Category Archives: Politics

Internet ‘kill switch’ bill reintroduced as Egypt remains dark

Sen. Collins said the bill would not allow the President to deactivate the Internet in whole or in part during times of political unrest or protest – just during a “cyber emergency,” according to Wired.com.

“My legislation would provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency,” Collins said in an e-mailed response to Wired.com last week. “It would give our nation the best tools available to swiftly respond to a significant threat.”

via Internet ‘kill switch’ bill reintroduced as Egypt remains dark.

Any bets that a time of political unrest or protest won’t be labeled “cyber emergency”?

I think it would be more appropriate to up a domain where the folks afraid of cyber-terrorists can hide and if the cyber emergency happens then they can be unplugged, leaving the rest of us bereft of their presence.

Fair is Fair

I heard someone ask the other ” What was fair?”. They were referring to the ‘tax cuts’  and the idea of letting the high income folks move back to the pre-Bush rates while the lower income folks stayed at the Bush rates. Was this ‘Fair’?

In my view, letting higher income earners pay taxes at a higher rate commensurate with the higher income is more than fair.  One of the primary reasons these people have such a high income is because the government has built an infrastructure that provides for them. We have regulatory agencies that provide a a safe and stable commercial environment.  We have troops stationed around the world, fighting in foreign countries, trying to maintain a safe and stable political environment.  Our government manages to maintain a safe and stable personal environment for most of its citizens, allowing them to direct their energies to personal growth and achievement rather than to day-to-day survival (I said most.) This all requires an infrastructure paid for by our taxes.

Over the past few years,  the national infrastructure has become suspect. Debts and deficits have risen because no one seems to think they should pay for all this infrastructure, and so, the infrastructure is weakening.

TAANSTAAFL.

What is fair is that the folks whom benefit the most from this infrastructure pay the most for it. And it isn’t like anyone who makes more than another should  take home less than someone who makes less. Additional taxes are applied to the the monies earned over and above the threshold level. Someone making $1,000,001 pretax is still taking home more after tax than someone making $1,000,000 pretax.  Until the infrastructure is repaired, those that have reaped the benefits of the past should continue to make it right for the future.

The ones trampled by the infrastructure shouldn’t be expected to pay for it. Effectively, they can’t pay for it.  The infrastructure should provide the all of society the opportunity to grow and prosper and it doesn’t always catch everyone equally. I am sure that most people would rather make $1,000,000 a year and pay some taxes than make $10,000 a year and not have to pay taxes.

So let the ones who profit from our society pay for it.  Not only is this fair;  it is equitable.

VAT

I have seen some talk about implementing a Value Added Tax in the US. The VAT taxes at each stage of the production process.  The manufacturer pays a VAT, the wholesaler pays a VAT, the retailer pays  a VAT and the consumer pays a VAT. The final price  of a product includes the VAT.  I have seen the VAT in other countries and sometimes I even remember to send in the forms to get my tourist refund. The major issue with a national VAT in the US is that it will require a constitutional amendment to implement and I don’t see that happening.

On general principle I don’t want the VAT to cover Food, Health, Shelter or Education (once the item  is identified as such- we don’t know the lumber is part of a shelter until it actually goes into a shelter. Food is interesting – is it going to a food prep service (reseller) or to a final consumer?  Everything else, services and goods, can be covered by the VAT, although I suppose an argument can be made that Newspapers should also be exempt, but they will be extinct soon enough.

But if that unlikely event does happen, how does that work with the state taxes? If the national VAT is 20%, would goods in NH sell with a 20% premium and goods in NJ sell at + 27% and Chicago at +31%? I favor  the idea of making a flat national VAT  and splitting 50% of the take with the local jurisdictions. The States, Cities, Counties and RTAs can figure out how to split it up. And what about all those excise taxes and surtaxes? Those hotel users have to pay more than their share.

One of the side benefits of a VAT is the option to get rid of the penny. If posted prices include VAT, the retailers can set their prices to nice round numbers and we won’t need pennies anymore. Hooray!

Deficit Shmeficit

I have solved the Deficit! (Courtesy of the New York Times. ) And I even started paying down the debt! Piece of cake.

Of course, they only offered options that have already been discussed and weren’t throwing out new options.

I would like to simplify the income system to provide a single deduction for everyone, like the top of the 2nd quintile of income – currently about $35K – and then everyone pays 20% of their income greater than that, incrementing by 1%  for each step of the median household income – currently about $50K -up to a total of 55%.

I would also not allow any corporation to deduct any annual compensation in excess of the President’s annual salary as an expense. The corporation will need to treat such excessive compensation as profit and pay corporate taxes on it.

Basically, we the people dug a very big fiscal hole for ourselves over the past two generations and we need to start paying it back. If we want to add new services like universal health care, we the people need to be prepared to pay for it.

I saw somewhere that the US Personal Income is $14T and annual Employee Compensation is about $8T. Using these as ballpark figures, since everyone seems to have their own numbers, with our annual national health care costs running to $2.5T, we can impose a 30% payroll tax that goes exclusively to health care. None of putting these monies into the general funds. They are intended for health care and they stay in health care. (We ought to do the same with the Social Security monies as well.)  Then we implement a single payer system; everyone is covered by health care and the employers, who are contributing 50% of the payroll tax, can get out of the health care insurance business.  And when the medical costs plummet to more reasonable rates in a few years, the payroll tax can be reduced as well. The tax is meant to cover the annual medical costs, not run as a trust fund accumulating cash for future needs.

Building Walls

From Thomas Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists, Jan 1, 1802

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

I think this draws a pretty strong link between the establishment clause of the first amendment and the phrase “separation of church and state”, although some anal types will argue that he said ‘between’ not ‘of”. 

I think that many Republican candidates are unclear on the concept of ‘concept’. Delaware, Delaware, Colorado, Nevada.

I see Daily Kos has some links to Republicans in their own words, but here I wonder about ‘context’ more than ‘concept’

Cheap-Labor Conservatives

I read Paul Krugman’s column on our future prosperity, and then found that Avedon had also read and commented on it along with some links to other commentors. One of the best I saw was about cheap-labor conservatives.

Work cheap or starve, a motto to live by.

These cheap-labor conservatives should read the mission statement for the United States sometime. It’s right there in the first paragraph of the Constitution –  after “We the People of the United States, in Order to”.

  • form a more perfect Union,
  • establish Justice,
  • insure domestic Tranquility,
  • provide for the common defence,
  • promote the general Welfare, and
  • secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

and ends “do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

About the only mission they seem to care for is to provide for the common defence, because there is money to be made there.

What a Waste

Each year, the federal government wastes billions of American taxpayers’ dollars on improper payments to individuals, organizations, and contractors.  These are payments made in the wrong amounts, to the wrong person, or for the wrong reason.  In 2009, improper payments totaled $98 billion, with $54 billion stemming from Medicare and Medicaid.  We cannot afford nor should we tolerate this waste of taxpayer dollars and in our health care system.

From the White House

Let’s see, $3,830 Billion budget –  $98 Billion waste. That’s about  2.6% percent waste. Not the best of numbers, but certainly not worth going into a paralytic fury about.  I suppose it is easier for some people to grasp a much smaller number than the almost $4 trillion dollar federal budget. Why not allocate another $1 Billion to Inspector General offices to reduce the waste. If they can reduce the waste by 2% or more they more than pay for them selves.

The 2011 Medicare/Medicaid budget seems to be about $755 Billion. with $54 Billion in waste that is over 7% fraud. HHS is planning to increase their Fraud unit budget $250 million in 2011 to $561 million. Maybe that will reduce the waste a bit.

That leaves $44 Billion in waste for the remaining $3075 Billion  budget, or 1.4% waste.

I was going through the federal budget looking to see who had Inspectors General in their budget items. I was surprised to see that not all departments have an Inspector General. Especially surprised the Department of the Interior doesn’t have one large enough to have its own budget line item. Somewhere in the text write up the Inspector General is mentioned. I guess that explains why billions of dollars from the Indian Trust funds have gone missing. But Interior not only has the BIA but they also oversee our royalty payments from the industries extracting minerals from public lands.

At least GAO gives the citizens a chance to report the fraud they see.

Back to Representation

Every time I write a bit on Congress, I go back to thinking about Representation. I am rethinking my original idea on making it 1 representative for every 100,000 citizens. The Constitution sets a lower limit of 30,000 per representative but it doesn’t set an upper limit. Evidently, 100 years ago Congress fixed the House of Representatives at 435 because they ran out of room in their chamber. This leads to one representative for over 700,000 citizens, on average, with Montana having one representative for over 950,000, today.

While 1/100K is a reasonable number – I think it give the citizens of each district a better chance to meet and know their representative and to share their views with them – I am willing to work with other numbers. 210,000 is about as high as I would like to go.  Close to what the level was when congress fixed the number of Representatives. People still have an opportunity to know their rep. Montana would have 5 representatives (OK there is a down side to most ideas). We would be closer to a representative democracy, closer than the country has been in a hundred years.

Of course, if We the People don’t do our job, nothing much will change in Washington.