A Brief Thought On the Deficit

Dearest listeners. Today the American government is faced with a colossal deficit of approximately 13 trillion dollars. Economists fear that we are at the tipping point at which the revenue earned by the government will not be able to even pay off the interest on the innumerable loans the government has taken out over the course of its 234-year lifespan.

But we are faced with a dilemma. Politicians being politicians, they refuse to raise taxes, citing that the problem does not come from the amount of revenue the government earns from its annual harvests in April. To begin with, though, the tax code is fraught with loopholes and complications. It needs to be cleaned in more ways than one. I do believe that the process of raising taxes as one's wealth rises is worthless. It makes it not as profitable to raise one's social status. A major tenet of American culture is that anyone can make it anywhere. Raising your taxes as you earn more is counter to this principle. Therefore, this should be removed from the tax code, instead replacing it with a flat tax of, for example, 30%. Its both fair and simple.

However, let us return to the fact that taxes apparently shouldn't be raised under any circumstances, no matter what. It's a political no-no, and that's idiotic. Taxes ebb and flow with the state of the country's deficit, and they cannot just be lowered and lowered and lowered. We have come across a plain example of the Machiavellian paradox.

Niccoló Machiavelli, an Italian humanist philosopher of the Renaissance, developed many theories of governance in his writings. In one of these, he states that a ruler should not always simply appease the masses, but do what is best for the state. If a ruler always pleases his people, when it comes time to make changes that will harm each person individually, but benefit the state as a whole, they will be incredibly resistant. This is what is occurring in not only the United States, but also other nations as they react to their deficits and aging populations. The populace is screaming against the reforms because they will take away government handouts  (or in the United State's case, low taxes) that they have considered essential rights. It's time for everyone to man up, tighten their belts, and prepare to not be political fools. The United Kingdom has done this successfully. We can too.

Nuclear Power

Hello dear listeners. I have just read that the New START Treaty, a vital treaty to reduce nuclear arms, is due for vote in the next few weeks. The Republican party, which had mostly opposed the treaty, has seen the views of its electorate, and decided to split. The more conservative Republicans continue to oppose the treaty, citing that it would lower America's ability to respond to threats and lower the danger of Mutually Assured Destruction. These are invalid points. We (we meaning the entire global community) currently have enough nuclear arms to annihilate every country on the planet three times over. The decreasing of our supplies of nuclear weapons from roughly 2,200 to 1,500 is a task for the safety of the global community. I certainly don't want to be killed in World War III. Because, as Einstein said, "I don't know how World War III will be fought, but I know how the Fourth World War will be: rocks!"

Now the question is how to correctly utilize the stocks of enriched uranium and plutonium that each nuclear weapon contains. I do not know if this is on the table, but I think that this fissile material should be used to fuel a new era in the construction of nuclear power plants. We can derive great stores of clean energy, provide plenty of jobs, and solve our nuclear crisis by simply utilizing the fuel for a better use. If this action is not taken, this hazardous material will probably end up in a military storage facility, the vast stores of energy it contains useless. That is not the path I would like to take.

Let's take out three birds with one stone. Let's switch to nuclear power.

An Update on Current Affairs

Hello to my four current followers. In the past few months a myriad of different events have occured, mostly negative. The world has become a much rockier place, and I am frightened for several reasons.

To start, the complete reversal of the United States House of Representatives to the Republican Party. I am not so much scared of the political ideas they will implement, as on some I agree with them, but I am mortified by the possibilty of the repeal of many environmental standards.

I think that an explanation of my name is in order as of now, as it helps explain why I feel so strongly liberal about environmental issues. Nudibranchs are a specific family of sea slugs in the order Ophistobranchia. The name, translated from its roots, means naked gills or naked lungs. Their gills, unlike most marine gastropods, are outside of their bodies in protrusions called cerata. Because of their vulnerability, they ingest poisonous sponges, cnidarians, and other toxic marine life. They are my personal favorite creature.

However, the oceans are overtaxed and being destroyed by pollution. All animals, not just nudibranchs, are vulnerable. With thousands, if not millions, of scientific papers related to the destruction of the environment, how can the Republicans possibly deny any more that we need to change our habits?

The scientific community is raging at the views of the Republican party. While we will never prove that humans are directly causing global warming, we are certainly increasing the effect, they argue. For example: it is a well known fact that the combustion of fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide and water, along with other chemicals. Modern technology does help us remove some of the more harmful ones. However, we also know that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere. So if about 200,000,000 cars are producing carbon dioxide almost every day, how is it disputable that humans are not affecting, if not directly causing, climate change?

There is further proof that because of the effects of the Industrial Revolution, the number of droughts, flash floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters related to climate change have been increased exponentially. It is unreasonable, if not just crazy, to argue that we, as the only form of sapient life on Earth, should not try to stop this.

However, the Republicans argue that implementing environmental laws will cost the nation jobs. While most likely, and unfortunately, this is true, that is increasing the threat of  a disaster of global proportions. The longer we wait to stop climate change, the more we are going to have to do to either A. prevent life loss, or B. reverse the effects. We have to act now. Not ten years from now, not twenty years from now. Now. Otherwise, the effects will be too great to stop.

As I have said in a previous post, a trillion or two is worth preventing the end of the world.

Moving to other affairs, we have the budget defficit, which Congress is failing at as usual. The solution to this problem is going to have to involve a raise in taxes for everyone, not just the "rich."

Note that I put quotes around the word rich. That is on purpose. The definition of rich seems to be, for the average American, millionaires and billionaires. Unfortunately, the tax bracket including millionaires and billionaires also includes people who just became successful, i.e. small business owners. We need to separate the succesful from the wealthy before we start raising taxes on the "rich." It's unfair to group people that live completely different lives into the same group. Confusing millionaires with small business owners is just as
bad as equating the middle-class with the lower-class.

However, I have to agree with Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernankey that now really isn't the time to raise taxes to cover the deficit. However, we do need to stop "kicking the can down the road." So maybe it is time to deal with the monster in the closet of the deficit. But to prevent damge to the enconomy, taxes should niether be raised nor lowered. Instead, the code should be cleaned up.

I don't remember which Senator said this, but in a speech to the Detroit Economic Conference, a Republican Senator talked about how the tax code works in short. It was staggering. The number of things a person can be taxed on is appalling, and the number of loopholes in the law is surely inumerable. Before we start raising, lowering, or changing any part of the numeral parts of the tax code, we should make it effectively and fairly make revenue.

I will not talk about Don't Ask, Don't Tell in length, as I believe it's unimportant. All I think is that it should be changed to Don't Ask, Don't Care.

Thank you for listening. Tell your friends, please, and if you listen but haven't subscribed, please do. I'd like to know you care.

Democrat v. Republican and Why It Isn't Working

We have a bipartisan system. Our constitution states that each side is meant to represent the opposite points of view for each issue. Unfortunately, modern issues are too complex to allow for just one solution.

Let's begin with our struggling economy. The Democrats propose raising taxes on the rich. Let's define the term "rich," though. "Rich" in the modern sense means anyone who earns over $250,000 per year. That probably makes up about 4% of that tax bracket, which makes up only 5% of the U.S. population. Most of those people are doctors, lawyers, and small business owners who worked through extra years at college and work arguably more stressful jobs. The people who deserve taxation are people who earn over $1,000,000 per year, a so-called "millionaire's tax." In fact, before the 1950s, only millionaires paid income tax. Simply put, a solution to taxation may be a removal of the income tax, as 95% of the revenue comes from the top 1% of wealth.

However, lowering taxes may not be a solution right now. That's what the Republicans want. Arguably, lower taxes could stimulate the economy, but to me, it seems like a cheap election ploy. The goal of every politician today is to get reelected. Some politicians have been in the House or Senate for over 30 years. Therefore, I think its logical to amend the constitution so that politicians can only be elected once, and receive no salary. Being a politician should be about getting things done, not getting a cushy job because you have enough money to spoil the opposition with possibly bogus campaign adds. I'm  pointing fingers at both sides, because almost all politicians are wealthy enough to make adds and run for office. Which is why I think that political parties should fund the races. Everyone gets $100,000 to run for office; if you don't win, you can't say it was because you didn't spend enough money. Furthermore, adds should be limited to support, not criticism of other candidates.

Despite this, I think the bipartisan system is really ineffectual. In the end, it becomes a brawl between two opposing armies who will just try to defeat the other by any means necessary. Just look at the recent health care bill. A full year was spent on it basically because the Republicans just kept saying no, no, no. That's a pointless waste of time for both sides. In that time, the Republicans should have come up with an effective response that could have favored what they support: strong defense, low taxes, and small government. Also, some things end up just being political games. Bills that could help the environment become worthless because they allow oil companies to continue to have free reign through our already overtaxed oceans or start to gain ground in fragile areas of the northern tundra. That is why I propose that the party system be completely disbanded, or independent parties be allowed to enter the House and Senate. There are more than one perspective on every issue. Let's have those perspectives heard.

It's A Conspiracy I Tell You!

Conspiracy is always a common part of political blogging. Whether you agree with the idea that government should have the right to hide things from the people or not, the fact is governments do hide a lot of things in their back closets. While none of the following ideas are confirmed to be true, I do believe its time for our government to stop keeping things in the shadows.

To start with, the torture of supposed terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Though the proceedings there have never truly been corroborated by the United States government, it is hard to deny the evidence of leaked camera videos. While the argument rages over whether or not the prisoners deserve rights granted by the constitution, here is my belief that I stand by.

Though the rights given by the constitution are not natural or physical (i.e. no law of science can prevent something against the constitution from occurring), the constitution is still a binding document on all U.S. soil. The constitution states that prisoners have a right to a fair trial by a jury of their peers, and that people have guaranteed unalienable rights, including a right to not be inflicted cruel and unusual punishment. Therefore, the actions at Guantanamo Bay are illegal and unconstitutional, even if the prisoners are suspected terrorists.

Eventually, even actions of national security become medieval witch hunts.


Secondly, and feel free to dismiss this as the craziest and most idiotic idea ever posted on this blog, the idea that the United States Military is hiding secret alien technology. Simply put, we are not in the Cold War anymore. Let's reveal what happened, so that the annoying conspiracists can be silenced once and for all. No more "UFO Hunters" on the History Channel, please. However, if what the conspiracists are saying is true, then the public deserves that knowledge for the advancement of human civilization. If we can spread to other planets or even other star systems, than we have solved so many environmental problems.


Actually, these are the only two conspiracies I really care about. Any others are probably preposterous rumors with very little background, or something made up to stop a political party that eventually became a common truth. Like the fact that Christopher Columbus discovered America first, even though Viking settlers, at least, had definitely colonized Newfoundland in the early 1300s. Seriously, some things people tell are completely insane. What matters is that the government is hiding things and should not. We have a right to know.
  

Foreign Relations

Sorry I've been gone. But I'm back.

Today we discuss relations with several key members of current events. In order, these will be:

China

Russia

The Middle East

Mexico and Central and South America

Africa

Let's begin.

China


As the most rapidly growing economy and a direct opponent to American political and economic philosophy, it is likely that a war between China and the US may occur. The factors involved in this are how long the US plans to rely on China as a trading partner and source of cheap labor. While I am not a proponent of anti-globalization, I do agree that mega-corporations take advantage of China and other East Asian countries as a source of inexpensive labor. While not necessarily "criminal," it is something that should be made part of a collection of laws that I am calling "The Business Moral Code." The point of this would be to force businesses to comply with things that should just be common sense; for another example besides cheap labor, food companies regularly produce meat that is only marginally above edible. I think this should be a crime.

China is important for other reasons as well. As a major importer of oil, it regularly helps fund the Middle East. Requirements for China to begin going green could stop this cash flow, and, through this, terrorism, which is funded mostly by wealthy Middle Eastern oil barons.

However, I also believe pressure should be put on China to become a more democratic nation. I believe many of these problems could be solved if the People's Republic actually becomes a republic.


Russia

Many people seem to ignore Russia these days. Former superpower it may be, it still has an impressive armed and political force. The thousands of almost unguarded nuclear weapons also pose a threat to international security.

The tension between the US and Russia will continue to exist until political relations are strengthened.
Furthermore, if China or Russia declare war on the US, the other is likely to follow suit. Therefore, strengthening political ties could prevent a Third World War.

However, most important are the nukes. A terrorist or terrorist organization in the hands of a nuclear weapon will have no qualms about using it on a city. While President Obama has met with the Russian administration and succeeded in an agreement to significantly decrease the number of nuclear weapons, they should be made rid of entirely or put under international control by, per se, the UN.

Similar to China, political alliance with America may help increase democracy and economic growth in Russia. Therefore, there could be benefits for both sides.

The Middle East

A war stricken dessert rich in resources and corruption aptly describes the Middle East. Centuries of culture have bred proud zealots of religion. All based on a sludgy black liquid.

Countries of interest: Iran, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.

Iran is a difficult issue. While many say that war should be declared on this nation, I say not until we can obtain a significant coalition of forces for an assault. Until then, politicians must prevent the use of an nuclear weapon on Israel. However, I do think that it may be inevitable that an assault on Iran will occur. The question is: do we have the money or the resources to attack? Certainly not now.

Israel must continue to be an ally of the United States under the protection of the United States. If the alliance disappears, Israel will be completely annihilated by the combined forces of Iran, the Palestinians, and Hezbolah. However, I must note that my views do come from mostly being a Jew. While I do not think that Israel is dealing with the situation correctly, I do think that US alliance is the only thing stopping Iran from launching its nuclear weapons.

Saudi Arabia and the other oil countries are major blocks in environmental reform, along with the companies that drill there. Furthermore, it is a well known fact that Saudi Arabians fund terrorist organizations. Stopping the use of oil will eliminate these organizations life blood.

Mexico and Central and South America

Mexico: let's help them get their economy running. We can stop illegal immigration by making life in Mexico better for those living there.

Cuba: If we can let China get away with being communist, we can let them get away with it too.

All of South America: Stop drug trafficking. Maybe it's impossible, but the starting point is to let everyone there earn a better life.

Africa

The birthplace of mankind is now one of the worst places to be. Poverty stricken corrupt countries are the norm. With genocide and civil war everywhere, is it possible to save Africa? I think that increased power to the UN could help save our heritage and the majestic splendor that is Africa.

Key issues to deal with: Genocide in Darfur, Sudan; Civil War in the Democratic Republic of Congo; Child Soldiers and Workers; Poverty.

Let's get Africa on track.


So that's my feelings on foreign relations. Please comment and subscribe. Why do I want subscribers? So that you'll know when  I post.
    

Another Important Thing

Heard about it. Found it. Haven't used it yet, but we'll see.

http://wikileaks.org/