Put Down The Scissors

Everyone should be talking about the House Progressives' budget proposal. Not everyone agrees that we need to cut, cut, cut to reduce America’s deficit.

America doesn't have a spending problem. We have an investment problem. Despite the popular trope, a government budget is not the same as a household budget. We need to stop thinking of it as grocery list and think of it as a form of mutual fund.

We as taxpayers pay the government and, in turn, the government invests money to produce a return for the taxpayers. The discussion should not be, “what to cut.” The discussion we need to have is, “what to invest in.”

"We have been here before." Graphic CC Sean Thornton

It's not a waste of money to invest in bridges, roads, and schools. Programs like WIC, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid contribute to the general welfare of the country. Bridge and road projects create jobs, contribute to public safety, and help spur business development in new areas. Schools can create the next generation of software programmers or engineers that can help America compete in a crowded global market.

Our investment in defense is wasteful. We invest more in defense than the next 13 countries combined. What return are we seeing on that? It’s wasteful to invest almost $4 trillion in a decade long war in a country that posed no threat. It’s wasteful to continue spending $1.5 trillion on an over-budget fighter jet that can’t fly without knocking out its pilots.

We need jobs. We need well-paying jobs that provide people a living wage. We need to make sure people can afford health care. We live in the richest nation in the world. There is no excuse for children to go hungry or die from preventable diseases here.

People are a good investment. People are the smartest investment America can make. But it’s a responsible investment that the "party of fiscal responsibility" doesn't believe in.

Fiscal responsibility isn't about cutting spending and being afraid of taxes. It's about using our money in ways that will do the most good. We can get a solid return on our investments. But only if we choose the right priorities.

Cheap Marie Antoinette Reference

It's almost comi tragic to look at the VERY SERIOUS debate about the dueling budget proposals in Congress.

Like, here's the lowdown.

We cut taxes a whole bunch cuz it's popular! We did that for 30 years. We cut them for everyone, of course. But, we let the rich get the biggest slice of the pie cuz why not. Maybe they'll take pity and toss some to some poor people.

Hey, while we cut taxes, we can slowly let businesses creep in and expand their control. We spend 30 years letting business make more and more money without significantly raising wages. Workers are barely keeping up with inflation. Brilliant!

We earn less and less but, don't worry, we cut taxes so we don't notice as much. And, hey, we can slowly destroy the safety net. We spend 30 years snipping the cords. Lose your job in 1970, you'll get a significant chance to get back on your feet. Come down with a debilitating disease in 1970, there's a good chance you'll be able to live with modest dignity.

Lose your job in 2008? lol! Good luck. Need social security disability in 2007? Early onset Alzheimer's keeping you outta work? Well, look at it this way. At least you won't remember how miserable the two year wait for benefits was.

30 years later, we wake up on the tightrope. We waged two massive wars without raising taxes and passed unfunded mandates. Shit, we actually kept CUTTING taxes, we have no money. Plus we had to give piles of money to the banks when they shit the bed!

Shit, we can't raise taxes, the stagnant wages we cultivated will demolish anyone making less that $100k.

And, look--Christ--the businesses took advantage of us, fucked up the economy, and now we need to pay for all these people out of work, retiring into poverty, or working two jobs while in poverty!

Goddammit, what do we do?

Somebody call Paul Ryan. We need to cut this debt. Tell him to cut spending. We can't raise taxes cuz the rich asked us not to.

The poor? Let them eat cake.

Image from Flickr user DonkeyHotey

Apologies

In my last post I made a blanket policy statement.

In light of recent events, I'd like to accept that I am wrong.

Gun safety legislation may not be DOA, after all.

It's time.

Fun With Guns

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?

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.

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.)

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."