Pink Floyd, On the Turning Away

Pink Floyd, On the Turning Away

Dedicated to all of my CHRISTIAN, Republican brothers, who need a reminder of what it is to be like Christ. Because, when you can turn away from people you can see, and deny them the same care that you yourself receive, then there is no limit to the evils you will do to those you can’t see.     Ω

A Republican Takeover of Health Care

What does a Republican takeover of health care in America look like?

* Over 13 Million Americans being discriminated against by insurance companies because of pre-existing conditions. T H I R T E E N   M I L L I O N   A M E R I C A N S
* Over 40 Million Americans living without health insurance of any kind.
* 40,000 American citizens dying every year due to a lack of health insurance.
* Rising health care costs that are making insurance and medical care more unaffordable for thousands of Americans every day.
* Medicare becoming insolvent because Republicans don’t think anything needs to be done.
* Hundreds of thousands of Americans having their insurance policy rescinded because they happened to get sick…which is EXACTLY what the insurance companies say they are there for.
* Victims of domestic violence being denied insurance because Insurers call domestic abuse a pre-existing condition
* 60% of Americans want a health care reform bill. A Republican takeover of health care will deny them that.
* Republicans say they are strong on National Security, yet under a Republican Takeover of Health care in America, a 9/11 style massacre of Americans will continue to take place each month, as more than 3,300 Americans die every month due to a lack of health insurance.

A Republican takeover of healthcare…looks exactly like their reputation tells you it would look like.  Their ability to do nothing in the face of a national crisis is epic.    Ω

Why Do American Taxpayers Pay For Primary Elections?

Today, we shall focus on Primary elections.  Seeing as how many people who stop by here are Independents, and are also concerned about the taxes they pay, I thought I’d open a can of worms that few people ever talk about.  Let’s talk about Primary Election funding.  I can sum it up in twenty-seven words.

Primary elections are paid for by the residents of the jurisdiction, they are included in the budget of the Election Board as provided for by the Legislature.

What are Primary elections about?  The simplest answer is that Primaries are about narrowing the field of candidates for a General election, whatever that election be for, such as a Presidential, Congressional, or local office .  To simplify it even further, typically, in the United States, the Primary Election is all about choosing a Party Candidate to run in the General Election.  Primary Elections are the tool by which the two political parties, Republicans and Democrats, choose their candidates.

Does it seem odd to you that local citizens are forced to pay for a political party’s candidate selection process?  Isn’t that something the political party ought to pay for?  After all, it’s their gig, it’s for their benefit, why are taxpayers footing the bill for their election?  And we DO KNOW that these are Party Elections, because the Supreme Court has called them such.

With a cost of around $33 Million per State (averaged), the total bill is over $1.6 Billion for these elections across the nation.  That includes money for poll workers, sites, ballot counting, and all of the other things necessary for a fair election process.

So the question I want answered by political party supporters is; Why are we, the taxpayers, paying for your political party’s election?

It’s not constitutional, and in fact, I’d have to say that if anything, it’s probably illegal.    Especially considering that no political party in America has the legal authority to tax citizens for their election.  So, let’s hear from the party supporters.  Let’s hear your excuses.

And then, maybe, we’ll go to court to resolve this, and make the Republicans and Democrats pay for their own elections.     Ω

Summit Proves That Political Parties Cannot Govern Effectively

The Health Care summit had been described as a bipartisan effort at coming to agreement on a solution for America’s crumbling health care system.  But immediately after it was over, talking heads appeared on every news outlet to tell us what had really happened at the Blair House between 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM, yesterday.  The debate was described as political theater, a contest of wills, and there was apparently a victor, although no one seems to know for sure who won.  Some say President Obama demeaned himself by sitting amongst the two sides and moderating the event, while others said the Republicans were disciplined in their message and had thus carried the day.  Others said that the Democrats had succeeded in proving their point; that the Republicans were the party of “no”.

I suppose that’s what you see when you believe in the Two Party system of American politics.  What I saw was a President who was willing to put his reputation on the line as a top-notch debater, gather the facts and opinions of each side, and try to find common ground.  Instead, what he got from both sides was the same thing America has received for two decades; stubborn partisanship, only this time it was far more civil.  If I tend to lean on the side of the Democrats in this article, it is only because I agree that we cannot afford to wait any longer to solve our health care problems, especially with regards to Medicare and people with pre-existing conditions.

It was made abundantly clear yesterday that both Republicans and Democrats agree on that fact.  Both sides say that insurers ought not to be allowed to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, and that the rising cost of health insurance is causing businesses to lay people off.  The Democrats were unwilling to move off of their position of Federally mandated minimum provisions for any health insurance policy.*  But the Republicans were adamant, too, stating too many times to count that the current bill needs to be scrapped, Congress needs to start over with debate, and small, incremental steps are the way to solve the problem.

Maybe if we had started this process sixteen years ago, when the Republicans first promised that they would do exactly that, we would be able to afford that slow pace.  In 1994, Congressman Newt Gingrich and Senator Bob Dole told America that Republicans would work with Democrats on a comprehensive health care reform bill, but would not work with them on Hillary-Care.

Republicans won the House, and for twelve years was in the majority.  In all that time, they never brought one piece of legislation to bear on reforming health insurance, even though they knew, back in 1994, that America faced a health care and Medicare crisis that needed immediate attention.

To me, this sets the stage for yesterday’s “Summit”.  Democrats have been working for a year on a bill, and have included many of the ideas that Republicans suggested, and still, Republicans want to start over.  It’s too late to start over.  And it’s time to tell you what is really going on in Washington.

While I think President Obama was sincere in his approach to Republicans for the summit, I do not think that is even a part of the debate.  Rather, the debate hinges on the battle between doing what is best for one’s nation and what is best for one’s political party.  I think it became obvious yesterday which priority was most important to both parties.  And here I give the Democrats more credit than the Republicans, because at the very least, they are willing to make every attempt to solve a problem in America that is crippling us economically, killing 40,000 Americans  a year, and destroying Medicare.  They are no longer willing to compromise, but some might say that they have already compromised enough.

Republicans, on the other hand, have proven beyond the  shadow of a doubt that the only thing they are interested in doing is winning back Congress and the Senate in November.  Delay or obstruction on any and every piece of legislation, no matter how urgent, is their method of achieving it.  The Republican health care plan exposes this with startling clarity.  The Republican plan only provides health insurance for three million more Americans, while completely ignoring the pre-existing condition issue, which is the main issue driving the entire health care debate. So on one hand, Republicans will tell anyone within shouting distance how sympathetic they are to the plight of people who face rejection for health insurance due to their pre-existing conditions, while on the other hand, they completely ignore the issue in any legislative plan that they offer.

My mother used to tell me that the only way to prove how important something was to you was in how hard you worked for it.  Republicans are proving that health care reform is not important to them at all, as their every effort is aimed at starting over and going slowly.  But forty thousand dying Americans don’t have time to wait for Republicans to implement their decades-long incremental approach.

When an issue as important as health care reform is on the table, both parties need to drop their ideology and just fix the problem.  I know that might sound like the height of simplicity, but without the two parties, is there any denying that health care reform would already have been accomplished, or that we at the very least, would have made huge strides in doing so incrementally?

The Republicans are obstructing and delaying not because they do not believe in health care reform, but because their current ideology is one hundred percent focused on November elections.  The trouble is, the last time we had a health care debate, and Republicans claimed that solving the crisis was important to them, we gave them the House, and they proceeded to do nothing for twelve years.  I see no evidence that giving them back the House this time would produce any different result.  Any political party that can look forty thousand dying people in the eye and say, “Tort reform is the most important step in the health care debate” has no intention of dealing with the problem that is causing those deaths.

This is not an ideology thing.  It’s a Party thing.  The two parties are falling all over each other to destroy America.  Delay and obstruction are just two of the many symptoms that prove this.  And in the case of health care reform, no matter which side you believe is right, it is clear that unless America eliminates political parties from our government, the most important issues of our day will remain as campaign platforms.

Maybe the Democrats will get some balls and pass their bill through Reconciliation, but I ask you; why was that necessary at all?  The point isn’t that they are considering using a procedure normally reserved for questions of taxes and budget.  Instead, this is about the process that brought us to this point.  The process of political parties.  The struggle to dominate electorally, to win power and push through Party agenda.

I have a message for the two parties.  There is only one agenda; and that agenda belongs to the American people.  The American people are a diverse and complicated group, and no one agenda, no one size fits all of us.  That is why political parties are so dangerous to our process.  No one agenda can solve all of our problems; no one ideology can fit every American.  But political parties believe differently, which means they are diametrically opposed to the actual agenda of most Americans.  Political parties govern based not on what is good for the people, but what is good for the Party.  The health care debate has undeniably exposed this.  Yes, I agree with Democrats on this issue, but don’t get me wrong; there are plenty of areas where Democrats cling to their ideology at the expense of most Americans.

The only good thing that can be said about political parties is that they are committed. The American people just wish that they were as committed to us as they were to their party.  November is coming, and the only choice we have is whatever we consider to be the lesser evil at the moment.  The choice we face every two years, which pits one party against the other, shows each side calling the other the wrong choice.

America is bleeding to death, and the most important thing to the two parties is November.  By that time, 29,997 more Americans will have died due to a lack of health insurance.  You would think that would be the most important thing to our elected officials, but to a political party, “people” are just an abstract idea, a focus group to experiment on.

Oh, don’t come here trying to protect the party you support.  Too many times we have seen examples of both parties ignoring the good of the people, putting their party first.  The best thing that could happen to either party would be for them to be destroyed.  Incidentally, that would also be the very best thing that could happen to America.

* (from third paragraph)  What this means is that any health insurance policy sold in America must have a minimum set of provisions, and this is designed to set a level of minimum protections for the American consumer.  Currently, over twenty of our States, including mine, already have this in place, so the device that could trigger this is already available to us.   Ω

CNN Has Gone OCD on Killer Whale

Someone please tell me why CNN has such a hard-on for the Killer Whale story.

Takeover Here, Takeover There, Here a Takeover, There a Takeover, Everywhere a Takeover Takeover

It’s Thursday, February 25th, 2010.  Today is the big day!  It’s Health Care Bowl 1, being held inside of the Blair House in Washington DC, but the real action might be taking place outside of the Blair House, where Moveon.Org and the TeaPartiers will be protesting outside.  I’ve got money on the Teapartiers in the eleventh round, technical knockout, but not before they are penalized repeatedly for hitting below the belt.

Seriously, these two groups may just charge each other.

But the main event today is what Politicalpartypooper is doing.

Republicans have constantly cited the Democrats health care plan as a government takeover, so today, we are going to list all of the government takeovers in American history.  I encourage you to join in and add any I may have missed, as we continue this Republican theme of government dominance:

1. No government takeover list could ever be complete without the first government takeover in American history, a government takeover of government.

2. You civil war buffs will love this one, as it was an attempted government takeover of half the government of these United States of America.

3. A government takeover of banks

4. Another government takeover of banks

5. The government takeover of the Pony Express

6.  Government takeover of the Army

7.  A government takeover of our police force

8. A government takeover of our fire protection services

9. Government takeover of our national highway system

10. A government takeover of schools

11. A government takeover of tax collection

12. A government takeover of our public universities

13.  Government takeover of Radio

14. Government takeover of the legal system

15.  Government takeover of Land Grants

16.  Government takeover of Indians…ahem, native Americans

17.  Government takeover of Space and the moon, and Mars, and Saturn, and the Sun and on and on and on

18.  A government takeover of Natural Resources

19.  A government takeover of National Parks

20  Government takeover of World War 2

21.  A government takeover of civil rights

22. Government takeover of elections

23.  A government takeover of immigration

24. A government takeover of National monuments

25. A government takeover of our borders.

There are many, many more.  Be sure to list your favorites in the comments.   Ω

The Psychology Behind a Progressive Tax

The Republicans are fond of saying “You can’t bite the hand that feeds you.”  This, of course, is in reference to the Progressive tax system in America, and that line of thought is directly responsible for the flurry of tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans since 1980.  In 1979, the top marginal tax rate was 70% for any earned income above $215,400, which, with inflation, would be somewhere above $500,000 today.

Beginning in 1981, and ending with the Bush Tax cuts in 2002, that marginal rate fell to 35% on income over $311,950.  In 1979, the top bracket earned forty times more income than the average American.  Today, that gap has widened to 500:1.  Average wages are stagnant, we have ten percent unemployment, and nearly twenty percent Under-employment, with one in five American men out of work.  How to fix it…

When FDR jacked up the income tax rate on the wealthiest Americans of his time (63%), it wasn’t just to pay for his New Deal Programs, that was only part of it.  The larger part of his economic plan included building a foundation that would grow and elevate the American Middle Class to become the largest class of citizens, as well as a beacon to the world for Capitalism.  It worked.  For decades, unemployment remained moderately low, Middle Class incomes grew, families were able to support themselves with one earner, college graduate rates skyrocketed, and retirements were more secure.  In less than a generation, an entire class of Americans moved from poverty level to the Middle Class, and became the envy of the world.

Why did it work?  Because no one wants to give the Federal Government any more of their profit than is absolutely necessary.  FDR understood this, and he also understood that there was only one other place that the wealthy would put that money; back into the businesses they owned, in capital equipment purchases, hiring, and investment in other American companies.  Of course, it helped that World War 2 made America the Arms dealer to the world, and afterward, our economy was squarely placed as the preeminent economy of the world.  For the first time in American history, jobless rates remained beneath eight percent for almost forty years, while the economic mobility of the Middle Class continued to grow.  But, since 1981, when the tax rates on the wealthiest Americans began to be relaxed, jobless rates have again climbed above ten percent, twice in the last twenty-six years.  Coincidence?

Not likely.  The simple fact that most Americans miss is that when you give people an incentive to keep more of their money, that is exactly what they will do.  Conservative economic theory dictates that the only way to grow the economy is through tax cuts, especially for the wealthy.  Since 1981, no other class of people has seen a larger tax cut than wealthy Americans (70% to 35%).  But the economy has struggled, and the Middle Class has borne the brunt of that, with their wages stagnant, and unemployment twice hitting ten percent and higher, something that had not occurred since the late 1930′s.

To make this more personal for you, let’s say you owned a business that brought you an income of $2 Million per year.  Now, let’s add to that mix an income tax hike of 70% on income earned over $1 Million.  How likely are you to keep that remaining $1 Million as income, knowing that if you do, the Federal Government is going to collect $700,000 of it?  An educated guess indicates that you, like your predecessors before you, will pour that $1 Million back into the company rather than see it end up in the hands of a government that you consider to be inefficient at best.  Basic American human psychology.  Simple.

Let’s say that instead of a 70% tax rate, you are paying a 35% rate, which means you get to keep 65% of the money you report as income above $1 Million.  A best guess would then indicate that you would be far more likely to keep the extra $ 1 Million under these circumstances than under a 70% tax rate.  Is that 70% rate fair?  Hell, no.  Is 35% fair?  Maybe.

But fair has nothing to do with Capitalism, which has never concerned itself with fairness so much as it has been focused on profit and efficiency.  It is the Federal Government’s duty to see that Capitalism works for all Americans, not just the lucky few, and that is a job that, while onerous and hateful, is nevertheless part of providing opportunity for all.  Capitalism itself cannot exist for long if the vast majority of money resides with one small group of people.  Sooner or later, under those conditions, Capitalism will turn into Socialism, as more and more citizens become unable to support themselves, and the wealthy become the sugar daddy of America.

Either way you slice this pie, the economy starts at the top.  Trickle down is true, only not in the sense that Republicans believe it to be.  In order to encourage small and large business growth, you have to give people who own businesses reasons to hire.  Especially at the top tax bracket, the only way to encourage the wealthy to invest in their companies, and thus, in people and equipment, is to make it prohibitive for them to pocket more money.  Again, I’m not saying this is fair; but Capitalism isn’t about fairness.  If it were, everybody would earn the same wage, and we’d call it communism, with no one owning more property than the next person. I’m pretty sure no sane American business owner wants that.

That is a simplistic way of summing up how Capitalism will or will not work, but our history is no fluke.  When progressive rates made pocketing extra profit prohibitive, America, and especially America’s Middle Class, thrived.  There is no way around that fact.  The numbers do not lie.  We’ve had two very long periods now to show us how each method works.  Cutting taxes on the wealthiest Americans, while “fair”, has failed to allow the majority of Americans to improve their financial situations.  More and more Americans are falling from the Middle Class into poverty, which reverses a trend that lasted for nearly forty years.  As onerous as that very high progressive tax rate is, you cannot argue against the fact that Middle Class citizens were better off under it, while the wealthiest Americans continued to enjoy vast success.  The lower tax rates are clearly indicating that when the wealthy are encouraged to keep more of their money, that is exactly what they will do, to the detriment of the entire American economy.  High tax rates on the wealthy isn’t about financing welfare.  It’s about getting them to put their money back into the economy, rather than forcing the government to do what Capitalism ought to be able to do by itself.

Hey, I don’t blame the wealthy for wanting to keep more of their money.  It’s basic human psychology.  But how long will their money last in a system where more and more, they will have to support America not by employing them, but by giving them welfare checks?  Socialism is right around the corner, if we do not change things fast.  The only way to avoid it is to raise up the Middle Class, and get more of our poor back to work, and on the road to the Middle Class.  Only the wealthy can do that, and they have to be encouraged to do it, or, to put it more bluntly, blackmailed to do it.

In summation, the only way we can fix our economy for the long term is to allow the wealthiest Americans a low tax rate on the first portion of their earnings so they can continue to enjoy the excellent lifestyle that they have, while encouraging them to hire and make capital equipment purchases by using a prohibitive tax rate on the rest of their profits.  This is the only method in our history that has proven to work for all of America over the long term.

Capitalism isn’t fair.  It is what it is, but if we are going to remain Capitalists, then we need to end the assumption that low tax rates will encourage the wealthy to hire more Americans.  It’s simply not true.  When you allow anyone to keep more of their money, that’s exactly what they do; history bears that out time after time.  You have to give them a reason to reinvest, and that means higher tax rates, unfortunately.  It isn’t about soaking the rich, although I am sure some who read this will see it that way.  It’s about encouraging them to do the right thing, instead of doing the exact wrong thing.  The greater the gap between the rich and the poor, the more assured we are that Capitalism will ultimately fail.

Investors (Owners) Fucked By Wall Street Again

$150 Billion in new Wall Street bonuses for 2009.  52 Million American households invest in stocks.  That’s $2,880 for every investing household on average, which, for 2009, has been redistributed to wealthy Wall Street.  In other words, normal American investors just saw an average of $2,880 withheld from their return on investment without a vote on it, because shareholders (OWNERS) do not, as a general rule, have a vote on bonus payments and executive compensation.

Let me put it to you in a different way:

Owners of Wall Street, which, of course, are the shareholders of these institutions, have just been robbed, and the police are nowhere in sight.

$150 Billion is 5% of the Federal budget for 2010.

52 Million American households have had a break-in, and their Neighborhood Watch system failed to stop it.  That’s because the thieves wear suits, are carted around in Limos, and are currently enjoying your $2,880 by shitting in their solid gold toilet.  Welcome to America, Land of Opportunity, the place where the wealthy rob the Middle Class blind, and Conservatives everywhere cheer them on.

Investors welcome…especially around bonus time!

Jesus’ Little Glenn Beck Problem

All the believers were together and had everything in common.

Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Acts 2:44,45

Do you know where I’m going with this?

If you watched Glenn Beck’s CPAC speech, you probably have a pretty good idea.

I believe in calling a spade a spade, and I’ve not seen such a spade of Christian hypocrisy in a very long time, than when I watched Glenn Beck tell CPAC that the Republican party had yet to have its “Jesus moment”.  Only Beck didn’t mean a conversion to faith, or a sudden realization about what the life of Christ represented.  What he meant was that Republicans were headed toward socialism; big Government and big spending.

Get a load of his gems:

“Progressivism is the disease here in America,” he said. “It’s in both
parties. It’s eating the Constitution. It’s designed to.”

“We believe in the right of the individual,” Beck said. But he added, “We
don’t have a right to health care, housing or handouts.” He said that the
government does not have the power to give individuals their rights, “God
does.”

You are absolutely right, Mr. Beck.  We don’t have a “right” to any of that stuff.  Instead, according to Christ, we have a RESPONSIBILITY.  It’s funny how people like Beck always forget that part of Christ’s message.

Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”

“Which ones?” the man inquired.
Jesus replied, “‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony,

honor your father and mother,’† and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’†”

“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”Matthew 19: 16-21

Oh my God!!!  Jesus was a…a…PROGRESSIVE!!!

Mr. Beck, the message of Christ, which you proclaim to believe in, is showing you to be a hypocrite.  Focus, then, not on what they do not have, but on what you have; and which is your responsibility as a follower of Christ, to visit the lonely, to feed the poor, and to care for the sick.

No one is calling for a Communist Dictatorship.  What we call for is that you live out your life in Christ, rather than your life as a wealthy man who has forgotten what it is to be in  need.  Maybe God can help you with that some day, Glenn.  Should I pray for it?

Five Questions You Should Ask Every Conservative

♣

It’s hard to believe President Obama’s term is more than one year old, already, or, to put it as one of my conservative acquaintances did, “It’s hard to believe America is still free”.

I often get involved in visiting different liberal and conservative blogs, and commenting.  Being an independent, I find that to be the easiest way to start an argument no matter what I say, especially when I’m in the mood for one.  But lately, one of the conservative blogs I visit has been vicious.  Did you know that recently, according to Conservatives, not only are liberals evil, but independents have won that title, too?  In fact, my “friends” at one blog have gone so far as to say that independents are really only liberals in hiding, too cowardly to come out and admit the truth.  Hmmm.

Across the width and breadth of the internet, from time to time, you’ll come upon a conversation which just screams at you to say something, even if it means that everyone on that blog will shoot you with a rusty spear if they can see you.  Just such a thing happened to me the other day.  One of my favorite conservatives to debate was there, and he was all “you’re just a weath-redistributing LIBERAL!!!” and everything.  So, I responded by telling him that the only people in America who had their hands out was the wealthy, and I also told him, “You better be ready to dig in those pockets deep, boy, because they are about to need another bailout.”

It was at this point that he “reminded” me of all the welfare cases, the unions, the unemployed with their hands out, blah, blah, blah, blah…

So, I curved the debate around to the one place where I knew he could not escape from the truth.  I asked him five questions.  Here they are:

1.  Do you believe that Americans who REALLY want to work ought to be able to find a job that pays a decent living wage?

2.  What do you believe is a decent living wage for a father supporting a wife and two children?  For a single mother whose husband abandoned her? (that’s more like two questions, but who’s counting?)

3.  Why do we see that since 1979, the ratio of executive pay to average American pay has soared from 40:1 to 500:1?  And do you realize that this means if you earn $40,000, an executive earns $20 Million?

4.  In this most recent bear market, when your “stop-losses” on your stocks sold your shares at a huge loss and converted your retirement account to cash, who bought those shares that you sold, and when you finally get back into the market, whose shares will you be buying at a much higher price than what they bought them for?

5.  Where did that money in your 401k go?  It didn’t just disappear, so who has it now?

I asked him those questions yesterday…he has yet to respond.  Really, how can he respond without understanding that unless we do some wealth redistributing, his income will continue to stagnate, and his retirement plan will continuously be raided by bear markets, in which, only the rich have the money available to buy all of those “distressed” stocks, at bargain prices.

Do I believe in wealth redistribution?  You’re damned right I do. How can I not?  I’ve watched it happen for more than thirty years as the wealthiest Americans have, time after time, redistributed my wealth amongst themselves.  Ω