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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)