(CNS News) The federal government collected a record $3,586,456,000,000 in total taxes through first eleven months of fiscal 2021 (September through August), according to the Monthly Treasury Statement.
The federal government also collected a record $1,829,589,000,000 in individual income taxes in the September-through-August period.
However, because the federal government also spent $6,297,090,000,000, the Treasury still ran a deficit of $2,710,635,000,000.
When the September-through-August spending numbers for prior fiscal years are adjusted for inflation into July 2021 dollars (the latest month the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator will adjust them to), this September-through-August spending was the second highest ever.
The $6,358,959,120,000 (in constant July 2021 dollars) that the federal government spent in the September-through August period last year remains the highest ever.
Before this year, the most total tax money the federal government ever collected in the first eleven months of the fiscal year was in fiscal 2015, when it collected $3,302,908,320,000 (in constant July 2021 dollars).
Also before this year, the most individual income tax money the federal government ever collected was in fiscal 2018, when it collected $1,647,451,720,000 (in constant July 2021 dollars).
In addition to collecting a record $1,829,589,000,000 in individual income taxes in the September-through-August period, the Treasury also collected $285,119,000,000 in corporation income taxes; $1,190,606,000,000 in social insurance and retirement taxes; $64,648,000,000 in excise taxes; $24,708,000,000 in estate and gift taxes; $72,128,000,000 in customs duties; and $119,660,000 in miscellaneous receipts.
On the spending side, the federal government spent the most money through the Department of Health and Human Services, which has $1,340,131,000,000 in expenditures in September through August.
The Social Security Administration placed second, spending $1,092,771,000,000.
The Department of Defense—Military Programs spent $653,852,000,000 or less than half of the $1,340,131,000,000 spent by HHS.The business and economic reporting of CNSNews.com is funded in part with a gift made in memory of Dr. Keith C. Wold.
Tucker Carlson warned Monday that vaccine mandates are “about power,” adding that “these demands are so obviously irrational, that forcing you to accept them without complaint is the whole point of the exercise.”
In another impassioned monologue, Carlson note that “it is a form of sadomasochism, it is dominance and submission. It’s about power. If they can make you take medicine you don’t want or need, they’ve won. You are theirs. You belong to them. They want this.”
Carlson stated that “vaccines — which are far less effective than we were told they were initially, potentially dangerous for some, and completely unnecessary for tens of millions of others — are now, nevertheless, mandatory for virtually everyone in America.”
He continued, “So why is that? Why exactly is that the policy? In his speech to the country last week, Joe Biden didn’t bother to explain why. Explanations are not necessary at this point. Your consent is no longer required.”
Labelling Biden’s address on the mandate last week “the most divisive speech ever given by a modern American president,” Carlson noted that the central point Biden hammered home was that “your fellow Americans are dangerous to you. They could kill you. And that includes your family.”
“If they can force you to take a vaccine that you don’t need, what can’t they do?” Carlson asked, adding “why don’t they, I don’t know, make you take psychiatric drugs if you’re persistently disobedient? Express the wrong view, get a Thorazine shot. Why couldn’t they do that? What’s the limiting principle on them?”
The host added “you can imagine a panel of CNN doctors explaining that we’d all be a lot safer if the mentally ill propagandists on the radical right got the treatment they need, and stopped spreading their dangerous conspiracy theories. So giving them psychotropic meds is an urgent matter of public health. Does that sound far-fetched?”
Inflation continued to surge in August, but appeared to settle at nearly the fastest pace in almost 13 years as the economy continues to emerge from the pandemic, the feds said Tuesday.
The Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index, which measures a basket of goods and services as well as energy and food costs, jumped 5.3 percent in August from a year earlier.
Consumer prices rose 0.3 percent from July, the Labor Department said.
Economists surveyed by Dow Jones expected a 5.4 percent year-over-year spike in August and monthly increase of 0.4 percent.
The core consumer price index, which excludes volatile food and energy costs, rose 4 percent from a year ago, lower than the 4.3 percent year-over-year jump that the index saw in July.
August’s month-over-month increase in the core CPI was the smallest jump since February.
Much of the price increases this summer have been from sectors that were hit particularly hard by the pandemic and have since snapped back to high demand, such as used car prices, airfares and fuel costs.
Volatility in prices of those goods have been central to the Federal Reserve’s argument that the recent flare-up in inflation is temporary and not a reason to taper the government’s bond-buying program that’s been a boon to the stock market.
The index for airline fares fell sharply, decreasing 9.1 percent over the month. The index for used cars and trucks declined 1.5 percent in August, ending a series of five consecutive monthly increases, but those prices are still 31.9 percent higher than 12 months ago.
The cost of food continued to rise, but slowed somewhat compared with recent months, the feds said. The food index increased 0.4 percent in August from July, with the index for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs up 0.7 percent over the month and the beef index up 1.7 percent.
“The indexes for gasoline, household furnishings and operations, food, and shelter all rose in August,” the Bureau of Labor Statistics added in a press release.
Stock futures rallied on the data ahead of the market open as the new numbers suggest inflation may be easing and Fed officials may have been right about the price spikes being temporary.
But as Fed officials urge patience, corporate executives have been warning that they’re going to have to hike prices through the remainder of the year as they try to eke out a profit amid spiking shipping and labor costs.
Executives of major toymakers, retailers, grocery chains and consumer-goods conglomerates have all warned of surging prices.
In a paper published in the Lancet, experts warned there could be risks to boosters if they are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects.
Current evidence on COVID vaccines does not appear to support a need for booster shots in the general public right now, according to an international team of vaccine scientists, including some from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the World Health Organization (WHO).
“Current evidence does not, therefore, appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high,” Marion Gruber and Phil Krause, two senior FDA vaccine leaders, wrote in an opinion piece published Monday in the Lancet.
The scientists said the benefits of COVID vaccination outweigh the risks, but there could be risks to boosters if they are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, “especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines).”
“If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate,” the scientists wrote.
The scientists said COVID vaccines continue to be effective against severe disease, including that caused by the Delta variant — but most of the observational studies on which that conclusion is based are preliminary and difficult to interpret due to potential confounding and selective reporting, they said.
As The Defender reported last month, studies by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed COVID vaccine effectiveness against infection has decreased over time, and is less effective in combating the Delta variant.
Gruber and Krause emphasized “careful and public scrutiny of evolving data will be needed to assure boosting is informed by reliable science more than politics.”
The team wrote:
“The message that boosting might soon be needed, if not justified by robust data and analysis, could adversely affect confidence in vaccines and undermine messaging about the value of primary vaccination. Public health authorities should also carefully consider the consequences for primary vaccination campaigns of endorsing boosters only for selected vaccines.
“Booster programmes that affect some but not all vaccinees may be difficult to implement — so it will be important to base recommendations on complete data about all vaccines available in a country, to consider the logistics of vaccination, and to develop clear public health messaging before boosting is widely recommended.”
The scientists noted boosting may be appropriate for some individuals where a one- or two-dose vaccine did not provide adequate protection — such as immunocompromised people — although they noted people who did not respond robustly to a primary vaccination, may also not respond well to a booster.
Both the FDA and CDC have already signed off on allowing third doses for immunocompromised people. But experts are divided on whether boosters are necessary for the general population.
The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee will meet Friday to discuss Pfizer and BioNTech’s application to administer their COVID vaccine as a third dose, or “booster” shot, to people ages 16 and older.
The scientists also echoed the views of the WHO in arguing current vaccines could “save more lives” if they are used in people who are not yet vaccinated rather than for boosters.
The WHO last week called for a moratorium on boosters in wealthy nations until at least the end of the year.
In a statement to CNN on Monday, an FDA spokesperson said the new opinion paper does not reflect the views of the FDA:
“As noted in the article, the views of the authors do not represent the views of the agency. We are in the middle of a deliberative process of reviewing Pfizer’s booster shot supplemental approval submission, and FDA as a matter of practice does not comment on pending matters before the agency. We look forward to a robust and transparent discussion on Friday about that application.”
As The Defender reported Sept. 1, Gruber and Krause announced they will leave the FDA this fall, raising questions about the Biden administration and the way it sidelined the agency.
Two of FDA top vaccine regulators will leave the agency this fall, because they don’t believe there is data to support the Biden administration’s push to offer COVID booster shots later this month.https://t.co/eAynNSpeuJ
Gruber and Krause were upset that the Biden administration announced adults should get a booster eight months after they received a second dose — prior to boosters undergoing review or receiving approval by the FDA.
Neither Gruber or Krause believed there was enough data to justify offering booster shots yet, sources said, and both viewed the announcement, amplified by President Biden, as pressure on the FDA to quickly authorize them.
As The Defender reported earlier this month, the Biden administration announced a plan to begin offering a third booster dose to people who already received two doses of an mRNA vaccine beginning the week of Sept. 20.
U.S. health regulators have said there isn’t enough data to recommend booster doses for the general population.
Still, the White House has moved forward with its plan to make Americans eligible for a third dose of either Pfizer or Moderna’s vaccines eight months after the date of their second injection, even though that plan requires authorization from the FDA and CDC first.
Majority support efforts of Governors to stop him.
A new poll finds that almost 60 per cent of Americans don’t believe that Joe Biden has the constitutional authority to enforce federal vaccine mandates.
Last week, the administration announced that it would mandate the vaccine via the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, meaning employers with over 100 workers would have to force staff to get the vaccine or face massive fines.
This set off a massive backlash, with many Governors across the country vowing to fight the mandate via the courts.
According to a new survey by the Trafalgar Group, they will have the support of a majority of Americans.
The poll results find: “58.6% of voters do not believe President Biden has the constitutional authority to force private businesses to require vaccine mandates for employees, while 29.7% believe he does have the authority, and 11.7% aren’t sure.”
Amongst Republicans, only 10.7% believe Biden has the legal authority, while 83.5% do not believe he has the power.
Even amongst Democrats, a relatively slim majority of 54.9% believe Biden has the authority.
A majority of 56.1% also support the efforts of state governors to oppose Biden’s nationwide vaccine mandate on private businesses.
“This particular poll comes at a crucial time when the fake media are releasing fake polls to gaslight the public into believing Biden’s fascist mandates are popular,” writes John Nolte.
“Well, all anyone needs to remember is that Trafalgar gets it right, and corrupt media outlets, like the AP and CNNLOL, deliberately juice their polls to get the outcomes they want.”
As we highlighted yesterday, more COVID measures are expected to be announced this week, so expect such resistance to harden even further.
Democrat President Joe Biden officially pulled his nomination of David Chipman to be the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) on Monday after failing to gain enough support among Democrats to confirm him to the position.
Chipman held a variety of fringe views, including suggesting that he does not believe that the Secret Service needed to use guns, supporting banning semi-automatic rifles, telling first-time gun owners only to use their firearms “if the zombies start to appear,” stating that he was open to the idea of allowing some convicted felons have their gun rights restored, and using dubious claims about the Waco siege to push for gun control.
Chipman was also accused of being racist towards black ATF agents, allegedly stating that they could not have passed an exam to become an Assistant Special Agent in Charge without cheating, and allegedly hiding statements from lawmakers.
The administration had indicated last week that they would pull Chipman’s nomination after Chipman failed to garner enough support from Democrats to lead the ATF.
In May, numerous House lawmakers wrote a letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell opposing Chipman’s nomination, saying that Chipman’s “beliefs and hostile attitude toward the rights of gun owners are well known.”
“Throughout his career, David Chipman has made it no secret that he is an enemy of the 2nd Amendment,” the letter said. “In October 2018, Chipman argued in favor of subjecting all AR-15s and potentially all semi-automatic rifles to regulation under the National Firearms Act. As a former agent of the ATF, Chipman knows all too well that such action would effectively ban the most popular rifle in America as well as most other items regulated under the National Firearms Act.”
“Legal firearm ownership and integrity go hand-in-hand, and President Biden should not nominate anyone to lead the ATF who has repeatedly lied to further their own gun control agenda,” the letter continued. “As recently as 2019, Chipman was trying to mislead the public on the basic facts of firearm ownership. When discussing firearm suppressors, he claimed, ‘The gun does not sound gun-like. It takes the edge out of the tone … this is how I would describe it: It makes a gun sort of sound like a nail gun.’ This is widely known to be false.”
“When participating in an online ‘ask me anything’ forum discussion, Chipman published historical falsehoods to empower his advocacy for gun control,” the letter continued. “For instance, he stated, ‘At Waco, cult members used two .50 caliber Barretts to shoot down two Texas Air National Guard helicopters. Point, it is true we are fortunate they are not used in crime more often. The victims of drug lords in Mexico are not so lucky. America plays a role in fueling the violence south of the border.’ Needless to say, no helicopters were shot down at Waco. On the other hand, the Waco operation-in which Chipman had a role-resulted in the deaths of at least 76 people, including 25 children.”
The letter concluded by saying that Chipman was jeopardizing American’s constitutional rights and could possibly “reshape the landscape” of firearm ownership for generations, adding that he would “use every tool at his disposal to attack American gun owners.”
Conservative author and podcaster Dave Rubin sees President Joe Biden’s vaccination mandate as a “massive threat” to religious freedoms in the United States.
“It’s a massive threat and it’s an absolute assault on the Constitution of the United States of America,” Rubin told Faithwire during a phone interview Monday afternoon. “I think what we’ve learned in the last two years is they’re gonna just keep taking and taking and taking and taking until enough people say, ‘You cannot take anymore,’ and maybe it’ll be the faith community, which is under assault in a million different ways.”
”Maybe it’ll be the faith community that’ll finally say, ‘Enough is enough,’” he added.
Rubin’s comments come just days after Biden announced his administration is mandating all U.S.-based companies employing 100 people or more to insure all their workers are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or submit to weekly testing. And just one day ahead of the president’s announcement, United Airlines announced it will be placing staffers previously granted religious exemptions from the inoculation on indefinite unpaid leave.
Companies like United are, in Rubin’s view, essentially firing their workers who have sincere religious reasons to forgo vaccination against the coronavirus.
“[They’re saying] your exemption due to your faith doesn’t count in this case for a disease that has a 99.9% recovery rate, especially if you’re otherwise healthy,” Rubin said.
He went on to note people need to “stand up” to these kinds of policies because Americans cannot survive on indefinite unpaid leave.
Rubin has been warning about the possibility of a federal vaccination mandate for quite some time. In fact, in late July, Rubin was censored by Twitter for writing, in part, that those on the left “want a federal vaccine mandate for vaccines which are clearly not working as promised just weeks ago,” a comment he made in reference to reports suggesting even those fully vaccinated against COVID-19 are capable of spreading the virus.
“We’ve seen this time and time again,” Rubin said of his tweet, which has since been proven accurate. “Yesterday’s conspiracy theorists are today’s truth tellers. It was fairly obvious to me … that the federal vaccine mandate was coming. They had been hinting at it and the implication that it wasn’t coming seemed ridiculous to me.”
There have been concerns about threats to religious liberty ever since the beginning of the pandemic. In November of last year, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito argued the health crisis “has resulted in previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty,” adding, “It pains me to say this, but, in certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right.”
California has been among the most restrictive states in the U.S., when it comes to pandemic regulations, which has, in part, led to the recall vote against Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), who routinely flouted the draconian measures he put in place.
Rubin, who voted “yes” on the recall effort and is supporting leading Republican candidate Larry Elder, said there is “unbelievable excitement” on the ground in California.
“That being said, the big question is can we trust the machines here in California to give us an honest count of the vote?” he said. “And I’m very worried about that, and I think, basically, everybody is.”
Some crazy stuff happening with LA voting. At my polling place a staffer told one of my employees that the electronic machines don’t count votes, just register that you voted. The staff count themselves. Are there cameras? Any system to verify and match? pic.twitter.com/J4c9p3OtLB
“There’s a shake in the faith in the system — there’s a crack in that system right now,” he continued. “And we need that faith, because the whole thing is based on the belief that this system is fair and ‘one person, one vote.’ I believe there’s a tremendous amount of support for Larry in the recall. That being said, there are a tremendous amount of Democrats in the state. But the fact that they’ve sent out [former President Barack] Obama doing an ad, and Biden showing up today and [Vice President] Kamala Harris last week — the entire Democratic machine is here to save Gavin Newsom, who nobody likes.”
The state’s recall election ends Tuesday, Sept. 14.
Science Doesn’t Support Third Shot, Say Officials Who Left FDA in Spat With Biden Over Boosters
In a paper published in the Lancet, experts warned there could be risks to boosters if they are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects.
Current evidence on COVID vaccines does not appear to support a need for booster shots in the general public right now, according to an international team of vaccine scientists, including some from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the World Health Organization (WHO).
“Current evidence does not, therefore, appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high,” Marion Gruber and Phil Krause, two senior FDA vaccine leaders, wrote in an opinion piece published Monday in the Lancet.
The scientists said the benefits of COVID vaccination outweigh the risks, but there could be risks to boosters if they are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, “especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines).”
“If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, widespread boosting should be undertaken only if there is clear evidence that it is appropriate,” the scientists wrote.
The scientists said COVID vaccines continue to be effective against severe disease, including that caused by the Delta variant — but most of the observational studies on which that conclusion is based are preliminary and difficult to interpret due to potential confounding and selective reporting, they said.
As The Defender reported last month, studies by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed COVID vaccine effectiveness against infection has decreased over time, and is less effective in combating the Delta variant.
Gruber and Krause emphasized “careful and public scrutiny of evolving data will be needed to assure boosting is informed by reliable science more than politics.”
The team wrote:
“The message that boosting might soon be needed, if not justified by robust data and analysis, could adversely affect confidence in vaccines and undermine messaging about the value of primary vaccination. Public health authorities should also carefully consider the consequences for primary vaccination campaigns of endorsing boosters only for selected vaccines.
“Booster programmes that affect some but not all vaccinees may be difficult to implement — so it will be important to base recommendations on complete data about all vaccines available in a country, to consider the logistics of vaccination, and to develop clear public health messaging before boosting is widely recommended.”
The scientists noted boosting may be appropriate for some individuals where a one- or two-dose vaccine did not provide adequate protection — such as immunocompromised people — although they noted people who did not respond robustly to a primary vaccination, may also not respond well to a booster.
Both the FDA and CDC have already signed off on allowing third doses for immunocompromised people. But experts are divided on whether boosters are necessary for the general population.
The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee will meet Friday to discuss Pfizer and BioNTech’s application to administer their COVID vaccine as a third dose, or “booster” shot, to people ages 16 and older.
The scientists also echoed the views of the WHO in arguing current vaccines could “save more lives” if they are used in people who are not yet vaccinated rather than for boosters.
The WHO last week called for a moratorium on boosters in wealthy nations until at least the end of the year.
In a statement to CNN on Monday, an FDA spokesperson said the new opinion paper does not reflect the views of the FDA:
“As noted in the article, the views of the authors do not represent the views of the agency. We are in the middle of a deliberative process of reviewing Pfizer’s booster shot supplemental approval submission, and FDA as a matter of practice does not comment on pending matters before the agency. We look forward to a robust and transparent discussion on Friday about that application.”
As The Defender reported Sept. 1, Gruber and Krause announced they will leave the FDA this fall, raising questions about the Biden administration and the way it sidelined the agency.
Gruber and Krause were upset that the Biden administration announced adults should get a booster eight months after they received a second dose — prior to boosters undergoing review or receiving approval by the FDA.
Neither Gruber or Krause believed there was enough data to justify offering booster shots yet, sources said, and both viewed the announcement, amplified by President Biden, as pressure on the FDA to quickly authorize them.
As The Defender reported earlier this month, the Biden administration announced a plan to begin offering a third booster dose to people who already received two doses of an mRNA vaccine beginning the week of Sept. 20.
U.S. health regulators have said there isn’t enough data to recommend booster doses for the general population.
Still, the White House has moved forward with its plan to make Americans eligible for a third dose of either Pfizer or Moderna’s vaccines eight months after the date of their second injection, even though that plan requires authorization from the FDA and CDC first.