Mathias Dopfner on Europe Cowardice
Claim:  Axel Springer CEO Mathias Dpfner wrote an editorial for Die Welt blasting Europe for its timidity in confronting Islamic fanaticism. Status:  True. Example:  [Dpfner, 2004] A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe  your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true. Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements. Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where for decades, inhuman, suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and, even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us. Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians. Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush... Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U. N. Oil-for-Food program. And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement. How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany. I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists. One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolph Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time". What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction. It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness. Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush. His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed. In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China. On the contrary, we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass. For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy, because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake  literally everything. While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation, or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "Reach out to terrorists, to understand and forgive". These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house. Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice. Origins:   The editorial reproduced above, entitled "Europe, Thy Name Is Cowardice," was written by Mathias Dpfner, CEO of the large German publishing firm Axel Springer, and published in the German periodical Die Welt on 20 November 2004. Axel Springer published However, many of the English-language translations of this editorial that have been circulated via the Internet (such as the one reproduced above) include alterations or additional invective not present in the original.  Here is our own translation, which we have prepared to be as faithful to the original as possible: A few days ago, Henryk M. Broder wrote in the Welt am Sonntag, "Europe  thy name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so painfully true.  Appeasement cost millions of Jews and Gentiles their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated far too long before realizing that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to agreements. Appeasement stabilized the Communist Soviet Union and the former East Germany, those parts of Eastern Europe where inhuman, suppressive governments were glorified as the ideological alternative. Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and we debated and debated and were still debating when the Americans finally came in and did our work for us. Rather than protecting the only democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," relativizes the fundamentalist Palestinian suicide bombings in Israel. Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to condone the 300,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery in Iraq and condemn the actions of George Bush in the self-righteousness of the peace movement. And in the end it is also appeasement at its most grotesque when Germany reacts to the escalating violence of Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere by proposing a national Muslim holiday.   What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership realize that there is a form of crusade underway, an especially perfidious one of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims targeting civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies. This is a conflict that will likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century, waged by an adversary who cannot be tamed by tolerance and accommodation but is instead spurred on by such gestures, mistaking them as signs of weakness.  Two recent American presidents had the courage needed for staunch anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush. Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, and Bush  supported only by the persuasive Social Democrat politician Tony Blair  recognized the danger in the Islamic war against democracy. His place in history will need to be evaluated a number of years down the road.  In the meantime, Europe snuggles into its multicultural niche instead of defending the values of a liberal society with charismatic certitude and acting as a positive center of power in a delicate balance between the true global powers, America and China. We instead present ourselves as the world champions of tolerance against the intolerants, which even Otto Schily [Germany's former Federal Minister of the Interior] justifiably criticizes. And why, actually? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic.  For his policies, Bush risks the devaluation of the dollar, huge amounts of added national debt, and a massive and lasting strain on the American economy  because everything is at stake.  Yet while America's so allegedly materialistic robber baron capitalists know their priorities, we timidly defend the benefice of our social affluence. Just stay out of it; it could get expensive.  We'd rather discuss our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage or listen to televangelists preach about the need to "Reach out to murderers." These days, it sometimes seems that Europe is like a little old lady who cups her shaking hands around her last pieces of jewelry as a thief breaks in right next door. Europe, thy name is Cowardice. Last updated:  29 July 2006    Sources:   Dpfner, Mathias.  "Europa  Dein Name Ist Feigheit."   Die Welt.   20 November 2004.
On Oct. 11, 2020, Allstate insurance company released a new television advertisement that showed a man going about his day on what turned out to be a tiny island. The aim of the commercial appeared to highlight a new payment option that allowed drivers to only pay for miles driven. This meant smaller bills for drivers who don't drive a lot. released  The ad featured Babe Rainbow's "Morning Song." In the final shot, it was revealed that the man lived on a very small island. We found no shortage of tweets that asked if the island was real: "Morning Song."    The island in the Allstate video is indeed real. It is Ona, located in Norway. RepublicWorld.com reported the news in October. reported  Norway, Ona island lighthouse. (Courtesy: Andrea Pistolesi/Getty Images)  According to Fjords.com: "Ona is the name of the island community which consists of the two islands Ona and Husya. The two islands are connected with a small bridge." Fjords.com VisitNorway.com published a page with information for what tourists could expect when visiting the island: published Norway's southernmost living fishing village. The island serves as a year-round residence for 11 people and has a beauty that attracts travelers from far and near. Ona Fyr is a 15-meter high landmark built in 1865, located on the island's highest point, Onakalven. It is possible to go inside the lighthouse, and from the top, there is a fantastic view out over the sea and towards the mainland. You will also find the exclusive Ona Chocolate here, a small summer caf, two pottery workshops, a craft shop, a chapel, and a long, white sandy beach. The island is a peaceful place where you can enjoy the silence and tranquility. On the island, there are holiday homes located directly on the dock, and local suppliers offer a wide range of activities on-site, including various forms of fishing. While Ona is a real island, it appeared that the final shot of the Allstate advertisement might have been altered in editing to give the island a bit of a cleaner look. For instance, here is the view of the island from the end opposite the one shown in the Allstate advertisement:  Ona, Norway. (Courtesy: Andrea Pistolesi/Getty Images)  A number of YouTube videos also showed that small patches of rock surround Ona, which did not appear in the Allstate video. For example, small patches of rock appeared here at 0:23, but not in the advertisement: number of YouTube videos appeared here at 0:23 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP5X-OxbUFI?t=23 Digitally altered or not, Ona appeared to be a quiet, lovely vacation destination for anyone visiting Norway in the future. Speaking of islands, we previously reported about a photograph of a purported "Violin Island" in Costa Rica. That picture first arrived in our inboxes in 2017. reported President Donald Trump took a victory lap on the job market during one of his periodic Cabinet meetings. Unemployment is at a 17-year low,he saidon Dec. 6, 2017. Very shortly it's going to be at a 19-year low. We think the numbers are going to continue to go down. And we're also getting into the pool of the 100 million people that are not working. That pool is now coming back. As you know, that's not considered in the low employment numbers, which means we have a lot of people that want to get to work, and that will be working. The unemployment rate is indeed at its lowest point since December 2000. But we were curious about Trumps other assertion -- that would-be workers from a pool of 100 million are coming back into the workforce. President Donald Trump at a cabinet meeting on Dec. 6, 2017. (Kevin Dietsch-Pool/Getty Images) First off, Trump is in the ballpark when he says that there are 100 million people not working. There are currently 95.4 million people above the age of 16 who are out of the labor force -- meaning neither working nor actively looking for work -- and another 6.5 million people who are unemployed. If you look at the raw number of Americans who are not in the labor force -- people who are not working or looking actively for work -- that figure has risen by 1.02 million since January 2017, an increase of about 1 percent. Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate -- or the percentage of people age 16 and up who are either working or actively looking for work -- has been bouncing around in a narrow band since Trump took office -- between 62.7 percent to 63.1 percent -- with no clear trend. While neither of these measures supports Trumps assertion, each presents an imperfect view of the labor pool by including everyone 16 and up. Those totals are shaped by demographic changes. Demographic trends such as the aging of the baby boomer cohort have been the primary drivers for the decline in labor force participation, said Chris Lafakis, a director at Moody's Analytics. We simply have more retirees now because our population is older. If you drill down using statistics that are more targeted to working-age Americans, Trumps assertion looks more credible. Consider the employment-to-population ratio for Americans age 25 to 54. During Obamas last 12 months, this measurement rose by half a percentage point. (Rising, for this statistic, is good -- it means a larger percentage of Americans are employed.) But in the first 10 months of Trumps tenure, the statistic rose by six-tenths of a percentage point. Thats not a radical improvement, but its better than his predecessor managed in his final year. Heres the full chart (with Obama months in blue and Trump months in red): If you look at the raw numbers, the number of non-workers in the 25 to 54 age range has declined by about 691,000 since January 2017. Another statistic also puts the improvement in 2017 in a favorable light. That would be the unemployment rate known as U-6. This statistic uses a more generous definition of unemployment than the most commonly used measure. The U-6 rate includes not just workers who are officially unemployed but also those who are employed part-time when they would prefer a full-time job, and those who want to work but who havent looked for work in the preceding four weeks. In Obamas final year, this measure dropped by half a percentage point. (A drop is a good sign.) But under Trump, it has dropped by 1.5 percentage points -- three times faster in a shorter period of time. Heres the full chart: This statistic is an important one for judging Trumps assertion, because the people who would be driving the declines would specifically be those who find jobs after being unemployed by conventional definitions, plus those who had been forced to work only part time and those who had not looked for work for several months. President Trump is correct that the pool of non-workers continues to shrink, said Brookings Institution economist Gary Burtless, though he added that it has done so fairly steadily since the last quarter of 2011. Jed Kolko, the chief economist for the job site Indeed.com, puts significant stock in the two statistics that support Trumps statement. Our view is that the labor market is entering 2018 with strength and momentum, with some room to grow, Kolko said. Finally, its worth noting that no president can take full credit for the economys achievements (or take full fault for its shortcomings). Many other factors, including the health of the rest of the world economy and changes in demographics and technology, play a role as well. Our ruling Trump said that were  getting into the pool of the 100 million people that are not working. That pool is now coming back. The statistics that shine the most direct light on working-age Americans support Trumps point. Both the working-age employment-to-population ratio and the U-6 expanded unemployment rate have improved on Trumps watch. Its worth noting that they also improved during Obamas final year, so Trump was fortunate to take office at a time when the economy was already going in the right direction. But the scale of the increase has been bigger under Trump. We rate this statement Mostly True. Since the 2020 elections, Fox News host Tucker Carlson has attackedU.S. President Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, for allegedly engaging in business practices by means of which Hunter allegedly benefited from his father's position. But just a few years ago, according to an internet rumor, Carlson was asking for the younger Biden's help in getting his son into college. attacked A meme going around claims that an email shows Carlson thanking Biden for writing a letter to Georgetown University on behalf of his son, Buckley.  This claim is accurate. In 2014, when Joe Biden was serving as vice president, Carlson and his wife, Susie,reached out to Hunter Biden for help in getting their son into Georgetown University. Their email communication was revealed through forensic analysis of a laptop once owned by Biden that he had purportedly left at a Delaware computer repair shop in 2019. The laptop was obtained by Trump's then-lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and its contents pushed out to the New York Post in 2020. The correspondenceon Biden's hard drive, a copy of which was also in the possession of the FBI, was largely used to investigate his overseas business dealings during his father's time in the White House, but also have illuminated more about the Carlson-Biden relationship. reached out revealed laptop once owned by Biden correspondence The emails were given to The Washington Poston a hard drive by activist Jack Maxey, who received it from Giuliani. The Washington Post revealed the details of Carlson's and Biden's communication in May 2022, and was able to confirm with the help of forensic analysis and interviews with people familiar with the communications that this and other emails on the hard drive were real. The Washington Post So what did Carlson actually say? The Post shared an image of a few of the emails in which he thanks Biden for writing a letter to Georgetown "on Buckley's [his son's] behalf." He added, "So nice of you. I know it'll help." The Post Image via Washington Post Carlson's wife wrote to Biden in 2014: "I realize you don't really know Buckley. Maybe you could meet or speak to him and he could send you a very brief resume with his interests and grades attached." She also wrote: "Tucker and I would be so grateful if you could write a letter or speak to someone in the Georgetown Admission's Office about Buckley." Biden wrote back that he would be honored to help. "I will do anything you would like me to do," he said. Carlson described his son's interest in squash and fly fishing and wrote, "He loves Washington for all the right reasons, I think, and really wants to go to school here." When Biden agreed to write a letter for Buckley, Susie responded with, "Tucker and I have the greatest respect and admiration for you. Always!" Carlson admitted that he was once close with Biden in a phone interview with the Post. He said: "Hunter Biden was my neighbor. Our wives were friends. I knew him well. I talked to him many times about addiction, something I know a lot about. And I've said that. I think that Hunter Biden is an addict and that's why his life is falling apart, and I feel bad for him. I've said that many times, and I mean it." admitted He refused to discuss the emails, however, pointing (with apparent irony) to claims that the timing of the laptop's emergence in 2020 had the hallmarks of Russian disinformation. Previously, Carlson had dismissed and mocked claims of a Russian disinformation campaign as an effort by the establishment and tech giants to protect Joe Biden's 2020 election campaign. It is unclear if Biden ended up writing a letter, but Carlson's son did end up going to the University of Virginia. refused "I can't confirm these emails. The emails that you're referring to were described by our intel community as Russian disinformation," he said. He added that he could not verify the emails as he did not have access to the account. said Hunter Biden declined to comment to the Post. Since 2020, Carlson has regularly skewered the younger Biden on his show, accusing him of getting "lucrative jobs  because he had an important father." skewered He did say there were certain lines he would not cross, pertaining to the laptop. In October 2020, he said: "Much of the material on the laptop is of limited relevance to the public. [...] And by the way, if we're being honest, some of the exchanges between Hunter Biden and his father, and they are on there, too, reveal that whatever you say about them, Joe Biden really loves his son, and they're touching." But following the 2020 election, Carlson's anti-Hunter Biden rhetoric grew, and he even poked fun at his addictions in an October 2021 segment:"So again, let's say you were a crackhead through your 40s, made a lot of pornographic videos mostly of yourself, your genitals covered in M&Ms, and then once you got to your 50s, decide, 'Hey, I want to be Andy Warhol. You probably couldn't do it unless your dad happened to be the president, and that's how Hunter Biden pulled that off." grew "A Look at the Time Tucker Carlson Asked Hunter Biden for a Favor." Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/19/look-time-tucker-carlson-asked-hunter-biden-favor/. Accessed 7 Dec. 2022. Pengelly, Martin. "Tucker Carlson Tried to Use Hunter Biden to Get His Son into Georgetown." The Guardian, 20 May 2022. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/19/tucker-carlson-hunter-biden-georgetown-emails.Accessed 7 Dec. 2022. In January2015, links began circulating on Facebook promisingusers free lifetime passes to popular fast food outlets such as KFC, McDonald's, Wendy's, Starbucks, Subway, and Burger King, typically presented as promotions offeredin celebration of the brands' purported anniversaries: The embedded links led to severalURLs, and users who clicked through on them to claim the promised lifetime passes were routed to a pages that clonedthe style of Facebook-based content (but werehostedoff Facebook):    As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users.A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media:Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender.Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy.When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information.Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions.A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. As noted, the visible URLs in the above-reproduced imagesdon't belong to any official domains owned by these fast food chains. The ads are survey/sweepstakes scams that urge usersto share their enticementsvia Facebook in order to recruit friends to further the fake promotions and dupevisitors intosubscribing to various expensive offers to claim their "free" passes.Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among retailers used asbait byscammers, withmany of these scams aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau explainedhow userscan spot and avoid scammersimitating high-profilebrands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. A nearly identical scam commonin October 2015 promised a lifetime pass to Starbucks in the same manner. Many users who completed the steps were dismayed to discover that no such reward awaited them. Starbucks Claim:  Two weeks before the opening of the movie Angel Eyes, Jennifer Lopez demanded that all the film's references to her be changed to "J.Lo." Status:  False. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, May 2001] The following is an amusing exchange of emails between J.Lo's publicist Lucy LeSueur and the head of publicity at Warner Bros (with whom she recently completed the movie Angel Eyes). it follows a faxed request from Lucy to change JL's billing from Jennifer Lopez to J.Lo. Read from top down.  From: Martha Hudson (martha.hudson@warnerbros.com)To: Lucille LeSueur (lucy@rogerscowan.com)Sent: Friday, May 4, 2001, 2:08 p.m.Subject: RE: "Angel Eyes" tweaks Yes, we got your fax...I thought Alan said Jennifer wanted to do anything to promote this movie. Martha HudsonPublicity ManagerWarner Bros. Pictures, International4000 Warner BoulevardBurbank, CA 91522-0001  From: Lucille LeSueur (lucy@rogerscowan.com)To: Martha Hudson (martha.hudson@warnerbros.comSent: Friday, May 4, 2001, 2:22 p.m.Subject: RE: "Angel Eyes" tweaks Of course, she wants to do *anything*. (Thought you said you got the fax.) She merely wants you to meet her halfway.  From: Martha Hudson (martha.hudson@warnerbros.comTo: Lucille LeSueur (lucy@rogerscowan.com)Sent: Friday, May 4, 2001, 2:30 p.m.Subject: RE: "Angel Eyes" tweaks Lucy, how can I put this? (I suppose I should phone, but I'm too upset): According to this fax, you're asking us to pull all the one-sheets, posters and prints of the movie in order to bill Jennifer as "J.Lo" instead of her fucking God-given name. This is *not* going halfway-unless she intends to pay for the millions out of her own pocket. We are talking here about a movie that opens in two weeks!! The junket is tomorrow!! Are you guys smoking crack over there with Robert Downey? The bottom line (and I've gotbackup on this): She signed onto this project as "Jennifer Lopez." She - so help me - is going to be billed as "Jennifer Lopez." We can't help it if she's decided to get a diva transplant.  From: Lucille LeSueur (lucy@rogerscowan.com)To: Martha Hudson (martha.hudson@warnerbros.comSent: Friday, May 4, 2001, 3:22 p.m.Subject: RE: "Angel Eyes" tweaks Okay, I'm going to do you a big favor, Martha. I'm not going to repeat what you just said to J.Lo. But only because I don't want to see her go to jail FOR RIPPING OUT YOUR ORGANS WITH HER BARE HANDS! I simply can't believe the lack of respect here. Maybe you can play these games with "James" Caviezel (or is it "Jim"? ... Gee, I guess he can't make up his mind, either.) But J.Lo, clearly, is no "James"/"Jim" Caviezel. She is the world's preeminent female celebrity. She has more talent in her ass than most people have in their tiny finger. J.Lo is not just an actress. She is not just a singer. She is not just a celebrity. She is a movement. (Why do I even have to say this?) She feels extra-determined that "Jennifer Lopez" isn't where her movement is at these days. She is "J.Lo."  From: Martha Hudson (martha.hudson@warnerbros.comTo: Lucille LeSueur (lucy@rogerscowan.com)Sent: Friday, May 4, 2001, 3:35 p.m.Subject: RE: "Angel Eyes" tweaks Okay, how about this as a compromise: I've seen this critic guy on the Internet. He calls Jennifer "J.Lo's Magical Butt." That enough of a "movement" for you? P.S.: I'd like to see "J.Lo" try to rip out my organs. I hear my liver would grow back anyway. Which is more than I can say for her movie career after this Piece Of Shit opens.  From: Lucille LeSueur (lucy@rogerscowan.com)To: Martha Hudson (martha.hudson@warnerbros.comSent: Friday, May 4, 2001, 5:05 p.m.Subject: J.Lo ill Miss Hudson:This note is to inform you that J.Lo has taken ill and will be unable to attend Saturday's press junket at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills. She respectfully sends her regrets.  From: Martha Hudson (martha.hudson@warnerbros.comTo: Lucille LeSueur (lucy@rogerscowan.com)Sent: Friday, May 4, 2001, 5:42 p.m.Subject: RE: J.Lo ill Dearest Lucy: Kiss, kiss. We're sorry to hear about poor Jennifer Lopez. At least we won't blow our kissing-and-fawning budget tomorrow. We'll need it for that Travolta movie [Swordfish] coming up. Origins:  This    purported e-conversation between Jennifer Lopez's agent and a contact at Warner Bros. began arriving in inboxes in mid-May 2001. Because it fit with images already so strongly internalized (e.g., all media sensations are narcissistic and make impossible demands; all Hollywood agents are more caricature than person), many readers mistook it  for an actual private exchange that had somehow leaked to the Internet.  Even if one didn't quite catch the broader humor of this piece, however, a few details within it provided clues for the sharp-eyed reader that the whole thing was just a bit of satire:   E-mail for the Rogers & Cowan agency goes to rogersandcowan.com addresses, not to rogerscowan.com ones. Mail to lucy@rogerscowan.com bounced like a red rubber ball. Likewise, mail to the martha.hudson@warnerbros.com address was undeliverable.  Most telling of all was the purported name of Jennifer Lopez's agent at Rogers & Cowan: Lucille LeSueur. Last we heard from Lucille, she was planted in a mausoleum in Hartsdale, New York, having arrived at that destination in 1977. During her life, she was better known as the wife of Alfred Steele, Chairman of the Board of Pepsi-Cola, until his death in 1959. She also enjoyed some small personal recognition thanks to a lengthy film career under the stage name Joan Crawford. This lively back-and-forth that so entertained the Internet wasn't a real conversation;  it was a work of fiction created by an unnamed writer at Ifilm.com which was   published on that site under the "Hell Hath No Fury Like J.Lo's Magical Butt" on 16 May 2001.  published The piece struck all the notes people expect of folks in the film industry. The demand to change Jennifer Lopez's billing to "J.Lo" in all Angel Eyes material less than two weeks before the premiere was characterized by the agent as a "tweak," a term used to describe a small change, something so tiny it's barely worth mentioning. The posturing terminology of the agent ("I simply can't believe the lack of respect here") also fit the stereotypes, as did the blazing denunciation of the talent's demands ("We can't help it if she's decided to get a diva transplant") by the studio representative. But it was the larger presumption, that anyone that talented, famous, successful, and beautiful had to be self-absorbed to the point of insanity, that really fueled it. Long ago, Aesop told the story about the fox who lusted after grapes that hung just out of his reach, only to finally have to give up because they continued to elude his grasp. "Oh, they were probably sour anyway," he said as he slunk away.  Two millennia later, we still prefer our grapes sour. Barbara "makes better whine that way" Mikkelson Last updated:  10 August 2007    Sources:  Davis, Tony and Nick Leys.  "Spike."  Sydney Morning Herald.  15 June 2001  (p. 22). Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Sept. 27, 2020, The New York Times published a report after obtaining several years of U.S. President Donald Trump's tax returns. published a report As news broke that Trump had paid just $750 in federal income tax in 2016 and 2017  no federal income taxes in 10 of the past 15 years  in addition to the fact that he took an approximate $70,000 deduction for hairstyling during "The Apprentice," and that he has more than $300 million worth of loans coming due, a rumor started to circulate on social media that White House senior adviser Jared Kushner had quietly deleted all of his tweets from his Twitter account: no federal income taxes   This rumor is false. Kushner didn't delete all of his tweets following the NYT article about Trump's taxes.  The above-displayed tweet contains a genuine screenshot of the @JaredKushner Twitter account. This account has been online since 2009, but it has been used sparingly by its owner. Archived pages show that this account posted three messages back in March 2011  none of which was related to taxes  but was then inactive for at least three years. The few messages that were posted to this account were deleted sometime between 2014 and 2016, and no new messages have been posted since then.  JaredKushner March 2011 at least three years In other words, Kushner didn't wipe his Twitter account clean on the evening of Sept. 27 after the NYT published a story about his father-in-law's taxes. This account rarely posts tweets, and the three tweets that were shared to the account in 2011 (again, none of which were related to taxes) were deleted years ago.  This isn't the first time that someone has stumbled across Kushner's Twitter account in the aftermath of a controversy, noticed that it was barren, and then incorrectly assumed that Kushner had recently scrubbed it clean. In October 2017, shortly after Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III revealed charges against former Trump presidential campaign chair Paul Manafort and two other campaign officials, social media users noted then that Kushner's Twitter account was suspiciously void of content, and falsely claimed that he had recently deleted all of his tweets. falsely claimed A few months later, when it was reported that Mueller may have interviewed Kushner in the course of his investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election, this false rumor again was circulated on social media:  reported   The @JaredKushner account has been devoid of content since at least 2016. Claims that he recently deleted his tweets in the wake of breaking news stories are false.  Apuzzo, Matt.  "Muellers Prosecutors Are Said to Have Interviewed Jared Kushner on Russia Meeting."
  The New York Times.  29 November 2017. Buettner, Russ; Craig, Susanne; McIntire, Mike.  "Long-Concealed Records Show Trump's Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance."
  The New York Times.  27 September 2020. Claim:  Alabama mom's Obamacare horror story gives America a glimpse of government run healthcare. CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected on the Internet, December 2013] My family's journey with securing our new insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) started on October 1, 2013.   I have decided to write this letter to let the American people know what it has been like for us.   We are a family of four, with two little boys' ages seven years old and three years old.   My husband and I have had full time jobs for 6 years and 13 years respectively.  We have been with the same two companies for those years.  We are a middle class family; we own our three bedroom two bath house, we own two cars, and previously provided our own insurance for the four of us.  We have coverage through Individual Blue from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama until 12/31/13. Our premiums have been $380.00 a month, which also included dental coverage for all four of us.  On October, 1, 2013 we received our letters like other Alabamians about our new premiums and plans for 2014 from Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) of Alabama.  When I opened our letter to say I had sticker shock was an understatement.  Our premiums for the Blue Saver Silver would now be $753.26. This included the ACA tax but did not include the additional $75.00 we would need to pay in order to keep dental for me and my husband.  So we would need to pay total $828.26 to keep health and dental insurance for the four of us.  This payment is roughly $64.00 less than what we pay for our mortgage each month.  I was outraged that anyone thought we could afford this.  Sure we have some savings, but with that price tag we would whittle it down to almost nothing very quickly.  I consider savings as a rainy day fund, a start to saving for the kids college, our retirement, etc.  I never dreamed in a million years we would need to use it to pay our insurance premiums each month  how in the world could this help the economy too?  [Rest of article here.] here Origins:  The item referenced above, an open detailing one Alabama woman's extreme difficulty and frustration in obtaining ACA-compliant health insurance coverage for her family (including her 7-year-old son with ADHD) was posted under the name of Karri Kinder on 23 December 2013 as the sole entry in a blog and was republished (without additional comment) by the Independent Journal Review on 31 December 2013. blog republished Certainly her experience is not unique in kind, as many residents of Alabama covered by Blue Cross and Blue Shield (BCBS) of Alabama (an insurer who has an 88% share of the state's health insurance market) found out at the end of 2013 that they would be paying much higher premiums for ACA-compliant coverage through BCBS: Doug Hoffman, who works statewide to help people sign up for benefits through the Affordable Care Act, just received a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama notice in the mail to find health insurance rates for his family have doubled. And  he's mad  at Blue Cross. "I just got my benefits renewal from Blue Cross for next year and they doubled my rate!" he wrote AL.com in an email. "I was paying $675 for a family premium (2 adults, one 22 yo dependent) with a $1,500 deducible. The new rate for a comparable plan is $1,360 with a $3,000 deductible. Basically they have doubled my costs." "It appears as though Blue Cross is taking advantage of the ACA by hiking rates big time," said Hoffman, who is based in Birmingham with Enroll Alabama. Others, who have received the notices from the state's dominant health insurer are mad as well  at Obamacare. "Obama thinks that he is making insurance affordable," wrote one reader to the Mobile Press Register Sound Off feature. "I just got a letter from my Blue Cross Blue Shield that if I want to keep their insurance it's going to cost me $300 more a month. I already pay $300 a month now and they're wanting right at $600 a month for this Affordable Care Act." Blue Cross posted an explanation for the rate hikes to its Facebook page, maintaining that several reasons are behind the increased premiums: more taxes and fees, a requirement to rate family members individually, and the elimination of health underwriting and waiting periods for preexisting conditions: explanation The new law requires all health insurance companies in the individual and small group markets to use a consistent rating method called "member level rating." For the individual market, this means each person on an insurance policy will now be rated based on age, whether he or she uses tobacco, and the county in which the policy holder lives. In the past Blue Cross was able to offer one family premium, no matter the size.  For family plans, most family members will now be rated individually. Once each person has been rated, the amounts are added together to get a family's premium cost. For children age 20 and younger, the oldest three children will be individually rated and included in the family premium amount.   As a result, larger families may experience higher premiums. As Mike Oliver noted in an article for AL.com, the elimination of health underwriting may have a substantial effect on health insurance premiums in that state: article "Alabama has allowed medical underwriting  you're going to be quoted a high premium if you have something wrong with you," said Michael Morrisey, director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham Lister Hill Center for Health Policy. "The Affordable Care Act abolishes medical underwriting." This means that those with expensive health problems will likely now jump in and buy coverage because it will be less expensive for them  or if they already have coverage  their rates will go down. But that also means rates will go up for everyone else as the insurer spreads that new cost around. "The thing that happens when you eliminate underwriting is that you lump dissimilar people together," Morrisey said. "When you combine groups, one group is better off and the other group is worse off"  in terms of premium prices. As a policy, the elimination of medical underwriting and preexisting condition clauses helps broaden access to health care coverage and that was the aim of its inclusion in the Affordable Care Act. Reformers say it eliminates insurers from "cherry-picking" and reduces uncompensated care. Karri Kinder subsequently posted followups to her original blog entry about her insurance issue, the update of 4 January 2014 stating that: Karri Kinder blog entry I do have some good news.  Because I decided to write my letter and speak out, people stepped up and helped us.  We were contacted on January 1, 2014 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  I was told by the woman I spoke with that she had read my letter and wanted to get her team involved and see what they could do to help us.  I recounted to her what was happening and that I had been advised to go ahead and sign me and my husband up for a plan on healthcare.gov.  We went with a lower cost plan because it was going to just be the two of us.  We had no idea what it was going to cost for the children once we got some answers.  So we went with BCBS Blue Value Saver plan.  The cost of the plan is $459.19.  We qualified for $255.00 in subsidies so the final cost of the plan to us is $204.19 each month.  I told the lady that I would cancel that plan if I needed to.  What we wanted was to have all of us on one plan like we always have been.  She said, "If the kids qualify for All Kids then I am pretty sure they have to go that route or you will have to buy them a plan at the normal rate."  So again we were told more than likely we will have to go through All Kids.  She took the rest of our information down and said she was getting her team to work on it and would either call us back or All Kids would contact us. Last updated:  4 January 2014    Oliver, Mike.   "Blue Cross in Alabama: We Didn't 'Cancel' Health Policies."   AL.com.  2 December 2013.    Walsh, Alex.   "Obamacare, Big Blue, and You."   AL.com.  31 December 2013. Controversial changes to North Carolinas tax code passed under Thom Tillis leadership are now a target in his Senate campaign. In 2013, the North Carolina government received national attention for a wave of conservative legislation. The Republican-dominated General Assembly -- with Tillis as speaker of the House -- passed laws increasing voter ID requirements, lowering business regulations, upping restrictions on abortion providers,tightening education spendingand trimming unemployment benefits. Now, Patriot Majority USA, a liberal political action committee, hasreleased a television adsaying Tillis policies have disproportionately benefited the wealthy. The ad notes in particular thetax legislationenacted last summer -- which Tillis touts in his campaign against incumbent Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan. The ad says Tillis is cozy with Charles and David Koch, the billionaire brothers who cofounded Americans for Prosperity, an influential conservative PAC. And his policies are designed to benefit people like them. Thom Tillis thinks the wealthy, like the Koch brothers, deserve tax breaks, while teachers get a pay freeze, the ad says. Tillis thinks corporations like the ones owned by the Koch brothers should also get tax breaks, while seniors see their pensions taxed and pay more for prescription drugs. Thom Tillis: He may not be a Koch brother, but he certainly treats them like family. At one point, text on the screen says the Tillis tax plan will overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy. We looked into it and found that the law does not overtly harm those at lower-income levels, but the wealthy reap more of the benefits. Lets go to the numbers. Income taxes Supporters of the tax plan most often point to the reduced income tax rate, which they say cuts taxes for people in every income bracket. Thats true. However, people in higher-income brackets get bigger cuts than those in the lowest brackets. The income taxpart of the law sets the rate for everyone at 5.75 percent. Previously, the state had a graduated three-tier system, with rates of 6 percent for the lowest earners, and rates of 7 percent and 7.75 percent for higher earners. The lowest earners tax rates shrunk only marginally -- 0.25 points, while higher earners rates went down 1.25 and 2 points, respectively. Lower earners get a small break, though, in the income tax changes. The child tax credit goes from $100 to $125 per child for those earning below $40,000. The North Carolina Legislatures Fiscal Research Divisioncalculated how muchpeople in various scenarios would owe on average based on the changes to the income tax (other tax changes not included). Heres a sample of what they found: Scenario Tax owed before change Tax owed after change Change in taxes owed Married, two children, $20,000 income $40 $38 -$2 -5% change Married, two children, $250,000 income $15,832 $13,398 -$2,434 -15% change Married, no children, $20,000 income $540 $288 -$252 -47% change Married, no children, $250,000 income $16,142 $13,398 -$2,744 -17% change Single, $20,000 income $870 $719 -$151 -17% change Single, $250,000 income $17,858 $13,786 -$4,072 -22% change  In none of the scenarios examined by the Fiscal Research Division do people owe more in income taxes than they did under the previous tax code. But some benefit more than others. Theres no question who benefits the most -- the people at the upper end of the income distribution, said Lawrence Zelenak, a tax law professor at the Duke University School of Law, which is in North Carolina. For most people, it hardly makes any difference. But the people who get the major decrease have incomes of $200,000 or more. Other changes Critics say the new tax law also disproportionately benefits the wealthy because the Legislature did not renew -- effectively eliminating -- the State Earned Income Tax Credit, which is a refundable tax credit for low-income workers. In 2011, about 907,000 North Carolina tax filers claimed the state EITC, according to theNorth Carolina Justice Center, a liberal advocacy group. The maximum credit ranges between $24 for a single person and $302 for a family with three or more children. Additionally, the Legislature expanded the sales tax base -- making more goods and services subject to the tax, which everyone pays regardless of income. The tax base widened to include natural gas, electricity and some entertainment services, including admissions charges. The law also eliminated North Carolinas sales tax holidays and several sales tax exemptions, such as those for newspapers, vending machines and meals sold in schools. Opponents of raising the sales tax andother regressive taxessay they are unfairly burdensome on lower-income people because a higher percentage of their income is subject to these taxes than wealthier people. For example, if two people -- one making $500 a week and the other making $2,000 a week -- spend $100 each on groceries, the person with the lower income is spending a greater share of their income on these taxed items than the person with a higher income. Its worth noting that in 2011 -- Tillis first year as speaker -- the Legislature reduced sales tax rates from 5.75 percent to 4.75 percent. Tillis andother Republicansalso say the new laws reductions in corporate tax rates (down from 6.9 percent to 5 percent, and 3 percent if certain parameters are met) will bring business and jobs to North Carolina, which will benefit everyone and bring in more revenue over the long term. In total, the new tax code will reduce tax-collected revenue by about $684 million between 2013 and 2015, according to the Fiscal Research Division. Less revenue means less money for the state to spend on social programs, which hurts people in low income brackets, Zelenak said. Even if the law does not obviously harm poor people, this is a possible indirect effect. Our ruling A Patriot Majority USA ad said Tillis tax plan would overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy. North Carolinas tax code saw a wide array of changes in 2013 under Tillis leadership. We found that changes to the income tax code reduced taxes for everyone, but much more for wealthier people than lower-income people. Additionally, sales tax expansions, less government revenue and eliminating the state EITC are especially burdensome on poorer people. But some changes -- such as the increased child credit for lower-income tax filers and the possibility of more jobs and business due to lowered corporate tax rates -- could benefit the whole. Overwhelmingly is a strong word. For that reason, we rate this claim Mostly True. A big part of the mayoral campaign of Paul Vallas relies on his six-year record as CEO of the Chicago Public Schools under former Mayor Richard Daley. And the theme that Vallas often falls back on is that he was a turnaround specialist who revived a very troubled school system and left it in better financial and academic shape than he found it. I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today, Vallas declared in a New Years Eve interviewon WGN radio. Ive always been a problem-solver. My approach has always been to go in, bring financial stability to the systems that Ive taken responsibility for, design budgets that are long-term financial plans that actually invest in the community to generate growth. Vallas is facing a crowded field of contenders in next months city elections to replace the retiring Rahm Emanuel as mayor, and the flagging condition of the citys public schools will be sure to present a major test for whichever candidate prevails. Having a proven track record as a school fix-it specialist could be a big plus for Vallas. But how valid are his claims? We decided to take a look. Vallas claims raise two questions. First, whether his basic facts check out. Second, whether they can be credited to his leadership. News clips and columns from the Vallas era at CPS, which began in 1995, back up the first beat of his claim. They note that district leaders had projected before he took over that CPS was on track to run a deficit of more than $1 billion by 1999. Under Vallas, that huge deficit never materialized, and district financial records he pointed to show that by his last year at the helm in 2001 CPS claimed a positive balance of nearly $1 billion in all of its financial accounts. But can Vallas credit his policy decisions entirely for that transformation? Not exactly. In 1995, lawmakers in Springfield turned over control of the district, which was facing one of many financial crises, to Mayor Richard M. Daley. He named Vallas, who had been serving as his budget director, chief executive officer. Daley also appointed Gery Chico, now a mayoral opponent of Vallas, as school board president. But the new guard at CPS also got to play by a different set of financial rules. Instead of receiving state aid earmarked for specific purposes, for example, the district started getting a significant amount of funding in the form of a block grant. Another big change that helped un-tie its fiscal hands: Lawmakers allowed property tax dollars, which had previously flowed directly into the pension fund for teachers, to go to CPS instead. And in 1997, legislators permitted the district to forego payments into the pension fund provided it hit benchmarks signifying sound fiscal health. He was not operating under the same conditions as the CEO that existed prior to 1995, said Amanda Kass, associate director of the Government Finance Research Center at the University of Illinois-Chicago. During Vallas six years with the district, and for several years following his tenure, CPS paid next to nothing toward teacher pension costs. The Vallas era at CPS coincided with the dot.com bubble that sent markets soaring, helping the pension fund stay healthy even without the annual injections of cash it began missing out on. Had Springfield not changed the law, the CPS teacher pension fund would have been paid$90millionin 1995 to cover the employer share of pension costs that year. Instead, it got $10 million. Over the next decade, the fund was out$2billion. We asked Vallas in a phone interview why he opted to stop pension payments. The system was earning such strong returns, it didnt require that we make contributions during those few years, he explained. Kass said its considered best practice for local governments to continue employer share contributions regardless of the financial health of pension funds  something the 1997 law did not require. Had CPS continued contributions during the Vallas years, the pension fund would have had more cushion to weather the financial recessions that hit in 2001 and again in 2008, she explained. That said, Kass added that her observations come with the benefit of hindsight after watching the pension fund balance worsen dramatically after Vallas left and his successors continued to put off payments even as the funds fiscal viability declined. I do think that Vallas inherited a challenging situation, Kass said, noting that ratings of CPS bonds improved significantly during his tenure and enabled a system all but shut out of the credit markets to begin borrowing again. In short, CPS was on the financial ropes before Vallas took over but made significant fiscal strides under him. Changes in state law, however, gave him far more financial flexibility to operate than his predecessors. In touting his success as CEO, Vallas also pointed to the size of the district under his watch compared with much-diminished enrollment figures of today. Enrollment is important as a symbol of how attractive CPS is to families of school age children, but it also carries real financial weight because the fewer students attending classes the less state aid the district gets. Vallas numbers are roughly accurate. CPS enrollment stood at nearly 425,000 when he left the district, but now sits at about 361,000,stateandCPS figuresshow. But in using enrollment data as a measuring stick of his success, Vallas ignores significant demographic changes in the city since his time at CPS that render such a comparison misleading. Chicago saw a period of population growth in the 1990s due in large part to a substantial increase in immigrants, largely from Mexico. With that increase in immigration came an influx of students into CPS, said Chicago demographer Rob Paral. The stuff going on demographically today is quite different than the forces that were in play in the 90s, he said. Chicago was a huge magnet for all that 90s immigration. In the years after Vallas left CPS, the immigrant population of the city stopped growing and the African-American population began a significant decline. Minority students make up about 90 percent of CPS enrollment, so the changing demographics had a significant impact at the schools. Vallas said, I took over the school district when it had a $1 billion structural deficit and left them with $1 billion in cash and 70,000 more students than they have today. The bond rating and bottom line at CPS did improve significantly under Vallas, but new laws passed in Springfield also removed fiscal handcuffs which gave him more flexibility to manage the districts finances than his predecessors enjoyed. And he is correct that CPS has nearly 70,000 fewer students today than in 2001 when he departed. But that is due at least in part to significant demographic changes in Chicago outside the control of any schools chief. His claim is accurate but requires additional information to understand the context. We rate it Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click herefor moreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Pop superstar Taylor Swift is known for being generous to her fans. But is she charitable enough to help Washington pay interest on the national debt? The#squadat the Republican Party of Florida asked (and answered) the question with a viral image on theirFacebook page on Oct. 29, 2015, the same week Swift was in the Sunshine State for concerts in Miami and Tampa. How many concerts would Taylor Swift have to perform to pay off one day of interest on our national debt? She would have to perform every day for three years, the post read. We just couldntshake it off. We wondered, would it take three years or more for the biggest pop star in the country to pay off the interest on the national debt, playing a concert every single night? We checked to see if it would be possible, even in ourwildest dreams. Because theres no telling just how much Swift is personally raking in these days (beyond, you know, a lot), theres going to be a lot of estimating here, possibly ablank spaceor two. But we do know the national debt is up over the $18 trillion mark these days, so shes got her work cut out for her. Just so we didnt cause anybad blood, we reached out to the state GOP and asked them how they were figuring Swifts tour schedule through 2019. They credited the stat to the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation. We notedthe original version was slightly different: How long would it take Taylor Swift to pay off our debt? Forbes estimates that T. Swift earned around $80 million in 2015 and performed 55 concerts. She would have to perform every day for three years to pay for one day of interest that accrued on our debt. They also point out how hard other big names would have to work, like boxer Floyd Mayweather having to fight for every night for 331 years or Bill Gates having to fork over 229 lifetimes worth of personal income to pay the same bill. The foundation told us they figured out Swifts workload by calculating that she took home 28.6 percent of the gross receipts from her March 2013-June 2014 Red Tour, then stretched it out as if she played for 365 nights straight. That ends up being $526,000 per show, or $192 million for a whole year of Swift concerts (and a whole lot ofInstagrams). So how much is the daily interest on our national debt? Heritage used the 2015 estimate for interest from the Office of Management and Budget, which was$229.2 billionfor the year. One day of that is $628 million. Break that down and Swift would have to play every night for just more than 3 years to pay for one measly day of interest on an $18 trillion debt. Now, the Heritage Foundation told us they used the Red Tour because it has a full net estimate. But we here at PolitiFact Florida always like to note wheneverything has changed. Swift is a megawatt star these days, and she has been practically printing money since this years1989 World Tourbegan. The tour topped$185 millionbetween May and mid October. Thats about about 60 shows, give or take, with 20-plus to go until Swift can take a breather. ForbesandBillboarddo generally usea third of gross receiptsas a rough guideline  remember, those tours have to pay for all sorts of things besides the artist, like sets and costumes and roadies. The$80 millionForbesestimatefor June 2014-June 2015 is hard to parse, because it includes all income, which could range fromt-shirts to albums to streaming royalties. Well note its really not possible to say what she makes from any given show, because every venue is different. The tour stood to make $2.75 million from herHalloween show in Tampa, with a $928,000 bonus if the show sold out. (We cant confirm whether it did, butreports make it soundlike it came close.) In any case, we figure these days it's fair to say Tay Tay is worth closer to a very rough average of $1 million per show, especially when she's playing bigger arenas. That would really help her put a dent in the nations outstanding bills. We could also cheat with some creative bookkeeping and use data from theFederal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, which puts 2015 debt interest at a slightly lower $223.3 billion. That works out to $612 million per day. Do the simple math and our estimate knocks Swifts theoretical slate of shows down to about 612 nights. Thats a little over 1 years of concerts. But theres always the chance she wouldnt want to fork over all her earnings for the interest payments. She could use a little walking around money, you know? Also, she needs a little time to go home to catsMeredith GreyandOlivia Benson. Our ruling The Republican Party of Florida asked, How many concerts would Taylor Swift have to perform to pay off one day of interest on our national debt? She would have to perform every day for three years. This viral image was inspired by the Heritage Foundation, and while their math is based on old estimates, it stands up to scrutiny. Well note that Swift likely makes a lot more money these days, so she could probably pay the bill faster. But the point that it would take an inordinate amount of time to pay just a single days interest on the $18 trillion-plus national debt stands. We rate the statement Mostly True.