed, then candidate Joe Biden insisted. This statement was obviously not true. The spending of the Biden Administration and the Democrat controlled Congress is so out of control, that there is simply no way that only the affluent could pay for it.

Watch your wallet, Mr. and Mrs. America.

IT BEGINS: Economists Say Biden’s Proposed Tax Hikes Will Impact Americans Earning $200K

By Sean Hannity, March 18, 2021

Despite making numerous claims that his proposed tax hike will only affect Americans earning more than $400,000, analysts now believe President Biden’s policy could impact those making $200,000 per year.

“Anybody making more than $400,000 will see a small-to-a-significant tax increase,” Biden said during an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America” that aired Wednesday. “You make less than $400,000, you won’t see one single penny in additional federal tax.”

“Jen Psaki clarified on Wednesday that Biden’s proposed $400,000 threshold for tax increases applies to families, rather than individuals, meaning the hike could hit individuals who earn $200,000 a year if they are married to someone who makes the same amount,” reports Fox News.

“He meant families,” said Psaki.

President Biden has already called for $4 trillion in new spending on programs like CoVID relief and the Green New Deal.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Here’s the List of the Top 20 States Getting ‘COVID’ Bailout Money [And Why It Raises a Giant Red Flag]

It’s simply naïve and ignorant of human nature to expect people—especially the kind of people who become politicians—to dole out trillions of dollars without any hint of favoritism or impropriety.


President Biden is taking a victory lap after signing his $1.9 trillion ‘COVID’ spending bill. “Help is here,” he wrote in a tweet promoting his plan.

But Americans who are initially glad to hear that more ‘COVID’ relief is supposedly on its way may be surprised when they learn that the latest legislation funnels $350 billion in unneeded taxpayer money to flush the coffers of state and local governments.

In the president’s telling, this is much-needed aid that will allow municipal governments facing massive COVID-related revenue pitfalls to pay their front-line emergency responders and essential personnel. But the facts reveal a different story.

While it’s plausible on its face to think that COVID would have led to a revenue drop for state and local governments, this never materialized in most places. According to JP Morgan, state revenue was “virtually flat” in 2020 nationwide while 21 states actually saw slight revenue upticks.

Cato Institute economist Chris Edwards noted that while there was a significant downturn in state revenue in the second quarter of 2020, overall it was balanced out by an uptick in the third quarter. “There is no need for more federal aid to the states,” he concluded.

So, the $350 billion in state “aid”—which cost roughly $2,442 per federal taxpayer—Congress  just passed wasn’t actually necessary. What’s the driving motivation behind it, then? This becomes clearer when we consider which states are getting the most taxpayer cash.

Here are the 20 states receiving the most money from the latest spending legislation.

  1. California: $42.3 billion
  2. Texas: $27.3 billion
  3. New York: $23.5 billion
  4. Tribal Governments: $20 billion
  5. Florida: $17.3 billion
  6. Illinois: $13.5 billion
  7. Pennsylvania: $13.5 billion
  8. Ohio: $11 billion
  9. Michigan: $10.1 billion
  10. New Jersey: $10 billion
  11. North Carolina: $8.7 billion
  12. Georgia: $8.17 billion
  13. Massachusetts: $7.96 billion
  14. Arizona: $7.48 billion
  15. Washington: $6.94 billion
  16. Virginia: $6.68 billion
  17. Maryland: $6.21 billion
  18. Tennessee: $6.12 billion
  19. Colorado: $5.9 billion
  20. Indiana: $5.7 billion

At first glance, it’s hard to decipher a clear pattern on this list. It’s not ordered by population, otherwise Florida would be above New York and Georgia would be above New Jersey. So, how did they divvy up the money?

Curiously, the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress factored in not just population but also the number of unemployed citizens. This had the direct effect of skewing the bailout benefits toward states that enacted harsher lockdowns and punishing states who prioritized preserving economic activity.

It must be noted that the list is skewed to include more “blue” states that voted for Biden, 13, than “red” states that voted for Trump, 6. It was, in many cases, Republican governors who opted for lighter restrictions and abandoned harsh lockdowns. In states like Florida, this has averted the unemployment and social destruction other states experienced—without producing noticeably worse COVID deaths.

One could argue that perhaps focusing on the unemployment rate is meant to ensure the aid goes to the states shortest on revenue. But why not use actual revenue shortfalls, then? Indeed, California tops the list for bailout money, yet the Golden State is actually running a budget surplus!

The only conclusion left to draw, however disappointing, is that Democrats crafted this bailout’s structure to favor states who pursued the COVID-19 policies they agree with—aka, states run by Democrats. Suffice it to say that political favoritism should never determine how limited taxpayer money is spent.

But, unfortunately, cronyism and favoritism are features, not a bug, of big government spending programs. As economist Ludwig von Mises once explained, big government programs concentrate enormous spending power in the hands of a few political officials; all but ensuring that favoritism follows.

“There is no such thing as a just and fair method of exercising the tremendous power that interventionism puts into the hands of the legislature and the executive,” Mises wrote.

It’s simply naïve and ignorant of human nature to expect people—especially the kind of people who become politicians—to dole out trillions of dollars without any hint of favoritism or impropriety. So, while Americans will understandably be angered by the way Congress has carved out hundreds of billions for state governments that don’t need it, they’d be wrong to think this is a one-time mistake.

Corruption and dysfunction are baked into the cake when we entrust the government with vast economic powers.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Opinion Editor at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

DEMOCRAT☭ Biden admin planning BIGGEST TAX HIKE in almost 30 years

Crushing the American people. Lockdowns, job loss, isolation, suicide, metal illness, destruction of millions of small business — now this.

Biden is not legitimate.

Biden reportedly planning largest tax hike in almost 30 years

By: Phil Shiver, The Blaze, March 15, 2021

President Joe Biden is reportedly planning the largest hike in federal taxes in almost three decades to fund a long-term economic recovery program to follow in the footsteps of the recently passed $1.9 trillion stimulus package.

Unnamed sources confirmed the plans to Bloomberg News over the weekend, reportedly indicating that the major tax hike — the first since 1993 — is expected to pay for key Biden administration initiatives such as “infrastructure, climate, and expanded help for poorer Americans.”

But the sources said the planned changes are not designed to fund only the key priorities of the administration. With the tax hike, Biden’s team hopes to address what Democrats argue are “inequities in the tax system itself.” According to the Bloomberg report, the changes include:

  • Raising the corporate tax rate to 28% from 21%
  • Paring back tax preferences for so-called pass-through businesses, such as limited liability companies or partnerships
  • Raising the income tax rate on individuals earning more than $400,000
  • Expanding the estate tax’s reach
  • A higher capital gains tax rate for individuals earning at least $1 million annually
“His whole outlook has always been that Americans believe tax policy needs to be fair, and he has viewed all of his policy options through that lens,” Sarah Bianchi, a former Biden economic aide, told Bloomberg. “That is why the focus is on addressing the unequal treatment between work and wealth.”

Bloomberg cited an independent analysis of the plan conducted by the Tax Policy Center, which assessed it would raise taxes on American citizens by $2.1 trillion over 10 years. The group originally projected the plan would raise taxes by $4 trillion over a decade, but revised its forecast last November.

The plans are unsurprising coming from the Biden administration and progressive Democratic lawmakers, who have already shown a willingness to raise taxes to accomplish their policy goals. Democrats snuck $60 billion in tax hikes into the coronavirus relief bill even as the country faces continued economic difficulty as a result of the pandemic.

However, despite falling in line with Biden’s campaign promises and demands from progressive lawmakers, any major tax hikes may face an uphill battle in Congress. Tax hikes, especially if they result in a repeal of former President Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, are a non-starter for Republicans. Likewise, moderate Democrats have shown some reluctance to the idea.

Moderate Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) previously told The Hill repealing Trump’s tax cuts would be a “ridiculous” idea, though he later added, “Everything’s open for discussion.”

Then last month, an anonymous Democratic House member told The Hill the government should not be raising taxes.

“People would accept the corporate tax raised a few points, but beyond that you’re going to have problems, especially in the middle of an economic crisis,” the lawmaker reportedly said.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Federal ‘COVID’ Spending Just Hit $41,870 Per Taxpayer. Did You See That Much in Benefit?

For the same $6 trillion in expenditure, the government could have given every federal taxpayer a $41,870 check.


President Biden just signed his sweeping $1.9 trillion spending package into law. Once this bill hits the books, total taxpayer expenditure on (ostensibly) COVID relief will hit $6 trillion—which, roughly estimated, comes out to $41,870 in spending per federal taxpayer.

Did you see anywhere near that much in benefit?

The sheer immensity of this spending is hard to grasp. For context, $6 trillion is more than one-fourth of what the US economy produces in an entire year, according to Fox Business. The COVID spending blowout is at least eight times bigger than the (inflation-adjusted) price tag of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal.”

Moreover, the COVID spending bills have all lost huge sums of money to unrelated carve-outs, politician pet projects, corporate bailouts, fraud, waste, and worse.

In the latest $1.9 trillion package, more than 90 percent of the spending is not directly related to containing COVID-19. Only 1 percent of the money, about $15 to $20 billion, is spent on vaccines. Meanwhile, hundreds of billions go to bailing out poorly managed state governments’ budget holes that predate the pandemic and $86 billion rescues failing pension plans. Meanwhile, billions more go to Obamacare expansion and subsidizing public schools long after the pandemic.

And that’s just scratching the surface.

The numbers here really are quite damning.

For the same $6 trillion in expenditure, the government could have given every federal taxpayer a $41,870 check. Or, to think about it a bit differently, it could have written every American roughly an $18,181 check.

Let’s compare this to what most Americans actually received.

Only someone who fully collected expanded unemployment benefits throughout the pandemic and received all $3,200 in total of the stimulus payments likely received more than $18,181 in direct benefit from this spending package. And that’s a relatively small fraction of the public.

Because of the way the government used outdated (and arbitrary) income data to determine eligibility, many more taxpayers saw nothing or little in exchange for their $41,870 share of the cost, perhaps just the initial $1,200 stimulus or none at all. (Meanwhile, billions in checks went to dead people).

So, for almost all Americans, the actual benefits of the multiple pieces of lengthy stimulus legislation come in far, far below the figure that they would have received if the entire pile of money was just even split up and sent out.

How can that possibly be considered a success? In fact, it’s actually a net negative.

Too often, the stimulus conversation is simply framed around whether we should give money to a certain group of people or program—rather than also including the trade-offs and costs.

The question isn’t just: Should we send people $1,400 “stimulus” checks? It is, instead: Should we send people $1,400 stimulus checks at the cost of taking the equivalent amount (or more if you factor in waste) from other people? It’s not just whether we should send $350 billion to state and local governments—but should we do so at the cost of taking an average of $2,442 per federal taxpayer?

Money doesn’t grow on trees. Or, as the great economist Ludwig von Mises put it, the government “does not have the powers of the mythical Santa Claus.”

“The truth is the government cannot give if it does not take from somebody,” Mises wrote in Bureaucracy. “They cannot spend except by taking out of the pockets of some people for the benefit of others.”

The government cannot create wealth out of thin air. It can only give anyone anything via three ways:

  • Directly increasing taxes, which discourages economic growth and directly takes money away from people
  • Running up debt, which means much higher taxes in the future plus interest, creating a drag on economic growth
  • Printing money, which “stealth taxes” the public via inflation

There’s no such thing as a free lunch, and, much to the chagrin of spend-happy politicians’, Santa Claus is not real. Government spending doesn’t create wealth; it only transfers wealth, generally destroying a lot of it in the process.

So, unless Americans are actually seeing equal or greater benefit from spending compared to its cost, it’s a raw deal for taxpayers. And for the federal government’s “COVID” spending binge, it’s not even close.

Don’t believe me? Well, did you see $41,870 in benefit from these programs? Or even $18,181?

For almost everyone, the honest answer is no.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Opinion Editor at the Foundation for Economic Education.

RELATED VIDEO: Dr. David Martin explains that this is not a COVID vaccine, and calling it such is a con to get people to accept it as one.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Biden Vows to Impose the PRO Act Which Threatens Freelancers and Independent Contractors Livelihood!

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

GROVER NORQUIST

Grover Norquist is president of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), a taxpayer advocacy group he founded in 1985 at President Reagan’s request. ATR works to limit the size and cost of government and opposes higher taxes at the federal, state, and local levels and supports tax reform that moves towards taxing consumed income one time at one rate.

TOPIC: Freelancers and Independent Contractors Beware: Biden Vows to Impose the PRO Act Which Threatens Your Livelihood!

MARY ANN MENDOZA

Mary Ann Mendoza is the Founder of Angelfamilies.com and Angel Moms. I as a Consultant for Webuildthewall.us and an Advisory Board Member for Woman for Trump and was also an Advisory Board Member of Donald J. Trump for President Inc. Mary Ann attended the State of the Union Address on February 4, 2020 as Congressman Andy Biggs (AZ) guest. Mary Ann has been a guest on Fox News and Fox Business channel talking about illegal immigration and sanctuary issues.

TOPIC: We Must Protect the Rule of Law and Restore Order.

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All  rights reserved.

Death Row Inmates, Murders, Convicts Get $1,400 ‘COVID’ Cash From Democrat Trillion Pork $ Package

The Democrats are the party of the enemy. The bad is rammed it down our throats. The good is criminalized.

COVID relief bill offers convicted murderers stimulus checks, Cotton slams

Inmates are included among those who receive stimulus checks, just as they were in both of the previous Covid relief bills

By Morgan Phillips | Fox News March 7, 2021:

Sen. Tom Cotton: Stimulus bill breakdown shows ‘the swamp’ is looking after itself

Sen. Tom Cotton R-Ark., dissects the coronavirus stimulus bill and how it is hurting American families while helping the Washington elite.

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., slammed the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill passed by Senate Democrats Saturday, listing off a number of convicted murderers who would receive stimulus checks under the bill.

House Democrats plan to offer their final approval of the bill Tuesday before sending it to President Biden’s desk. The bill includes $1400 stimulus checks for individuals who make less than $75,000.

Inmates are included among those who receive stimulus checks, just as they were in both of the previous Covid relief bills that offered $1,200 and $600 checks. Cotton voted for both of those bills.

Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La., Cotton and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, offered an amendment on the floor Saturday to block checks from prisoners. It failed on a party-line vote, 49-50. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., argued that prisoners’ children could be affected by withholding the money from them.

“Prisoners have all their living and medical expenses paid for by the taxpayer, they don’t pay taxes, they don’t contribute to the tax base, they can’t be unemployed. Inmates are not economically impacted by Covid,” Cassidy argued.

The IRS had tried to withhold stimulus checks from incarcerated individuals, but a court forced their hand to offer the checks in October. There was nothing written in the previous two relief bills or the one passed Saturday against inmates receiving checks.

There are approximately 1.4 million in prisons across the country.

“Dylann Roof murdered nine people. He’s on federal death row,” Cotton wrote on Twitter. “He’ll be getting a $1,400 stimulus check as part of the Democrats’ ‘COVID relief’ bill.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Democrats Just Snuck a $1 Billion Tax Hike on Workers Into Their COVID Bill

A tax expert warned that IRS penalties ‘can destroy a person’s life’ and said many gig economy workers won’t be able to afford this sudden tax hike.


When the economy is struggling to recover from a pandemic and crushing government lockdowns, that’s probably the worst time to impose $1 billion in new annual taxes on the working class. But that’s exactly what a new provision quietly slipped into the Democrats’ sweeping $1.9 trillion COVID legislation would do.

“A last-minute insert by Democrats looking to offset the cost of their coronavirus aid package would send tax collectors into the gig economy, eventually costing Uber and DoorDash drivers, Airbnb hosts and others about $1 billion annually,” Roll Call reports.

Under current tax law, earnings data for gig economy workers only needs to be reported to the IRS once it reaches $20,000. This means that small earners pursuing gig work to supplement their income aren’t hit by crushing federal taxes. However, the Democrats’ provision would nearly eliminate this benchmark, and instead require all income above $600 to be reported to the IRS.

“The stiffer tax burden would be imposed while 10 million Americans are unemployed and more and more have turned to freelance and gig economy work to make ends meet,” Roll Call notes.

Indeed it would, and this would be disastrous for both workers and the economy.

This tax hike “adds a significant burden to gig economy and small business workers at the worst possible time,” according to TechNet spokesman Steve Kidera. One tax expert warned Roll Call that many struggling gig economy workers won’t be able to pay the higher taxes, and that IRS penalties “can destroy a person’s life.”

It’s mind boggling to think that after a year of depriving workers of their incomes and strangling the economy with government lockdowns, politicians would really shoulder billions more in taxes onto working Americans’ backs. It’s even more aggravating when one realizes that this is being done to pay for a $1.9 trillion “COVID” package where at least 15 percent of the money goes to partisan spending priorities like Obamacare expansion and only 1 percent goes to COVID vaccine distribution.

If politicians really wanted to reduce the package’s price tag, they could instead start by eliminating the legislation’s countless examples of cronyism and waste. For example, Democrats could cut out the $1 billion their bill allocates for “racial justice” for farmers, the $1.5 million it spends on a bridge in New York that Chuck Schumer wants built, or the $112 million it earmarks for transit projects in California.

Instead, in a move sadly typically for Congress, our elected officials are choosing to pile $1 billion in new annual taxes on the working class rather than eliminate waste and pet projects. This kind of political malpractice and fiscal irresponsibility will continue in Washington, DC until voters finally say enough is enough.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Opinion Editor at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

BANKRUPTING AMERICA: Senate Approves $1.9 Trillion Democrat Pork Package on Party-Line Vote

Grotesque. It’s all pork — funding the coup.

Senate Approves $1.9 Trillion COVID-19 Stimulus Package on Party-Line Vote

By Allen Zhon, The Epoch Times, March 6, 2021

The Senate approved the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 stimulus package Saturday on a party-line vote.

All 50 Democrats voted for the relief bill while all Republicans but one absent voted against the bill.

The bill, also known as the American Rescue Plan or H.R. 1319, was passed by the House on Feb. 27 by a vote of 219–212, with all Republicans and two Democrats voting against it.

The Senate was able to pass the bill after several amendments. The bill will be returned to the House for reconciliation which is expected to happen early next week.

The amendments adopted by the Senate included removing the $15 minimum wage, reducing the unemployment bonus on top of the usual unemployment benefit from $400 to $300 per week, and extending the payment of extra unemployment benefit to Sept. 6.

With 50 Democrats and 50 Republicans in the Senate, Vice President Kamala Harris is supposed to break the tie if the Senate votes on a party line. However, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) left Washington on Friday to his home state for a family funeral and enabled the Senate Democrats to pass the bill without help from Harris.

The House and Senate Republicans refused to vote for the stimulus package for various reasons. Republicans said the bill is not targeted, with only nine percent spending directly related to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic, is infiltrated with leftists’ agenda, and is moved forward without nearly any input from the Republican side.

“Senate Democrats just managed to pass their bloated spending bill disguised as ‘COVID relief.’ This is the first COVID bill to be entirely partisan because it isn’t designed to help end the pandemic—it’s a blatant attempt from Dems to jam through a partisan wish list,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the Senate Republican Whip, wrote in a Twitter post after the passage of the relief bill.

“This boondoggle of a bill is a case study in the pitfalls of pure partisanship. Democrats set the record for the longest recorded vote in modern history because it wasn’t ready for primetime,” he added.

The White House appears to be satisfied with the stimulus bill as amended.

White House spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters on Friday, before the passage of the bill, that the relief bill remains ‘incredibly progressive’ despite Senate compromises.

RELATED ARTICLE: Time To Start Talking About America’s Coming Bankruptcy

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Wall Street Banks And Tech Companies Are Fleeing New York And California

They’ll destroy the red states.

Wall Street Banks And Tech Companies Are Fleeing New York And California

There is a steady exodus of businesses moving out of New York and California and the pandemic may have completely changed the way companies operate. Now that working from home has taken its hold, the trend offers CEOs options. No longer do they have to pay for expensive real estate in New York City or San Francisco. They can have people working remotely or relocate jobs to locations that are less costly.

Major cities, such as New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, have punishingly high tax rates and lack business-friendly policies. With pushes to defund the police and cutting down on prosecutions, cities have been plagued by crime, violence, looting and disorder. Government officials have demonstrated flagrant disregard for their citizens by haphazardly ordering businesses and schools to shutdown with little warnings.

The flight out of New York has been in the works before the pandemic. Wall Street executives previously relocated thousands of jobs to states outside of New York, in an effort to cut costs. Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, UBS, Citigroup, Alliance Bernstein and an array of other financial institutions have established and aggressively staffed hubs in Florida, North Carolina, Salt Lake City, Dallas, Nashville and other less expensive locations compared to New York.

A combination of high taxes, poor governance on the part of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, ever-increasing crime, capricious business and school shutdowns and a resurgence in Covid-19 cases contributed to Goldman Sachs’ recent decision to move its large money management division to Florida.

The absence of a state income tax, plus warm weather and a business-friendly mindset, has already prompted hedge fund billionaires and native New Yorkers Paul Singer and Carl Icahn to relocate their respective businesses to Florida. Leon Cooperman, the billionaire former hedge fund manager and CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, previously moved to Florida. He said of his move, “I suspect Florida will soon rival New York as a finance hub,” due in part to the “Tax and Spend” policies of New York.

A number of bankers told their boss, Ken Moelis, the CEO of his eponymous investment bank Moelis, that they wanted to leave New York City for Florida. In response to their request, Moelis replied, “We’re a talent business. I want to attract, I want to motivate and I want to retain the greatest talent in the world. And if that talent wants to do it in Florida, that’s where we’ll support them.” Moelis, according to a Bloomberg interview, will consider opening or expanding offices, as his employees decide to relocate to cities where tax rates are lower, the climate is warmer and the government is friendly to business.

Charles Gasparino, the long-time chronicler of Wall Street, wrote in the New York Post, “Many other banks and financial businesses are now seeking to move out of the once-friendly confines of New York City, which isn’t so friendly anymore.” He added, “The trend has been a slow burn over the past two decades, but now it has kicked into high gear thanks to [Covid-19], spiraling costs and a feckless political class that runs this city and state.” Gaparino said about JPMorgan’s CEO, “[Jamie] Dimon, I am told, vetoed a plan several years back to move a swath of the bank to south Florida because he didn’t think the schools were good enough. Now, he appears to have changed his mind and is considering plenty of relocations outside New York City.”

It’s not just Wall Street firms. While the banks are primarily relocating to Florida and other Southeast locations, tech companies are going to Texas.

Elon Musk, having battled officials in California, said that he’s moving to Texas. Musk told the Wall Street Journal, “For myself, yes, I have moved to Texas.” He continued, “We’ve got the Starship development here in South Texas where I am right now. We’ve got big factory developments just outside of Austin for Giga Texas as well.”

The New York Times reported, “California, with its steep housing costs, raging wildfires and strict business regulations, has been losing residents to other states, with Texas as the most popular exodus destination. Of more than 653,000 people who left California last year, about 82,000 went to Texas, more than any other state, according to census figures.”

Hewlett-Packard, with its cofounders as two of the original grandfathers of Silicon Valley, who started their company in a Palo Alto garage back in 1939, will relocate its headquarters from San Jose, California to Houston.

Drew Houston, the CEO of Dropbox, said the company is moving to Austin and remote work will be the new standard practice. He’ll offer “Dropbox Studios” in a number of cities for workers who want to go into an office.

Oracle, led by billionaire Larry Ellison, moved its headquarters to Austin because of California’s high tax rate, exorbitant living costs and the ability to have remote workers. The tech giant offers employees the option of either working remotely or selecting which office they’d prefer working at.

Unless city and state elected politicians make changes, the flight out of high-taxed, expensive cities will continue. As corporations and well-paid, white-collar workers leave, the cities will bear the brunt of plummeting tax revenue. The decline will force mayors to drastically cut costs. This will include massive layoffs of teachers, police officers, firefighters, garbage collectors and other municipal workers.

With less services, the cities become dirtier, crime increases and living conditions worsen. This will prompt even more people to move. A cascading downward spiral could occur, making places like New York dangerous and inhospitable. It could become just like in the dark days of New York in the ‘70s. It took over a decade to turn things back around.

— 12/14/20: It was inaccurately stated that Deutsche Bank announced it is moving its workers out of NYC, rather than that staff could conceivably work remotely or from hubs.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

U.S. Spent $787 Million On ‘Gender Equality’ Projects In Afghanistan

According to Bongino.com, “a report issued by Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction noted that even though the United States spent more than $787 million dollars on ‘gender equality projects’ in Afghanistan since 2002, ‘harmful socio-cultural norms’ kept them [from] making major progress.” There have been a lot of people around since 2002 who could have told the political elites that spending $787 million, or even $1, on “gender equality projects” in Afghanistan would be a fruitless waste of money, but they have not been heeded, and indeed have been dismissed as “Islamophobes.” And now, despite the persistence of those “harmful socio-cultural norms,” those millions are almost certainly going to continue to flow into the “graveyard of empires.”

The Bongino report noted mildly that “restrictive sociocultural norms and insecurity…continue to impede progress for Afghan women and girls.” Among these are the fact that “girls’ access to education is constrained by the lack of female teachers and infrastructure, and pressures on girls to withdraw from school at puberty”; there is “a lack of female healthcare providers”; and “gender disparity is still a persistent characteristic of the Afghan labor force.”

Well, yeah. Anyone with a modicum of sense could have predicted all that back in 2002, when the payments first started being made, and long before that as well. Yet it’s likely that no one who allocated or spent this money had any idea why women are discriminated against in Afghanistan, and why these “harmful socio-cultural norms” kept them from making major progress.

They have no clue about this because it’s all about Islam. All too many on the side of freedom become as politically correct as any leftist when it comes to Islam, jihad, and Sharia.

The grim reality that the Washington “experts” on Afghanistan don’t realize or don’t want to face is that the Qur’an teaches that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” (4:34)

Muhammad’s child bride, Aisha, says in a hadith that Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?’” (Sahih Muslim 2127)

There is a great deal more of this. The Qur’an declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man: “Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as you choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her.” (2:282)

Another hadith has Muhammad extrapolating from this that women are mentally deficient:

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) went out to the musalla (prayer place) on the day of Eid al-Adha or Eid al-Fitr. He passed by the women and said, “O women! Give charity, for I have seen that you form the majority of the people of Hell.” They asked, “Why is that, O Messenger of Allah?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religious commitment than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Messenger of Allah, what is deficient in our intelligence and religious commitment?” He said, “Is not the testimony of two women equal to the testimony of one man?” They said, “Yes.” He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Is it not true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women said, “Yes.” He said, “This is the deficiency in her religious commitment.” (Sahih Bukhari 304)

The Qur’an also allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: “If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly, then only one, or one that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.” (Qur’an 4:3)

It rules that a son’s inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: “Allah directs you as regards your children’s inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of two females” (Qur’an 4:11)

It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures “shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated.” (Qur’an 65:4)

There is also a suggestion that there is something unclean about women. Islamic law stipulates that a man’s prayer is annulled if a dog or a woman passes in front of him as he is praying. “Narrated ‘Aisha: The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, ‘Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people).’ I said, ‘You have made us (i.e. women) dogs.’ I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away. for I disliked to face him.” (Sahih Bukhari 1.9.490)

Another hadith depicts Muhammad saying that the majority of the inhabitants of hell are women: “I looked into Paradise and I saw that the majority of its people were the poor. And I looked into Hell and I saw that the majority of its people are women.” (Sahih Bukhari 3241; Sahih Muslim 2737)

When asked about this, he explained: “‘I was shown Hell and I have never seen anything more terrifying than it. And I saw that the majority of its people are women.’ They said, ‘Why, O Messenger of Allah?’ He said, ‘Because of their ingratitude (kufr).’ It was said, ‘Are they ungrateful to Allah?’ He said, ‘They are ungrateful to their companions (husbands) and ungrateful for good treatment. If you are kind to one of them for a lifetime then she sees one (undesirable) thing in you, she will say, ‘I have never had anything good from you.’” (Sahih Bukhari 1052)

There is a great deal more in this vein, but the point should be clear: Those Washington wonks who sent $787,000,000 in American taxpayer money to Afghanistan for “gender equality” projects should have known all this, and realized that their schemes were foredoomed to failure. They didn’t know all this. They should have been fired. Instead, Biden’s handlers are likely to give them promotions.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Facebook bows to Turkey’s demands to block one of its military opponents

India: Muslim arrested for spitting on food while serving as cook at Hindu wedding

Nigeria: Muslims murder at least 10 people with rocket-propelled grenades

Media Blames Hindus for Rebuilding Temple Muslims Demolished and Replaced with a Mosque

Nigeria: Muslims disguised as government security forces abduct over 300 schoolgirls

South Korea to release $7 billion in frozen assets to Iran after consulting with Biden’s handlers

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

SICK: Wuhan Lab Eligible To Receive U.S. Taxpayer Funding Through 2024

Rewarding the CCP for the overthrow of “We the People” using Chinese bio-weaponry developed in Wuhan.

Wuhan Lab Eligible To Receive US Taxpayer Funding Through 2024

  • The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is authorized to receive taxpayer funding for animal research through January 2024, according to the National Institute of Health.
  • The WIV received $600,000 in taxpayer funds between 2014 and 2019 through the nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance to study bat-based coronaviruses. 
  • The president of EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, was the sole U.S. member in the World Health Organization delegation that investigated the origins of COVID-19 in China.
  • Daszak said the White House should blindly accept the WHO’s determination that it’s highly unlikely that COVID-19 could have unintentionally leaked from the WIV.

By: Daily Caller Foundation, February 21, 2021:

The Wuhan Institute of Virology is authorized to receive taxpayer funding for animal research until January 2024, the National Institute of Health told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The WIV is at the center of widespread speculation that COVID-19 could have entered the human population in China due to an accidental lab leak. Researchers at the lab were studying bat-based coronaviruses prior to the outbreak, a project partially backed by $600,000 in U.S. taxpayer funds routed to the lab through the nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance.

The president of EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, was the sole U.S. member of the World Health Organization delegation that investigated the origins of the pandemic on the ground in China in January and February. While the WHO delegation has yet to release a report on their findings, Daszak said the White House should blindly accept their conclusion that it’s highly unlikely the virus could have leaked from the WIV.

Daszak also said American intelligence, which indicates researchers at the WIV became infected with COVID-like symptoms before the first known cases in December 2019, shouldn’t be trusted.

EcoHealth Alliance’s work researching bat-based coronaviruses in China was funded by a $3.7 million grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in 2014, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The grant was terminated by the National Institutes of Health in April amid criticism over EcoHealth Alliance’s relationship with the WIV. The NIH said in a letter the nonprofit’s work in China did not align with “program goals and agency priorities.”

The NIH told EcoHealth Alliance in July it would restore the grant if it met certain conditions, one of which was to arrange for an independent team to investigate the WIV to determine if it had possession of the SARS-COV-2 virus prior to the first known cases in December 2019.

Daszak told NPR that the NIH’s conditions were “preposterous.”

“I’m not trained as a private detective,” Daszak said. “It’s not really my job to do that.” (RELATED: US Scientist With Close Ties To Wuhan Lab Discussed Manipulating Bat-Based Coronaviruses Just Weeks Before Outbreak)

However, the WIV still has an active Foreign Assurance on file with the NIH Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, which enables it to continue receiving taxpayer funds to engage in animal research, according to the NIH Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare.

A NIH spokeswoman told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the WIV’s Foreign Assurance was approved on Jan. 9, 2019, and is currently set to expire on Jan. 31, 2024.

The spokeswoman did not confirm whether the WIV is currently receiving direct or indirect taxpayer funding for research activities involving animals. EcoHealth Alliance’s last known subgrant to the WIV was in May 2019, according to USASpending.Gov.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Enemedia Silence After Beijing ☭ Biden Removes Petitioning From White House Website

Totalitarian left crushing the voice of the people.

Media Silence After Biden Removes Petitioning From White House Website

By Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge, Feb 16, 2021:

It appears that the ‘We the People’ petition system has been taken off the White House website. Here is an archive of what it looked like before Biden took office.

The system has been around for many years. At any given time, hundreds of petitions were active. If you get 100,000 signatures, the White House is supposed to give an answer. You may remember that there was an active “Free Assange” petition that the Obama Administration was obligated to answer (and gave a bad answer).

Now it appears the Biden White House has removed it. The website used to be here:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov

This URL, as well as URLs for all currently-active petitions, just forward to the White House front page. I explored the website and could not find any mention of it. The link used to appear in both the “Contact” and “Get Involved” links, but it is gone from both.

I have seen nothing about this in the media. When I Google “White House Petition System Down” and other similar searches, I only get 4-year-old articles about the time that Trump temporarily disabled it.

Wikipedia says that the system was taken down the day Biden took office: On January 20 2021, the day the Inauguration of Joe Biden took place, the website’s address started redirecting to the White House’s website home address.

This is a terrible event, and it must be publicized, and Biden must be made to reverse this decision

EDITOR NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

CARES Act Coronavirus Relief Went to CAIR, Bail Fund for Criminals

The text of the CARES Act states that it was implemented to “provide emergency assistance and health care response for individuals, families, and businesses affected by the 2020 coronavirus pandemic.”

As Jason Rantz documents, Washington illegally imposed a racial test on recipients. Federal aid should really be conditioned on non-discriminatory application.

…to qualify to the Washington Equity Relief Fund, a group of “reviewers” made sure the nonprofits were “led by and serving Black, Indigenous and people of color.”…

A group of over 100 peer reviewers discussed and scored applications before doling out funding, in collaboration with the Department of Commerce.

The reviewers were “prioritized” on the basis of their race. About 95% identified as a racial minority and 77% experienced poverty. Ironically, the Department of Commerce had the reviewers, who were excluding nonprofits run by white people due to perceived privilege, go through compulsory “anti-bias” training.

Consider all of this to essentially be funding for Democrat organizers and campaign operations at taxpayer expense. That’s the case with much of the “community” non-profit sector that’s funded by city, state and federal funds.

But it gets worse.

Collective Justice, part of the Public Defenders Association, is a partisan, social justice group. It actively lobbies light-on-crime policies and is now being propped up by federal tax dollars.

The nonprofit is currently asking supporters to back a Democrat-sponsored bill forcing courts to ignore the juvenile crimes of adult defendants in sentencing. It received $25,000 in federal tax dollars through the state.

Also receiving funds: the Council on Islamic American Relations of Washington (CAIR-WA). It frequently engages in partisan political activism and has fundraised locally for anti-Semitic congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN).

The Bail Project Spokane received $50,000 from the fund. The nonprofit is part of the national group, which opposes cash bail. It has been responsible for paying the bail for criminals who commit high-profile crimes after release.

The more money the government spends, the worse things get. That’s a solid rule. And the coronavirus turned into a pretext for funding some of the worst of the worst. This is not how politicians sold the CARES Act, but it’s how Democrats implemented it.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pakistan’s Khan Enraged That ‘West Associated Islam with Terrorism’

New Zealand PM accuses Australia of abdicating its responsibility by canceling citizenship of Muslima tied to ISIS

Gambia: Muslim cleric condemns ban on female on genital mutilation, ‘let’s follow the teachings of Islam’

Germany: Muslim known to police for years stabs man to death out of ‘hatred of homosexuals’

Malta: Man who converted to Christianity from Islam is living in terror after Muslim stabs him for apostasy

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Biden’s proposed gas tax will destroy trucking industry

A trucking company owner said the Biden administration’s plan to hike fuel tax could destroy the industry. One America America News Network’s Caitlin Sinclair has more.

©One America News Network. All rights reserved.

Biden’s New Plans to Boost Refugee Numbers. Wants 62,500 by September 30th!

The extremely unpopular 125,000 number, he now says, is for FY 2022 that begins on October 1, 2021.

However, he wants 62,500 immediately!

He must consult with Congress, but that is pro forma because they can’t stop him (nor would they!) under the Refugee Act of 1980.

See my post at RRW the other day (below).

For the time being I will mention important refugee news here as so few people are reading RRW (I lost thousands of readers when I was deplatformed there), and I think most people must believe that Trump took care of the issue.  He slowed the flow for a few years, but left the program completely intact.

All it needs now is a fresh infusion of your money, your tax dollars!

Your fight is going to be a local one!

The only thing you can do is to look out for your own communities and fight the plans to place more impoverished people in your towns and cities. How do you do that?  I have ideas from past experience.  If you are really interested ask me by commenting to this post and I’ll see how much interest there is in a tutorial of sorts.

(See maps here for present resettlement sites in the US.)

Most of your governors are too weak, too chicken and in the pockets of big business, so they won’t stand up to the Dems who run Washington.

You need to know this information.  It is going to happen more quickly than I had envisioned.  In less than 8 months—62,500!  And during the Chinese virus crisis to boot!

I am guessing this move is to get the federal money flowing to the contractors*** in anticipation of the largest number of clients (they do refer to them as clients!) they could see in over 4 years. 

From the AP at the Baltimore Sun:

Biden wants to raise refugee admissions to 62,500, quadrupling Trump’s record-low limit

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden wants to raise refugee admissions to 62,500 for the current budget year, overriding former President Donald Trump’s record-low limit of 15,000, a U.S. official and others said Thursday.

The official and others with knowledge of the plans spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

Trump set the ceiling on refugee admissions in October when the 2021 budget year started, and it runs until September 30. Biden’s proposal of 62,500 would replace that, and the president has already announced plans to raise admissions to twice that amount in 2022.

Biden plans to top anything St. Obama ever did in terms of refugee resettlement! 125,000 would do it!  Would be the highest number in nearly 3 decades.

Biden is said to have wanted to raise refugee admissions immediately but not set the target as high as 125,000 people because that would be unrealistic to reach this year with the coronavirus pandemic and the work needed to rebuild the refugee program that had been largely dismantled by the Trump administration.

Biden by law must submit his proposal to Congress and consult with lawmakers before making a presidential determination. The U.S. State Department confirmed that it sent the president’s report to Congress, starting that process.

Putting Refugees before the well-being of suffering Americans!

***For those of you new to Refugee Resettlement, these are the nine federal refugee contractors who worked to put Biden and Harris in the White House and are lobbying for millions of illegal aliens to be transformed into legal voting citizens, as well as raising the refugee admissions ceiling from 15,000 this year to 125,000.

They are largely paid by you, the taxpayer, for their work of changing America by changing the people, and in so doing, are putting Americans last!

RELATED ARTICLE: Webinar: Experts Say “Biden Effect” Threatens New Migrant Crisis

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.