Why does money and power always corrupt? I find that even if you try to have a perfectly sane and normal conversation about money or power, eventually the worst nature of all human beings comes out - on either side of the debate.
I have said things here in the past two posts that I truly believe. But in saying these things, I may have hurt a fellow brother in Christ. I don't know why its hard to have a debate without it devolving into pain and recrimination, but I do know that that was never my intent.
Still, I find it hard to drop the subject. I don't know what part of my ego insists that I am right and that others are wrong, but if that part of my ego is causing pain in others, I need to shut it down. It should have no place in my life.
I recently took over as the Head of the Stewardship Committee at my Church with the one personal caveat that I would be certain this committee did not engage in Church politics. I have seen the corrupting influence it can have on Church committee's even when everyone on the committee is well-intentioned. I suppose I should add that such a mixture of politics and finances in my own life can also have a corrupting influence.
Therefore, I am hereby declaring an end to the discussion of politics and money from now on here at this blog. Neither right wing nor left wing - I shall remain flightless from here on out.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Rebuttal
Last week, Warren Buffett wrote an incredible opinion piece in The New York Times asking the federal government to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans, himself included. "My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress," he argued. "It's time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice." Buffett's editorial sent economists and politicians into a frenzy as they debated the merits and implications of his request. Underlying the chatter is an important question: Does our country benefit, financially, from taxing our wealthiest citizens?
According to Bruce Bartlett, who's held senior policy roles in both Ronald Reagan's and George H. W. Bush's administrations, as well as on the staffs of Reps. Ron Paul and Jack Kemp, "in 2008, those in the top 1 percent of the income distribution, with incomes over $380,000, had an effective tax rate of 23.3 percent. In 1986, a year when the real gross domestic product grew a healthy 3.5 percent, their effective tax rate was 33.1 percent. It has been much lower every year since."
Bartlett, who culled Internal Revenue Service data for his analysis, which appears this week in his New York Times column, goes on to say: "If this group were still paying 33.1 percent, federal revenue would have been more than $166 billion higher in 2008 alone. That would be enough to reduce the budget deficit by about 10 percent this year. If the top 1 percent of taxpayers had continued to pay the same effective tax rate they paid in 1986 every year from 1987 to 2008, the federal debt today would be $1.7 trillion lower."
While Bartlett acknowledges the assumptions implicit in his calculations, the bottom line is clear. America has lost boatloads of money thanks to our willingness to cut taxes on those who can most easily afford to pay them. This despite our country's history of successfully taxing the rich. Under Reagan, for example, the richest 1% of Americans paid one-third of their income to the federal government.
Between High European Taxes and Low U.S. Rates, a Happy Medium
Those who argue against higher taxes often fear that an increase will slow economic growth. But history dispels that myth. As William G. Gale, an expert on tax policy at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution, wrote on CNN.com, "Even the massive tax increases during and after World War II -- amounting to a permanent rise of 10% to 15% of gross domestic product -- and the much smaller tax increases in 1990 and 1993 did no discernible damage to U.S. economic growth."
The debate over whether and how much to tax the rich isn't new. But it's extremely important in the current economy. The debt ceiling deal reached earlier this month includes spending cuts, but does nothing to increase revenues. Additionally, the spending cuts come primarily from programs that support low- and middle-income households. The richest Americans? They're virtually exempt from chipping in to resolve the nation's budget problems.
Which is why Buffett is publicly asking to pay more in taxes -- and why he's right. After all, "households in the top 1% of the distribution can afford to contribute," argues Gale. "They have done enormously well during the past 30-plus years. In 1979, their income accounted for 10% of total income. According to the most recent data (from 2008), their share of total household income more than doubled to 21%. In contrast, real income for middle-class workers has remained roughly constant over the same time frame."
In his opinion piece, Gale outlines a variety of options for raising taxes. In all cases, he's advocating for moderation. "None of this means that the U.S. needs to move to European taxation levels," he writes. "But between the depleted tax revenues we raise now -- the lowest share of the economy in six decades -- and the high taxes experienced in European countries, there is plenty of room to raise revenues in an economically sound manner to support a reasonable level of government."
Or, to put it more bluntly, our country is in the throes of a debt crisis. We're delusional to think that we can continue with the current tax rates. So let's stop asking whether or not we should raise taxes on the rich and instead turn our attention to how we can most effectively do so.
Loren Berlin is a reporter with the AOL Huffington Post Media Group. She can be reached at loren.berlin@teamaol.com, on Twitter at @LorenBerlin, and on Facebook.Which is why Buffett is publicly asking to pay more in taxes -- and why he's right. After all, "households in the top 1% of the distribution can afford to contribute," argues Gale. "They have done enormously well during the past 30-plus years. In 1979, their income accounted for 10% of total income. According to the most recent data (from 2008), their share of total household income more than doubled to 21%. In contrast, real income for middle-class workers has remained roughly constant over the same time frame."
In his opinion piece, Gale outlines a variety of options for raising taxes. In all cases, he's advocating for moderation. "None of this means that the U.S. needs to move to European taxation levels," he writes. "But between the depleted tax revenues we raise now -- the lowest share of the economy in six decades -- and the high taxes experienced in European countries, there is plenty of room to raise revenues in an economically sound manner to support a reasonable level of government."
Or, to put it more bluntly, our country is in the throes of a debt crisis. We're delusional to think that we can continue with the current tax rates. So let's stop asking whether or not we should raise taxes on the rich and instead turn our attention to how we can most effectively do so.
See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/nWl920
Monday, August 22, 2011
If I Was President... (completely disregarding the way politics actually works)
I had some good ideas over the weekend, and I thought I'd pass them along to whoever is listening out there. Hopefully, someone will listen and together we can solve all of our countries problems PDQ! So, here goes...
1) Solving the Immigration/Afghanistan/Economic Problems In One Fell Swoop - First, you grant amnesty to all of the illegal immigrants in this country. Deadline: April 1st, 2012. All illegals in this nation have to apply with weight granted to those who have been here the longest (wait for it...) In addition to place of birth, etc, we collect information on how they've been surviving here in this country (I.E. Who's been paying them and keeping them employed). On April 2nd, we close the borders. Anyone caught sneaking into the United States after that will be dealt with thusly - they will be sent to a detention camp, they will be treated nicely, then they will be loaded on to a plane and flown to Afghanistan. Not to fight, mind you, but just to be deported. Since Afghanistan doesn't share a border with the US, they will not return to this country. AND, as a bonus, an influx of illegal immigrants into Afghanistan will likely overwhelm the country and drive the Taliban out as that country implodes from all the extra mouths to feed. End of war. Two problems solved.
On May 1st, the IRS will be handed all of the information collected from the formerly illegal immigrants and asked to collect back taxes from not only the new citizens, but also from all the people that employed them. Fines for late fees, unfiled tax forms, and lying on official paperwork will be assessed, but jail time will not be required. That should fill our coffers and also replenish all the money we spent on 50 million non-tax paying freeloaders. Two more problems solved.
2) Dealing with my Republican Counterparts and Compromising On Fiscal Philosophy - I don't agree with the Republicans that rich people shouldn't pay their fair share of taxes because they need that money to create jobs, but I'm willing to compromise a solution.
First, we set the new tax standards on all corporations to a REALLY high percentage (like say close to 50%). Then, and this is the important part, we allow for the taxes to be lowered permanently based upon the current US jobless rate. We tie the lower amount to an attainable goal (say 5% jobless rate) and so long as the jobless rate remains that amount, the corporate taxes shall be at their lowest rate. Incentive: Create Jobs to Get Good Tax Rates. And if they try to just pocket the money, or ship jobs overseas, the tax rate soars and the government then has the funds to make sure the safety nets remain funded. Two More Problems Solved.
3) It's time we abolish WHOM from the English language. Nobody can darn well remember whether its whom or who that they're supposed to say. And really, in what other context is whom even a word? Its like someone added that letter M just to confuse people, or, dare I say it, its a conspiracy amongst English Teachers to keep their jobs!
(As an addendum... Obama shouldn't receive any credit for Libya if Democrats aren't also going to hand Bush credit for Iraq. In both cases, the President got us involved in a conflict that we really didn't need to be involved in and in both cases neither President really did anything substantial to bring about the end of the conflict. Kudos to Obama for at least keeping our ground troops out of the fight.)
1) Solving the Immigration/Afghanistan/Economic Problems In One Fell Swoop - First, you grant amnesty to all of the illegal immigrants in this country. Deadline: April 1st, 2012. All illegals in this nation have to apply with weight granted to those who have been here the longest (wait for it...) In addition to place of birth, etc, we collect information on how they've been surviving here in this country (I.E. Who's been paying them and keeping them employed). On April 2nd, we close the borders. Anyone caught sneaking into the United States after that will be dealt with thusly - they will be sent to a detention camp, they will be treated nicely, then they will be loaded on to a plane and flown to Afghanistan. Not to fight, mind you, but just to be deported. Since Afghanistan doesn't share a border with the US, they will not return to this country. AND, as a bonus, an influx of illegal immigrants into Afghanistan will likely overwhelm the country and drive the Taliban out as that country implodes from all the extra mouths to feed. End of war. Two problems solved.
On May 1st, the IRS will be handed all of the information collected from the formerly illegal immigrants and asked to collect back taxes from not only the new citizens, but also from all the people that employed them. Fines for late fees, unfiled tax forms, and lying on official paperwork will be assessed, but jail time will not be required. That should fill our coffers and also replenish all the money we spent on 50 million non-tax paying freeloaders. Two more problems solved.
2) Dealing with my Republican Counterparts and Compromising On Fiscal Philosophy - I don't agree with the Republicans that rich people shouldn't pay their fair share of taxes because they need that money to create jobs, but I'm willing to compromise a solution.
First, we set the new tax standards on all corporations to a REALLY high percentage (like say close to 50%). Then, and this is the important part, we allow for the taxes to be lowered permanently based upon the current US jobless rate. We tie the lower amount to an attainable goal (say 5% jobless rate) and so long as the jobless rate remains that amount, the corporate taxes shall be at their lowest rate. Incentive: Create Jobs to Get Good Tax Rates. And if they try to just pocket the money, or ship jobs overseas, the tax rate soars and the government then has the funds to make sure the safety nets remain funded. Two More Problems Solved.
3) It's time we abolish WHOM from the English language. Nobody can darn well remember whether its whom or who that they're supposed to say. And really, in what other context is whom even a word? Its like someone added that letter M just to confuse people, or, dare I say it, its a conspiracy amongst English Teachers to keep their jobs!
(As an addendum... Obama shouldn't receive any credit for Libya if Democrats aren't also going to hand Bush credit for Iraq. In both cases, the President got us involved in a conflict that we really didn't need to be involved in and in both cases neither President really did anything substantial to bring about the end of the conflict. Kudos to Obama for at least keeping our ground troops out of the fight.)
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
There are some things you don't jinx...
So, in a nutshell, here's what happened.
My Dad went in for a routine check-up, which prompted some tests, which lead to an angioplasty, which revealed the need for a bypass operation. This all literally happened over the course of a couple of weeks. Now, my Dad is generally very healthy. He wasn't really having too many symptoms and he wasn't really in much danger - except of course that he could have a coronary at any moment. So, it was decided to do the operation.
Now my Dad tends to be extremely private when it comes to things like this. He didn't really want the news getting out far and wide. So, I didn't spread the news. I kept it to myself. But there was a second reason I didn't pass it on. I was extremely confident that he was going to be okay.
Don't get me wrong. I didn't leave you all out of the loop because I didn't feel like you needed to know. On the contrary, I really wanted to tell someone. But combined with this "knowledge" that he was going to be okay, was this real fear that I didn't want to jinx it. Something told me to keep my mouth shut. So I did. And he's all right. So... there's that.
Its easy to say that its childish to be superstitious about things, but I never said I knew exactly how the universe works. If a butterfly can cause a hurricane, who knows what an errant comment can change? Loose lips sink ships, why can't they also reverse the outcome of surgery?
Anyway, my Dad is recovering. I am extremely grateful for all the prayers that found their way here. Please don't feel that I left you out of anything on purpose. I really just didn't want to jinx the outcome. And I'm glad my Dad is fine.
My Dad went in for a routine check-up, which prompted some tests, which lead to an angioplasty, which revealed the need for a bypass operation. This all literally happened over the course of a couple of weeks. Now, my Dad is generally very healthy. He wasn't really having too many symptoms and he wasn't really in much danger - except of course that he could have a coronary at any moment. So, it was decided to do the operation.
Now my Dad tends to be extremely private when it comes to things like this. He didn't really want the news getting out far and wide. So, I didn't spread the news. I kept it to myself. But there was a second reason I didn't pass it on. I was extremely confident that he was going to be okay.
Don't get me wrong. I didn't leave you all out of the loop because I didn't feel like you needed to know. On the contrary, I really wanted to tell someone. But combined with this "knowledge" that he was going to be okay, was this real fear that I didn't want to jinx it. Something told me to keep my mouth shut. So I did. And he's all right. So... there's that.
Its easy to say that its childish to be superstitious about things, but I never said I knew exactly how the universe works. If a butterfly can cause a hurricane, who knows what an errant comment can change? Loose lips sink ships, why can't they also reverse the outcome of surgery?
Anyway, my Dad is recovering. I am extremely grateful for all the prayers that found their way here. Please don't feel that I left you out of anything on purpose. I really just didn't want to jinx the outcome. And I'm glad my Dad is fine.
Monday, August 01, 2011
Marvin Mudpie Will Return
I used to love sitting through the end of a James Bond movie credits just to see those words at the end, "James Bond Will Return". To me it meant continuity but also made me excited for further adventures.
Now, my own ne'er-do-well spy, Marvin Mudpie, hasn't had quite as much luck. Started as a collaboration with Ian Thriters, Marvin Mudpie's first book, "Dunebreaker" was completed in 1984. His second adventure, "Stilleto," was completed the following year. Since then there have been about four short stories written and one mini-series that explored his origins. He also was a co-star in the Bimbotech saga, but we'll ignore that for now. Mudpie has been largely absent around these parts for 11 years.
This points out the answer to the question about how do I get my ideas. For some stories, I can force an answer. If the story needs a mundane solution to a mundane problem, I just think one up. But for other characters or stories, there is never anything mundane about them, and you have to wait for a story idea to pop into your head.
Well, POP! I had a DOOZY of an idea on Sunday on my way to church. It still makes me chuckle even now. It came out of the clear blue and let's just say that it will finally answer all of your questions about our debt crisis and who is behind the last few years of economic unrest - while presenting our hero, Marvin Mudpie, with his greatest villain yet!
But the thing is, I don't ever plan for a Mudpie story. I had probably written him off as a hero a while back. 11 years is a long time to go between stories. And yet, there are some story ideas that can only be handled by this master spy. As soon as the idea occurred to me, I KNEW it was a Mudpie story.
So, now I have to cram yet another story idea onto my very full plate. Don't expect it anytime soon. You won't see the first chapter of this story until the middle of September on the newly revised TAC website. Until then, remember that old spies never die, they just become plumbers.
Now, my own ne'er-do-well spy, Marvin Mudpie, hasn't had quite as much luck. Started as a collaboration with Ian Thriters, Marvin Mudpie's first book, "Dunebreaker" was completed in 1984. His second adventure, "Stilleto," was completed the following year. Since then there have been about four short stories written and one mini-series that explored his origins. He also was a co-star in the Bimbotech saga, but we'll ignore that for now. Mudpie has been largely absent around these parts for 11 years.
This points out the answer to the question about how do I get my ideas. For some stories, I can force an answer. If the story needs a mundane solution to a mundane problem, I just think one up. But for other characters or stories, there is never anything mundane about them, and you have to wait for a story idea to pop into your head.
Well, POP! I had a DOOZY of an idea on Sunday on my way to church. It still makes me chuckle even now. It came out of the clear blue and let's just say that it will finally answer all of your questions about our debt crisis and who is behind the last few years of economic unrest - while presenting our hero, Marvin Mudpie, with his greatest villain yet!
But the thing is, I don't ever plan for a Mudpie story. I had probably written him off as a hero a while back. 11 years is a long time to go between stories. And yet, there are some story ideas that can only be handled by this master spy. As soon as the idea occurred to me, I KNEW it was a Mudpie story.
So, now I have to cram yet another story idea onto my very full plate. Don't expect it anytime soon. You won't see the first chapter of this story until the middle of September on the newly revised TAC website. Until then, remember that old spies never die, they just become plumbers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)