December 2012
On socialism and capitalism
25/12/12 11:05
I don’t see how anyone wants to argue about capitalism versus socialism. We’re no more capitalist than the USSR was communist. Really. We have subsidies for industries, instituted by conservatives, mind you, and lots of other practices that aren’t pure capitalism. How about defense, infrastructure, national initiatives like space travel, and more? And rightly so.
The issue is what services do we want to provide, and what don’t we want? And then, how do we pay? I reckon we want a social safety net, national health insurance so everyone’s covered and the cost is minimized to support national competitiveness, and investments and incentives for behavior that boosts us as a country. Add some defense, and some environmentalism.
I’m not asking for big government, I’m asking for right government, and a fair fiscal policy to support it. And the conservative movement since Reagan has been exactly the opposite, despite exaggerated blather to the contrary. Let me add “do the research” to Bill Clinton’s “do the math”.
The biggest government spending has been under conservatives, and the lowest taxation. If the government were a consumer we’d cut up its credit cards! But we wouldn’t quit the day job. Now we’ve got to pay the piper. We’ve got to invest to get the country growing again, and then we can look to streamline government, matching revenue to services. Yes, we trim waste, but not core services (read: education).
Look, we’ve had 30+ years to prove that unregulated business doesn’t lead to trickle down. Anyone pushing that barrow is just greedy or stupid (or both). Let’s get back to a time when you could get rich, but not quickly without paying your dues. Let’s get back to a set of values that says we pay for what we receive, and our effort is rewarded.
And to skewer another canard, stop that ‘those folks don’t want to work’. Sure, there are those fatheads, but there always have been. We need to provide programs to give them legitimate opportunity, and track them. If they don’t do the effort, they don’t get rewards. That’s just sensible.
The issue is what services do we want to provide, and what don’t we want? And then, how do we pay? I reckon we want a social safety net, national health insurance so everyone’s covered and the cost is minimized to support national competitiveness, and investments and incentives for behavior that boosts us as a country. Add some defense, and some environmentalism.
I’m not asking for big government, I’m asking for right government, and a fair fiscal policy to support it. And the conservative movement since Reagan has been exactly the opposite, despite exaggerated blather to the contrary. Let me add “do the research” to Bill Clinton’s “do the math”.
The biggest government spending has been under conservatives, and the lowest taxation. If the government were a consumer we’d cut up its credit cards! But we wouldn’t quit the day job. Now we’ve got to pay the piper. We’ve got to invest to get the country growing again, and then we can look to streamline government, matching revenue to services. Yes, we trim waste, but not core services (read: education).
Look, we’ve had 30+ years to prove that unregulated business doesn’t lead to trickle down. Anyone pushing that barrow is just greedy or stupid (or both). Let’s get back to a time when you could get rich, but not quickly without paying your dues. Let’s get back to a set of values that says we pay for what we receive, and our effort is rewarded.
And to skewer another canard, stop that ‘those folks don’t want to work’. Sure, there are those fatheads, but there always have been. We need to provide programs to give them legitimate opportunity, and track them. If they don’t do the effort, they don’t get rewards. That’s just sensible.
Guns 'n' thangs
25/12/12 10:57
As with healthcare (and voting), I find that the Aussies are smarter than us. They restrict certain weapons to folks in rural areas who might legitimately have an ‘at large’ threat like feral pigs, and handguns are kept locked up at shooting ranges. They recognize that the concern over a tyrannical government is far less than an angry and/or soused spouse or other family member. Criminals still get guns, but it’s much harder. And as so many statistics say, our weapons deaths are far out of proportion to our population compared to other countries where guns are better controlled.
Look, I don’t want to ban guns, I just want to remove the opportunity for criminal activities. While I do think that assault weapons and cartridges - that is guns designed to kill people not animals - are unnecessary, my bigger issue is access and tracking. I want no gun to be sold without verified identification of the purchaser, a nationwide database of owners, and possibly even tracking tags. We tag our pets, and they’re way less harmful.
The Second Amendment interpretation was originally seen as arming a militia, not the average citizen, and that only recently changed under pressure from, yes, the NRA (which only recently changed it's own perspective on this). And I’ll bet dollars to donuts that both a) the average member isn’t gonzo about allowing mass killing weapons, and b) that the largest proportion of funding comes from manufacturers. As does the agenda.
It is far past time to stop risking our lives for weapons profits. OK?
Look, I don’t want to ban guns, I just want to remove the opportunity for criminal activities. While I do think that assault weapons and cartridges - that is guns designed to kill people not animals - are unnecessary, my bigger issue is access and tracking. I want no gun to be sold without verified identification of the purchaser, a nationwide database of owners, and possibly even tracking tags. We tag our pets, and they’re way less harmful.
The Second Amendment interpretation was originally seen as arming a militia, not the average citizen, and that only recently changed under pressure from, yes, the NRA (which only recently changed it's own perspective on this). And I’ll bet dollars to donuts that both a) the average member isn’t gonzo about allowing mass killing weapons, and b) that the largest proportion of funding comes from manufacturers. As does the agenda.
It is far past time to stop risking our lives for weapons profits. OK?
