On Monday morning President Obama unveiled his plan to lower the deficit. While the measures were not immediately objectionable in their own right, it is what Obama did not say that is most troubling. He did not talk facts, and he hardly used statistics, the most memorable fact being that Warren Buffett pays less taxes than his assistant. I hope Mr. Buffett rectifies the situation by making a large donation to the United States government. He can do so at, http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html. I will not hold my breath for Buffett's charitable gift, but I will expect the President to change his tactics. So please Mr. Obama give me the facts.
Please explain to me, the tax payer (your employer), why you feel that the rich are not paying their fair share. According to the 2011 tax bracket, wealthier Americans are clearly surrendering a higher percentage of their income to the national government http://www.bargaineering.com/articles/federal-income-irs-tax-brackets.html. Maybe it is because of the multiple loop holes present in our tax code. So, why not close those loop holes?
While President Obama's teleprompter came up with a rebuttal, I would give him some facts. Historically, tax cuts on the wealthy have actually resulted in more money being drawn from them through taxes http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm. A great example is the Reagan tax cuts which produced significantly more money from the upper echelon of wealth in our country. Different people will give you different reasons as to why. An undeniable reason is that by lowering their taxes, you eliminate the need for the wealthy to try and find loop holes in the tax code. If someone is smart enough to make a lot of money, then they are smart enough to figure out a way to save it. By lowering their taxes to a manageable and fair percentage, you eliminate the need to pay a lawyer to find those loop holes.
Mr. Obama this is not partisan politics, this is fact. Please take heed of this example and give me facts!
September 20, 2011
September 16, 2011
A View of Our Government
This past week has been a rather busy one for me. As a result, I did not get adequate time to look at news, in any format. The highlight of what I did read was commentary on Jackie Kennedy's interviews. A lot of younger woman (including Mrs. Kennedy's own grandchildren) were shocked to hear her say that she could never imagine disagreeing with her husband. I think this reaction shows just how far the world has come!!
Instead of reading the news, I was reading textbooks and journal articles on Public Administration and disaster management. I wish to make a few comments on those readings in this post. One of the articles looked at philosophical approaches emergency management. Parentalism was one of the types of philosophical approaches discussed in the reading. According to the author parentalism is found the Utilitarian school of thought, but only with slight modifications.
I DO NOT WANT to get philosophical here, instead I want to discuss my thoughts while reading that article. I came to the conclusion, that under no circumstance do I want our government (especially our federal government) considering itself my parent. "Parent" is way too close to "big brother" for me!!
What then should our government be? President Obama and Director Fugate (FEMA's director) have been- perhaps unknowingly- playing right into this parent view of our government. Both constantly refer to the "federal family" which will come to aid of any American during and after a disaster.
I have a better and more realistic view of our government. I view our Federal government as Batman and the state and local governments as Gotham Police. PLEASE HEAR ME OUT!
Our state government, like Gotham Police, is that institution that is always there for you. They may make mistakes, such as refusing to give up control of the STL Police Department, but they always mean well.
Our national government, like Batman, helps us out when we need it. The national government, like Batman, is whoever we need them to be. Most important though, our national government, like Batman, our national government does its job reluctantly but sincerely.
I realize that our government, both state and national, does not always correspond to the image I portrayed. But I think the Batman and Gotham image is a lot more appealing then a Federal Family.
Instead of reading the news, I was reading textbooks and journal articles on Public Administration and disaster management. I wish to make a few comments on those readings in this post. One of the articles looked at philosophical approaches emergency management. Parentalism was one of the types of philosophical approaches discussed in the reading. According to the author parentalism is found the Utilitarian school of thought, but only with slight modifications.
I DO NOT WANT to get philosophical here, instead I want to discuss my thoughts while reading that article. I came to the conclusion, that under no circumstance do I want our government (especially our federal government) considering itself my parent. "Parent" is way too close to "big brother" for me!!
What then should our government be? President Obama and Director Fugate (FEMA's director) have been- perhaps unknowingly- playing right into this parent view of our government. Both constantly refer to the "federal family" which will come to aid of any American during and after a disaster.
I have a better and more realistic view of our government. I view our Federal government as Batman and the state and local governments as Gotham Police. PLEASE HEAR ME OUT!
Our state government, like Gotham Police, is that institution that is always there for you. They may make mistakes, such as refusing to give up control of the STL Police Department, but they always mean well.
Our national government, like Batman, helps us out when we need it. The national government, like Batman, is whoever we need them to be. Most important though, our national government, like Batman, our national government does its job reluctantly but sincerely.
I realize that our government, both state and national, does not always correspond to the image I portrayed. But I think the Batman and Gotham image is a lot more appealing then a Federal Family.
September 11, 2011
Thoughts on 9-11
It seems appropriate to discuss 9-11 on the tenth anniversary of that fateful day. The events of that day will be forever etched in people's memory. Yesterday, President Clinton and President Bush spoke at a ceremony in Shanksville, Pennsylvania- the site of plane crash of Flight 93. Flight 93 was the plane that fought back, and saved the Capitol from destruction. It was truly inspiring to listen to both presidents articulate their views of that tragic day. Clinton cited similarities between the actions on Flight 93 with other significant events in history, most notably the Alamo.
Switching gears slightly, I'd like to direct the reader's attention to an article written by George Will. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/sept-11s-self-inflicted-wounds/2011/09/08/gIQAfjm5FK_story.html
The article is certainly worth reading, but I should warn the reader that Will's assessment is rather pessimistic. I'd like to draw out a theme from the article, which centers on what actually changed that day. Will made the argument that for the average American things really have not changed. I’d like to approach that topic from a different direction, and ask what lesson(s) can be taken from 9-11. Few will disagree that 2011 has not necessarily been a high point in American history; but I feel that by readjusting our views events such as 9-11 we can gain strength and courage from our history.
The lesson we all need to take from 9-11 is that America is resilient and strong. Strength can be found in the first responders who ran into the burning towers. Courage was certainly present in the two employees from the Port Authority who helped evacuate their fellow employees and then went to other floors and cleared people out. These were people simply helping others. Was their fate tragic? Yes, it most certainly was. But from this tragedy we can find hope in each other. There is no doubt in my mind that if a similar tragedy happened again, individuals would rise to the occasion. My conviction in this thought is found in the stories from ten years ago today.
Let us therefore, never forget. Let us remember the Twin Towers; let us remember Flight 93; and let us remember the Pentagon! With our faith in one another, America can move forward stronger than before!
Switching gears slightly, I'd like to direct the reader's attention to an article written by George Will. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/sept-11s-self-inflicted-wounds/2011/09/08/gIQAfjm5FK_story.html
The article is certainly worth reading, but I should warn the reader that Will's assessment is rather pessimistic. I'd like to draw out a theme from the article, which centers on what actually changed that day. Will made the argument that for the average American things really have not changed. I’d like to approach that topic from a different direction, and ask what lesson(s) can be taken from 9-11. Few will disagree that 2011 has not necessarily been a high point in American history; but I feel that by readjusting our views events such as 9-11 we can gain strength and courage from our history.
The lesson we all need to take from 9-11 is that America is resilient and strong. Strength can be found in the first responders who ran into the burning towers. Courage was certainly present in the two employees from the Port Authority who helped evacuate their fellow employees and then went to other floors and cleared people out. These were people simply helping others. Was their fate tragic? Yes, it most certainly was. But from this tragedy we can find hope in each other. There is no doubt in my mind that if a similar tragedy happened again, individuals would rise to the occasion. My conviction in this thought is found in the stories from ten years ago today.
Let us therefore, never forget. Let us remember the Twin Towers; let us remember Flight 93; and let us remember the Pentagon! With our faith in one another, America can move forward stronger than before!
September 7, 2011
Thursday's Speech
The subject of today's discussion is an article from the Huffington Post. Please take a second and look it over.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/06/obama-jobs-plan_n_951294.html
Using an article from the Huffington Post is sure to raise a few eyebrows, but the article is used in the spirit of bipartisanism, which is badly needed. The article gives hints to what will be said during the President's Thursday speech, and no surprise the President is asking for pay-roll tax cuts, extension of unemployment benefits and tax credits for businesses. A conservative estimate of the costs is around $80 billion.
The question is, is this what we need, and is it worth it? There are two ways to go about this discussion:
(1) We can extoll the benefits of our Robin Hood government helping the destitute.
Or….
(2) We can think in practical terms.
The former has been done over and over again, because it never fixes the problem. It simply gives the dispute a temporary unstable-crutch. So, let us take a moment and think about the latter. Remember, practical is not always pretty, but it is practical and is therefore doable.
For starters we need to end the extension of unemployment benefits. Non-profit organizations have the capabilities to help these people, so we should let them do just that. Like I said, practical is NOT always pretty, but a Robin Hood government is not sustainable. Exhibit A is Europe.
The President seems to have the right idea when it comes to taxes. Apparently the President will be asking for an extension of: (1) the payroll tax cut, (2) tax credits for businesses that hire the unemployed and (3) tax breaks that allow businesses to deduct new equipment. These types of ideas need to be implemented.
Some people will argue that Congress needs to enact legislation to help the unemployed, at the expense of the employed. This logic is totally backwards. Our government needs to give tax relief to the employed (particularly to employers, and small businessmen). Tax relief puts money in their pockets, which eventually leads to them hiring more people. In other words, the public sector needs to help and encourage the private sector toward job growth. This is because the private sector is always quicker to respond then the public sector, especially when the former has money in its pocket.
So Mr. Obama when you give your speech on Thursday please remember that lowering taxes, tax breaks and tax cuts are helpful tools which can (and WILL) spur job growth!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/06/obama-jobs-plan_n_951294.html
Using an article from the Huffington Post is sure to raise a few eyebrows, but the article is used in the spirit of bipartisanism, which is badly needed. The article gives hints to what will be said during the President's Thursday speech, and no surprise the President is asking for pay-roll tax cuts, extension of unemployment benefits and tax credits for businesses. A conservative estimate of the costs is around $80 billion.
The question is, is this what we need, and is it worth it? There are two ways to go about this discussion:
(1) We can extoll the benefits of our Robin Hood government helping the destitute.
Or….
(2) We can think in practical terms.
The former has been done over and over again, because it never fixes the problem. It simply gives the dispute a temporary unstable-crutch. So, let us take a moment and think about the latter. Remember, practical is not always pretty, but it is practical and is therefore doable.
For starters we need to end the extension of unemployment benefits. Non-profit organizations have the capabilities to help these people, so we should let them do just that. Like I said, practical is NOT always pretty, but a Robin Hood government is not sustainable. Exhibit A is Europe.
The President seems to have the right idea when it comes to taxes. Apparently the President will be asking for an extension of: (1) the payroll tax cut, (2) tax credits for businesses that hire the unemployed and (3) tax breaks that allow businesses to deduct new equipment. These types of ideas need to be implemented.
Some people will argue that Congress needs to enact legislation to help the unemployed, at the expense of the employed. This logic is totally backwards. Our government needs to give tax relief to the employed (particularly to employers, and small businessmen). Tax relief puts money in their pockets, which eventually leads to them hiring more people. In other words, the public sector needs to help and encourage the private sector toward job growth. This is because the private sector is always quicker to respond then the public sector, especially when the former has money in its pocket.
So Mr. Obama when you give your speech on Thursday please remember that lowering taxes, tax breaks and tax cuts are helpful tools which can (and WILL) spur job growth!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)