Why must the rich pay all the taxes?

Just because 1 percent of Americans earn over 23 percent of the country's income and 20 percent of Americans earn over 50 percent of the country's income, why should they pay the bulk of taxes?

Just because 40 percent of Americans earn less than 12 percent of the country's income, why should they be exempt from income tax? What are these freeloaders doing to pull our country out of recession and support our wars? The 6.2% they pay for Social Security and the 1.45% they pay for Medicare is a drop in the bucket. Sales and excise taxes don't count because these losers can barely afford to buy anything that's taxed to begin with so their contributions are minimal. Why should they be getting a free ride with earned tax credits and the like on their roughly $4,000-$6,000-a-person income while the wealthiest Americans have to pay up to 35% of their earned income in taxes?

Sure the guys at the top get a lower rate for capital gains and exclusions for dividend income or their municipal bond holdings while the less fortunate have to pay taxes on their pathetic savings account interest, but hey, they're the ones who stimulate our economy - just ask any hedge fund manager or credit default swap trader.

Billionaire Warren Buffet claims he pays one third less tax on his last dollar of income than his secretary does on hers, but I can't figure out if he's bragging or complaining.

What's with this whole Social Security thing anyway? Any fund manager could do a better job managing that money than the federal government. Just ask the guys at Lehman, no I mean Merrill Lynch, no Goldman Sachs... oops, perhaps not the best examples. Kids should be supporting their parents anyway. That's how we used to do things. What's that, the kids can't find jobs and are swamped by education loan debt? Well, life is hard and then you die.

All those lazy out-of-work people are swamping our homeless shelters, soup kitchens and hospital emergency rooms. When are we going to stop giving the American poor a free ride and put them to work cleaning our roads and bridges and public restrooms for room and board? It's not slavery if your intentions are good.

Katie's Walk for Diabetes Cure

In almost every way Katie Wolf is a typical 9 year old girl. But in her short life Katie has has 9,534 pricks to check her blood sugar, 6,056 shots, 416 insulin pump set changes and has had an insulin pump attached to her body for 832 days. Katie has had blood drawn every 3 months.

You see Katie has lived with juvenile diabetes for over 4 years. Katie's dad, Kevin, has lived with juvenile diabetes for 27 years (over 2/3 of his life). Juvenile or Type 1 diabetes is insulin dependant. It is becoming more prevalent than Type 2 diabetes which can often be "fixed" with careful diet and exercise. Type 1 will never be "fixed" without a medical breakthrough/cure which requires substantial and continued financial support. The Juvenile Diabetes Research Fund International is the best hope of finding a cure for this frightening disease for Katie, her Dad, and millions more.

On October 2, 2010, Katie will join fellow "Divabetics" to "Walk to Cure Diabetes" in Ontario, California. To support her courageous effort, click on the Title of this post which will connect you with her fund-raising page. Good luck, Katie!

Perhaps a Beamer?

So I went to the bank to roll over a CD. Could not force myself to lock in less than 1% interest for 9 months. Even if the rates are the same or lower in 9 months, what does it matter? Money sitting in savings accounts, money markets and CD's all over the country is languishing. I know it is important to keep cash on hand for emergencies, but when your banking fees exceed your interest on accounts, a stuffed mattress is more appealing.

What to do?
I could buy some real estate, but I don't know how to manage rental units and don't need (or want) a second home. Besides, I believe the real estate bust is far from over with more unpleasant surprises down the road.

I could invest in stocks. Some are offering dividends that are especially attractive compared with bank accounts. But I am already there as much as I want to be right now. I no longer trust the companies I invest in. They lie on their balance sheets, they lie to their shareholders, they gift wrap any company profits and lovingly bestow them on their risk-taking management teams, adamantly resist any temptation to reinvest profits back into their companies and thrill Wall Street by laying off experienced workforces that will be difficult to replace when (if) the economy recovers.

There are always U. S. Treasuries, a great favorite right now. So popular are they the interest rates are at historic lows and the opportunity for erosion of capital (known as risk to the more blunt among us) is uncomfortably high.

On the other hand...
That 328i in the BMW lot looked awful cute. I wonder how it handles? What harm could an little test drive do?

Senate Blocks Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell

[Click on the post title for source article.]

So the Senate voted to block debate on the annual authorization of military programs, largely to prevent ending Don't Ask Don't Tell. Arkansas Democratic senators Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor voted with the Republicants to deprive supporters of a filibuster proof majority.

Is ending Don't Ask Don't Tell a liberal agenda item? You betcha. The policy is poorly conceived, unevenly implemented and based upon the premise that a group of people should live a lie. Liberals refuse to believe THAT is the American way.

This is a civil rights issue - equal protection under the law. Don't Ask Don't Tell is particularly invidious because it forces gays to live a lie and even then does not guarantee them protection. The law codifies discrimination and legitimizes sexual harassment.

Why is Tolerance a Lightning Rod?

Why do the intolerant react with rage to positions of tolerance? I do not know. But taking such positions opens one up to vicious, frightening attacks. The only change in the 40 years since the incident below is the unlikelihood the epithet "nigger lover" would be used today. And I am not totally sure about that. Much as I hate writing that term, those were the words that were used.

On the Workboat to Liberty Island - 1970
Tolerance spoke softly, gently, in self-effacing terms,
Tuned thoughtfully to her companion - intolerance.
Foolishly depending upon vagueness and half-hearted accommodation,
To ALL others.

As a tiny match ignites the forest,
Did soft-spoken hints at difference
Fuse the explosion - of bigotry.

Two needles sprang into
The pale blue eyes of hate.
Instant comprehension of the hackneyed phrase -
"If looks could kill."
Could? Something died.

Tolerance cringed in fear before,
Naked eyes of hooded demons.
"Are you a nigger lover?" screamed the man (?)
"There are two sides..." she stammered.
"Are you a nigger lover, slut?"

Crushing, crashing down, she fled in terror
From the man -

There was left the inescapable.
The knowledge -
Of night riders; Gestapo; inquisition;
The inviability of tolerance,
Which, accommodating intolerance,
Is raped and murdered in her bed by
The guest who accommodates nothing.

Written February 8, 1977, seven years after the incident.

Elizabeth Warren Named "Advisor"

Pragmatism trumped valor, and quite possibly political acumen, when President Obama named Elizabeth Warren an "advisor" to the President and the Treasury Secretary, rather than Director of the newly formed Consumer Protection Bureau. While I understand the President's reluctance to take on a tough Senate confirmation fight, I cannot help but wish he had chosen that route. A Senate hearing would have been illuminating and I do not believe it would have been a bad thing for the underdog Democrats heading into a challenging election season.

Warren, who is detested by financial industry insiders, has garnered wide support among consumer advocates for her stand against the big guys in her position as Director of the Congressional TARP Oversight Commission.

The same New York Times article that reported her appointment [click on this post's title for the link] reported: "The favorite among administration officials [for the position of Bureau Director] is Michael S. Barr, an assistant secretary of Treasury for financial institutions who is an authority on financial regulation and on services for low and moderate-income households." [We have seen how well Treasury has served THAT constituency.] Additionally, the article said, "Privately, Mr. Geithner [Wall Street's darling] promoted Mr. Barr for the consumer post."

The article further mentioned Mr. Geithner's apparent pleasure at the appointment.

Just when I thought the Obama Administration might be developing some spine.

Our President might do well to heed the words of country singer Aaron Tippin: "You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything."

Moderates March on Washington?

Last night Daily Show host Jon Stewart unveiled his plan for a "Million Moderate March on Washington."
The date: October 30, 2010
The place: The Mall in Washington D.C.
The goal: "Let's take it down a notch, America."

Click on the post title for details.

Stewart, whose Daily Show is characterized by impeccable research, specializes in pinpointing the lies, inconsistencies and foibles of politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle and the mainstream media with irreverent hilarity. Stewart wants to restore sanity to the nation's discourse. He will be joined in the effort by his Comedy Central colleague, Stephen Colbert (pronounced Col-bare). Colbert, who purports to be ultra-conservative, will be vying for supporters with his "Freak out for Freedom, America" message.

I have never attended a major demonstration, but this one is tempting. Night after night, I stay up late to catch my daily dose of sanity and humor from Jon Stewart.

Hmmm, a million moderates? Surely there are AT LEAST that many left?

Elizabeth Warren for Consumer Protection

I heard a pundit insist Elizabeth Warren should not head up the new Consumer Protection Agency because she does not have a background in the financial industry. This is a problem why? As head of the Congressional Oversight Committee for the TARP, she certainly has not demonstrated any lack of understanding about the industry. Of course the industry has found her persistence in seeking accounting for its use of those funds somewhat off-putting.

I also heard the complaint she is too widely supported by consumer advocates. This is a bad thing? I have not noticed a shortage of policy makers from the financial industry in the Obama Administration.

Bloomberg.com http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-15/obama-said-to-consider-installing-elizabeth-warren-at-treasury.html reports that rather than appoint Warren head of the new agency, which would require a difficult approval process in the U. S. Senate, the Administration is considering naming her a counselor of Treasury Secretary (and financial industry insider) Timothy Geithner. She would be Geithner's subordinate. Geithner's opposition to Warren has been widely reported. As head of the new agency, she have far more independence. Theoretically Warren would still be responsible for getting the new agency off the ground. The banking industry is far more supportive of this approach. I do NOT find this reassuring. Sounds like a plan to neutralize one of the most dedicated (and outspoken) financial reformers in the country.

The director of the Consumer Protection Agency should be a consumer activist. Otherwise, what is its purpose? I am convinced Warren would look out for my interests, not the industry's and for this nomination the Administration should pull out all the stops.

Divide and Suppress

During an interview on NPR this morning, I heard that 49% of Americans have an unfavorable view of Islam. American Muslims are treading carefully on the eve of this 9/11. The end of Ramadan ushers in a three-day holiday. Because it includes 9/11 this year, Muslims are toning down their holiday celebrations.

Thursday vandals wrote racist graffiti on the wall of the Hudson Islamic Center. People immediately said "They must have been from outside the city," or "They are probably mentally challenged." The instinctive reaction was only outsiders would behave so badly and a refusal to confront the potential for darkness within their own community. This morning three young men were arrested for the crime. They were residents of Hudson. No mention was made of their mental condition.

We live in a media-fueled climate of racism and extremism - against Hispanics, against Muslims, against non-Christians, against less fundamentalist Christians. Interaction between Democrats and Republicans reflects intolerance rather than a will to wisely govern.

Nurturing discord benefits those who would keep the American people weakened and underfoot. It's working far too well.

To Tax or not to Tax

The Bush Era tax cuts were supposed to stimulate the economy and spread the wealth. They succeeded in the former and failed in the latter. Even their success as economic stimulus comes into question. The boom earlier in the decade had more to do with the illusion property values would rise forever and the creation of esoteric financial instruments that hid the rot in the system until the structure collapsed than with real economic growth. The very wealthy did get wealthier. The rest of us got poorer, many got much, much poorer.

While our nation's wealth migrated to huge corporations and the super-rich who controlled them, the government amassed enormous budget deficits. Government expenditures, including two very costly wars, were made with borrowed money. The results weakened the core of the nation's financial structure and could not continue.

Proclaiming the Republicans or the Democrats caused the deficits does not fix the problem. Cutting taxes will not fix the problem. Maintaining current spending levels will not fix the problem.

None of the solutions are palatable. Postponing action will only worsen the problem. Letting the tax cuts' sunset provisions take effect is only a start.

Our nation needs policies that nurture American self-sufficiency instead of stifling it. It cannot sustain a system in which it imports far more goods that it exports. While this works very well for corporations that continue to off-shore production and jobs, it is disastrous for the country. It makes it less diversified, increases its indebtedness, increases unemployment, robs it of the fruits of its innovations and drastically lowers its standard of living and economic security.

Our nation needs to build on the strengths of its citizens, not pander to their weaknesses; leave the era of factionalism and recommit to working together to forge a stronger, better integrated society. If sacrifice is asked of us, there must be corresponding benefits and the sacrifice must be evenly spread across all economic levels.

Complaints of a Liberal Elitist

Why Liberals Need to Draw a Line in the Sand
We got a massive bailout of the very rich, lackluster stimulus funds bogged down with bureaucratic red tape for the rest of us. Our tax system encourages the constant flow of wealth away from the middle and working classes to the super rich.

We got a national health care bill that curtails a woman's right to choose, transfers more of the nation's wealth to the insurance companies, places a heavy burden on small employers and forces citizens to buy over-priced product from private-sector companies.

Despite financial reform, credit card companies continue to charge usurious interest rates, banks continue to fleece depositors with outrageous fees and savers get barely visible returns on their deposits.

When corporations seek Chapter 11 protection to "reorganize," taking out small shareholders and debt holders and relieving themselves of pension liabilities, it is considered savvy financial management. When homeowners walk away from mortgages they can no longer afford (no Chapter 11-style reorganization available to them), they are considered dishonest free loaders who violated "sacred" contracts. The Secretary of the Treasury is a tax evader who, when he finally paid them, faced none of the consequences ordinary tax payers have to face.

Ending "don't ask don't tell," keeps getting put on the back burner. Guantanamo Bay remains open. Corporations have achieved the legal status of citizens. Acorn was destroyed but Goldman Sachs flourishes.

Our prisons are privatized and our infrastructure is being sold off. Much of our precious water supply is owned by Nestles, a Swiss corporation with a questionable human rights record.

Oil companies rule. While China develops renewable energy technologies, we contemplate our navels.

The media labels conservative Democrats "moderate" and liberals are termed "activists." The media is controlled by a handful of conglomerates whose very existence violates antitrust laws.

Our leaders preach the importance of small business and let the big guys undersell them into receivership, swallow up their assets and innovations, and raise prices.

The poor are blamed for the depredations of the rich. Hardworking Americans impoverish themselves acquiring college educations, then cannot get jobs.

Politicians praise American initiative and self sufficiency while individual citizens are prevented from participating in disaster abatement and big corporations are allowed to buy up and bury the technologies (or export them to other countries) that might reignite our economy.

While Republicans catered to their base, Democrats threw meager bones to theirs, assuming "liberals" had no place else to go. That "no place" threatens to include the polls in November.

Yeah, liberals need to draw a line in the sand.

Owning a Small Business

It's all about eking out your cash flow, robbing Peter to pay Paul, trying to collect your receivables so you can pay your payables. Every government report you are required to complete subtracts from your bottom line. Every insurance policy you must carry costs money for a bet against yourself. Debt is terrifying. It limits your flexibility to control expenses during product cycles, economic downturns or in the face of competition from larger, more diversified companies. It increases your cost of goods sold. Without borrowing, your business probably will never get out of the starting gate. Even with it, failure is common. Most small businesses fail within the first five years.

If you are sued, and this is a litigious society, you retain a lawyer. This is expensive. It costs money you will not see again, no matter the outcome of the suit. If you lose, you and your business could well end up bankrupt. If the suit is covered by one of your insurance policies, defense will be handled by the insurance company, which usually will settle, no matter how frivolous the complaint, in order to control cost. This opens wide a door to those adept at "gaming" the system.

Common wisdom assumes persons who own their own businesses are wealthy. Sometimes they are; however most small business owners struggle. They work long, arduous hours at wages no union worker would accept; try to maintain compliance with a regulatory maze larger companies have entire departments to deal with; and carry their business problems home every night. There is no shutting the door on the office for the small business owner.

Why do it? To be your own boss. To be self-sufficient. To have at least the chance to do things your way. To work at something you actually enjoy doing.

Why did we invade Iraq?

War is the continuation of diplomacy using other means, Carl von Clausewitz.

Why did our leaders decide to invade Iraq? Since the public is never trusted with the full picture, what follows is speculation.

Iraq probably seemed like a sure thing, a no-brainer.

1. Despite the absence of evidence of WMD, Saddam's posturing made their existence appear highly likely.
2. In a region dominated by religious states, Iraq was secular. The possibility of religious factionalism must have been judged remote.
3. Iraq was governed by an extremely unpopular tyrant.
4. Iraq had rich oil fields.

I believe Cheney, Rumsfeld and company were convinced our forces would be hailed as liberators, Saddam would be toppled, a stable, friendly regime quickly put in place and lo and behold, we would have a solid ally (i.e. client state?) in a dangerous corner of the world, a strong base from which to combat radical Islamic terrorism and preferred access to all those lovely oil reserves.

Did any of these reasons justify the war? I certainly don't think so and didn't then. I believe going to war in Iraq was one of the worst foreign policy decisions this country ever made. This disastrous decision was made worse by the incredible incompetency of its execution.

Execution of the War
None of the civilians planning and starting the war had military or combat experience. Colin Powell, who did, was sidelined, then co-opted, then again sidelined. Generals who disagreed with the tactical and strategic methodologies of the invasion received short shrift -- many were reassigned or were forced into or opted for early retirement.

A pity none of the civilians had read Sun Tzu or Carl von Clausewitz or had a background in military history. Even a good football coach knows that the best game plans rarely survive the first set of downs. Absolutely no flexibility to adapt to the unexpected was built into the campaign. Suggestions by commanders in the field for adjustments to conditions on the ground were adamantly resisted by Rumsfeld's War Department.

I reiterate my point in an earlier blog, successful civilian oversight of the military requires civilian commanders who are well educated in military matters. Otherwise they enter war room briefings unequipped to make good decisions. If they wait until they take office, it is too late. Events will overtake them.

Study of history and civics is absolutely essential to a viable society.

Bill of Rights: VII, VIII, IX, X

These seem more open to different interpretations that I through VI.

Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The Iraq Combat Mission is Over

Last night President Obama addressed the nation regarding the end of the combat mission in Iraq. It was not a victory speech, because there was no victory. Thousands of U. S. soldiers died, tens of thousands were critically wounded, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died.

Did the conflict make us safer from terrorism? On the contrary, it probably made us more vulnerable by increasing hatred of the U. S. and making a dangerous corner of the globe less stable. Yes, the vicious dictator Saddam Hussein was removed. But nothing better has replaced him. Iraqi infrastructure was destroyed. A secular society devolved into one torn by factional religious hatred. The country could still descend into civil war. Iran lies dangerously positioned on the Iraqi border.

Did the war bring us assets? It drained our treasury and limited our ability to deal with problems at home. It did nothing to decrease our dependence upon unfriendly countries for our oil. The only beneficiaries were the companies that supplied the materials and manpower needed to wage it.

What happens if Iran invades Iraq or, more likely, manages to insert itself into the Iraqi political process?

Iraq. Let there be no mistake. We broke it. We could not fix it.
I hope it's over.