what happened to the tax dollars you have just paid on your IRS 1040?

• Old = 1/3
• Poor & unemployed = 1/4
• Military = 1/4
• Everything else (i.e. 'discretionary spending") = 20%

just thought you would like to know.

The Fed Lies - inflation is already 10% and counting

Perhaps you have heard the official Hed-Fed line that inflation is still tiny, only 2% or so.

This is a total lie.

You see, this 'official' figure does NOT include gasoline and food. Well, if you are a normal person, you have seen the price of gasoline and food go through the roof. You are currently have mucho inflation every time you fill up your gas tank or try to buy groceries.

Indeed, if we use the 'old' measure of inflation, it is actually around 10%. The 'official' figure does not include food and gasoline because, so the pointy-heads say, that these are too volatile to base monetary policy on. Well, perhaps, but it means that the measure that the Fed uses has NO relation to the actual cost of living for the average person.

Perhaps 'Helicopter Ben' can be convinced to use the realistic cost of living for a family of 4, rather than some theoretical number, for his outlook as to what the inflation rate really is.

Commander-In-Chief asleep-at-the-switch

Right now, today, is one of the greatest moments in history: the Arab Spring. There are dramatic geopolitical changes taking place in the Middle East and North Africa; a weary, brow-beaten populace is tossing off the yoke of totalitarian government. These events are just as historically powerful as the fall of the Berlin Wall.

What a pity: the American President is sitting on his hands, unsure of what to do, hoping that things will blow over. The CIC can reshape that part of the world for generations to come, but our current CIC is the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Perhaps he can be prevailed upon to play a little less basketball, do a little less demonizing of oil companies, and think really hard about how to bring democracy and freedom to a part of the world devoid of same and ensuring that the good guys win.

a Field Guide to Political “-isms”

No, I do not have training, either formal or informal, in political philosophy, and not really qualified to the write this article. However, after a while, one gets just a wee-bit tired of people misusing terms like: fascist, Socialism, and Communist. So, this is my attempt to untangle the mess. Yes, the descriptions are rather elementary, but this is how I think about it so I can keep them straight.

Fascism

A nationalistic political system that tightly integrates foreign policy, military, culture, economy, values, religion, and citizens using corporate principles into an organic, obedient whole.

The economic policies can be left or right wing. Individuality and liberty are strongly discouraged in favor of conformity. An aggressive, militaristic foreign policy is a key aspect.

Nazism

A variety of Fascism that employs the principles of racial superiority, eugenics, and anti-Semitism as a source of strength.

Socialism

This political system envisions the common or public ownership, use and allocation of economic resources for the common good. It frowns upon bureaucracy, hierarchy, and power structures in favor of collective or dispersed decision making. This rather broad philosophy encompasses many different flavors, differing mainly in the relative balance of power between collective decision making and the free market; European Social Democracies lean towards the latter. The hallmarks of this flavor are workers’ rights, welfare, and social justice.

Communism

A political philosophy envisioning an endless class struggle between the rich (bourgeoisie) and the working poor (proletariat) for control over wealth, culminating in the victory, eventually, of the latter. It comes in several different flavors, including: Leninism (which adds a one party political system to catalyze the process), Stalinism (which adds central economic planning and 5 year plans), and Maoism (ah ain’t quite sure about this one, since ‘The Little Red Book’ is an incoherent mess, but has something to do with empowering peasant villages; in the end, it is hard to distinguish between this and the central party statism of Stalinism, even though Maoists hated Stalinism even more than capitalism, probably for something about betraying the cause or something).

It is a serious mistake to equate or confuse Communism with Socialism. Although Communism is a single party political system, it also a mistake to assume that all single party systems are Communist.

Totalitarianism

Absolute, total, unlimited control of all aspects of life, public and private, by either one person or a group of people.

Dictatorship, Autocracy

These are not exactly the same from a historical viewpoint, but as a modern gloss they can be thought of as identical. A variety of Totalitarianism where power is exercised by a single person.

Oligarchy

Where a small group of people exercises effective control.

Plutocracy

An Oligarchy where the controlling group are the rich and the wealthy.

Monarchy

The head of state is the husband (king) and/or wife (queen) of a royal family. It is hereditary, but can also be usurped. Often, monarchs are politically weaker than the head of state of other political systems. There are several varieties of monarchy depending on the relative balance of power between the monarch and other political institutions, including Constitutional Monarchy.

American Representative Republic

Strictly speaking, the government of the United States is not a democracy. The problem is that the Founding Fathers, when they wrote the Constitution, redefined several political concepts. In the original, pre-Christian, Hellenistic sense, democracy meant every citizen voting on every issue, and the majority rules absolutely (hence, ‘tyranny of the majority’); this is emphatically NOT how US politics operates. The US is a Republic, because it does not employ a monarch as the head-of-state. It is representative because all politicians exercising power are elected (directly or indirectly) by the citizens. When the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, they invented a whole new system of governance unknown to political science that specifically limited the power of the central government; unlike Karl Marx, their system persisted.

Theocracy

A rare political system where the religious leaders are also the political leaders that rule the country. The existence of strong influence by the Catholic Church in Medieval Spain or Sharia law are not indications of theocracy (e.g. Saudi Arabia has Sharia law, but it is a monarchy). Current example is Iran.

Meritocracy

Those who are most capable and successful therefore accumulate political power and economic resources. Most Capitalistic countries are Meritocracies. It is not enough for a country to simply declare that the most talented and most able will have the most power and influence: this must be true in practice.

Final Word

As you can tell, some of these terms overlap, and it sometimes becomes difficult to classify a nation’s governance with certainty. Is Cuba autocratic, fascist, or Stalinist? Probably a little of all of them. Is Red China with its embrace of Capitalism actually now Socialism? Nope: still Leninist as far as I can see. Totalitarianism can be properly thought of as Oligarchy on steroids. See how hard it is to pigeon-hole political philosophy?

Yes, I know, there are probably many mistakes, and I encourage you blog when find them.

solving the energy crisis is stupidly simple

All we need is determination and a true desire to increase energy, rather than spouting platitudes.

Radioactivity is Our Friend

There is really only one satisfactory source of electricity for an energy hungry nation that produces 25% of all the world's stuff: nuclear power.

Critics will harrumph: they cost a lot and take lots of time to build. Well, not quite: they are referring specifically to the Toshiba/Westinghouse APC1000. This a 1,000 megawatt montrosity, and just the construction costs are a billion bucks, and all the licensing and safety stuff adds billions more. Environmentalists can delay construction of said monstrosity for a decade or more, filing lawsuit after lawsuit.

There is a new generation of mini-me, fast-neutron nuclear reactors. They are only 10-100 megawatts, cost only a few million, are quickly constructed, and totally safe (nuclear accidents are impossible with this new design of lead cooled reactors).

Natural Gas

Here on the Left Coast, almost 50% of our electricity comes from natural gas. That's foolish: we should be using nuclear to make electricity. We can easily use natural gas in our cars. Not only is NG compatible with our current gasoline delivery system (ethanol is not; it requires substantial retooling alll along the supply chain), we have gobs of it right here at home.

Besides: Honda already makes a successful NG gas car; you can buy one in Brazil. It works great.

Shale Oil

You probably have heard about this, but is called 'fracking' in the media. The fear is that it will contaminate the water table.

We have more than 200 years' worth of oil in our very own country locked up in shale. All we have to do is get it.

Drill

For the time being, we have plenty of oil reserves in our country; we do not have to import 60% of our oil, all we have to do is go get it in our own backyard. However, drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, off the West Coast, the Rockies, ANWR, and so forth. The only thing that is stoping us overly paranoid environmental concerns.

Huzzah! Ryan firmly grasps the third rail!

Anecdote.

I am old enough to have lived through the Reagan administration. In particular, I read the book written by David Stockman, R's budget director. He stated that James Baker, the architect of R's first and second election victories, carried around a bazooka on his shoulder labeled 'social security': if anyone even suggested touching SS, he would blow your f*cking head off.

I am glad to see that the political landscape has change. Polls of young 'uns in their 30's and 40's seem to understand that Medicare and Social Security will not exist in their current shape when they get old and retire. Therefore, now the time is ripe to reshape Medicare and SS in ways unimaginable during R's presidency.

We must finally admit, after all, that we simply cannot afford Medicare and SS as they are currently built.

How to Reduce Medical Costs

Medical costs in the US has gone through the roof. Granted. However, I would like to point out the 600# canary sitting in the corner that is cause of most of these medical costs.

Doctors.

No, no, I do not mean that physicians are being overpaid. We, as medical consumers, are required too often to 'consult a doctor or physician'. Most of our medical maladies can be simply and cheaply solved by a neighborhood medical clinic or advice nurse, with nary a doctor in sight.

My medical insurance has an 'advice nurse'. Several times, a quick panicky phone call has been solved with simple advice, and saved several trips to the doctor. The nurse tells you what to do, and, more importantly, whether you need to make an appt. with the doc.

Neighborhood clinics providing low cost, informal medical service can not only reduce medical spending, but also give us more immediate, more personal, happier medical care. Course, the bureaucrats will have to undo all of their laws preventing these types of inexpensive medical resources (something about ensuring 'high quality' medical care; we should only require that it be affordable).

blame it on the tea party

Democrats are blaming the Tea Party for the current troubles regarding the government budget and hypothetical shutdown.

This is a good thing: it means that Dems fear the Tea Party.

Party on!!!

the UN is totally Looney-Tunes - read their Declaration of Human Rights

First, this is not a joke. This really does exist. As far as I can tell, they appear to be totally serious about this.

The reference is:

The Declaration of Human Rights

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a23

Article 24.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Boehner Blinks (sigh...)

Well, now we know what the Speaker of the House had in mind: surrender to the Dems. Last night's agreement only cuts $38 billion, way short of the necessary $60 billion cut. Worse, it does NOT include required elimination to Uncle Sam funded abortions or NPR.

Why do I get that sinking feeling that Boehner and other establishment Republicans have no intention of seriously cutting the size, scope, or power of the Federal Gov't, but rather have planned all along to stab the Tea Party in the back?

Huzzah!! Let the Government Shut Down!!

Wait, wait.

Stop.

Stop.

Wait.

Do you mean to tell me that 800,000 federal employees are considered to be ‘non-essential’?

In that case, why do they have jobs at all? If we simply fired ALL of them, our lives will continue as usual?

Boehner and establishment Republicans surrender to Dems, abandon Tea Party

The new crop of Republicans, most of them supported by the Tea Party, seems to have been betrayed.

See, word leaked out that House Leader Boehner was willing to compromise on the Continuing Resolution (CR): he would accept the Dem proposal for $33B rather than the $60B in seed cuts demanded by the freshman Congressmen.

It is clear to me that the old-guard, establishment House Republicans do not share the goals and principles of the Tea Party. They are in mold of ole’ W: not interested in reducing the power or scope of the Feds and increasing personal liberty and freedom. Rather, they wish to take away $$$ from programs they do not like, and redirect them to programs that they think are better for our nation. The thought that the Feds ought not to be spending these $$$ on anything in the first place and letting the citizens keep their dough has NEVER occurred to them.

Sorry to be the bearer of evil tidings, but I believe that people like the Speaker are not really for castrating Federal Power, but are secretly rubbing their hands in glee, fantasizing about all those wonderful, deserving programs that they will shower with money when they shift federal $$$ rather than eliminating them.

Bottom line: the new crop of Tea Party Republican freshman will go nowhere and will be fought every inch of the way by the old-guard of their own party. Their only hope is to shove dingbats like Boehner and allies to the very brink of the abyss and put the fear of God into them. Now is the time for hard-nosed leadership, not a *can’t we all just get along* attitude.