the biggest threat to the US Economy is the Congress." That is the best quote I have seen in a long time and it was said by Senator Joe Manchin.
I am also struck this morning how none of the Tea Party people believe they represent the constituents who did not vote for them and would support policies of compromise. Of course, this also applies to Bernie Sanders who would need to acknowledge some of RedStateVT's views should be accommodated in compromise.
If Congress just behaved in a manner that focused on solutions that move us forward rather than trying to unwind the policies of the other side, we would make progress. And Congress would not be the biggest threat to the U.S. Economy.
Monday, December 31, 2012
Sunday, December 30, 2012
A Broken Record
This is what I feel about the political debate including what I write about it. Mr. Romney's Economic Advisor writes today in the New York Times about the need to raise taxes on the Middle Class if you are going to solve the long term fiscal deficit. He says this is so because the income tax revenue picture is already progressive and he discusses the need for solutions to the critical issues driving the future Medicare picture.
However, while reading it, I was struck by his failure to acknowledge that we have borrowed 100% of the cost of the War on Terror and no Republican will admit this and state that we should pay for it with increased revenues. I will also add that we should probably raise some revenues to pay for the unfunded Medicare Pharmacy Benefit that the Bush II administration created.
Once we have a structure for paying for the War on Terror (and that might well include some tax increases below the top 20% to help pay for the Medicare Pharmacy Benefit), then Democrats would be forced to deal with the unaffordable issue on some expenditure categories, and, hopefully, there would be a true negotiation between the GOP and the Democrats for a balanced solution to our fiscal deficit.
But when the GOP does not acknowledge the need to repay the debt that has financed the War on Terror with increased revenues, they provide cover to the Democrats to not deal with the cost of other categories. To reduce the cost of other categories to repay the debt incurred by the War on Terror is inherently unfair and unpopular with the majority of voters.
As an aside while writing the above, I am stuck yet again by how irresponsible the Bush II administration was. Unfunded wars, unfunded improved entitlements, weakening of financial regulation that allowed Ponzi Schemes and systemic economic risk to form, and in general, no regard for using facts and reality to manage the government. Just a slavish adherence to Supply Side Economics solves everything. Supply Side Economics needs a sound economy to provide benefits to the fiscal situation. Bush II destroyed a sound economy created by Reagan, Bush I and Clinton. Bush II might well be the worst President in history.
However, while reading it, I was struck by his failure to acknowledge that we have borrowed 100% of the cost of the War on Terror and no Republican will admit this and state that we should pay for it with increased revenues. I will also add that we should probably raise some revenues to pay for the unfunded Medicare Pharmacy Benefit that the Bush II administration created.
Once we have a structure for paying for the War on Terror (and that might well include some tax increases below the top 20% to help pay for the Medicare Pharmacy Benefit), then Democrats would be forced to deal with the unaffordable issue on some expenditure categories, and, hopefully, there would be a true negotiation between the GOP and the Democrats for a balanced solution to our fiscal deficit.
But when the GOP does not acknowledge the need to repay the debt that has financed the War on Terror with increased revenues, they provide cover to the Democrats to not deal with the cost of other categories. To reduce the cost of other categories to repay the debt incurred by the War on Terror is inherently unfair and unpopular with the majority of voters.
As an aside while writing the above, I am stuck yet again by how irresponsible the Bush II administration was. Unfunded wars, unfunded improved entitlements, weakening of financial regulation that allowed Ponzi Schemes and systemic economic risk to form, and in general, no regard for using facts and reality to manage the government. Just a slavish adherence to Supply Side Economics solves everything. Supply Side Economics needs a sound economy to provide benefits to the fiscal situation. Bush II destroyed a sound economy created by Reagan, Bush I and Clinton. Bush II might well be the worst President in history.
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Education Matters
Catching up on some magazines that came in over the holiday, I read a spirited defense of teachers and the role of education in society. This did not deal with teacher unions but rather the good that teachers have done for so many students and what that education is meant to accomplish.
What prompted the article was the focus on home schooling and the book advocating that everyone forego college and become a computer programmer entrepreneur. I had noticed the book but not given it much thought.
I have been concerned about home schooling because I don't understand the quality control process. However, statistics show that parents who take this on generally do OK because the kids do as well or better than the graduates of organized schools in college.
However, I know I benefited from college and not just in a monetary sense. The teachers I had in high school and college taught me to think independently, to research facts and derive a sense of how to achieve what I want given those facts. The course work taught me how to understand the complexity of this world and its societies and to appreciate the value that different experts can bring to a discussion of issues.
Just focusing on the monetary reward of education oversimplifies the role that each of us needs to play in society as a responsible citizen.
I think the origin of this lack of respect for teachers has three sources. One, teacher unions are resented for protecting underperforming teachers and creating an environment where managers have limited control over performance management processes. Two, a significant percentage of schools are not doing a good job, have not done a good job for many years, and this frustrates people who want the best for their child. Three, U.S. culture has been completely focused on the monetary reward of work for a long time (rightfully so) without reflection on the value that informed opinions being to the country.
Thus, we have a substantial number of people who believe the earth was created 6,000 years ago, doubt the scientific base that says CO2 causes the atmosphere to heat, don't understand fiscal or monetary policy and do not understand the need for gradualism in changing policies. And I cannot forget the retired NYC police officer who said to me that the government should stay out of his retirement benefits because to do otherwise was socialism. This of course is a variant on the theme that many retired people believe Medicare is not a government program and therefore should not be part of any budget solution. Ignorance is dangerous to political process.
What prompted the article was the focus on home schooling and the book advocating that everyone forego college and become a computer programmer entrepreneur. I had noticed the book but not given it much thought.
I have been concerned about home schooling because I don't understand the quality control process. However, statistics show that parents who take this on generally do OK because the kids do as well or better than the graduates of organized schools in college.
However, I know I benefited from college and not just in a monetary sense. The teachers I had in high school and college taught me to think independently, to research facts and derive a sense of how to achieve what I want given those facts. The course work taught me how to understand the complexity of this world and its societies and to appreciate the value that different experts can bring to a discussion of issues.
Just focusing on the monetary reward of education oversimplifies the role that each of us needs to play in society as a responsible citizen.
I think the origin of this lack of respect for teachers has three sources. One, teacher unions are resented for protecting underperforming teachers and creating an environment where managers have limited control over performance management processes. Two, a significant percentage of schools are not doing a good job, have not done a good job for many years, and this frustrates people who want the best for their child. Three, U.S. culture has been completely focused on the monetary reward of work for a long time (rightfully so) without reflection on the value that informed opinions being to the country.
Thus, we have a substantial number of people who believe the earth was created 6,000 years ago, doubt the scientific base that says CO2 causes the atmosphere to heat, don't understand fiscal or monetary policy and do not understand the need for gradualism in changing policies. And I cannot forget the retired NYC police officer who said to me that the government should stay out of his retirement benefits because to do otherwise was socialism. This of course is a variant on the theme that many retired people believe Medicare is not a government program and therefore should not be part of any budget solution. Ignorance is dangerous to political process.
And Back to Health Care We Go
E.J. Dionne nails the GOP inconsistency on the head with some points I have been making. Health Insurance Exchanges at the State level were a GOP idea and we do not have an entitlement problem, we have a cost of health care problem and solving it is complicated. Compassionate end of life care must contribute to control of costs.
Link
Link
Monday, December 24, 2012
Parallels Between 1933 Nazi's & the House GOP
I know that is a provocative title, but I just learned a fact about the 1933 election that brought Hitler to power.
The National Socialist's Party led by Hitler only got 44% of the vote but because there were so many other parties running in the election, Hitler got to form the government. After he was in office, he cancelled elections thereafter. So WWII and the holocaust arose despite 56% of the voters in the country voting for something else.
Now we have the House GOP, which nationwide had 1 million fewer votes in the 2012 House of Representative elections but 25 more seats because of gerrymandering, refusing to govern by compromising and keeping the country running in a prudent fashion. Is it any wonder that Obama beat Romney by getting more votes? Is it any wonder that in the Senate races more Democrats won than Republicans?
Republicans are in the minority and have an obligation to present their point of view, but also have an obligation to keep the government running. Stopping the government from working is the equivalent of canceling elections and starting a war as a minority party.
Is this why there is such support within the GOP for no regulation of semi-automatic weapons or gun magazines? So Lindsay Graham, who I thought was a reasonable person, can march into war with his Bushmaster or AK47 that he keeps in his home. I suspect he lives in a safe neighborhood so he doesn't need it to defend his property from riff faff invading his home. So, perhaps, the GOP is getting itself into military fighting shape when they only get 44% of the vote.
I know there are statistics out there that show murders happen everywhere in the U.S. no matter what the regulation. But should Fireman have to wait for police escorts before they respond to a fire? Should children have to be protected by armed guards just in case a madman walks into their school? What kind of country does the NRA want to live in?
The murder rate in the U.S. is 4x that of Britain and 6x that of Germany. And more and more of US murders are wanton killings of randomly available targets, not gang warfare. I don't believe video games are causing this, but they could be toned down. I don't believe a national database will capture every mildly insane person, but a licensing procedure with interviews (and an ATF person with the guts to deny a person a license if they are thought to be unstable) might. But so would limiting access to the weapons. No one needs semi-automatic weapons with huge magazines. Cities should be able to try and get handguns off the streets and license those who do have them. We need a dog license and a drivers license, why not a gun license? I know it is in the Constitution but we don't want anyone to be able to buy a bazooka or shoulder fired missile, so why are semi-automatic weapons legal?
The GOP is a rural dominated party. So is the Egyptian Brotherhood. The Egyptian constitution that will install Sharia influenced processes will pass, but Cairo residents voted 57% against it. More parallels between the modern GOP and other potentially autocratic regimes.
This is depressing, I am going to our XMAS eve traditional night out now.
Merry Christmas. I hope we get some sanity in D.C. in our collective stocking.
The National Socialist's Party led by Hitler only got 44% of the vote but because there were so many other parties running in the election, Hitler got to form the government. After he was in office, he cancelled elections thereafter. So WWII and the holocaust arose despite 56% of the voters in the country voting for something else.
Now we have the House GOP, which nationwide had 1 million fewer votes in the 2012 House of Representative elections but 25 more seats because of gerrymandering, refusing to govern by compromising and keeping the country running in a prudent fashion. Is it any wonder that Obama beat Romney by getting more votes? Is it any wonder that in the Senate races more Democrats won than Republicans?
Republicans are in the minority and have an obligation to present their point of view, but also have an obligation to keep the government running. Stopping the government from working is the equivalent of canceling elections and starting a war as a minority party.
Is this why there is such support within the GOP for no regulation of semi-automatic weapons or gun magazines? So Lindsay Graham, who I thought was a reasonable person, can march into war with his Bushmaster or AK47 that he keeps in his home. I suspect he lives in a safe neighborhood so he doesn't need it to defend his property from riff faff invading his home. So, perhaps, the GOP is getting itself into military fighting shape when they only get 44% of the vote.
I know there are statistics out there that show murders happen everywhere in the U.S. no matter what the regulation. But should Fireman have to wait for police escorts before they respond to a fire? Should children have to be protected by armed guards just in case a madman walks into their school? What kind of country does the NRA want to live in?
The murder rate in the U.S. is 4x that of Britain and 6x that of Germany. And more and more of US murders are wanton killings of randomly available targets, not gang warfare. I don't believe video games are causing this, but they could be toned down. I don't believe a national database will capture every mildly insane person, but a licensing procedure with interviews (and an ATF person with the guts to deny a person a license if they are thought to be unstable) might. But so would limiting access to the weapons. No one needs semi-automatic weapons with huge magazines. Cities should be able to try and get handguns off the streets and license those who do have them. We need a dog license and a drivers license, why not a gun license? I know it is in the Constitution but we don't want anyone to be able to buy a bazooka or shoulder fired missile, so why are semi-automatic weapons legal?
The GOP is a rural dominated party. So is the Egyptian Brotherhood. The Egyptian constitution that will install Sharia influenced processes will pass, but Cairo residents voted 57% against it. More parallels between the modern GOP and other potentially autocratic regimes.
This is depressing, I am going to our XMAS eve traditional night out now.
Merry Christmas. I hope we get some sanity in D.C. in our collective stocking.
Sunday, December 23, 2012
Pre-XMAS Musing in this Political Year
One view on gun control and it has a constitutional basis in the 2nd Amendment.
Click to see
Thomas Friedman's observation on the GOP.
"It can’t win with a base that is at war with math, physics, human biology, economics and common-sense gun laws all at the same time."
No wonder they can't govern the House with a sense of how to fit in the world that the rest of us live in.
And Ross Douthat calls Michael Bloomberg a center-left policitican. I guess he is from a Republican view point but not from a Democratic view. He would be a center right person by most people's definition because he supports Wall Street and Big Business and doesn't expect any support from unions.
But meanwhile, Mr. Douthat must be really depressed by the GOP performance in D.C. stating:
"The right-wing view is embittered, paranoid and confused. It opposes anything the establishment supports but doesn’t know what it wants to do instead. (Defund government or protect Medicare? Break up the banks or deregulate them? Send more troops to Libya or don’t get involved? Protect our liberties or put our schools on lockdown?) Sometimes the right’s “just say no” approach holds the establishment at bay — as on climate change and immigration, to date. But sometimes, as the House Republicans are demonstrating in the budget showdown, it makes the eventual defeat that much more sweeping."
Click to see
Thomas Friedman's observation on the GOP.
"It can’t win with a base that is at war with math, physics, human biology, economics and common-sense gun laws all at the same time."
No wonder they can't govern the House with a sense of how to fit in the world that the rest of us live in.
And Ross Douthat calls Michael Bloomberg a center-left policitican. I guess he is from a Republican view point but not from a Democratic view. He would be a center right person by most people's definition because he supports Wall Street and Big Business and doesn't expect any support from unions.
But meanwhile, Mr. Douthat must be really depressed by the GOP performance in D.C. stating:
"The right-wing view is embittered, paranoid and confused. It opposes anything the establishment supports but doesn’t know what it wants to do instead. (Defund government or protect Medicare? Break up the banks or deregulate them? Send more troops to Libya or don’t get involved? Protect our liberties or put our schools on lockdown?) Sometimes the right’s “just say no” approach holds the establishment at bay — as on climate change and immigration, to date. But sometimes, as the House Republicans are demonstrating in the budget showdown, it makes the eventual defeat that much more sweeping."
I am not sure why Mr. Douthat doesn't support climate change policies (it now appears that the ocean's absorption of CO2 is causing its acidity to increase potentially killing all all shell fish) or immigration reform (we need the 11mm workers to prevent the GDP contracting along with a 5% decline in the labor force), but at least he is acknowledging the reality that people want politicians to govern by working with the other side when they are in the minority and in the majority.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
National Databases for the Mentally Impaired?
This is what the NRA is proposing to reduce the risk of the mentally ill getting guns with which to shoot up innocent people.
Isn't a national database of individual abilities what the book 1984 was all about? Isn't keeping the government out of individual lives what every American wants to prevent? How does a person who somehow overcomes their mental illness supposed to get their name off the list so they can get a job? Would such a specific law targeting a specific group even be constitutional?
The 1st group I would imagine suing to prevent the law from being implemented is the NRA.
All we need to do is get automatic weapons off the street and out of circulation. If the Congress had let the law continue in 2004, there wouldn't be very many automatic weapons in circulation. Now it will take 100 years for them to wear out and not be useful, although you might be able to do it faster by limiting ammunition sales.
I support hunters, but this focus on allowing anyone to own any gun is beyond my comprehension. Why not let everyone own a bazooka and a shoulder fired anti-aircraft missile? After all, they are simply forms of guns and something any self-respecting terrorist would love to have. Then we would need for the good guys to have the same weapons so they could take out the terrorists. This is the world the NRA wants us to live in?
Isn't a national database of individual abilities what the book 1984 was all about? Isn't keeping the government out of individual lives what every American wants to prevent? How does a person who somehow overcomes their mental illness supposed to get their name off the list so they can get a job? Would such a specific law targeting a specific group even be constitutional?
The 1st group I would imagine suing to prevent the law from being implemented is the NRA.
All we need to do is get automatic weapons off the street and out of circulation. If the Congress had let the law continue in 2004, there wouldn't be very many automatic weapons in circulation. Now it will take 100 years for them to wear out and not be useful, although you might be able to do it faster by limiting ammunition sales.
I support hunters, but this focus on allowing anyone to own any gun is beyond my comprehension. Why not let everyone own a bazooka and a shoulder fired anti-aircraft missile? After all, they are simply forms of guns and something any self-respecting terrorist would love to have. Then we would need for the good guys to have the same weapons so they could take out the terrorists. This is the world the NRA wants us to live in?
Friday, December 21, 2012
Has the GOP Lost Their Mind?
On the Fiscal Cliff, if you just say no and don't participate in a solution, how can you expect to influence the solution? No wonder most voters blame the GOP for the calamity we are possibly going to enter.
As for the NRA, my estimate is that it would cost $10 bn a year to put an armed guard in every school. I estimated, with the help of my colleagues at work where we split 50/50 politically, that there are 150,000 schools and each guard would cost $70,000 a year with benefits. How are school systems that are under financial pressure going to pay for these guards? Once again, the GOP sticks their head in the sand and says no to everything. I think the GOP supports mass murderers.
As for the NRA, my estimate is that it would cost $10 bn a year to put an armed guard in every school. I estimated, with the help of my colleagues at work where we split 50/50 politically, that there are 150,000 schools and each guard would cost $70,000 a year with benefits. How are school systems that are under financial pressure going to pay for these guards? Once again, the GOP sticks their head in the sand and says no to everything. I think the GOP supports mass murderers.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
If you care about the cost & quality of college
I wrote this last week, but no one has read it and anyone who is interested in what universities are doing and what it costs should know this.
Last week's Economist article on the problems with higher education has some shocking data.
The cost of a university education has risen by 5x the rate of inflation since 1983. The cost of a university education in 2010 requires 38% of median income up from 23% in the year 2001. And the standards for such degrees have been reduced to the point where I am not sure how to gauge what academic results really mean. 43% of all grades at 4 year universities are "A's". GPA's in 2006 averaged 3.11 up from 2.52 in the 1950's. AND a third of students to not take any courses requiring more than 40 pages of reading over an entire term.
This is appalling and I welcome reader input as to what can be done to change this. I don't think the Federal Government has any role in any of this and I don't think that for-profit education is an answer for this either.
Maybe, business should insist on 2 year degrees and hire those people before they hire 4 year people for whom they have no idea what standards they have been educated to. I hate to say that because I know I benefited from a liberal arts education, but then I had to read 40 pages a WEEK in almost every course.
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Sunday 12/9 Musings
I think we are going over the fiscal cliff because many in the Government want to reform the overall tax code and you cannot accomplish that in the time we have left before we go over the cliff. And if we go over the cliff, you are then changing tax rates from higher levels so it is easier to accomplish. One stalking horse from the GOP Senate is a design to broaden the tax base. The only thing left is a VAT or national sales tax, which while it is regressive, is probably a good thing from an incentive stand point as a nation we do need to raise our savings rate. Thank you Tom Coburn (R) of Oklahoma for revealing that.
Both the Economist and Thomas Friedman highlight the idiocy of Israel's new settlement plans on the West Bank and the Economist most pointedly says Israel should either get going on a 2 State negotiation or realize that if they do not, Jews will be a minority in an Arab country and the implications of how Jews would remain in control are horrifying. I fear Israel is reaching a point of no return of going over their own version of a morality cliff and that saddens me deeply. More deeply than continuing to live with a need for a strong military and an iron fist on terrorism which I completely support.
Ross Douthat identified what it would take for the GOP to open my mind on voting for them.
"The conservatism of 2011 and 2012 had a lot to say about the long-term liabilities of the American Government but far too little to say about the most immediate anxieties of American citizens, from rising health care costs to stagnating wages to the socioeconomic malaise spreading across the country's working class. Neither the Reagan legacy nor the current conservative catechism holds the solutions to these problems: they require Republicans to apply their principles more creatively, and think about policy anew."
And before quoting Maureen Dowd on what the GOP Presidential process produced in a candidate and doomed whomever to lose, I must say to organizations like Move-On and AARP who are against all entitlement reforms, GET REALISTIC. The country cannot afford what is promised and must find ways to stabilize entitlements. Yes, we need to control health care costs, so help develop policies that will do that without creating death panels. They exist in small pockets around the country and need to expanded through advocacy.
What the GOP Primary Process forgot about the country and what must change if I am to vote for the GOP again. Progress is made in the middle by being respectful of all views on all issues. Adhere to principles but respect that the either side's principles are deserving of respect. That is the nation we have and what we must work with.
"Who would have ever thought blacks would get and support the first black president? Who would have ever thought women would shy away from the party of transvaginal probes? Who would ever have thought gays would work against a party that treated them as immoral and subhuman? Who would have ever thought young people would desert a party that ignored science and hectored them on social issues? Who would have ever thought Latinos would scorn a party that expected them to finish up their chores and self-deport?"
Both the Economist and Thomas Friedman highlight the idiocy of Israel's new settlement plans on the West Bank and the Economist most pointedly says Israel should either get going on a 2 State negotiation or realize that if they do not, Jews will be a minority in an Arab country and the implications of how Jews would remain in control are horrifying. I fear Israel is reaching a point of no return of going over their own version of a morality cliff and that saddens me deeply. More deeply than continuing to live with a need for a strong military and an iron fist on terrorism which I completely support.
Ross Douthat identified what it would take for the GOP to open my mind on voting for them.
"The conservatism of 2011 and 2012 had a lot to say about the long-term liabilities of the American Government but far too little to say about the most immediate anxieties of American citizens, from rising health care costs to stagnating wages to the socioeconomic malaise spreading across the country's working class. Neither the Reagan legacy nor the current conservative catechism holds the solutions to these problems: they require Republicans to apply their principles more creatively, and think about policy anew."
And before quoting Maureen Dowd on what the GOP Presidential process produced in a candidate and doomed whomever to lose, I must say to organizations like Move-On and AARP who are against all entitlement reforms, GET REALISTIC. The country cannot afford what is promised and must find ways to stabilize entitlements. Yes, we need to control health care costs, so help develop policies that will do that without creating death panels. They exist in small pockets around the country and need to expanded through advocacy.
What the GOP Primary Process forgot about the country and what must change if I am to vote for the GOP again. Progress is made in the middle by being respectful of all views on all issues. Adhere to principles but respect that the either side's principles are deserving of respect. That is the nation we have and what we must work with.
"Who would have ever thought blacks would get and support the first black president? Who would have ever thought women would shy away from the party of transvaginal probes? Who would ever have thought gays would work against a party that treated them as immoral and subhuman? Who would have ever thought young people would desert a party that ignored science and hectored them on social issues? Who would have ever thought Latinos would scorn a party that expected them to finish up their chores and self-deport?"
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Conservative Musings
It is good every once in a while to read something that reminds you that conservative positions can have a highly principled basis. The country needs conservative principles if it is to prosper. Today's WSJ had several well written articles reminding me of that.
An interview with the outgoing Head of the Heritage Foundation highlighted 37 years of what the think tank has been trying to accomplish. The 1st thing is that the Heritage Foundation always starts one of its papers with the facts. I repeat, THE FACTS. Good policy must be based upon facts and principles. You can debate the propriety of where do draw the line between competing principles but policies must be based upon and address the facts. That is the 1st premise of what the Heritage Foundation has tried to accomplish. We can only hope Mr. DeMint believes in this.
These sound thinking Conservatives developed Romney Care with the requirement that all people must be in the Health Insurance System because without them being there they become freeloaders on the system when they receive care they cannot pay for. I also believe (but cannot quote chapter and verse) that they had a solution for controlling health care costs within the existing framework for Heath Insurance, not vouchers that push that off on the Insurance Companies that have so far not figured out a way to control health care costs.
Mr. Feulner, the outgoing head of the foundation, recalls when conservatives liked to work with Democrats to have government policy solve problems, not simply oppose any government policy. He cites Jack Kemp working with Democrats to create urban enterprise zones to reduce poverty in inner cities.
Mr. Feulner also recalls his free trade argument with Roger Milliken, a big financial supporter of the foundation. Mr. Millikan wanted the foundation to support a textile quota system. I am a free trade supporter and I quote Mr. Feulner's response to Mr. Milliken.
"Sorry Roger, you know we are free traders. When you had me down there to your plant, I asked why should you be able to buy a German spinning mill and a Japanese loom, but my wife can't buy a Malaysian short for our kids at Wal-Mart? It doesn't make any sense. And he ripped up his contribution check in front of me."
That is principled conservatism. Not what we see in the Congress where GOP legislators refuse to tackle tax subsidies for energy and other industrial companies and farmers (Democrats have a problem with that one also).
I hope Mr. DeMint does not destroy the Heritage Foundations commitment to laying out the facts.
There was also an article on the SEC sending a Wells Notice to Netflix for allegedly releasing material information on Facebook and that being illegal.
I have mixed emotions about the SEC. They certainly have an important role to play as witness what happens when they are not effective: Bernie Madoff (and how many others like him?), insufficient investor disclosure of risk management (Lehman, Bear, Merrill, AIG, Citi, JPM, Countrywide), and inadequate policing of processes laid out in prospectuses (how many untruths were there in RMBS securities before the Great Recession). However, they can be overzealous as well. A friend of a friend sits in jail half way through a 10 year sentence because he signed financial statement 3 months after becoming CFO and then the following month found and disclosed an accounting fraud in an Asian subsidiary. He acted with the best knowledge that he possessed at each step of the way but because he signed financials before he uncovered the fraud, he was prosecuted, despite the fact that he corrected the financial statements as soon as he knew the truth. This is hardly justice.
Now, the news the head of Netflix released on Facebook was not directly tied to anything in the financial statements and he has 200,000 Facebook friends. More people saw this bit of information this way than they would have through a Press Release on the Investor Relations page. Now such a Press Release should have probably been released in conjunction with the Facebook post, but is this really material enough to warrant a Wells Notice. The SEC has tendency to run amok and I think the reason is that they are all lawyers. They need financial analysts who understand materiality and proper process and can look at the world in a practical manner to protect investors. Instead they just keep hiring lawyers who think law suits are the only measure of productivity.
By the way, I fail to see how fining companies for bad past behavior against shareholders helps shareholders. This method of changing behavior only harms shareholders because the money paid in fines could otherwise have been used in one manner or another to help shareholder returns. This SEC policy makes me livid.
I also detest the double taxation of dividends but that cow is so far out of the barn, it is not worthy of any further elucidation.
An interview with the outgoing Head of the Heritage Foundation highlighted 37 years of what the think tank has been trying to accomplish. The 1st thing is that the Heritage Foundation always starts one of its papers with the facts. I repeat, THE FACTS. Good policy must be based upon facts and principles. You can debate the propriety of where do draw the line between competing principles but policies must be based upon and address the facts. That is the 1st premise of what the Heritage Foundation has tried to accomplish. We can only hope Mr. DeMint believes in this.
These sound thinking Conservatives developed Romney Care with the requirement that all people must be in the Health Insurance System because without them being there they become freeloaders on the system when they receive care they cannot pay for. I also believe (but cannot quote chapter and verse) that they had a solution for controlling health care costs within the existing framework for Heath Insurance, not vouchers that push that off on the Insurance Companies that have so far not figured out a way to control health care costs.
Mr. Feulner, the outgoing head of the foundation, recalls when conservatives liked to work with Democrats to have government policy solve problems, not simply oppose any government policy. He cites Jack Kemp working with Democrats to create urban enterprise zones to reduce poverty in inner cities.
Mr. Feulner also recalls his free trade argument with Roger Milliken, a big financial supporter of the foundation. Mr. Millikan wanted the foundation to support a textile quota system. I am a free trade supporter and I quote Mr. Feulner's response to Mr. Milliken.
"Sorry Roger, you know we are free traders. When you had me down there to your plant, I asked why should you be able to buy a German spinning mill and a Japanese loom, but my wife can't buy a Malaysian short for our kids at Wal-Mart? It doesn't make any sense. And he ripped up his contribution check in front of me."
That is principled conservatism. Not what we see in the Congress where GOP legislators refuse to tackle tax subsidies for energy and other industrial companies and farmers (Democrats have a problem with that one also).
I hope Mr. DeMint does not destroy the Heritage Foundations commitment to laying out the facts.
There was also an article on the SEC sending a Wells Notice to Netflix for allegedly releasing material information on Facebook and that being illegal.
I have mixed emotions about the SEC. They certainly have an important role to play as witness what happens when they are not effective: Bernie Madoff (and how many others like him?), insufficient investor disclosure of risk management (Lehman, Bear, Merrill, AIG, Citi, JPM, Countrywide), and inadequate policing of processes laid out in prospectuses (how many untruths were there in RMBS securities before the Great Recession). However, they can be overzealous as well. A friend of a friend sits in jail half way through a 10 year sentence because he signed financial statement 3 months after becoming CFO and then the following month found and disclosed an accounting fraud in an Asian subsidiary. He acted with the best knowledge that he possessed at each step of the way but because he signed financials before he uncovered the fraud, he was prosecuted, despite the fact that he corrected the financial statements as soon as he knew the truth. This is hardly justice.
Now, the news the head of Netflix released on Facebook was not directly tied to anything in the financial statements and he has 200,000 Facebook friends. More people saw this bit of information this way than they would have through a Press Release on the Investor Relations page. Now such a Press Release should have probably been released in conjunction with the Facebook post, but is this really material enough to warrant a Wells Notice. The SEC has tendency to run amok and I think the reason is that they are all lawyers. They need financial analysts who understand materiality and proper process and can look at the world in a practical manner to protect investors. Instead they just keep hiring lawyers who think law suits are the only measure of productivity.
By the way, I fail to see how fining companies for bad past behavior against shareholders helps shareholders. This method of changing behavior only harms shareholders because the money paid in fines could otherwise have been used in one manner or another to help shareholder returns. This SEC policy makes me livid.
I also detest the double taxation of dividends but that cow is so far out of the barn, it is not worthy of any further elucidation.
Friday, December 7, 2012
And I forgot, the U.S. is against International Cripples
The Senate GOP voted down a treaty based upon our own laws regarding people with disabilities because of threats to individual liberty that are simply false. Not even Robert Dole could shame these GOP Senators into voting Yes.
CO2 is Acidic and it is destroying Shell Fish Beds
I am pretty sure that among my regular readers, only RedStateVT is a nonbeliever in Global Warming. He is just not convinced that the measured warming is the result of human activity. However, I do not think he denies the fact that human activity is causing the world to emit more CO2.
Advocates that nothing needs to change like to point out that the oceans absorb CO2. Now comes a report on the reality that acidic ocean water is destroying shell fish beds and shell fish farming. For now, the farming can offset the acid with alkalizers, but they do not believe they will be able to do so forever.
What this means is, that if you enjoy shell fish (Oysters, Clams, Scallops, Lobsters, Shrimp) you should be concerned about reducing the CO2 emission into the atmosphere because the shell fish in the ocean cannot stand any more CO2 being absorbed into the oceans. There is nothing any nation in the world can do to stop this tomorrow. All we can do is make slow progress aimed at improving this situation. That means attacking CO2 emissions to save the Shell Fish.
and I would add, who knows what the acid in the ocean will do to any other living thing that swims in it.
What a win! Reduce CO2 to lower acid in the oceans and have the side effect of working to slow Global Warming.
Advocates that nothing needs to change like to point out that the oceans absorb CO2. Now comes a report on the reality that acidic ocean water is destroying shell fish beds and shell fish farming. For now, the farming can offset the acid with alkalizers, but they do not believe they will be able to do so forever.
What this means is, that if you enjoy shell fish (Oysters, Clams, Scallops, Lobsters, Shrimp) you should be concerned about reducing the CO2 emission into the atmosphere because the shell fish in the ocean cannot stand any more CO2 being absorbed into the oceans. There is nothing any nation in the world can do to stop this tomorrow. All we can do is make slow progress aimed at improving this situation. That means attacking CO2 emissions to save the Shell Fish.
and I would add, who knows what the acid in the ocean will do to any other living thing that swims in it.
What a win! Reduce CO2 to lower acid in the oceans and have the side effect of working to slow Global Warming.
The Labor Stat's are correct, Jack Welch is wrong
I read an article this week by two economists about the need for policy makers to manage policy with recognition that the baby boomers are retiring. While that should be self evident, it is not as seen in policy proposals by both parties.
1st, the headline. 200,000 baby boomers are now retiring every month. Yes, RedStateVT, you are in that number a couple of years ago. That means, the economy only needs to generate 100,000 incremental jobs a month to absorb new entrants to the workforce. Since the economy has been averaging @150,000 jobs a month for the last 2 years, the labor statistics are correct and Jack Welch's snide Tweet was factually wrong. He should apologize to the professionals who assemble this data.
2nd, the GOP was correct in rejecting President Obama's fiscal stimulus proposal aimed at improving the rate of improvement in the labor rate. We should spend more money on infrastructure repair, but at the same time we have to improve the fiscal balance. Now is the time to start that process. We should pay for infrastructure by reducing tax subsidies to industry.
3rd, the GOP really blew it in under Bush II. We needed those budget surpluses to pay for the baby boomers legitimate claims on entitlements starting now. Those claims are going to be worth 3% to 4% of GDP for the next 30 years and we are going to pay for them somehow. It would have been great to be saving for them by paying down the outstanding debt by not having the Bush Tax Cuts for the last 10 years and pay for the War on Terror from current cash flow.
4th, Simpson Bowles is the only path to managing the increasing claims on entitlements and fostering economic growth to pay for them. If only the Politicians would lead and not pander to the extreme right and left.
1st, the headline. 200,000 baby boomers are now retiring every month. Yes, RedStateVT, you are in that number a couple of years ago. That means, the economy only needs to generate 100,000 incremental jobs a month to absorb new entrants to the workforce. Since the economy has been averaging @150,000 jobs a month for the last 2 years, the labor statistics are correct and Jack Welch's snide Tweet was factually wrong. He should apologize to the professionals who assemble this data.
2nd, the GOP was correct in rejecting President Obama's fiscal stimulus proposal aimed at improving the rate of improvement in the labor rate. We should spend more money on infrastructure repair, but at the same time we have to improve the fiscal balance. Now is the time to start that process. We should pay for infrastructure by reducing tax subsidies to industry.
3rd, the GOP really blew it in under Bush II. We needed those budget surpluses to pay for the baby boomers legitimate claims on entitlements starting now. Those claims are going to be worth 3% to 4% of GDP for the next 30 years and we are going to pay for them somehow. It would have been great to be saving for them by paying down the outstanding debt by not having the Bush Tax Cuts for the last 10 years and pay for the War on Terror from current cash flow.
4th, Simpson Bowles is the only path to managing the increasing claims on entitlements and fostering economic growth to pay for them. If only the Politicians would lead and not pander to the extreme right and left.
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Jim DeMint Heads off to Head the Heritage Foundations
I am not sure what to make of this. I have had respect for the Heritage Foundation's point of view as they designed RomneyCare, and by implication, ObamaCare. I not also that Utah, a state where the GOP dominates, has Health Insurance Exchanges so individuals have access to group rates.
Does this mean Jim DeMint believes in that approach to solving our heathcare woes or does he intend to whip the Foundation into shape so it never does something like that again?
Does this mean Jim DeMint believes in that approach to solving our heathcare woes or does he intend to whip the Foundation into shape so it never does something like that again?
College Education Issues
This week's Economist article on the problems with higher education has some shocking data.
The cost of a university education has risen by 5x the rate of inflation since 1983. The cost of a university education in 2010 requires 38% of median income up from 23% in the year 2001. And the standards for such degrees have been reduced to the point where I am not sure how to gauge what academic results really mean. 43% of all grades at 4 year universities are "A's". GPA's in 2006 averaged 3.11 up from 2.52 in the 1950's. AND a third of students to not take any courses requiring more than 40 pages of reading over an entire term.
This is appalling and I welcome reader input as to what can be done to change this. I don't think the Federal Government has any role in any of this and I don't think that for-profit education is an answer for this either.
Maybe, business should insist on 2 year degrees and hire those people before they hire 4 year people for whom they have no idea what standards they have been educated to. I hate to say that because I know I benefited from a liberal arts education, but then I had to read 40 pages a WEEK in almost every course.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Governor Romney Gets a Cushy Job
The internet world was making much about Governor Romney accepting his appointment to the Board of Directors of Marriott Corporation. These articles were basically saying that he was a working man again.
There is no cushier job than being a member of a big company's board of directors. Yes, you have real responsibilities and, yes, you do have to do some work, but you get to do a lot of that work at home.
So for somewhere between $150,000 and $300,000 a year, Governor Romney's buddies have asked him to attend 10 meetings a year and do 1 to 2 days of work before each meeting. So he will be paid somewhere between $5,000 and $10,000 a day for 30 days of work a year. And he will get company paid health insurance as well.
Nice work if you can get it. I would roll over and go figurative heaven if that were to happen to me.
There is no cushier job than being a member of a big company's board of directors. Yes, you have real responsibilities and, yes, you do have to do some work, but you get to do a lot of that work at home.
So for somewhere between $150,000 and $300,000 a year, Governor Romney's buddies have asked him to attend 10 meetings a year and do 1 to 2 days of work before each meeting. So he will be paid somewhere between $5,000 and $10,000 a day for 30 days of work a year. And he will get company paid health insurance as well.
Nice work if you can get it. I would roll over and go figurative heaven if that were to happen to me.
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Whoops, I forgot about the Conservatives who don't face voters
They are coming out of the wood work to oppose any compromise, saying that the President did not win a mandate. So when 70+% of the voters blame the Republicans for sending us over the cliff and possibly into recession, know that I will be in agreement with them.
I hope you have enough cash to weather the recession because your investments will be in sewer if this comes to pass without compromise.
Here are some quotes assembled from a Yahoo story.
I hope you have enough cash to weather the recession because your investments will be in sewer if this comes to pass without compromise.
Here are some quotes assembled from a Yahoo story.
"Heritage's response echoed the sentiment of many conservatives in Washington who are urging House Republicans to avoid cutting a deal with the president if it means raising taxes.
In an open letter signed by more than 100 prominent conservative activists and organized by the advocacy group Let Freedom Ring, House Republicans were warned that they would not receive support in the future if they "cave" during negotiations.
"In the House, the nation elected in 2012 one of the largest Republican majorities in the past 100 years. You have a mandate to fight for conservative principles that is arguably much broader than the one that narrowly reelected President Barack Obama claims to have for his leftist agenda," the letter read. It was signed by Republican activists like Richard Viguerie, Leadership Institute founder Morton Blackwell, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, Media Research Center President Brent Bozell and Republican donor Foster Friess."
Monday, December 3, 2012
While Politicians are Not Being Serious,
I will not have much to say. We all know we need a total of $4.0 trillion and that will mean 1/3 from revenue and 2/3 from spending. The President asked for $1.6 bn of revenue which is 40%, and showed some spending cuts, but the Republicans are still focused on making the revenue number lower without putting up any spending cut ideas of their own. The President should not negotiate with himself.
The real reason to write tonight is The Economist article on the problems with higher education. There was some shocking data in this article.
The cost of a university education has risen by 5x the rate of inflation since 1983. The cost of a university education in 2010 requires 38% of median income up from 23% in the year 2001. And the standards for such degrees have been reduced to the point where I am not sure how to gauge what academic results really mean. 43% of all grades at 4 year universities are "A's". GPA's in 2006 averaged 3.11 up from 2.52 in the 1950's. AND a third of students to not take any courses requiring more than 40 pages of reading over an entire term.
This is appalling and I welcome reader input as to what can be done to change this. I don't think the Federal Government has any role in any of this and I don't think that for-profit education is an answer for this either.
Maybe, business should insist on 2 year degrees and hire those people before they hire 4 year people for whom they have no idea what standards they have been educated to. I hate to say that because I know I benefited from a liberal arts education, but then I had to read 40 pages a WEEK in almost every course.
The real reason to write tonight is The Economist article on the problems with higher education. There was some shocking data in this article.
The cost of a university education has risen by 5x the rate of inflation since 1983. The cost of a university education in 2010 requires 38% of median income up from 23% in the year 2001. And the standards for such degrees have been reduced to the point where I am not sure how to gauge what academic results really mean. 43% of all grades at 4 year universities are "A's". GPA's in 2006 averaged 3.11 up from 2.52 in the 1950's. AND a third of students to not take any courses requiring more than 40 pages of reading over an entire term.
This is appalling and I welcome reader input as to what can be done to change this. I don't think the Federal Government has any role in any of this and I don't think that for-profit education is an answer for this either.
Maybe, business should insist on 2 year degrees and hire those people before they hire 4 year people for whom they have no idea what standards they have been educated to. I hate to say that because I know I benefited from a liberal arts education, but then I had to read 40 pages a WEEK in almost every course.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Post Thanksgiving Musings
Not going to work today allowed me to read the Wall Street Journal in a relaxed manner. I found some interesting tidbits on the state of the Tea Party's mind set,
1st, there was an article on how the Tea Party wants to oust GOP senators who have voted in various ways to keep the government running in a coherent manner. The South Carolina tea parties are upset that Senator Lindsay Graham voted to confirm President Obama's Supreme Court nominees. Would they rather the seats were still open because of filibusters and then when the next GOP President tried to fill them, the Democrats filibustered everyone and you would end up with a Supreme Court that had nobody on it? That is not a functioning government and people want a functioning government. That is the reason so many Tea Party candidates were defeated, not because they failed to be ideological pure.
2nd, Kimberley Strassel opined that the main problem with the GOP effort was a failure to get out their people to vote. Since the only reason the House is controlled by the GOP is gerrymandering (nationwide, the Democrat House Candidates got more total votes than the GOP House Candidates), might not the real problem be the comprehensive set of policies that the GOP represent are not reflective of a majority of the country's voters and they need to be brought back towards the middle so that a sufficient number of people decide voting for the GOP is not a mistake and that swings the election?
3rd, some brilliant minds in the GOP Tax staff decided that the way not to raise tax rates is to apply your marginal tax rate to 100% of your income. That would be the actualization of the exact policy that Romney accused Obama of advocating: using tax policy to disincentivize working harder for marginal income. Say the 35% tax rate starts at Gross Income of $300,000. Below that everyone pays an average rate of say 25%. Under current tax policy, you pay an average of 25% on the 1st $300,000 and 35% on everything over $300,000. If this "brilliant" plan went into effect, people who make between $300,000 and $330,000 would have no incentive to earn the last $30,000. And who would win on this, no one who is not a high income person. There would be a tax hike on everyone earning any money to the last $ marginal rate and the only winners would be wealthy who do not see their marginal rate increase from 35% to 39% which is what the President wants to do.
1st, there was an article on how the Tea Party wants to oust GOP senators who have voted in various ways to keep the government running in a coherent manner. The South Carolina tea parties are upset that Senator Lindsay Graham voted to confirm President Obama's Supreme Court nominees. Would they rather the seats were still open because of filibusters and then when the next GOP President tried to fill them, the Democrats filibustered everyone and you would end up with a Supreme Court that had nobody on it? That is not a functioning government and people want a functioning government. That is the reason so many Tea Party candidates were defeated, not because they failed to be ideological pure.
2nd, Kimberley Strassel opined that the main problem with the GOP effort was a failure to get out their people to vote. Since the only reason the House is controlled by the GOP is gerrymandering (nationwide, the Democrat House Candidates got more total votes than the GOP House Candidates), might not the real problem be the comprehensive set of policies that the GOP represent are not reflective of a majority of the country's voters and they need to be brought back towards the middle so that a sufficient number of people decide voting for the GOP is not a mistake and that swings the election?
3rd, some brilliant minds in the GOP Tax staff decided that the way not to raise tax rates is to apply your marginal tax rate to 100% of your income. That would be the actualization of the exact policy that Romney accused Obama of advocating: using tax policy to disincentivize working harder for marginal income. Say the 35% tax rate starts at Gross Income of $300,000. Below that everyone pays an average rate of say 25%. Under current tax policy, you pay an average of 25% on the 1st $300,000 and 35% on everything over $300,000. If this "brilliant" plan went into effect, people who make between $300,000 and $330,000 would have no incentive to earn the last $30,000. And who would win on this, no one who is not a high income person. There would be a tax hike on everyone earning any money to the last $ marginal rate and the only winners would be wealthy who do not see their marginal rate increase from 35% to 39% which is what the President wants to do.
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
This is how F**K'd up the Middle East is!!
Alawites in Turkey are saying the Syrian Free Army is a USA led uprising while Assad is saying the Syrian Free Army is an Al Qaeda Terrorist organization.
Then somehow components of the GOP which supported the Bush II desire to introduce democracy in Iraq now say Obama has committed a mistake by not protecting the dictators, who prevented democracy, so that the new governments, who support Hamas would have been prevented from taking control.
I know that last sentence is a run-on but this is why I think the only answer is for Israel to grant the Palestinians a state so they can demand that the leadership create a vibrant economy that is built on peace, not an impoverished state that ferments terrorism.
I could continue my rant on any number of the idiocies in this part of the world but the bottom line is rationality is not a leading characteristic of any of these countries and Israel's only choice is to find the moral high ground and then defend themselves from people who think that the development of a way of life stopped in 700 AD (christian years).
I must finish by pointing out that each of the early leaders for the GOP Presidential nomination in 2016 will not state whether they believe in evolution and some say intelligent design that created the world 6000 years ago is correct. Maybe some aspects of the U.S. are not far behind Saudi Arabia, although these same people who do not believe in evolution love Saudi Arabia until they produce terrorists that attack the U.S.A.
Maybe the whole F***ing world is insane.
Then somehow components of the GOP which supported the Bush II desire to introduce democracy in Iraq now say Obama has committed a mistake by not protecting the dictators, who prevented democracy, so that the new governments, who support Hamas would have been prevented from taking control.
I know that last sentence is a run-on but this is why I think the only answer is for Israel to grant the Palestinians a state so they can demand that the leadership create a vibrant economy that is built on peace, not an impoverished state that ferments terrorism.
I could continue my rant on any number of the idiocies in this part of the world but the bottom line is rationality is not a leading characteristic of any of these countries and Israel's only choice is to find the moral high ground and then defend themselves from people who think that the development of a way of life stopped in 700 AD (christian years).
I must finish by pointing out that each of the early leaders for the GOP Presidential nomination in 2016 will not state whether they believe in evolution and some say intelligent design that created the world 6000 years ago is correct. Maybe some aspects of the U.S. are not far behind Saudi Arabia, although these same people who do not believe in evolution love Saudi Arabia until they produce terrorists that attack the U.S.A.
Maybe the whole F***ing world is insane.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
What Conservatism Needs to Explain to Me
in terms of philosophy.
I read a book review this a.m. of a biography of William Rehnquist, the long serving Supreme Court Justice and the start of what is likely to be at least a 40 year run of Conservatives at Chief Justices of the Supreme Court. Rehnquist served. as Chief Justice for 19 years and his clerk, John Roberts, is very likely to serve at least 21 years given his youth.
Rehnquist devoted his professional life to opposing federal government imposition of any controls over discrimination. He wrote opinions rejecting integration and upholding "separate but equal". He upheld the right of state legislatures to prevent poor people from voting and actively worked to do so in elections before he became a judge. While he did vote for certain cases that upheld Congress's right to impose rules on states; overall, he generally came down on the side of state's rights and the application of political thought to legal decisions.
Chief Justice Robert's, with the notable exception, of the Affordable Health Care Act, and the remainder of the conservative majority on the current Supreme Court are from the same school. I personally do not have a problem with the slicing and dicing of the line between the rights of the Federal Government and the rights of the States. What I do have a problem with is the inconsistent legal lines that occur with the application of political thought.
Thus, we have the situation where gun control laws cannot be created by Congress even though there is interstate commerce in guns and state gun control laws are essentially eviscerated by reality.
We have the situation where neither the Federal Government nor the States can control campaign finance spending despite there being ample evidence of money corrupting politicians almost since the founding of the United States of America.
I am sure there are other examples but you get my point. Individual rights should be subservient to good of the population when violence or corruption is the result of the exercise of these individual rights. Such a belief does not impinge on an individual's right to free speech, right to own a gun (just certain types of guns with certain requirements), right to freedom of religion or the right to privacy.
There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits regulation of interstate commerce, protection of the environment and the right to inhibit corruption.
Only when Conservatism can explain to my satisfaction that they will protect and manage efficiently these responsibilities will I consider voting for a Conservative.
I read a book review this a.m. of a biography of William Rehnquist, the long serving Supreme Court Justice and the start of what is likely to be at least a 40 year run of Conservatives at Chief Justices of the Supreme Court. Rehnquist served. as Chief Justice for 19 years and his clerk, John Roberts, is very likely to serve at least 21 years given his youth.
Rehnquist devoted his professional life to opposing federal government imposition of any controls over discrimination. He wrote opinions rejecting integration and upholding "separate but equal". He upheld the right of state legislatures to prevent poor people from voting and actively worked to do so in elections before he became a judge. While he did vote for certain cases that upheld Congress's right to impose rules on states; overall, he generally came down on the side of state's rights and the application of political thought to legal decisions.
Chief Justice Robert's, with the notable exception, of the Affordable Health Care Act, and the remainder of the conservative majority on the current Supreme Court are from the same school. I personally do not have a problem with the slicing and dicing of the line between the rights of the Federal Government and the rights of the States. What I do have a problem with is the inconsistent legal lines that occur with the application of political thought.
Thus, we have the situation where gun control laws cannot be created by Congress even though there is interstate commerce in guns and state gun control laws are essentially eviscerated by reality.
We have the situation where neither the Federal Government nor the States can control campaign finance spending despite there being ample evidence of money corrupting politicians almost since the founding of the United States of America.
I am sure there are other examples but you get my point. Individual rights should be subservient to good of the population when violence or corruption is the result of the exercise of these individual rights. Such a belief does not impinge on an individual's right to free speech, right to own a gun (just certain types of guns with certain requirements), right to freedom of religion or the right to privacy.
There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits regulation of interstate commerce, protection of the environment and the right to inhibit corruption.
Only when Conservatism can explain to my satisfaction that they will protect and manage efficiently these responsibilities will I consider voting for a Conservative.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
The World is a Complicated Place II
This is something the conservatives should remember when they are contemplating their belief that it is their way or the highway.
I found some interesting blurbs on the internet. Apparently, the Tea Party is fed up with the GOP establishment (which to my amazement includes Karl Rove) for throwing Todd Akin under the bus. For those who don't recall Todd Akin, he is the Missouri Senate candidate who said women's bodies shut down when they are raped and they can't get pregnant. Of course, this was just a rationalization for his (and many others in the GOP) for their belief that abortion should not be available in any case, including rape, incest and mother's health. So my advice to the Tea Party, is you just lost many elections in part because of this stance, think about what it takes to gain a working majority of votes.
The NY Times yesterday had a really thoughtful column by Timothy Egan on the complexity of American Society and what it takes to get a majority of voters to agree with you. Although aimed at Republican's and complementary about how America maintains itself, I would use it to remind Democrats that although they won, balance is needed in stabilizing government finances and that includes Entitlement Reform. There are good Republican ideas and there are good core Democratic ideals, but no ideal can be delivered if it is not affordable. Look to Simpson-Bowles for the answer notwithstanding Paul Krugman.
Link to Excellent Thought Column
The most solid form of economic growth occurs when the budget is balanced, the economy is near full employment, the government's spending is roughly 21% of GDP and there is no inflation. George Bush II ruined us by forgetting that and going all in on supply side economics. Deficits should shift to surpluses when the economy is still progressing toward full employment, not just at full employment.
The Economist this week did a piece on the complexity of poverty. It made me sad because I know how fortunate I am to have been able to use education to escape from that part of the economy that has been decimated by globalization and automation. My intellectual interest always has at its core a thought process of what does this mean for economic development and improving the lives of the underclass. Poverty is as complex as finding nationwide voting majorities. Each poor person has an individual story and in the end, only they through their hard work, can escape poverty.
But at the same time, there are government policies that can help. The Economist focused on a working woman in South Carolina who holds 2 jobs what provide her with 57.5 hours of work a week. She makes roughly $32,000 a year but neither job provides health insurance, even though she works in a medical clinic for 37.5 of those hours. She is not unusual, while 15% of the people are below the poverty line of $23,000 for a family of four, a much bigger percentage of the population earns something between the poverty level and $40,000. Depending how big their family is and whether there are 2 incomes or not, these people are on the edge of dropping back into poverty if they lose a job.
Fortunately, the government policies that help these people will be protected. ObamaCare should provided access to health insurance for those without beginning January 2014. The Earned Income Tax Credit was enacted in the Ford Administration and the Child Tax Credit was passed by the GOP led Congress under Clinton. Combined, these 3 programs encourage people to work and not stay on welfare. It is critical that they be protected for those earning less than $40,000.
What made me sad about the article was it brought home to me something that I intuitively understand. Globalization and automation have created an underclass in the United States. I don't know what beyond excellent education and health insurance we can do for these people. Eventually, wages in China, Mexico, Brazil, Indonesia and India will rise to the point where transportation costs motivate employers to bring low skill manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. and pay a wage level that makes life affordable. But this will not happen for another 10, 20 or 30 years. 30 years is almost an entire working career and this process really hit home when the construction real estate boom ended in 2008. I hate to think there is no government policy that can help these people but I can't think of anything beyond education, health insurance and targeted tax policy. Supply side economics doesn't work because those who benefit reinvest are in the global economy and either save their money or reinvest it lower wage places.
Of course, the people who are suffering through their lot in life are a diverse group of people. They fuel the anger of the Tea Party, they fuel the anger of the anti-Wall Street crowd, they fuel the strident belief on the left that all social programs should be maintained and expanded. This diversity is why Mitt Romney lost. Romney preached a return to the policies that created the crisis and did not address the needs of the underclass. While Mitt had the support of the angry Tea Party, he scared many others who care about the underclass but understand we need to restore fiscal sanity in a balanced manner.
The world is a complicated place.
I found some interesting blurbs on the internet. Apparently, the Tea Party is fed up with the GOP establishment (which to my amazement includes Karl Rove) for throwing Todd Akin under the bus. For those who don't recall Todd Akin, he is the Missouri Senate candidate who said women's bodies shut down when they are raped and they can't get pregnant. Of course, this was just a rationalization for his (and many others in the GOP) for their belief that abortion should not be available in any case, including rape, incest and mother's health. So my advice to the Tea Party, is you just lost many elections in part because of this stance, think about what it takes to gain a working majority of votes.
The NY Times yesterday had a really thoughtful column by Timothy Egan on the complexity of American Society and what it takes to get a majority of voters to agree with you. Although aimed at Republican's and complementary about how America maintains itself, I would use it to remind Democrats that although they won, balance is needed in stabilizing government finances and that includes Entitlement Reform. There are good Republican ideas and there are good core Democratic ideals, but no ideal can be delivered if it is not affordable. Look to Simpson-Bowles for the answer notwithstanding Paul Krugman.
Link to Excellent Thought Column
The most solid form of economic growth occurs when the budget is balanced, the economy is near full employment, the government's spending is roughly 21% of GDP and there is no inflation. George Bush II ruined us by forgetting that and going all in on supply side economics. Deficits should shift to surpluses when the economy is still progressing toward full employment, not just at full employment.
The Economist this week did a piece on the complexity of poverty. It made me sad because I know how fortunate I am to have been able to use education to escape from that part of the economy that has been decimated by globalization and automation. My intellectual interest always has at its core a thought process of what does this mean for economic development and improving the lives of the underclass. Poverty is as complex as finding nationwide voting majorities. Each poor person has an individual story and in the end, only they through their hard work, can escape poverty.
But at the same time, there are government policies that can help. The Economist focused on a working woman in South Carolina who holds 2 jobs what provide her with 57.5 hours of work a week. She makes roughly $32,000 a year but neither job provides health insurance, even though she works in a medical clinic for 37.5 of those hours. She is not unusual, while 15% of the people are below the poverty line of $23,000 for a family of four, a much bigger percentage of the population earns something between the poverty level and $40,000. Depending how big their family is and whether there are 2 incomes or not, these people are on the edge of dropping back into poverty if they lose a job.
Fortunately, the government policies that help these people will be protected. ObamaCare should provided access to health insurance for those without beginning January 2014. The Earned Income Tax Credit was enacted in the Ford Administration and the Child Tax Credit was passed by the GOP led Congress under Clinton. Combined, these 3 programs encourage people to work and not stay on welfare. It is critical that they be protected for those earning less than $40,000.
What made me sad about the article was it brought home to me something that I intuitively understand. Globalization and automation have created an underclass in the United States. I don't know what beyond excellent education and health insurance we can do for these people. Eventually, wages in China, Mexico, Brazil, Indonesia and India will rise to the point where transportation costs motivate employers to bring low skill manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. and pay a wage level that makes life affordable. But this will not happen for another 10, 20 or 30 years. 30 years is almost an entire working career and this process really hit home when the construction real estate boom ended in 2008. I hate to think there is no government policy that can help these people but I can't think of anything beyond education, health insurance and targeted tax policy. Supply side economics doesn't work because those who benefit reinvest are in the global economy and either save their money or reinvest it lower wage places.
Of course, the people who are suffering through their lot in life are a diverse group of people. They fuel the anger of the Tea Party, they fuel the anger of the anti-Wall Street crowd, they fuel the strident belief on the left that all social programs should be maintained and expanded. This diversity is why Mitt Romney lost. Romney preached a return to the policies that created the crisis and did not address the needs of the underclass. While Mitt had the support of the angry Tea Party, he scared many others who care about the underclass but understand we need to restore fiscal sanity in a balanced manner.
The world is a complicated place.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Veterans Day, Government Policy and Israel
On this Veterans Day, we should all take a moment to contemplate the sacrifice our soldiers accept to protect us from people and countries that would do us harm. We should contemplate what the proper role and range of American Defense Policy should be. We should contemplate how we pay for that Defense Department and remember the costs are not simply the current costs, but also the cost of helping those warriors who come home damaged in some manner. Defense costs are current expenses and should be paid for out of current revenue, not borrowed money as the Bush II administration decided we should. In conservative economic policy, funds are borrowed to pay for investment which will produce the revenues to repay the debt.
In a similar theme, Thomas Friedman today urges the Israeli government to contemplate the changing electorate in the U.S. and think about the implications for an Israel that does not encourage a separate Palestinian State. My point about Israel has never been a question of its right to self-defense. They will need a strong proverbial sword for a long time into the future.
Link to Freidman
However, Israel, like the U.S., excludes a significant percentage of its population from the reality of defending the State. In the U.S., we have an all volunteer military that few children of wealth volunteer for. In Israel, the conservative, most hard-lined religious sects who want all of Jerusalem and the West Bank for Israeli settlement are not required to serve in the military and thus bear none of the burden of the defense their beliefs require. The hard-lined sects prevent the compromises on land that are needed to provide Palestinian leaders with the legitimacy they need to govern.
Israel governs land that has an ever increasing population of Palestinians. There will be no drop in Palestinian birth rates until there is economic growth. There will be no economic growth in Palestine until there is peace. Without a drop in Palestinian birth rates, Israel will not be sufficiently Jewish to be a Jewish State. Israel needs a 2 State solution. Israel must foster a way to establish a Palestinian State or it faces an ever increasing risk of committing genocide against Palestinians. That is not only too horrifically ironic to contemplate, but also something that the world will never accept.
I know some of my friends will say what about Iran and similar promises to wipe Israel off the map. Well, such thoughts would be much more difficult if there were a Palestinian State and Israel already has the full support of the U.S. and most E.U. countries to defend themselves against that.
The political world is changing and the newly enfranchised citizens of the Arab World are not accepting of the current status of Palestine. There is nothing in that progression of change that Israel can stop, and Israel's path to influence of that change will come about only if there is a Palestinian State.
Israel, like the Republican Party, must recognize that the population of today is not the population of even 30 years ago. The world changes and policies must change too, while maintaining a strong well funded military for defense purposes.
In a similar theme, Thomas Friedman today urges the Israeli government to contemplate the changing electorate in the U.S. and think about the implications for an Israel that does not encourage a separate Palestinian State. My point about Israel has never been a question of its right to self-defense. They will need a strong proverbial sword for a long time into the future.
Link to Freidman
However, Israel, like the U.S., excludes a significant percentage of its population from the reality of defending the State. In the U.S., we have an all volunteer military that few children of wealth volunteer for. In Israel, the conservative, most hard-lined religious sects who want all of Jerusalem and the West Bank for Israeli settlement are not required to serve in the military and thus bear none of the burden of the defense their beliefs require. The hard-lined sects prevent the compromises on land that are needed to provide Palestinian leaders with the legitimacy they need to govern.
Israel governs land that has an ever increasing population of Palestinians. There will be no drop in Palestinian birth rates until there is economic growth. There will be no economic growth in Palestine until there is peace. Without a drop in Palestinian birth rates, Israel will not be sufficiently Jewish to be a Jewish State. Israel needs a 2 State solution. Israel must foster a way to establish a Palestinian State or it faces an ever increasing risk of committing genocide against Palestinians. That is not only too horrifically ironic to contemplate, but also something that the world will never accept.
I know some of my friends will say what about Iran and similar promises to wipe Israel off the map. Well, such thoughts would be much more difficult if there were a Palestinian State and Israel already has the full support of the U.S. and most E.U. countries to defend themselves against that.
The political world is changing and the newly enfranchised citizens of the Arab World are not accepting of the current status of Palestine. There is nothing in that progression of change that Israel can stop, and Israel's path to influence of that change will come about only if there is a Palestinian State.
Israel, like the Republican Party, must recognize that the population of today is not the population of even 30 years ago. The world changes and policies must change too, while maintaining a strong well funded military for defense purposes.
Friday, November 9, 2012
Thoughtful Writing
David Brooks has good advice for both Democrats and Republicans.
Link to David Brooks
Tom Egan on the wonder of American Democracy and the crassness of some who don't like Barack Obama
Tom Egan Link
Link to David Brooks
Tom Egan on the wonder of American Democracy and the crassness of some who don't like Barack Obama
Tom Egan Link
Drones are Bad?
I quote something I found in this weeks Economist.
"But Kurt Volker, a former American official close to John McCain, sees a bigger problem: drones have made killing too easy. In a recent article he asked: "What do we want to be as a nation? A country with a permanent kill list? A country where people go to the office, launch a few kill shots and get home in time for dinner? A country that instructs workers in high-tech operations centers to humans on the far side of the planet because some government agency determined that those individuals are terrorists?""
My answer to that is YES. We are in War on Terror. The enemy is committed to inflicting harm on Americans and Judaean-Christian Culture where ever it exists. It is also committed to inflicting harm on Muslims who do not agree with them. They are anarchist and they are dispersed operating in cells located in remote places.
We cannot put boots on the ground everywhere they exist, but we must combat them.
The article discusses the care taken to not kill innocent people although that does happen.
Drones are the most effective way to fight this War on Terror. It is also the most cost effective way to do this and the least taxing on the troops we ask to defend us.
I am surprised that a John McCain advisor would question this.
"But Kurt Volker, a former American official close to John McCain, sees a bigger problem: drones have made killing too easy. In a recent article he asked: "What do we want to be as a nation? A country with a permanent kill list? A country where people go to the office, launch a few kill shots and get home in time for dinner? A country that instructs workers in high-tech operations centers to humans on the far side of the planet because some government agency determined that those individuals are terrorists?""
My answer to that is YES. We are in War on Terror. The enemy is committed to inflicting harm on Americans and Judaean-Christian Culture where ever it exists. It is also committed to inflicting harm on Muslims who do not agree with them. They are anarchist and they are dispersed operating in cells located in remote places.
We cannot put boots on the ground everywhere they exist, but we must combat them.
The article discusses the care taken to not kill innocent people although that does happen.
Drones are the most effective way to fight this War on Terror. It is also the most cost effective way to do this and the least taxing on the troops we ask to defend us.
I am surprised that a John McCain advisor would question this.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Post Election Thoughts
The resident GOP supporters in my work setting are blaming the minority voters for voting overwhelmingly for President Obama. I pointed out to them that there are middle of the road conservative Democrats and formerly liberal Republican's who cannot bring themselves to vote for a politician or a political party that does not believe in compromise and policies that live and breath in the middle of the extremes. After all, that is why I started this blog and why I could not vote for any GOP candidates at this time.
Now, let's say my GOP co-workers are correct. Well the answer is not to berate these voters but either to (i) try and convince them that they do not see their best interests correctly (but that is what Romney tried and many losing GOP senators tried) or (ii) develop policies that help achieve the goals of Government that centrist Democrats can support with centrist Republicans. I realize this part of the political spectrum is thinly populated, but calling such people "RINO's" or whatever is not productive.
As for Mitch McConnell's #1 goal "to make President Obama a one term President" irrespective of the fact that that is a bad way for the government to conduct itself, I hope he reassesses this #1 goal and makes solving problems with Democrats his goal.
Anyway the unequivocal good news is that the Affordable Health Care Act will be implemented and that no additional Constructionist Judges will be appointed to the Supreme Court in the next 4 years.
Now, if only a Grand Compromise along the lines of Simpson Bowles can be agreed to and avoid the fiscal cliff.
Now, let's say my GOP co-workers are correct. Well the answer is not to berate these voters but either to (i) try and convince them that they do not see their best interests correctly (but that is what Romney tried and many losing GOP senators tried) or (ii) develop policies that help achieve the goals of Government that centrist Democrats can support with centrist Republicans. I realize this part of the political spectrum is thinly populated, but calling such people "RINO's" or whatever is not productive.
As for Mitch McConnell's #1 goal "to make President Obama a one term President" irrespective of the fact that that is a bad way for the government to conduct itself, I hope he reassesses this #1 goal and makes solving problems with Democrats his goal.
Anyway the unequivocal good news is that the Affordable Health Care Act will be implemented and that no additional Constructionist Judges will be appointed to the Supreme Court in the next 4 years.
Now, if only a Grand Compromise along the lines of Simpson Bowles can be agreed to and avoid the fiscal cliff.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Outrageous TV Political Ad
Until this weekend, we in NYC have been spared the absolute shit being put on the air by the GOP advocates sanctioned by Citizens United. I don't know why this weekend they have been wasting their dollars in NYC but they have.
Tonight, I saw the most outrageous ad and must comment. It was paid for by Citizens Against Government Waste. I know this organization has a somewhat respectable founding, but this was beyond the pale.
It showed Chinese of the PRC chortling about owning US debt and saying the US is working for them because of Obama's fiscal stimulus.
I would like to point out that Chinese financing of the US budget deficit began in 2001 under the Bush administration which had no qualms about cutting taxes and financing the WAR on TERROR with money borrowed from the Chinese because they would neither put the cost of the WAR on Terror in the budget nor raise the revenues to pay for it. Nor would the Bush II administration contemplate enforcing regulation of the mortgage industry preferring to let the market work it out.
The result was the Great Recession which we are still working through and millions of innocent people who lost their jobs because of unregulated capitalism.
The ad impies that Obama should be voted out of office so those same policies can be implemented.
It is outrageous and I hope Obama wins and he gets to appoint 2 more Supreme Court justices who will vote to overturn Citizens United.
Tonight, I saw the most outrageous ad and must comment. It was paid for by Citizens Against Government Waste. I know this organization has a somewhat respectable founding, but this was beyond the pale.
It showed Chinese of the PRC chortling about owning US debt and saying the US is working for them because of Obama's fiscal stimulus.
I would like to point out that Chinese financing of the US budget deficit began in 2001 under the Bush administration which had no qualms about cutting taxes and financing the WAR on TERROR with money borrowed from the Chinese because they would neither put the cost of the WAR on Terror in the budget nor raise the revenues to pay for it. Nor would the Bush II administration contemplate enforcing regulation of the mortgage industry preferring to let the market work it out.
The result was the Great Recession which we are still working through and millions of innocent people who lost their jobs because of unregulated capitalism.
The ad impies that Obama should be voted out of office so those same policies can be implemented.
It is outrageous and I hope Obama wins and he gets to appoint 2 more Supreme Court justices who will vote to overturn Citizens United.
Post Sandy (Hurricane) Pre Election Musings
People are really suffering along the coast line and I know it must be difficult to get them everything they need. I feel for the public servants and utility workers who are struggling to put things back together.
Longer term, I think we have to reconsider how government encourages waterfront development and plan for some gradual changes. Nature produces storms and humans need to allow tolerances in the system to mitigate the damage. An ocean waterfront is not a place to invest money you cannot afford to loose. An ocean waterfront is a place for parks and public access to beaches. Landscapes that can absorb storm surges.
Now as for the gasoline lines. My own planning for this storm involved filling the cars with gas, getting cash from the bank, purchasing water and preservable food, building an ice supply for the cooler and filling the tub with water to flush the toilets. But we would not have lasted the 5 days some have been without electricity now. We would have had to leave the region using our cars and that is why the gasoline purchase was so critical.
I don't understand why everyone did not do this and I have been pretty angry with the drivers of the cars waiting in the gas lines in front of our house. I have sympathy for the workers who use their vehicles daily and understand they might have burned through their full gas tank in 3 days, but not the others in the first lines.
Now we are so far along, that even prudent people might be running out of gas. I will note that many in the gas lines are cars with smaller gas tanks. So fuel efficiency has its place but not when there is a shortage of gasoline.
As for the election, what will be, will be. I am distancing myself from this emotionally although I believe the choice is very stark between what will happen in regards to a woman's right to choose. And I cannot believe Ross Douthat's comment:
President Obama did not single-handedly put us on this path. But he has kept us on it, accelerated our progress down it, and campaigned for re-election as though taking this course had no downsides whatsoever. He’s the candidate of the Medicare status quo in a country facing an entitlement crunch, of government bailouts in an economy with a crony capitalism problem, and of contraceptive mandates in a society with a birth dearth.
Longer term, I think we have to reconsider how government encourages waterfront development and plan for some gradual changes. Nature produces storms and humans need to allow tolerances in the system to mitigate the damage. An ocean waterfront is not a place to invest money you cannot afford to loose. An ocean waterfront is a place for parks and public access to beaches. Landscapes that can absorb storm surges.
Now as for the gasoline lines. My own planning for this storm involved filling the cars with gas, getting cash from the bank, purchasing water and preservable food, building an ice supply for the cooler and filling the tub with water to flush the toilets. But we would not have lasted the 5 days some have been without electricity now. We would have had to leave the region using our cars and that is why the gasoline purchase was so critical.
I don't understand why everyone did not do this and I have been pretty angry with the drivers of the cars waiting in the gas lines in front of our house. I have sympathy for the workers who use their vehicles daily and understand they might have burned through their full gas tank in 3 days, but not the others in the first lines.
Now we are so far along, that even prudent people might be running out of gas. I will note that many in the gas lines are cars with smaller gas tanks. So fuel efficiency has its place but not when there is a shortage of gasoline.
As for the election, what will be, will be. I am distancing myself from this emotionally although I believe the choice is very stark between what will happen in regards to a woman's right to choose. And I cannot believe Ross Douthat's comment:
President Obama did not single-handedly put us on this path. But he has kept us on it, accelerated our progress down it, and campaigned for re-election as though taking this course had no downsides whatsoever. He’s the candidate of the Medicare status quo in a country facing an entitlement crunch, of government bailouts in an economy with a crony capitalism problem, and of contraceptive mandates in a society with a birth dearth.
Let me get this straight. We should limit contraception availability for people who cannot afford it without health insurance coverage, so that such women of limited income will have more babies, so our population will increase? And then under the GOP plans , we will cut the access of many of those new children to health care and higher quality education thereby creating a larger underclass, higher crime rate and more spending on law & order. That is a great way to reduce government spending! I hope he clarifies his thoughts some day.
Friday, November 2, 2012
For my Readers who know John Dwight
I quote from a book I am reading on Prohibition, Last Call by Daniel Okrent
"But by mid-decade the value of goods afloat on American coastal waters had bought a vicious element into the rum-running business: nautical auxiliaries of violent urban gangs. For crewman on the mother ships, the days when your customers would bring you groceries or carry your mail ashore had given way to fear-filled nights. The sanguinary chill that settled over Rum Row had been signaled by the scuttling, in 1923, of the John Dwight, a 107-foot steam trawler hauling a Canadian cargo of Frontenac Export Ale through Rum Lane, near Martha's Vineyard. The bodies of eight Dwight crewmen were later found in the surf off the Vineyard hamlet of Menemsha. Three had had the skin stripped from their faces. Others had had their eyes burned out, their finger-prints scarred beyond recognition by acid. The sone of Dwight's captain was found adrift in a dinghy, his skull fractured, his body wedged beneath a seat. One of the dead men was known to have been carrying $100,000 in cash for an impending purchase."
Readers wanting choice quips about this can contact me.
"But by mid-decade the value of goods afloat on American coastal waters had bought a vicious element into the rum-running business: nautical auxiliaries of violent urban gangs. For crewman on the mother ships, the days when your customers would bring you groceries or carry your mail ashore had given way to fear-filled nights. The sanguinary chill that settled over Rum Row had been signaled by the scuttling, in 1923, of the John Dwight, a 107-foot steam trawler hauling a Canadian cargo of Frontenac Export Ale through Rum Lane, near Martha's Vineyard. The bodies of eight Dwight crewmen were later found in the surf off the Vineyard hamlet of Menemsha. Three had had the skin stripped from their faces. Others had had their eyes burned out, their finger-prints scarred beyond recognition by acid. The sone of Dwight's captain was found adrift in a dinghy, his skull fractured, his body wedged beneath a seat. One of the dead men was known to have been carrying $100,000 in cash for an impending purchase."
Readers wanting choice quips about this can contact me.
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Hit the Link and Play the Game
I doubt there is anyway to do this without making corporate health insurance subsidies taxable income or a value added tax. This is why Romney numbers don't add up. And I wonder if he could get a GOP House to even bring them out of committee.
Balance the Budget the Romney Way
Society & Economic Policy
This post is going to be a struggle to keep clear because my thoughts are not fully developed.
Link to Article that Inspired this
The article outlines the societal outcomes that have arisen from the pressures of globalization. The new information for me in particular is how much worse we are in certain measures versus many other developed countries. We spend less on early childhood education and have much more inequality in the success of education across this land than other countries do. Combine that with globalization and you have the growth in income inequality.
I have benefited from globalization and my education made me well equipped to compete. I hope that I have imparted that advantage on my child. Time will tell, but it looks good so far. I believe in personal responsibility for parenting and education, but I also believe that as a country we should benchmark ourselves against other countries and think seriously about why we may be falling behind and what should be done about that.
For the last 30 years, Supply Side Economics has dominated Economic Policy. Tax Policy has favored capital over labor. Most of my thought process thinks leaning in this direction is healthy and would have resulted in our having widespread solid economic growth. It is possible that the Great Recession skews current measures and the interactions on a longer term basis are in a sounder position, but I am not so sure given the length of the trends.
In particular, the ability of the wealthy to convert ordinary income to capital return is not fair and working for income should be treated fairly by economic policy.
What is most interesting about many rich people is that they volunteer to give their wealth to charity as they age. But many of them do not want to pay higher taxes that would support paying for early education for the masses. Wouldn't it be better to give them skills so they don't need charity as they age?
I know reality is complex, but I have to conclude this ramble with the one thing I know is different between the U.S. and the countries that rank higher in quality of life societal measures. Universal Health Insurance paid for by individuals and neither tied to employment nor paid by the employer. Obviously we do not have that in the U.S.
What would such a system look like?
Individuals would pay for their own health insurance. It would look like health insurance today but with the government paying some portion of the health insurance rather than the employers.
Health Insurance would be portable as you move from job to job. No More Cobra.
The same Health Insurance coverage across state lines.
National Medical Malpractice policy, no more shopping for jurisdictions, with a focus on payment for incompetence not innocent mistakes. I know that is complicated but I really believe people should not look to or become rich off of insurance claims. Particularly, when a Dr had good intentions. Reform of this should address the situation where tests are given simply to provide defense from malpractice lawsuits.
You can leave the providers of health care in the private market. There is no need to employ everyone as in Socialized Medicine. Competition on being cost competitive there should be encouraged.
So, what am I advocating? Tax policies that level the playing field between capital and labor. Reduce and eliminate as much as possible tax subsidies and use that revenue to reduce tax rates preserving that element of supply side economics. National Health Insurance. And some focus on raising education standards for those in rural and lower income areas. And I am saying vote for moderates of both parties who understand this need for balance.
Link to Article that Inspired this
The article outlines the societal outcomes that have arisen from the pressures of globalization. The new information for me in particular is how much worse we are in certain measures versus many other developed countries. We spend less on early childhood education and have much more inequality in the success of education across this land than other countries do. Combine that with globalization and you have the growth in income inequality.
I have benefited from globalization and my education made me well equipped to compete. I hope that I have imparted that advantage on my child. Time will tell, but it looks good so far. I believe in personal responsibility for parenting and education, but I also believe that as a country we should benchmark ourselves against other countries and think seriously about why we may be falling behind and what should be done about that.
For the last 30 years, Supply Side Economics has dominated Economic Policy. Tax Policy has favored capital over labor. Most of my thought process thinks leaning in this direction is healthy and would have resulted in our having widespread solid economic growth. It is possible that the Great Recession skews current measures and the interactions on a longer term basis are in a sounder position, but I am not so sure given the length of the trends.
In particular, the ability of the wealthy to convert ordinary income to capital return is not fair and working for income should be treated fairly by economic policy.
What is most interesting about many rich people is that they volunteer to give their wealth to charity as they age. But many of them do not want to pay higher taxes that would support paying for early education for the masses. Wouldn't it be better to give them skills so they don't need charity as they age?
I know reality is complex, but I have to conclude this ramble with the one thing I know is different between the U.S. and the countries that rank higher in quality of life societal measures. Universal Health Insurance paid for by individuals and neither tied to employment nor paid by the employer. Obviously we do not have that in the U.S.
What would such a system look like?
Individuals would pay for their own health insurance. It would look like health insurance today but with the government paying some portion of the health insurance rather than the employers.
Health Insurance would be portable as you move from job to job. No More Cobra.
The same Health Insurance coverage across state lines.
National Medical Malpractice policy, no more shopping for jurisdictions, with a focus on payment for incompetence not innocent mistakes. I know that is complicated but I really believe people should not look to or become rich off of insurance claims. Particularly, when a Dr had good intentions. Reform of this should address the situation where tests are given simply to provide defense from malpractice lawsuits.
You can leave the providers of health care in the private market. There is no need to employ everyone as in Socialized Medicine. Competition on being cost competitive there should be encouraged.
So, what am I advocating? Tax policies that level the playing field between capital and labor. Reduce and eliminate as much as possible tax subsidies and use that revenue to reduce tax rates preserving that element of supply side economics. National Health Insurance. And some focus on raising education standards for those in rural and lower income areas. And I am saying vote for moderates of both parties who understand this need for balance.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Why ObamaCare Matters to me Personally
Yesterday, in the middle of Hurricane Sandy blasting us with wind, I found a voice mail from a nice lady in Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield's customer service department informing me that my wife's claims for her continuing chemotherapy were being denied because the cancer was a pre-existing condition. The exclusion for such claims runs for a year and then would be covered.
Now the Affordable Health Care Act and NY State Law already make this illegal if you have had insurance up until the time you became covered by Empire, which we did. However, although we had provided evidence of such insurance during the application process, that evidence of insurance went to the sales group in Roanoke, VA and apparently did not make it into the records of the Claims Department somewhere in NY. I think it is in Albany but who really knows in this modern world of the internet.
More nice ladies told me to fax said evidence of insurance, which I had in a file, and then found the fax in the system and advanced it to the next stage. Bottom line, $36,000 of claims that I will have to pay, if Empire does not, are at stake here. Empire has contrived to stall, delay and deny responsibility for payment of this every step of the way. This process started in July and will still take another 60 days for the provider to receive payment.
What if I hadn't saved the proper paperwork after sending it in with the application? What if I were a senior citizen with diminished mental capacity? This is why we need one universal health insurance system. Our old insurance company had all the information and was paying. Our COBRA period ran out and we were forced into the individual health insurance market with a different insurance company. Yes, Empire will eventually pay but only because we had the sense to save some paperwork.
Clearly, Empire has a process here that tries to protect themselves from paying things they do not have to, but in that process, they spend a lot of employees time on things that only delay payment, not prevent it. That imposes unnecessary costs onto the health care system.
Curascripts has higher working capital charges because Empire has not paid them. The Dr's office has higher working capital charges because they have not been paid. Empire has higher operating expense because they need more customer service representatives to speak with people like me and the claim's review process has more people reviewing the same claim multiple times. The next review of this claim will be the 4th one. All these higher expenses are paid by us in higher insurance premiums and provider charges. None of these expenses would occur under a universal health insurance system.
Romney Ryan want to turn Medicare into a private health insurance system that will place the elderly with their reduced mental capacities into a system that is a challenge for younger people to manage. The only result of this will be some of the elderly (and maybe at some point in life, every elderly person) abstaining from health care because they won't know how to manage the insurance coverage and think they have to pay for it, which they cannot afford to. Then they will end up in the hospital when they collapse. It will not reduce the cost of health care for the system because the last 90 days of life are the most expensive and more people will end up in hospitals for their last days.
We have Universal Health Insurance in Medicare and we should have it for people of all ages.
The current system is a nightmare when you get caught up in it.
Now the Affordable Health Care Act and NY State Law already make this illegal if you have had insurance up until the time you became covered by Empire, which we did. However, although we had provided evidence of such insurance during the application process, that evidence of insurance went to the sales group in Roanoke, VA and apparently did not make it into the records of the Claims Department somewhere in NY. I think it is in Albany but who really knows in this modern world of the internet.
More nice ladies told me to fax said evidence of insurance, which I had in a file, and then found the fax in the system and advanced it to the next stage. Bottom line, $36,000 of claims that I will have to pay, if Empire does not, are at stake here. Empire has contrived to stall, delay and deny responsibility for payment of this every step of the way. This process started in July and will still take another 60 days for the provider to receive payment.
What if I hadn't saved the proper paperwork after sending it in with the application? What if I were a senior citizen with diminished mental capacity? This is why we need one universal health insurance system. Our old insurance company had all the information and was paying. Our COBRA period ran out and we were forced into the individual health insurance market with a different insurance company. Yes, Empire will eventually pay but only because we had the sense to save some paperwork.
Clearly, Empire has a process here that tries to protect themselves from paying things they do not have to, but in that process, they spend a lot of employees time on things that only delay payment, not prevent it. That imposes unnecessary costs onto the health care system.
Curascripts has higher working capital charges because Empire has not paid them. The Dr's office has higher working capital charges because they have not been paid. Empire has higher operating expense because they need more customer service representatives to speak with people like me and the claim's review process has more people reviewing the same claim multiple times. The next review of this claim will be the 4th one. All these higher expenses are paid by us in higher insurance premiums and provider charges. None of these expenses would occur under a universal health insurance system.
Romney Ryan want to turn Medicare into a private health insurance system that will place the elderly with their reduced mental capacities into a system that is a challenge for younger people to manage. The only result of this will be some of the elderly (and maybe at some point in life, every elderly person) abstaining from health care because they won't know how to manage the insurance coverage and think they have to pay for it, which they cannot afford to. Then they will end up in the hospital when they collapse. It will not reduce the cost of health care for the system because the last 90 days of life are the most expensive and more people will end up in hospitals for their last days.
We have Universal Health Insurance in Medicare and we should have it for people of all ages.
The current system is a nightmare when you get caught up in it.
Sunday, October 28, 2012
If Only Obama had said this in Debate 1
Low Taxes do not help the rich. Low taxes help the super rich, the 1%; not the vast majority of those who are well off but depend on a vibrant middle class to buy their goods and services. That middle class has been harmed by the bursting of a real estate bubble caused by a lack of regulation and the hollowing out of our education system and infrastructure.
Link to Robert Frank who inspired that thought
Policies matter. Income inequality in the U.S. has been a long time coming and will take a long time to be overcome. The reasons for this trend are complex and based in a combination of economic comparative advantage with capitalism's ruthless pursuit of the highest return on capital. The only thing government can do is create a set of policies that allow each American to improve their own personal comparative advantage.
The Democratic set of policies is focused on balancing the budget in a fair manner. Yes, we will cut expenses in many places, but we also do so in a manner that preserves the government's ability to meet its obligations to retirement benefits, helping those who need help and spending to support education and infrastructure. To do that, we need to raise revenues from those who can afford to pay.
The Republican set of policies that supposedly will address economic inequality use disproven myths as their basis of truth and they are not true.
"America is the land of opportunity". Not for those who do not benefit from parents who can afford college. When I was a youth, my middle class parents could afford to pay for a private college education without my borrowing any money. Today, I estimate my parents would be making $80,000 to $90,000 or roughly take home of $58,000 after tax and health insurance. How could they afford to pay even the $25,000 that a public college costs let alone the $50,000 that a private school costs? Is it any wonder that students today have thousands of dollars of debt when they graduate and the debt repayment delays their participation in the middle class spending patterns. Now the Community Colleges of America cost less and do a wonderful job preparing people to participate in the economy. But public education must prepare children uniformly to be well prepared for such an education and global competition. That is why democratic policies will continue to provide financial support for education. Most kids cannot borrow the money from their parents, Governor Romney.
"Trickle-down Economics works". If it works so well, why is the comparison of my family's place in time the truth?
"The rich are the job creators". Yes and no, entrepreneurs create jobs, but not every rich person is an entrepreneur. Converting fees earned by a firm for managing money into bonuses that for most Americans are ordinary income taxed at 28% but for such private equity and hedge funds get capital gains treatment at 15% is simply unfair. I support tax reform that equalizes income tax rates for types of activity. No rich person will fail to hire someone who produces incremental return on equity just because the equity return gets taxes at 28%, not 15%. That $ of incremental return will still add to the overall profitability increasing the wealth of the job creator.
"The cost of reducing inequality is so great it will kill the economy". If there is no middle class, where will economic growth come from?
"Markets are self-regulating and efficient". The housing bubble fueled by asset securitization was supposedly sound because the market was self-regulated and efficient. Now we are dealing with the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. Never again will Wall Street greed sink the economy and force unprecedented fiscal and monetary policy!
Democrats will improve regulation, we will balance the budget in a fair manner while cutting expenses in a fair manner. Corporate handouts through the tax code will not be immune from cuts.
Joseph Stiglitz who inspired that piece
Democrats are pro-life while believing that each woman has the right to choose whether a particular set of circumstances is right for the upbringing of a child. Abortion should be rare and undertaken only when an individual woman believes she has no other choice. But the government has limited rights to control such choice because time is of the essence when a woman faces such choice and it must be between herself, her family and her doctor.
Republicans claim they are pro-life but their policies focus on only the unborn. Their sanctity of life is focused on the unborn but not protecting that child from being shot by a semi-automatic weapon, or getting medical treatment if their parents cannot afford health insurance. What about the sanctity of life for the elderly for their lifetime of contribution to society and providing them the health care and social security they have paid for?
Why do only the unborn get the right to be protected from government policy? What about the living's right to be protected from government's policy or have government policy protect their sanctity of life. Democrats see the need for balance in all of this. The Republicans want to force women to carry children borne of violent acts by deviant fathers with questionable genetic makeup and then abandon the living to vagaries of the market. That is what the privatization of medicare and social security means. The elderly, when they have diminished mental capacity, will have to figure out how to afford their health care and their investments, when more than a few could not do it well when they were at full mental capacity.
Thomas Friedman Inspiration
While President Obama lost his chance to say all of this in Denver, I hope you will be convinced that his reelection is of critical importance so that economic policy balances the needs of the rich and the middle class, the budget is balanced in a fair manner, that medicare and social security are fixed without conversion from what we know, that Obamacare is implemented without delay and fixed where it needs to be, and that woman's rights to make individual decisions for themselves are respected.
Link to Robert Frank who inspired that thought
Policies matter. Income inequality in the U.S. has been a long time coming and will take a long time to be overcome. The reasons for this trend are complex and based in a combination of economic comparative advantage with capitalism's ruthless pursuit of the highest return on capital. The only thing government can do is create a set of policies that allow each American to improve their own personal comparative advantage.
The Democratic set of policies is focused on balancing the budget in a fair manner. Yes, we will cut expenses in many places, but we also do so in a manner that preserves the government's ability to meet its obligations to retirement benefits, helping those who need help and spending to support education and infrastructure. To do that, we need to raise revenues from those who can afford to pay.
The Republican set of policies that supposedly will address economic inequality use disproven myths as their basis of truth and they are not true.
"America is the land of opportunity". Not for those who do not benefit from parents who can afford college. When I was a youth, my middle class parents could afford to pay for a private college education without my borrowing any money. Today, I estimate my parents would be making $80,000 to $90,000 or roughly take home of $58,000 after tax and health insurance. How could they afford to pay even the $25,000 that a public college costs let alone the $50,000 that a private school costs? Is it any wonder that students today have thousands of dollars of debt when they graduate and the debt repayment delays their participation in the middle class spending patterns. Now the Community Colleges of America cost less and do a wonderful job preparing people to participate in the economy. But public education must prepare children uniformly to be well prepared for such an education and global competition. That is why democratic policies will continue to provide financial support for education. Most kids cannot borrow the money from their parents, Governor Romney.
"Trickle-down Economics works". If it works so well, why is the comparison of my family's place in time the truth?
"The rich are the job creators". Yes and no, entrepreneurs create jobs, but not every rich person is an entrepreneur. Converting fees earned by a firm for managing money into bonuses that for most Americans are ordinary income taxed at 28% but for such private equity and hedge funds get capital gains treatment at 15% is simply unfair. I support tax reform that equalizes income tax rates for types of activity. No rich person will fail to hire someone who produces incremental return on equity just because the equity return gets taxes at 28%, not 15%. That $ of incremental return will still add to the overall profitability increasing the wealth of the job creator.
"The cost of reducing inequality is so great it will kill the economy". If there is no middle class, where will economic growth come from?
"Markets are self-regulating and efficient". The housing bubble fueled by asset securitization was supposedly sound because the market was self-regulated and efficient. Now we are dealing with the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. Never again will Wall Street greed sink the economy and force unprecedented fiscal and monetary policy!
Democrats will improve regulation, we will balance the budget in a fair manner while cutting expenses in a fair manner. Corporate handouts through the tax code will not be immune from cuts.
Joseph Stiglitz who inspired that piece
Democrats are pro-life while believing that each woman has the right to choose whether a particular set of circumstances is right for the upbringing of a child. Abortion should be rare and undertaken only when an individual woman believes she has no other choice. But the government has limited rights to control such choice because time is of the essence when a woman faces such choice and it must be between herself, her family and her doctor.
Republicans claim they are pro-life but their policies focus on only the unborn. Their sanctity of life is focused on the unborn but not protecting that child from being shot by a semi-automatic weapon, or getting medical treatment if their parents cannot afford health insurance. What about the sanctity of life for the elderly for their lifetime of contribution to society and providing them the health care and social security they have paid for?
Why do only the unborn get the right to be protected from government policy? What about the living's right to be protected from government's policy or have government policy protect their sanctity of life. Democrats see the need for balance in all of this. The Republicans want to force women to carry children borne of violent acts by deviant fathers with questionable genetic makeup and then abandon the living to vagaries of the market. That is what the privatization of medicare and social security means. The elderly, when they have diminished mental capacity, will have to figure out how to afford their health care and their investments, when more than a few could not do it well when they were at full mental capacity.
Thomas Friedman Inspiration
While President Obama lost his chance to say all of this in Denver, I hope you will be convinced that his reelection is of critical importance so that economic policy balances the needs of the rich and the middle class, the budget is balanced in a fair manner, that medicare and social security are fixed without conversion from what we know, that Obamacare is implemented without delay and fixed where it needs to be, and that woman's rights to make individual decisions for themselves are respected.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
The Tea Party and Typical Islamic Governance
are identical.
They feature absence of pluralism and the prevalence of "rule or die" politics -either my sect or party is in power or I'm dead.
This is dominant political feature in the Arab-Muslim world and the Tea Party.
Thank you Thomas Friedman for pointing this out.
They feature absence of pluralism and the prevalence of "rule or die" politics -either my sect or party is in power or I'm dead.
This is dominant political feature in the Arab-Muslim world and the Tea Party.
Thank you Thomas Friedman for pointing this out.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Obama 2.75 Romney 1.5
Last night goes Obama 1 Romney 0. I might have given Romney a .25 for acknowledging that the sanctions against Iran seem to be working, but he was so incoherent trying to hit his soundbites that he failed to deliver any themes about his grasp of foreign policy. I fear that he does not understand foreign policy or how diplomacy works. I am not sure Romney understands anything beyond power politics and trying that has possibly been the source of Obama's failures.
So overall Obama Biden wins the debates over Romney Ryan 2.75 to 1.5. I don't understand what President Obama was trying to accomplish in Denver and fear that may cost him the election as it seems the undecided voters decided that night and being the light thinkers that they are, stopped evaluating that night.
I will come back to undecided voters, the role of partisanship and Citizens United in my next blog whenever that may come to pass. It is not a relationship that bodes well for lowering partisanship.
So overall Obama Biden wins the debates over Romney Ryan 2.75 to 1.5. I don't understand what President Obama was trying to accomplish in Denver and fear that may cost him the election as it seems the undecided voters decided that night and being the light thinkers that they are, stopped evaluating that night.
I will come back to undecided voters, the role of partisanship and Citizens United in my next blog whenever that may come to pass. It is not a relationship that bodes well for lowering partisanship.
Monday, October 22, 2012
The Danger of Heightened Partisanship
I have been thinking about the closeness of our national elections and the power that gives to a small number of voters to control the overall policy of the country. This is the same dynamic that gave us Prohibition. Most jurisdictions where voters were given the chance to decide whether their political jurisdiction would be wet or dry voted down dry preferring to allow the legal and taxed sale of alcohol.
However, the anti-alcohol voters were single issue voters and if you were not for them, you were against them and the anti-alcohol votes could determine the winner of many elections. Thus, prohibition was passed.
Today, the electorate is roughly divided into 45% cores for each party. The remaining 10% cares about any number of issues and many are single issue voters. Taxes, abortion, women's rights, gun control, environment, retirement benefits and the list goes on.
The Presidential candidates have to both cater to their core and get them motivated to vote and pander to these single issue voters. This means that when we get into a situation where serious choices need to be made, we do not get an honest picture of what either candidate will do because they want to win the election and such victory will be determined by this 10% in the single issue category. So the candidates talk out of both sides of their mouth.
It would be far better to have a spirit of cooperation recognition that the views of the 45% that opposed you need to be respected so that problems can be addressed in a bipartisan manner. Then we can make prudent progress on our challenges and the minorities in the middle would not be dominating the majorities.
As for the remaining undecided voters, they apparently do not care about policies, but rather determine who they will vote for based upon some whim other than policy
However, the anti-alcohol voters were single issue voters and if you were not for them, you were against them and the anti-alcohol votes could determine the winner of many elections. Thus, prohibition was passed.
Today, the electorate is roughly divided into 45% cores for each party. The remaining 10% cares about any number of issues and many are single issue voters. Taxes, abortion, women's rights, gun control, environment, retirement benefits and the list goes on.
The Presidential candidates have to both cater to their core and get them motivated to vote and pander to these single issue voters. This means that when we get into a situation where serious choices need to be made, we do not get an honest picture of what either candidate will do because they want to win the election and such victory will be determined by this 10% in the single issue category. So the candidates talk out of both sides of their mouth.
It would be far better to have a spirit of cooperation recognition that the views of the 45% that opposed you need to be respected so that problems can be addressed in a bipartisan manner. Then we can make prudent progress on our challenges and the minorities in the middle would not be dominating the majorities.
As for the remaining undecided voters, they apparently do not care about policies, but rather determine who they will vote for based upon some whim other than policy
Sunday, October 21, 2012
RIP George McGovern
My 1st losing Presidential vote until Al Gore and I will admit that after the election I went on to ignore Mr. McGovern because he was irrelevant to anything I cared about. And he ran a terrible campaign with the Eagleton mess.
However, as reader of history, I discovered over time what a hero and brave soul he was during WWII flying the maximum number of bomber missions over Germany.
And he was a politician who believed in family values having been married to the same woman for ever and not desiring to be in the limelight for any purposes of self satisfaction. In his obituary I found the following quotes from him in 2011 on the importance of this election to the country and what the Democrats stand for.
However, as reader of history, I discovered over time what a hero and brave soul he was during WWII flying the maximum number of bomber missions over Germany.
And he was a politician who believed in family values having been married to the same woman for ever and not desiring to be in the limelight for any purposes of self satisfaction. In his obituary I found the following quotes from him in 2011 on the importance of this election to the country and what the Democrats stand for.
“We are the party that believes we can’t let the strong kick aside the weak,” Mr. McGovern wrote. “Our party believes that poor children should be as well educated as those from wealthy families. We believe that everyone should pay their fair share of taxes and that everyone should have access to health care.”
With the country burdened economically, he added, there has “never been a more critical time in our nation’s history” to rely on those principles.
“We are at a crossroads,” he wrote, “over how the federal government in Washington and state legislatures and city councils across the land allocate their financial resources. Which fork we take will say a lot about Americans and our values.”
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Thursday 10/18 musings
Why didn't either of the 1st two Presidential debates address medicare, medicaid and social security in some detail?
As for the economy, there is an interesting commentary in the 10/13/12 Economist on the differences in productivity measures between those working in urban settings vs those working in rural settings. It has real implications for what government policies should be in place and what people in rural settings should be thinking about for their own life choices and expectations.
And someone should ask Candidate Romney and the GOP Congressmen if they intend to close the Food and Drug Administration. I think they do and I would like to know who would be dealing with this meningitis outbreak caused by a private pharmaceutical company if not for the FDA and the public health services throughout this country. Government oversight is critical to protecting the trusting population from people who will take shortcuts to turn a profit for themselves. There is a 200+ year history of scoundrels trying to make money off of fraudulent medicines and the population needs protection.
As for the economy, there is an interesting commentary in the 10/13/12 Economist on the differences in productivity measures between those working in urban settings vs those working in rural settings. It has real implications for what government policies should be in place and what people in rural settings should be thinking about for their own life choices and expectations.
And someone should ask Candidate Romney and the GOP Congressmen if they intend to close the Food and Drug Administration. I think they do and I would like to know who would be dealing with this meningitis outbreak caused by a private pharmaceutical company if not for the FDA and the public health services throughout this country. Government oversight is critical to protecting the trusting population from people who will take shortcuts to turn a profit for themselves. There is a 200+ year history of scoundrels trying to make money off of fraudulent medicines and the population needs protection.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Obama 1 Romney .25
The totals are now Obama Biden 1.75 Romney Ryan1.5
Romney gets a 1/4 point for some legitimate digs at Obama and for being in favor of affirmative action. That was a beautiful moment when Romney said "get me some female candidates for my jobs so we can have a balanced administration". Will Romney appoint Supreme Court justices who believe likewise?
Obama held Romney's feet to the fire and showed his numbers do not add up. How do you cut tax rates for everybody, eliminate taxes on interest and dividends and capital gains, increase defense spending and pay for it by limiting deductions to $25,000? That does not add up and Romney had no rebuttal for it when pressed. He just said it adds up! This is a guy who knows how to run a business? or was his business asset stripping which doesn't take as much skill.
Also, how does repealing Obamacare reduce the cost of health care to employers and create jobs? Health costs and the cost of health insurance are steadily rising in the current system, the uninsured are still not getting preventive or early care in the current system; Obamacare tries to control these costs and may or may not be successful, but the one thing I know is that there is nothing in the current system that even tries to control these costs. No one who is not hiring because of Obamacare would be hiring without Obamacare. Anyone who says otherwise is not telling the truth.
Obama gets the full 1 point for pointing out what he has accomplished, the challenges he faced upon coming into office and promising to protect the things he cares about.
I may have missed it, but I don't think I heard any questions about Medicare (I tuned in 3 or 4 minutes late)
Romney gets a 1/4 point for some legitimate digs at Obama and for being in favor of affirmative action. That was a beautiful moment when Romney said "get me some female candidates for my jobs so we can have a balanced administration". Will Romney appoint Supreme Court justices who believe likewise?
Also, how does repealing Obamacare reduce the cost of health care to employers and create jobs? Health costs and the cost of health insurance are steadily rising in the current system, the uninsured are still not getting preventive or early care in the current system; Obamacare tries to control these costs and may or may not be successful, but the one thing I know is that there is nothing in the current system that even tries to control these costs. No one who is not hiring because of Obamacare would be hiring without Obamacare. Anyone who says otherwise is not telling the truth.
Obama gets the full 1 point for pointing out what he has accomplished, the challenges he faced upon coming into office and promising to protect the things he cares about.
I may have missed it, but I don't think I heard any questions about Medicare (I tuned in 3 or 4 minutes late)
Sunday, October 14, 2012
The Importance of the Democrat Republican Difference
On this slow Sunday when all three NY teams may well go down to defeat and I may or may not be screaming at the TV (although if I watch one more Curtis Granderson strikeout I may commit hari kari), I am reminded about the real difference between Romney and Obama.
First, Nicholas Kristof highlights the importance of everyone being compelled to buy health insurance. This long time friend of his did not and now his $500,000 plus cancer treatment bill is being absorbed by the system. Romney refuses to say how he will control costs but he is bound and determined to end Obamacare and not try to find a way to end the problem of the uninsured. We cannot control health care expenditures without ending the problem of the uninsured. The uninsured get sicker because they don't go to the Dr sooner. Early treatment of cancer might cost $100,000 and be successful so the individual returns to a productive life and pays back some of that expense through their health insurance premiums. Late treatment costs as much as $500,000 and more potentially and likely results in death with no repayment from the individual. And when such expensive treatment is not paid for, somewhere else in the system prices are raised and we all pay for it.
Link to Kristof article
There is also an article in the Times about how the 1%'s focus on preserving their wealth through a focus on lower taxes is destroying upward mobility. And there is an article about a hard working woman who finds her profits going down because her city's economy is in a long term decline and she doesn't know what she can do to reverse it. Both stories reflect political realities, but neither brings into the discussion the real issue at play here.
Link to "The Self Destruction of the 1%
Link to 2nd story
The real issue is globalization of everything. The cost of doing business in the U.S. is too high relative to the rest of the world. Costs are rising in the rest of the world and eventually, this will reverse and jobs will come back to the U.S. but it will not help today's workers who cannot compete in the Global Economy. So what can be done for these people?
There is no magic bullet. But universal health care would be a good start. If we control the cost of health care, there will be more $ left over in employed people's wallets to spend on something else. That will create jobs through the multiplier effect.
Spending $ to update our decaying infrastructure would also be a good start to employ construction workers who are not working. This will create job through the multiplier effect.
Making sure our schools educated people to compete in the Global Economy is critical as well. Support community colleges. They are the market answer to control the ever rising price of college.
But the fiscal deficit must be cured over the intermediate term or debt will swamp the ability of the government to meet its obligations. This means some form of Simpson Bowles must be passed. This means revenues must be raised. Romney has said he will not raise revenues. Obama will raise revenues in a fair manner. The 1% are competing in the Global Economy and doing fine. They can afford to pay more. In fact, the top 10% or 20% of the population is competing in the Global Economy and doing well enough to pay more in taxes. But there must be expenditure control as well. Simpson Bowles suggest a mix of 1/3 revenue 2/3 expenditure cuts. Something in that neighborhood is the right answer.
Romney's policies will be heartless. When people do not have health insurance, they make poor decisions. Only by preserving Obamacare will we proceed down a productive path to finding balanced economic growth and preserving the social mobility contract that is so important to the psychology of the country.
First, Nicholas Kristof highlights the importance of everyone being compelled to buy health insurance. This long time friend of his did not and now his $500,000 plus cancer treatment bill is being absorbed by the system. Romney refuses to say how he will control costs but he is bound and determined to end Obamacare and not try to find a way to end the problem of the uninsured. We cannot control health care expenditures without ending the problem of the uninsured. The uninsured get sicker because they don't go to the Dr sooner. Early treatment of cancer might cost $100,000 and be successful so the individual returns to a productive life and pays back some of that expense through their health insurance premiums. Late treatment costs as much as $500,000 and more potentially and likely results in death with no repayment from the individual. And when such expensive treatment is not paid for, somewhere else in the system prices are raised and we all pay for it.
Link to Kristof article
There is also an article in the Times about how the 1%'s focus on preserving their wealth through a focus on lower taxes is destroying upward mobility. And there is an article about a hard working woman who finds her profits going down because her city's economy is in a long term decline and she doesn't know what she can do to reverse it. Both stories reflect political realities, but neither brings into the discussion the real issue at play here.
Link to "The Self Destruction of the 1%
Link to 2nd story
The real issue is globalization of everything. The cost of doing business in the U.S. is too high relative to the rest of the world. Costs are rising in the rest of the world and eventually, this will reverse and jobs will come back to the U.S. but it will not help today's workers who cannot compete in the Global Economy. So what can be done for these people?
There is no magic bullet. But universal health care would be a good start. If we control the cost of health care, there will be more $ left over in employed people's wallets to spend on something else. That will create jobs through the multiplier effect.
Spending $ to update our decaying infrastructure would also be a good start to employ construction workers who are not working. This will create job through the multiplier effect.
Making sure our schools educated people to compete in the Global Economy is critical as well. Support community colleges. They are the market answer to control the ever rising price of college.
But the fiscal deficit must be cured over the intermediate term or debt will swamp the ability of the government to meet its obligations. This means some form of Simpson Bowles must be passed. This means revenues must be raised. Romney has said he will not raise revenues. Obama will raise revenues in a fair manner. The 1% are competing in the Global Economy and doing fine. They can afford to pay more. In fact, the top 10% or 20% of the population is competing in the Global Economy and doing well enough to pay more in taxes. But there must be expenditure control as well. Simpson Bowles suggest a mix of 1/3 revenue 2/3 expenditure cuts. Something in that neighborhood is the right answer.
Romney's policies will be heartless. When people do not have health insurance, they make poor decisions. Only by preserving Obamacare will we proceed down a productive path to finding balanced economic growth and preserving the social mobility contract that is so important to the psychology of the country.
Saturday, October 13, 2012
NIMBY's Please Be Realistic
After the modern Republican Party, nothing gets my dander up more than NIMBY's. Now I am not referring to all things here; as even I will agree that a nuclear power plant 30 miles from 12 mm people does not make sense and even I will agree that the environment needs to be looked after. I am an environmentalist. But we need energy and we need economic development. Without either, we do not have employment opportunities for those who need work.
This means we need to drill for energy, not say no to everything as some do. Just make sure they drill cleanly and safely. Responsible drillers do that. If you take the highest royalty check from some no name outfit, you have only yourself to blame for not dealing with a reputable firm.
We need pipelines to transport that energy, not say no to a pipeline that will be underground somewhere near you. Oh boo hoo to the family somewhere in upstate New York where their bucolic horse pasture was going to have a gas pipeline buried underneath it. Move the bloody horses during construction, make them replant grass, and move the horses back and get over it. You are being paid for your trouble.
You can not be against drilling and pipelines and against wind farms on ridges or solar panels in your neighborhood. Some greens are against all of this. What do they want to do? Ride horses and live by candle light at night huddled around a wood fire in the fireplace for warmth in the winter. That economy ceased to exit 100 years ago and there is no going back. If you want that, buy a farm and live however you want to.
Finally, what set this off today. There is a closed golf course in White Plains, NY. Like all Westchester golf courses, it is a lovely natural setting that the local wild life can frolic on. The golf course failed because the economy for golf courses changed and no wanted to buy it as a golf course. The City of White Plains thought about it, but a minority of its citizens golf and there is already a county owned golf course in White Plains, so it was not seen as a pressing need for city expenditure. Particularly, when the French American School of New York wants to buy the land, build their school needs on it and preserve the rest as open space. Now some people want the city to buy the land and build a park. It would be nice to have this as a park, but the City really doesn't have the money to buy the land and the owners would like to get what they can for the land and the FASNY is offering a nice sum for the land.
Yes, fans of this blog, some residents of White Plains do not want the FASNY to get this land and operate their school on this fabulous property for a school. Who in their right mind would not want something like FASNY to take over a vast property and maintain most of it as green space? The alternative is a developer buying it and building estates on 1 to 2 acres. That would add to the property taxes (which every municipality needs), but the green space would be eliminated. These NIMBY's are not being realistic and they should be. We all need to be realistic.
Go FASNY and Boo to the No FASNY sign holders.
This means we need to drill for energy, not say no to everything as some do. Just make sure they drill cleanly and safely. Responsible drillers do that. If you take the highest royalty check from some no name outfit, you have only yourself to blame for not dealing with a reputable firm.
We need pipelines to transport that energy, not say no to a pipeline that will be underground somewhere near you. Oh boo hoo to the family somewhere in upstate New York where their bucolic horse pasture was going to have a gas pipeline buried underneath it. Move the bloody horses during construction, make them replant grass, and move the horses back and get over it. You are being paid for your trouble.
You can not be against drilling and pipelines and against wind farms on ridges or solar panels in your neighborhood. Some greens are against all of this. What do they want to do? Ride horses and live by candle light at night huddled around a wood fire in the fireplace for warmth in the winter. That economy ceased to exit 100 years ago and there is no going back. If you want that, buy a farm and live however you want to.
Finally, what set this off today. There is a closed golf course in White Plains, NY. Like all Westchester golf courses, it is a lovely natural setting that the local wild life can frolic on. The golf course failed because the economy for golf courses changed and no wanted to buy it as a golf course. The City of White Plains thought about it, but a minority of its citizens golf and there is already a county owned golf course in White Plains, so it was not seen as a pressing need for city expenditure. Particularly, when the French American School of New York wants to buy the land, build their school needs on it and preserve the rest as open space. Now some people want the city to buy the land and build a park. It would be nice to have this as a park, but the City really doesn't have the money to buy the land and the owners would like to get what they can for the land and the FASNY is offering a nice sum for the land.
Yes, fans of this blog, some residents of White Plains do not want the FASNY to get this land and operate their school on this fabulous property for a school. Who in their right mind would not want something like FASNY to take over a vast property and maintain most of it as green space? The alternative is a developer buying it and building estates on 1 to 2 acres. That would add to the property taxes (which every municipality needs), but the green space would be eliminated. These NIMBY's are not being realistic and they should be. We all need to be realistic.
Go FASNY and Boo to the No FASNY sign holders.
Friday, October 12, 2012
Biden .75 Ryan .25
I would have given Joe a 1 but neither RSL nor I could stand his smirking. Come on, you are over 60 and can't you control that sort of thing. Now I will admit both RSL and I laughed out loud immediately upon Ryan's statement that the GOP Congress tried to be non-partisian. That deserved more than a smirk upon reply.
But all in all, I thought Biden did a good job of describing how the Democrats would conduct themselves over the next 4 years and what they would try to accomplish. I was glad Biden went into the importance of the Supreme Court appointments over the next 4 years. I think I will bump him up to a .75 for that (he was a .50 before I wrote that).
I give Ryan a .25 because he clarified Romney's "if you are around 60, you will get your medicare" to include 59 year olds like me. (actually he returned to the standard of 55 year olds).
Actually, RedStateVT, maybe you should think about a vote for Obama so you can get to the right side of 55 before anything changes.
But all in all, I thought Biden did a good job of describing how the Democrats would conduct themselves over the next 4 years and what they would try to accomplish. I was glad Biden went into the importance of the Supreme Court appointments over the next 4 years. I think I will bump him up to a .75 for that (he was a .50 before I wrote that).
I give Ryan a .25 because he clarified Romney's "if you are around 60, you will get your medicare" to include 59 year olds like me. (actually he returned to the standard of 55 year olds).
Actually, RedStateVT, maybe you should think about a vote for Obama so you can get to the right side of 55 before anything changes.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
The GOP Has No Clothes On Embassy Security
"The purpose of the pre-election hearing, presumably, is to embarrass the administration for inadequate diplomatic security. But Issa seems unaware of the irony that diplomatic security is inadequate partly because of budget cuts forced by his fellow Republicans in Congress."
"For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for theState Department’s Worldwide Security Protection program — well below the $2.15 billion requested by the Obama administration. House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012. (Negotiations with the Democrat-controlled Senate restored about $88 million of the administration’s request.) Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected."
From the Washington Post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)