Republican Economic Bull Puckey.

In this Rachel Maddow video, we (finally) hear complete and total debunking of Republican (voodoo) economics. As an aside, it was George H.W. Bush who coined this phrase when running against Reagan in the '80 primaries....

Some interesting takeaways:

1. The most effective stimulus is food stamps, returning $1.72 for every dollar spent.
2. The least effective stimulus? Tax cuts. Returning $1.02 for every dollar spent.

The days of supply-side economics are OVER...and none too soon! Let's just hope that these voodoo economics are discredited by all who aspire to reason.

All government spending is not bad.

Government spending has been given a (somewhat deserved) bad name. "Bridges to nowhere, Alaska" funding comes to mind. As wasteful as our government can be, this article on Salon.com points out that not all government spending is bad.

I'll take this line of thinking a step further and state that government spending has actually been the spark for several strong economic booms and has had strong influence on the direction of economy...and can have a strong influence on our future, should we allow it to happen. I've listed the ones I know about here:

1. The "Space Race" fueled the funding necessary to kick off the technology boom.
2. The military has spawned many derivative products and industries. CDMA (technology used for cell phone networks) is one that comes to mind.
   
3. Darpanet was the precursor to today's internet.
4. The interstate highway system. (Scorned at the time it was developed, though praised for many years since.)
   

Ok, so that's "only" 3, but I'm sure there are many more. The point is that wise (and sometimes necessary) government spending is good for the economy. For instance, investment in technology and infrastructure could help to break the "digital divide" and poor progress of our telecommunications companies.

Currently, our broadband connectivity ranks 15th. Considering that this connectivity will be (already is?) the next big vehicle for commerce and expansion, that's pretty troubling. How could this happen in what conservative idealogues like to call the vibrant, competitive and "infallible" free market? Because the infrasture that telcos control is naturally monopolistic. Market forces oblige the telcos to squeeze profit out of existing infrastructure, not develop new and better infrastructure. The lax FCC regulation of current administrations has only magnified this issue. How to fix the issue and restore our once great broadband connectivity standing? Pursue a national FTTH (fiber to the home) initiative. There are those who would argue that our distances are too great and our population density too low to make this feasible. I counter with...tell that to your underserved and communications impaired children and grandchildren. Both Sweden and Finland have lower population densities and manage to do a much better job than we have, thus far.

Nope. The "wide open spaces" argument is bunk. As are a lot of the arguments on the side that opposing government spending....at all costs. The private sector just doesn't do well investing in anything that is overly expensive or overly "new". It tends to be extremely risk averse, to our detriment. Let's please not forget this as we pass the first of what's sure to be several stimulous bills through Congress!

Obama and the future of capitalism.

I feel that Obama has been dealt a tough hand. One that he must make the most of!

Only time will tell whether or not he (and America) can succeed, but I already see positive change. The moronic policies of the worst administration in our history are being unraveled. The end of Git'mo is in sight, along with the travesties of justice it represented. The Iraq War and the stupidity with which we've approached it will (at the very least) be re-examined, if not ended altogether. Yes, it's very nice to have adults in charge again.

One issue, however, will much more difficult for Obama to tackle. It's the economy....stupid! The cause? Well, it's easy to pin the blame on the out of control government spending or lax regulation. Or, on the risk taking exceedingly irresponsible financial institutions. Or, on those in the general public who have lived (or perhaps still are living) far beyond their means. Regardless of where you decide to pin the blame, here we are. Standing on the edge of a cliff. Wondering how we let things get this bad.

In my opinion, it call comes down to one simple fact. Without a strong middle class, capitalism as a system fails. Period. Policies that attack the middle class or diminish the importance of them, then, are akin to shooting yourself (or the economy) in the foot. The policies of the last 20-30 years have attacked and exploited the middle class (to the benefit of very few) and we, as a whole, are paying the price for this stupidity. These policies need to be reversed if our democracy is to survive.

Here's to hoping that Obama can get this ball rolling in the right direction. He has to. We have to. Any other outcome is just too scary!

Obama's "inexperience".

While experience is important, it's certainly not the most important trait of good leaders. Also keep in mind that while McCain has lots of political experience, he has less executive experience than Obama.

Here's a quote from my father that conveys my feelings exactly....using history as a guide (March 6, 2008):

"This afternoon on the way back from the polling place, I was thinking that another Illinois lad ran for president. He had some experience in the state legislature, but only two years in Congress. Not only that, he disparaged the military, opposed a war(Mexican War) and was opposed within his party by a man with substantial legislative and executive experience. Still, he wasn't half bad as a president. The capitol of Nebraska is named after him today."

For those of you who are geographically impaired, the capitol of Nebraska is Lincoln, as in Abraham Lincoln.

2008: Start of the "Mother of all Depressions".

Whoever gets elected (looks like Obama) will have to deal with this horrible turn of events to start his presidency.

There's blame aplenty, but placing it squarely on one man's or one administration's shoulders is out of line. The past few administrations were just following policies put in place in the late 70s and early 80s. Policies and tools that were meant to curb the out of control inflation of the 60s and 70s, not the out of control credit of the past 20 years.

Oh, criminal negligence (on the part of government officials), corruption, and irrational salary explosion (especially at the top) hasn't helped...

I'm sure my Ron Paul supporting, fiscally conservative brother will chime in with more, so that's all I have to say, for now.

And so it begins...

...or ends.

If there was any doubt that the US's dominance in this world was coming to an end, the (poor/lack of) management in the sub-prime lending scandal and its culmination (for now) in the Bailout Abomination should erase whatever's left.

And Paulson has wasted no time in bringing a Goldman Sach's buddy into the fray.

Look for more cronyism, and very little in the way of substantive reform...in the short term. And hold onto your pants (if you still have them). We're in for a rough ride!

Bailout Abomination!

I was hoping that Congress would implement some oversight measures to ensure that Paulson's $250bil "slush fund for buddies" is used properly. Instead, the Senate adds tons of irrelevant (and wasteful) "pork"! The only good thing about the Senate re-jiggered bill is that it increases the FDIC limit from $100k to $250k.

Jeez! Congress's moment to shine and they end up looking no better than the Wall Street criminals that got us in this mess... Nice!

It's not Just McCain That's "Out of Touch"...

...it's (apparently) his whole campaign!

In this article, the following is stated:

Holtz-Eakin also defended McCain's assertions about the fundamentals of the U.S. economy being strong and cited the Republican presidential candidate's work on the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees telecommunications, as part of his qualifications to lead the country through a financial crisis.

"You're looking at the miracle that John McCain helped create," Holtz-Eakin told reporters while holding up a Blackberry device.

Thanks Mr. Holtz-Eakin. Now I know who to blame for the mess that is this country's telco "market". Dominated by a few ILECs (Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers) that are more interested in squeezing profit out of their current infrastructure than updating it for 21st. century needs. A few years ago we ranked near the top in broadband speed. Now we sit at an appalling 15th!


Why does this matter? Well, not only is the internet the future of commerce, but the future is already here and we are falling behind...far behind!

Get a clue! Stop taking credit and asking for laurels where shame would be more appropriate!

John McCain: Serial Liar

Or rather, John McCain's campaign is based on a series of lies. Negative campaigning gets McCain nowhere, with me, but apparently a long ways with a fair portion of the U.S.

It's not surprising, though it is disappointing.

GOP Tricket...a Bit Difficult to Swallow.

This is what the GOP is asking you to believe:

"I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....

• Grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents: you're "exotic, different".
• Grow up in Alaska, eating mooseburgers: a quintessential American story.

• Name is Barack: you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
• Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track: you're a maverick.

• Graduate from Harvard law School: you are unstable.
• Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating: you're well grounded.

• Spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees: you don't have any real leadership experience.
• Total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people: you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

• You have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches: you're not a real Christian.
• You cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month: you're a Christian.

• You teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control: you are eroding the fiber of society.
• If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant: you're very responsible.

• If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family: your family's values don't represent America's.
• If your husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA: your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now."

If you actually believe the GOP's crap: you need to read more or, perhaps, go back to school.

This guy could be my father...

Here's a quote I found in a comment on a "The Moderate Voice" posting.

The thing that distresses me most about Gov. Palin and Sen. McCain is that they appear to be trying to deceive the public into voting for them, or more accurately, against Obama. They lie openly about Obama's policy proposals and about their own histories. They know that the facts will contradict them, indeed that video footage of their own words will contradict them, but calculate that the public will buy their talking points without heeding other sources of information. The calculation works, because most do not have the time or depth of interest to dig into every statement.

Most cynically of all, their campaign openly supports the idea of making the race for the presidency a popularity contest rather than a decision based on the issues. They seek to raise their positives while raising their opponent's negatives, with no regard for the fact that their policies are anti-democratic; that is, they are attempting to scare voters into voting against their own clear personal interests, as well as those of their children.

And so, we boomers, and those older than us, will exit the scene leaving to our children a mountain of debt and a degraded planet. To my own son, to your children and all others, I am truly sorry. I have tried my entire adult life to support those who would take us in a different direction.

Credit to GreenDreams.

Republican Convention News.

Palin a Big Government Republican.

Looks like Palin, in addition to being another spend-and-spend, big government Republican, is also intolerant to opinions that differ from her own. That sounds familiar, doesn't it?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/kilkenny.asp

If McCain/Palin get elected, it will just confirm my belief that the US is chock full of a bunch of sub-par thinkers.

Palin just another right-wing Nut Job

While Sarah Palin has achieved some great success in Alaska, and is a smart woman. She is not a good speaker, and, most definitely, not an intellectual. If there's any truth to the rumors of her "book banning" as mayor of a small town in Alaska, then she flat out scares me. Based on my direct exposure (so far), she certainly doesn't have the temperament to lead our country. The Republican negative-spin machine has (once again) hit full steam and, (once again) they've lost my vote.

Additionally, in theme with my previous post, I cannot vote for another "common man" appeasing ticket. I don't want someone like myself leading the country, I want someone decidedly _better_ than myself!

McCain Intellectually bereft?

While I'm not certain that either of these articles captures McCain, I am certain that I don't want another "ignoramous", non-intellectual running our country:

• Cafferty on McCain
• Butler on McCain

While I could, perhaps, write off Cafferty's article as over-the-top, Butler's lack of faith in someone he spent time with (both at Annapolis and as a POW) I can't dismiss.

I'll certainly be studying McCain's studiousness over the coming months, as I can't condone someone dumber than myself running this country.

Iran: Ramping up for War?

Recently BushandCo have upped funding for covert operations in and around Iran to $400m. For the sake of my children's children, I hope outright war with Iran doesn't happen.

Also, though Ron Paul takes a very clear stance on these sorts of foreign relations issues, neither McCain nor Obama have been as forthcoming, though I suspect McCain to be closer to the Bush philosophy. Personally, I prefer the Teddy Roosevelt approach to foreign relations... from the West African proverb, "speak softly, but carry a big stick". To me, this means that wars (conflicts, police actions, whatever you want to call them) should only be used when all other options have been exhausted. Starting another "preemptive war" flies in the face of this philosophy....and common sense!

Terrorism, the Executive Power Grab, and the Politics of Fear

While I think that terrorism, and terrorists are certainly a concern, I viewed the events of 9/11 as inevitable, both because of our policies of supporting oppressive regimes around the world, and because we'd (quite frankly) been quite lucky up to the tragic events of 9/11. While 9/11 demonstrates, perhaps, the pinnacle of what terrorists can do, I don't feel that it merited the life-changing reaction that the Bush administration advocated and has (largely) brought about. Declaring war on terror has only served to strengthen, not weaken the terrorists.

My belief is that the Bush Administration's real goal has been to increase (or "restore", in their words) power to the executive branch of government. 9/11 merely provided an ideal opportunity to use fear as a catalyst for their ambitions. Fear is a powerful ally, but it is generally short-lived, especially in democracies. Though the Bush Administration has inflicted as much damage as they could, their window of opportunity is closing. The politics of fear, I hope, is coming to an end.

Being socially liberal and fiscally conservative, I view the Bush Administration as the worst in the history of the United States. They have grown and centralized (federalized) big government, while attacking fundamental rights. I feel that my children will be paying for their mistakes throughout their lives.

I will vote for the candidate that I feel can start the process of undoing the damage that BushandCo have done.

2 candidates

We've already reached the point where the media is reporting on only two candidates. If reliable, independent news sources such as NPR automatically default to covering only the two party nominees, what hope does a third party candidate have to get any traction or coverage for their ideas?

What's more, it appears that the coverage is more and more about the campaigns themselves and how they are polling, how much money they are raising etc. What about covering the candidates actual positions, views, and beliefs?

It seems as though our media outlets (even NPR!!!) are turning election coverage into a reality TV show. We might as well go all the way and start texting in our votes. Probably more reliable than the damn Diebold machines anyway.

Newt weighs in on gas prices.

Though I don't agree with all he has to say, I'd certainly welcome releasing more of the petro reserves and the push (more and larger government subsidies) for alternate fuels.

21st. Century Battle: Autocracy vs. Democracy

More and more it appears that the world is prepared to accept, and even embrace, a free, market-based economy. Sure, not everyone is "playing fair", and there are likely to be (and have been) stumbling blocks on the way towards a completely global field of play, but we are well on our way towards this end.

The rise of China as an undeniable economic powerhouse is disturbing because it is a government bent on repression and control, except where profit is involved. My hope is that some successful Chinese entrepreneur will rise above the brainwashing their regime has imposed upon them and speak out against the basic rights their government denies them. My fear is that they will be paid handsomely not to do so, and the Chinese government will be allowed to continue repressing these rights, to the detriment of most...and benefit of the very few. This fear is made all that much stronger by my feeling that an autocratic government can make things easier for business. At a minimum, schedules become easier to predict and government-funded projects are less likely to be put on hold or delayed.

Democracies are great for people (as they should be), but more difficult for business. Schedules and government funding are more unpredictable and businesses are forced to adapt to constantly changing (and sometimes overly restrictive) regulations. Still, I think that the marriage of democracy and capitalism is what's best for the world, and it's future. For the benefit of all of us, let's hope that businesses (and China) feel the same!

I doubt that either Obama or McCain will seriously address this issue in their respective campaigns, which is a shame because I feel that it just might be the most important "battle" of the 21st. century. If the autocracy-capitalism combination wins out, our world (at the end of this century) will be pretty ugly...

[UPDATED 6/25/08]

Ok, so this isn't so much of a "new" battle, but rather the continuation of an old one. Still, it is no less important. Democracy(ies) must find a way to win... No 21st. century battle is more important!

I just received (and finished reading) my Father's Day gift from my father. It's a book called "The Return of History and the End of Dreams" by Robert Kagan. Not only is it an excellent read, but it strongly supports the view I present in this post.