Bernie Sanders has been drawing huge crowds to his rallies. The American media cannot ignore that. But they will never use the S word to describe Bernie even though that is how he describes himself. Bernie represents those who would tax Wall Street to preserve social security and a host of other common sense proposals. He dares to suggest that college should be free rather than the first stage of a life of indentured servitude and indebtedness.
People are listening – especially young people. Bernie has been saying these things for years but the media for the most part has been ignoring him. Now he has a bigger megaphone. His decision to run for President in order to get his message out there is paying off.
As Bernie himself has said: “the ideas and the points that we are making are reverberating very strongly with the American people.” Whoever would have thought that Bernie Sanders, Socialist, would be reverberating with the American people, the American people who love freedom and think that society should be set up in such a way that everybody has a chance, no matter how small, of getting rich?
On the other hand Bernie points out that social security is not in danger of running out of money. All you have to do is lift the cap and let rich people pay the same percentage of their income into it as do poor people. That is pretty reverberating if you can just get the message out. Bernie is getting the message out.
The media wants to call Bernie a “populist.” Well, in this instance populism equals socialism. The notion that rich people should pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes as they did during the Eisenhower administration, that there should be a tax on financial transactions and that taxes on the rich should support programs that aid the poor, is that populism or socialism, or both?
But then Americans have always been hypocritical about socialism. Even when they are enjoying the benefits from it, they don’t want to acknowledge it. In an article in the New York Times, Socialism, American Style, Gar Alperovitz and Thomas M Hanna point out that socialism is a way of life in many American states including those that are considered “conservative.” Only you can’t call it that. That would not be politically correct.
Conservative Alaska is a Hotbed of Socialism
Take Alaska, for example. In this ultra conservative state there is a little socialist program known as The Alaska Permanent Fund. The Alaska Permanent Fund, established by a Republican governor in 1976, combines not one, but two socialist principles: public ownership and the provision of a basic income for all residents. The fund collects and invests proceeds from the extraction of oil and minerals in the state. Dividends are paid out annually to every man, woman and child in the state. Even Sarah Palin’s family collects them.
This is from an article I wrote titled The Alaska Permanent Fund: Socialism in a Republican State:
Alaska is a land of rugged individualists – Republicans all the way. However, a little known fact is that Alaska taxes the oil and gas corporations operating there and distributes the proceeds on an annual basis equally among every man, woman and child living in the state. The biggest farce of all is that Tea Party touter, Governor Sarah Palin, slapped an excess profits tax on the state’s oil companies in 2008, the year she ran for vice-President alongside John McCain, so that every person in Alaska received a dividend of $3269 that year. That was a pretty good haul for a family of four: $13,076. For Palin’s family – husband Todd, sons Track and Trig and daughters Bristol, Willow and Piper – it came to an even better haul – $22,883!
We have also written about the Alaska Permanent Fund here. With global warming heating up the climate, more people will be moving to Alaska, not only in search of a moderate climate, but also to take advantage of the yearly stipend which might grow to the point that citizens of Alaska wouldn’t have to work at all especially in view of the minerals that are becoming available due to the melting of the Arctic ice cap. Of course, that oil should stay in the ground if the earth has a chance of not warming up by 2 degrees C and causing widespread calamity.
Political correctness and hypocrisy demands that neither Palin nor any Republican politician mention the Alaska Permanent Fund nor any other socialist program from which money is taken from corporations and redistributed to the people. After all other states might get the idea that, if Alaska can do it, their state might be able to do the same thing. Well, in ultra conservative Texas, they’ve already figured that out: give lip service to conservative, rugged individualist principles while employing de facto socialist ones.
Texans Don’t Mind Benefiting from a Socialist Policy
As Alperovitz and Hanna state:
Texas is another example of conservative socialism in practice. Almost 150 years ago the Texas Permanent School Fund took control of roughly half of all the land and associated mineral rights still in the public domain. In 1953, coastal “submerged lands” were added after being relinquished by the federal government. Each year distributions from the fund go to support education; in 2014 alone it gave $838.7 million to state schools. Another fund, the $17.5 billion Permanent University Fund, owns more than two million acres of land, the proceeds of which help underwrite the state’s public university system.
You’d think that Bernie Sanders would have plenty of supporters in Texas, namely all those who benefit from the Texas Permanent School Fund and Permanent University Fund, but instead they’re all supporters of ultra conservative Governor Rick Perry, at least the majority consisting of white Texans are. Again lip service to conservatism while the actual reality they benefit from is socialism.
It’s the same with Obamacare. All those southern conservatives who are benefiting from it love the reality while at the same time calling for its repeal. As a Washington Post article stated: “When the political history of the Affordable Care Act is written, Kentucky will occupy a special place in the tale. The implementation of the ACA there has helped produce the second steepest drop in the uninsured rate of any state. Yet even though that’s occurring in one of the most unhealthy regions in the country, the general idea of ‘Obamacare’ remains deeply unpopular.”
Many countries employ the same principles, but without the hypocrisy. These funds are called sovereign wealth funds. Norway imposes a 50% tax on oil extraction which is put into its sovereign wealth fund which provides pensions and benefits for the Norwegian people. There’s no talk there of “ending social security” because they don’t have the money. Norwegians have plenty of money since they have profited from their co-owned public wealth in the form of oil extraction.
Only in America is there talk about the nonviability of social security. Most people don’t even realize that if the rich paid into social security at the same rate as the poor, social security would be overfunded not underfunded and senior citizens could get a nice raise especially the needy ones.
Frank Thomas has written knowledgeably about Norway’s sovereign wealth fund here:
The sovereign wealth fund in which Norway saves its oil-gas income is invested internationally primarily in stocks, bonds, and, starting recently, real estate. The strict primary goal is to save for future generations, when hydrocarbons run out. Investing abroad also helps to avoid overheating the Norwegian economy. In 2009, the fund advanced 34% to recover most of the bubble losses.The fund now owns more than 1% of the world’s shares in over 8000 companies. It is Europe’s biggest equity investor. Strategically, the fund takes a 30 year investment horizon. Thus, not surprisingly,the fund is currently investing aggressively in green industries. Helped by the past 30 year petroleum revenues that have been well-invested, Norway has become the 2nd richest nation per capita.
What if California Had Invested in a Sovereign Wealth Fund?
What if California would have taken control of its oil and gas revenues and invested in a sovereign wealth fund? There would be no budget problems today and there would be plenty of money to invest in infrastructure like desalination plants. California would have had the money to deal with its water shortage problems. Instead it became a debt based economy owing what amounts to a mortgage to Wall Street.
Another example: The Permanent Wyoming Mineral Trust Fund, with a market value of more than $7 billion accumulated from mineral extraction, has helped to eliminate income taxes in the state. The basic principle is that the mineral resources of the state belong to the citizens of that state not some private corporation. The idea is that the state should endeavor to enter into a relationship that adequately compensates the citizens for the extraction of their property.
One of the largest “socialist” enterprises in the nation is the Tennessee Valley Authority, a publicly owned company with $11 billion in sales revenue, nine million customers and 11,260 employees that produces electricity and helps manage the Tennessee River system. It seems that some socialist enterprises are not only very successful but are also very popular with the citizens who collectively profit from such enterprises.
Another example is publicly owned utilities. There are, in fact, already more than 2,000 publicly owned electric utilities that, along with cooperatives, supply more than 25 percent of the country’s electricity, now operating throughout the United States. In one of the most conservative states, Nebraska, every single resident and business receives electricity from publicly owned utilities, cooperatives or public power districts. Partly as a result, Nebraskans pay one of the lowest rates for electricity in the nation.
Perhaps the best example of public ownership or socialism, if you will, is the Public Bank of North Dakota(BND). Instead of shipping money to Wall Street, North Dakota uses the profits from its state owned bank to reduce taxes, invest in infrastructure and provide reasonable student loans. Many cities, counties and states are waking up to the fact that the profits that have heretofore been reaped by Wall Street from operations in their states should instead be reinvested in the state or public entity itself. The BND is serving as an example for them to follow. Private profit that goes into out of state investors’ pockets is replaced by public profit which benefits citizens locally whether in a state or a city or other public entity.
Americans Should Derive Part of their Income From Public Wealth
As I said in the aforementioned article: Rich people live off of dividends, rent or interest paid to them in one form or other from their accumulated wealth. Public wealth is owned by the citizens of the US collectively. To receive a dividend from their co-owned wealth would tend to ameliorate the growing inequality of wealth ownership in the US and supplement poor and middle class incomes. Every citizen should be in a position of deriving at least a part of their income from co-owned wealth, especially since income from jobs is going downhill due to automation and outsourcing. This would eliminate poverty, provide a basic income guarantee, stimulate the economic system from the bottom up and restore the middle class.
The US is a debt based country which by virtue of the dollar’s place as the world’s reserve currency can continue to go into debt. Most other countries don’t have this luxury so they start sovereign wealth funds which invest in American debt among other things so that their citizens are in the position of being investors while American citizens are essentially debtors for whom the chickens have not yet come home to roost.
Bernie Sanders’ message is starting to make good sense to thousands of American people who are fed up with the BS Republicans have been feeding them. They are listening to Bernie, Elizabeth Warren, the Pope and the Dalai Lama and beginning to take seriously the facts of climate change, free public education up to the university level, Medicare for all and a beefed up social security program. Ownership of wealth and assets should not be only for the rich. Socialism provides that public wealth shall be redistributed to the poor and middle class as well.
michael-leonard says
“But then Americans have always been hypocritical about socialism.”
I think it’s true that basically all taxes are socialistic redistribution of revenue. But, as your article correctly indicates, most people don’t really understand what socialism is or how it works — in America, every day.
As I first wrote in September, 2009, our economic system, capitalism, is basically at odds with our democratic political system. Capitalism is much more suited to totalitarian or fascistic political systems — like China — while socialism is more aligned with democracy.
BTW, you may wish to correct the spelling of “the Eisenhauer administration”.
John Lawrence says
I disagree that all taxes are socialistic redistribution of income. Number 1: we have a very regressive tax system. That means the poor and middle class pay most of the taxes not the rich. Number 2: tax money is redistributed upward – to the rich, not downward to the poor.
Also we don’t really have a democracy; we have a plutocracy. Even if it worked the way the Founders intended, it would still be based on winner take all, majority rule. European democracies have proportional representation and other mechanisms which give minorities more of a voice in electoral politics.
michael-leonard says
We’re really on the same page, Mr. Lawrence.
Yes, our democratic system has been co-opted to the point where it now effectively IS a plutocracy. And yes, I also have written that one of the fixes for our governmental system is to institute proportional representation. It was much more that way back at the nation’s founding.
The tax system also is broken, just as you describe. But truly, taxes have always been that way — medieval monarchs taxed the people to fund their way of life; revenue redistribution.
Once in a while, a tax works the other way ’round — taxes funding mass transit, though woefully insufficient, benefit the masses (especially in larger cities or other countries).
John Lawrence says
It would be interesting to see a study that showed which way tax money was redistributed at different points in history. During the 30s and the FDR administration and up through the Eisenhauer administration,I think taxes were redistributed downward. After Reagan it was the reverse.
If the government had a public central bank that printed its own money, there would be no need to redistribute tax money. Money would be printed and spent into the economy at the level of infrastructure creation and repair as it was during the Lincoln administration. Taxes would actually be reduced as they are in North Dakota where profits from their public bank pay for things that other states pay for with tax money. And taxes would not have to be collected just to pay interest on loans to Wall Street which accounts for a lot of taxes that need collecting today.
Gale Snoats says
Re: michael-leonard, August 18, 2015 at 7:53 pm on broken lineage of taxation from medieval monarchs/peasants…
This is the dimmest, most negative view of the periods Feudalism. Indeed, the King (or Monarch) enjoyed the most “rights and or privileges” in a hierarchical society. But to imply it was merely a system of transferring wealth from poor to rich begs the question, “why did the peasant stay?”
I’d submit that while the hierarchy/caste seems or is unfair compared to modern western sensibilities if working properly, everybody had their place, served a purpose and it went both ways.
The ground the peasant likely farmed was owned by the Monarch/King (State) so arguably the produce grown was not necessarily the peasants to choose with what to do.
Of course, the peasant isn’t going to stick around if the King can’t provide protection to him/her/them in times of difficulty be it invasion, illness or scarcity.
I’ll reiterate each position w/all accompanying prestige or despise had responsibility or the system broke down.
It was no different than many other forms of government to come before or after. Much depended on the integrity of the King/Monarch and his ability to choose others of responsibility well. A good and wise king probably reigns over a more content people than does a cruel, paranoid and plotting one.
It may seem a small thing but the king or monarch relied almost entirely on the loyalty and well-being of the peasantry in time of war.
bob dorn says
Snoats, your noble peasantry wasn’t able to flee the lands of your average medieval despot any more than slaves were free to leave American plantations. They were tied to the land by their ancestral connections, spoke dialects of your noble King’s language that precluded wandering a few miles from their hovels to establish themselves in rival’s lands who viewed them as an enemy. Even if they could speak those rival’s foreign dialects they’d have had slim chance of getting their donkey, pig and children through often hostile territory where they’d most likely have to steal food to survive.
I think you’ve smoat a might blow on behalf of some juvenile Libertarian fantasy. Yes, today’s American workforce has more freedom to move from tyranny’s reach than did the country’s slaves, but if I were you I wouldn’t encourage your children to vote for a few of the Republicans who’ve been listening to a popular radical talk show host who’s reintroduced the idea of conscripted convict labor, particularly if they’re black and poor and unable to pay their parking tickets.
Gale Snoats says
I’m going to agree to disagree re:feudalism. I’m a fair student of history and sure, I suppose it’s good to be the King, but these people regardless of caste or hierarchy had an integral place in the community. I’ve nothing to reiterate and perhaps expand that any society, any governor or governed is as amicable and successful as each person’s integrity dictates. Obviously, a good and noble king, monarch, etc likely made for a more good and noble society within his realm.
Gale Snoats says
Think what you may, I am a Constitutionalist. From my POV neither party has done a bang up job in a very long time of actually adhering to it and moreover to the D. of I. You should give them a read sometime. The bad part is that by electoral college or popular vote when we elect candidates to _______ we are effectively giving them carte blanche or discretion to interpret the Feds new program, new department, new war per the Constitution and qualify as Constitutional. Yes, we have the Supreme Court but it is increasingly about social justifications than adherence to the US Constitution.
I’ve no idea who you’re talking about re: certain radio talk show host, advocating chaingang cheap contracted labor. I don’t listen to radio much at all, I find it curious you’re accusing me yet you’re the one w/all the information yet afraid to state the individuals names.
Blacks and others jailed for parking tickets typically don’t indulge the penitentiary. This is usually left for more serious criminals regardless of race. Nevertheless, we have the following…
“Equivalent proportions of black (58%) and Hispanic (60%) prisoners were convicted of violent offenses, while the percentage of white inmates (49%) serving time for violent crimes was smaller.
Roughly, 60% of non-white prisoners are in due violent crime not parking tickets. Roughly, 50% of whites in prison have committed violent crimes.
Perhaps, the other ~ 40% of blacks had to many parking tickets as did the other ~50% of whites.
Generally, blacks are 5x more likely to commit a violent offense than anyone else based on race. They are quite likely to commit their violent offense against a fellow black American as well.
Anyway, not quite sure what you were driving at. Discrediting me, that much is obvious My Stats are FBI, Justice and a think tank or two.
Curious, I find that forgiveness, establishing trust, prayer and visiting the imprisoned is a good way to be personally humble and perhaps treat another the way I’d like to be treated in similar circumstances.
There is no place quite like a max security prison and a long stretch to suck the life out of a person. How is it you assist the imprisoned regardless of race and/or crime?
“…a popular radical talk show host who’s reintroduced the idea of conscripted convict labor…” A new vast, right-wing conspiracy? You really ought to drop a name ’cause you know this individual is stating so & specifying blacks in max security due unpaid parking tickets.
Gale Snoats says
John, your hypothesis: the poor and middle class pay the greatest quantity of taxation for primarily assorted Federal budgets, then states, municipalities, etc instead of rich is patently false albeit seemingly popular among neo-socialists.
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/113th-congress-2013-2014/reports/49440-Distribution-of-Income-and-Taxes.pdf
If we merely consider the hypothesis on the merit of statement it begins to come apart…
The Federal Government in 2015 so utterly massive, w/it’s “un” or underfunded social programs, newer massively more expensive social programs, various & largely untapped stimulus funds (how many times have various individuals pledged to use these funds to update and improve the electrical grid?) and nothing approaching true budget cuts in ~ two decades. If you suggest the Clinton Admins. claims of a balanced budget this is one way in which social security goes broke/requires survival funding.
The present admin claimed to reduce military funding but when it did that it increased black budget spending thus no idea what, where or why the money is used. The last pentagon budget saw an increase, however, a good chunk of the budgeted funds were spent on congressional earmarks to get the bill passed before a single bullet was made. This is also known as pork barrel spending.
In simplistic terms, the poor and middle income brackets couldn’t/can’t produce anywhere near, anywhere near, somewhere near the quantity of revenue the State requires. Even then there’s so much overspending we’re in debt so great we’re all likely to become subjects of a paradigm very different than the one which we now exist and are free to debate.
Once upon a time states, municipalities gave corporations, etc tax free everything wagering, more/higher paying jobs would make happy residents. Taxation on those higher wages make for happy municipality. Now everything goes overseas/across borders. It doesn’t matter whose in the White House/or not, whose putting in 16-20 hrs a wk on Capitol Hill.
Finally, regarding the sort of intermediaries you recommend for the US that Euro leftist Democracy’s have… The US has always possessed such individuals. They’re called “Citizens”. It’s our job to insure our elected representatives are leading in a manner befitting the D.ofI. and U.S. Const. We are all part of the government. When we get lazy, devoted more to sports, selves, ideologies, whatever and give up vigilance we begin losing all that once made us great or should make us great in the 1st place.
Be more like the “Eurocracies”… we get the socialism which gave such eager audience to nazism, communism, fascism, though the 3rd is more a tactic used by others than “Sorelianism”. Georges doesn’t get his own “ism”. They entertained Margie’s Eugenics theory and followed through when it received very little play in the more conservative US where only progressive entities such as the KKK gave audience to it.
Our country is a mess, we’re broke, broken, divided and ripe for the plucking. We can’t pay our debts. A time is fast approaching (I’d love to be wrong) when nations we hoped to control will come to collect their collateral from the American people, not it’s government. This has happened over and over in human history.
John Lawrence says
Well, I’ll just mention a couple things about taxes. With regard to FICA (social security) taxes, it is imposed on only the first $113,700 of gross wages in 2013 and $117,000 in 2014. The tax is not imposed on investment income such as interest and dividends. So it’s a tax on income derived from work not investments.
Hence it favors the rich and extracts a regressive tax from the poor especially the poor unemployed who pay double (both the employee’s and the employer’s share). There are no deductions or exemptions. A 90 year old self-employed person pays close to 15% of his or her income on FICA taxes.
Second rich hedge fund types can use “carried interest” to get out of paying taxes at all as well as offshore tax shelters.
Gale Snoats says
Be that as it may, despite the red everywhere in the Fed’s accounting ledger due out of control spending the overwhelming majority of its taxable revenue comes from the wealthy.
This ought to be obvious on its surface as the poorest are more likely than not to use of some Fed services rather than generate substantial tax revenue. Nor can a shrinking middle class flip the ever growing bill required to satiate the Fed’s spending needs. Thus, we’re left with the wealthy to assuage as much of the burden as possible.
Re: interest on investments??? All my investments require taxation on investment/principal and any such derived interest at such time I accumulate the money. While it’s being invested, yes there is no taxation. When I remove the whole sum or a portion I am hit up side the head w/taxation and penalty as a reminder my investment is really preferred to be in someone else’s control.
The federal government taxes not only investment income – dividends, interest, rent on real estate, etc. – but also realized capital gains. The taxman is smart, too; investors cannot escape by investing indirectly through mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, REITs or limited partnerships. For tax purposes, these entities are transparent. The tax character of their distributions flows through to investors in proportion to their economic interest, and investors are still liable for tax on capital gains when they sell.
If it’s an issue of simplifying tax codes, i.e. flat sales taxes, etc are wildly popular, just nobody in a position to effect change can/will make changes. Most Americans whatever their stripes have been favorable to such measures, however, given the IRS has just been given a big shot in the arm I’m not counting on a budget reduction there.
Re: the plethora of new taxes to accommodate what borrowing can’t in order to fund the Patient Protection (all the power brokers love to forget this part) & Affordable Healthcare Act has in part resulted in a tax code so hopelessly complex many tax preparers are squeamish about wrestling it.
John Lawrence says
You don’t seem to mention the inordinate sums of money the military and the military-industrial complex take out of the Federal budget, but only the welfare programs that benefit the poor.
I’m surprised you haven’t managed to find out the tricks about starting an offshore corporation in a tax free jurisdiction and transferring all your investments there. Well, I guess there are smart rich people and ones that haven’t figured out how to beat the system yet.
Gale Snoats says
1st: Its not my intent to be disagreeable merely for the sake of being so. I’m not your enemy, nor do I see justifiable rationale in attempting to cast me as such.
2nd: I came to the discussion b/c I found the content curious. I’ve been dissatisfied most of my 48 yrs due the contrast in actual governance and such principles of governance our public servants/leaders swear oaths to uphold, to protect. You know… Popular Sovereignty,Limited Government, Separation of Powers, Checks & Balances & Federalism. I believe these issues have been allowed to erode &/or compromise to the point at which these central principles cease to exist and no longer predominate the relationship between the people and the government.
m dissatisfied w/the leadership
3rd: As frequently occurs on such threads, every comment more or less says the same thing or at least reaffirms the same thesis. I’ve, respectfully presented a disparate POV.
4th: Your ever more so evasive, making assumptions/accusations, utterly ignoring evidentiary based positions, assertions, etc that are divergent relative to your own instead. Instead of discussing or debating amicably you have been evasive, accusing even taunting. You seemingly chose to remain ignorant of any but such positions as you espouse.
Throughout our banter you’ve demonstrated greater and greater lapses of intellectual honesty. So much for diversity of thoughts and opinion when discussing/debating. I’m sure you practice such when not trading comments w/one who… like myself is more cautious about socialist trends in the USA, they have merit, however, the US has been in simultaneous steep decline on every issue while socialism gains popularity.
Lacking wisdom, understanding & love the manner of government/society will matter little.
You misjudge me entirely and I wonder if it isn’t your fixations that seem so familiar.
——————–
21Aug15@ 1:15PM my The present admin claimed to reduce military funding but when it did that it increased black budget spending thus no idea what, where or why the money is used. The last pentagon budget saw an increase, however, a good chunk of the budgeted funds were spent on congressional earmarks to get the bill passed before a single bullet was made. This is also known as pork barrel spending.
——————=
I wish you well and that socialism is & continues to be the panacea you desire it to be.
John Lawrence says
Thank you for your cogent and pertinent comments, Gale. You certainly have an intelligent and well thought out point of view. I’m sorry if I haven’t debated amicably. I respect your positions.
I haven’t had time in the comments section to develop well reasoned positions as you have. Sorry if I have been flip.
However, I don’t espouse “socialism” as a thing in itself. I do espouse certain changes to our society both economic and political which are more or less the same things that Bernie Sanders is talking about.
Good luck to you.
John Lawrence says
You seem fixated on the poor and middle class “tax brackets” which are not a fixed entity. The maximum income tax bracket has been dropped from over 90% under Eisenhauer to 28% under Reagan. Soon after taking office in 1981, Reagan signed into law one of the largest tax cuts in the postwar period. The rich are not paying their fair share at least by historical standards.
Tim Flynn says
“The American media cannot ignore that. But they will never use the S word to describe Bernie even though that is how he describes himself.”
There was no point in reading any further since the above comment is nothing but an outright lie as the author is knows full well.
The overwhelming number of “mainstream” media articles never fail to identify Bernie Sanders as an avowed Socialist.
John Lawrence says
It’s news to me, albeit welcome news. I’m glad the American people are now embracing a socialist.
chris halfacre says
Mr. Lawrence,
I didn’t make it past the firt paragraph. The media calls Bernie Sanders a Socialist all the time, he refers to his self as a DEMOCRATIC Socalist, Social-Security is all ready functional, and he wants to tax Wall Street to pay for free public higher education. You should check out the website made by some of his followers feelthebern.org
John Lawrence says
Same as above. I’m glad the American people are now prepared to embrace a socialist.
Goatskull says
I don’t think it means Americans will embrace a socialist. Maybe they will maybe not. The point of what Tim Flynn and chris halfacreare saying is that the American media HAS in fact referred to to Bernie Sanders as a socialist, not whether or not most Americans will embrace one.
bob dorn says
Goatskull, there’s a difference between being right
and doing right.
Goatskull says
And your point is?
bob dorn says
You’re right.
Goatskull says
Apologies- Didn’t have my coffee yet.
Morty Geist says
No matter who or what must vote for
a democrat to save the supreme court.
John Lawrence says
Yes, Morty, any Democrat will do as far as that is concerned.
Grace Rich says
Bernie Sanders appears to be the only reasonable candidate for President. The problems which have to be solved: infrastructure, education, climate change, and wealth redistribution can only be solved by an outspoken progressive like Sanders. No wonder he draws such large crowds and young people are for him. He really is their only chance for some kind of a future!
John Lawrence says
You’re absolutely right, Grace. We’ll see if the Republicans can generate enough smoke and mirrors to fool the American public. They weren’t able to do it in 2008. Let’s hope they’re not able to do it again. Either Bernie or Hillary would be effective if the Dems could only get control of Congress. Otherwise, it will be more of the same stagnation and stalling and dysfunction. At least a Dem will be able to make choices about the Supreme Court. But Congress could stymie that too.
Gale Snoats says
All rights and privileges a U.S. citizen has is derived from the Declaration of Independence. From this came our Constitution a social contract between the governed and governing. If the government isn’t protecting the citizens it’s failing to meet its contractual obligation. Our’s is a “Popular Sovereignty”
Our’s is also a “Limited Government”. The U.S. government cannot lawfully derive power from itself. It can only use power given it by “The People” and obey its laws. Given our constitution is to a degree a “living document” it matters little whether we remain a Republic, a social democracy, monarchy, etc.
What matters most is integrity, integrity of governors and citizens alike. No matter, genuine good stewardship of the nation is severely hampered when one considers exactly what happens to each dollar spent on behalf of Federal taxation alone.
For any of the previous posts criteria to become viable in a manner consistent w/the good of our nation we, the government must come to grips w/and truly address the way in which every citizen’s funding is taxed. Of every dollar citizens spent on Federal taxation… $0.46 is utterly wasted, nearly 1/2 goes up in smoke though I’m sure someone enjoys it. $0.31 is spent paying interest on foreign debt.
Note: ~ 1/3 of each tax dollar is used to pay “Interest” on foreign debt, it’s a given none of us or our children will be alive when we break into principal at this rate. This leaves $0.23 of every tax dollar to work with, that actually gets used in some tangible way. Whether all agree on necessity, etc is another topic.
These issues must be dealt w/swiftly/decisively and positively for the United States. If not, those countries we’re indebted to will collect the collateral their due per contract. In some respects, global economics are not so different from simple.
Perhaps, a start might be repayment of any/all still unused stimulus taxation. It seems it is most often used for such public utilities, rails, roads, bridges, tunnels, dams, reservoirs, navigable waterways, etc.
All of which already operated with annual budgets with planned minor, major maintenance and eventual replacement being factors. Even the energy corps nuclear power plant is required to maintain adequate funding for decommissioning upon reaching the end of operational life.
So, if we have infrastructure needs including the oft talked about/oft claimed allocation of funds for improved, smarter, hardened power grids, the funding for such should come from money already being derived from consumers/taxpayers.
Ian Mackenzie says
…Another thought provoking article John. I’m pulling for Bernie with, perhaps, Elizabeth Warren as VP. Would that be a good team?
John Lawrence says
You betcha!
michael-leonard says
That’s a dream team, all right; it’ll only happen in our dreams.
Mlb says
You’re comparing states to the federal government and countries that makes your argument flawed. Also can you define ‘the rich’ please. How does Bernie stand with 2nd amendment?
John Lawrence says
Anything a state could do along these lines the Federal government could do as well. The US government could have a sovereign wealth fund if it so chose, but the reality is that the Federal government has a sovereign DEBT fund.
A lot of people have defined “the rich.” I’d say a reasonable definition is the upper 1%. But then it’s not rocket science.
I haven’t looked up how Bernie stands with the 2nd amendment, but I would bet he’s for robust gun control as I am.