#Taxes & Reforms:

[batboyblog]

Things the Biden-Harris Administration Did This Week #28

July 19-26 2024

The EPA announced the award of $4.3 billion in Climate Pollution Reduction Grants. The grants support community-driven solutions to fight climate change, and accelerate America’s clean energy transition. The grants will go to 25 projects across 30 states, and one tribal community. When combined the projects will reduce greenhouse gas pollution by as much as 971 million metric tons of CO2, roughly the output of 5 million American homes over 25 years. Major projects include $396 million for Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection as it tries to curb greenhouse gas emissions from industrial production, and $500 million for transportation and freight decarbonization at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

The Biden-Harris Administration announced a plan to phase out the federal government's use of single use plastics. The plan calls for the federal government to stop using single use plastics in food service operations, events, and packaging by 2027, and from all federal operations by 2035. The US government is the single largest employer in the country and the world’s largest purchaser of goods and services. Its move away from plastics will redefine the global market.

The White House hosted a summit on super pollutants with the goals of better measuring them and dramatically reducing them. Roughly half of today's climate change is caused by so called super pollutants, methane, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Public-private partnerships between NOAA and United Airlines, The State Department and NASA, and the non-profit Carbon Mapper Coalition will all help collect important data on these pollutants. While private firms announced with the White House plans that by early next year will reduce overall U.S. industrial emissions of nitrous oxide by over 50% from 2020 numbers. The summit also highlighted the EPA's new rule to reduce methane from oil and gas by 80%.

The EPA announced $325 million in grants for climate justice. The Community Change Grants Program, powered by President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act will ultimately bring $2 billion dollars to disadvantaged communities and help them combat climate change. Some of the projects funded in this first round of grant were: $20 million for Midwest Tribal Energy Resources Association, which will help weatherize and energy efficiency upgrade homes for 35 tribes in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, $14 million to install onsite wastewater treatment systems throughout 17 Black Belt counties in Alabama, and $14 million to urban forestry, expanding tree canopy in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

The Department of Interior approved 3 new solar projects on public land. The 3 projects, two in Nevada and one in Arizona, once finished could generate enough to power 2 million homes. This comes on top of DoI already having beaten its goal of 25 gigawatts of clean energy projects by the end of 2025, in April 2024. This is all part of President Biden’s goal of creating a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035. 

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen pledged $667 million to global Pandemic Fund. The fund set up in 2022 seeks to support Pandemic prevention, and readiness in low income nations who can't do it on their own. At the G20 meeting Yellen pushed other nations of the 20 largest economies to double their pledges to the $2 billion dollar fund. Yellen highlighted the importance of the fund by saying "President Biden and I believe that a fully-resourced Pandemic Fund will enable us to better prevent, prepare for, and respond to pandemics – protecting Americans and people around the world from the devastating human and economic costs of infectious disease threats,"

The Departments of the Interior and Commerce today announced a $240 million investment in tribal fisheries in the Pacific Northwest. This is in line with an Executive Order President Biden signed in 2023 during the White House Tribal Nations Summit to mpower Tribal sovereignty and self-determination. An initial $54 million for hatchery maintenance and modernization will be made available for 27 tribes in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. The rest will be invested in longer term fishery projects in the coming years.

The IRS announced that thanks to funding from President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, it'll be able to digitize much of its operations. This means tax payers will be able to retrieve all their tax related information from one source, including Wage & Income, Account, Record of Account, and Return transcripts, using on-line Individual Online Account.

The IRS also announced that New Jersey will be joining the direct file program in 2025. The direct file program ran as a pilot in 12 states in 2024, allowing tax-payers in those states to file simple tax returns using a free online filing tool directly with the IRS. In 2024 140,000 Americans were able to file this way, they collectively saved $5.6 million in tax preparation fees, claiming $90 million in returns. The average American spends $270 and 13 hours filing their taxes. More than a million people in New Jersey alone will qualify for direct file next year. Oregon opted to join last month. Republicans in Congress lead by Congressmen Adrian Smith of Nebraska and Chuck Edwards of North Carolina have put forward legislation to do away with direct file.

Bonus: American law enforcement arrested co-founder of the Sinaloa Cartel, Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada. El Mayo co-founded the cartel in the 1980s along side Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. Since El Chapo's incarceration in the United States in 2019, El Mayo has been sole head of the Sinaloa Cartel. Authorities also arrested El Chapo's son, Joaquin Guzman Lopez. The Sinaloa Cartel has been a major player in the cross border drug trade, and has often used extreme violence to further their aims.

[canisalbus]

Vachete Suomi AU. Vesuri ja Vaski asuvat suuressa kylässä jossain sisämaassa kaukana suurista kaupungeista kuten Turusta. Kirkonkylän pappi, Vesuri, yrittää parhaansa mukaan vakuuttaa kyläläisiä kasvattamaan perunaa, koska se on satoisa ja ravitseva kasvi mutta kyläläiset eivät tahdo luopua nauriista. Vaski on kartanonvoudin poika ja yrittää pitää suhteita yllä kyläläisiin, että he olisivat suostuvaisia maksamaan veroja kuninkaalle eivätkä hyökkäisi hänen isänsä kimppuun.

Loose translation:

Finnish Vaschete AU.

Vesuri (a type of pruning knife/billhook) and Vaski (brass/copper/bronze) live in a big village somewhere inland, far away from the country's populous cities like Turku (Finland's oldest city and former capital located in the southwestern coast). The village priest, Vesuri, is trying his best to persuade the villagers to start farming potato, a high-yielding and nourishing crop, but people are reluctant to give up their turnips (one of Finland's most important staple foods up until 1800's when potato finally took over). Vaski is the son of a local lord of the manor (or maybe you'd call it bailiff? Or even jarl?) and is doing his best to get along with the villagers so that they would continue paying their taxes to the king and wouldn't turn against his dad.

[pupkinpumpkin]

Anytime I replay DAI and I get to that first conversation with Vivienne back at Haven, I take a long inhale Everytime she asks what I think about doing with the mages.

Like I know my Inky has not thought about this too much. She just knows her clan, but I think about it constantly and no answer I am offered is good enough to assuage my long rant that I yell at the computer for like 8 straight minutes before I choose the Mages Should Be Free line and get the inevitable Vivienne Greatly Disapproves

I love Vivienne a lot, I do, even with the differing political views, but Jesus Christ girlie pop never ask me that question again because I will go off Every Single Time

[hauntedtapeworm]

I’m such a Gemini 💝

[liberalsarecool]

Some pay 0%.

The system is rigged. Low tax rates on the uber- wealthy created our debts and deficits.

Billionaire welfare is the most inefficient use of tax dollars. It's morally disgraceful.

The only solution is raising their tax rates and eliminating their legislated advantages.

[benjaminallhope-fulltimemind]

This isn't suprising given that this is the most partisan supreme court we've ever seen and it's only getting more blatant, they will bend over backwards to fit the conservative agenda even if it makes them public hypocrites. This is why we need to drastically reform the supreme court at minimum and dissolve it at most, the damage they wreak is unparalleled given that they can't be checked in any meaningful capacity despite what conservative elements may claim. Now's not the time for moderation or reaching across the aisle since time and time again democrats reach their hand out only to get it slapped again and again and again, they have made their choices clear with project 2025 and we can't simply sit idly by as they dismantle our democracy and deny others constitutional rights like the traitors and villains they are!

[spewagepipe]

The Evolution of RPGs: The Landlord's Game

The Landlord's Game was invented in 1902 by Georgist activist Elizabeth "Lizzie" Magie, in an effort to educate the public about how the seemingly-obtuse Georgist land-tax would cure the problems of capitalism. Magie, despite having no noteworthy background in gaming, turned out to be a game design prodigy. She single-handedly innovated multiple long-standing design elements and created the single most influential commercial board game of all time.

The Landlord’s Game appears, at first, to be structured like a simple race game in the vein of Pachisi or Goose, but one of Magie's most influential innovations was the idea of a looping circuit: Upon reaching the end of the track, players simply start a new lap. Victory is decided on the basis of the play-money that is lost and gained as the players land on the various spaces. The original rules prescribe five laps, but the game can be shortened or lengthened to taste.

Race games are already tedious, so repeatedly looping the track might have been downright Sisyphean – except that Magie's board is highly dynamic. Another influential element of her design was a space where players draw a random event card from a deck, such that the space’s effect is always unique. But almost all of the track spaces in The Landlord's Game are subject to some change: players can buy a "title deed" for most spaces that then forces any subsequent players who land there to pay "rent" to the owner.

Players earn a modest "wage" for each lap they complete – but not enough to keep pace with the escalating taxes, fees, and rents. When you can't pay, you start losing turns locked in the "Poor House", which can see you functionally eliminated from the game. To win, you must charge more rent than your opponents, so that they end up in poverty instead. As the rulebook notes, this system (modelled after real-life capitalism) will eventually drive all but one player to ruin.

But players can vote at any time to adopt the Georgist "Single Tax" policy, which means that rents are paid to a new “Public Treasury” instead of to the owners of title deeds. At the same time, all of the spaces that charge taxes or fees become free of charge (either immediately or gradually as the public treasury grows). Portions of the public treasury are used to increase the players’ wages, and whenever a player would otherwise be sent to the “Poor House”, they instead move to the nearest public sector workplace (where they earn additional wages).

The overall effect of the Single Tax mode is that poverty is eliminated, and it is no longer possible to brutally extort one’s opponents. The game shifts into a much friendlier – and tighter – race to see who can make the most wealth, rather than who can cause the most harm. Unfortunately, the Single Tax mode has not survived into the modern era: as if to prove the inherent cruelty of real-life capitalism, the Parker Brothers company first refused to publish The Landlord's Game, and then later stole the design. They stripped Magie of her inventor's credit, erased all traces of Georgism from the game, and published it under the now much-more-widely known brand Monopoly.

Click here for the index of my Evolution of RPGs posts.

[lizagranger128]

Start spreading the word!! Sign a strike card here for the general strike: https://generalstrikeus.com/strikecard

“Research shows that strikes engaging a threshold of 3.5% of the population have never failed to bring about change.

3.5% of the US population is 11M people. When we have 11M Strike Card signed, we Strike! Sign your Strike Card today.”

[eaglesnick]

“The history of all previous societies has been the history of class struggles” – Karl Marx.

This observation is particularly pertinent to Britain where the state has repeatedly persecuted the sick and poorer members of society in defence of maintaining the privileged position of the rich and powerful.

Despite England prospering during the 18th century, with economic growth in both manufacturing and farming, many people remained poor. The rich, including the nobility and gentry, held significant political power and owned vast amounts of land, the primary source of wealth at the time. This period witnessed, the top 10% of the population owning and controlling  around 80% of the country’s wealth. In stark contrast the majority of the population lived at subsistent levels.

During the late 18th century, due to bad harvests, the poor found themselves starving. Grain prices were high due to shortages, and  many farmers and landowners, in order to maximise profits,  preferred to export their grain rather than sell it at home.. These moves were supported by the government of the day at the expense of the poor: Grain riots broke out , the leaders being either hanged or sentenced to penal transportation.

In the early 19th century, food shortages once again saw the poor rioting as they faced starvation. The “Bread or Blood" riots of 1816 that occurred in East Anglia, where the hardship of the poor was at its worst, were brutally suppressed by government. Again, siding with the farmers and landowners, the government had the leaders of these protests imprisoned, transported or executed.

Severe hardship and poverty in the late 19th century also witnessed food riots. It is during this time the government of the day decided to "reform" its policies regarding the poor. Whereas previously any protest by the poor was likely to have been   met by state endorsed violence and repression, now the poor were to be admitted (some would say imprisoned) to purpose built workhouses.

Every parish was to have a workhouse under the “New Poor Law”.  Government promoted workhouses as institutions of moral reform and opportunity for the poor. They were described as places where the destitute could learn discipline, acquire skills, and eventually reintegrate into society. In short, the government argued that it was fulfilling a moral duty to both reform the existing provision for poor and to provide for the most vulnerable in society.

This narrative was used to justify the harsh conditions and strict rules within workhouses, emphasizing that they were designed to deter idleness and encourage self-reliance. However, the reality was far grimmer, with overcrowding, unsanitary conditions, and forced labour being common. Government  propaganda often masked the inhumane treatment and the stigma associated with entering a workhouse.

The draconian world of the workhouse was not abandoned until 1929, at the start of the Depression. Even then, the poor and sick could find themselves in what were known as Public Assistance Institutions which were not abandoned until 1948, when, after the 2nd WW, the modern welfare state come into being. The sick and poor could now breathe a little easier.

However, jump forward 30 years and we find the welfare state and the protection of the poor and sick once again under attack. Margaret Thatcher's government in the 1980s implemented significant welfare “reforms” including cutting housing benefits and unemployment support.

Tony Blaire’s “New Labour” government continued welfare “reforms” by reducing the poor's dependency on state support but disproportionately affected vulnerable groups, such as disabled individuals

Cameron’s Tory government saw the introduction of Austerity policies, including even more so-called welfare reforms. The Universal Credit system was introduced, aimed at simplifying benefits and encouraging employment. However, the reforms also involved cuts to housing benefits, disability allowances, and the implementation of a benefit cap, which limited the total amount of benefits a household could receive. Again, these “reforms” disproportionately affected vulnerable groups and increased poverty levels.

As noted above, in the 1700’s the top 10% of the population owned 80% of the total wealth. Today, the top 10% own 57% of the total wealth. A modest improvement but it has taken 200 years to bring it about. This redistribution of wealth has not however gone to the poor but towards the creation of a much larger middle class.

The bottom 20% of the British population - the working poor, the unemployed and the sick - a fifth of all citizens -  only own 0.5% of the nations total wealth. Despite this, Starmer’s Labour government has made the political choice to follow the historical policy of punishing the poor and vulnerable in their time of need rather than helping them.

Starmer is no different to Cameron who is no different to Blair who was no different to Thatcher. Under the guise of “necessary reforms” the poor and sick are to have their benefits cut because to do so is a “moral imperative” as the current welfare system is “broken”. 

Time and time again, throughout British history, governments of the day have sided with the rich and wealthy against the sick and the poor. Nothing has changed. Starmer could have chosen to introduce a wealth tax, or increase income tax for those most well off. Instead, he has sided with the rich and wealth, protecting their privileged position within society.

Under Reeves new welfare “reforms” a further 250,000 individuals will be plunged into poverty, disproportionately affecting the sick and the disabled.

When the British people voted Labour at the last election they were told they were voting for change. This was a lie.  Instead, they find themselves reliving some of the darkest chapters of British history wherein the sick and the poor are expected to sacrifice whatever little they have in order to maintain the lavish lifestyles of the rich and powerful.

[deepbreakfast]

[ivygorgon]

📨 An open letter to the U.S. Congress

💰 Fix our broken tax system! And TAX THE RICH!

✍️ 923 so far! Help us get to 1,000 signers!

Our tax system is rigged for the wealthy, allowing billionaires to pay lower tax rates than hardworking Americans. This injustice fuels economic inequality and widens the racial wealth gap.

Congress must act now to reform our tax code so that it works for all Americans���not just the privileged few. That means: ✅ Ending tax breaks on investment income so wages and wealth are taxed fairly ✅ Implementing a Billionaire Minimum Income Tax to ensure the ultra-rich pay their fair share ✅ Reforming deductions to benefit working families, not just the wealthy ✅ Closing corporate loopholes and eliminating giveaways to massive businesses

These changes would generate billions for healthcare, education, and infrastructure—investments that help working Americans thrive. Every day we delay, billionaires get richer while families struggle. It’s time for tax justice.

📱 Text SIGN PKKWCJ to 50409 🤯 Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409 for more!

[empirearchives]

Changes to the Tax Collection System in Revolutionary and Napoleonic France

My translation from Le prix de la gloire: Napoléon et l’argent by Pierre Branda.

This part is specifically about the reforms made to the tax collection system. Problems with taxation had been the source of many woes, so it went through major changes.

“The [tax] work of the Consulate mainly concerned the reorganization of tax collection. Until now, this essential element was not administered directly by the Ministry of Finance. The Constituent Assembly had wanted the tax rolls for direct contributions, that is to say the ‘tax slips’, to be established by municipal administrations. Their work was complex, because each year it was necessary to draw up a list of taxpayers, determine each person’s share of tax and send them the amount of the contribution to pay. Poorly motivated (or even corrupt), the municipalities had put little care in the execution of their mission since a large part of the taxpayers had not yet received anything for their taxes of year VIII, or even of year VII or year VI. Also, with two or three years of delay in preparing the rolls, it was not surprising that tax revenues were low (nearly 400 million francs were thus left outstanding). If the sending of tax matrices left something to be desired, the collection of direct contributions was hardly better. The tax collector was also not an agent of the administration: this function was assigned to any person who agreed to collect taxes with the lowest possible commission (otherwise called ‘collecte à la moins-dite’). With such a system, there were numerous inadequacies, often due to incompetence, but also due to the prevailing spirit of fraud. However, in their defense, the profits of the collectors were most of the time too low to provide such a service; also, to compensate for their losses, they were ‘forced’ to multiply small and big cheats. In any case, in such a troubled period, letting simple individuals carry out such a delicate mission could only be dangerous for the regularity of public accounts. In short, the mode of operation of taxation that Bonaparte and Gaudin inherited was failing on all sides and threatened to sink the State.”

“One month after Gaudin’s appointment, on December 13, 1799, the Directorate of Direct Contributions was created with the mission of establishing and sending tax matrices. This administration, dependent on the Ministry of Finance, was made up of a general director, 99 departmental directors and 840 inspectors and controllers. The organization of direct contributions became both centralized and pyramidal, the opposite of the previous system, decentralized and with a confused hierarchy. The work of preparing the rolls, for so long entrusted to local authorities, passed entirely ‘in the hands of the Minister of Finance’ and in this way the taxpayer found himself in direct contact with the administration. The tax system no longer having any obstacles, the beneficial effects of such a measure did not take long to be felt. With ardor, the agents of this new administration carried out considerable work: three series of rolls, that is to say more than one hundred thousand tax slips, were established in a single year. It must be said that the ministry had not skimped on their pay (6,000 francs per year for a director, 4,000 for an inspector and 1,800 for a controller), which was undoubtedly not unrelated to such success.”

“Tax reform was slower. It was not until 1804 that all tax collectors were civil servants. The consular system gradually replaced the collectors of the departments, then of the main cities and finally of all the municipalities whose tax rolls exceeded 15,000 francs. At the end of the Consulate, the entire tax administration was thus entirely dependent on the central government. Subsequently, the one in charge of indirect contributions (taxes on tobacco, alcohol or salt) created on February 25, 1804 and called the Régie des droits réunis was built on the same pyramidal and centralized model. It was the same later for customs.”

“According to Michel Bruguière, historian of public finances, ‘Napoleon and Gaudin can be considered the builders of the French tax administration. [...] They had also developed and codified the essential principles of our tax law, so profoundly derogatory from the rules of French law, since the taxpayer has nothing to do with it, while the administration has all the powers’. Basically, after having clearly understood the true cause of the ‘financial wound’, Bonaparte wanted an effective, almost ‘despotic’ instrument to avoid experiencing the unfortunate fate of his predecessors. As a good soldier, he created a fiscal ‘army’ responsible for providing the regime with the sinews of war. It was also necessary to definitively break the link between private interests and state service in everything that concerned public revenue. The time of the farmer generals of the Ancien Régime or the ‘second-hand’ collectors of the Directory was well and truly over. Napoleon Bonaparte, with his fierce desire to centralize power in this area as in many others, undoubtedly gave his regime the means to last.”

French:

Page 208

Page 209

Page 210

[thepopoptic]

Ronald Reagan on the Truth About Government Budgeting

Reagan Had It Right

[polliantics]

Ronald Reagan's presidency (1981-1989) - Was he a good or bad president?

Legacy:

Reagan remains a hero among conservatives for his economic policies and anti-communism but is criticized by progressives for increasing inequality and social program cuts. His presidency reshaped American politics, and debates about his impact continue today.

Why He Was a Bad President:

Massive Deficit & Debt – His tax cuts and increased military spending led to huge budget deficits, nearly tripling the national debt.

Trickle-Down Economics Issues – While the economy grew, income inequality widened, and critics argue his policies disproportionately benefited the wealthy.

Cuts to Social Programs – His budget reductions in social welfare programs hurt lower-income Americans, particularly in healthcare and education.

Iran-Contra Scandal – His administration secretly sold weapons to Iran and illegally funded Nicaraguan rebels (Contras), leading to a major political scandal.

AIDS Crisis Response – Reagan was criticized for his slow response to the AIDS epidemic, which disproportionately affected the LGBTQ+ community.

War on Drugs & Mass Incarceration

Reagan escalated the War on Drugs, signing the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which imposed harsh mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses.

The law disproportionately targeted Black and Latino communities, especially with the 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. This contributed to mass incarceration and long-term social harm.

Union-Busting & Labor Rights

Reagan fired over 11,000 striking air traffic controllers (PATCO) in 1981 and banned them from federal employment. This was a major blow to organized labor and emboldened anti-union policies nationwide.

His administration favored corporations over workers, weakening unions and contributing to stagnant wages.

Ignoring the AIDS Epidemic

The Reagan administration largely ignored the HIV/AIDS crisis for years. Press secretary Larry Speakes even joked about it in early briefings.

Reagan didn’t publicly acknowledge AIDS until 1985—after thousands had died—and didn't take meaningful action until the late 1980s.

Hostility to Civil Rights & Welfare Cuts

He opposed affirmative action and tried to weaken the Voting Rights Act.

His administration slashed funding for social programs like food stamps, mental health services, and public housing, worsening poverty for marginalized communities.

Reagan also tried to gut the Civil Rights Commission and slow down school desegregation efforts.

Support for Authoritarian Regimes & Death Squads

Reagan backed brutal right-wing dictators in Latin America, including:

El Salvador – Supported the military despite its ties to death squads that massacred civilians.

Guatemala – Backed dictator Efraín Ríos Montt, who carried out genocide against Indigenous Mayans.

Nicaragua – Funded the Contras, a rebel group known for human rights abuses, leading to the Iran-Contra scandal.

South Africa – Opposed sanctions against apartheid and vetoed a bill that would have pressured the racist regime.

Deregulation & Weakening Consumer Protections

His deregulation of banking and savings & loans institutions contributed to the Savings and Loan Crisis, which led to a massive government bailout.

Environmental policies were weakened, reducing protections for clean air, clean water, and endangered species.

Workplace safety regulations were rolled back, making conditions worse for workers.

Anti-LGBTQ+ Policies

Beyond his failure on AIDS, Reagan was generally hostile to LGBTQ+ rights.

He opposed gay rights measures and backed laws that banned LGBTQ+ people from adopting children.

His Supreme Court appointees helped uphold Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), which kept anti-sodomy laws in place until they were overturned in 2003.

Myth of the “Welfare Queen” & Racial Dog Whistles

Reagan popularized the racist stereotype of the “welfare queen” to justify cutting social programs, even though the narrative was based on exaggerations and misinformation.

His rhetoric on “states’ rights” and opposition to civil rights protections played into the Southern Strategy, appealing to white voters who opposed racial progress.

Why He Was a Good President:

Economic Growth (Reaganomics) – His tax cuts, deregulation, and free-market policies contributed to strong economic growth in the 1980s, reducing inflation and unemployment after the stagflation of the 1970s.

Cold War Victory – His aggressive stance against the Soviet Union, including military buildup and the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), is credited with pressuring the USSR toward collapse.

Patriotism & Optimism – Reagan restored a sense of national pride and confidence after the Vietnam War and Watergate. His speeches and demeanor made many Americans feel hopeful about the country’s future.

Tax Reform – The 1986 Tax Reform Act simplified the tax code, eliminated loopholes, and reduced tax rates, particularly on corporations and individuals.

Social Security Reform – He worked with Democrats to extend the solvency of Social Security through bipartisan compromise.

[wildchives4]

The thing about being pissed at non-voters is like, the split between voters will be relatively representative of the split between non-voters. It's like ppl think the only group that doesn't vote is dispassionate/lazy liberals

[commonsensecommentary]

“Many of the political battles now tearing our country apart boil down to a relentless pursuit of the money that government rains down upon us like a crazy, rich uncle and the equally assiduous quest for the power needed to keep that spigot of cash blasting.”