Wednesday, November 6, 2019

More on Political Relativity

This explains political relativity very well, and in a very funny way.


I may find this more amusing than most because I continue to be called a Socialist by Conservatives, and a Conservative by Liberals. When typically in tests I score as a "Moderate Republican" per this comic.


Can A Sitting President be Investigated for Crimes?

NYT Trump Tax Return Case Confronts Supreme Court With a Momentous Choice


This will be very interesting to see how they rule?
And if the GOP voters will be happy with either ruling?
I mean what may help Trump may help future DEM Presidents.


Though I still wonder what Trump has hidden in those tax returns that he is so scared to show us like he promised he would... :-)

Monday, November 4, 2019

Trump Demands What He Would Not Do

Yahoo Trump demands whistleblower testify in person — the thing he refused to do in Mueller probe

At least he is consistent in being a hypocrite and a liar... :-)  It will be interesting to see if he finally turns over his tax returns or if keeps trying to hide them?  Apparently he has no secrets from his supporters and will fight like hell to ensure they never find them...

NYT Trump Taxes: Appeals Court Rules President Must Turn Over 8 Years of Tax Returns

I still wonder often how the Trump True Believers rationalize him hiding so much normally open information from them?  (ie Tax Returns, Testifying Under Oath, Actual recording of that perfect discussion with the President of Ukraine, etc) 

Why would he need to read the doctored summary instead of just letting us hear the actual recorded call?  Is it that bad?

Sunday, November 3, 2019

Wealth and Income Rights?

The Five Best Sentences (ie S1 - S4)
  1. You can not legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
  2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
  3. The government can not give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from someone else.
  4. You can not multiply wealth by dividing it.
  5. When half the people get the idea that they do not half to work, because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because someone else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end for any nation.
A friend posted the above list on FB. It seemed one one of those silly overly simplistic Conservative memes, so I kept it for further thought and discussion.  So let's give it a try...

Before starting, I will pose the normal question... What is FAIR taxation? (ie T1 - T4)

  1. Fair would be if we took the total cost of government, divided it by the number of adult able bodied citizens. And each adult then paid their fair share of the bill. (ie Dues concept)
  2. Fair would be if total cost of government was divided by the total income of every adult able bodied citizen. And each citizen paid their fair share of the bill. (ie Percent of Winnings to the House Concept)
  3. Fair would be if total cost of government was divided by the total income - some base living cost (~$25,000?) of every adult able bodied citizen. And each citizen paid their fair share of the bill for every $ they make above the base living. (ie Percent of Winnings above Base Cost to the House Concept)
  4. Fair would be if taxes and credits/programs were set to reduce the net income and wealth gap between the adult able bodied citizens. This means high income and wealthy people pay significantly higher rates than other citizens in attempt to attain a fair society.(ie Equalization concept)
My view is that T3 is probably the most "FAIR" method, and the USA is close to this since wealthier people may pay higher rates, but they also shelter a lot of wealth gains from taxes by not selling the assets.  If you doubt this just checkout how families use the step up basis technique and trusts to avoid paying taxes on their gains.  Where as us working stiffs have few to no shelters available to us.  We work and almost every dollar is taxed via payroll or income taxes.  And if you make so little that you can afford to put almost nothing into a 401K or IRA... You just pay taxes...

S1. You can not legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
This obviously seems incorrect, since welfare payments, food stamps, the medicare system and the disability system have allowed many truly poor people to live safely and humanely. Of course the problem is that some of them get comfortable and stop striving to improve, work, learn and become independent.

S2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
Now if everyone worked for their income and wealth increases, this would be correct.  However citizens with a lot of capital, land, investments, etc really do not need to "work" for those income and wealth increases. Especially if they inherited it from their Parents or other family members.

So where does "luck" fit into our system, if one is born with a silver spoon and another born with a lead spoon...  How does our society want to address this? Do the silver spoon folks get to claim that they "worked" for it?  While looking down on the less fortunate folks?

S3. The government can not give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from someone else.
This is true and yet somewhat silly.  The reason I say this is because the wealth and land rights of every citizen really only exist because our government says they do.  This is why you have land titles, incorporation documents, etc that are registered with the government.  Without our governments we would be back to a time of war lords where the strong could take what they want. And the cost for this protection is that we as citizens agree to live with in the rules of our society. (ie government)

S4. You can not multiply wealth by dividing it.
Now I am not even sure what this one is trying to say. However of course a government can facilitate the multiplication of wealth by taking it and spending it wisely. Ensuring we have great highways, educated workers, clean water, healthy workers, etc do wonders for multiplying wealth.

Of course it can also waste wealth by enabling dependency, spending too much on providing services, passing pointless regulations, etc.

S5. When half the people get the idea that they do not half to work, because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because someone else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end for any nation.
This is also true and yet somewhat silly. Now I agree that there are some true dead beats out there, but I put it at maybe 1% - 3% of the population. Certainly not anywhere near 50%.  And please remember that most middle class folks are just paying their fair share of the taxes...  It is the upper 20%  who are paying more than their "fair share". And they may not be doing so depending on what you think regarding the "wealth tax avoidance" topics above.

Future
The big question is how are we going to manage wealth creation and distribution when ever more jobs become automated? Will the people holding the capital get to keep all the gains while those who lost their jobs become impoverished?  I am assuming we the people and our government will need to face this reality at some point.

Of course with the tribes refusing to collaborate it will be a bumpy road.


Friday, November 1, 2019

What Behaviors will GOP Enable?

NYT Analysis: House Impeachment Inquiry Vote Underscores Intense Polarization

So apparently the GOP is dedicated to protecting a President who obviously used the office of President of the USA and the tax dollars of the US citizens to pressure a foreign government to:
work with his personal lawyer
publicly announce that they would investigate his primary Democratic opponent
publicly announce that they would investigate Ukranian / Democratic interference in the 2016 election (a debunked theory) (more debunking)

So the question now is will the GOP politicians and voters be able to swallow Trump's new message... 
"It is okay that I broke the rules and withheld
US Defense dollars from their intended purpose
for potential personal gains. I am Trump and
the rules do not apply to me, since I need
emperor like powers to fight the government
that you elected."
The scary thing is that I assume it will work.  People seem very capable of ignoring the sins of "their politician".  I mean just consider that ZERO GOP representatives voted to even investigate this issue further.  Does anyone think that would be the case of this was a Democratic President?


So apparently law and order is not that important to voters and politicians.  What matters is he my guy or their guy "breaking the rules"? 



Wednesday, October 30, 2019

Who Needs Insurance or Money?

VOX Trump quietly cut legal immigration by up to 65%
This is what immigration restrictionists have been waiting for.

I have to wonder how many of us would be US citizens if Trump had been President in the 1850 to 1900 period?

CNBC rump suspends entry of immigrants who cannot pay for healthcare

This is so ironic given that Republicans do not want to mandate that citizens meet the basic requirement.
"Some immigrants, mostly family members of US citizens or green card holders, can apply for lawful permanent residency abroad and obtain a green card almost immediately. Otherwise, immigrants can come to the US on two types of visas: those for immigrants who intend to settle in the US permanently and eventually obtain a green card, and those that only allow an immigrant to remain in the US temporarily.
In order to get a green card, an immigrant will have to prove to a consular officer that they will obtain health insurance within 30 days of their arrival in the US. If they can’t, they must demonstrate that they will be able to pay for their medical expenses.
The proclamation does not lay out clear procedures for determining whether immigrants meet the proclamation’s requirements — it will be up to individual consular officers charged with evaluating visa applications and the State Department, which is expected to issue internal guidance on it. 
But based on insurance coverage alone, the majority of adults who were granted green cards over the last three years would have been shut out."
So if this is an acceptable position for immigrants...  Why is the GOP against this for US Citizens?




Monday, October 28, 2019

Is Booing POTUS Okay?

VOX Trump was on the receiving end of “lock him up” chants at the World Series

I wonder what Trump was thinking... In his little delusional world he is a popular genius, and yet faced with 10,000+ boos and many chants of "lock him up". How does he process this? Can he even acknowledge that ~50% of Americans dislike or detest him?

Usually I would say it is wrong to boo the POTUS, however I think it is okay with Trump given how negative and critical Trump is of everyone who disagrees with him.
"President Trump on Monday used his first trip to Chicago as president to tear into the city and its leadership, comparing its violence to Afghanistan and blasting officials as inept and disloyal to the U.S."
Especially when Trump is unwilling to work on improving gun control across the country. Which provides a lot of the guns in Chicago.
About six in ten “crime guns” seized by Chicago Police originated from gun shops outside of Illinois, according to a 2017 report issued by the department. Crime guns are defined by law enforcement as those that are “illegally possessed, used, or suspected to be used in furtherance of a crime.”

In about 95 percent of cases, the person found in possession of a crime gun is not the original purchaser of the weapon, the report said.

Sunday, October 27, 2019

Yes Men Will Get You Impeached

WE 'I feel bad that I left': John Kelly warned Trump he would be impeached

CNN White House: John Kelly 'was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great President'

I think I will trust the retired Marine General...  Especially after listening to Trump making up pre 9/11 stories again this morning.
There were so many good comics on the topic, I had to steal 2.

Border Wall Update

WAPO Trump administration has acquired little of the private land in Texas it needs for border barrier

BBC Wall Update

FOX Wall Coverage

It seems that so far Trump has mostly just replaced vehicle barriers with "the wall" which is the easy part since the US government already controlled the land. New "wall" in Texas will be much harder since it requires obtaining the land from private owners.

So should private owners be forced to sell land in the middle of their property to the Federal government for a "wall" they do not want?  Usually the GOP would be against such Federal power plays. Thoughts?


Thursday, October 24, 2019

The Republican Defense?

What to do the President from your party is caught doing something really questionable and likely illegal?


  • This is like questioning who called in the tip that someone was "embezzling" from a company.
  • I mean the initial review has proven without a doubt that the report was correct.
  • Many very experienced and trustworthy civil servants have corroborated that the "embezzling" took place and who was behind it. 
  • So why would we need the Whistle Blower's testimony?
  • Apparently the case must be pretty air tight, since instead of defending the President they decide to interrupt the proceedings.
  • Kind of like Trump's resistance to releasing his tax returns, what crimes has he committed that he is scared to show the people what he and his staff have been doing?
  • What would GOP politicians and voters do if a DEM President refused to be transparent with them?
  • Really? We know a potential crime occurred and you want to avoid hearing the evidence?
The good news is that hopefully the initial investigation will be done by mid-Nov, then the DEMs will be able to start making even more information public

What then will be their defense for:

Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Taylor Trump Quid Pro Quo and Lynching

VOX Read: Top State Department official’s testimony outlining Trump’s Ukraine quid pro quo
This is very bad for President Donald Trump.

FOX: Diplomat Bill Taylor testifies Trump used Ukraine aid, White House meeting as leverage for probes

It seems pretty clear that Trump was trying to use tax dollars and a White House visit for personal gain.  Now the question is if the Trump True Believers care?

 And then Trump says something very stupid and inappropriate.

FOX McConnell chides Trump for calling impeachment inquiry a 'lynching'

I mean the committees are investigating now and Trump will have his time to defend himself once it is determined by the House that there is adequate reason to send it to the Senate.  I am sure that the Black people who were lynched had wished they had a small portion of this due process.

Lynch: "to put to death (as by hanging) by mob action without legal approval or permission"

Sunday, October 20, 2019

Should Conversion Therapy be Banned?

Third Hour Everyone, Stop Freaking Out: The Church Is NOT Pro-Conversion Therapy

A FB Friend who happens to be Mormon posted that link.  One of his FB Friends posted the following link in response.  He also wrote what I perceived to be his dissatisfaction with the Mormon Church trying to join the 21st century by becoming a bit more tolerant and protective of minors.

National Task Force for Therapy Equality

So I did a little looking, found and posted these links.  So far no replies.

Utah Conversion Therapy Ban Bill

Apparently the MN Senate blocked MN's CT Ban bill in May...

AP Mormon church opposes Utah LGBTQ ‘conversion therapy’ ban

SPLC NARTH Becomes Main Source for Anti-Gay ‘Junk Science’

And how is this for ironic.

CBS Former conversion therapy leader comes out as gay and apologizes to community

Out Right International

So should Parent(s) who fear that their children are confused about their sexuality be allowed to bring them to a place to receive hetero-normative indoctrination?

Or should the children be protected from this "therapy" that apparently has pretty much no scientific backing?

Personally I can not even imagine being a child who feels LGBT+ and has to face a gauntlet of closed minded parent(s), religious leaders and zealot counselors who work to convince them that everything they are feeling is sinful, wrong, unnatural, etc.


Saturday, October 19, 2019

Trump or Warren?

NYT Trump or Warren   Laurie shared this excellent piece by David Brooks.  It will be interesting to see Trump can still win if a lot of Law and Order Republicans put our values ahead of the party line.

 I'll steal it for your convenience...

"This is a memo for the politically homeless. It’s a memo to those of us who could never support Donald Trump but think the Bernie-Squad-Warren Democratic Party is sprinting too far left. It’s a memo built around the following question: If the general election campaign turns out to be Trump vs. Warren, what the heck are we supposed to do?

The first thing we could do, of course, is pray for a miracle. Maybe the Democrats will nominate one of the five B’s or the K: Biden, Buttigieg, Booker, Bennet, Bullock or Klobuchar.

These candidates are pluralists, not purists. They make many voters who disagree with them feel heard and respected. They practice the craft of politics, building majority coalitions to get things done.

If the party nominated one of those six, you really could see the Democrats gather progressives and moderates into an enduring majority coalition as the Republicans recede into old, white, rural obsolescence. You could see movement on a range of issues where large majorities are already stacked on one side: guns, climate change, reducing income inequality, expanding health coverage.

But right now, Elizabeth Warren has the momentum, and so those of us who feel politically homeless may face a stark choice.

For many, supporting Warren is too high a price to pay, even for ousting Trump. “There is no universe where I will ever vote for Donald Trump, and there is no universe where I could ever vote for Elizabeth Warren,” Jennifer Horn, a former chairwoman of the New Hampshire G.O.P., told The Washington Examiner. And you can see why so many people have that reaction.

First, there are Warren’s policies. On trade, she’s a protectionist. Her 10-year, $34 trillion health care plan isn’t paid for. Her student debt cancellation plan is a handout to the upper middle class. Her campaign seems to not acknowledge the inevitable trade-off between economic growth and high spending, high taxes and high regulation.

Second, she’s one of the few Democrats who could actually lose. As Yascha Mounk notes in The Atlantic, Democrats won in 2018 because they won back a lot of nonpartisan suburban office park workers who found moderates they could vote for. When you remind independents of Democratic support for abolishing private health insurance and decriminalizing unauthorized border crossing — two key Warren policies — they become six percentage points less likely to vote for the Democrats. Trump will tell voters: You may despise me, but she’ll destroy the economy.

Third, a Warren presidency would be deeply polarizing and probably unsuccessful. Warren’s policy ideas would make any progressive-moderate coalition impossible. She’d try to govern with her 40 percent partisan base, just as Trump has, which is no way to pass big legislation.

Fourth, there is a wave of insular intolerance coursing through parts of the American left. If given executive power, some progressives may use it to cancel any culture or faith other than their own.

And yet, if it comes to Trump vs. Warren in a general election, the only plausible choice is to support Warren. Over the past month Donald Trump has given us fresh reminders of the unique and exceptional ways he corrupts American life. You’re either part of removing that corruption or you are not. When your nation’s political system is in danger, staying home and not voting is not a responsible option.

Politics is downstream from morality and culture. Warren represents a policy wrong turn, in my view, but policies can be argued about and reversed. Trump represents a much more important and fundamental threat — to the norms, values, standards and soul of this country. "

Last week, Trump all but greenlighted the ethnic cleansing of Kurds without an ounce of remorse. He normalizes dishonesty and valorizes cruelty. His letter to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reminds us yet again that we have a president whose professional competence is at kindergarten level. Once a nation has lost its heart, mind and soul, it is very hard to get these things back.

Furthermore, Trump is an unprecedented threat to democratic institutions. Over the past few years, I’ve thought the progressive fears of incipient American fascism were vastly overblown. But, especially over the past month, Trump has worked overtime to validate those fears and to raise the horrifying specter of what he’ll be like if he is given a second term and is vindicated, unhinged and unwell.

In their book “How Democracies Die,” Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt argue that authoritarians undermine democracy in several ways. They reject the democratic rules of the game, the unwritten norms we rely upon to make the political system work. They deny the legitimacy of their political opponents, using extreme language to deny them standing as co-citizens. They tolerate or even encourage violence, threatening to take legal action against critics in rival parties.

Trump has been guilty of all three sins, and given a second term he will feel free to stomp where up until now he has merely trod.

This election is about whether we can hold together as a functioning nation, across our economic, racial, geographic and ideological divides. In such circumstances, a bad option is better than a suicidal one."

Thursday, October 17, 2019

Fact Check Before Sharing - Please...

Here is a FB post by Drewbie that I think is worth sharing. Though it took me awhile to get to it...
"Every couple of years I find myself advocating for fact checking before hitting that share button on social media. Admittedly, sharing of pretty much anything at all is the main reason I, and so many others I know, have gone away from facebook altogether. I only ever joined so I could share pictures of my kids with far flung family and friends and see their families grow and go on adventures as well.
Now when I scroll through the "news" feed from time to time, I see more than half of the posts are reposts and shares from other sources. Now, a recipe or craft idea can be fun, but really, I'd rather see a picture of you making the recipe or you doing a craft. I don't really care what social media influencers have to say about anything. 
The main driver of this particular post is to rail on the other kind of share / repost; the political stuff. It is exceedingly rare to see a post with a political tilt that presents facts that are true. A 10 second search will show the bias in the information presented and tell you the real story of the often twisted origin of the information being presented. If you feel compelled to hit that share button, please take those 10 seconds to verify the integrity of the information you're about to post. Don't perpetuate the "fake news" from either side of the political divide. 
Continuing to push these false narratives does nothing but drive a deeper wedge between people. It creates a stronger "Us vs Them" mentality which won't help anyone except those that stand to gain from that division. Be better than that. Please.
If you have an opinion, please feel free to post that. Engage in conversation. Ask questions of each other about why you feel the way you do. Get better informed from both sides of the aisle and maybe find common ground with those that seem so diametrically opposed to your thoughts. 
In the meantime, I'm done doing the fact checking for people. If I see something that's not true, I'm just going to flag it as "false news" because facebook has given me the tools to do so. I encourage you all to do the same, or better yet, just stop sharing other people's nonsense and start posting the personal excitement that we all first signed up to this site to see.
Here was my response...
 Oh come now... You should think of all those Far Left and Far Right posts as an opportunity to spread truth and annoy difficult people... :-) 
Of course, this is coming from a guy who made a hobby of doing so regularly with his own blog... The fun of doing it on Facebook is not only do you get to help the poster learn how foolish they have been... You get to share that knowledge with all their likely similarly challenged FB friends. And they can not complain about you "going political" on them since they started the string. 
By the way, I am likely to steal your post for an up coming blog post...
The good news is that he said he likes G2A and agreed to letting me post his wise tirade.

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

DEM Debate in 6 Charts

538 DEM Debate in 6 Charts

I did not watch it...  Thoughts?

Who can beat Trump assuming the Senate does not convict?