First, let me say that gun control is a dead topic.
Democrats aren't touching and only the most dedicated progressives are making any noise about it. Well, and dedicate gun nuts.
Personally, I think that gun control is an important part of crime reduction. But, not nearly as important as educational and economic improvements. For everyone.
But the reactionary and downright delusional overreach on gun rights is absurd.
But, seriously, what are people thinking? Allowing guns in bars. "Stand your ground" laws that make it nearly impossible to prosecute shooters. Allowing guns in schools. Absurd.
This article from Mother Jones discusses looser restrictions, here. http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/map-gun-laws-2009-2012
Common sense just tells you that no one needs to be drinking in public with a concealed weapon. People with a history of violent crime should be screened out of gun ownership. Most felons lose their right to vote. Why not the right to bear arms?
There have been absolutely zero attempts to expand gun control over the last decade. What, exactly, are these laws reacting to?
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Your Moral Exemption is my Objection
So, how do these "moral exemption" laws work?
So, if my employer has a "moral objection" to birth control, they don't have to cover it with their benefits package, right?
Say I work for a Jehovah's Witness. Can they refuse to cover blood transfusions? How about Christian Scientists? We can just refuse all medical procedures on "moral grounds."
Moreover, isn't this tantamount to telling employees what they can and can't buy with their compensation? Health insurance IS part of any competitive compensation package, after all.
If my employer objects to alcohol, should I take up a paper route to pay for beer?
I'm confused. This all seems very arbitrary to me.
So, if my employer has a "moral objection" to birth control, they don't have to cover it with their benefits package, right?
Say I work for a Jehovah's Witness. Can they refuse to cover blood transfusions? How about Christian Scientists? We can just refuse all medical procedures on "moral grounds."
Moreover, isn't this tantamount to telling employees what they can and can't buy with their compensation? Health insurance IS part of any competitive compensation package, after all.
If my employer objects to alcohol, should I take up a paper route to pay for beer?
I'm confused. This all seems very arbitrary to me.
Friday, December 7, 2012
Compassionate Conservatives: We recognize your pain.
I can't wait for "Compassionate Conservatism" to make a comeback.
It's going to be great. The idea that Republicans haven't been failing minorities, gays, workers, the poor, and youth--you know, most of America. They've just been messaging it the wrong way.
It needs repackaged. What the GOP really needs to do is reintroduce the ideologies and policies that have left so many people behind over the last decade. But, friendlier. Explain it in simpler terms.
Show Americans that, despite all evidence to the contrary, low tax rates for the rich really have benefitted minorities. Gutting regulations really has resulted in safer, cleaner air. Global warming is just a myth. The BP Gulf oil spill wasn't a perfect example of companies ignoring regulations, safety, and warnings to maximize profits. It was really a risky business opportunity that didn't pan out.
The lives of the workers that survived were greatly improved. The economic hit on the Gulf coast, the untold amount of dead marine life, and the workers who were killed were just unfortunate situations.
Can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.
Keeping wages low for Americans really is a way to ensure more opportunities for employment. In fact, when we gut minimum wage requirements, there will be even more opportunities.
And don't worry about food stamps and Medicaid. The programs you rely on because of the opportunities those wages create. They're really just holding you back.
Plus, the free market that's been denying you care for preexisting conditions (such as pregnancy, doanchaknow) will adjust. As long as there's profit to be had.
All in all, you'll be better off with Compassionate Conservatism at the helm. We hear your problems. And we all have friends that have been inconvenienced by your pain.
We're from the free market and we'll continue to help. (For a small fee.)
It's going to be great. The idea that Republicans haven't been failing minorities, gays, workers, the poor, and youth--you know, most of America. They've just been messaging it the wrong way.
It needs repackaged. What the GOP really needs to do is reintroduce the ideologies and policies that have left so many people behind over the last decade. But, friendlier. Explain it in simpler terms.
Show Americans that, despite all evidence to the contrary, low tax rates for the rich really have benefitted minorities. Gutting regulations really has resulted in safer, cleaner air. Global warming is just a myth. The BP Gulf oil spill wasn't a perfect example of companies ignoring regulations, safety, and warnings to maximize profits. It was really a risky business opportunity that didn't pan out.
The lives of the workers that survived were greatly improved. The economic hit on the Gulf coast, the untold amount of dead marine life, and the workers who were killed were just unfortunate situations.
Can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.
Keeping wages low for Americans really is a way to ensure more opportunities for employment. In fact, when we gut minimum wage requirements, there will be even more opportunities.
And don't worry about food stamps and Medicaid. The programs you rely on because of the opportunities those wages create. They're really just holding you back.
Plus, the free market that's been denying you care for preexisting conditions (such as pregnancy, doanchaknow) will adjust. As long as there's profit to be had.
All in all, you'll be better off with Compassionate Conservatism at the helm. We hear your problems. And we all have friends that have been inconvenienced by your pain.
We're from the free market and we'll continue to help. (For a small fee.)
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
The "Race Card"
There's this thing referred to as the "race card" that gets a lot of play from Very Serious People.
The same Very Serious People who tut tut liberals and conservatives for not compromising simply for the sake of compromise.
The race card, itself, is merely an illusion. A way to dismiss racial concerns, no matter how legitimate.
People are quick to dismiss racism. It's unpleasant. People seem to forget that racism doesn't need to be racist in intent. Policies and actions that disproportionately affect minorities are still racist.
However, once someone points that out, the race card has been dropped and the Talking Heads begin to cluck their tongues disapprovingly.
Never mind the history of our great nation. We forget that the railway system was built by minorities during a time of legal segregation and outright contempt for minorities in America.
The expression the "wrong side of the tracks"? That's not a coincidence.
The interstate system built in the 50s separated the inner cities from the burgeoning suburbs. Further establishing suburbs as isolated escapes from poverty. Poverty that--as a result of generations of de jour and de facto segregation--disproportionately affects blacks.
Legal segregation only ended in the 1960s. Barely one generation ago.
•••
Now, today, I believe that racism is less a motivating factor than a side effect. Poor whites are hurt by cuts to entitlements and social programs just as much as poor blacks. That's classism, not racism.
However, intentional or not, these policies still disproportionately affect blacks and other minorities. That's racist.
The threat with classism is that poor whites begin to use intentional racism as a justification. A crutch. As if to say, "This isn't the way things are SUPPOSED to be. There must be a reason." It's good old White Privilege. And, to anyone who rejects the notion, I challenge them to refute the endless literature and documentation on the subject.
Surprisingly poignant are studies of poor whites in the Antebellum South. This is precisely the sentiment that lead to continued racial resentment in the south today.
We can't be too quick to reject race. The effects of race in American history are simply too resonant to ignore. The southern strategy, still successfully used by conservative politicians today is deliberately built on racial resentment.
There is no "race card."
The same Very Serious People who tut tut liberals and conservatives for not compromising simply for the sake of compromise.
The race card, itself, is merely an illusion. A way to dismiss racial concerns, no matter how legitimate.
People are quick to dismiss racism. It's unpleasant. People seem to forget that racism doesn't need to be racist in intent. Policies and actions that disproportionately affect minorities are still racist.
However, once someone points that out, the race card has been dropped and the Talking Heads begin to cluck their tongues disapprovingly.
Never mind the history of our great nation. We forget that the railway system was built by minorities during a time of legal segregation and outright contempt for minorities in America.
The expression the "wrong side of the tracks"? That's not a coincidence.
The interstate system built in the 50s separated the inner cities from the burgeoning suburbs. Further establishing suburbs as isolated escapes from poverty. Poverty that--as a result of generations of de jour and de facto segregation--disproportionately affects blacks.
Legal segregation only ended in the 1960s. Barely one generation ago.
•••
Now, today, I believe that racism is less a motivating factor than a side effect. Poor whites are hurt by cuts to entitlements and social programs just as much as poor blacks. That's classism, not racism.
However, intentional or not, these policies still disproportionately affect blacks and other minorities. That's racist.
The threat with classism is that poor whites begin to use intentional racism as a justification. A crutch. As if to say, "This isn't the way things are SUPPOSED to be. There must be a reason." It's good old White Privilege. And, to anyone who rejects the notion, I challenge them to refute the endless literature and documentation on the subject.
Surprisingly poignant are studies of poor whites in the Antebellum South. This is precisely the sentiment that lead to continued racial resentment in the south today.
We can't be too quick to reject race. The effects of race in American history are simply too resonant to ignore. The southern strategy, still successfully used by conservative politicians today is deliberately built on racial resentment.
There is no "race card."
Sunday, December 2, 2012
The Princes and the Paupers. (And the taxes.)
We can’t talk about budgets and deficits without addressing taxes. That’s the supposed impasse in Washington right now.
The reason to support tax increases over benefit cuts as a way to decrease the deficit is simply this: Corporations and the wealthy benefit the most from entitlements.
That sounds contradictory. It’s really not. Articles like this and this explain why. Wal Mart can make $6 billion in net income as the economy limps along. Wal Mart’s average wage is around $11.75 an hour. That’s about $21,000 a year if you assume the workers are full time. Which, most of Wal Mart workers aren’t.
The problem here is that the Walton family--like CEOs, presidents, and board members across the country--are raking in cash while their workers aren’t. Setting aside taxes for the moment, these profits are only possible because companies like McDonald’s, Home Depot, and Wal Mart offer paltry benefits if they offer any at all.
The lack of benefits and low incomes hit employees with a double whammy. Low incomes force employees to seek out SNAP benefits. 14% of food service employees are on food stamps. Without benefits, employees utilize Medicaid or, if they’re eligible, Medicare.
Meanwhile, Social Security is more important than ever. Fewer and fewer companies are offering robust retirement packages and pensions. Because of workers’ lower than average wages, it cuts deeply into their ability to save for retirement. About 33% of Americans have no savings or retirement accounts. This isn’t an irresponsibility. Many Americans just don’t make enough to save.
We have an unfortunate conundrum. The wealthy whose companies are benefitting from these programs often advocate benefit cuts to preserve their low tax rates.
Something has to give. The free market is leaving service workers behind. At the same time, workers are looking at a grim reality as public programs are cut back. If private companies aren’t willing to provide for retirement, health care, and a living wage; the Government is going to need to pick up the slack.
The reason to support tax increases over benefit cuts as a way to decrease the deficit is simply this: Corporations and the wealthy benefit the most from entitlements.
That sounds contradictory. It’s really not. Articles like this and this explain why. Wal Mart can make $6 billion in net income as the economy limps along. Wal Mart’s average wage is around $11.75 an hour. That’s about $21,000 a year if you assume the workers are full time. Which, most of Wal Mart workers aren’t.
The problem here is that the Walton family--like CEOs, presidents, and board members across the country--are raking in cash while their workers aren’t. Setting aside taxes for the moment, these profits are only possible because companies like McDonald’s, Home Depot, and Wal Mart offer paltry benefits if they offer any at all.
The lack of benefits and low incomes hit employees with a double whammy. Low incomes force employees to seek out SNAP benefits. 14% of food service employees are on food stamps. Without benefits, employees utilize Medicaid or, if they’re eligible, Medicare.
Meanwhile, Social Security is more important than ever. Fewer and fewer companies are offering robust retirement packages and pensions. Because of workers’ lower than average wages, it cuts deeply into their ability to save for retirement. About 33% of Americans have no savings or retirement accounts. This isn’t an irresponsibility. Many Americans just don’t make enough to save.
We have an unfortunate conundrum. The wealthy whose companies are benefitting from these programs often advocate benefit cuts to preserve their low tax rates.
Something has to give. The free market is leaving service workers behind. At the same time, workers are looking at a grim reality as public programs are cut back. If private companies aren’t willing to provide for retirement, health care, and a living wage; the Government is going to need to pick up the slack.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)