Counter intuitive and has nothing to do with Lindsay Lohan so don’t expect to hear much about the inverse relationship between wages and tax cuts – Americans’ Incomes Sank After Bush Tax Cuts
That latest indictment of the reckless Bush tax giveaway to the rich comes from tax expert David Cay Johnston. Just days after the Census Bureau reported a jump in poverty during even before the start of the December 2007 Bush recession, Johnston reported, “Total income was $2.74 trillion less during the eight Bush years than if incomes had stayed at 2000 levels.”
After asking, “So how did the tax cuts work out?” Johnston paints a grim picture of economic failure:
Even if we limit the analysis by starting in 2003, when the dividend and capital gains tax cuts began, through the peak year of 2007, the result is still less income than at the 2000 level. Total income was down $951 billion during those four years.
Average incomes fell. Average taxpayer income was down $3,512, or 5.7 percent, in 2008 compared with 2000, President Bush’s own benchmark year for his promises of prosperity through tax cuts.
Had incomes stayed at 2000 levels, the average taxpayer would have earned almost $21,000 more over those eight years. That’s almost $50 per week.
And to be sure, the Bush tax cuts which have already drained the Treasury of $2.3 trillion were a major contributor to the record U.S. income gap…
A handy chart at the link makes it easier to see the middle-class paid for their share of the tax cuts with a cut in wages. There were/are also the delayed costs of a crumbling infrastructure, the interests on the national debt and the further erosion of our educational system – the cornerstone to having a middle-class.
Flowering plants produce nectar to attract insect pollinators. Some plant species, such as the Lima bean, also secrete nectar from so-called extrafloral nectaries to attract ants which in turn fend off herbivores. Scientists in the Max Planck Institute in Jena, Germany, have discovered that the production of extrafloral nectar is light dependent. Using a special photoreceptor, the phytochrome, scientists have shown that the plants are able not only to distinguish between day and night, but also to adapt their nectar secretion to current light conditions. The phytochrome probably influences the
regulation of a special enzyme that binds the plant hormone jasmonic acid (JA) to the amino acid isoleucine (Ile). The emerging JA-Ile molecule affects the secretion of extrafloral nectar in such a way that the plant’s defense against herbivores is most effective whenever herbivory is most likely – or, more precisely, during the day.
Since plants don’t have brains the plants are using something other than what we think of as conscience thought to figure out the difference between light and dark, and light conditions which are in between. That would seem to be a kind of thinking going on at the gene level or by proteins produced by genes. Programming would probably be a better adjective than thinking, but even so at some point in their evolution plants had to figure out how devise a survival strategy or program so their genes would be passed on.