The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
A Bridge Blog
Assigning blame since April 20, 2007

War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, Trillion Dollar Deficits are Responsibility

Print the article

This entry was posted on 3/1/2009 12:06 PM and is filed under uncategorized.

I've been following the discussion around Obama's budget, a document entitled A New Era of Responsibility ... Renewing America's Promise.  I'm appalled at the recklessness of the thing.  Obama seems to be banking on the Big Lie theory, that people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one.  His projections of massive and unprecedented deficits as far as the eye can see are utter madness.

We already know what works.  We have Clinton's presidency to show us the way.  The wealthy need to pay their fair share.  The government needs to look for ways to economize.  Obama had an unprecedented opportunity to show political courage, ask for shared sacrifice, and really revolutionize America.  Instead he's ensuring America's decline under an ocean of debt.

Unfortunately, there is no coherent and principled opposition to the thing.  Republicans' hypocrisy and decline into fascism over the last 8 years has left them, as I saw someone describe it on Meet the Press this morning, like a bunch of eunuchs at the Playboy mansion, analyzing and observing the events around them, while unable to participate.

If I were the declarer in chief, here's how I'd play Obama's hand:

Roll back the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy yesterday.  Especially the inheritance tax.

I hear the opposition: 'You don't raise taxes in a recession.'  Yeah, well you don't lower taxes when you're at war, either, but somehow that argument fell on deaf ears over the last 7 years.  Allowing billionaires who die in 2010 to pass on their entire vast fortunes tax-free is insane and irresponsible in a time of financial crisis.  Give them a generous 10 or even 20 million dollar exemption and then tax the rest at a healthy 40 or 50%.  Raise the top marginal rate back to 39.6%.  Even at that level it's somewhat on the low side, but at least it gets you back into the right ballpark.

Stop letting insolvent banks hold our economy hostage and bleed our economy dry.

I was watching Bill Moyers last night and finally heard from someone who made some sense on the banking crisis.  Regulators need to assess the solvency of each bank.  Obama should insist that the directors/management of all insolvent banks tender their resignations (not that he will necessarily accept them all.)  Stockholders in insolvent banks must not be bailed out.  Their shares are worthless because the underlying entity is insolvent.  The government should take over each bank as it defaults on its obligations, if it can't be arranged to do so sooner.  The government should recapitalize the banks and then resell them back to the market.

Freeze military spending.

There's probably more waste, fraud and abuse in the department of defense budget than in all other departments put together.  Smart people should be able to figure out how to keep America safe with a budget that's only 5 times as much as the world's next most expensive military budget.  I'm all for paying soldiers more.  But corrupt folks like Blackwater and Halliburton need to be investigated for fraud and the era of no-bid contracts needs to come to an end.  Obsolete military programs need to be shelved.  Obsolete military bases need to be closed.  Unnecessary wars and foreign occupations need to responsibly and swiftly end.

Don't increase education spending, spend education money more wisely.

Do you want the world's most brilliant citizenry?  Here's my plan:  Make broadband Internet available to every American.  You can profitably mass-produce a cheap net-ready workstation for under $200 each.  If you gave one to EVERY American, that'd be a paltry $60 billion.  Focus on young people of lower socioeconomic means and I'm sure you could provide near-universal access for one tenth that amount.  Make online videos/classes and testing on virtually every academic subject under the sun available for low cost to all and for free to those of limited means.  I don't understand why you can't have the best teachers in America make videos of their classes, make them available to America's families, and get Americans thinking again.  I'd love a Harvard education, whether I have some piece of paper on my wall that cost me $200,000 or not.  It really isn't that complicated.

Gut the budget for the Department of Homeland Security.

It's up to the CIA and the DoD to prevent a terrorist from smuggling a dirty bomb into this country or from using cyber-terrorism to cripple this country's technological infrastructure and bring it to its knees (a more likely and dangerous threat, imo.)  If you want to see colored lights and whatnot, go to your nearest intersection.  As for natural disasters, people need to relearn the lesson that decisions have consequences.  That if you build a city below sea level you're periodically going to get wet and that if you live in an area prone to hurricanes, it's up to you to either build structures capable of withstanding them or footing the cost of rebuilding.  They also need to learn the lesson that living in fear of terrorism or getting hit by lightning or by a plane that falls from the sky and hits your house just isn't rational and there needs to be a sane balance between expenses incurred and lives saved.

Raise the age at which you qualify for social security benefits.

Social security is a Ponzi scheme.  Always has been.  A racist and sexist one at that (discriminating against blacks and males, who tend to die significantly younger than their non-black/female counterparts.)  But at least when it was created, the life expectancy tables meant that it wouldn't be an excessively onerous financial burden (the average life expectancy in 1930 was 58 for men and 62 for women.) http://www.ssa.gov/history/lifeexpect.html  That's no longer true.  Fix it.

Health care.

Give the AMA and the insurance industry a chance to propose a plan that will insure all Americans without raising our current health care spending a dime.  If they fail/refuse, go to a single-payer model like the rest of the civilized world has done long ago.  We pay massively more per capita than any other country and yet tens of millions are uninsured.  The market model has failed in health care.  It's time to accept that and move to something that works.  More money (as Obama has proposed) is not the answer.  We spend too much already.

Tax carbon.

It was the right idea when I first heard of it in 1992.  It's the right idea today.  Nobody has the right to pollute my environment without paying me for the damage they have caused.  As the old native American saying goes, 'We don't inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.'  Americans need to be given a reality check when it comes to the true cost of energy.  That will spur conservation and increased investment in renewables.

End the 'War on Drugs'

The widespread incarceration of non-violent offenders is one of the great human rights travesties of all time.  I'd put it on par with slavery in terms of its destructiveness to our society and our moral fabric.  People have the inalienable right to dominion over their own physical person.  That includes ingesting substances that others deem harmful. 

Stop subsidizing breeding

As the world population approaches 7 billion people, I don't think the problem is that there's not enough folks. 

 
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments

    • 3/3/2009 1:34 PM Mary wrote:
      You aren't the only one not terribly happy w/our new president's plans; good to see you're as, um......unrestrained with your convictions as always...
      Reply to this
    • 3/4/2009 2:57 PM Wayne wrote:
      Hey Jon

      Good to see you back blogging. You may as well propose a plan for peace in the Middle East while you're at it.

      Basically, I agree with all your points except the second last one. If all the drug users were recreational users who were productive members of society, you would have a valid point, but unfortunately, this is not so. The vast majority of the illicit drug users do not have the economic means to support the activity and so they turn to a multitude of other crimes, often violent, against many segments of society to pay for their drug use.

      Organizations involved in the drug trade are often better equipped than the enforcement agencies charged with attempting to stop them. War on drugs is actually the right term, because, believe me, it is a war in every sense of the word.
      Reply to this
    • 3/5/2009 12:31 PM Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
      Mary - Welcome ... long time. Divided government works best. Checks and balances, etc. Unfortunately the Republican party is still not run by grown-ups. I look forward to the day when it is again.

      Wayne - I couldn't disagree with you more. Prohibition always creates more problems than it solves.

      War on Drugs

      Pros:

      1. MIGHT cause a handful of people whose lives would be hampered by drug use to decide not to try them at all.

      Cons:

      1. The biggest CON for me is that it robs people of their liberty. People have the right to make bad decisions. There is nothing more totalitarian/Big Brother/nanny-state than for some shmuck who is talented at appealing to the ignorant masses to deign to tell me that he has the authority to tell me what I can and cannot ingest. It robs me of my freedom and sets a dangerous precedent for what a government can and cannot dictate to the governed. At least when prohibition was passed, Congress had sufficient integrity/wisdom to realize that such an abrogation of individual liberty would require, at a minimum, a constitutional amendment. Unfortunately, most people are too ignorant to realize that if you don't exercise your freedom and insist on your freedom, you will lose your freedom.

      2. Causes horrendous violence related to the production and distribution of the product. Once you make drugs illegal, there is no more disincentive for those who grow/manufacture and distribute drugs from acting in the most violent way imaginable in order to maximize their profits. Since the sale of the product is a felony, once you choose to sell drugs there's no disincentive to killing your competitors, law enforcement officers or innocent bystanders or to marketing your product to minors.

      3. Costs gobs of money that could be spent far more productively. From the cost of prisons (and the lifelong cost of feeding/housing all these people you convict) to the cost of judges/lawyers to the loss of significant tax revenues (I'm all for taxing the bejeesus out of them once you decriminalize them) to the cost of law enforcement, the War on Drugs flushes hundreds of billions down the toilet that could be spent on education, health care, or investigating and prosecuting REAL crimes.

      4. Contributes to the spread of horrible diseases like AIDS and Hepatitis.

      5. Leads to increasing potency/toxicity/tainting of drugs, resulting in tragic consequences.

      Oh, I just thought of one more pro. If the drug war had been fought a little more competently, George Bush, former coke fiend, might have been convicted of a felony or two and never would have been permitted to destroy the American economy and way of life. Then we'd be able to afford to continue the drug war for another decade or two whether it makes sense to or not. Unfortunately, it wasn't and we can't.
      Reply to this
      1. 3/5/2009 2:23 PM Wayne wrote:
        Good points, all. But in your first post you didn't expand on the idea in this way. So, first you need to legalize and then take control of distribution. Once you have that in place, you set up quality control, pricing structures and arrange to have the profits taxed. And you need do so in such a way that you take distribution out of the hands of the drug lords. Then you have a viable model. Unfortunately, I don't believe that the current distributors will go quietly into the night and let the Government take over.
        Even after all this, you don't have a way to address the types of street crime that go on so that the product users can afford their indulgences. Unfortunately, most of the users will still be economically disadvantaged and will continue to fund the habit through illegal activities. Convince me that you can solve that part of the problem and you get my support.
        And THEN give me the plan you owe me to have peace in the Middle East
        Reply to this
        1. 3/8/2009 11:59 AM Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
          Wayne -

          I don't think any of the obstacles you mention are particularly problematic. If you offer people a safer and legal alternative at comparable prices, they'll choose it.  Will those distribution centers have to be well secured?  Definitely.  Will some people commit crimes to fund their drug habit?  Sure.  But now governments will have far more resources at their disposal to combat that problem. The biggest obstacles are public ignorance resulting from decades of grossly misleading government propaganda and a lack of political will.

          As for peace in the middle east, the US needs to be an honest broker. As long as Israel is given carte blanche to ignore UN council resolutions, to encroach into areas beyond their internationally recognized borders and to practice apartheid against the Palestinians, the Palestinians will continue to resist with the only means at their disposal, as I believe would most people under similar circumstances. I'm in agreement with the gist of this letter, which perhaps we can use as a point of reference: http://www.mediamonitors.net/michaelsladah&suleimaniajlouni1.html#israelsdefiedresolutions
          Reply to this
          1. 3/10/2009 8:18 AM Wayne wrote:
            That letter is a great reference resource. Nice job. Most folks have no idea that Israel has been the main culprit in discord in the Middle East.
            In fact, when Israel was created in 1948, they immediately took an additional 50% of what was then Palestine, by force.

            Ironically, in 1968, while in high school, I participated in a model U.N. Assembly as United Arab Republic and sponsored a resolution that got the Assembly to kick Israel out of the U.N. for violating all of the Resolutions from 1967 and the first half of 1968 that are quoted in the link you posted. It was all in fun, of course, but researching it at the time really opened my eyes to what was really going on there.

            Anyways, now that we have solved a large part of the world's economic and social problems, we should get back to playing a little bridge.
            See you on BridgeBase

            cheers
            Reply to this
            1. 3/12/2009 10:39 AM Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
              Wayne -

              I'm not sure about giving Israel the 'main culprit' tag. I can relate to both sides in the conflict. As I understand it, various promises were made to both sides by the colonial powers (Britain/France) who divided up the middle east after WWI.

              Winning a war has traditionally allowed you to annex territory (and to write the history books.) See just about every non-ocean border in the world today. Was it 'fair' to the 80% Muslim population of Palestine 100 years ago that over the course of the next 50 years a bunch of Europeans would flood in, kill/displace them, take their land and demote them to second-class citizen status? No. It wasn't 'fair' to the Native Americans either when that was done to them. Does that mean you're hopping on a boat and going back to Europe, Wayne? Killing people and taking their stuff is in our DNA.

              Did you happen to read the quote at the bottom of the letter I cited? I didn't notice it until we started this comment-exchange. I rather like it:

              "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."

              - Samuel P. Huntington

              Very true, my only quibble would be that non-westerners would have done the same if they had the opportunity.
              Reply to this
      2. 3/6/2009 2:20 PM Mary wrote:
        Jon, I wonder if you might explain how the financial institutions failed so miserably and whose to blaim? I think I'll understand your writing better than what I've read and heard. If you don't feel like blogging it - just ignore this comment. Thanks!
        Reply to this
        1. 3/8/2009 12:27 PM Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
          Mary -

          Sorry to disappoint you, but I can't give you more than an educated guess as to blame for the financial meltdown. I didn't see it coming. But if I wanted to find the culprit, here are some areas I'd look:

          1. Compensation pegged to quarterly results, leading to high-risk behavior.

          Smart people should have figured out long ago how to compensate management in a way that encourages them to act in the long-term best interests of their companies.

          2. Deregulation

          Many people, myself included, bought into the 'Cult of the Market' idea that the market could self-regulate, and that generally speaking, government regulation was a bad thing. This crisis has proven otherwise.

          3. Complexity

          Nobody likes to admit that they're not smart enough to understand something. When you're tasked with valuing assets and you're not even sure what those assets are, you've got a recipe for disaster.

          4. Conflicts of interest

          As we learned in business school, auditors are in the very uncomfortable position of having to choose between pleasing their clients and serving their fiduciary responsibility to the public. I suspect that too often, motivated by greed, they sided with their clients.
          Reply to this
    • 3/9/2009 6:57 PM Mary wrote:
      Jonathan, I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts. I just feel like the more I absorb what has happened, the sadder and angrier I get...and I'm fearful for the next several years for our country.
      Reply to this
    • 4/1/2009 5:18 AM Benoit Lessard wrote:
      The best suggestions ive seen in 2009.

      Inheritance and carbon taxes are a must.

      I suggest however cuts instead of freeze in the military. With the failures of Vietnam, Irak and Afghanistan I think the problem is political and management not lack of money.

      War on drugs should be only on hard drugs, legalizing everything that is less problematic then alcohol (canabis ectasy) is surely the way to go.

      Subsidizing breeding is economically unsound because you can get cheaper and already "formed" citizen with immigration. But there nothing better for social cohesion than breeding. So here i could go either way.

      Bailing banks and cars manufacturors is plain dumb. If they are in the red than the shares are worthless. Buy back for peanuts fusion them and resell on the market.
      Reply to this
    • 4/24/2009 3:29 PM Jonathan Ferguson wrote:
      Hi Benoit, thanks for the feedback.

      Why haven't there been any really huge wars between major powers since WWII? I'd argue that a great deal of credit should go to the US military leviathan. It's a tremendous deterrent. So I'd stand by my'freeze but don't cut' recommendation, even leaving political considerations aside.

      I'd much rather see a war on ignorance than a war on any drugs, hard or soft. If educated and informed citizens still want to use crack or heroin, fine by me, good way to usher them out of the gene pool.

      Show me a company that's 'too big to fail' and I'll show you a company that's too big. Just think of the hundreds of car manufacturers in this country that have gone bankrupt due to good-old competition with GM, Ford and Chrysler. That's the way markets work. I concur completely with you here.
      Reply to this
    Leave a comment

    Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

     Enter the above security code (required)

     Name

     Email (will not be published)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.