President Obama's New Deficit-Reduction Plan
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-09-20/president-obamas-new-deficit-reduction-plan
President Obama unveiled a new long-term deficit reduction plan yesterday. It calls for new taxes on the wealthiest Americans. And it seeks to eliminate tax loopholes for the biggest corporations. The president said it will cut the deficit by more than $3 trillion over the next decade. Republicans - opposed to any new taxes - immediately attacked the proposal. Analysts say the president's sharply drawn battle lines could make it harder for the congressional super-committee. The bipartisan group is tasked with reaching a deficit-cutting deal by Thanksgiving. Diane and her guests will talk about what's in the plan and how it's being received in Congress and the country.
Guests
Norman Ornstein
resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and coauthor of "The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track."
Isabel Sawhill
senior fellow, Economic Studies, The Brookings Institution.
Naftali Bendavid
national correspondent, The Wall Street Journal.
Congressman Phil Gingrey
Republican, 11th District, Georgia.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Each of our previous depressions has been heralded by gross inequalities in wealth, i.e., by huge concentrations of wealth in the hands of a small number of people. The depressions have also been promoted by deregulation, by taking away the safeguards that prevent real abuses.
I would not object if Obama let all of the Bush tax reductions lapse. When Bush made those reductions I took it as a cynical way to buy the votes of middle-income people (while doing a favor for other rich people of course). I don't recall my lifestyle suddenly blooming with a few extra hundred dollars to spend. Maybe I made more trips to eat pastries and drink expensive latte grande at the Starbucks in the bookstore. I would rather live without fancy coffee and without worry over having all investments turn to dust.
pe0m,
Enough with the liberal guilt -- boo hoo, going without your expensive latte and pastries. I say, I will let you eat that cake. There is nothing gross about inequality in wealth. How else do we measure success? People who have vast sums of wealth obviously earned it. They are the truly deserving.
And stop blaming the depressions on Hoover and Bush. That is sooo out of fashion.
Go ahead and stuff your face with that croissant. But stop the class warfare against the wealthy, you are making them angry.
Hail the rich,
Daniel
In all the excitement about extending the "Bush Tax Cuts" in the last Congress and all the criticism from the left for the President not fighting harder to have the rich pay their share, I think you and your guests may have forgotten something. In 2007 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed fought valiantly to save middle class American families from the unfair and unintended consequences of the Alternative Minimum Tax that would impose a higher tax rate on them because Congress had not raised the income levels that would trigger the ATM. As Ms. Pelosi said, "The tax was never intended to fall upon these middle class families. The tax is to assure that the wealthy do not avoid paying their fair share." The 27 million "middle class" families fell into the income bracket of $150,000 to $360,000 per year and the ATM rate would have been 32%. Would that not have repealed the Bush Tax Cuts and gotten the Democrats what they have screamed for since the cuts were enacted?
In response to:
Eric
September 20, 2011 - 10:21 am
Almost anybody who owns a big operation, a factory for instance, will (since he is a member of the community) receive services that apply to the factory. Police, fire department, maintenance on the roads that bring workers to the factory and send trucks on their way, etc. Some of these expenses are on the accounting books, and some can be charged proportionately to the factory owner, e.g., his fleet of trucks pay higher tag fees according to how much weight they carry. But there are also costs of the factory that may not be paid by the factory at all. What if the operation produces a stink that offends anybody downwind of it?
Bill Gates would be in a bind if his company could not hire workers educated by the public school system. He would be in a bind if there were no police or fire services. He takes advantage of a whole host of infrastructure items and other advantages provided by a well-ordered community. Somebody who is barely surviving economically may have no valuable property to protect, no thought of hiring people educated by the public school system, etc. Even his or her personal safety costs paid by the city may be minimal.
As for higher prices in response to higher taxes, the key idea is probably that producers of any kind will always charge what the market will bear. Did consumer prices go down when the Bush tax cuts went in? Or did people raise prices a little, figuring that consumers now maybe had a few hundred extra dollars to spend and wouldn't mind soda at a dollar instead of 89 cents?
What about the idea that there is less demande because we all ready have lots of stuff! Our standard of living has increased greatly since the 1950's and we don't need as much anymore besides food and clothes. There is much larger manufacturing capacity than people to buy.
Furthermore, as many large manufacturers and busineeses have moved overseas, many small businesses who supplied them have lost that demande as well.
"ericwino wrote:
Fairtaxman,
I'm confused about your notion that 'private sector entity... would then levy taxes in proportion to a person's wealth rather than income.' When you go to the grocery store, does the checkout person ask your net worth or adjusted gross income and THEN recalculate your bill based on your ability to pay. NO! Condominiums charge maintainance fees based on your portion of the total square footage of the building, not your wealth/income. Condo dwellers choose the size unit they inhabit, don't they? Does Bill Gates receive any more service from government than someone who is flat broke and unemployed? NO! My theory is that 'progressive' income tax leads only to higher prices, since high income earners tend to set their own wage scale and merely pass on their higher tax bill on to the consumers of their goods/ services. Any thoughts?
Eric
September 20, 2011 - 10:21 am"
Hey, Slicko-
Purchases and consumption are auto equalizing because if I pay $500,000 for a fancy car, the Clerk doesn't need my Statement of Worth. As Doc Jones said during the Energy Crisis,"If you gots de Money or you gots de Credit Card, we gots de gas".
Had it not been for the Government's protection of Copy, Patent and Trademark Rights and the mind-boggling subsidies by the Govt on R&D, Computers and Software, plus Govt tolerance for Gate's predatory and sometimes illegal practices, Bill Gates would be just another Harvard Dropout begging his classmates for some sort of Sinecure.
"Pass on the higher Tax bill"? Ever heard of competition?
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
Furthermore, Slickboy, there is a long tradition of Taxes based on consumption and wealth of the Taxpayer in the US.
In Colonial times and after, the wealthy paid taxes on the size and value of their land and estates, numbers of Slaves, Horses, boats, Exports, Imports, Toll Bridges and Ferries, Distilleries, etc, etc and Income from those assets.
In addition, they were obliged to Tithe to the Church (whether they adhered to the Church or not), to support the Church, the Poor and many functions now considered Government business.
In addition, in times of War, were obliged to raise, dress, arm, feed and transport numbers of Troops according to his/her wealth.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
monte wrote:
"The definition of bigot and racist does not change because the user of these words is black. If you and she do not like your own words being used to point out the obvious hypocrisy in your posts I suggest you refrain from using them in the first place."
monte, well crafted. Yes pisces is a racist because she hates white people. It doesn't matter what that white person's relationship to other races might be, how they feel or act toward other races. If they are white they are the enemy.
As for Grady Lee Coward, here we have a liberal progressive who fancies himself judge, jury, and executioner; arbiter of all things racial. It would be sad if it weren't so funny! He'll use the term racist with no basis, no evidence, and when you call him on it, instead of realizing the error and owning up to it, he doubles down. So now, if he doesn't like the views of someone you AGREE with on the board (be they on taxes, the size of government, a social issue, whatever) you're STILL a racist.
No. Here's what Grady Lee Coward is. He's the worst kind of liberal. He's a drive-by liberal. He comes by, shoots his mouth off, and runs away like a little girl.
No thinking person here really takes anything Grady Lee Coward says seriously. If he would hang around long enough to argue and defend a position, he might gain some credibility. But ... that's not what drive-by wuss liberals do.
"Lynn Cowburn wrote:
I have always been a staunch proponent for social benefits like welfare and unemployment taxes. However, my current experiences as a hiring manager in a small business, as well as the owner of several small businesses with my husband, is that we can't find people to take jobs that we have available. When I have found potential candidates, a large percentage have only wanted the job if I was willing to delay paying them until unemployment and other benefits to run out. I suddenly find myself of the belief that these programs are preventing the job numbers from improving!
A note, the jobs I have are not complex.
September 20, 2011 - 10:57 am"
You're a Liar!!!
You ought to be ashamed of yourself. There are Millions of decent out-of-work Americans who will do anything to keep their Families fed and housed who have exhausted their Unemployment or would rather work, who will grab your jobs without trying to make deals.
Are your not complex jobs you have, the kind that gives a guy 2 days work which gets him kicked off of Unemployment and forced to wait 1 or 2 weeks or more to get back on again?
" I suddenly find myself of the belief that these programs are preventing the job numbers from improving!"
You got a lot of nerve pedaling that Lunatic notion that the Unemployed and Unemployment Compensation and Food Stamps causes the Unemployment. You ought to be made to walk the streets looking for some kind of work and lay awake at night worrying about losing your home with no money for food or clothes, School Books and Fees for the Kids or gas for the car.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
"Grady Lee Howard wrote:
...This reminded me of Congressman Paul shamed the other night by extremists yelling,"Let him die! Let him die!" when that is something Ron Paul would never support. Dr. Paul and I could agree on this chant, "Let hatred die."
September 20, 2011 - 11:16 am"
Part of that outburst was because of the way slimy Blitzer worded the question. He said, "What if the Guy CHOSE not to have Medical Insurance". Most people who lack Medical lack it because they couldn't afford it or are ineligible.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
"chueymota wrote:
We should look at how we got into the deficit problem. When President Bush and Mr. Chaney were in office, the general belief that was stated was that deficites do not matter. Later on Mr. Bush got us involved in the war in Iraq and tax breaks to the rich were passed by the congress...
September 20, 2011 - 10:45 am"
It didn't stop there. The loss of Business competition and Tax cuts left more money in the hands of the rich than the Economy could absorb. So we have too much capital chasing too few opportunities leading to huge bubbles and other Hare-brained investments sure to blow up and make lots of Money disappear.
But the idea that the stupid Runt Bush blundered into all this mess is to vastly underrate the Malefactors of Great Wealth.
The Super Rich have secured their wealth in hard assets and Government Bonds and will continue bringing on terrible deflation which will require us poor fish to pay off our and the Government's debts with our newly valuable, but hard earned Dollars.
Most people have no idea how much wages and Prices fell after the Great Crash of 1929.
The plan was laid out years ago and they were waiting for the death of Communism to close the trap. Their plan is proceeding beautifully and will soon be complete. Good Bye Pensions, Good Bye Homes, Good Bye Savings, Good Bye Jobs, Good Bye Suckers!
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
mchaun wrote:
"You're a Liar!!!"
Look, Monte. I guess anybody is free to say what they want on this board, but don't you think a better approach to Ms. Cowburn might have been to ask her the type of jobs involved and the part of the country she lives in?
There are places where it is NOT POSSIBLE to find people to fill certain hi-tech jobs. Maybe that's what she's talking about. With other jobs, sometimes people with the right skills just aren't living where those jobs are Here's a little more off-beat example, but it will demonstrate the point; a friend of mine owns and trains polo ponies in the summer. He can't get good trainers in this country. PERIOD. He says he either gets "cowboys" that are too rough, or "show horse trainers" that aren't tough enough. It's a VERY specialized skill-set So instead, he has to bring trainers in on temporary visas from Argentina. Now, that's an extreme example, but the prinicple is also true in certain hi-tech jobs and other jobs with very specialized skills. So, if you want to get an accurate picture of the jobs situation in this country, try a little more probing questions rather than just screaming Liar!
The fact is YOU DON'T KNOW if she is lying or not. But, it's easier to just stay in the dark and think evil of the nasty capitalist than get the truth, isn't it?
482 Million Dollars are being spent on providing to low income people every year in this country.
$ 124 Billions collected by people on SS I ( payments for so called Back pain
depression,Anxiety) these are able bodied people in their 30's.Most of the people should be forced back in to work force after a year.Otherwise these people will be collecting benifits for the next 70 to 80 years.Eleminating this perk and free cell phones US Govt. can save Billions and help with the budget deficit.We don't to have to cut any benifits our Seniors,who worked hard and contributed in to the fundover the years.
Michael.
Unfair tax increases on the productive won't help the unproductive in a sustainable way but it does help a hapless Obama regain some cred with his political base.
Pols show that people want something and want someone else to pay for it. This appears to drive our tax policy.
Here's one way to reduce the deficit: get the gov out of picking industry winners and losers, eg Solyndra; looks like the company's executives are all taking the 5th. Time to prosecute the white house.
Phil Gingrey's oily delivery of the standard pre-packaged corporate think tank talking points would be better utilized for selling used cars.
----
To wit, cutting taxes for the rich ultimately did not work for the Calvin Coolidge-Herbert Hoover administrations (Great Depression) and has not worked in the past 30 years either, emphatically as demonstrated with the GW Bush administration that helped drive the national economy into the ground. Our most sustained prosperous moment in this country has been 1940's through the mid-1970's, without tax-cuts, without government cuts.
-----
Those who are adamant about cutting taxes for millionaires and billionaires are rich themselves and/or are most likely working for the rich. The current Republicans and Tea Party candidates are part of the gold watch club. And unfortunately the Democrats increasingly are drawing from the same well and are a poor contrast. The Tea Party was infact created by a PR firm working for the insurance industry (to shout down national health care) and is nothing but a corporate puppet bankrolled by the Koch brothers.
----
Warren Buffet is no fool and knows that cutting taxes for the rich does not result in jobs. Meanwhile government cuts are resulting in real job losses now. The FDR administration understood it was better to increase goverment jobs in such areas as parks, infrastructure, and the arts--than to cut taxes on the rich and cut programs.
----
Removing all tax cuts and tax loopholes for the minority wealty class and withdrawing our troops from these oily safaris will do far more for the economy and the American people than staunching a bunch of fat cats who produced little but financial jiggerypokery while waging class war on the working class.
In response to Eric's comments of yesterday I would like to note that his analogy to a grocery store would be correct it services rendered and offered were done so only on an individual basis. However, in a state, unfortunately (or otherwise) we need to deal with communal issues. Therefore I think that the condo analogy is more apt. There the services are rendered by the condo to all in a coherent fashion and (apparently it is generally agreed) that it is fair that each pays in proportion to the area of his/her apartment(s).
In response to Monte's statement (that 54% of tax filers pay no taxes) I would like to see an authoritative source for it (comments by Lawrence O' Donnel, Hannity and Limbaugh do not qualify). Then I would like to see what is the make up of this segment of tax filers that pays no taxes. Blancket statements, inciting as they maybe (or perhaps for this same reason) have to be dealt with caution and diligence.
I will have to postpone my analysis on "why a flat tax is grossly unfair on purely capitalist grounds" till the day after tomorrow.
hainc,
In truth, Obama doesn't care if the rich get taxed more or not, and actually he would probably prefer if his "plan" did not pass. His goal is not to raise taxes on the rich but to use them as a tool to demagogue the Republicans in 2012. That's all that's going on here. It's a hail Mary pass against being a one termer. He knows his time is running out.
"ecgberht wrote:
mchaun wrote:
"You're a Liar!!!"
Look, Monte. I guess anybody is free to say what they want on this board, but don't you think a better approach to Ms. Cowburn might have been to ask her the type of jobs involved and the part of the country she lives in?
There are places where it is NOT POSSIBLE to find people to fill certain hi-tech jobs. Maybe that's what she's talking about."
She described the jobs and THEY WERE NOT HIGH-TECH!!
"..a friend of mine owns and trains polo ponies in the summer. He can't get good trainers in this country. PERIOD. He says he either gets "cowboys" that are too rough, or "show horse trainers" that aren't tough enough. It's a VERY specialized skill-set So instead, he has to bring trainers in on temporary visas from Argentina."
Yeah, I saw the Movie, Brokeback Mountain, wasn't it? Yum,yum, Handsome Argentine Caballeros riding wildly across the Pampas!! Does he let you share his Hammer Dicked Cowboys?
Training Polo Ponies, Indeed!!
" So, if you want to get an accurate picture of the jobs situation in this country, try a little more probing questions rather than just screaming Liar!
I asked her about the Jobs, she did not answer.
"The fact is YOU DON'T KNOW if she is lying or not."
The facts are that She and Michael below always have their Urban Myths about the fakers on Disability, the Welfare Queens buying 50 pounds of Sirloin with Food Stamps, the Homeless Beggars making $200 per Day.
GFYself and leave me alone! You can't even read yet take it upon yourself to lecture Commenters who are considerably smarter, better informed and much more decent than you and your Right wing Lackeys.
Your comment is one of the looniest I have seen on this site, which usually provokes mostly intelligent and sensible opinions
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
Wow, you must like taking the stoopit punishment I keep laying on you 'cause you just keep coming back for more!
"Yeah, I saw the Movie, Brokeback Mountain"
I'll bet you did! Does it get you hot? Good thing for you those DVDs don't wear out, huh?! I haven't seen it but I do know what it's about. Sorry, I don't play on that team, Monte, but hey, I don't judge you.
"The facts are that She and Michael below always have their Urban Myths about the fakers on Disability, the Welfare Queens buying 50 pounds of Sirloin with Food Stamps, the Homeless Beggars making $200 per Day. "
These are not Urban myths, my friend. These people exist. 50 lbs of sirloin is hyperbole, as are the homeless beggars making $200 per day - BUT there are some who game the systems, some that do beg as a full time job yet live in homes in decent neighborhoods where I live. I know it for a fact. Hey, I don't actually have anything against that, but I don't see it as socially productive.
Ms. Cowburn said, "I have always been a staunch proponent for social benefits like welfare and unemployment taxes. "
I take her at her word on that. Again, to say that abuse of the unemployment system has not taken place is just unrealistic. My sister-in-law's son is a case in point - most of the period that he was on unemployment he didn't really look for a job at all. When his UE was about to run out and it was unclear if the most recent extension would go through, he "miraculously" found a job.
My point with Ms. Cowburn's jobs is that the job market is not evenly balanced between available jobs and people who are willing to fill them. Part of the fault of that is demographics. Part of it is how little we ask of the unemployed in order to collect their benefits.
"GFYself and leave me alone!"
WAAAAHHHH!!! WAAAHHH!!! Ecgberht is so mean to me! Grow up you baby. If you can't stand the heat, get better at arguing your points with better information.
"[you] take it upon yourself to lecture Commenters who are considerably smarter, better informed and much more decent"
GFYself is decent?! As for the smarter and better informed, says you. Factually I've embarrassed you on every issue and all you can do is cast ad hominem in return. But ... that's what liberals do.
"accountant wrote:
I've decided I'm for Cain's 9-9-9 plan, but I think that the banks and other investors won't be happy about paying a 9% tax on each stock purchase. Of course, housing will take another beating when there's a 9% tax on the purchase, but that's how life is"
Little guys buy stocks. So if I buy 200 shares of AT&T stock at say $26 a share, that is 9%x $5000. Close to $500 in taxes.
"accountant wrote:
Well we hear from the congressman that raising taxes onthe wealthy will kill jobs. But a quick review tells us this: 2002 - 2008, tax cuts, no new jobs. 2009- 2011 same tax cuts, no new jobs. Perhaps its time for a change of plan"
August 2006 unemployment was 4.7 %. Can you specify more?
"sacchinft wrote:
When the bad times are caused by Republicans cutting regulations and lowering taxes, the Republican solution is to cut regulations and lower taxes"
Are you sure sacchinft? Because what I am hearing from Congress is to cut spending.
"Neanderthal wrote:
When will those individuals making over 250,000.00 that are Christian conservatives begin to use their conscience and literally pay their fare share. This is a morale issue. No where in the world does eliminating government and reducing taxes on the rich people or companies work. The Republicans and Tea Baggers are requesting ridiculous demands. They should be ashamed"
Neanderthal:
How do you know that some of these Christian Conservatives are not paying by personal contributions to the unforunate?
Last I heard the Southern Red States where many of these Christian Conservatives lives give more than your northern blue states?
Lynn Cowburn wrote:
I have always been a staunch proponent for social benefits like welfare and unemployment taxes. However, my current experiences as a hiring manager in a small business, as well as the owner of several small businesses with my husband, is that we can't find people to take jobs that we have available. When I have found potential candidates, a large percentage have only wanted the job if I was willing to delay paying them until unemployment and other benefits to run out. I suddenly find myself of the belief that these programs are preventing the job numbers from improving!
Lynn: I used to work for a milk company and we would have people call to see if positions were avialable. Of course the receptionist caught on and would tell some of these caller to come to the plant and fill out an application. She knew that to get unemployment benefits all an applicant had to do was put three applications a week to get their check. Many of these callers did not want to take the time to come to the plant in order to fill out an application.
"meanconser wrote:
Lynn Cowburn wrote:
I have always been a staunch proponent for social benefits like welfare and unemployment taxes. However, my current experiences as a hiring manager in a small business, as well as the owner of several small businesses with my husband, is that we can't find people to take jobs that we have available. When I have found potential candidates, a large percentage have only wanted the job if I was willing to delay paying them until unemployment and other benefits to run out. I suddenly find myself of the belief that these programs are preventing the job numbers from improving!
Lynn: I used to work for a milk company and we would have people call to see if positions were avialable. Of course the receptionist caught on and would tell some of these caller to come to the plant and fill out an application. She knew that to get unemployment benefits all an applicant had to do was put three applications a week to get their check. Many of these callers did not want to take the time to come to the plant in order to fill out an application.
September 21, 2011 - 11:09 pm"
If they did not want to take the time to come to the plant in order to fill out an application, how do they get their 3 Applications to stay on UE?
Did you have any jobs open anyhow? Of course not.
You people are so full of it.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
mchaun wrote:
"If they did not want to take the time to come to the plant in order to fill out an application, how do they get their 3 Applications to stay on UE?"
Careful, Monte. Your ignorance is showing again. It used to be that a recipient needed to verify that they were looking or work But it is no longer true that someone on unemployment needs to "get their 3 Applications to stay on UE". All you have to do is, essentially, check a box that says you looked. No specifics.
Don't you ever get tired of looking uninformed and ignorant?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment_insurance#Application_process
Now, let's review who's "full of it", shall we, Mr. "Decent"?
mchaun wrote:
"Did you have any jobs open anyhow? Of course not.
You people are so full of it"
Haun:
There is alot of turnover in Route Milk Sales. Spoke to a former route man Monday at the company I worked for, he told me there are 4 routes open. This kind of work is back breaking, dirty, and long hours.
All you stated I should suffer I have during this recession. My response was to find any job I could. I found one in 2 days. It was hard work, at a lower pay rate, and doing work I would previously have considered beneath me. Lower pay meant no extras like cable TV, house phone, or doctor visits. I made sandwich bread and used lots of dried beans to get my grocery bill down to $250 a month for a family of five. I didn't qualify for unemployment because I worked for myself. I did qualify for Medicaid and food stamps but didn't apply.
Now about those jobs. The first were for waitstaff, bussers, and hostesses at a restaurant. The next for salespeople and door knockers to make appointments for them. The sales were in a trade that almost anyone who had previously worked in building could do. Supposedly there were lots of unemployed construction workers. The last set of jobs were also in a building trade but said right in the ad that no experience was required. None of these jobs were part time or short term. In fact the sales jobs were very profitable if you were willing to work hard like I had already done.
So again, these weren't complex jobs, and yet no responses to ads run in multiple locations including the unemployment office and schools for weeks on end. When we did get responses, they put on qualifiers or said they couldn't imagine doing that kind of job.
So back to the subject at hand. If you are desperate for cash, you do what it takes to take care of your family. I did. But if you have some other way of getting money that doesn't involve working maybe you are a heck of a lot more picky. That was my experience and the reason for my comments. I now believe that a rework of the social welfare programs is in order as they do not create incentives to make a change in an individual's situation.
ecgberht wrote:
avintageyear wrote:
"ecg: you can want a moral argument or any other kind of argument all day long, that's your business. What's fascinating to me is that you seem to think you are entitled to one."
Yes I get that you can't provide one, so thanks for cofirming that.
Our country was founded upon moral principles of how the people are governed. The left has forgotten that. The Tea Party is our canary in the coal mine and a constant reminder. Try reading the declaration. Here, let me give you a taste of how it goes ...
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
July 10, 2012 - 2:30 pm"
So, what's your point??
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com