Hypotheticals-this is long, but totally worth it

Given the backdrop of this whole tax cut debate, I thought it might be important to explain some basic economic fundamentals. Now, admittedly, though I was not an economic major in college, I did earn my degree in History; in that realm, I am what is referred to as an “economic historian,” or someone who believes that most human actions throughout history have as their base catalyst an economic motive. In addition, I have taught economics in a public school as a non-partisan (as any good teacher should be). I guess what I am trying to say is that, while I may not be able to offer you the most thorough or complex understanding of our economic situation, I hope you’ll trust that I have the basics more or less nailed down (if not, call me on it and I’ll publish your essay on this blog). Anyway, onto the lesson!
First, for economic theory to work, one must assume that people make rational decisions if they have appropriate information; that is to say, if Bill can by 3 apples for $5, or 5 apples for $5, (assuming these apples are essentially the same in quality and size) he will choose the latter.
Adam Smith described wealth as, "the annual produce of the land and labour of the society." In this sense, “land” refers to all the physical resources a nation possesses, and “labor” refers to all of the physical, social, and mental ways in which human beings manipulate, or “improve,” natural resources to create goods and services. Smith also established the fact that human beings essentially function selfishly—that is, they seek to fulfill their own best interests, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages (Smith, The Wealth of Nations).” In doing so, Smith argues, people serve the public good whether they want to or not; this self-regulating effect is known as the “invisible hand.”
This idea was slightly modified by the concept of the “Nash equilibrium,” named for the late, brilliant mathematician John Nash. This concept, at its most basic, states that the best decision for an individual takes into account not only their self interest, but those interests around them, especially as it relates to the particular field of competition in which they are engaged.
OK, so now let’s re-examine the current debate. To more thoroughly illustrate the economic concepts in play, let’s use three hypothetical people as example. First, we have Johnny Laborman, who works at various jobs doing unskilled construction, and whose wife has been laid off from her job as a secretary in the public sector, but is collecting unemployment insurance. Let’s say their annual income after taxes is around $28,000. Next, we have Jackson McMiddle, who works as a warehouse manager, and whose wife still has a job, albeit low paying, as a legal secretary. Their net take per year is $56,000. Finally, we have G.D. Crassworth, who owns a decent sized construction company; his wife stays home and keeps herself in fantastic shape. Their annual salary is about 20 times Jackson’s, at $1,120,000 per year.
Now, let’s use the current compromise between Republicans and president Obama as a template (this has now been passed by the way), and see how our hypothetical’s fare. Suppose that, because of the payroll tax cut and some other provision of the bill, Johnny Laborman and his wife go from making $28,000 to $30,000, a year in 2011. OK, that’s good right? And if Johnny acts in his own selfish interests, we can probably expect him to spend that extra $2,000 on household items, such as a new television, computer, furniture, etc. After all, this is the most direct way that Johnny can improve his life in the short term; although, given their financial troubles related to finding consistent employment, there is a chance that he saves the money, which is not going to stimulate the economy. We’ll assume there’s about a 70% chance he spends the money.
As for McMiddle, say between he and his wife, they take in an extra $4000 a year. Now, given Mac’s self interest, there’s a very good chance that he will spend this money, or save it with the intention of spending it soon (either on a house or an upgrade in furniture), because he and his wife are both gainfully employed, and he has every reason to believe that this will continue.
Of course, Crassworth does much better than either of the other two. The salary that he pays himself from his construction company balloons by $80,000, so now he is making $1.2 million per year. What will he do with his extra money? Well, chances are, if he wanted to have something before, he was able to buy it, so it is unlikely he is now going to spend his money much differently. Sure, he might use that money to buy a yacht, or a new car, or some extremely expensive jewelry for his wife, but even then, chances are this will have little effect on the economy; most luxury items, such as yachts, cars, planes, etc. are manufactured in other countries, where companies can pay their high quality employees better salaries because they don’t have to worry about paying for health care.
In reality, the most likely thing G.D. is going to do is save his money, or use it to buy gold, or some other secure investment. Chances are he’s not going to buy more stock—if he’s smart, he knows that the global financial situation is far too unstable to invest in with confidence, and in all likelihood, he’s already owns a fair sized portfolio.
What about the claim that Crassworth would us the money to hire new employees? Well, he might, but in that case, why would he pay himself a salary, get taxed on it, and then turn around and use that money to hire somebody to work for his company, where it will get taxed again. If he wanted to hire someone, he’d keep the money in the company, where it won’t get taxed more than is necessary.
So, it is likely that most of the $80,000 won’t end up finding its way back into the economy, especially in the short term. This as opposed to our lower and middle class examples, who will likely spend almost all of their tax break in the fiscal year.
Still, what this demonstrates is that cutting taxes is an indirect method of stimulus at its very best. And, unfortunately, acting in their own best interest, McMiddle and Laborman may end up buying products that are manufactured abroad, simply because it is with these products that they get the best bang for their buck.
The other problem is that people in the middle class face other demands for their money that are less economically productive. (1—see footnote)
Getting back to our hypothetical’s, this is why progressives are opposed to cutting taxes for the rich: ultimately, it doesn’t stimulate the economy—if it did, given that we’ve had these cuts for 8 years now, one would think that our economy would be in much better shape than it is. Now, cutting taxes on the poor and middle class is probably a good idea, but what if it was coupled with direct stimulus—what if we took the $700 billion in tax cuts that Obama and the Republican’s want to borrow from China to give to people that make over $250,000 a year, and instead, used it to improve our roads and transportation systems, streamline our electric grid, and supplement state budget shortfalls. Well, let’s run through the effect on our boys.
Laborman, our poor hypothetical, would immediately benefit because he would likely be able to secure a long term, high paying job in construction. Additionally, there is a much greater likelihood that his wife, who has administrative office skills, but no job, will have a much easier time finding work, which in turn will save our government from having to pay her unemployment insurance. With the new employment, suppose he and his wife go from netting $28,000 a year, to $35,000 a year—an extra $5,000 a year as compared to what they would earn through tax cuts alone. Again, because they are poor and have been doing without, we can reasonably expect that they’re going to spend much of that money, which in turn will create more demand for goods and services and provide opportunities for job creation in the private sector.
Because of the multiplying effect of the commerce created by a vast array of infrastructure spending and the resulting job creation, Johnny McMiddle’s business increases dramatically, and he is promoted to oversee an expansion of the warehouse business, hiring new employees to work in his place, and advancing to a new position with a higher salary. His wife’s job doesn’t pay any higher, but still, with his advance, Johnny and his wife now net $70,000 a year. At this point, they are safely in the middle class, and have enough money to spend on all kinds of things, including buying a new home.
This is great news for Crassworth. His construction business, which had been slowing down to a crawl with the bad economy, is now bidding to build numerous projects, and because people are finally buying houses again, he is planning to build a medium sized, suburban housing division close to a decommissioned high school that is now being renovated and rebuilt.
With all the extra business, Crassworth is paying himself slightly more than he used to make, netting about 1.5 million a year (300K more than he’d make with a tax cut). The best part for him, however, is that his business holdings have increased dramatically, and his future is not only secure, but because it is in a business, he can hand it over to his children without worrying about paying an inheritance tax. The best part for his community is that he has created hundreds of jobs, and demand for a tremendously varied list of materials, fueling job creation for all kinds of artisans and manufacturing companies.
As a result of all of this economic activity, society has improved in a dramatic way, because wealth has been created. You’ll notice, that while wealth does not tend to trickle down from rich to poor, it does tend to flow upward once the lower and middle class have job security, upward mobility, and money to spend.
Of course, if one wanted to argue that I created hypothetical situations of my own accord and manufactured the results, I can’t argue with that—I did. However, in no way did I ever suggest that the characters I created act in an irrational way—I simply supposed that they act rationally and in their own selfish, best interests, as Smith suggests is the template for a high functioning, capitalist society.
The great irony is that Republicans like to joke about Obama’s slogan of hope, and they like to crow about freedom. But what are we left to do after we’ve granted these massive tax cuts to the rich—hope, pray, beg that somehow they end up trickling down, that somehow this action creates jobs? Because logic tells us that cutting income taxes on the richest two percent won’t do either—as we’ve seen in the last ten years, it simply fuels our ballooning deficit.
And really, what freedom does a person have if they can’t find a job? Not much. All we can ask of any individual is that they work for a living and contribute to society by spending their money in whatever way seems best to them. But without a job, we can’t even ask them to do that, and that is the true tragedy of all of this: Obama and the Republicans can talk until the apocalypse about how this is going to stimulate the economy, but that simply doesn’t make it so. And it is a tragedy that there is a clear answer to our economic troubles, a clear course of action to take, and yet our government is running in the opposite direction—and doing so in defiance of logic, reason, and historical evidence.
We are not acting rationally, or in our selfish, or collective best interests. I don’t think Adam Smith or John Nash would be very happy at all.

(1) Take insurance for example. At its most basic, insurance that is run for profit is counter productive, because the intent of insurance is to replace value that is lost via accident or catastrophe. The fact that insurance companies skim millions off of top of that pool may create some jobs, but in essence it is only a redistribution of wealth to those who happen to have enough money to provide it, i.e. the wealthy; moreover, if the insurance company is profitable, then the complete value of the capital that was damaged is never fully replaced, meaning that as a net result, the nation loses wealth. Remember, money is only a representation of wealth, a symbol, because wealth can only be created by “the annual produce of land and labour of the society.” Money enables us to trade our goods and services more directly and efficiently, but it is only a token—this is why a country cannot simply print more money indefinitely to cure its financial problems.

Caving...or, proof that I was right

The Republicans won again against President Obama, despite the fact that their politicking was completely transparent, and tremendously corrupt.
Last week, the House passed a bill to extend the Bush era tax cuts on every dollar made under $250,000 per family. On Saturday, the Senate brought the bill to the floor, where Republican opposition stopped it from moving forward. An alternative version was then brought to the floor by New York Senator Chuck Schumer-D that would extend the tax cuts up to $1 million. Still this was too low for Republicans, who are on record now as willing to stick lower and middle class Americans with a tax hike if they can’t get tax cuts for their rich donors.
Nevertheless, Obama just cut a deal with Republicans to extend the tax cuts for two more years, in exchange for a 13 month extension of unemployment insurance, a small payroll tax cut, and a few other tax initiatives aimed at student aid. Worse, for no apparent concession at all, he also agreed to cut the estate tax, which only effects the richest 1% of all Americans.
WHY? Well, who knows? The fact is that we are talking about personal income and estate tax cuts for people that already have a ton of money; not business or corporate taxes, or payroll taxes, or any kind of tax cut that would be directly linked to job creation. The idea that this kind of tax cut is actually going to stimulate the economy in any measurable way is absurd—it’s simply another way in which the rich will avoid having to pay their fair share for the administration of government services, they of all of us, benefit from the most.
Progressives everywhere are sitting now with their faces in their palms asking over and over, “why, why, why? We had those corrupt bastards right where we wanted them! Why?” I mean, why not just let the tax cuts expire, and then pin down the Republicans continually for their malfeasance and their crass political maneuvering? Think about it: every time they complained about the economy, or tried to say that Democrats didn’t do anything for ordinary Americans, Dem’s could turn around and say, “We tried, but the Republicans thought it was more important to stall government to get tax cuts for their ultra wealthy. We voted on extending middle class tax cuts, but the Republicans wouldn’t pass the bill! Republicans refuse to help the middle class—they refuse to help the unemployed—they are more concerned in representing the interests of the rich and powerful than helping the ordinary Americans hit hardest by these economic times.”
Now it is much harder to say that, because Obama gave in to Republican demands, thereby agreeing, albeit passively, with their agenda.
Oh, and one other thing—the hypocrisy of the Republican Party stinks to the high heavens. Just last month, before the election, weren’t they complaining about the deficit? Weren’t they crowing about irresponsible, out of control spending, and government pork projects? Well, that is exactly what this agreement is: its not paid for by anything but deficit spending, it is the very height of irresponsible tax policy, and what the Republicans wanted in exchange for the passage of middle class tax cuts and the extension of unemployment insurance is a pork project for their constituents, the super rich.

Next

So, for some strange reason this week, Barack Obama decided to freeze the pay of all federal workers for the next two years. He did it, of course, under the guise of fiscal responsibility, but it leaves one begging the question: is this man a Democrat—is he a liberal?
I hate asking that question, because I voted for the man in 2008. I too, was wrapped up in the hope and change of that time—I believed that our country was finally ready to move forward on every front: our economy, education, foreign policy, energy, etc. Sure, I knew there would be setbacks on the way, I knew that Republicans would try to block legislation, and that people in the media and on the right would continue to say moronic things like “tax cuts create jobs,” which of course, is completely ridiculous, especially when they are talking about income tax cuts for the richest 2% of people in our country. But, overall, I really believed that Obama would fight for the middle class; that he would, as a great orator, embarrass the Republicans when they bandied their plutocrat policies about Washington, and reject them outright. I believed that he would stick by the progressive principles he ran and won on. I had hope, but apparently that was naïve.
Because this man has caved, capitulated, and compromised at every possible turn. He first took up economic stimulus—a laudable goal—but ended up signing a bill that was far too small to impact the economy, and much of which was tied up in tax cuts that were so miniscule that many idiots on the right were actually convinced that Obama had raised their taxes (fostered by broad based lying by the right wing media outlets, and a tacit refusal by the rest of the media to challenge or repudiate the malfeasance that has crept, nested, and laid eggs in the fourth estate).
Next, he turned to health care reform, where he almost immediately ruled out a public option, held private meetings with the insurance companies that went on to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to lobby against him and slander the Democratic party. The end result was that industry insiders and Republicans were given months of air time to lie about the health care bill (that actually contained a lot of positive reforms), while the media looked the other direction. And the one person who had the bull horn in his hands, who could’ve called out the lies, who could’ve stood up for what was right, was Barack Obama, and he was silent.
In this short two year span, Obama has been too quick to compromise, he failed to lead on issues as a president should, and he has not used his bully pulpit to explain what is right and what is wrong to the American people. While Republicans hold up “Don’t Ask—Don’t Tell” legislation from reversing years of ugly discrimination against gay Americans, Obama should be screaming from the top of his lungs that “Republicans hate gay people,” and that “their position puts American lives in danger,” every day. When Republicans hold up the extension of unemployment benefits, Obama should lay out publicly the fact that unemployment insurance is the best possible type of economic stimulus there is, because for every dollar we pay out, it generates at about a dollar and three quarters of economic activity. He should then conclude, publicly, that it is clear that Republicans must want the U.S. economy to fail. And when Republicans take their other absurdly foolish positions, on things like refusing to enact the START treaty with Russia (designed to secure loose nuclear weapons and reduce stockpiles), voting against extending tax cuts for middle class Americans (we actually spend our money, which does create jobs)—because the bill didn’t include tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires (which Republicans did in lockstep in the House yesterday), and just lying all the time about everything from Obama’s trip to India to the healthcare reform bill, Obama should be shouting them down at every single turn.
Would he be attacked? Absolutely. But the right wing is already throwing every lying effort they can muster to defeat the man, so what is there to lose? Nothing, and yet ironically, Obama seems content to continue paying ransom to captors who refuse to let him go.
Ultimately, I think Democrats have to run a more progressive candidate against him in the primaries in 2012. The stakes are too high to do otherwise, and those who believe in moderation and compromise refuse to acknowledge the simple fact that our political climate doesn’t allow for that anymore, because the Republican party has proven time and again that they represent only the interests of the super rich and transnational corporations. They refuse to work in a collegial way with Democrats or anyone, for that matter, who wants to represent the interests of 98% of the American people. Moreover, they are extremely focused on manipulating public opinion, which they are successful doing because they have direct cooperation from much of the media (which is an oligarchy of 5 companies), and the rest of the media refuses to call them on it. We have to, at the very least, run a candidate that will tell the truth: that the Republican party is wholly corrupt, that it is supported by a media oligarchy, and that without drastic changes to our country’s governance, the middle class in this country is going to disappear, and the U.S. will cease to be a democracy.
The good news is that it is not all doom and gloom. There are progressive politicians out there that are fighting for the interests of the middle and lower class. House Democrats have proven that throughout their reign with Nancy Pelosi as their Speaker, consistently passing excellent reforms and legislation without any cooperation from the Republicans. Unfortunately, because our Senate is a non-functioning body, many of these bills have ceased to become law, as is likely to happen with yesterday’s action, where House Democrats extended tax cuts for the middle and lower classes. However, forcing Republicans to cast votes against 98% of the American people is exactly the kind of thing Democrats should be doing.
Ultimately, all we can do is run progressive candidates that: 1) are willing to stand up to the Republicans, call them on their incessant lying, and expose their malfeasance and corruption; 2) push for and pass effective legislation aimed at forming a robust middle class, and 3) fight for a United States in which every person has access to an effective education, affordable, high-quality health care, and a job that pays a living wage. Barack Obama is unwilling to stand up to the Republicans, does not seem to give a damn about the middle class (wage freezes for federal employees), and has done nothing significant to change the way we educate our populace, deliver health care (until 2014), or build our economy. And even if he can’t accomplish goals 2 and 3, because of Republican opposition, he simply doesn’t penalize them for it by saying anything to the American people.
I’m done with this guy. Next!

Don't Extend the Tax Cuts

The next time you hear someone say that cutting taxes creates jobs, punch that person directly in the face. Or, if you are want to be a little less confrontational, ask them if they believe in leprechauns, unicorns, and the tooth fairy as well. Because the idea that tax cuts—specifically, that cutting income taxes for people making more than $250,000 a year—is totally ridiculous, and completely unfounded.
The Bush era tax cuts have now been in place for nearly a decade, and yet, we are looking at the highest rate of unemployment since 1983. If these tax cuts were going to make such huge difference for our economy—if tax cuts always stimulate the economy, just where in the fuck are the jobs?
Nowhere to be found. In fact, the richest 1 percent of this country have never been richer, but for some strange reason I can’t fucking figure, they aren’t out there investing and creating jobs. The money never trickled down because it’s currently feeding trust fund babies or building factories in India and China; or worse, simply sitting around in some rich fuck’s bank account, doing nothing but collecting interest. The real irony is that a huge number of corporations have a ton of money on hand, available to build factories, increase production, increase efficiency, and in turn, hire workers. But right now they’re sitting tight. Why?
Because no one has any fucking money to spend. It’s all trickled up and away from the lower and middle classes, and what money we do have is spent paying mortgages, student loans, medical bills, tuition, etc. This is precisely why supply side, trickle down, Reaganomics—whatever you want to call it—doesn’t work. People can’t buy up the supply if they don’t have any money. Companies and investors know that, so they aren’t going to spend money trying to build more shit—they’re going to sit on it, which is exactly what is going on now.
So how Republicans, like Jack “douche-nozzle” Roberts, whom the Oregonian likes to publish, can sit there and argue that we just can’t raise taxes on the rich is just unconscionable. According to Nicholas Kristof’s recent New York Times article, extending the Bush tax cuts to the richest 0.1% of Americans would grant them an extra $370,000 a year. Given that they probably already take care of a pretty lavish lifestyle with what they have, to assume that they are actually going to spend all of that in one fiscal year, or use it to hire more workers, is pretty naïve.
The bullshit meter really hits a high note when you realize that these same fucking assholes don’t want to extend unemployment insurance. This, despite the fact that recent studies show that we can reasonably expect approximately $1.60 to $1.70 of economic activity for every $1 paid out in unemployment or food stamps. It’s baffling how bad these people are.
I guess the next question is: how long can our society sustain this type of malfeasance without just completely crumbling? If I had to guess, not much longer. Even if the economy shows signs of improving in the short term, we can’t expect it to continue to improve without significant changes to how our government functions. And that is just the problem: we can’t make changes for the better. We aren’t ever willing to tell the richies and the corporations to pay their fair share, or to take responsibility for the state of our country. We’re never willing to force the stakeholders to let go of their stakes—even when it’s clear they’ve abused their power. And every corporation, organization, politician and individual is only thinking about their own selfish best interests, rather than taking into account that their interests often align with the interests of those around them.
If you’ve ever seen A Beautiful Mind, recall the scene where the main character, Steve Nash, and his friends go to the bar. Nash has an epiphany while all of his buddies are drooling over the most beautiful blonde girl in the bar. He realizes that if they all try to hit on the blonde, all of them will fail, because they will end up blocking each other, and moreover, they won’t be able to be successful hitting on any of the other girls, because the girls will feel second best after seeing the boys fall all over themselves to get the blonde. What Nash finally concludes is that if they go hit on the other girls in the first place, and ignore the blonde, they won’t insult the girls, won’t block each other, and consequently Nash smiles, “we all get laid.” In so doing, Nash ends up proving that Adam Smith and the fictional character from Wall Street, Gordon Gecko (“greed is good”), are wrong—or, incomplete—when they argued that everyone acting in their own best interests serves the common good. Ultimately, everyone acting in their and the group’s best interest is truly what serves the common good, and yields the best results for everyone.
The problem is that the nature of a two-party system doesn’t foster this type of cooperation or leadership. Republicans go for the blonde every damn time, and Democrats are still sitting at the table trying to think of a line. But Republicans aren’t ever going to get her because women aren’t interested in all talk and no action, and Democrats won’t ever get up the balls to go speak to the woman, let alone ask her out. And we, the American people, just want to get laid—who gives a shit about the blonde? Brunettes and redheads are better in bed anyway. But, until our politicians think about solutions that work for all Americans, no one is getting anything.
OK, so that was officially a tangent. But I still think we shouldn’t extend the Bush tax cuts for people making more than $250,000 a year. Just because the Democrats are too ball-less to hit on the blonde, doesn’t mean they should sit there and do nothing while the Republicans rape her.

Proposed

The United States is currently rotting its way from an industrialized nation to a third world country, and unless we get the economy turned around—and fast—it is simply going to be too late to stop. Quite frankly, both political parties are partially to blame, but that isn’t the root of the problem. The root lies in how our political system functions, specifically the disproportionate influence of not only money, but also of media. Until regular citizens, whose interests are far different from those of the power elite, exercise the same measure of influence, the system will continue its dysfunction, as will the political parties that represent the interests of those that inhabit and do business in this nation.
To this end, several key things must be accomplished in order to right the ship, and therefore I propose we, as American citizens, create a voting block dedicated to accomplishing some very simple goals, that everyone who is rational and reasonable, should be able to support, regardless of party affiliation or differences in mainstream viewpoints.
In doing so, we shall agree to support candidates, regardless of political affiliation, who agree to seek to accomplish these stated goals. Our support, of course, is conditional. Significantly before each election, our voting block will ask candidates who seek our endorsement, to apply for our endorsement, explaining how they intend to bring about accomplishing the goals of our organization. In addition, each member of the organization will be provided with information detailing each candidate’s voting record, stated views, campaign donations, etc. Then, our members will vote on which person to endorse in the upcoming election. Once the vote is tallied, every member must agree to vote for that candidate that wins the endorsement. Since our goals are national in nature, every discussion on endorsement will be national, whether we are considering voting for the President, a Senator, or a House member.
In order to be truly effective as a voting block, members must be extremely loyal to the decisions of the organization as a whole, completely ignore partisan politics, and focus entirely on the actions of each candidate seeking our endorsement, and how those actions can bring about the goals we seek to achieve.
In the coming year, I will work hard to set up a website, facebook page, twitter account, and other social networking tools so that this voting block can begin functioning before the 2012 election. Each member will have a user name and password, and in this way, votes will be confidential, as well as secure. Once I have done more leg work and finalized some of the details, I will let everyone know, but for now, I think we should decide what it is we would like to see accomplished.
Here are some of my proposals—please let me know what you think:
1) Amend the constitution to specify that corporations are not people, and that only individuals or groups that are American citizen enjoy the right to freedom of speech.
2) Amend the constitution to endow congress with the right to regulate federal, state, and local elections.
3) Cut the corporate tax rate to 15% and end all deductions and subsidies to private industry.
4) Reform our educational system. One idea: create a graduated education tax credit for each student from age 4 to 22, and then allow schools to compete for students, setting their own price of tuition. For example, for taxpayers making less than $20,000 a year, the tax credit would be for $9,000, between $20,000 and $50,000, $8000, between $50,000 and $100,000, $7000, between $100,000 and $250,000, $5000, between $250,000 and $500,000, $3000, and beyond that, there would be no tax credit. The numbers would have to be figured out more exactly, but something to this effect. To receive the tax credit, one would have to prove that they have a dependant child who is attending an accredited school. Teachers and administrators would still need to receive their licenses through the states. Currently owned public schools could then be leased either whole, or piecemeal, to competing schools with a price ceiling in place to ensure access to public facilities, and at the same time, allowing the government to take in more revenue. Schools would be responsible for their own agenda and curriculum, but would be subject to state testing and evaluation to provide parents with information on each individual school. Finally, the federal government would set up a fund that would match private or public investment in building and/or maintaining more schools, which would provide badly needed jobs in construction, and encourage communities to invest in local schools.
5) Nullify all trade agreements and treaties with foreign nations. All future agreements should be exactly the same for both countries—for example, if Great Britain puts a tariff on a U.S. good, then we put exactly the same tariff on British goods. Tariffs and agreements should also take into account prevailing wages in those countries and be adjusted to make U.S. goods competitive with foreign goods.
6) Allow a public option to participate in the health insurance exchange. Basically, this will lead to a single payer system, because the public insurance would be a non-profit that is only responsible for paying medical bills. Ironically, the deficit commission that met recently containing several prominent conservatives, made this same recommendation.
7) Cut military spending so that the Department of Defense may comprise no more than 12% of the federal budget (it is currently about 19%).
8) Reform Social Security so that upon age 65, every citizen receives $750 per month until their death, regardless of lifetime payments. Cut Social Security taxes to reflect this (average benefits in 2010 were around $1,100 per month).
9) Create a 5% additional tax on the revenues of televised media, since they are benefitting from the public airwaves, and use the revenue to fund education.
10) Institute a wealth tax on private individuals worth more than $50 million, and tax their total worth by 0.1% annually (meaning, for an individual worth more than $50 million, in addition to other taxes they are subject to, they would pay an additional $50,000 per year to the treasury. For someone worth 1 billion, this amount would be $1 million).

Predictions

OK, so first of all, I suppose I ought to absolve myself of a great sin...I didn't vote. I know, I know, what a stupid, hypocritical bastard--me, of all people, who lives and breathes politics, didn't vote. Truth be told, I wanted to, but forgot to register, and then it was too late. It would be really nice if you could just prove you were a citizen, walk into a polling place, and vote, but then again, that would be much too easy and way too democratic of a notion for it to be put into practice, so I'll just take responsibility and say I blew it.
Anyway, as you might guess, that doesn't mean I wasn't paying attention to what was going on Tuesday night, and while it wasn't very surprising, it was nonetheless a very depressing evening. Let me recap the 2010 election in TRUTHFUL terms, since apparently no one else is willing to tell it: senior citizens (who receive social security and are covered by medicare), along with angry rural, white voters (many of whom receive farm subsidies and whose counties and states generally get more far more federal money than they pay in taxes), got angry about paying taxes, a black man in the white house, and the fact that he wanted to make some very moderate changes to the medical insurance industry (which is still bleeding us dry). So they voted for Republicans, who are promising to both cut taxes and pay down the deficit. Now I may only be an English teacher, but that's just bullshit.
Unfortunately, old people and dumb people don't. They got fooled, or more correctly, they voted for falsehoods they refuse to acknowledge as the lies that they are, because they would rather pretend everything's just the way they say it is, as opposed to admitting their worldview is bankrupt, and they've been wrong all along. And because of that, because people who essentially owe their comfortable lives to social programs brought into being by Democrats--who see the wisdom in planning for, and providing, to some degree, a stable society--because the elderly and the rednecks chose to make a terrifyingly brainless choice Tuesday, we are now going to see the following things during the next two years:
1. The Bush tax cuts will be extended, even for those Americans making over $250,000 a year, exacerbating the deficit by $700 billion. Obama will capitulate to the Republicans on this, because otherwise, he will be forced to be a villain for the rest of his 1 term presidency, unless he somehow manages to get elected again in 2012, which is going to be tough because:
2. Every other action the Republicans take will be to undercut Obama's popularity. There will be hearings, investigations, allegations, and all kinds of legal proceedings putting Obama and his entire cabinet under constant scrutiny. The other thing we know for sure is that:
3. The Republicans won't compromise. So, in all likelihood, nothing will actually get done to alleviate any of the myriad, chronic problems this country faces in the short future. Nothing. Just a lot of complaining and mudslinging for the next two years, which by the way will be:
4. Horrifying. If you noticed the flood of money into this year's election having a huge effect on political messaging, imagine what it will be like in 2012 when there's a presidency on the line. You can thank the conservative Supreme Court and especially the Bush appointees for that.
5. The silver lining...since nothing meaningful will get done, it is unlikely independent voters will support Republicans as they did during this election, and on top of that, Obama and the Dems will be less of a motivating factor for conservatives, because they themselves are in power in the most powerful arm of the legislative branch, meaning that to shoot at Democrats and Obama, they're going to have to shoot at Boehner and the elephants as well. Plus, liberal voters (like myself) should be more motivated to go out and cast ballots after the horror of any type of Republican rule, which as we all know, is backward, inefficient, and sexually abhorrent.
6. And, as always, father time rolls on...sleep well old timers!

There's a word for it: bribery...or, in this case TREASON

Well, I'm not sure how my last blog was received as I know that most of you are well meaning and decent American citizens who hardly need to be filled in on the perils of voting for Republicans or not voting at all. The fact is that what I said represents an amalgamation of stances that Tea Partiers and Republicans have taken, and if they had their wishes, I'm sure they would try to pass their draconian platforms. Luckily, Obama is in the Whitehouse, so even if they do take over the House and the Senate this fall, it is unlikely that any conservative legislation will get through; instead we'll just be subjected to all kinds of inquisitions and investigations, and perhaps even an impeachment. I guess that's what you get for being a moderate, eh Barack? That's Karma for not pushing single payer, and as this blog has established, Karma is a big, big bitch.
Anyway, what really horrifies me most about this upcoming election is that tons of corporations, including foreign ones, are putting forth a shitload of money to elect Republicans. The worst offender is perhaps the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who has taken money from all kinds of places, including China, India, Dubai, and other countries with questionable records on human rights (of course, since Bush and Cheney and their love of torture, I don't suppose we hold the moral high ground on that topic like we used to). It is estimated that the U.S. Chamber will spend $75 to $80 million in this election, and receives money from 80 foreign owned companies. They say that they carefully separate the funds, foreign and domestic, but then again, since Republicans in the House and Senate refused to vote for the DISCLOSE act, which would have forced those influencing our political process to at least say who they are and where they got their money, I guess we'll never know. And this is not the only shadowy group spending money in this midterm election--there are others, such as a group called American Crossroads, spearheaded by Karl Rove, whose goal is to spend $50 million to elect conservative candidates. In all, these groups plan to spend over $200 million--all of it to elect Republican candidates.
Now, if we put it all together, here's the simple scenario. All of the following are facts (not sure if Republicans believe in these anymore, but trust me, they DO exist). Bush was elected in 2000, and was president until 2008. During his administration, he successfully passed massive tax cuts, started two wars on manufactured/false information, and turned a blind eye to business regulations, ranging from Wall Street to Big Oil. During this time, the federal deficit soared, wages stagnated, and ultimately, the economy crashed, forcing a federal bailout of some of America's most influential corporations (this now should be enough to convince anyone considering voting for Republicans to immediately reverse their position). In addition, Bush appointed two justices to the Supreme Court: chief justice John Roberts and justice Samuel Alito. These judges were key players in a court ruling known as Citizens United (2010), which paved the way for the current flurry of spending in our state and federal elections.
So to sum up: Bush elected, appoints justices (that lied to Congress, based on the Citizens United ruling), election spending laws are nullified, and corporations (in support of deregulation and shipping jobs overseas) spend money in elections to elect Republicans, who will...be lapdogs to the corporations who sponsored their election.
Listen, I understand that candidates from both parties take campaign donations from moneyed interests in order to get elected, but that is precisely what has ground our political system to a halt. That is precisely what is wrong with our government! The influence of money on our elected officials has totally betrayed the American people, and it has made our government totally ineffective. And surprise, surprise, the forces that WANT this system are supporting Republicans. Therefore, it is unlikely that Republicans are ever going to support legislation, or what we really need, a constitutional amendment, that cuts them out of this loop of money.
Think of it this way: elected offices are jobs. Jobs with fantastic benefits (including a tremendous health care plan), a nice salary, and given their agenda lately, a hell of a lot of time off! Politicians want to keep these jobs, and spending money on elections is one of the primary ways in which they do so. And while it is becoming increasingly apparent that most voting Americans are unable to do so, I can assure you that our elected officials do what is in their best interests, and for Republicans, that is taking money from multinational corporations that want to see American jobs sent overseas, tax breaks that saddle the middle class with funding our government, deregulation of industry, and non-competitive government contracts, otherwise known as pork.
If Americans elect Republicans this fall, as it looks like they will do, the message to all of our elected officials will be this: voters don't care if you are on the take, and irresponsible governance doesn't matter as long as voters have a scapegoat (Bush or Obama).
I guess my question is: really? Are Americans really this fucking stupid? Because if we are, we deserve a shitty economy and a bad health care system. We deserve for multinational corporations to take our money and abuse us. Mark my words: this is the beginning of the struggle of the proletariat vs. the bourgeoisie that Karl Marx predicted. And mark this: I'm not a Marxist--I'm a democratic capitalist--but if we don't start governing ourselves more responsibly, we're going to turn that man into a fucking prophet.
The fact is, by allowing foreign companies to influence our elections to their benefit, Republicans and their supporters are committing treason against this nation. And it looks like their going to get away with it, because people are too stupid to pay attention to what is going on. Don't be one of them. And don't let the treason take place silently. Whine about it. Bitch. Moan. Fight. If we don't stand now, we may never have the chance.

Remember, remember

A few things that folks need to remember before they go to the polls, or mail in their ballots this fall. Remember, you are not just voting for a candidate. You are voting for a philosophy, for a paradigm, for a party’s methods, and for its worldview.
You may be angry, as I am, that the party currently in power, the Democrats, haven’t delivered the change that they promised us in 2008. You may be angry that the economy is bad. You may be angry for any number of reasons—and you’ve a right to be. Every single American citizen who’s seen their opportunities erased, their health care costs rise, their wages stagnate, has a right to be angry. But if you’re a Democrat, or a liberal, and that keeps you home, or if you’re an independent, or a moderate Republican (the few that still exist), and you’re considering voting Republican or Tea Party, be forewarned of the consequences of these actions.
Remember, by not voting, or voting Republican, you are endorsing the idea that foreign money should be able to influence our elections. You are endorsing the practice of millionaires and billionaires spending untold amounts of money to sway public opinion in order to elect Republicans (the rich want to keep their tax cuts), and the fact that if they do, those they elect will be in the pockets of multinational corporations, acting in THEIR best interests, rather than representing WE, the American people.
Remember, if you stay home, or vote angrily for the opposition, you are in support of privatizing social security, in support of abolishing Medicare, and in support of ending our country’s guarantee to a free, public education. You are in support of privatizing police and fire departments; in support of the right of corporations to profit, without regulation, on the backs of doctors and their patients. Moreover, you are in support of the health insurance industry’s right to deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, even children. You also support THEIR right to put lifetime caps on YOUR coverage, and to use significant portions of YOUR premiums to deny YOUR claims so that they can continue to pay THEIR CEO’s millions of dollars a year in compensation.
Remember, by electing Republicans, you support tax breaks for the richest 1% of Americans, adding $700 billion to the federal deficit. You support the shipping of jobs overseas, including tax breaks for corporations who do so. Most of all, you support the idea of trickle-down economics: cutting taxes for large, multinational corporations in the hope that this will somehow catalyze job creation for the middle class. You also support cutting regulations designed to protect consumers and the environment, again, in the hope that even though this can end in horrible tragedies (such as the one witnessed this spring and summer with the gulf oil spill), it might sponsor job creation (news flash for those that haven’t noticed: Bush and the Republicans cut taxes and regulations during the first 8 years of this decade, and all we have to show for it is high unemployment, a shrinking middle class, and a ballooning federal deficit).
Remember, by casting your ballot for Republicans, or staying home, you’ll be supporting the denial of civil rights and reproductive rights to women, including the refusal to grant things such as an abortion in cases of rape and/or incest, or when the mother’s life is at risk, and even access to birth control, if your pharmacist happens to morally disagree with it. You’ll be supporting people, such as Rand Paul, who think the Civil Rights Act of 1965 was a big mistake. You’re also in support of the right of government to spy on its citizens, deny them due process of law, insert itself into every aspect of your private life, and judge you based on THEIR religious yardstick.
Remember that joining you at the polls to cast ballots for the Republicans will be all of America’s white racists, homophobes, and extremists. You’ll also be among people who believe that the Bible is the precise word of God, and don’t believe in evolution or climate change. Many of them won’t believe that our president is a U.S. citizen, and some of them will have marched and protested carrying signs of him depicted as a witch doctor, monkey, or terrorist. You’ll be voting in harmony with all of them; or by staying home, tacitly approving of their agenda.
Yes, you are right to be angry about the state of our country. I am too. But I know that if I vote for Republicans this fall, or decide to sit this election out, I am supporting everything stated above. So while your vote is your business, and every U.S. citizen has a right to vote for whom they wish, please remember, remember. Remember to think about the consequences of your decision, because as a voting member of this democracy, every citizen is in some small way responsible for the state of this nation. So remember. Remember.

Just the facts...actually, wait, it's mostly just opinion, but its true

OK folks, I'd love to start swearing like a coked up, drunk, closeted gay Republican right now, but I won't do that because I'd lose half of my audience, which, given the frequency of my recent blogs, means...carry the one...hmmm, my guess, about three. Leaving...three. Right? Anyway, after all of that...stuff, I ought to just, AH FUCK IT I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE MOTHERFUCKING TRUTH! RIGHT NOW!
Look, the fact is, the lies are coming out left and right all of the sudden--surprise, surprise, it's election time and BAM: there they are just steaming like shit: lies. Anyway, I just want to get a few things straight:
1) The current budget deficit has been caused primarily by the Bush tax cuts (which did cut taxes for everyone), the medicare drug bill (that gave billions away to the drug companies--in government money, passed by Bush and the Republicans), and the two wars we are currently still involved in: Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, if Congress simply lets the Bush tax cuts expire (which may well happen since the Republicans filibuster everything that comes their way), its estimated that we'd have almost completely paid off the deficit by 2015. Keep in mind that when Bush came into office, the budget was essentially balanced.
2) We are still in a very bad economic situation. A situation that would be exacerbated horribly if we simply take the Republicans at face value, who propose to: freeze current tax rates, cut spending to 2008 levels (one of the only reasons it is higher now is that Obama actually included the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq in the federal budget, which Bush and the Republicans managed not to do through some, shall we say creative accounting--seems to me that got us into the current mess we're in, in more than one way), and rescind the health care reform bill that was just passed, which flawed though it may be, at least attempts to address some of the costs and injustices that exist in our current system (keep in mind, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the health care bill will actually reduce the federal deficit).
So, now, you are about to be told by a bunch of complete assholes with no conscience whatsoever (Republicans), that all of your problems, the deficit, and the economy, are the fault of the Democrats. You are going to be bombarded by ads paid for by multinational corporations that have moved their manufacturing bases overseas, effectively exporting millions of American jobs, telling you not to vote for Democratic candidates. Oh, and the kicker for that one is that these fucksticks have been allowed to do this by a Supreme Court ruling made possible by Bush appointees, John Roberts and Samuel Alito, striking down campaign finance laws, so that now, technically, Chinese or Saudi Arabian companies, or even international tycoons of ill repute, can spend as much money as they want attempting to influence our elections.
Look, am I super impressed with Obama? No, but at least Obama and the Democrats have their noses pointed in the right direction. The Republicans essentially are proposing to do exactly what they did for the last eight years they were in power. They still think that tax cuts are the only answer for an ailing economy, and as far as deficit spending, THEY'RE THE FUCKING ONES THAT RAN IT UP IN THE GOD DAMN FIRST PLACE, SO I CERTAINLY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE SHOULD TRUST THEM NOW!
The fact is, if Republicans win in November, at the very best, nothing will get better, because our government will be shut down by constant inquiries attempting to dig up dirt on Obama, so they try to impeach him like they did to Clinton when they took back Congress in 1994. But, in all likelihood, things will actually get a lot worse, because we're in not in any kind of situation where we can afford for our government to be inefficient or trending backwards.
Put it this way--many Republicans want to get rid of Social Security. Can you imagine where we would be if Social Security was gone, given the recent burst of the housing bubble and the collapse of the stock market that followed. It would mean that much less money being paid out to businesses and landlords. It would mean that many of us, on top of supporting ourselves in hard financial times, would have to be supporting grandma and grandpa as well. And if the tea partiers had their way, and manage to get rid of Medicare, well, then we'd be stuck paying for those bills too, and that is much deeper shit than we're in now.
I hope people aren't going to be too stupid again, but if you run across someone that plans on voting for the Republicans this fall, please, for the love of your country, please remind them of how badly those stupid fucking morons ruined our economy in the first place, and what they did between 2000 and 2008. Because things are still really bad, but if these guys get back into office, we're truly, simply, fucked.

What Logic Tells Us in the Face of Disaster

The right wing would have you believe that Democrats are in for it this Fall. Their base is energized, there's a black man in the White House, and his job approval is down. People are upset about all kinds of things and they're looking for someone to blame. Yes, indeed, it looks like the left wing is in for a letdown in 2010, with Republicans just licking their chops anticipating their ascendancy back into power.
Yay. A change in the seat of government! Yay. A new order in Washington! Yay. A political message to the president and his liberal agenda! Yay. A mini-revolution for a center-right nation! Yay...rrr...ray...
Rape. That's the word for it, because if the right wing rides economic discontent into office this November, it will be a Republican political rape. Rape, as most people agree, is a crime predicated by a need for power, in which someone is sexually violated, and that is just want the Republicans want politically. If they wanted to join the political process of governance, they've had plenty of opportunities. They could've worked with Obama and the Democrats on the road to economic recovery, health care reform, financial regulation, and even tax restructuring. Instead, they chose to filibuster, complain, and raise false concerns while slandering our president to the point where 18% of this country believes he is actually a Muslim.
In this sense, the Republican party has violated the American people forcefully, delaying economic recovery by stalling unemployment checks, making effective health care reform impossible, and refusing to cooperate with necessary legislation regarding the myriad problems we face as a nation. They have violated the American people forcefully and purposefully, knowing that if government was stalled, and made to seem corrupt and ineffective, they could use public anger to manipulate the emotions of the American electorate to vote them back into power in Washington. They have raped the American people, robbing them of the responsible governance to which they are entitled in order to gain political power. And, as of right now, it looks as if they'll get away with it.
The true tragedy is that nothing will get done if and when they do assume power. Government will be made to stall for another 2 years in an effort to make Obama look bad so that he can be unseated in 2012. The economy will continue to stagnate with 10% unemployment, while we wait, floundering, for the kind of decisive action that it will take to finally pull us out of this recession. Yay.
The irony is that the Republicans are using a public sentiment which they almost wholly created. The correct notion that our government is corrupt and broken was made clear during their reign, under Bush, that forged many of the causes of the current recession, and at the very least, failed to mitigate the harmful market forces in play that were foriegn, endemic, or pre-existing. Unfortunately, many Americans seem to have forgotten this, and in the interim have had their emotions manipulated by the conservative media, looking now poised to vote with their hearts rather than their heads in November. If so, the results, as stated above, won't be good ones.
The only consolation for the cognitive American is that in the end, regardless of the political outcome, people who embrace intelligence will alway survive and prosper. Those who use proven facts, science, and reason will always succeed, because even if government changes based on the manipulation of emotion and information, markets don't. Successful companies don't scorn the latest data and research, as conservative media outlets do; they embrace them. Competitive corporations seek the most talented people, not those who've forsaken knowledge, as the right wing has. The best and most prosperous businesses operate in a world where reality matters, because it exists as a key to their prosperity, regardless of what people want to believe.
In this sense, ultimately, most mainstream Republicans are screwed. They don't operate in a fact based reality. They scoff at edcuated individuals and discredit intellectuals, professors, and scientists. They lean on faith and religious hubris rather than admitting or acknowledging legitimate, secular philosophical truths. They live in the dark. They refuse to change course, admit mistakes, or listen to dynamic and diverse viewpoints. These aren't the characteristics of winners, entreprenuers, and innovators--they're the foundational flaws the have ended the reigns of monarchs, unseated politicians, and toppled empires. Their the traits of bullies--the excuses that losers make.
Indeed, while it may serve Republican political interests for people to be ignorant and ill-informed, it's hardly a leap to surmise that it won't be very advantageous for the people with their heads in the sand. And while large corporations may throw money to the GOP because of their economic interests in tax cuts, tax breaks, and deregulation, they aren't going to hire the rubes they fool to develop their business plans or engineer the next factory. They're going to hire smart people for that.
Thus, while those of us that live in a fact-based reality have become frustrated with the right wing base and their tendancy to vote on emotion and ignorance, the truth is that is is precisely these people who are in the worst position, and who will invariably find themselves at the bottom of Republican economic policy.
Make no mistake: it won't be good. If Republicans gain offices in 2010, schools, services, and jobs will continue to be cut. Perhaps this time they'll even succeed at privatizing social security, or cutting medicare benefits. The people that will be hurt most by it? The people that will feel the violation of the Republican political rape in the worst way? The same fools that voted them into office. Yay.

Republicans are Sith Lords that supported the Nazis and Own Poisonous Pet Snakes (Ear Muffs)

What the fuck is going on at 1600 Pennsylvania? What the fuck is going on at Democratic headquarters? One should certainly hope they are doing some fucking planning down there that involves some fucking aggression, anger, and malice toward the right, or once again, we are going to see power slip into the hands of the fucking Republicans—like in 1994.
Guess what they’re going to do? You guessed it—exactly the same thing they did back then: constant trials and inquisitions of Democratic officials, representatives, senators, and yes, certainly our president Barrack Obama. Mind you, like Clinton’s impeachment, none of it will actually pertain to the governance of our country, or address the myriad problems our nation faces.
Republicans know they have no solutions they can offer this nation—their intentions are only to fulfill the wishes of their corporate sponsors. They’ll make their political hay on who people fuck and trumped up ethics violations, pretending to be the moral compass of Washington to sway the fools in the bible belt, while deregulating business, disavowing business and the wealthy of their tax burden, and further unionizing moneyed interests with the powers of government. Who knows? Maybe this time they’ll succeed in privatizing social security and get us into yet another war, while again running the economy into goddamn ground.
One would think that for a party run primarily by lawyers with bachelor’s degrees in Political Science or History, the Democrats might have learned their lesson, but by all accounts, they haven’t. They haven’t gone far enough with any of their reforms, they haven’t given the public a clear portrait of why their road has been so difficult, and they haven’t done enough to energize the middle and lower class.
Of course, in some sense, we should respect the fact that Obama hasn’t used his office to play politics the way Bush did. And no one can deny it has been an uphill battle—the full horrifying, corpulent weight of the vultures in the corporate media have been an echo chamber for Republican interests, spreading lies, misinformation, and malcontent unabashedly, with a greedy fucking smile on their face from ear to ear.
However, the fact remains, that the Democrats have made one key error in their judgment: moderation in their agenda hasn’t accomplished anything that more brazen, and frankly more effective policies, wouldn’t have also accomplished. Look, either way, Fox News and the shit heads they employ are going to bitch, whine, lie, and distort everything that Democrats do anyway. You’re going to get called a socialist or a communist either way, so why not show some real guts and do something to engender support from the largest segment of the voting public: the lower and middle classes. You’re certainly didn’t impress us by immediately selling out the public option for health care, never mind completely ignoring the concept of a single payer system. Couple that with a stimulus package that was way too small to stem our economic hemorrhaging, continued wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that apparently still have no end in sight, and a financial regulation bill that was stripped of any real power, and it appears to the little guy that Pete Townshend was right after all: meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
And for all of that, Fox still hates you, the Republicans still don’t want to cooperate in the Senate, and you’ve legitimized the idiots in the Tea Party’s complaints about big, ineffective government, backroom deals, and unchecked corporate power. Now if they weren’t half racist, batshit crazy, or both, I could really get along with these Southern assholes.
When are the Democrats going to understand that you don’t earn respect by asking the guy who fucked your girlfriend and hates you to calm down and be more reasonable? The Republican party, and please, please, know that I am spot fucking on here…The Republican party is LOST—they have no idea what they are talking about, they don’t care how bad the economy gets as long as they can get elected, and I can promise you, they don’t give a shit about anyone unless they can fuck them or give them money.
They are the bad guys. There is no compromise with bad guys. Luke Skywalker didn’t fly his X-Wing over to the Death Star to see if he could talk things over with Darth Vader—he fired his fucking photon torpedoes into the exhaust port and blew those fucking bastards to hell! Who does Indiana Jones hate? That’s right: snakes and Nazis. And he doesn’t try to ask them to be less creepy or anti-Semitic…he fucking burns them, kills them, and steals their biblical treasures so that they can’t use them in their war against humanity. Snakes, Nazis, and Sith lords all like Republicans. They vote for them, donate to their campaigns, and feed them coke and prostitutes (the well known fuel of the Republican party). Hell, they thought about nominating Voldemort for the presidency in 2008, but they weren’t sure how the whole wizard thing would play with the religious right. Thank God Harry put that one to rest.
So here’s what we need to do, progressives and Democrats: stomp on the throat of the Republican party. Put them down, dig a 6 foot hole big enough for Rush’s fat fucking face, bury them in a steel coffin, weld it shut, and then fill the hole with concrete. No more waffling, peacemaking, or compromising. We’re done. If someone watches Fox News, you should laugh them out of the room—the facts and the truth are always on our side. If someone talks about the deficit, ask them whether or not they support spending more than the rest of the world on our military budget, or if they support the billions of dollars in tax breaks Republicans have secured for oil companies and the wealthiest Americans. If they talk about freedom, ask them why according to Republicans and the Supreme Court, the rich are far more free than the rest of us, or why Republicans don’t support the DISCLOSE Act, which would lend transparency to campaign donations. If they talk about the economy, why haven’t Republicans been out front on getting a larger stimulus package, and why have they held up unemployment benefits and food stamps, when both liberal and conservative economists agree that every dollar of unemployment/food stamp spending generates nearly $1.75 of economic activity.
I’m not all that happy with what we’ve gotten out of our Democratic government these past two years, but it’s a hell of a lot better than what the Republicans are going to give us. The fact of the matter, however, is that if we lose this fall, Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. You simply can’t waffle your victory. You have to take it—violently, if the need arises.

Old Man Assholery (earmuffs)

So for some reason recently, Paul Allen decided to fire Blazer’s GM Kevin Pritchard, arguably one of the best in the business, the architect of the current Blazer squad, the man who made the trade to bring Brandon Roy to Portland. Not that it was surprising—it had long been rumored that Pritchard was on his way out, due primarily to the tenuous relationship he had with Allen.
Now Blazer fans are left with several questions. First of all: why? And if that can be answered, then why in this manner? The way in which Pritchard was dragged through the mud, and then forced to prepare for a draft he would never take part in, was at its best, disgraceful. After all, if Pritchard was so good at evaluating talent, i.e. preparing for the draft, then it goes back to the first question: why was he fired? Isn’t evaluating talent one of the primary jobs, if not the primary job, a GM has? More puzzling is this: assuming Pritchard wasn’t that good at his job, or that there was someone else out there who was better, why wouldn’t Allen have brought that person in to conduct the draft, rather than forcing Pritchard (who according to Allen must be an inferior GM), to do all the grunt work with his job hanging in the balance?
The answer to almost all of these questions is quite simple: old man assholery (pronounced: ass-hul-eree). Old man assholery is a case where you have an old man with way too much power making terrible decisions using outdated ideas and rationale. Instead of making the best decision possible, based on data, projections, and the best information available, the old man goes back to what he knows best: stubborn gumption and a self righteous belief that he knows best and everyone else can go to hell.
It usually begins with some bullshit story about how he accomplished some nominal goal by sheer will, like how in ought-4 he beat the older kids at shucking corn by practicing for hours in the bathroom with his mother’s lotions to develop hand speed, and how this led to him to build a great career and provide for his family, and on and on and on. The thing is, it is almost always the case that the old guy was at one point a great person, but now he’s just falling back on how things worked in the 50’s, rather than adjusting to the new age.
The truth is, there is nothing wrong with old man assholery when the old man isn’t in charge of making consequential decisions. We love grandpa’s that say whatever they feel like—what they say is often extremely humorous, and well, they’re old, so they have a right to say it.
But when that old man is in charge of a professional franchise, like Paul Allen, or Al Davis, or worse, an entire sport (Bud Selig and David Stern), terrible things can happen. I mean, Al Davis still thinks that the way to win football games is to get a quarterback with a huge arm and have him chuck the ball down the field to the fastest black man available. There was a time when that worked…but not anymore. Or take baseball’s commissioner Bud Selig’s resistance to instant replay, and his refusal to reverse the terrible call that ruined a perfect game. His justification was that baseball is a game that values the human element—yeah, you’re right Bud, we do, we value the players, and they are human. But we don’t value an umpire who makes a terrible call and ruins history, and we don’t value hanging that guy up to dry when we possess the technology to get the fucking call right.
And ultimately, we owe it to old man assholery that we have a terrible economy, and nothing ever changes in politics. I love how you hear all these fucking dinosaurs talking about how they hate the deficit, how all these crusty old bastards don’t want to give people health care, how Obama’s a socialist, and all this bullshit. But ask them about how their last visit to the doctor went, and who paid for their last surgery so they can listen to Rush Limbaugh for a few more years. Medicare. Who pays for them to buy these goddamn scooters so they can piddle around for FREE. Medicare. Also known as you and me, the taxpaying public. You’d think they could at least extend us the courtesy of allowing us to have free health care too, but you’d be wrong. Why? Old man assholery. The NRA, the war on drugs, our dependence on foreign oil, our bloated military budget, supply side economics…all due to pure old man assholery.
Look, I get it. It is important to respect one’s elders. And there are a lot of wonderful older people that are rational, sharp, and wonderful parents and grandparents to us. But at some point, when terrible decisions are impacting my life, and the lives of the people I love, I’ve got a right to be mad at the people that are making those decisions. So at some point, we’ve got to say a hearty “fuck you” to these old assholes, put them in a home, and get some people in power who are capable of acting rationally.

Spinning the Spill

Reading newspapers in print and online, one expected, surely, to find that all Americans would be united in their support for the victims of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Wouldn't all of us reach out to the innocent, while condemning those guilty, namely BP, Transocean, and Halliburton? Shouldn't every U.S. citizen want those responsible for this tremendous environmental tragedy to pay for the damages?
Apparently, for the right wing in this country, the answer is no. Now, it took awhile--they either hadn't figured out how to spin the spill, or were smart enough to wait for the initial horror of the disaster to wear off. In any case, the line of the right wing on this one is simple: how dare President Obama demand that BP pay for the cleanup, and why is the U.S. Government trying to cut down on the profitability of this poor corporation? And of course, we know that this leads back into the right wing's constant and baseless accusation that Obama and his fellow Democrats are socialists trying to take over the very corporations that are trying to lead us out of our economic woes.
That Republicans and Tea Partiers believe this nonsense is absolutely shocking. It is akin to a person whose house burned down due to a spark caused by faulty wiring, coming to the defense of the company responsible, and then telling the fire department to leave when they show up to put out the flames, after cussing the individual firemen out and accusing them of being no good communist reds. One would hope that if this is truly their stance on the matter, everyone who believes this tripe ought to give up all of their legal rights when dealing with corporations so as not to negatively effect the economy.
Clearly, Fox News and other conservative media outlets are unbelievably effective in influencing their consumers, so much so that on a regular basis, Republicans and Tea Partiers argue against their own rights and best interests for the sake of their corporate masters, and at the same time, do so with the righteous indignation of a populist movement trumpeting freedom and individual liberty. It is patently bizarre.
The real problem is that if this movement gains steam, and Republicans win offices as they are expected to this fall, we, as a nation, may completely lose our way. Right now, we are in desperate need of pragmatic ideas and solutions for the challenges we face in the 21st century, but as long as our politicians and media have to pander to the irrationality spawned on the right wing, we simply cannot move forward, with or without BP.

Just Don't Want to Take our Medicine

We need to start living in reality folks. No, really, we do. There are just too many problems our country faces for the majority of our citizens to be living in fantasy land. And right now, that’s just where we are: politicians continue posturing, the media continues to ignore core issues and focus on gossip, and most Americans carry with them an ideology that brands itself as common sense, but in reality, is grounded in foolish country mantras and backwater thinking. In short, like our besieged, ineffective president, we spend a lot of time looking good and sounding good, but not a lot of time getting anything done.
Take our current economic crisis, for instance. State governments everywhere have massive, gaping holes in their state budgets due to the recession, and yet so far, the federal government hasn’t done anything to aid states. Politically, everyone is trying to merge what works for individuals with a solution for government, saying things like, “we’ll just have to tighten our belts,” and “we need to cut spending.” And that sounds really great until you think about it for a second and you realize it’s a complete load of baloney. If we cut spending, that means we are cutting education. Anywhere between 50 and 75% of most state’s budgets are spent on education. If we cut education, we negatively impact our economy in 3 ways: 1) in the immediate short term, teachers are cut, and no new teachers are hired, which means we have more people on unemployment, and less people with stable careers buying goods and services and otherwise stimulating the economy; 2) the cost of a college education is driven higher, meaning it is accessible for fewer students, meaning less qualified, trained, and creative people able to enter the work force in the near future; and 3) in the long term, we create a working class that is less well educated and skilled in general.
Obviously, the knee-jerk reaction is: how can you say teachers are stimulating the economy when our tax money pays their salaries? Well, the simple explanation is that the tax rate isn’t going up—no more money needs to come out of your pocket to pay to keep teachers in the classroom. I am not suggesting that we raise taxes to fund our state budget shortfalls, but that we redirect federal money to fill them (yes, in Oregon, 66 and 67 were supposed to do just this, but 95% of Oregonians are completely unaffected by those taxes, and the few that are can afford to be).
Unfortunately, this idea exists that we don’t have enough revenue to accomplish all the things we need to accomplish as a country, and that is simply a myth. The real problem is that too much of our federal and state budgets go toward industries that generate little to no economic benefit for our country. We spend far too much money on the military ($663 billion a year, plus $52 billion for the department of veterans affairs) and far too much money on incarceration (states, more so than the federal government, but to the tune of $69 billion).
Here’s a hint: lets get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, OR cut the military budget by $100 billion—since that’s only 2/13 of the overall budget, we really ought to be able to manage that. Additionally, if we decriminalized marijuana, we could cut our incarceration and enforcement costs tremendously as well.
The problem again, is that doing either of these things would allow a lot of people with interests contrary to those of the American people to say a lot of things that would sound good. Things like: “You can’t cut the military—we’ll be attacked!” and “Obama and the Democrats legalized marijuana—what’s next? Pornography on the White House lawn?” And the media would beat the issue to death in a totally unprofessional way, and poor, conservative Americans would be outraged, and the Republicans would be swept into office in the next election in order to reverse these supposedly egregious policies.
So, maybe Obama is smarter than I think, or at least more pragmatic. It’s not that our country isn’t ready for single payer health care, the legalization of marijuana, or scaling back the military industrial complex, but given the modern U.S. political climate and the media lens through which everything is filtered, we won’t accept them. Thus, our only option is to cut our state government, specifically education, or pass taxes on the back of the middle class to pay for our shortfalls. The end result is a bad economy.
For a country so desperate for a cure to our economic ills, we sure don’t want to take our medicine.

Bud Selig's Epic Fail

By now I’m sure you’ve heard about umpire Jim Joyce’s blown call, spoiling Armando Galarraga’s perfect game on the last out. It was a blatantly bad call and everyone knows it; Joyce and baseball commissioner Bud Selig have both made public statements admitting it openly. However, in a stunning example of assholery, Selig has decided not to reverse the call, even though the call had zero effect on the game’s outcome—the next batter grounded out. The problem is that as Americans, we are all too used to this exact scenario: people in power making decisions not to decide, and using the excuse of adherence to principles as a justification for waffling out of responsibility, instead of showing real leadership and doing what everyone can clearly see is right.
While Joyce is certainly at fault for making a god-awful call (what was going on in his mind behind his stupid, handlebar mustached face is beyond me), he is after all human, and he has admitted his mistake. That is really all he can do; in my book he’s forgiven. The problem is that this country is crawling with morons that lack the ability to think clearly, and Joyce, as well as his family, are now receiving death threats. And Bud Selig could have easily ended the whole fiasco, for Joyce, his family, and Galarraga by making a simple decision that would have been lauded by all as the just and right thing to do…but somehow, stunningly, he didn’t.
Somehow, as I suspect today’s Republicans must do, Selig concocted a crackpot argument that allowed him to make a tremendously bad decision, a decision totally and utterly divorced from rationality—a choice that exists as the absolute antithesis of honor, decency, and all that is right. In this case, he said, we have to accept the fact that the human element is an integral part of baseball, and changing the call would endanger the very foundation of the game (yes, just in case you were wondering, that is among the top 3 dumbest things someone has ever said to justify making a terrible choice, right up there with: “he may not be smart but he’s the type of guy I could really sit down and have a beer with,” and “sure he’s only sixteen, but he said he really loved me”). Assholes and charlatans everywhere celebrated. Republicans, for the first time in recorded history, tipped their waitresses and hookers more than 8%. Surely, they thought to themselves, if someone in power can get away with such a deliberately bad choice, there must still be room for the party of swindlers, cheats, and liars.
The real tragedy for Americans is that this continues to happen time and time again: a terrible decision backed by horseshit reasoning, if any reason is given at all. Some examples: the BCS system, despite popular opposition and outcry for a playoff system, will remain in place. Single payer health care, by far the best solution for providing universal coverage and cutting the cost of our health care system, was not even an option because our government, including Obama and many of the Democrats, decided that taking the side of big insurance and pandering to the Republican party was more important than doing the business of the American people. The U.S. system of education, by and large, still operates on an outdated agrarian calendar, where students have summers off. NBA referees are hacks. We continue to fight three wars (drug, Iraq, Afghanistan) that are costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars and have no end in sight. The field for March Madness, one of the most perfect events in all of sports, is going to be expanded so the sponsors and CBS can make more money. The Supreme Court has said that corporations are people, and that they can are to be totally unrestricted in influencing elections with campaign donations. A large proportion of the American public still believes that tax cuts and the deregulation of the marketplace is the best way to build the economy, even after the housing crisis and the shithouse state of our economy after 8years of Bush. Crystal Bowersox didn’t win American Idol. And for some asinine reason, neither BP, nor God, nor our Government can stop the fucking oil from leaking into the Gulf of Mexico (by the way, Southern jackasses, KARMA IS A BITCH, AIN’T IT? That’s what you get for having Tea Parties and voting for Republican oilmen for the last 50 years, you fucking racist, redneck, reactionaries--I just hope it doesn't effect the responsible humans who voted using reasonable information).
When, oh when is the insanity going to end Bud Selig, you fucking assclown? When are you going to deliver on the CHANGE you promised, Obama—you do realize that no matter what you do the Republicans are going to continue to lie, right? It’s kind of what they do. Christians and Southerners: when are you going to accept that some people are different than you are, i.e. black, latino, or gay, and that it is OK? And when are you stupid douchbags going to stop being single issue abortion voters?
I guess what I would desperately like to know, is when is our nation going to wake up and say, ENOUGH! It’s high time to have the courage in our convictions and make some real changes for the better. It’s high time for our leaders to act with justice and leadership in mind. It’s high time for our businesses and corporations to be better corporate citizens. It’s high time to do what the majority of Americans want instead of kowtowing to the whining minority, who usually happen to be idiots. And if the people in power can’t get it done, then it’s high time to get the pitchforks and torches out and go down to the capitol and get some of these fucking guys, because we can’t vote their asses out of office fast enough, and neither party is willing to nut up for the American people.
Your time is coming Bud Selig, and if you don’t think so, go down to Louisiana and ask some of those rednecks. Ask those idiots who were supporting the Republicans and their siren song of “drill baby, drill.” Ask ‘em Bud. Because they’ll tell you that Karma is big, fat, oily bitch.

Schools Reflect Society's Values

Lately, there’s been a litany of commentary and news articles on education, its status, and what, if anything, can be done to improve one of the most public and important aspects of our society. As a teacher, I welcome the scrutiny, because as a person on the front lines, I agree that there are many problems for which we desperately need solutions. However, before everyone gets into a total frenzy, let me at least comfort you with this: the state of education in Oregon is simply a reflection of our society’s values.
One of the biggest problems people complain about is the drop in state test scores and graduation rates. While the numbers are alarming, the decline can be correlated with a general increase in students that are not fluent in English as well as the number of students that live in, near, or just above the poverty line. Students that aren’t fluent in English are obviously not going to achieve at the same level as their fluent counterparts, and students that have to worry about access to basic necessities such as food, clothing, shelter, and medicine are at a well documented disadvantage in the classroom. The decline of the middle class, as well as the increase in illegal immigration, in other words, has a lot more to do with low test scores and graduation rates than the quality of teachers or the success of administrative programs.
Moreover, look at the shape of our society. Nearly every student has a cell phone. Nearly every home has a high definition television. At the same time, involvement in community organizations is down. People spend less time reading, and more time in front of a computer or television screen. We are by far a more self-indulgent, self centered, alienated society than we ever have been.
On top of all this, responsible parenting has fallen by the wayside. At the school I work at, it is not uncommon for a student to have excused absences for more than 20 or 30 days of the year—and these are the kids with parents who are responsible enough to call the school. It says nothing of the unbelievable number of students who skip class on a daily basis, for whom, apparently, there is no penalty (the school makes automated calls home for every recorded unexcused absence). More amazing is that many of my students say that they don’t make it to class because they can’t wake up in the morning, which always makes me wonder: where are the parents? Ultimately, whether the excuse is that they’re at work, they’re sleeping, or they’re too busy, kids need responsible parents to be successful in school, and for a lot of my students, that is simply not the case.
The fact is, by and large, administrators and teachers are far more educated and well trained than they ever have been. Most teachers in Oregon earn their masters degree in teaching before they ever get inside a classroom, and the few that don’t have to earn it within 5 years. On top of this, every district in the state has regular mandatory professional development programs, and some districts, like Salem-Keizer, have mentor programs that pair experienced educators with new teachers to ensure students receive quality instruction.
While it is convenient to blame schools, teachers, and administrators for the lack of student success, ultimately, we must reconcile ourselves with the fact that our schools are merely a reflection of the direction that our society is headed. We live in a society where the middle class is being destroyed by unemployment, underemployment, and the rising cost of living, especially healthcare. In addition, the plain truth is that we are an increasingly alienated people plagued by self-indulgence, instant gratification, and a tendency to pass the buck rather than accept personal responsibility for our problems. Schools can certainly do better, but if we’re going to turn our schools around, we’re going to have to make drastic changes—not only to our schools, but to the larger society which they serve.

Analogy Sunday

Sometimes thoughts can best be expressed through metaphor...obviously, if a simple recounting of facts were sufficient, very few people would be in support of the Republican party. Given the current state of our politics, here are some analogies to think about.

"The Friend we all have who is a Huge Asshole OR Recent GOP History and Current Party Platform"
Republicans are like the friend on a hike who insists they know the way. After hiking for miles off the beaten track, through bushes and low growing trees, the group comes to the realization that they are, in fact, lost. Confronted with this reality, the friend, at fault for the group's situation, grows sullen and angry, and refuses to take responsibility or apologize for their misguided leadership. When the others try to get their bearings and start discussing how to get back on the right trail, the friend starts to grumble and then begins to shout at those who are proposing solutions to the predicament. When the group does finally decide on a course of action, the friend throws the kind of fit that would put a three year old to shame, cries, screams, and then resolutely sits down on a log, refusing to move.
The group now has a decision to make: stay with their horrifying friend and wait for someone to save them (or more likely, for the bears to come), drag the person along like a child, kicking and screaming, or leave them in the forest, hoping that they will eventually come to their senses when left alone.

"The Virgin and Her Disgruntled Lover (Voters) or Democrats and Health Care Reform"
Democrats are like the high school girl who has yet to give up her virginity, after dating her high school sweetheart for over a year. She worries that if she has sex with this boy, he may leave her, having accomplished his goal, to move on to other conquests. At the same time, she knows that he wants to have sex, that he has been a perfect gentleman, and that he has been extremely patient with her wishes. She has been stalling for the last 6 months, making him get checked for STD's (though neither of them has ever had sex), taking him to relationship counselors, and anything else she can do to delay the inevitable. Still, she is just not sure what to do...
Meanwhile, boyfriend is torn. He loves the girl, but her unwillingness to take the next step is extremely frustrating. And while he doesn't have a ton of options, he has noticed other girls in class that, although slutty and ultimately drama queens, would at least offer him the chance to get laid and get back at his girlfriend.
The girl has a choice to make: either stop stalling and sleep with him, or somehow hope that her charm can continue to keep at bay the precarious patience of a sex starved 17 year old male.

The Great College Boycott

As the mounds of corporate dollars flow and seemingly make decisions (formerly made by living and breathing human beings--oh, but wait, corporations are people, too, right, so, never mind) unconsciously on matters from healthcare to sports scheduling, it seems that we, the people, have lost our right to have a say in what matters. Money 7, Humans 0--this score provided to you by the Association for Corporate Personhood (and the rape of the human condition).
The problem is that most people are simply content to go along for the ride. Health care premiums go up--oh well, hope I don't get sick. Lose your job--oh well, I'll work two part-time jobs. BCS announces that there will not be a playoff system--oh well, what the hell else am I gonna do on fall Saturdays but watch college football? The clear message that we, the average Americans, have been sending to our corporate masters is, don't worry about us, well get all pissed off, but, after awhile, we'll just accept whatever you give us and go along with it.
Well I say we go along no more! And where do we make our stand? Why not the BCS? Unlike healthcare and many other political issues, which have been irrationally polarized by corporate interests (a la divide and conquer--see Machiavelli), most everyone, Republican, Democrat, Tea Partier, Green, and Independent, can agree that the BCS is screwed up, and college football needs a playoff system. Colin Cowherd and the corporate sports media will tell you otherwise, because they have dollars tied up in the status quo, but the fact is, the current system of controversy, a beauty pageant ranking system, and a never ending series conference comparisons leaves a sour taste in the mouths of most college fans.
Here is what I propose: every fan should go ahead and watch their team as they would throughout the regular season--college football is great, and no one would want to give up on the entire season. However, as Americans I believe we should band together and refuse to watch any of the bowl games, especially the BCS games, unless our favorite team happens to be in one of those games. In this way, every fan can watch or go to every game for their team this year, but with everyone else tuning out during the college post season, we will send a clear message that the current BCS system is simply not acceptable.
It's high time we stood up for ourselves and put our foot down when it comes to the average American getting screwed by corporate interests. If we effectively boycott the college football post season (except your team's game), advertisers will demand that we have a playoff system. Please send this to every college football fan you know so that this idea will spread across the country and we can finally have our voices heard. The Great College Boycott.

Follow Through

Lately, it seems our government can’t get anything done, while the vast majority of Americans are stuck suffering in a terrible, jobless economy. Understandably, this has caused an upwelling of populist anger against government in general. Mainstream Republicans seem to have conveniently forgotten everything that happened before Obama took office, as if they suddenly woke up from a dream to find themselves in a nightmarish economy complete with burgeoning federal budgets and a Democratic party back to its usual tax and spend policies. Even less mentally stable conservatives have gone so far as to form the Tea Party (ironically, the only tea party ever to occur where manners and civility are fundamentally discouraged), accusing President Obama of being a Marxist, alleging that health care reform is an attack on freedom, and pledging themselves to such erroneous conservatives as Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin.
If the noxious stink of immoral righteousness, racism, hypocrisy, and plain, bare assed foolishness gets any worse (it smells like rendered hot dog fat, old Bibles, canned goods, and gunpowder, by the way), everyone right of center might simply spontaneously combust from sheer hubris. These people obviously have no bearing on reality, and while it’s always fun to list the mistakes of the Bush administration and his Republican Congress (it would be a lot more fun if we weren’t in such deep shit right now), clearly the folks on the right aren’t going to listen—they are simply too deeply ensconced in conservative lore to take an objective view of where we are and how we got here.
So instead, let’s take a different approach. Let’s examine the ideology of the right if it were to be implemented, and try to predict what would happen. It’s an exercise I call “follow through,” and it is an excellent way to separate practical proposals from pleasant sounding but impractical rhetoric.
First of all, conservatives don’t want health care reform. They cite three principal reasons for this: 1) its too expensive, 2) the free market is more efficient than socialism, and 3) it is an attack on freedom. Never mind that every one of these arguments is inherently irrational (1-it would be more expensive, as you will see, to not reform health care; 2-we don’t have a free market health care system; and 3-that is just fucking stupid and only an absolute moron would believe such nonsense)—let’s just go ahead and see what would happen if we don’t reform our health care system.
Yesterday, Anthem Blue Cross, a health insurance company in California, raised its customer’s rates 39 percent—its parent company, Wellpoint, saw its profits rise to over $2.3 billion last quarter. Over the last decade, health care premiums for families have risen 131%, and worker contributions to their premiums have risen 128% according to research by the Kaiser Family Foundation (http://facts.kff.org/chart.aspx?ch=1182). A principle reason that insurance companies can raise rates without consequence is that they currently enjoy an antitrust exemption status, meaning that in most cases there is basically no competition—otherwise, companies like Anthem Blue Cross couldn’t get away with sharply raising their customer’s rates on a whim.
Currently, Republicans and a few conservative Democrats oppose lifting the antitrust exemption for health insurance companies. So, if we follow through with the position of being against health care reform, as Republicans, conservatives, and Tea Partiers say they are, then by default, they are for insurance companies having the right to raise premiums as high and as often as they like. They are also for a ballooning federal deficit (the government already bears a tremendous burden of paying for health care), for making sure that people with disabilities and other pre-existing conditions are denied coverage, for denying coverage to anyone whose employer doesn’t provide it (at $400 a month on average for an individual, and $1000 a month for families, it costs as much to have health insurance as it does to pay rent http://healthinsurance.about.com/b/2009/04/24/poll-shows-the-average-health-insurance-premium-out-of-reach-for-uninsured.htm), and for continuing to let taxpayers cover uninsured users of the system through the absurdly expensive emergency rooms of their local hospitals. By being against health insurance reform, they are in favor of all of those things, an untenable position if they followed through with their argument.
Conservatives are also upset about is government spending. They are mad about the bank bailout (which you may recall, was enacted by Bush http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/24/bush.bailout/index.html, or if you prefer to get your news from Fox http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,428921,00.html), and mad about the federal deficit. Yet, ideologically, Republicans are also in favor of extending the Bush tax cuts, which would further exacerbate the budget shortfall. Moreover, one of the largest sectors of the federal budget is defense spending, and yet, not a single person on the right would dare cut the military. It’s the same with our prison system, the largest, most expensive in the world, and yet conservatives continue to push for longer crime sentences (which have been shown to have almost no effect on crime whatsoever), and refuse to even consider decriminalizing fairly innocuous drugs such as marijuana. Thus, on the one hand, conservatives say they want to cut taxes, and yet, on the other, they clamor for and justify some of the most expensive government programs.
Recently, in Oregon, conservative groups fought diligently against measures 66 and 67, initiatives that made small increases on some corporations and citizens making over $125,000 so that the state could pay for education and other state services. In this particular situation, it sets up a rather disturbing train of thought, which is nothing new: conservatives bashing education, and especially, teachers. But let’s follow this through: what responsible parent would say to their child, “education doesn’t matter, and your teachers are assholes?” Hopefully no one. Yet, that is exactly what conservatives have been doing, and on issues other than education.
Going down the list of ideas and policies conservatives say they believe in, almost every single one is untenable if we “follow through” with logic: they want to privatize social security and at the same time, oppose regulation of the financial system. But where would our society be if we had privatized social security, as Bush proposed, before the financial meltdown in 2008, which was caused, in large degree, by deregulation?
Suppose we outlaw unions, another conservative goal: eventually if we follow that through, without the ability to collectively bargain, teachers, machinists, electricians, plumbers, and other skilled professionals would be forced to work at substandard wages, possibly without proper safety precautions. Over the long run, fewer people would choose to become involved in these careers, leading to a further decline in U.S. manufacturing and education. This is the last thing a struggling economy needs.
Finally, suppose we adhere to the conservative belief in trickle down, or supply side economics. This means that the government cuts taxes on all businesses, and possibly even provides subsidies to support domestic industries. Seems like a sound practice, right? Wrong. Follow through with the idea. Cutting taxes on industry means more money has to come out of the pockets of the lower and middle class to provide revenue for the government to function, or government services, which tend to benefit the middle and lower class, have to be cut.
The money saved by corporations could be used to hire more U.S. workers, or for research and development, which would be good for the economy, but there are a number of other things that might happen to it, including: paying higher dividends to investors, paying higher salaries or awarding bonuses to company executives (see AIG and Goldman Sachs), building, manufacturing, or engineering products overseas and paying foreign employees, or, quite possibly, given the recent supreme court decision to enshrine corporate personhood, spending money on lobbyists or political ads to purchase representatives, senators, and judges of both state and federal government, all of which would be bad for the average American, and bad for our economy.
So while conservatives, Tea Partiers, and Republicans are all up in arms about the current state of our nation, the plain fact is that none of their ideas, nothing in their ideology, is going to make a damn bit of difference when it comes to solving our problems, IF, we follow through with the consequences of such policies.
(Wow, see kiddos, we just deconstructed the entire conservative world view…neat, huh?)