The Mitt Romney discussion has made me very unhappy with the US tax code and Congress in general. Why should millionaire Mitt Romney pay a 15% tax rate, while poorer working people pay a significantely higher percentage? Paul O'Neill, former Secretary of Treasury, was just on Bloomberg Surveillance Midday, and said that the tax code is "unworthy" of the US.
Why do rich people hate America so much that they refuse to support it? And why does Congress accede to their wishes? Money! It just shows how corrupt the Congress is. Laws are up for sale to the highest bidder.
It's sad that all those graves in Arlington Cemetery were for nothing. America has become unjust and undemocratic. We are becoming the old Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, or something else equally bad. We have a department called "Homeland" Security, which sounds like it is straight out of Nazi Germany. Since when is "homeland" a good American word? The first thing Wikipedia says about "heimat" is that it is a German concept that has no simple English translation, although it is often expressed as "homeland." Wikipedia says, "Heimat is a German concept." I doubt that George Washington or Thomas Jefferson ever used the word "homeland," although I haven't researched it. (Searching the Washington papers in the Library of Congress, it appears to be used once, in a footnote by the editor about a Dutchman whom Washington knew.)
At the moment, I am inclined to support no candidate from a major party, Democratic or Republican, because I believe both parties are corrupt. One of the few politicians I support at the moment is Elizabeth Warren. Obama and the Democrats lost my vote when he threw her under the bus after she had worked tirelessly for the consumer protection bureau. Jamie Dimon, his fellow bank CEOs, their lawyers, their lobbyists, and their money, blocked her appointment.
This is a sad state of affairs, and you are part of it.
I hope that I won't go to jail under PIPA or SOPA for quoting from Wikipedia. Although maybe today is like the day back in 1846 when Henry Thoreau went to jail for refusing to pay his poll tax, leading to his seminal work on "Civil Disobedience." It's better to be in jail than to support a corrupt government.
Note: I am a Vietnam veteran (Army artillery) and a retired Foreign Service officer. My grandfather, a veteran of World War I, is buried in Arlington Cemetery. My father was a veteran of World War II and the Korean War.
We need a country that is more concerned about honor than money.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
How Do We Stop the Iranian Bomb?
The Republican candidates, except for Ron Paul, are all hot and bothered about stopping Iran from getting the atomic bomb. But they never mention Israel's bomb. And they pretty much ignore Pakistan's bomb, and India's bomb. And they never mention America's bombs, Russia's bombs, China's bombs, Britain's bombs, etc. The responsible way to stop Iran would be to have a genuine, functioning non-proliferation regime, not one full of loopholes for any country determined to stay outside the regime.
The main impetus behind Iran's drive to build a bomb is Israel's bomb. It's not clear that the Iranians actually have a dedicated bomb development program, but it is clear that they want a nuclear infrastructure that would allow them to build a bomb in a relatively short time, if they decided that they needed one. And why would they need one, probably because they felt threatened by Israel. Of course, Israel feels threatened by Iran. But the cold war was basically about mutual threats between the US and Russia, and we both survived, so far.
If we were serious, about getting Iran to back off of its nuclear program, we all have to get serious about nuclear arms. The US and Russia both have to seriously disarm. Israel, Pakistan, and the rest have to give up their nuclear programs. George Bush actually increased cooperation with India's civil nuclear program, despite is military nuclear program, a step undermining non-proliferation globally, although it may have made sense bilaterally.
If the US were to invade Iran to shut down its nuclear program, by rights it should also invade Israel, Pakistan, North Korea, India, and other problem countries. Arguably, the older nuclear powers, the US and Russia, are grandfathered under the regime, although they are theoretically obligated to disarm, too.
The main impetus behind Iran's drive to build a bomb is Israel's bomb. It's not clear that the Iranians actually have a dedicated bomb development program, but it is clear that they want a nuclear infrastructure that would allow them to build a bomb in a relatively short time, if they decided that they needed one. And why would they need one, probably because they felt threatened by Israel. Of course, Israel feels threatened by Iran. But the cold war was basically about mutual threats between the US and Russia, and we both survived, so far.
If we were serious, about getting Iran to back off of its nuclear program, we all have to get serious about nuclear arms. The US and Russia both have to seriously disarm. Israel, Pakistan, and the rest have to give up their nuclear programs. George Bush actually increased cooperation with India's civil nuclear program, despite is military nuclear program, a step undermining non-proliferation globally, although it may have made sense bilaterally.
If the US were to invade Iran to shut down its nuclear program, by rights it should also invade Israel, Pakistan, North Korea, India, and other problem countries. Arguably, the older nuclear powers, the US and Russia, are grandfathered under the regime, although they are theoretically obligated to disarm, too.
Newt Gave Up on America
Newt Gingrich gave up on America when he shut down the government in 1995. A great country would not give up and quit. I'm still mad because it affected me directly. First, while I was assigned to the American Embassy in Warsaw to run the Maria Sklodowska Curie fund, named in honor Nobel Prize winner Marie Curie, the Republicans stopped funding it after two or three years, although we had signed a agreement with Poland to fund it for five years. A great country would honor its promises. So, don't count on the Republicans, especially Newt, to honor any promises, whether to pay interest on the national debt, make Social Security payments, or pay soldiers' salaries.
I was in the process of transferring from Poland to Italy at the State Department's request when Newt shut the government down. The US Embassy in Rome furloughed me, along with most employees, but it left me with no place to live. All my worldly possessions were in storage or in my car getting ready to leave Warsaw for Rome in one hour when they called and said, "Don't leave." But my wife and I had no place to stay in Warsaw. It worked out, but no thanks to Newt. The government should not send people to foreign countries and then abandon them. Newt is totally irresponsible. The idea that he might be President is deeply disturbing.
I was in the process of transferring from Poland to Italy at the State Department's request when Newt shut the government down. The US Embassy in Rome furloughed me, along with most employees, but it left me with no place to live. All my worldly possessions were in storage or in my car getting ready to leave Warsaw for Rome in one hour when they called and said, "Don't leave." But my wife and I had no place to stay in Warsaw. It worked out, but no thanks to Newt. The government should not send people to foreign countries and then abandon them. Newt is totally irresponsible. The idea that he might be President is deeply disturbing.
Romney and Jobs
Most of the debate about whether Romney created jobs at Bain Capital misses the point. Of course, businesses succeed and fail. Some jobs will be created, some eliminated. The questions is whether Romney cared about jobs, or just about maximizing profits. For example, if it cost Bain $1,000 to keep a job that paid $25,000 to some long-term employee, would Romney do it? That question has not been asked, but I think the answer is no. That is a legitimate position, a purely Darwinian capitalist view. But do you want the government to approach the jobs issue the same way? I don't think so. The government should take a more humanitarian approach to jobs. And businesses could, too.
In some cases, businesses fail because the men who started them don't have the heart to fire people who have been with them for years, although the company's hard times require it. The Mitt Romneys of the world can come in and do it because they are heartless. And they end up preserving some jobs, just not all of them.
But what is Romneys view of the importance of jobs versus profits? We don't know, and probably never will, because Romney seems to have no permanent views on anything.
I think Romney's income taxes may be revealing, if he releases them. He probably benefitted from all the tax breaks for rich people, particularly those in investment activities, that the lobbyists have gotten passed over the years, thanks to huge donations from rich people. They can afford huge payments to lobbyists and campaign contributions to politicians, because the resulting tax breaks save them obscene amounts of money. I'm guessing Mitt benefited enormously. It will be even worse if it turns out that he is hiding income by putting assets in the Cayman Islands, or some other tax haven.
In some cases, businesses fail because the men who started them don't have the heart to fire people who have been with them for years, although the company's hard times require it. The Mitt Romneys of the world can come in and do it because they are heartless. And they end up preserving some jobs, just not all of them.
But what is Romneys view of the importance of jobs versus profits? We don't know, and probably never will, because Romney seems to have no permanent views on anything.
I think Romney's income taxes may be revealing, if he releases them. He probably benefitted from all the tax breaks for rich people, particularly those in investment activities, that the lobbyists have gotten passed over the years, thanks to huge donations from rich people. They can afford huge payments to lobbyists and campaign contributions to politicians, because the resulting tax breaks save them obscene amounts of money. I'm guessing Mitt benefited enormously. It will be even worse if it turns out that he is hiding income by putting assets in the Cayman Islands, or some other tax haven.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)