Nobody in the media talks about the basics of health care insurance. Of course, if you know the basics of economics, you have to start asking some difficult questions, and the media don't like difficult questions.
At the heart of economics is the transaction. You have a buyer, a seller, a product or service, and a medium of exchange. The seller gives the buyer an item or does something that benefits the buyer; in return, the buyer gives the seller money. The seller wants to charge as much as possible, but he knows the buyer can go to other sellers, who may have lower prices. The buyer also knows that there are other sellers, so he attempts to find the lowest price among them.
Almost too simple, right? But you can't even fit insurance into this model. How much does a policy cost? It depends on your age, your medical history, and other variables that they won't disclose. Once you have a quote, what are you buying? You don't really know, because they can rewrite the policy or drop it at any time, for any reason or for no reason. Once you have a policy, what is it worth? When (not if) you get sick, you don't know what they'll cover and what they won't, because they'll do anything to avoid paying a dime to the people who treat you. How does one policy compare to another, so that you know you've made a good deal? Well, you can't be sure of the cost, or the value, or even if you'll have a policy when you need it, so you'll never know if you got the best price. You can't make an informed decision about your purchase when you don't really have any information.
It gets worse. When you have health insurance, what exactly do you have? Nothing but a promise that, when you need medical care, someone else will pay the bills. Insurance is not a product or service in itself. The medical care you receive is a service, but you don't have the option of shopping for it, and you never really know what you paid for it. Insurance companies routinely force medical providers to take a lower fee for the promise of getting more customers. In another industry that would be called a kickback.
It gets worse. You've heard horror stories about people losing coverage, so there's no need to go into that here. If it happens to you, what do you do about it? In the classic transaction, if the buyer is cheated, he knows not to buy from the same seller again, and he will tell all his friends about the bad seller. The seller knows, even if he makes a short-term profit from cheating someone, his bad reputation will mean a long-term loss. If the insurer cheats you, though, where can you go? When your employer provides your coverage, you have no choice. It would be nice if your employer gave you some money and let you pick the insurer, but in some states that's illegal.
Suppose you could go to another company? Well, in most states, you only have one other major player. In 39 states, two insurers control more than half the action, and in Hawai'i the top two control 98 percent! You see plenty of ads for car insurance; you don't see many ads for health insurance because there's no point. In another industry that would be called monopolizing the market. The insurance companies write their own rules, though, so it's not only legal, it's mandatory.
Can it get any worse? Oh yes. We all know that the price of insurance is increasing much faster than inflation. Where does that money go? Before HMOs, and even as recently as 1995, about 96 cents of every premium dollar went to medical expenses. That's what you pay the premiums for, right? Today that number is closer to 80 cents. The difference goes, not into profits for the insurance companies, but into overhead and reserves. Insurers, as a matter of course, refuse to pay benefits. You have to dig up papers, fill out forms, make phone calls, all to get something you've already paid for and were promised you would get. They're wasting resources, you're wasting resources, and we're all paying for it. We pay twice as much for health care as civilized countries, and that's one big reason.
Another reason we pay more is because government tilts everything in their favor. Congress tried to pass a law requiring them to pay out a minimum percentage of premiums. They made sure it died.
The other expense is reserves, that is, money put aside to pay future claims. But insurance companies literally have so much money they don't know what to do with it.
There are two bottom lines. Economically, if you consider your health as an asset, you have to pay to maintain it, just as you would a car or a house. Here is the root of the problem: the term "health insurance" doesn't make sense. You buy insurance, not to maintain an asset, but to replace it. You can't replace your health. If you can't afford to maintain your house, then eventually it collapses, and you're left with nothing. If you can't afford decent health care, if you can't maintain your health, it will collapse.
Here's the other bottom line. If America considers itself religious at all, if we believe that human life is important at all, then we have a moral imperative to make health care available for everyone. Jesus didn't tell people to work harder and buy things, he healed them. People who support the current system either refuse to see how broken it is, or believe in an amoral capitalist system, or blindly follow demagogues who are profiting from disease and death.
Health insurance as we know it is inefficient, unfair, opaque to consumers, and basically a criminal enterprise. There is no free market.
What ya gonna do? The whole point of insurance is to pool the risk. A small but predictable fraction of people will need huge amounts of resources to deal with serious illnesses. A small fraction will need next to nothing. Everyone else will need occasional treatment and checkups. If everyone pays into the same pool, the payments are as small as they can get, and the risk is minimized. That is known as the single-payer system, but it was never seriously considered when they "reformed" the system in 2009-10.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Consequences
One of the major themes of this blog (if not the major theme) is that the wealthy control America, not the right or the left. On top of that, they're doing a pretty lousy job of running things. Their basic problem, I believe, is immaturity.
As parents, we have an impulse to shield our children from the unpleasant truths of life, for instance, that actions have consequences. Suppose you see your son spit chewing gum on the ground. A trivial thing, really, but what they call a "teachable moment:" you can take your son aside and explain why littering is wrong. It makes the area look bad; someone could step on the gum; a dog might eat it and get sick; and so on. Most of all, it gives you a chance to counteract the child's natural tendancy, which is to be lazy, sloppy, inconsiderate, and self-centered. Bad habits, like trash, tend to accumulate.
Suppose it's a few years later, and your son leaves his dirty clothes on the floor. Another teachable moment. There is a hygiene issue; taking a few seconds and using a hamper is not a hardship; someone eventually has to pick them up and wash them. You could even make him responsible for his own laundry. Suppose, though, that you let it slide. You now reinforce, not counteract, his childish tendencies. He does what he wants without consequence, knowing that you will take care of any messes he creates.
Suppose it's a few more years later. Your son has discovered cars, sex, drugs. A teachable moment at this point could involve a night in jail, and you don't want to do that to your little snowflake.
And now he's a trader on Wall Street. He's still lazy, making a living by moving around other people's money. He's still sloppy, using financial instruments he doesn't understand. He's still inconsiderate, not caring what could happen to others, to the economy. He's still self-centered, focusing only on his bonus. He's surrounded by people just like him, all reinforcing each other's behavior. When the economy crashes, it's not his fault, because nothing is ever his fault, he never learned that actions have consequences.
And you still have to clean up his mess. You can't possibly save his bank with your own money, so you go to the government and blackmail or bribe them into using public money.
Take a step back. Now you're a taxpayer again. You have to pay, with your taxes, even with your job, to clean up a spoiled child's mess. It's not just unfair, it should be a crime. Actions have consequences.
The wealthy, though, can make consequences go away. We all know there are two sets of laws in this country, one for them, one for the rest of us. They can commit crimes and force others to suffer the punishment. Make no mistake, someone always suffers.
Don't believe me? Look at our infrastructure. In the 1950s the federal government invested in the future by building a system of wide, uninterrupted, public roads: the Interstate system. At the time they knew that the materials they used wouldn't last more than 50 years. The clock is ticking. Like any other roads, Interstates need basic maintenance. To do all these repairs, refurbishments, and replacements would take manpower, thus providing jobs for the foreseeable future.
In the 1980s federal spending became unpopular. Other industrialized nations spend about 10% of the national budget on their roads; our share has drooped to 2%. The roads are in bad shape, and they will get worse. If we start work immediately, they will get even worse, but then they will get better. If we wait too long, they will become almost useless. Without the Interstates, trucks will have to divert to state roads, which are also poorly maintained. Goods will take longer to get to market--including basic goods like food, gasoline, clothing--and they will be more expensive. Travel will become more dangerous. Bridges will collapse, like the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis in 2007. And it will get worse before it gets better.
That's not quite what you expect if you believe in less government spending, is it? But actions have consequences. Less spending on infrastructure means less infrastructure. It's that simple.
The wealthy want you to believe in less government spending. That means they pay less in taxes. As a bonus, the government, starved of funds, can't regulate business properly--even more profit. They win, we suffer the consequences.
As parents, we have an impulse to shield our children from the unpleasant truths of life, for instance, that actions have consequences. Suppose you see your son spit chewing gum on the ground. A trivial thing, really, but what they call a "teachable moment:" you can take your son aside and explain why littering is wrong. It makes the area look bad; someone could step on the gum; a dog might eat it and get sick; and so on. Most of all, it gives you a chance to counteract the child's natural tendancy, which is to be lazy, sloppy, inconsiderate, and self-centered. Bad habits, like trash, tend to accumulate.
Suppose it's a few years later, and your son leaves his dirty clothes on the floor. Another teachable moment. There is a hygiene issue; taking a few seconds and using a hamper is not a hardship; someone eventually has to pick them up and wash them. You could even make him responsible for his own laundry. Suppose, though, that you let it slide. You now reinforce, not counteract, his childish tendencies. He does what he wants without consequence, knowing that you will take care of any messes he creates.
Suppose it's a few more years later. Your son has discovered cars, sex, drugs. A teachable moment at this point could involve a night in jail, and you don't want to do that to your little snowflake.
And now he's a trader on Wall Street. He's still lazy, making a living by moving around other people's money. He's still sloppy, using financial instruments he doesn't understand. He's still inconsiderate, not caring what could happen to others, to the economy. He's still self-centered, focusing only on his bonus. He's surrounded by people just like him, all reinforcing each other's behavior. When the economy crashes, it's not his fault, because nothing is ever his fault, he never learned that actions have consequences.
And you still have to clean up his mess. You can't possibly save his bank with your own money, so you go to the government and blackmail or bribe them into using public money.
Take a step back. Now you're a taxpayer again. You have to pay, with your taxes, even with your job, to clean up a spoiled child's mess. It's not just unfair, it should be a crime. Actions have consequences.
The wealthy, though, can make consequences go away. We all know there are two sets of laws in this country, one for them, one for the rest of us. They can commit crimes and force others to suffer the punishment. Make no mistake, someone always suffers.
Don't believe me? Look at our infrastructure. In the 1950s the federal government invested in the future by building a system of wide, uninterrupted, public roads: the Interstate system. At the time they knew that the materials they used wouldn't last more than 50 years. The clock is ticking. Like any other roads, Interstates need basic maintenance. To do all these repairs, refurbishments, and replacements would take manpower, thus providing jobs for the foreseeable future.
In the 1980s federal spending became unpopular. Other industrialized nations spend about 10% of the national budget on their roads; our share has drooped to 2%. The roads are in bad shape, and they will get worse. If we start work immediately, they will get even worse, but then they will get better. If we wait too long, they will become almost useless. Without the Interstates, trucks will have to divert to state roads, which are also poorly maintained. Goods will take longer to get to market--including basic goods like food, gasoline, clothing--and they will be more expensive. Travel will become more dangerous. Bridges will collapse, like the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis in 2007. And it will get worse before it gets better.
That's not quite what you expect if you believe in less government spending, is it? But actions have consequences. Less spending on infrastructure means less infrastructure. It's that simple.
The wealthy want you to believe in less government spending. That means they pay less in taxes. As a bonus, the government, starved of funds, can't regulate business properly--even more profit. They win, we suffer the consequences.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Still Unfair
It's been ten long years since Bush v. Gore. The Supreme Court, in what was already an increasingly blatant series of partisan cases, installed the worst president in modern history. The justices tend to cite landmark cases in their later "work," but they have never referred back to BvG. Alito tells people to "get over it," a playground retort that tells you: a) he won't discuss it because he can't defend it; b) he won't apologize for it because he has no shame; c) he won't admit it was partisan because he's still handing down shoddy, biased decisions; and d) he doesn't care what anyone thinks because he's publicly involved in political affairs. He is a hack, not a judge.
If you don't remember the specifics, here's a quick review. The presidential election of 2000 apparently ended in a dead heat. Bush had 246 electoral votes, Gore 266, with only Florida's votes not included. Those 25 votes would decide the election, but the difference in the state's totals was less than one-half percent between the two candidates. Under state law the election officials had to perform a recount and report within seven days. That was when the circus began.
Lawyers for both sides flooded into the Sunshine State. Stories about voter intimidation, purging of eligible voters from rolls, and other irregularities began to surface. Secretary of State Katherine Harris, who had co-chaired Bush's Florida campaign, tried to invalidate the recount by certifying each county's totals as originally reported. In other words, she wanted to use her position to ignore the actual totals and declare the election over because her candidate had ostensibly won.
A Bush family crony and unindicted co-conspirator, James Baker oversaw a blizzard of legal diversions. Recounts in various counties started, stopped, and started again, all under the watchful eyes of lawyers. Reporters breathlessly told us about different kinds of chads. The actual votes, the will of the people, got pushed further and further into the background. The Florida Supreme Court displayed an unhealthy interest in facts and evidence, going so far as to order a complete and final recount to resolve the election properly. The Bush legal team went over their heads. Reagan and Bush Sr. had appointed the majority on the Supreme Court, so that was where the case needed to go. Bush had to win; the legal justification was almost an afterthought. Best of all, with SCOTUS there could be no appeal. More than a month later, the federal justices stopped the recount, effectively appointing Bush the new commander in chief.
There were plenty of issues to provoke outrage. For me there are three that still resonate a decade later.
One, the whole process became politicized too quickly. The country can't have confidence in an election if the votes are pushed aside in favor of legal hair-splitting, partisan maneuvering, and endless debates over established procedures. The higher the stakes, the more important it is to follow the law. If a county has a recount procedure in place, follow it to its conclusion, flawed though it may be. Fix the flaws later. Bush may have actually won, but we'll never know.
Two, a democracy (even a representative democracy) lives or dies on the integrity of its elections. The only point in the political process where you have any real power is in an election. If someone interferes with how your vote is recorded, he is taking away your power, he is substituting his decision for yours, he is subverting the democratic process and committing treason. Americans don't seem to understand how important their votes are. The general outrage over Florida soon dissipated, with few reforms ever put in place. The biggest "reform" was a switch to electronic devices, which I've covered in another entry. The time for reform is now, before the next election.
Three, the Supremes are supposed to be impartial. They're human beings, but judges are allegedly chosen for their impartiality. They are supposed to have the training and experience to put their personal prejudices aside. That's their job, that's their duty. With Bush v. Gore they abandoned their duty. They are indirectly responsible for the ensuing disasters, from two pointless wars to Katrina to the current depression. They have become as corrupt as the rest of the federal government.
If you don't remember the specifics, here's a quick review. The presidential election of 2000 apparently ended in a dead heat. Bush had 246 electoral votes, Gore 266, with only Florida's votes not included. Those 25 votes would decide the election, but the difference in the state's totals was less than one-half percent between the two candidates. Under state law the election officials had to perform a recount and report within seven days. That was when the circus began.
Lawyers for both sides flooded into the Sunshine State. Stories about voter intimidation, purging of eligible voters from rolls, and other irregularities began to surface. Secretary of State Katherine Harris, who had co-chaired Bush's Florida campaign, tried to invalidate the recount by certifying each county's totals as originally reported. In other words, she wanted to use her position to ignore the actual totals and declare the election over because her candidate had ostensibly won.
A Bush family crony and unindicted co-conspirator, James Baker oversaw a blizzard of legal diversions. Recounts in various counties started, stopped, and started again, all under the watchful eyes of lawyers. Reporters breathlessly told us about different kinds of chads. The actual votes, the will of the people, got pushed further and further into the background. The Florida Supreme Court displayed an unhealthy interest in facts and evidence, going so far as to order a complete and final recount to resolve the election properly. The Bush legal team went over their heads. Reagan and Bush Sr. had appointed the majority on the Supreme Court, so that was where the case needed to go. Bush had to win; the legal justification was almost an afterthought. Best of all, with SCOTUS there could be no appeal. More than a month later, the federal justices stopped the recount, effectively appointing Bush the new commander in chief.
There were plenty of issues to provoke outrage. For me there are three that still resonate a decade later.
One, the whole process became politicized too quickly. The country can't have confidence in an election if the votes are pushed aside in favor of legal hair-splitting, partisan maneuvering, and endless debates over established procedures. The higher the stakes, the more important it is to follow the law. If a county has a recount procedure in place, follow it to its conclusion, flawed though it may be. Fix the flaws later. Bush may have actually won, but we'll never know.
Two, a democracy (even a representative democracy) lives or dies on the integrity of its elections. The only point in the political process where you have any real power is in an election. If someone interferes with how your vote is recorded, he is taking away your power, he is substituting his decision for yours, he is subverting the democratic process and committing treason. Americans don't seem to understand how important their votes are. The general outrage over Florida soon dissipated, with few reforms ever put in place. The biggest "reform" was a switch to electronic devices, which I've covered in another entry. The time for reform is now, before the next election.
Three, the Supremes are supposed to be impartial. They're human beings, but judges are allegedly chosen for their impartiality. They are supposed to have the training and experience to put their personal prejudices aside. That's their job, that's their duty. With Bush v. Gore they abandoned their duty. They are indirectly responsible for the ensuing disasters, from two pointless wars to Katrina to the current depression. They have become as corrupt as the rest of the federal government.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
A Letter
A friend forwarded a letter to me. I won't name the author, who (according to the letter) is an actor on a popular television series. He might be surprised to learn that his name is being used for propaganda.
Make no mistake, this type of message is propaganda. There's a patina of respectability because it claims to come from a known source. There's even a photo of the actor, so it must be genuine.
The refrain in this message is that the author is "tired." He's worked hard all his life. I'll give him that one. Acting is marketing oneself more than anything, and marketing is hard work.
Then the moaning begins. He's tired of the government taking his hard-earned money and giving it to lazy bums who don't work as hard as he does. He doesn't understand that some people are simply not capable of working as hard as he does. In fact, he's been lucky to avoid a long period of disability, which happens to half of all Americans, or a chronic illness.
He's tired of paying taxes to bail out people who tried to flip pricey houses. Actually, the big bailouts went to the big banks. He's also tired of the government programs that created the bubble. Actually, the banks paid Congress to deregulate them. The bubble happened because of too little government in one area, not too much.
He's tired of limousine liberals who trash America. Who loves his country more: someone who blindly favors one side over another and continually smears all government, or someone who points out the flaws in both sides in order to have a better country?
He's tired of hearing about Muslims who want peace, because the news is full of Muslims committing acts of violence. He might want to put some of that hard work into learning something about Islam and Arab countries before he makes such blanket statements.
He's tired of affirmative action. Apparently he doesn't see the discrimination going on all around him. It's easy to ignore the misfortunes of others when you are so fortunate.
He's tired of oil money going to establish mosques in America, when Christian churches aren't allowed in Muslim countries. Here's one idea: don't buy oil.
Wait, that won't work. He's tired of hearing about global warming, but he won't put some of his hard work into learning a little bit about climatology. Instead he will take the word of think tanks who create junk science with oil company money.
He's tired of paying to help junkies, who obviously meant to wind up destroying their lives when they took that first snort of cocaine. They aren't ill in any way, even mentally ill, so they don't need treatment. When you're lucky, you don't need drugs to cope with the world.
He's tired of illegal aliens. They should be hard-working, lucky anglophones like him before they can become citizens.
He's tired of unpatriotic people trashing the military for torturing terrorists. First, the CIA, not the military, did most of the torturing. Second, they had to make it up as they went along, because our government had nobody who knew how to torture. Third, the blame rests squarely on high-level people like Dick Cheney, who must be happy to see this kind of blame-shifting going on. There's more, but the message here is that questioning the government is unpatriotic. Unless the government is actually accomplishing something at home, then it's time to start impeachment proceedings.
He's tired of political parties blaming each other for everything; they're both bunches of liars and cheats. Except that the Democrats are much worse. At least he's fair and balanced.
He's tired of celebrities and politicians who get caught with their pants down and apologize gracelessly. Once again, I agree.
Heading for the big finish. He's tired of hearing people blame everyone but themselves for anything and everything, when they should blame themselves. This is the "personal responsibility" card. When you're lucky, you don't have problems, so all you do is take credit for your good luck. When you do have problems, you should magically solve them yourself, whether they're medical, legal, cultural, or economic. And "personal responsibility" always goes with "corporate irresponsibility," which means corporations are never held responsible for anything.
So, we have welfare queens, house flippers, limousine liberals, Muslims, minorities, more Muslims, tree huggers, junkies, Mexicans, hippies, and irresponsible people of every stripe, with a healthy sprinkling of Obama and big government. All we need are trial lawyers, communists, and the liberal media for a complete list of tried and true conservative targets.
I'm tired too. I'm tired of hearing how much conservatives hate everyone who isn't like them. I'm tired of the blind allegiance to conservative politicians who don't know how to do anything but throw sand in the motor. I'm tired of hearing the same old rhetoric that perpetuates problems instead of solving them. I'm tired of hearing opinions from people who don't know anything (and, much worse, don't want to know anything) about a topic. Finally, I'm tired of hearing litanies of complaints without a single suggestion about how to address them in a meaningful way.
What ya gonna do? If government isn't solving your problem (and odds are it isn't), get out and solve it yourself. Talk to people--the best cure for intolerance is spending time with your "enemy." Do some research--you may be surprised by how much the politicians on both sides are lying to you. Find or found a community group--you may be surprised at how many people are frustrated enough to get off their couches. Don't write to your congressman or run for office--it's a waste of time.
Make no mistake, this type of message is propaganda. There's a patina of respectability because it claims to come from a known source. There's even a photo of the actor, so it must be genuine.
The refrain in this message is that the author is "tired." He's worked hard all his life. I'll give him that one. Acting is marketing oneself more than anything, and marketing is hard work.
Then the moaning begins. He's tired of the government taking his hard-earned money and giving it to lazy bums who don't work as hard as he does. He doesn't understand that some people are simply not capable of working as hard as he does. In fact, he's been lucky to avoid a long period of disability, which happens to half of all Americans, or a chronic illness.
He's tired of paying taxes to bail out people who tried to flip pricey houses. Actually, the big bailouts went to the big banks. He's also tired of the government programs that created the bubble. Actually, the banks paid Congress to deregulate them. The bubble happened because of too little government in one area, not too much.
He's tired of limousine liberals who trash America. Who loves his country more: someone who blindly favors one side over another and continually smears all government, or someone who points out the flaws in both sides in order to have a better country?
He's tired of hearing about Muslims who want peace, because the news is full of Muslims committing acts of violence. He might want to put some of that hard work into learning something about Islam and Arab countries before he makes such blanket statements.
He's tired of affirmative action. Apparently he doesn't see the discrimination going on all around him. It's easy to ignore the misfortunes of others when you are so fortunate.
He's tired of oil money going to establish mosques in America, when Christian churches aren't allowed in Muslim countries. Here's one idea: don't buy oil.
Wait, that won't work. He's tired of hearing about global warming, but he won't put some of his hard work into learning a little bit about climatology. Instead he will take the word of think tanks who create junk science with oil company money.
He's tired of paying to help junkies, who obviously meant to wind up destroying their lives when they took that first snort of cocaine. They aren't ill in any way, even mentally ill, so they don't need treatment. When you're lucky, you don't need drugs to cope with the world.
He's tired of illegal aliens. They should be hard-working, lucky anglophones like him before they can become citizens.
He's tired of unpatriotic people trashing the military for torturing terrorists. First, the CIA, not the military, did most of the torturing. Second, they had to make it up as they went along, because our government had nobody who knew how to torture. Third, the blame rests squarely on high-level people like Dick Cheney, who must be happy to see this kind of blame-shifting going on. There's more, but the message here is that questioning the government is unpatriotic. Unless the government is actually accomplishing something at home, then it's time to start impeachment proceedings.
He's tired of political parties blaming each other for everything; they're both bunches of liars and cheats. Except that the Democrats are much worse. At least he's fair and balanced.
He's tired of celebrities and politicians who get caught with their pants down and apologize gracelessly. Once again, I agree.
Heading for the big finish. He's tired of hearing people blame everyone but themselves for anything and everything, when they should blame themselves. This is the "personal responsibility" card. When you're lucky, you don't have problems, so all you do is take credit for your good luck. When you do have problems, you should magically solve them yourself, whether they're medical, legal, cultural, or economic. And "personal responsibility" always goes with "corporate irresponsibility," which means corporations are never held responsible for anything.
So, we have welfare queens, house flippers, limousine liberals, Muslims, minorities, more Muslims, tree huggers, junkies, Mexicans, hippies, and irresponsible people of every stripe, with a healthy sprinkling of Obama and big government. All we need are trial lawyers, communists, and the liberal media for a complete list of tried and true conservative targets.
I'm tired too. I'm tired of hearing how much conservatives hate everyone who isn't like them. I'm tired of the blind allegiance to conservative politicians who don't know how to do anything but throw sand in the motor. I'm tired of hearing the same old rhetoric that perpetuates problems instead of solving them. I'm tired of hearing opinions from people who don't know anything (and, much worse, don't want to know anything) about a topic. Finally, I'm tired of hearing litanies of complaints without a single suggestion about how to address them in a meaningful way.
What ya gonna do? If government isn't solving your problem (and odds are it isn't), get out and solve it yourself. Talk to people--the best cure for intolerance is spending time with your "enemy." Do some research--you may be surprised by how much the politicians on both sides are lying to you. Find or found a community group--you may be surprised at how many people are frustrated enough to get off their couches. Don't write to your congressman or run for office--it's a waste of time.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
An Analogy
If you're still having trouble picturing the political landscape, here's an analogy that may make it easier to follow.
Imagine a wagon full of apples rolling downhill on a bumpy road. You're supposed to be the one driving the wagon, but your friends want to drive too. Some of them pull the wheel one way, some pull the other way. They're so busy fighting with each other, they don't watch the road ahead. You can pull the wheel one way or the other, but you have to pull for a while to overcome your friends. Did I mention the road was bumpy? And there are ditches on either side? And no brakes?
Wait, it gets worse. A bandit stowed away on your wagon. He's furiously throwing your cargo of apples off the wagon. He's also promised a share of the apples to some of your friends, but you don't know which ones. The bandit could care less if your wagon crashes.
That's a pretty desperate situation, but unfortunately, that's where our democratic process is.
Obviously our country is the wagon. You are the independent voter who tries to keep our country on the right track by voting for the right people. In the real world, different groups want to use the government for their own ends, so they tug and strain and curse to turn it their way. Ideally, in our republic, the government turns right, and the voters correct the imbalance by turning left; a few years later the reverse occurs; in the long run we avoid trouble by not going too far in either direction. That doesn't happen any more.
For one thing, the mass media and the parties have done their best to alienate the electorate. Typically, 40 to 50 percent of potential voters don't bother. They're not represented in the analogy, except in the inertia of the wagon.
Most of the actual voters have made up their minds before they vote. About 40% vote Democratic no matter what, another 40% Republican. The numbers may be even higher these days. These partisans are the "friends" in the analogy who pull the wheel left or right without understanding the consequences.
That leaves 20% (or even less) to decide the election. Many of them vote based on their personal economic situation, which should keep the country in the center, just by the law of averages.
The bandit represents the wealthy in this country. They're robbing the rest of us blind, and as long as they can keep up the stealing, they don't care if the economy goes into a ditch. Their latest target is Social Security. You've been paying into it your whole working life, but if they get it privatized, Wall Street will have a trillion-dollar lunch off of your money. Do you want to get to the bottom of the hill and find out your cargo is gone? Then keep voting Republican.
Our wagon has been veering to the right for some time, and we've already got two wheels off the road and almost into a ditch. The voters pulled the wheel left, just enough to keep the wheels out of the ditch. The danger is not over, but the wagon is still veering to the right. It's just a matter of time before we run off the road. Another good bump like 9/11 could take the choice out of your hands.
What ya gonna do? You don't want the wagon to run off the right side of the road. You don't want to overcorrect and run off the left side, either. The first job is to center the wagon, by keeping the Republicans from getting more control. It's not just about putting people in Congress, you see, it's about the judges they appoint, the projects they fund or don't fund, the laws they pass or don't pass. Fixing the Great Recession will take more than two years.
After the election, the next step is campaign financing. The Citizens United case was the equivalent of giving megaphones to each of the wheel pullers and putting a blindfold on you; it will be impossible to make rational decisions about the future of our country when you can't hear yourself think and can't see the road ahead.
We have to save our country before it's too late. Democracy may not work very well, it may seem like the worst system on earth, but as Churchill pointed out, all the others are worse.
Imagine a wagon full of apples rolling downhill on a bumpy road. You're supposed to be the one driving the wagon, but your friends want to drive too. Some of them pull the wheel one way, some pull the other way. They're so busy fighting with each other, they don't watch the road ahead. You can pull the wheel one way or the other, but you have to pull for a while to overcome your friends. Did I mention the road was bumpy? And there are ditches on either side? And no brakes?
Wait, it gets worse. A bandit stowed away on your wagon. He's furiously throwing your cargo of apples off the wagon. He's also promised a share of the apples to some of your friends, but you don't know which ones. The bandit could care less if your wagon crashes.
That's a pretty desperate situation, but unfortunately, that's where our democratic process is.
Obviously our country is the wagon. You are the independent voter who tries to keep our country on the right track by voting for the right people. In the real world, different groups want to use the government for their own ends, so they tug and strain and curse to turn it their way. Ideally, in our republic, the government turns right, and the voters correct the imbalance by turning left; a few years later the reverse occurs; in the long run we avoid trouble by not going too far in either direction. That doesn't happen any more.
For one thing, the mass media and the parties have done their best to alienate the electorate. Typically, 40 to 50 percent of potential voters don't bother. They're not represented in the analogy, except in the inertia of the wagon.
Most of the actual voters have made up their minds before they vote. About 40% vote Democratic no matter what, another 40% Republican. The numbers may be even higher these days. These partisans are the "friends" in the analogy who pull the wheel left or right without understanding the consequences.
That leaves 20% (or even less) to decide the election. Many of them vote based on their personal economic situation, which should keep the country in the center, just by the law of averages.
The bandit represents the wealthy in this country. They're robbing the rest of us blind, and as long as they can keep up the stealing, they don't care if the economy goes into a ditch. Their latest target is Social Security. You've been paying into it your whole working life, but if they get it privatized, Wall Street will have a trillion-dollar lunch off of your money. Do you want to get to the bottom of the hill and find out your cargo is gone? Then keep voting Republican.
Our wagon has been veering to the right for some time, and we've already got two wheels off the road and almost into a ditch. The voters pulled the wheel left, just enough to keep the wheels out of the ditch. The danger is not over, but the wagon is still veering to the right. It's just a matter of time before we run off the road. Another good bump like 9/11 could take the choice out of your hands.
What ya gonna do? You don't want the wagon to run off the right side of the road. You don't want to overcorrect and run off the left side, either. The first job is to center the wagon, by keeping the Republicans from getting more control. It's not just about putting people in Congress, you see, it's about the judges they appoint, the projects they fund or don't fund, the laws they pass or don't pass. Fixing the Great Recession will take more than two years.
After the election, the next step is campaign financing. The Citizens United case was the equivalent of giving megaphones to each of the wheel pullers and putting a blindfold on you; it will be impossible to make rational decisions about the future of our country when you can't hear yourself think and can't see the road ahead.
We have to save our country before it's too late. Democracy may not work very well, it may seem like the worst system on earth, but as Churchill pointed out, all the others are worse.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Vote Money
Still not sure who to vote for this time? Take the guesswork out of elections. Vote for the Money Party!
You don't have to choose between Democrat and Republican. You don't even have to go to the trouble of voting! You're still voting for money.
The Money Party platform is simple: rich people deserve to get and keep every dime they can, however they can. That's it! No complicated issues to think about, no campaign promises to break, no opposition party to slow things down.
Are you too busy making a living to follow politics, make an informed decision, and vote? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you staying away from the ballot box.
Are you fed up with negative campaign ads, or the sheer number of ads? Or do you just not pay attention and wait for *American Idol* and *Desperate Housewives* to come back on? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you staying hypnotized.
Are you following the election like it was some kind of reality show or popularity contest? Do you care about polls, about who's ahead, about the horse race aspect of it all? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you ignoring the issues.
Are you listening to the DC pundits, who explain everything in terms of political advantage? Are you listening to the other pundits, who paint the other side as buffoons or criminals? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you making partisan and emotional decisions.
Are you fed up with big government? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you looking the other way while they let our roads and water lines crumble.
Are you a disciple of laissez-faire capitalism? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you allowing them to get away with murder.
For the Money Party, money isn't everything, it's the only thing. Government works when they tell it to work and does what they tell it to do. Tax cuts? Deregulation? Tax breaks for moving jobs overseas? Forcing everyone to buy overpriced health insurance? Bailouts for investment banks? It's all gravy.
Ask not what the Money Party can do for you. They don't care about you.
What ya gonna do? Obviously, most people don't engage in the political process, so let's cut them out of it. People who don't even bother to vote, people who don't know anything about the issues, people who vote with their emotions, none of them deserve a voice. People who do care about voting should show that they're serious and committed to the political process. Let's charge a fee to register, how about, oh, a nice round number, one million dollars? We can stop pretending that your vote matters. You don't have to sit through those ads any more. The real voters can stop making all those bribes and tell their representatives how to vote. Better yet, cut out the middleman, let the real voters write the legislation. They're already doing it, why not make it official?
So vote Money! ... while you can still vote.
But seriously, folks, don't take my word for it. The vast right-wing conspiracy (especially these guys) is doing better than ever. You didn't notice? Congratulations, you've been distracted!
You don't have to choose between Democrat and Republican. You don't even have to go to the trouble of voting! You're still voting for money.
The Money Party platform is simple: rich people deserve to get and keep every dime they can, however they can. That's it! No complicated issues to think about, no campaign promises to break, no opposition party to slow things down.
Are you too busy making a living to follow politics, make an informed decision, and vote? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you staying away from the ballot box.
Are you fed up with negative campaign ads, or the sheer number of ads? Or do you just not pay attention and wait for *American Idol* and *Desperate Housewives* to come back on? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you staying hypnotized.
Are you following the election like it was some kind of reality show or popularity contest? Do you care about polls, about who's ahead, about the horse race aspect of it all? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you ignoring the issues.
Are you listening to the DC pundits, who explain everything in terms of political advantage? Are you listening to the other pundits, who paint the other side as buffoons or criminals? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you making partisan and emotional decisions.
Are you fed up with big government? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you looking the other way while they let our roads and water lines crumble.
Are you a disciple of laissez-faire capitalism? Congratulations, you've been distracted! The Money Party counts on you allowing them to get away with murder.
For the Money Party, money isn't everything, it's the only thing. Government works when they tell it to work and does what they tell it to do. Tax cuts? Deregulation? Tax breaks for moving jobs overseas? Forcing everyone to buy overpriced health insurance? Bailouts for investment banks? It's all gravy.
Ask not what the Money Party can do for you. They don't care about you.
What ya gonna do? Obviously, most people don't engage in the political process, so let's cut them out of it. People who don't even bother to vote, people who don't know anything about the issues, people who vote with their emotions, none of them deserve a voice. People who do care about voting should show that they're serious and committed to the political process. Let's charge a fee to register, how about, oh, a nice round number, one million dollars? We can stop pretending that your vote matters. You don't have to sit through those ads any more. The real voters can stop making all those bribes and tell their representatives how to vote. Better yet, cut out the middleman, let the real voters write the legislation. They're already doing it, why not make it official?
So vote Money! ... while you can still vote.
But seriously, folks, don't take my word for it. The vast right-wing conspiracy (especially these guys) is doing better than ever. You didn't notice? Congratulations, you've been distracted!
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Treason
You want to be a good citizen. You pay attention to politics. You listen to the candidates. You make your choices. You go to the polls. When you go to all the trouble of voting, you want your vote to matter. These days, though, it's entirely possible that your vote is irrelevant, that you wouldn't know about it, and that you have no way of finding out.
It doesn't matter which party you belong to. A bad election hurts everybody. If your side doesn't get hurt this time, it will next time. That's human nature.
We'd like to live in a democracy, where we can vote on every issue, but that's not practical. Instead we vote for representatives, and they vote on the issues. The brilliant idea behind a republic is that we have a controlled revolution every two years. We agree on the rules ahead of time, we put limits on the possible changes, and we abide by the results. If enough people play by the rules, it works--crudely, but it works.
What we have now is a loose confederation of people who routinely break the rules. We don't publicize them enough or punish them enough. They are trying, in a limited way, to overthrow our government by replacing a duly elected official with someone else. That is treason. We hang traitors.
These traitors are computers masquerading as voting machines. More specifically, these traitors are the people who make, sell, and operate the computers, because the computers themselves are pretty stupid. It turns out the people who make the computers are fairly stupid themselves. Smart people who know computers have been saying for years that these machines are vulnerable to manipulation, by the makers, by the users, and by hackers.
Here's a simple and common trick. A computer is pretty stupid; you have to spell out names for its codes, such as X for Smith and Y for Jones, so it will display the names. When you vote for Smith, the computer adds one to column X, and that's the only fact it records about your vote. Here's the trick. When they set up the computer for the election, they switch the codes: Smith becomes Y and Jones becomes X. Now, when you vote for Smith, your vote goes into column Y instead of column X.
Think about that very carefully. If you are a Republican, you may have just voted for a Democrat. There is no way to go back and check the numbers, to recount the ballots. On election night, the computer has a total in column X and a total in column Y, nothing else. If the traitor can switch the codes in the morning and switch them back at night, without being detected, it's the perfect crime.
It doesn't stop there. What if the computer changed every tenth vote from one column to another? What if it simply generated the totals without counting any votes? How would you know? The companies who make these computers won't let you see the code that runs them. Partisan politicians will protect their election officials. These computers aren't monsters like the Terminator, but they're dangerous just the same.
Here's the bottom line: whichever side you're on, it might be your vote that they change. If you didn't vote for them, then it's not really your government, it's someone else's, regardless of who you voted for. You're no longer living in a republic. Your government is no longer accountable to you. To those traitors and their masters, your vote doesn't matter, and you don't matter.
So what ya gonna do? Get an absentee ballot. If you go to vote, ask for a paper ballot. If they won't give you one, ask for a receipt from the machine (you won't get it). Don't make a stink so big that they have you arrested, but make a stink. And remember that the poll workers are volunteers. Don't blame them, blame the people who are buying our elections, and our candidates, and our government, and our souls.
After the election, tell your representatives that you demand they get rid of the computers. Do you have so much faith in computers, in the people who make and use them, that you are willing to give them absolute control over your vote? Do your trust your government that much?
It doesn't matter which party you belong to. A bad election hurts everybody. If your side doesn't get hurt this time, it will next time. That's human nature.
We'd like to live in a democracy, where we can vote on every issue, but that's not practical. Instead we vote for representatives, and they vote on the issues. The brilliant idea behind a republic is that we have a controlled revolution every two years. We agree on the rules ahead of time, we put limits on the possible changes, and we abide by the results. If enough people play by the rules, it works--crudely, but it works.
What we have now is a loose confederation of people who routinely break the rules. We don't publicize them enough or punish them enough. They are trying, in a limited way, to overthrow our government by replacing a duly elected official with someone else. That is treason. We hang traitors.
These traitors are computers masquerading as voting machines. More specifically, these traitors are the people who make, sell, and operate the computers, because the computers themselves are pretty stupid. It turns out the people who make the computers are fairly stupid themselves. Smart people who know computers have been saying for years that these machines are vulnerable to manipulation, by the makers, by the users, and by hackers.
Here's a simple and common trick. A computer is pretty stupid; you have to spell out names for its codes, such as X for Smith and Y for Jones, so it will display the names. When you vote for Smith, the computer adds one to column X, and that's the only fact it records about your vote. Here's the trick. When they set up the computer for the election, they switch the codes: Smith becomes Y and Jones becomes X. Now, when you vote for Smith, your vote goes into column Y instead of column X.
Think about that very carefully. If you are a Republican, you may have just voted for a Democrat. There is no way to go back and check the numbers, to recount the ballots. On election night, the computer has a total in column X and a total in column Y, nothing else. If the traitor can switch the codes in the morning and switch them back at night, without being detected, it's the perfect crime.
It doesn't stop there. What if the computer changed every tenth vote from one column to another? What if it simply generated the totals without counting any votes? How would you know? The companies who make these computers won't let you see the code that runs them. Partisan politicians will protect their election officials. These computers aren't monsters like the Terminator, but they're dangerous just the same.
Here's the bottom line: whichever side you're on, it might be your vote that they change. If you didn't vote for them, then it's not really your government, it's someone else's, regardless of who you voted for. You're no longer living in a republic. Your government is no longer accountable to you. To those traitors and their masters, your vote doesn't matter, and you don't matter.
So what ya gonna do? Get an absentee ballot. If you go to vote, ask for a paper ballot. If they won't give you one, ask for a receipt from the machine (you won't get it). Don't make a stink so big that they have you arrested, but make a stink. And remember that the poll workers are volunteers. Don't blame them, blame the people who are buying our elections, and our candidates, and our government, and our souls.
After the election, tell your representatives that you demand they get rid of the computers. Do you have so much faith in computers, in the people who make and use them, that you are willing to give them absolute control over your vote? Do your trust your government that much?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)