National Guns License

We're witnessing an historic level of children being killed by guns- most probable way to die, more than car crashes- and enough has been enough ten years ago.

To accord with the Second Amendment, each state could issue gun licenses. Except, transportation of firearms across state boundaries, ought to require a National Firearms license.

Like a car: title, license, registration and insurance would be required of the user. Dealers and manufacturers assure quality, and Dealers must use professional discretion following, so called, red flag laws.

We know how to do this. The States could use the national guidance for State Licenses and registration.

A written safety exam, required safety demonstation, and age minimums would be contingent. Additionally, mental health wellness, compitency, and background checks are required.

Any modification, such as required Corrective lenses, permits to carry in public and concealed all would be on gun owner's license to quickly deter foolish, irrational, and mentally ill ownership.

Each gun has a registration already, but it would require each gun to have Title and registration, being operated by licensee. Three parts of liability, so that insurance companies can give liability insurance for torturous constraints, lest we determine the tort settlements per victim.

We already have the infrastructure for all intents and purposes, now let's please do something already!

Post Off!

There was a fascinating moment when I was first in Japan back in 1997, and I entered the post office.

A world of not just stamps, but bill pay, basic banking, insurance, and connection to other government resources all in one place. Denver has 311 for some of the latter, for instance.

By then I had a private bank account, but today's American could use proper passbook savings in USA, and basic simple fee checking accounts in lieu of non-banking 'card' services, also called non-traditional banking alternatives? Under this idea, anyone could walk in and open up an account.

Further, the insurance we could provide US citizens were we to take up this different vision, would be basic coverage to drive, rent, or even buy a simple government backed life insurance policy that wouldn't lapse, and could always be redeemed.

Not just collecting stamps, our post office could be a front line remedy for any bill collectors- allowing the payor ample time and space to drop by the local Post office, and maybe pay from the PO savings account they held.

Alloting this preferred treatment, the Post office will have the ability to operate at a nominal and marginal profit, not reliant upon stamp and shipping costs to sustain income.

Finally, Amazon, Fed Ex, and other services should be sent to the back of the pile with priority given to paychecks, pensions and paperwork that the current go-go e-forms of the dont read just click "ok" culture will eventually be slowed with discovery of the law.

Such to say we need to get rid of the current Postmaster General, and get the business of ordinary people done fairly and on time, expanding the very definition of the public postal offices.

Been meaning to write that for two dozen years.

1776? More like 1812 & you were the British

Love to modern Great Britain, Happy Jubilee (awkward), but in the 19th century back when the Sun Never Set they had landed in the newly founded Capitol and burned many of the works including the building defiled a year ago by insane, confused and seditious persons, to the ground.

With all due respect let's review 1776:

1.  No Representation no taxation may be an argument for regressive VAT, but it's No Taxation without Representation reminding us we were a subject colony with subservient order.

2.  Powers of the many States.  The many divergent interests couldn't agree on the definition of a human at the dawn of Science, yet they coalesced against greater tyranny.  Thus began a bold experiment transcendental of past singular State Independent Republics, such as 16th century Holland, because as declared was aligned with a greater cause, where many States we're considering outright independence, they chose instead, to attempt something never tried in human recorded history.

3.  United we stand divided we fall.  Since ancient China good leaders have known that great power of Unity, and we are often only as strong as the weakest link.  Although we have been given dominion over the planet, we are simultaneously a fragile biological creature, like any other that can also go extinct. 

International Interdependence is the key Technology of Government and philosophy that appears to have been discovered from the Seven Years War, a virtual World War of colonial powers- it also presented the opening for a century and a half of colonial rebellion, and independence of former colonies organizing as singular in the Age of Stateism.

4.  We are in perpetual formation, and so to be inclusive of what through reason, dignity and jurisprudence has since become the transitive right of all humankind in philosophy to reasonably unite in Congress to not just be nominally represented, to have these rights defended in common, but also in order to pursue Life, Liberty, and reasonable happiness that doesn't infringe upon any others same bundle of rights as citizens.  E pluribus unum.

5.  Division of powers.  King John may have signed and sealed the Magna Carta, but it acted as more of a promissory note in exchange for the tens of thousands more people whom the Dukes would be needing to regularly supply the King's endless Feudal warfare, back in those dismal days when it was much harder to raise a human, and we were much fewer.  

There were scores of repromises, compromises, and variations over the century following, but ultimately The Magna Carta writ bold was coveted as proof of some notion of independence from despots.  The articulation of all aspects of modern society post dark Age Europe could be said to have emerged from this fourteenth century experiment.

Once Washington reasonably agreed to lead, the idea of King of America was doomed, and in their best wisdom they divided the labors of State: Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary to replace the King, Parliament, and Courts.

6.  No King's, Queens or Imperators!  The Agricultural realists that made this land knew life was an endurance of seasons.  A central figure is inefficient as an organizing principal in matters of progress, science and ethical administration.  Every two, four and six years the boldest, best and brightest should go to trade on behalf of their constituenties in good faith and conscience, regardless of political career (and leave eventually).

7.  Please, add to the list of rights responsibly, it's a work in progress.  The rights and responsibilities in our Bill of Rights are for everyone everywhere on US soil all the time, and when all of the above are disfunctioning, then please change... Including revise or remove, if needed.  

Conclusions: All human beings may be born of different station, place, rank, class, or situation, yet we are equally entitled to all rights such as the freedom of Religion, but also the freedom from any imposition of Religion, for example.  

The Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights are of course imperfect documents written by human beings.  Washington stepped down from ostensible Kingship (contemporaneously other than maybe France, our allies, trading partners and opponents could only imagine him as Regent) he warned against imitating Sister Britain with the formation of parties, implying that although each Representative, Executive and Judge, also human, may be imperfect, All must make their choices and answer for them accountably to that constituency of voters, and their Maker.

The method to Washington's leadership was accompanied by humility, self awareness and the dignity and nobility of humanity like Cincinnatus two millenea before him to prefer freedom over power.

Our Civil War four score and seven after was further, unfortunately violent, correction of this power dynamic, but it can be linked to a nexus of biblical levels of iniquitous human chattelry, massive unjust territorial expansions causing disproportionate representation from an inconvenient distance and historical onerous circumstances, and international competition from foreign interests.

We have deescalated such power misalignments through negotiations, dialogue and compromise for a century and a half of something we call bipartisanship, and there is no reason for The United States of America to regress to past misalignments, unneeded partisanship, or violence.

People sacrificed in 1776 in order to plant the tree of Liberty for the future to enjoy- a considered answer to the long-term problems of humanity.

One year ago was an internal invasion of people, domestic terrorism, by mostly citizens, who by operation of law are now having lawful abridgement of those same rights granted to thus be responsible to pay penalty, fines and serve time for their crimes, as the largest, freest, most watched, most monitored lawful election in human history was certified.

We have but one Republic, and as Franklin said "if you can keep it!"

Forget Beer, It's Time for a Fender Bender

Presidential Elections are the most famous popularity contests in the world.

 

Famously, we like to think we are voting for an Angel, rather than settling for a Devil by the thought exercise, “which candidate would you rather have a beer with?”  (Yes, like a good American grammarian I ended the survey question a preposition with.)

 

Except, we are in extraordinary circumstances:

 

Hundred Year Pandemic

Chronic Systemic Deferred Maintenance

Climate Change Proven beyond a Doubt

Reconciliation of Civil Rights a precipitous necessity

Worst Economic statistics since measurements began from The Great Depression

 

You can see how people might be willing to choose the best devil in such terrible circumstances, rather than the nicest angel.  Whose Executive Administration will be able to handle the massive macroeconomic issues?

 

Almost makes you not even care if you even like the person, so long as you think they may help?

 

So, which Candidate would you rather get into a low speed fender bender with?

 

 

Thought Exercise

 

You are driving your crap auto called US, and the timing belt needs adjustment, tires are worn, and the brakes have been squealing for months, but like most Americans you don’t have an extra $400 to fix them.

 

As you approach an intersection at the speed limit, you anticipate a yellow light ahead and begin your squeaking brakes.  As the light turns, you are a quarter mile from the stop line, and of the two cars ahead of you the car directly in front of you, a new silver Mercedes-Ferrari Electric Hybrid, has stopped about 500 feet away.

 

Your brakes engage, squeak as loud as you have ever heard, and for one reason or another you hit the $456,000 four door sedan that tops off at 155 MPH in 12 seconds.  The bumper, replacement cost your annual salary, after installation, is broken.  Don’t ask for details, it just needs $45,000 worth of work from a 15 MPH fender bender.

 

Out comes (A) either driver, Presidential Candidate (take the test again, and replace with either Major Political Party), and from the shotgun position (B) a Secret Service agent who will witness and back whatever Mr. A says, no matter how awful.

 

Two more facts: 1. They are self-insured, so they have no Insurance, if it is their fault; and 2. Mr. B pressed the emergency oil slick button as they drew to a halt at seven miles per hour—thus it is 100% their fault.  Oil is everywhere, and the Intersection Camera clearly can show the before and after.

 

Which one of these two gentlemen would you then like to encounter in what, without the super tip-top-secret auto, (a) wouldn’t have been an accident, nor (b) be considered potentially your fault and liability? 

 

That is a more accurate measure for where we are today.

 

 

Lest we should consider this the Junior High School election, remember that the Executive of the USA typically administers directly to a force of hundreds of thousands of people, lest the millions directly commanded.  So, which group do you pick... go ahead take the thought exercise a third time, and remember to Vote!

The Case for and Probability of a Sanders Presidency

Before we address the reasons Mr. Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist who has been in Congress for years as an Independent and caucused with Democrats, could win The Electoral College (as well as maybe even over 53% of the popular vote) in a General Election, let us start by comparing him to his very real rival for nomination; it is sort of hers to lose, as she has sort of begun to do; Hilary Clinton.

Foreign Policy is considered a big part of how the former Lawyer, Senator and Secretary of State via Pennsylvania, Little Rock, and New York could beat the former Mayor, Congressman, and current Senator from Vermont with a proven track record of say what you mean, and do what you say.

Further, some of the ideas about Sec. Clinton (her actual highest rank in service to the American people) revolve around that she’s the ‘realist.’ 

Except, this supposed argument of foreign policy realism, hinges upon 20^th century political dialogues about communism and the USSR?

I argue, as an Economist, that any Federal Economic Policy is the foundation upon which both Foreign and Domestic Policy rest.

And we have been a mixed capitalist system (meaning a socialist-capitalist democracy) since The Great Depression (1932). 

Sanders freely works with these truths:  Plus, progressive, underserved, and younger voters sense or know these operational truths of economics; therefore, as we enter four score years, since we began guaranteeing our citizens as a national government, Bernie is the actual realist in the race from strictly economic principles, but I digress.

I am unsure that 99%-ers, Millennials, Social Liberals, Progressives, or Economic realists will agree with my reasoning, in part or whole, yet I guess we may all agree on the bottom line... a better future for our grandchildren and their grandchildren— thinking Seven Generations.

So, here’s my case for what will differentiate Sen. Sanders from his rivals through to November:

WARFARE

On this point, almost anyone who doesn’t respond “bomb them (whoever the enemy is) back to the stone age,” as the best answer to any question of foreign threat to our beloved, misunderstood, and often misguided United States of America; the rest of us need to seriously take a moment to review the clarity and undaunted-ness the Senior Senator has had when it actually counted most to committing American blood, treasure, and resources, especially once we became the unilateral superpower.

On the disastrous move by G. W. Bush, The Younger, to go to War in Iraq on false and manufactured intelligence in 2004, Sanders was one of very few, and even fewer of those still serving in Congress, to have seen through the folly in the moment with foresight, and voted ‘No.’ Clinton voted with the establishment in that same vote.

Besides this, he is the Chair of the Veteran’s Affairs Committee, so Sanders knows the true ongoing costs of making a disastrous decision to go to war.

Clinton voted for endless Emergency Powers, for adventurous wars, and has a record from her time as head of the State Department that isn’t universally admired, if not respected— Sec. Kerry has gone much further to accomplish more substantive results by comparison within and on behalf of the same Administration. 

Thus, even if you disagree with this one of the three points, finding yourself more of a hawkish-dove, than a dovish-hawk, continue reading as to why Sanders can and should prevail against all his rivals in both contests.

WELFARE

Republicans call this “Entitlement Reform,” but what they typically mean is ‘controlling’ entitlements, but most importantly to the actual conservative constituency, in order to manage (or cut) associated costs. 

Republicans continue calls for a re-run straight from the 1980’s of tax-cuts for the 1%, who are already enjoying the best tax benefits, ever, that only translate to eventually pissing off poor, minority, and elderly groups, by capping or eliminating benefits they rely upon to live in exchange for having helped build our nation, but also should be a wholesale alarm to our Veterans and retired civil servicepersons. 

Sanders proposes to afford these programs reinstating what is called Progressive Taxation (lower taxation rates for the poor, and greater taxation rates for the rich), and for the most part was the tradition in our nation, until Ronald Reagan began spending recklessly on the US credit card and playing with Trickle Down Economics, permanent national treasury deficits, and no real wage (adjusted for inflation) increases for the bottom two-thirds of the nation ever since. 

George H. W. Bush, The Elder, observed correctly, before he lost to Ronald Reagan in 1980 to become elevated to Vice President (after having run the CIA for years), that this solutions set was “Voodoo Economics.”  Ad naseum argumentum (arguments that repeat over and over insistently) do not prove right this miserable failure.

Bush the Elder, eventually lost his re-election, since everything he had learned in life, told him he needed to raise taxes on the wealthy, like Reagan did too, because the safety netting for Americans had begun it’s own demolition once Reagan Administration and Republican lawmaking efforts got rolling (and then rolled from the S&L Scandal before ending up into the ditch with the Bank Bailouts— see Neil Bush).

Whatever you call this Economic Policy, it is now a proven failed economic, governing, and fiscal model, in ointments and puddings found around the world since 2008, and we have begun reinstating those safety nets— the enthusiasm across ‘voting blocks,’ indicate Sanders tracks with this trend.

Voters of all stripes, ranks and files must think to not only vote for the children yet to be born, but those who have lost their way in this life, yet still live.  Back when PTSD was called shell shock, this was termed Welfare of the State by the people for the people.

We all want good fiscal policy, and budgetary prudence... the difference— Bernie Sanders also promises to expand Social Security and Veteran Benefits; create Universal Education and National Health Insurance; but also continue the request, to keep the promise written at the foot of The Statue of Liberty, that asks for those “tired, poor, and masses yearning to be free.”   

There is no request or shown preference at Lady Liberty’s feet for only those people with advanced degrees on Work Visas, exclusion of opportunities for the lower or middle classes, nor does it say “No Mexicans, or Muslims.” 

Aside from that, anyone concerned with Native American Rights, let alone the poor (or the 99%), serious about casting a vote this year for any establishment candidate could only seriously consider the Democratic Party. 

Otherwise, there will be made available third-party protest (each only able to garner under 1%) votes that, once again, won’t be noticed by The Establishment— trust me, like Mr. Sanders, I am not a Democrat, either.

Although his Democratic Establishment rival may again be somewhat analogous to this Democratic Socialist, my truth: Sanders, I feel is someone who would probably agree with my more libertarian advocacy for a simple methodology of expansion for the ACA to ‘not discriminate upon age.’ Unlike the Republicans who seem proud to have earned their mantle of “Do-Nothing-Republicans” by voting to repeal ACA 62 times, WITHOUT COUNTER-OFFER, here is at least my idea:

This could happen any day of the week should any relevant class in California decide to sue the State exchange and Medicaid under the Unruh Act, that bans discrimination by age.  This amendment this would most probably open the door to reform critical health insurance coverage (Medicaid and Medicare) to include any citizen who needed health care, nationally.

This “available model” is favorable to a mandatory model, or even Single-payor, because it is still allowing for self-insurers, and those who prefer an esoteric insurance device to act as a market tamp on pricing by offering capital efficiencies in terms of (much lesser degree direct and) indirect competition. 

But the idea of sending in any candidate, who may be willing to take another thirty years dancing with the powers-that-be to get the citizens some version of National Healthcare whilst the nation suffers; let alone those (Republicans) not willing to admit to a Health Crisis, Poverty Issues, nor Climate Change; simply beggars belief.

I think I will chance it with the guy, Sanders, who once again seems to be facing the actual reality of our geo-political and economic situations:

My macroeconomic fiscal conservative recap in favor of Universal Healthcare;

Without some version of universal coverage in health insurance, it is an unfair competitive advantage to almost every one of our foreign trading partners (who mostly have some form of national state health insurance) that acts as an inverse tariff against our national exports and imports, because our manufacturers and business owners do not have comparable benefit(s). 

Meaning that any good, product or service (imported or exported) includes in its measured value in currency terms the subsidized healthcare costs of our competitors’ workers and citizens, thus allowing our trading partners to attract and retain higher quality labor, as well as creating a “reverse hidden taxation to trade,” or inverse tariff. 

In other words, when we don’t have a comparable benefit to any national competitor, then this acts in favor of foreign competition as hidden cost of goods per export, simultaneous to hidden subsidy (in favor of exporting nation) per import. 

This is economically true of most state social netting programs that reduce costs and burdens to business.  Ending this incongruity, and any other social disadvantages to workforce, manufacturers, exporters, and importers, will benefit Corporate America for generations to come.

When any Republican and any Democrat are held up to be chosen by our vet, disabled, and/or elderly voters around the nation as to which candidate for the POTUS will really be backstopping and improving Healthcare, Social Security, and VA Benefits— The retired citizen with a prospect of living to past age one-hundred with advances in modern medicine, the infirm citizen with a permanent disability, disease, ailment and/or deformity, but also anyone who has served this nation— voters should rightly recoil in horror at the massive cuts to benefits being proposed by that Republican field writ large. 

Winning Republican will have to at best modify Entitlement Reform plans, or at least hedge their speech (i.e. lie) on the stump, if they have even made any policy notes known, to then bestill this vast constituencyship, which seems particularly ebullient this year.  Again any Democrat will probably win.

WEEDFAIR

It is not ‘marijuana,’ it is not ‘weed,’ rather it is the cannabis species in all its forms: industrial, commercial, and medicinal. 

Every Republican has espoused doubling down on Ronald Reagan’s failed, outmoded, and unpopular “war” seeking to repeal these State initiatives by the people and their representative governments!

This is the key distinction for the Democratic nominees.  Although, with hedging language, Mrs. Clinton somehow shows up as a 1990’s Republican talking about ‘states rights,’ on this issue; Sanders can make, and often shows, if not alludes to, the connection; that the ill-conceived adventure called “War on Drugs,” Libertarian and Reganite Ron Paul would agree, has been an escapade, which the taxpaying citizenry has answered back these thirty years later with, ‘black lives matter,’ as the number one civil rights issue facing our nation today.

Assuming we also include any people of color within that sentiment, and add any citizen in any disadvantaged class: that insane effort by the US Government against it’s own people must finally come to a complete end.  

It didn’t work with alcohol: without identifying and addressing the real and underlying social issues belying the symptomologies and behaviors (let alone citizen violations against arbitrary and capricious lawmaking, policy, and now case-precedent that must be overturned or outlawed, itself) sought to be modified, or contained, on such complex social issues; it then fails the actual cause of government to protect and defend its citizens in a reasonable free state of liberty, as ratified and identified by our founders, who all used industrial hemp, at a minimum. 

Further, when incarceration is the primary remedy provided by the opposite party (again, the proven poor solution set since the Drug War began last century under the Reagan Administration), there will be continued disenfranchisement of those felons, disadvantaged, and forgotten citizens who have given up on our cynical system— non-voters.  Ending the failed Drug War will end disenfranchisement of citizens from their system.

Voters have Thanksgiving Dinners with those non-voting folks.  And anyone not thinking of being a voter this time, please plan to vote, if you still have the right, and see what happens!

Repealing the now-proven inefficient prohibition of cannabis will save trillions of dollars across the board!!

It will redirect vital policing mechanisms back to the borders, counter-terror, and actual crimes against policy of State— where they belong.  And, by the way, it will pay for itself, generate billions in taxes annually, and create new jobs.

However, Free Hemp is more importantly the number one Law and Order issue for 2016, in part because by redirecting the resources of state to enforce policy, as we have begun to do in Colorado, then, besides fiscal prudence, it should also expedite the removing of those Federal Emergency Powers (yes, we are still under a State of Emergency) to ideally reinstate the concepts of law derived from the Magna Carta and it’s associated democratic principalia connected to habeas corpus.

WHY SANDERS CAN WIN

Weed States aka The Fab Four: CO, WA, AK, OR, and sort of the District of Colombia, which isn’t actually a State, but does vote.  No one in these states is going to consciously ratify any politician explaining why their States Rights will be invalidated and revoked by the Federal Government, should we choose to vote for them to administer the Executive Offices of the USA. 

23 Medicinal States; 15 CBD Only States; 2 pending Medicinal States. 

This represents 44 States (All Native Nations are free to grow, manufacture and sell cannabis products; probably most of our Commonwealth Members will agree; and our Fab Four, and [again] DC) accepting, honoring and commercializing Hemp in 2016! 

(I added Florida, because last year an Initiative to become the fifth state to fully legalize cannabis was passed by the voters at a phenomenal 58%, but didn’t meet the sixty percent ‘super-majority’ threshold to become amended into the State Constitution.  They are going for it again this year!)

44/50!!

Consistently, our US Population supports legalization of cannabis by a majority since 2002, because it is so very common sense— those who don’t, mostly because they were indoctrinated to believe cannabis to be worse than opium, if you can imagine, are getting older and passing away. 

Support really only continues to grow, as the most important plant in the human pantheon comes back online, and myths become demystified.

And States citizens sincerely voting in 2016 to become #5 (and beyond) to legalize it: Nevada, California, Maine, Arizona, Connecticut, Michigan, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, and Missouri; all have activated their grass-root bases to follow the Weed States into the actual future— just like climate change, it also does exist!

So, this sea change favors a Progressive crowd to be mobilized at the base in 2016.

Then, the ACA States where a successful state health insurance exchange system has begun to heal millions of Americans, including myself, is set up: CO, HI, WA, OR, CA, NV, NM, MN, IA, MS, KY, MD, NY, VT, MA, RI, and CT. 

I would tell 538.com and any other prognosticators, just put these states into Any Democrat’s column, because the countless stories of relief, respite, and hospice cannot be told considering the millions of improvements we are seeing every day to the actual health of our country.  This will begin to show up as lagging economic statistics, as more of our people continue get the help they need.

If any of those states didn’t break Democratic, then I wouldn’t consider that any final verdict upon the ACA— itself mostly the 1990’s Republican solution set, their counter-offers, after the failed Hilary-care effort, which she cashed-in for the CHP (more or less the current national children’s health insurance program, to her credit), currently referred to as Obamacare.

Because this is so massive and complex of an issue, results are so preliminary, then it is no wonder the Do-nothing Republicans voted to repeal this important social netting— their own ‘90’s policy counter-offers— now 62 times, offering no real new solutions, as of February 2, 2016— THEY JUST DON’T GET IT!

Even if the ACA goes unchanged, only managed, it will realize trillions of dollars in long-term savings to the Federal Government, as is, while continuing to heal America. 

Every Republican wants to end available health care solutions without any real counter-offer, thus no true Republican will be preferred by those citizens experiencing positive ACA results— Americans are just not buying it, even though there do exist also many stories about frustration with implementation.

To guess, there is political inefficiency, disagreement, and/or disorganization that could account for the 18 exchanges that have defaulted to the Federal Program, as they are mostly “red states.” 

Thus, this may indicate a potential anti-Obama trend in some of the Federal Exchange states.

(I did not weight those states in the neither/nor zone still developing their exchange solutions.)

However, Wisconsin, Maine, New Hampshire, and maybe Louisiana and Arizona are the only of these eighteen that could be mitigated by other (weed, jobs, etc.) factors, issues and turnouts to prefer Any Democrat.


Therefore, assuming that voters find Mr. Sanders the more trusted, experienced, pragmatic choices for the Democratic primary; assuming my hypotheses about ACA and Free Hemp are more or less correct; then I expect a final General Election map (Sanders-v-Any Republican) to appear something like this:

I am endorsing Bernard Sanders of Vermont for President in 2016. 

Finally: Please, let us not act like we are the oldest modern democracy by having the most anemic voter turnouts.  Even if you do not agree in part or whole with this argument, as citizens let us demonstrate our vigor of old age; please, make sure to vote in November!

Happy President’s Day!

Peace goes perfect with Savings

I was unsure if I would even comment on "Silly Season," at all this year, but here is one man's humble opinion:

(A) Republicans-Romney-Ryan-R-r-r...

An 8 page plan, half of which is a critique of the Administration, where four competing ideas, are assured to us to somehow compose the basis to run an entire nation, is the only "detail," released by the R team.  The rest seems code, insider talk, and self reference for we dont like the current president-- for whatever reason.

Realistically, another "r" word, cutting taxes, reducing deficits, and balancing budgets appeals to the fiscal conservative in me, except that the fiscal conservative knows math, and economics.  This strategy will wreck Social Security, Obamacare, and probably eventually destroy medicare and other long standing social networks necessary for an empathetic and humanistic society-- unless there is fundamental change.

Ad naseums of trickle down sunsets from 1970 ~ 2008 are enough for me, just because the Republican says it (over and over) doesn't mean it somehow becomes true over time.  Just ask Romney's sons.

Republicans in general halted a majority of ordinary congressional business for the last two years-- dump the bums!


(B) Obama Administration, and Dems

Occupying the center on most rational issues, Romney has no room to create differentiations, and as they both agree on a majority of the Corporate Agenda-- Obama has come up very short on the progressive radar.

Over the four years he has made proforma moves long in the works, and the cornerstone of his efforts, especially when the Democrats held majority powers,  becomes Obamacare.

On that criteria alone, there was literally no difference between Romney, who created a similar program for Mass., and the President.  Only Romney pretending to be some different version of himself created some platform to repeal Obamacare-- easier said than done, and a total waste of energy, because it throws out many babies with the bathwater.

The major issues this election are Liberty, Freedom and Peace.


(C) Liberty, Freedom, and Peace

Not discussed, but actually alluded to by Obama on his recent appearance on The Daily Show, are the lifting of Emergency Powers and restoration of habeus corpus.  Without these actions by the executive we are still electing to be compared to the best of fascist regimes, not the best of all human governance systems.  We must restore the balance of powers, and lift the permanent state of war.

Freedom to start business, be lent money upon a equitable basis, and to succeed.  Onerous tax systems, fee and regulatory, and ambiguous State powers to assist Sole Proprietors, Small Businesses, and entrepreneurs all are part of the sluggish recovery.

Common sense and easy to understand regulations are necessary for entry, but then additional reorganization of the SBA and CofC systems to help all the incoming generations of highly distracted, creative and slightly entitled Americans are only secondary to furthering easy access to proper community development loans by the banks we allowed to survive past 2009 by making them loans as taxpayers with faith in the powers that be.

Yet, now the banks restored, have tightened guidelines, so the rich grow richer, and the businesses, and taxpayers, continue to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.  Where are our new business loans?  Where are the mortgage streamlines?  Where are the forclosure forestallments?

Somehow the banks feel that their request for $6 trillion in 2008 was more imperative than the last person they just turned down for the foreclosure prevention.  The sense of corporate citizenship needed to be a part of the conditions for TARP funds.

But it all belies the pretext, which is we rely upon perpetual escalation, warfare, and conflict in order to justify our War Economy.  Neither candidate is offering a vision of Peace, pax americana, or otherwise, where we save Billions by suing for peace, and restoring multilateral order as organized by International Laws and standards.


CONCLUSION

When the US grows up and more nimbly interacts with it's allies to defend our allies, then a huge peacetime savings will accrue.  Interestingly, the $5 trillion deficit most economists agree the RR "5-points" would incur, I estimate could be saved once a complete peace has been negotiated.

Except neither candidate is talking about restoring Liberty, Freedom, or Peace!

I already voted, and refrain from endorsing either candidate.  God save the USA, and may we vote without consideration of party.  VOTE!

Interim Report Card: Obama and Congress

I have been focusing my energy on more positive things since I last blogged (a philosophical countenance upon monetary issues, since then a devaluation of the dollar, and a credit downgrade for the USA).

Many of the negative things we citizens have been enduring are in part due to congressional incompetence!


D for CONGRESS

1. Disappointing. Anyone who thought a fresh crop of outspoken freshmen would shift the paradygm should now see that (a) freshmen need to make small committee level type mistakes before getting to run with the big dogs, because the weak Speaker unable to whip the Teaparty group specifically has been a joke; (b) sometimes our system allows legitimate "tails," or minority views, to wag the dog of the center; yet (c) our system is about compromise, and the center has won out in most of the debates. The absurdity of the House of Representatives has been amateur hour.

2. Disrespect. Yes, the Pubs are the "party of No," actively defending their point of view and loudly hoping for the CEO of the USA to fail... except We The People are represented by all branches of government-- that throughputs into hoping against the USA itself, and seems highly disrespectful no matter how rosy the economy. So these red herrings and ad hominems look to be much fiddling whilst Rome Burns! What ever happened to respect for the office of the President?

3. Delay, Distract, and Derail. Between both parties the lack of civil dialogue has led to endless tactical maneuvers that have ultimately kept the American people riding in the rumble seat, while we watch some falsetto reality show about idiots sent somewhere to compromise and lead, but instead doing everything except what has been needed-- and so much needs doing!

4. Democrat. The Dems have been playing chicken, too. What ever happened to civil discourse? Both sides show they dont know how to get things done with fact, consensus, and logic. Keynesian theory, like climate change, is scientifically verifiable, so why do Dems somehow have a big issue explaining that massive cuts at the heart of a recovery will ensure a new downturn in economic activity. What small and large businesses and investors REALLY await is ANY final say on tax codes, securities regulation, and others of the many chickens that came home to roost in 2006 ~ 2008 (under the Bush Administration) still clucking along with us. Not too many care who is to blame, but await the issues to be addressed, solved, and a long term track set up so calculations can be made. We want chicken salad and have been served a lot of chicken $#!+. The whipsaw markets and the inconstant congress have made planning as much of a hunch as a calculation, and this is not right to do to potential employers during the worst job crisis since Ronald Reagan!


C-flat for Obama.

We are really seeing a tin ear on many things, particularly juxtaposed against the congressional reality from the President.

He has fallen flat on many issues that his populist core group, of which I count myself as formerly one, would have imagined his administration could have tackled in his sleep.

1. Habeas Corpus. To me this is the only issue of the 2012 election if this doesnt get handled, very soon. Don't get me wrong, I am sure there are some very bad people out there trying to do very bad things to the USA,, but at what cost are we willing to proceed? Still unsettled is the rejection of the initial human rights of the landholder found in the Magna Carta, enshrined by our civilization, and repealed under the harsh justice of Bush the Lesser. Yet Obama three years in unwilling to re-establish ancient Rule of Law?? Straight up F on this one.

2. Tax. Dear Mr. President, under similar constraints, your hero, Reagan, also raised taxes. What economist is telling you to not generate revenues by simplifying government, tax codes, and regulations-- a net tax increase? Maybe Geithner is the least of our worries, but there is not really a debate amongst scholars as to what is needed stimulatively by the Buyer and Seller of last resort. You are trying to run the largest economy without proper income. Would any millionaire or billionaire also seek to run an operation with expenses exceeding income? No, they would pass the cost on. D+ on economy.

3. Negotiating. Before I consider voting for you again, I need you to show me that you wouldn't be hustled by a car dealer. In the real world, you see, people close deals all day long. I guess its a lawyers in Washington DC thing to expect that you acceed to the oppositions positions before they show willingness to engage in earnest horse trading. Practice by playing poker with your staff or something, because this is getting embarrassing to watch. Then the endless tactical back and forth. Next time, print out your hard and fast deal points and let congress work around you -- not the other way around! Congress is only popular to the tune of their family and friends networks now, so why would you let them have the first or last word ever again? D- on negotiation.

4. Everything else. Obama has been remarkably productive in the first couple of years, but it seems has been caught flat footed. His administration has gotten many remarkable things accomplished while fighting two wars they didnt start. I remember watching Nixon flying away from the White House lawn on TV when I was three, so I have no short term memory issues to somehow imagine that much of our problems stem from the horrible administrative decisions by the prior CEO.

Yet, I tried to bite my tongue about Bush, because I knew (a) he was only a person, (b) tens of thousands of others worked around him to create the millions of bad choices, least of which was Cheney, and (c) barring the previous administrations refusal to leave office without a coup, we are Americans, and even the quasi-fascist neo-cons left when the People spoke. So, yes, comparatively Obama has been a fresh start, but now we are into the quagmired reality of hard choices--regardless of who started what (My argument is that it's Nixons fault for taking us off the Silver Standard, but who cares, right? How will that argument get anything accomplished today??).

I give Obama a B- drifting into a C+ were it not for the key issues above, to combine for a very flat C-.

I can only pray we are restored our rights, and that the people who will be going back to Washington DC in the fall decide to take seriously the multitude of issues that have befallen the American peoples-- for surely this wont do!