Tuesday, April 09, 2013

Tax the Rich

Taxes went up earlier this year, and, in regards to the rich, that was a good thing.  I'm attaching a link to an opinion piece I agree with.

Robert Creamer: The Biggest Republican Lie -- 'America Is Broke'



For me the single most important fact is that when the economy was teetering in 2007 the rich got bailed out.  I appreciate the logic that that also helped everyone else, but I also think it will help everyone else if the rich get taxed to pay down the government debt that has ballooned in the past decade - from cutting their tax rates, from declaring war without raising taxes, and from keeping other people employed and fed when millions of jobs were ground to dust.

Paying down the debt will reduce the money wasted on interest payments and relax people's anxieties about the government's long-term productive investments: green energy, smart power grids, free WiFi at schools, digital books for kids, re-pave roads, re-open closed state parks, more scholastic scholarships and scientific research.

Now people fear corruption and waste, and I support rooting this out.  But there are many more ways to do this:

Shaping the Millennium: Federal Budget Cut Suggestions

And when we're not in any wars and we're not in debt, I think reducing taxes again would be reasonable.  

Monday, April 01, 2013

ADHD = Imitation of Multi-tasking

I think kids are just mimicking their parents, and what seems like parents accomplishing lots of separate tasks simultaneously looks like chaos to a kid who doesn't know what their parents are doing: dishes, cooking, cell phone convos, TV, laundry, texting, internet surfing, etc...

ADHD In Children: CDC Data Shows Sharp Rise In Diagnoses

Thursday, March 21, 2013

Obama's Suggestions to Israel

I pulled this part out of his speech to Israel. The rest of the speech is reassuring the country that America is on the same side and Obama personally appreciates them.

Obama Speech

"I also know that not everyone in this hall will agree with what I have to say about peace. I recognize that there are those who are not simply skeptical about peace, but question its underlying premise, and that’s a part of democracy and the discourse between our two countries. But it is important to be open and honest with one another. Politically, given the strong bipartisan support for Israel in America, the easiest thing for me to do would be to put this issue aside, and express unconditional support for whatever Israel decides to do. But I want you to know that I speak to you as a friend who is deeply concerned and committed to your future, and I ask you to consider three points.

First, peace is necessary. Indeed, it is the only path to true security. You can be the generation that permanently secures the Zionist dream, or you can face a growing challenge to its future. Given the demographics west of the Jordan River, the only way for Israel to endure and thrive as a Jewish and democratic state is through the realization of an independent and viable Palestine. Given the frustration in the international community, Israel must reverse an undertow of isolation. And given the march of technology, the only way to truly protect the Israeli people is through the absence of war – because no wall is high enough, and no Iron Dome is strong enough, to stop every enemy from inflicting harm.
This truth is more pronounced given the changes sweeping the Arab World. I recognize that with the uncertainty in the region – people in the streets, changes in leadership, the rise of non-secular parties in politics –it is tempting to turn inward. But this is precisely the time to respond to the wave of revolution with a resolve for peace. As more governments respond to popular will, the days when Israel could seek peace with a handful of autocratic leaders are over. Peace must be made among peoples, not just governments. No one step can change overnight what lies in the hearts and minds of millions. But progress with the Palestinians is a powerful way to begin, while sidelining extremists who thrive on conflict and division.
Second, peace is just. There is no question that Israel has faced Palestinian factions who turned to terror, and leaders who missed historic opportunities. That is why security must be at the center of any agreement. And there is no question that the only path to peace is through negotiation. That is why, despite the criticism we’ve received, the United States will oppose unilateral efforts to bypass negotiations through the United Nations.
But the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and justice must also be recognized. Put yourself in their shoes – look at the world through their eyes. It is not fair that a Palestinian child cannot grow up in a state of her own, and lives with the presence of a foreign army that controls the movements of her parents every single day. It is not just when settler violence against Palestinians goes unpunished.  It is not right to prevent Palestinians from farming their lands; to restrict a student’s ability to move around the West Bank; or to displace Palestinian families from their home. Neither occupation nor expulsion is the answer. Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land.
Only you can determine what kind of democracy you will have. But remember that as you make these decisions, you will define not simply the future of your relationship with the Palestinians – you will define the future of Israel as well. As Ariel Sharon said, “It is impossible to have a Jewish, democratic state and at the same time to control all of Eretz Israel. If we insist on fulfilling the dream in its entirety, we are liable to lose it all.” Or, from a different perspective, think of what David Grossman said shortly after losing his son, as he described the necessity of peace – “a peace of no choice” he said, “must be approached with the same determination and creativity as one approaches a war of no choice.”
Of course, Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with anyone who is dedicated to its destruction. But while I know you have had differences with the Palestinian Authority, I believe that you do have a true partner in President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad. Over the last few years, they have built institutions and maintained security on the West Bank in ways that few would have imagined a decade ago. So many Palestinians – including young people – have rejected violence as a means of achieving their aspirations.
Which leads to my third point: peace is possible. I know it doesn’t seem that way. There will always be a reason to avoid risk, and there’s a cost for failure. There will always be extremists who provide an excuse to not act. And there is something exhausting about endless talks about talks; the daily controversies, and grinding status quo.
Negotiations will be necessary, but there is little secret about where they must lead – two states for two peoples. There will be differences about how to get there, and hard choices along the way. Arab States must adapt to a world that has changed. The days when they could condemn Israel to distract their people from a lack of opportunity are over. Now is the time for the Arab World to take steps toward normalized relations with Israel. Meanwhile, Palestinians must recognize that Israel will be a Jewish state, and that Israelis have the right to insist upon their security. Israelis must recognize that continued settlement activity is counterproductive to the cause of peace, and that an independent Palestine must be viable– that real borders will have to be drawn. I’ve suggested principles on territory and security that I believe can be the basis for talks. But for the moment, put aside the plans and process. I ask you, instead, to think about what can be done to build trust between people.
Four years ago, I stood in Cairo in front of an audience of young people. Politically, religiously, they must seem a world away. But the things they want – they’re not so different from you. The ability to make their own decisions; to get an education and a good job; to worship God in their own way; to get married and have a family. The same is true of the young Palestinians that I met in Ramallah this morning, and of young Palestinians who yearn for a better life in Gaza.
That is where peace begins – not just in the plans of leaders, but in the hearts of people; not just in a carefully designed process, but in the daily connections that take place among those who live together in this land, and in this sacred city of Jerusalem. Speaking as a politician, I can promise you this: political leaders will not take risks if the people do not demand that they do. You must create the change that you want to see.
I know this is possible. Look to the bridges being built in business and civil society by some of you here today. Look at young people who have not yet learned a reason to mistrust, and those who have learned to overcome a legacy of mistrust that they inherited from their parents because of the simple recognition that we hold more hopes in common than the fear that drives us apart. Your voices must be louder than the extremists who would drown them out. Your hopes must light the way forward. Look to a future in which Jews, Muslims and Christians can all live in peace and greater prosperity in this Holy Land. Look to the future that you want for your own children – a future in which a Jewish, democratic state is protected and accepted, for this time and for all time.

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Raise the Minimum Wage!

Yay!  Housing prices are going up!  Right?  Except for all the people who could never afford a house - or cars or even their rent!

This article has a few very interesting comparisons to consider and a conservative alternative to alleviate poverty in America.

Elizabeth Warren: Minimum Wage Would Be $22 An Hour If It Had Kept Up With Productivity

Elizabeth Warren Minimum Wage

Tell the Government to Stop Subsidizing the Oil & Gas Industries



I just sent this to Barbara Lee, my current representative in Oakland, California Senators Boxer and Feinstein, and the President.  Join me:

Find Your Representative

Find Your Senator

Email Obama

  Jordan Weissman just published an article in the Atlantic called "The Most Obvious Tax Reform Idea." It's about the subsidies the oil and gas industries receive. It's not enough alone to pay down our debts, of course, but it has symbolic value as corruption to many Americans. 

  These industries have been making huge profits for years while the high cost of their products make life harder for Americans that depend on them. The industry seems rife with collusion, and this subsidy seems like more padding in the investment portfolios of the wealthy. What's worse is that Americans have been talking about getting rid of this subsidy for years now, so it seems that the government is getting bribed through campaign contributions or brainwashed by lobbyists to ignore the demand of the public. 

  If Republicans are holding this up, keep making them show this in public by having them vote on it. (I've emailed my congressional representative and the President as well). Then do your best to get the word out to the media - send it to the Atlantic for a follow-up piece.  Keep showing the U.S. that the Republicans who are complaining about big government waste and suggesting that Democrats are responsible for raising taxes are lying about their priorities.

 I know a lot of educated, charismatic, politically-active voters, and this is the sort of action they can say good things about to quell the cynicism. I know you've taken stands on other progressive issues. You just need a new one every month - ideally one you can win - to keep the hope alive.

Good Luck to you and all the staff that support you.

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Civilian Deaths in Iraq

I've been looking for this information for so long!  

"In Iraq, 115,376 Iraq civilians were killed between 2003 and 2011 as sectarian fighting intensified, according to the Brookings Institution's Iraq Index, while the number of internally displaced Iraqi civilians rose from 400,000 in 2003 to 2.7 million by 2010."

Check out the link to the Brooking's Institution's report, too.

You can see that the number of civilian deaths dropped dramatically in the Fall of 2007, a full year before the election. I guess that demonstrates that the Bush White House started getting things right at the end. It's hard to give them compliments.  (I mean they invaded the country needlessly to begin with).

It is also encouraging to see that in the year since the U.S. left Iraq the number of civilian casualties continued to drop dramatically, and their economy continued to pick up. Unfortunately the police and military there have been taking a beating since U.S. troops left...

Friday, March 15, 2013

Come on Mr. President: Address the Drones!

I write this as a fan of President Obama, who maintains faith that he is steering the country in the right direction the right way - not by dictating the path forward but by helping guide the discussion of the American people, so we ask for government to serve us responsibly and make it make the changes we want. 

That said I agree with John Podesta and everyone else calling for more clarity on the Drone program.

John Podesta: Obama should lift secrecy on drones - The Washington Post



I actually disagree with the widely-shared interpretation that Rand Paul's filibuster did anything except show that Mr. Paul is willing to put his money where his mouth is, rather than scheming out of sight, threatening to do it.  (And I respect him for that).  All the White House did was clarify one clause in their stance - from "extremely special circumstances" to "Americans engaged in combat."  Don't get me wrong: I'm glad we got clarification on that.  But it's not like the Obama administration was taking out Americans who disagreed with his political beliefs (or burning him in effigy or threatening to kill him) until Mr. Paul made his stand.

Here's an explanation of what happened to the three Americans killed by drones, in case you're not sure:
Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. Citizen, in America’s Cross Hairs - NYTimes.com

Regardless I think we've all waited long enough to hear Obama's vision for the use of drones.  There should be enough data to make clear how effective and how damaging the program is, comparing the safety of American troops and foreign citizens to the perception that America is terrorizing people in other countries.  If there is a good reason why Obama has not made it clear to us yet, he should at least speak to that.

And even then I think he needs to get on with it. I keep sending emails to the White House.  You can too:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments

And while you're at it, imagine how you would like drones to be used - and international justice to be served. The "War on Terror," which could reasonably be re-defined as suppressing a rebellion against international trade and culture, could go on forever.  It seems to me it would be more appropriate to use police tactics, giving terror suspects (violent rebellion suspects) the same rights we afford criminal suspects, arresting them for trial. 

In this evolution drones would have to be re-designed to disable or trap suspects for a couple of hours, until police could arrive to take them into questioning - say with a temporary nerve gas, tranquilizer darts or a massive electrified net. And they'd only be used in situations where local authorities couldn't or wouldn't arrest the suspects themselves. Drones could still retain some lethal capabilities to support authorities if they meet violent resistance, much the way police carry weapons in case they are attacked.

The key to this, I think, is convincing locals that the suspects are going to be treated fairly once they are captured, so ground support personnel don't have to fight too much against otherwise cooperative neighbors. And that would require developing an international court system that people around the world could agree on. The Hague is a great first step.


The next step is holding Americans and Europeans -including government officials- subject to the same rules we are holding people of the developing world accountable for. Our courts would have to be integrated, with a lot of debate about which laws are local and which are international and how much power local governments have to be different. Beliefs will have to be supported or challenged by research.  Does the American prison system work?  Or the system in Islamic countries, cutting people's hands and fingers off?  Or caning in Singapore?

I think this work has already begun, with businesses, media and government collecting and sharing the views of all the people of the earth so they can serve and thrive.  The more people hear about one another's ideas the more they will consider changing towards a consensus.


Fundamentalists and traditionalists are freaking out, protesting and blowing themselves up over the proposition of alternatives to their views. But this is proving itself to be unpopular and ultimately the flexible will continue to adapt, embrace and reform their cultures to the best ideas being offered from around the world.

Those are big, long processes that will take years to refine. In the meantime, people in the communities where drones are being used need access to information, so they can follow what happens to captured suspects, learn about the evidence, and develop faith that the system is fair. Smart phones are rapidly becoming ubiquitous in developed countries, but in areas where drones are going to be useful the military might need to spread this technology to offset the impact of their presence.


The justice system is also going to have to move faster on cases than it has. Why is it, for example, it has taken years to try Bradley Manning, the soldier who gave classified information to WikiLeaks? 
People in Afghanistan or Pakistan won't wait for years to find out what happened to people who are whisked away for trial in a foreign country. They'll assume the worst. 

There's also a cost to someone's life when you spend years incarcerating them pending trial or dragging them in and out of courts. If we really believe that someone is innocent until proven guilty, it is unacceptable to interfere with their lives like this. 

People in other countries won't trust us unless we keep proving to them that our system works. We should offer it to them in the same way we offer it to our own citizens, including the opportunity to voice criticism of the system and help shape it. So tell Obama what YOU want him to do about drones!