The world will look up and shout, "You're a bunch of idiots!" And I'll whisper, "Well this isn't helping that image.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwdOwgD5OsY 

SKIP TO 4:20 for the really crazy.  

That video right there is a "912 teabag party" protest thing where the nuts went to go crazy. I really want to defend their right to protest, but these people should be institutionalized for being batshit crazy.  

Remember people, get your kids out of college. The professors are brainwashing you. You have no control over your opinions or the way you see the world. As a highschool graduate you are incapable of forming your own opinion. The college structure is just too strong!  

Evolution is crap and we should burn the books that mention it. Start burning books, and while we're at it, fuck learning in general. Let's go back to being cowboys :D  

And I wonder why we have lost standing in the world. I often wonder why us, as Americans aren't keeping up with the rest of the world in terms of modernizing, in terms of academia, in terms of intellectual property, and pursuits of philanthropy. Why are we not acting like stand-up people and acting like drooling, yell-happy idiots?  

Not to say we're stagnant, but we're not in a continuous state of moving forward. And how can we be if people in our country are this backwards and plain dumb?  

Yeah, get your kids out of college, take away their ability to compete in the global workforce. Just keep saying that you're protecting them from brainwashing.  

That's surely not a form of child abuse. If you knew what the Boston Tea Party meant you wouldn't be raping its good name.  

God damn America, is this the face we want to have? Are these the "good Americans?" Are these the "Pro-Americans?" Are these the "Real Americans?"  

Because if they are, and they won't tell you any different, we should all start laughing at the USA.  

Freedom of speech should be a right that is used to better us as a people. Not to fuel faux-Populism. It's not an excuse to be an ignoramus.

Prop 8. The other side.

Nobody talks about the underlying problem that is plaguing this issue. They are treating gay and lesbian couples as though they aren't part of the American public. Some argue that gays and lesbians are different because of their sexual orientation, but that's a load of crap. They work hard, contribute to society and pay their taxes just like everyone else. 

This ostracizing treatment is not only un-American, but inhumane. Stop excluding, start including. And you don't really hear that in the Prop 8 debates as much as you should. Of course we should question the legality of the legislations involved. But while we're at it, we need to highlight the humanity in the discussion.  

Gays and Lesbians simply want what others have. The right to pursue happiness. Didn't we establish that all people are given the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? What? We're going to pick and choose who gets what? Is this going to be "separate but equal" all over again? Because if it is, we all know how fair that was. I'm sorry I got so passionate, but when I muse about the nation I love, I don't want that picture muddied up by bigotry and exclusionary narrow-mindedness. I want to think of a place where everyone has a chance. This debate isn't helping that musing at all.

A great article concerning Prop 8 here.

Where was the outcry?

"...Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." - Dick Cheney

That statement above is the reason why the Bush Administration had such a terrible time with economic balance. Spend spend spend on war and failures in economic theory and don't care because the deficits don't matter.

The Bush Administration started out with a surplus, $5.6 trillion. Where did they go with that surplus? Into the greatest economic disaster since the Great Depression. The administration burned the surplus into a $10 trillion deficit. 

A report by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee and the Budget on July 31, 2008, is actually titled "The Bush Administration’s Failed Economic and Fiscal Record." 

Republicans today are talking about how they are the party of fiscal conservatism and responsibility. But where were they when the previous President was racking up debt in Iraq and through failed economic policies? 

There was no outcry when the debt was piling up during a Republican (conservative) administration, yet the current stimulus bill was a work of the devil himself to House and Senate Republicans. John McCain referred to the stimulus as "generational theft," whereas the war in Iraq and the idiotic tax cuts that failed to help the economy were sound policies and practices. Nobody has to pay that $10 trillion debt back? My generation does not have to pay back the failed war in Iraq that is now nothing more than a money-sinkhole? We do not have to pay back the failed tax cuts that did nothing for the majority and only helped widen the income gap? 

$10 trillion debt coupled with a great economic disaster brought on by a failure of a presidency isn't worth an outcry but a stimulus that is seeking to alleviate the pressures is? Something doesn't fit right. I bet the solution is to go back to the "solutions" that helped us get into this mess.

Who's Laffing now?

"Tax cuts pay for themselves." A single statement that sounds too good to be true. Well, it is too good to be true. Tax cuts, against the appeal, fail to increase revenue and stimulate the growth and sustainability of an economy. The Laffer Curve is an ingenious model showing that the rate of taxation doesn't necessarily increase tax revenue. What this means is that there's a certain point (the apex of the curve) where tax rate and tax revenue are at a happy max - any further increase lowers revenue. Note that this is government revenue and actually is under fixed assumptions, don't be mislead by supporters of the curve, all economic models are under some fixed assumptions whether it be ceteris paribus, full-employment, etc. Laffer Curve is often under the assumption that there is a full employment of resources, and does not take into account inflation or income gaps.  

The Laffer Curve is often used to support tax cuts, citing "When we have lower taxes, people keep their money and we starve the beast," completely ignoring the assumptions under which the curve is based. I know many people love tax cuts. For the general public, more money is always nice. For the nation as a whole, tax cuts aren't the best thing. Edward Lazear, the latter Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Bush 43 was one of the people who said that tax cuts do not pay for themselves. He was of course, talking about long-term effects. In the short run, tax cuts can help, as evidenced by that short respite we had in 2003. Economists were screaming "calm before the storm," and nobody listened, was it complacency? Mayhaps. N. Gregory Mankiw, the man who preceded Lazear had once compared an economist who says that tax cuts pay for themselves to a “snake oil salesman trying to sell a miracle cure." (Edward Lazear, testimony before the Joint Economic Committee, June 27, 2006; N. Gregory Mankiw, Principles of Economics (Fort Worth: Dryden Press, 1998), pp. 29-30.) Peter Orszag concluded that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are “likely to reduce, not increase, national income in the long term” because of their effect in swelling the deficit. (William Gale and Peter Orszag, “Bush Administration Tax Policy: Effects on Long-Term Growth,” Tax Notes, October 18, 2004.) Bush Treasury Department’s own “dynamic” analysis of the cost of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts estimated that they would generate only enough economic growth to cover less than 10 percent of their long-term costs. The report is here and really only tries to fluff up the policies - it is very very very important to note that the long-term effects can only be determined under best-case scenarios. That is, the models and projective benefits are under a set of assumptions. All of which are to be ignored in the current economic situation.  

I am in no way saying that I want an 93% tax rate or something insane. We all work for our money, bring home the bacon, the phrases go on and on. In relation to public policy and economic stimulus/sustenance, we should be focusing on investing revenue and getting returns - nobody ever pulls money out of a stock that has potential of a return simply because "more money in my pocket." The point of investment, by the government or by an individual is to gain long term benefits. Short-term investing might get you a grand next month, but keeping long-term, sustainable investments and playing it smart gets you a lot more when you need it - in your future. The benefits-to-cost ratio of a long-term investment dwarf those of a short term fix. Keynes is rolling in his grave and Laffer's laughing.  

A personal comment: It's sad to see how we're still debating tax cuts when we should be looking at growth. Rather than a $150 billion dollar tax cut, we should have a $150 billion investment in public works and/or toss that into infrastructure spending seeing as though currently the stimulus bill only has about 11-12% of its money going towards infrastructure spending. That's tiny, and really hinders job growth in all sectors, not to mention, pushes the United States back in terms of efficiency. Members of the GOP have also called for an additional $150 (depending on where you read the info from - different news outlets are reporting varied numbers, probably averages to begin with anyhow) in tax cuts to be added to the bill. Giving an additional 18% of the total bill to tax cuts, claiming that direct financing of infrastructure would not provide jobs nor would give the "middle-class" any benefit - as though renovations aren't needed, that steam pipe bursting in Midtown in July 07 is no sign, nor the water main break in Maryland in December that we could sure use some renovations. Those won't give us "jobs." People don't need to be employed in order to fix things! <- Sarcasm.

Uncertainty does not stop progress.

The costs of poor planning, muddled logic, inaction, and general incompetence have threatened to run America into the ground. Rather than remaining the "land of opportunity," the past administration and idealogues in charge made America the "land of diminishing opportunity." 

Our new outlook should be the promotion of education, opportunity and even dreams. Social, cultural, and economic progress should be on the forefront of all these things. Promoting safe-living should be on the forefront of education as well. If we cannot give our young minds the tools to live well, how can we ensure they have futures?

The new administration is showing that it will not succumb to ideologies, fear, or ignorance of facts. It is showing that it will move forward, calling upon all Americans to be the solution they want to see by calling out for service. 

With a site like "USAservice.org" and the call for Americans to come together to better themselves and their communities, Barack Obama echoes J.F.K.'s famous words, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." 

In a time of uncertainty and worry, J.F.K made the declaration, "First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth," this declaration ushered forth the goal that led America into the future. The commitment was met with fervor, determination, and eventually landed us on the moon.

If we set our goals and apply American ingenuity as we have done in the past, there is nothing stopping us from pursuing, obtaining, and securing a prosperous future.

Grand Obstructionist Party and Geithner's mistake.

                The new administration is finding obstructions early on in their journey. Senator Kyl (R-AZ), the same Senator Kyl that blamed the market meltdown and housing crisis on Democrats, minorities, the poor, and the young, is pushing to delay the confirmatin of Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary until after the Inauguration.

                The delay in putting Mr. Geithner in office stems from two (non) issues that came up during the vetting process:

1) He had failed to pay self-employment taxes - back taxes he owed when working abroad for the International Money Fund.

2) He had a housekeeper that had no Employee Authorization Papers for the last 3 months of employment. 

                These seem like high charges, and something that would definitely derail his appointment. The fact is, that it is a non-issue. When brought to his attention, Geithner paid all of his back taxes and even the penalties he owed because of his late payments. 

                Geithner's action in response to his taxes does not suggest a man who evades taxes. Geithner saw his mistake and corrected it in a timely fashion. 

                The details of the housekeeper situation are that she had authorized papers when she was hired, and in the last 3 months of her employment, before she stopped working to have a baby. She still lived in the USA, and is married to a U.S. citizen. She was also granted a green card a few months later.

                This is also a non-issue. The lapse in authorization is not a big matter. Senator Kyl and his obstructionist colleagues are making mountains out of molehills. This is all just embarrassing, not criminal. When Geithner was made aware of his tax obligations, he paid in a timely fashion. This is not a characteristic of a tax-dodger. Also, Geithner did pay his income taxes, which further suggests mistake, not intentional avoidance. 

                In an article about this tax issue in the Wall-Street Journal, the IMF did issue warnings to their employees about payroll taxes - but this isn't the end of the tale:

After the Internal Revenue Service audited him in 2006 and discovered the payroll-tax errors, Mr. Geithner corrected them for 2003 and 2004. Only after Mr. Obama picked him for Treasury secretary last fall did Mr. Geithner pay the Social Security and Medicare tax he owed for 2001 and 2002.

                Kyl and those who plan on obstructing Geithner’s appointment may be shocked by the possibility that:

                Mr. Geithner's problems stemmed from bad advice. In 2004, an accountant advised Mr. Geithner in writing that he did not owe employment taxes. An accountant who reviewed Mr. Geithner's 2001 tax return also didn't inform Mr. Geithner he owed taxes, according to an Obama aide familiar with the situation.

                Above all, it is important to note that the article goes on to say:

Tax professionals noted that even trained preparers sometimes miss the subtleties involved in taxation of employees of international organizations. "We've seen returns of people...where it was done incorrectly, and it was prepared by a CPA or a tax preparation service," said Bob Len, a partner at Wolf Group in Fairfax, Va.

The tax non-issue is an honest mistake let the man go. In this current economic situation, we cannot allow obstructionists to impede the appointment of a man who may well prove to be the big help in pulling us out of the recession-muck, unlike Henry Paulson, who made a $350 billion blunder. Members of both parties have come out in support of Geithner, praising Geithner’s record and his potential as Treasury Secretary despite his two non-issues. In lieu of believing the outstanding support of the nomination, members in the GOP are still standing in the way.

In the end, Senator Kyl, and the obstructionist actions like it are just cheap attempts to say, “We’re not irrelevant! Look at us! We’re working hard and being hawks that are protecting our nation’s interests!” when in reality, they’re just hindering progress. The GOP’s failures in the last 8 years have cemented them as a party that has not only lost touch with their base, but also the world and everyone in it. They have lost their relevance as a force within our nation. To move forward, we cannot rely on the same old GOP. They’re a rusty clunker in a time when the thing that we need most is a well-oiled machine.  

Memo: Stimulating the Economy.

The bailout on Wall Street did not produce any results. AIG blew a chunk of its bailout money on a company vacation and spa retreat. The banks won't tell us how they used their bailout money. The "let the market handle the market approach" blew up in our faces and dug us a deep hole. The approach taken by the administration in the past 8 years took an almost naive approach to the economy.

More bailouts are not the solution. Throwing money and saying "Let it handle itself," is not the answer that the USA needs. Focusing on job creation is the answer we need. The plan needs to include measures to invest in infrastructure and energy technology. A major portion of his plan should address the lack of manufacturing jobs in the country. America has little to no manufacturing presence in the global market. How can we be expected to compete in the global market if we do not produce goods? Manufacturing provides stable job growth, and will also help reduce our trade deficit with other nations. 

The main thing that the new President needs to address is long-term investment in things that will provide continuous and stable growth. A "quick fix" won't be effective in alleviating the blight on the economy. 

To get the Republicans on board, Obama has added $150 billion in tax cuts. Tax cuts are pushed forward by those who believe that cutting taxes will cut spending. What happens when the government has to spend? Creating programs and putting forth new investments in building the nation aren’t free. Where's that money going to come from? Government ends up borrowing that money, further adding to the nation's debt. Conservatives still believe that government spending is the reason why the debt and the nation's money are being mismanaged. It's not simply spending- it's the fact that the money has been mismanaged in the past 8 years. Old inefficient ideas and piss-poor money managing skills are the reasons why some believe that government spending is the problem.

The warning here is that the President should not worry about doing too much, but his concern should be that his plan will do too little. The truth is that you need money to make money. Tax cuts and pandering to Republicans will get nothing done, and will further dig the American people further into the ground. The spending has to be there. The solution will be costly, and will definitely add to the debt, however, smart investments, hawk-like monitoring and set goals will no doubt get us out of the recession and on our way to becoming an economic powerhouse. 

The solution to our economic woes is not frugality. The answer is to be smart and spend wisely. Do not let things ferment and rot like the past 8 years have done, throwing money at problems and not asking for accountability. That can only bring on more hardship.

 

 

An interesting article to read is Robert Kuttner's Memo to Obama to dream bigger.