It was another night of self inflicted attacks but it was a bit more interesting.
There is still a lot of time left and whether the current front runner survives is pretty uncertain. He will at least make it to the first few primaries where we will see how he does.
The media likes to portray this as a battle between the moderates and the progressives, but I don't really see it that way.
The fundamental issue is whether the American people are willing to accept that Government is needed to solve problems and that it will cost something.
For many years the argument has been that private industry and American ingenuity was the way to go and Government merely got in the way. Of course this ran against the fact that self interest prevents private industry from addressing big issues, like climate change or health care.
Of course to some extent if the American public was willing to only patronize companies that had good records in those areas it might be effective. However, we are generally going to opt for the option that is best for us.
Big problems, especially climate change, requires the Government. As a capitalistic country the way to accomplish this is by taxing the profits or penalizing companies that cause the problem.
Yes those taxes will probably be passed along, but if imposed on the worst companies, they will also encourage more environmental purchases.
The other alternative is mass relocations because of coastal flooding and more and more horrific weather events.
Its not really an option.
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Thursday, August 1, 2019
Friday, June 14, 2019
Our Government, is it Honest?
Well an admitted liar has resigned as the press secretary for the administration that easily holds the record for most lies.
I have no idea what the future holds for her and in some respects she simply carried out the orders of the main liar, but don't think that is going to be much of an excuse, although she probably will end up with the so called news channel that host the most liars.
We seem to accept that lying is commonplace and we see so much of it we don't register much shock anymore.
There is of course a history of how lying became something we expected from the Government and which now has eroded some basic aspects of society.
There were probably always some misinformation but the revelations in the Pentagon Papers had a significant impact on the American psyche. Followed up shortly thereafter with Iran-Contra and we were off to the races.
As the Internet grew we got Wiki-Leaks where secrets were revealed some of which contradicted public positions.
We have evolved to the point where everybody is either lying or accusing other of lying.
We need to restore trust in our Government, that they aren't covering up things that we need to know, like contaminates in our water supply or other dangers to our health and safety.
This is supposed to be our Government and it should have our interests as its primary concern.
Unfortunately too often it seems that large companies that can make large donations get the consideration.
That needs to change.
I have no idea what the future holds for her and in some respects she simply carried out the orders of the main liar, but don't think that is going to be much of an excuse, although she probably will end up with the so called news channel that host the most liars.
We seem to accept that lying is commonplace and we see so much of it we don't register much shock anymore.
There is of course a history of how lying became something we expected from the Government and which now has eroded some basic aspects of society.
There were probably always some misinformation but the revelations in the Pentagon Papers had a significant impact on the American psyche. Followed up shortly thereafter with Iran-Contra and we were off to the races.
As the Internet grew we got Wiki-Leaks where secrets were revealed some of which contradicted public positions.
We have evolved to the point where everybody is either lying or accusing other of lying.
We need to restore trust in our Government, that they aren't covering up things that we need to know, like contaminates in our water supply or other dangers to our health and safety.
This is supposed to be our Government and it should have our interests as its primary concern.
Unfortunately too often it seems that large companies that can make large donations get the consideration.
That needs to change.
Monday, April 22, 2019
Government Fairness
We should never forget that decisions made by the Government impact peoples lives in very significant ways. In addition to the life and death decisions made regarding our active duty troops, it makes decisions that impact our lives from before our birth to the day we die, and even after.
You want the air you breathe to be clean, the schools safe and equipped, the streets safe, the highways in repair, the police professional, the health care system to be available and affordable, the food you eat safe, the country protected, the unemployment and retirement benefits to be there when needed, justice blind and your vote to count.
For all of those things we need Government at some level, and we generally want that Government to be fair.
We also know it is better to be rich in this country and if you are rich you are more likely to get what you want.
That old saying about needing money to make money is nowhere as true as in Government. If you need something, it certainly helps to buy a few politicians.
We have significant systems of welfare for the rich in the form of Government contracts, subsidies, incentives and favorable tax treatments. Some of these may generate jobs, but those jobs are diluted by high executive salaries, profits and the use of automation.
In fact the latest giveaway tax law increased profits significantly, helped stockholders, but had a minor and passing impact on jobs.
Its time to make sure politicians represent all the people, not just the ones who can make big campaign donations.
You want the air you breathe to be clean, the schools safe and equipped, the streets safe, the highways in repair, the police professional, the health care system to be available and affordable, the food you eat safe, the country protected, the unemployment and retirement benefits to be there when needed, justice blind and your vote to count.
For all of those things we need Government at some level, and we generally want that Government to be fair.
We also know it is better to be rich in this country and if you are rich you are more likely to get what you want.
That old saying about needing money to make money is nowhere as true as in Government. If you need something, it certainly helps to buy a few politicians.
We have significant systems of welfare for the rich in the form of Government contracts, subsidies, incentives and favorable tax treatments. Some of these may generate jobs, but those jobs are diluted by high executive salaries, profits and the use of automation.
In fact the latest giveaway tax law increased profits significantly, helped stockholders, but had a minor and passing impact on jobs.
Its time to make sure politicians represent all the people, not just the ones who can make big campaign donations.
Wednesday, February 6, 2019
State of the Union
Just didn't get much out of the State of the Union address that I wasn't already aware of.
It just seems that most of the positive trends started under the previous administration and have continued despite current efforts. Obviously that not completely true, but considering how little has been done in the last two years, its true more than false.
The economy is doing OK, not great, just OK. It was in free fall in 2008 and 2009 and the actions designed to save it worked, although not immediately. Also some areas are going to be permanently changed and the low skilled high paid manufacturing jobs are a thing of the past. Most of those people have been forced to find lower paying service jobs which has reduced their standard of living. Skilled people are in fact doing well, but they already were.
What is needed is a push to open new industries for the future and provide better skills training in our schools.
We just don't have a border crisis and the efforts to say we do are simply misspent effort. We do have a potential infrastructure crisis, and we need to start fixing it, but so far despite rhetoric, no significant progress has been made.
What's going on in foreign policy is a real mixed bag and the war against ISIS is hardly over. The strategies of the last two years were continuation of what we were already doing. We may have prompted some additional NATO spending, or else it was prompted by more uncertainty in Europe. We see Russia continue its aggressive policies and we have pulled out of a nuclear treaty that may have been ineffective but now its non-existent. In Asia, we have heightened tensions with China in Trade and territory disputes and maybe some improvement with North Korea (or maybe not).
We haven't seen any real progress in health care or prescription drugs and its unlikely that we will. I hope I am wrong on this but I don't think I am.
He asked for bipartisanship but his view of that is that everyone do what he wants.
He touched on some hot button issues like abortion, making the courts more conservative, reducing regulations that are clearly partisan issues. He seems to be aware that he has to reach our a bit past his base if he hopes to get re-elected, but not sure he knows how.
Time will tell.
It just seems that most of the positive trends started under the previous administration and have continued despite current efforts. Obviously that not completely true, but considering how little has been done in the last two years, its true more than false.
The economy is doing OK, not great, just OK. It was in free fall in 2008 and 2009 and the actions designed to save it worked, although not immediately. Also some areas are going to be permanently changed and the low skilled high paid manufacturing jobs are a thing of the past. Most of those people have been forced to find lower paying service jobs which has reduced their standard of living. Skilled people are in fact doing well, but they already were.
What is needed is a push to open new industries for the future and provide better skills training in our schools.
We just don't have a border crisis and the efforts to say we do are simply misspent effort. We do have a potential infrastructure crisis, and we need to start fixing it, but so far despite rhetoric, no significant progress has been made.
What's going on in foreign policy is a real mixed bag and the war against ISIS is hardly over. The strategies of the last two years were continuation of what we were already doing. We may have prompted some additional NATO spending, or else it was prompted by more uncertainty in Europe. We see Russia continue its aggressive policies and we have pulled out of a nuclear treaty that may have been ineffective but now its non-existent. In Asia, we have heightened tensions with China in Trade and territory disputes and maybe some improvement with North Korea (or maybe not).
We haven't seen any real progress in health care or prescription drugs and its unlikely that we will. I hope I am wrong on this but I don't think I am.
He asked for bipartisanship but his view of that is that everyone do what he wants.
He touched on some hot button issues like abortion, making the courts more conservative, reducing regulations that are clearly partisan issues. He seems to be aware that he has to reach our a bit past his base if he hopes to get re-elected, but not sure he knows how.
Time will tell.
Tuesday, February 5, 2019
Who Benefits
Your perception of things is clearly influenced by your environment.
If you look at color coded maps of the last presidential election you see a solid block of red in large areas with blue on the coasts and Illinois.
Many of the red states do not have major metropolitan areas. They do have cities, an generally the cities show up as little blue islands if you expand the map, but the cities do not dominate those states.
In a city the benefits of Government are most evident. They may not be as effective as people would want but if you consider the anarchy that would occur in the absence of Government you realize how needed it is.
In the country you can imagine a world without Government, although they generally depend on it more than they realize.
Nevertheless, less Government is appealing and certainly the appeal of lower taxes attracts many.
Its fairly easy for them to believe that a lot of the taxes they pay end up subsidizing undeserving people in those very cities, although the statistics show a different story.
The states that get back less than they pay to the Federal Government are mostly those blue states. You can see the numbers in the article I linked to.
States Net Benefit
The idea that big Government is mostly benefitting the undeserving is of course a myth that is perpetrated.
It really doesn't.
If you look at color coded maps of the last presidential election you see a solid block of red in large areas with blue on the coasts and Illinois.
Many of the red states do not have major metropolitan areas. They do have cities, an generally the cities show up as little blue islands if you expand the map, but the cities do not dominate those states.
In a city the benefits of Government are most evident. They may not be as effective as people would want but if you consider the anarchy that would occur in the absence of Government you realize how needed it is.
In the country you can imagine a world without Government, although they generally depend on it more than they realize.
Nevertheless, less Government is appealing and certainly the appeal of lower taxes attracts many.
Its fairly easy for them to believe that a lot of the taxes they pay end up subsidizing undeserving people in those very cities, although the statistics show a different story.
The states that get back less than they pay to the Federal Government are mostly those blue states. You can see the numbers in the article I linked to.
States Net Benefit
The idea that big Government is mostly benefitting the undeserving is of course a myth that is perpetrated.
It really doesn't.
Thursday, January 31, 2019
Scorecard
After two years of this administration, the scorecard isn't all that good. Not everything is bad but enough things are that we see the polls reflect the below average performance.
Of course there are two things to consider.
If you disagree with the goals in a specific area you are unlikely to view results favorably. There are however certain goals which are generally agreed to by all.
One of these is to have a healthy economy and to some extent it is. Of course it isn't the best economy ever, its just not bad. Unemployment is low but the quality of jobs and income growth suffers from what is our new economic reality which is eliminating high paying low skill work. This is significant because many of the people who were unhappy two years ago about their job prospects are in the exact same situation and without some new industrial undertaking it is unlikely to change. Those with skills are in demand and so we see effectively a continuation of the situation since the last recession. The danger is that if we have another recession, our fallback safety nets are weaker now because of our deficits.
It should be noted that the last two years saw an increase in the deficit as tax breaks lost revenue which was not made up by increased economic activity. The administration has adopted supply side theories which try to increase demand by reducing the supply cost (simplistically). However, while this works academically, it requires that demand have no ceiling. It also requires that reductions in the cost of production get passed along. We know that much of the tax break money was simply passed along to stockholders with very little of it being used to improve production. The reason for this is simple, capital has been very inexpensive since the financial crisis so worthwhile projects were already funded.
Reduced Government has probably been one of the more successful initiatives of the Administration as a fair number of regulations have been removed. You may not agree with the aim, but it was something they were able to do fairly successfully. It impacts other areas Americans care about but it was something they achieved to a large extent.
Similarly they have been able to appoint some conservative justices to both the Supreme Court and lower courts. You may not agree with this aim or the nominees but they did manage to appoint them.
What impact they will have will play out over the next few decades no matter how the next election goes.
(to be continued)
Of course there are two things to consider.
If you disagree with the goals in a specific area you are unlikely to view results favorably. There are however certain goals which are generally agreed to by all.
One of these is to have a healthy economy and to some extent it is. Of course it isn't the best economy ever, its just not bad. Unemployment is low but the quality of jobs and income growth suffers from what is our new economic reality which is eliminating high paying low skill work. This is significant because many of the people who were unhappy two years ago about their job prospects are in the exact same situation and without some new industrial undertaking it is unlikely to change. Those with skills are in demand and so we see effectively a continuation of the situation since the last recession. The danger is that if we have another recession, our fallback safety nets are weaker now because of our deficits.
It should be noted that the last two years saw an increase in the deficit as tax breaks lost revenue which was not made up by increased economic activity. The administration has adopted supply side theories which try to increase demand by reducing the supply cost (simplistically). However, while this works academically, it requires that demand have no ceiling. It also requires that reductions in the cost of production get passed along. We know that much of the tax break money was simply passed along to stockholders with very little of it being used to improve production. The reason for this is simple, capital has been very inexpensive since the financial crisis so worthwhile projects were already funded.
Reduced Government has probably been one of the more successful initiatives of the Administration as a fair number of regulations have been removed. You may not agree with the aim, but it was something they were able to do fairly successfully. It impacts other areas Americans care about but it was something they achieved to a large extent.
Similarly they have been able to appoint some conservative justices to both the Supreme Court and lower courts. You may not agree with this aim or the nominees but they did manage to appoint them.
What impact they will have will play out over the next few decades no matter how the next election goes.
(to be continued)
Wednesday, January 23, 2019
Unequal Treatment
If you consider the history of this country and try to decide what America is you might have a problem.
We have always had divisions between different world outlooks and even erupted into a deadly civil war because of them.
Are we in fact a melting pot or is a better analogy a buffet line of different choices?
From the very beginning the issues relate to the amount of power that should be invested in the Federal Government.
This is still the fundamental issue.
Are we a collection of 50 states with some shared interests or are we a single nation?
The answer is not clear.
Take education, something that we have historically treated as a local matter. However we switched it to a more national issue during the civil rights era as we realized not all citizens were being treated equally.
Recently we have seen some reversal of this allowing less federal oversight.
Should every citizen of this country be provided the same rights and opportunities or should it vary based on where you live?
If each State sets different standards it will obviously vary significantly.
Take creationism, a religious theory that is not based on any actual scientific evidence but espoused in bible. Should it be taught as an alternative to evolution, a scientific theory that is nearly universally agreed to?
It really wasn't that long ago that unequal treatment was a routine thing in many states.
Has it in fact gone away?
We have always had divisions between different world outlooks and even erupted into a deadly civil war because of them.
Are we in fact a melting pot or is a better analogy a buffet line of different choices?
From the very beginning the issues relate to the amount of power that should be invested in the Federal Government.
This is still the fundamental issue.
Are we a collection of 50 states with some shared interests or are we a single nation?
The answer is not clear.
Take education, something that we have historically treated as a local matter. However we switched it to a more national issue during the civil rights era as we realized not all citizens were being treated equally.
Recently we have seen some reversal of this allowing less federal oversight.
Should every citizen of this country be provided the same rights and opportunities or should it vary based on where you live?
If each State sets different standards it will obviously vary significantly.
Take creationism, a religious theory that is not based on any actual scientific evidence but espoused in bible. Should it be taught as an alternative to evolution, a scientific theory that is nearly universally agreed to?
It really wasn't that long ago that unequal treatment was a routine thing in many states.
Has it in fact gone away?
Friday, December 21, 2018
Shutdown and Walls
If you are in charge of the Government and can't keep it open you are obviously bad at your job.
Shutting down part of the Government over a wall that we don't need is mean and silly at the same time.
It will impact the employees during Christmas and while they will almost certainty get paid, it isn't a good thing. Also services will be closed that many Americans use.
You may be one of the few people who think building a wall on the border is important, but most of us don't and to spend a bunch of money on something that won't accomplish anything is simply silly.
To frame it as something we need for border security is pretty absurd.
It is unlikely to accomplish anything and will be very expensive to build, patrol and maintain with little likelihood it will impact border security.
We have had a fair number of people cross our southern border without authorization. This is not desirable but in all honesty it hasn't had much of a negative impact on us.
To think a stationary wall will solve the problem is ridiculous.
You hear a lot of rhetoric about how you aren't a country if you don't control your borders?
Who made up that definition?
We had countries back when border security wasn't something you even considered.
Still, we do need to have some control and the effective way to do that is something that can be debated by experts and an affordable, effective solution can be devised.
Its not a wall.
Shutting down part of the Government over a wall that we don't need is mean and silly at the same time.
It will impact the employees during Christmas and while they will almost certainty get paid, it isn't a good thing. Also services will be closed that many Americans use.
You may be one of the few people who think building a wall on the border is important, but most of us don't and to spend a bunch of money on something that won't accomplish anything is simply silly.
To frame it as something we need for border security is pretty absurd.
It is unlikely to accomplish anything and will be very expensive to build, patrol and maintain with little likelihood it will impact border security.
We have had a fair number of people cross our southern border without authorization. This is not desirable but in all honesty it hasn't had much of a negative impact on us.
To think a stationary wall will solve the problem is ridiculous.
You hear a lot of rhetoric about how you aren't a country if you don't control your borders?
Who made up that definition?
We had countries back when border security wasn't something you even considered.
Still, we do need to have some control and the effective way to do that is something that can be debated by experts and an affordable, effective solution can be devised.
Its not a wall.
Sunday, November 25, 2018
Embedded Government
One theme that recurs with the current administration is how they like to portray themselves as victims .
This plays well with their base which also considers themselves victimized by the powers that be, apparently themselves.
Ignoring the theme of denied self entitlement, this administration faces the same checks and balances as every other administration has.
Government doesn't reboot itself when a new administration gets elected. First we have 235 years of previous history where laws and the constitution guarantee certain behaviors by Government employees.
Some things can be changed by Executive Orders, but, that is limited by the division of powers.
To think anything about this is unique is of course part of their victim mentality.
The business of government is by its very nature a bureaucratic thing and it requires planning, hard work, and compromise, all areas not strong points with this group.
They think that they can push things through by public announcements and attacking this with different opinions
It has led to a lot of public bluster but few actual lasting changes.
Considering the policies they tried to enact that's not the worst thing.
This plays well with their base which also considers themselves victimized by the powers that be, apparently themselves.
Ignoring the theme of denied self entitlement, this administration faces the same checks and balances as every other administration has.
Government doesn't reboot itself when a new administration gets elected. First we have 235 years of previous history where laws and the constitution guarantee certain behaviors by Government employees.
Some things can be changed by Executive Orders, but, that is limited by the division of powers.
To think anything about this is unique is of course part of their victim mentality.
The business of government is by its very nature a bureaucratic thing and it requires planning, hard work, and compromise, all areas not strong points with this group.
They think that they can push things through by public announcements and attacking this with different opinions
It has led to a lot of public bluster but few actual lasting changes.
Considering the policies they tried to enact that's not the worst thing.
Monday, November 19, 2018
Government Distrust
One of the things that has always been somewhat confusing about the American democracy is how many people think the Government is their enemy.
This tracks back to our earliest days when mistrust of the Government led to the Bill of Rights, a protection from the Government oppressing us.
If we are a Government of the people, why so much mistrust?
Governments in general tend to restrict what you can do, at least the way we perceive it.
We tend to forget that without Government, a lot of things we take for granted would be problematic.
For example, we all know that the various parts of the Government provide law enforcement, which, assuming you are law abiding, is a positive thing.
The problem generally is that the Government protects the many, who take it for granted, while making the few toe the line.
So a business owner told by OSHA that he has to incur costs for the safety of his workers is not going to be happy, and probably his workers won't care or may feel their jobs are being threatened.
Food processors like to stamp their products as Government approved, but they don't like when the Government costs them money.
Almost all of us, at least those who work, feel some pain from the payroll deductions to pay for all this, and inherently feel we pay too much, even thought we don't actually pay the full costs.
The point I am making is that the benefits of Government are spread over a large number, in effect making it almost invisible, while enforcement is much more targeted.
We pay too much and get too little and every so often the Government bothers us, making us get permits, or licenses, or possibly giving us a ticket or even arresting us.
We could do without it, except of course without it there would be anarchy.
Its just so annoying.
This tracks back to our earliest days when mistrust of the Government led to the Bill of Rights, a protection from the Government oppressing us.
If we are a Government of the people, why so much mistrust?
Governments in general tend to restrict what you can do, at least the way we perceive it.
We tend to forget that without Government, a lot of things we take for granted would be problematic.
For example, we all know that the various parts of the Government provide law enforcement, which, assuming you are law abiding, is a positive thing.
The problem generally is that the Government protects the many, who take it for granted, while making the few toe the line.
So a business owner told by OSHA that he has to incur costs for the safety of his workers is not going to be happy, and probably his workers won't care or may feel their jobs are being threatened.
Food processors like to stamp their products as Government approved, but they don't like when the Government costs them money.
Almost all of us, at least those who work, feel some pain from the payroll deductions to pay for all this, and inherently feel we pay too much, even thought we don't actually pay the full costs.
The point I am making is that the benefits of Government are spread over a large number, in effect making it almost invisible, while enforcement is much more targeted.
We pay too much and get too little and every so often the Government bothers us, making us get permits, or licenses, or possibly giving us a ticket or even arresting us.
We could do without it, except of course without it there would be anarchy.
Its just so annoying.
Friday, November 9, 2018
Adult Governance
How much of an impact the democratic controlled congress will have on certain issues remains to be seen.
It clearly isn't able to pass legislation without buy in from the senate and the administration, so its ability to start new initiatives is going to be limited.
It can however impact the other sides initiatives in a similar fashion meaning that to get things passed, legislation will have to include some concessions to them.
This is in fact called democracy where negotiation becomes more important then rhetoric.
Some of the areas where this will have the most impact include social issues.
It can protect things like freedom of choice, health care, social security which were targeted to reduce the deficit.
Maybe the most important role it has is to be reasonable and not pave the way for a reversal in two years.
The last two years have seen the appointment of two conservative judges to the Supreme Court who will influence day to day American life for decades. Other seats will inevitably come up and if not in the next two years certainly in the four after that.
There is a pretty clear demographic trend that indicates America becoming more progressive. It looks inevitable but the inevitable part of it may take years.
Having a federal judiciary that is going to prevent progress would be a lasting legacy of intransigence we don't need.
Adult leadership that doesn't chase windmills but doesn't abandon progressive causes is what's need.
There has been a real absence of that recently.
It clearly isn't able to pass legislation without buy in from the senate and the administration, so its ability to start new initiatives is going to be limited.
It can however impact the other sides initiatives in a similar fashion meaning that to get things passed, legislation will have to include some concessions to them.
This is in fact called democracy where negotiation becomes more important then rhetoric.
Some of the areas where this will have the most impact include social issues.
It can protect things like freedom of choice, health care, social security which were targeted to reduce the deficit.
Maybe the most important role it has is to be reasonable and not pave the way for a reversal in two years.
The last two years have seen the appointment of two conservative judges to the Supreme Court who will influence day to day American life for decades. Other seats will inevitably come up and if not in the next two years certainly in the four after that.
There is a pretty clear demographic trend that indicates America becoming more progressive. It looks inevitable but the inevitable part of it may take years.
Having a federal judiciary that is going to prevent progress would be a lasting legacy of intransigence we don't need.
Adult leadership that doesn't chase windmills but doesn't abandon progressive causes is what's need.
There has been a real absence of that recently.
Wednesday, October 24, 2018
Lies and Respect
Its becoming harder and harder to keep up with the lies being crated at recent campaign rallies.
He has no restraint and is willing to completely fabricate things such as a mythical tax cut proposal, Democrats funding the refugee caravan, riots in California, Puerto Rico using disaster relief to pay national debts, etc. etc. etc.
I don't know if anyone believes any of this, I guess some will, but it has to be a pretty small group by now.
Some of his behavior comes across as somewhat desperate attempts to retain majorities in the House and Senate and based on the current state of things, he might actually be successful.
Public figures in this country have generally lost the respect of the public and with a clown president is it any wonder.
This is in fact the result of negative campaigning which seems to be the only actual campaigning that works.
Gallup finds 21% of U.S. adults approving and 73% disapproving of the way Congress is handling its job. The current president has never been over 50% approval.
In recent Gallup polls the number one issue identified by Americans is Government and Leadership.
None of the leaders of either party garners much respect. The attacks have reached new lows in many cases and aren't likely to abate.
This lack of trust in our Government and leadership is problematic.
It makes it hard to form any sort of national consensus and while certainly open debate of issues is desirable this constant attack of individuals is unprecedented.
It will require a significant change in behavior by our politicians before it improves.
Not sure that is going to happen any time soon.
He has no restraint and is willing to completely fabricate things such as a mythical tax cut proposal, Democrats funding the refugee caravan, riots in California, Puerto Rico using disaster relief to pay national debts, etc. etc. etc.
I don't know if anyone believes any of this, I guess some will, but it has to be a pretty small group by now.
Some of his behavior comes across as somewhat desperate attempts to retain majorities in the House and Senate and based on the current state of things, he might actually be successful.
Public figures in this country have generally lost the respect of the public and with a clown president is it any wonder.
This is in fact the result of negative campaigning which seems to be the only actual campaigning that works.
Gallup finds 21% of U.S. adults approving and 73% disapproving of the way Congress is handling its job. The current president has never been over 50% approval.
In recent Gallup polls the number one issue identified by Americans is Government and Leadership.
None of the leaders of either party garners much respect. The attacks have reached new lows in many cases and aren't likely to abate.
This lack of trust in our Government and leadership is problematic.
It makes it hard to form any sort of national consensus and while certainly open debate of issues is desirable this constant attack of individuals is unprecedented.
It will require a significant change in behavior by our politicians before it improves.
Not sure that is going to happen any time soon.
Monday, October 22, 2018
Legal Discrimination?
Sometimes you see something that just makes you wonder.
There is apparently a proposal circulating in administration to define sex as what is on your original birth certificate.
This will essentially deny transgender and others who redefine their gender identities of certain rights and protections.
I gather this is to appease certain Evangelical sects that find this conflicts with the bible, which for them is fine, but we are not supposed to have a national religion.
I honestly will admit the current status of gender identity isn't something I really understand except to believe based on current knowledge that the individuals face significant challenges in their lives already.
However the idea of subjecting them to discrimination for political purposes is just unacceptable.
Those who argue that treating them as the gender they identify as conflicts with the "natural order of things" or subjects "normal" children and people to inappropriate situations.
That natural order of things has been used to justify so many practices, such as slavery, or sexual abuse that we now know are not the "natural order" of things. Other things like bisexuality are in fact part of the natural order of things, but not the only part.
I haven't seen any evidence that people with gender issues are causing problems for others. They are historically the ones who have been the victims because they are different.
To take a step back and subject them to legal issues related to their natural lifestyle is opening the door to other abuses by the Government.
Lets hope it doesn't happen.
There is apparently a proposal circulating in administration to define sex as what is on your original birth certificate.
This will essentially deny transgender and others who redefine their gender identities of certain rights and protections.
I gather this is to appease certain Evangelical sects that find this conflicts with the bible, which for them is fine, but we are not supposed to have a national religion.
I honestly will admit the current status of gender identity isn't something I really understand except to believe based on current knowledge that the individuals face significant challenges in their lives already.
However the idea of subjecting them to discrimination for political purposes is just unacceptable.
Those who argue that treating them as the gender they identify as conflicts with the "natural order of things" or subjects "normal" children and people to inappropriate situations.
That natural order of things has been used to justify so many practices, such as slavery, or sexual abuse that we now know are not the "natural order" of things. Other things like bisexuality are in fact part of the natural order of things, but not the only part.
I haven't seen any evidence that people with gender issues are causing problems for others. They are historically the ones who have been the victims because they are different.
To take a step back and subject them to legal issues related to their natural lifestyle is opening the door to other abuses by the Government.
Lets hope it doesn't happen.
Sunday, October 21, 2018
Election Tax Cut Promise?
So with the prospect of losing at least the house while running a massive deficit, we see an attempt to buy votes via the promise of a tax cut for middle earners.
Of course we can expect to hear rhetoric like if you want to see this tax cut, vote for us.
Sadly it might work to some extent with his base who ignore the fact that they want to gut the programs they rely on like Social Security, Medicare, and others.
In fact for much if not most of his base, what they pay in federal taxes is probably not very significant, although of course taxes are unpopular.
Its also almost certain that any such cuts enacted would disproportionately favor high earners and probably businesses.
It should be noted that this administration has managed to increase the deficit and the trade deficit while pretending to address them.
The trade deficit is impacted since its easier to buy certain agricultural products elsewhere than to switch supply chains.
The fiscal deficit is the result of the spending increases and the tax cuts enacted.
We are also seeing an increase in interest rates that is going to hurt.
Its been a theme that has sold well, except that most of us realize that taxes aren't the onerous problem the Republicans make them out to be.
Most people realize that you need at least some Government and that you have to pay for it.
Still taxes are and will always be unpopular, although many people look forward to their tax refunds as a little extra cash they can use. Of course it was always their money but having and extra couple of bucks each pa check is not as good as a few hundred once a year.
We aren't the best savers.
Of course we can expect to hear rhetoric like if you want to see this tax cut, vote for us.
Sadly it might work to some extent with his base who ignore the fact that they want to gut the programs they rely on like Social Security, Medicare, and others.
In fact for much if not most of his base, what they pay in federal taxes is probably not very significant, although of course taxes are unpopular.
Its also almost certain that any such cuts enacted would disproportionately favor high earners and probably businesses.
It should be noted that this administration has managed to increase the deficit and the trade deficit while pretending to address them.
The trade deficit is impacted since its easier to buy certain agricultural products elsewhere than to switch supply chains.
The fiscal deficit is the result of the spending increases and the tax cuts enacted.
We are also seeing an increase in interest rates that is going to hurt.
Its been a theme that has sold well, except that most of us realize that taxes aren't the onerous problem the Republicans make them out to be.
Most people realize that you need at least some Government and that you have to pay for it.
Still taxes are and will always be unpopular, although many people look forward to their tax refunds as a little extra cash they can use. Of course it was always their money but having and extra couple of bucks each pa check is not as good as a few hundred once a year.
We aren't the best savers.
Saturday, October 20, 2018
Eye of the Needle?
I'm not an expert on every religion but I believe most if not all have provisions about how to deal with people less fortunate than you, and in general you are supposed to help them as best you can.
Yet so many people who claim to be religious object to doing just that, at lest when the Government does it.
Some might argue that Government programs don't properly identify the needy or that they are inefficient, but it would seem wouldn't apply when talking about refugees from war zones or people suffering from identifiable diseases.
It of course starts to strike home when it involves things like cuts to Social Security or Medicare, which isn't perceived in the same way.
The objection seems to be to the payment of taxes the use to help others.
Our so called entitlement programs.
Now many of us don't think of Social Security as an entitlement program, but its not a savings plan.
Its designed to give a proportionately higher benefit to lower income earners which makes it a calculated progressive benefit.
Everyone does contribute to it but if it was converted into something like a 401K program, poor workers would be harmed greatly while higher income earners would do better.
One of the reasons its popular with the Republicans.
People who claim to be religious folk mostly.
Other entitlement programs like food stamps, Medicaid, Affordable Health Insurance etc are also under attack by these folks who appear to worship the almighty dollar more than any religious principle such as feed the hungry, comfort the sick or help the poor.
They hear these things on Sunday but they just don't seem to be paying attention.
Yet so many people who claim to be religious object to doing just that, at lest when the Government does it.
Some might argue that Government programs don't properly identify the needy or that they are inefficient, but it would seem wouldn't apply when talking about refugees from war zones or people suffering from identifiable diseases.
It of course starts to strike home when it involves things like cuts to Social Security or Medicare, which isn't perceived in the same way.
The objection seems to be to the payment of taxes the use to help others.
Our so called entitlement programs.
Now many of us don't think of Social Security as an entitlement program, but its not a savings plan.
Its designed to give a proportionately higher benefit to lower income earners which makes it a calculated progressive benefit.
Everyone does contribute to it but if it was converted into something like a 401K program, poor workers would be harmed greatly while higher income earners would do better.
One of the reasons its popular with the Republicans.
People who claim to be religious folk mostly.
Other entitlement programs like food stamps, Medicaid, Affordable Health Insurance etc are also under attack by these folks who appear to worship the almighty dollar more than any religious principle such as feed the hungry, comfort the sick or help the poor.
They hear these things on Sunday but they just don't seem to be paying attention.
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
Private/Public?
One of the things we normally do in this country is allow private companies to make a profit while administering Government programs.
This stems from a somewhat misguided belief that they can do it cheaper and better than the Government.
However, if in fact the Government is allowed to provide the same service, the private companies complain arguing they can't compete.
That should tell you that the premise is simply wrong.
Now, there are certainly advantages to private enterprise in a market that is being developed as they can respond more quickly and compete in real time to win markets.
That advantage disappears however as a market matures and what is required is simply administration.
Take something like the Social Security Administration. No private company could provide the service they do at anything like the same cost. They ultimately are concerned about profit, not service so to provide the same service plus profit would cost more.
Public workers take a lot of abuse, but most of them aren't very different than private workers, they go to work, do their job, get paid.
To my knowledge the main reason we emphasize letting private companies to provide services is to provide them profits.
This is not to say that inadequately funded public services, like education in many places, is going to work. It will however work better for the majority of students in the area than say a charter school that provides services for profit to a select group.
Diverting funds for a purpose like that ultimately penalizes the many for the privileged few.
We should strive to have the most efficient Government services we can. Once you add profit as a cost, you haven't achieve that.
This stems from a somewhat misguided belief that they can do it cheaper and better than the Government.
However, if in fact the Government is allowed to provide the same service, the private companies complain arguing they can't compete.
That should tell you that the premise is simply wrong.
Now, there are certainly advantages to private enterprise in a market that is being developed as they can respond more quickly and compete in real time to win markets.
That advantage disappears however as a market matures and what is required is simply administration.
Take something like the Social Security Administration. No private company could provide the service they do at anything like the same cost. They ultimately are concerned about profit, not service so to provide the same service plus profit would cost more.
Public workers take a lot of abuse, but most of them aren't very different than private workers, they go to work, do their job, get paid.
To my knowledge the main reason we emphasize letting private companies to provide services is to provide them profits.
This is not to say that inadequately funded public services, like education in many places, is going to work. It will however work better for the majority of students in the area than say a charter school that provides services for profit to a select group.
Diverting funds for a purpose like that ultimately penalizes the many for the privileged few.
We should strive to have the most efficient Government services we can. Once you add profit as a cost, you haven't achieve that.
Thursday, July 12, 2018
Government?
Sometimes as I observe the clown show in Washington, I wonder how did we get here?
The answer is mostly apathy.
Too many Americans don't care or don't think they make a difference.
In fact, it almost seems like we have turned the system over to the most rabid among us.
If you do in fact believe strongly in something, say that abortion is akin to murder, you are simply more likely to get involved and support certain candidates.
Poll data shows that most Americans actually support reasonable approaches to a lot of the issues facing us while rabid minorities have odd agendas.
Of course apathy is only part of the problem, the other is misinformation.
The government is not interested in coming for your guns or making your children change their sexual orientation.
These are not real issues.
Similarly, football players who kneel during the national anthem don't cause any harm to anybody.
They have the right to express a view, like everybody else.
We have so much inflammatory rhetoric about things that are simply either not true, or inconsequential that we should laugh at these issues?
Having to press one to speak in English to a robot on the other end is not the end of American culture.
Its recognition that this is a diverse nation with many people legally here who are native Spanish speakers.
We are not about to adopt sharia law, its not even remotely possible.
However we have entertainers pretending to be news people who incite listeners for ratings.
We believe all sorts of things that are demonstrable false and because of that things that are demonstrably true get questioned.
Apathy and misinformation, not a formula for good government.
The answer is mostly apathy.
Too many Americans don't care or don't think they make a difference.
In fact, it almost seems like we have turned the system over to the most rabid among us.
If you do in fact believe strongly in something, say that abortion is akin to murder, you are simply more likely to get involved and support certain candidates.
Poll data shows that most Americans actually support reasonable approaches to a lot of the issues facing us while rabid minorities have odd agendas.
Of course apathy is only part of the problem, the other is misinformation.
The government is not interested in coming for your guns or making your children change their sexual orientation.
These are not real issues.
Similarly, football players who kneel during the national anthem don't cause any harm to anybody.
They have the right to express a view, like everybody else.
We have so much inflammatory rhetoric about things that are simply either not true, or inconsequential that we should laugh at these issues?
Having to press one to speak in English to a robot on the other end is not the end of American culture.
Its recognition that this is a diverse nation with many people legally here who are native Spanish speakers.
We are not about to adopt sharia law, its not even remotely possible.
However we have entertainers pretending to be news people who incite listeners for ratings.
We believe all sorts of things that are demonstrable false and because of that things that are demonstrably true get questioned.
Apathy and misinformation, not a formula for good government.
Thursday, June 7, 2018
Debt, it will eventually bite us.
Its one of the things that we accept but don't like, taxes.
Running on a platform that promises to reduce taxes is almost always better than using common sense and saying you might have to raise taxes.
Taxes are too high is the most common comment people make about them but what should we cut is the general problem.
So we cut taxes and increase spending, which is after all a recipe for ultimate disaster.
The real question should be what do we want and how are we paying for it?
The Government is unable to meet its annual obligations and has to borrow every year just to keep running.
To fix this you need either more income or less expenses or a mixture of both.
You might argue that we should eliminate waste, fraud and become more efficient, and we should, but that is not solving the budget problem.
We are also not solving it by ignoring the big ticket items and reducing small (at least by Government standards) programs.
This is complicated by the sacred cows we have, the untouchables, so to speak.
I don't want to ignore growth, since growth reduces certain expenditures and increases taxes without increasing the tax rate. However we are not going to see enough growth to fix our problem, and eventually, our problem is going to have a negative impact on growth.
We keep kicking this problem down the road, supported by low interest rates and general confidence that we will pay our loans.
Both of those facts can change fairly quickly and with potentially disastrous results.
We either address the issue of where to spend our income or we face significant economic disruption, sooner or later.
Running on a platform that promises to reduce taxes is almost always better than using common sense and saying you might have to raise taxes.
Taxes are too high is the most common comment people make about them but what should we cut is the general problem.
So we cut taxes and increase spending, which is after all a recipe for ultimate disaster.
The real question should be what do we want and how are we paying for it?
The Government is unable to meet its annual obligations and has to borrow every year just to keep running.
To fix this you need either more income or less expenses or a mixture of both.
You might argue that we should eliminate waste, fraud and become more efficient, and we should, but that is not solving the budget problem.
We are also not solving it by ignoring the big ticket items and reducing small (at least by Government standards) programs.
This is complicated by the sacred cows we have, the untouchables, so to speak.
I don't want to ignore growth, since growth reduces certain expenditures and increases taxes without increasing the tax rate. However we are not going to see enough growth to fix our problem, and eventually, our problem is going to have a negative impact on growth.
We keep kicking this problem down the road, supported by low interest rates and general confidence that we will pay our loans.
Both of those facts can change fairly quickly and with potentially disastrous results.
We either address the issue of where to spend our income or we face significant economic disruption, sooner or later.
Monday, February 26, 2018
Trusting Government
One of the biggest changes during my lifetime has been how people trust big institutions and the Government.
Its possible I was naïve, but when I was young we felt that we could trust Government and most big institutions to have our best interests at heart.
After all these were the people we elected and they were elected to represent us, not lie to us.
Yes there were some people who attacked the Government but most of us had a lot of confidence it what the Government told us.
Then we had Vietnam, Watergate. the Pentagon Papers and Iran-Contra.
All of these were clear instances where people in Government lied or distorted things they told us.
In some cases it was for what they felt was the better good and in others it was simply for individual purposes, but it changed a lot of things.
In addition we had a proliferation of cable TV stations to the point where opinions could be presented as facts and reach large audiences.
The end result is a pretty common belief that the Government isn't trustworthy.
Of course if you believe the Government is at odds with the people, the only real solution is to get rid of it with a new one.
This is one of the things that helped the dotard win, the belief that he was going to "drain the swamp".
Of course he isn't doing anything of the kind and in all honesty is cementing the idea that the Government isn't to be trusted into a whole new generation's consciousness.
I doubt we will ever recapture the trust I grew up with and maybe that's a good thing.
It certainly felt better though.
Its possible I was naïve, but when I was young we felt that we could trust Government and most big institutions to have our best interests at heart.
After all these were the people we elected and they were elected to represent us, not lie to us.
Yes there were some people who attacked the Government but most of us had a lot of confidence it what the Government told us.
Then we had Vietnam, Watergate. the Pentagon Papers and Iran-Contra.
All of these were clear instances where people in Government lied or distorted things they told us.
In some cases it was for what they felt was the better good and in others it was simply for individual purposes, but it changed a lot of things.
In addition we had a proliferation of cable TV stations to the point where opinions could be presented as facts and reach large audiences.
The end result is a pretty common belief that the Government isn't trustworthy.
Of course if you believe the Government is at odds with the people, the only real solution is to get rid of it with a new one.
This is one of the things that helped the dotard win, the belief that he was going to "drain the swamp".
Of course he isn't doing anything of the kind and in all honesty is cementing the idea that the Government isn't to be trusted into a whole new generation's consciousness.
I doubt we will ever recapture the trust I grew up with and maybe that's a good thing.
It certainly felt better though.
Monday, February 19, 2018
President's Day
Presidents get elected based on many factors and we have had some great ones and some not so great ones. George Washington was our first President but his primary claim to fame was as the leader of the revolutionary armies, not his actions as President. Not that he was a bad President, just a better general.
We also, at least in much of the country consider Abraham Lincoln a great President although his whole term was spent suppressing the states that had seceded. He did of course preside over the end of slavery and certainly had some great potential had he not been ended so tragically.
Of course measures of success are normally based on the events that happened during each President. For example Thomas Jefferson is remembered for the Louisiana Purchase although certainly while a great expansion of the country not the most complex executive decision.
If you consider how the country has progressed, probably none has had a greater impact on our modern country than Franklin Roosevelt who engineered the New Deal and introduced a great number of social programs we still rely on. Of course in some quarters he is considered the President who started the welfare state and is hardly a hero.
A lot depends on how you see this country and its citizens and how you view its obligations to its citizens.
Still this is a good day to celebrate the office and consider that the country has carried on regardless of who held the office thanks to our institutions and checks and balances.
A comforting thought in light of our current situation.
We also, at least in much of the country consider Abraham Lincoln a great President although his whole term was spent suppressing the states that had seceded. He did of course preside over the end of slavery and certainly had some great potential had he not been ended so tragically.
Of course measures of success are normally based on the events that happened during each President. For example Thomas Jefferson is remembered for the Louisiana Purchase although certainly while a great expansion of the country not the most complex executive decision.
If you consider how the country has progressed, probably none has had a greater impact on our modern country than Franklin Roosevelt who engineered the New Deal and introduced a great number of social programs we still rely on. Of course in some quarters he is considered the President who started the welfare state and is hardly a hero.
A lot depends on how you see this country and its citizens and how you view its obligations to its citizens.
Still this is a good day to celebrate the office and consider that the country has carried on regardless of who held the office thanks to our institutions and checks and balances.
A comforting thought in light of our current situation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)