The Russian Bear Roars

Is the Cold War really over? I don’t think so. It was always a mystery to me that in a matter of months after the fall of the U.S.S.R. the United States government concluded it was over. For reasons I never understood the new Russia was no longer a threat to the rest of the world. After all the same people that lived in the old U.S.S.R. are still alive and well in the new Russia. Vladimir Putin the recent past president and now prime minister of Russia was recruited into the KGB and was a member of the Communist Party from the mid 1970s until the party was dissolved in December 1991.The Russians, like the Americans, do not like a government on or near its borders that it considers a threat. A good example is the United States attempt to isolate Cuba. We consider the Caribbean to be within our sphere of influence. Now Georgia, which was part of Russia for most of the past 200 years, is thumbing its nose at Russia and Poland has signed an agreement to put a U.S. missile interceptor base in their country.

Despite our words of support it is not likely that we will go to war with Russia over Georgia. Leaving politics aside I do not believe that the United States will come to the aid of any small nation that borders Russia. I know that NATO includes many nations in Eastern Europe (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania). Is the United States prepared to defend their borders from invasion from Russia?

In 1796, George Washington warned his new nation “…Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people out to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.” Washington said “The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.”

John McCain’s statement, “We are all Georgians”, could be a frightening view into his state of mind. He is, after all, a military man. If he were president would he take America into battle over Georgia? I fear the answer may be yes.

A Hoax to Control Oil

Oil reached $147.27 per barrel on July 11 . Today it has dropped to $117.11 per barrel (as low as $114.90 on August 8). In January of this year the price was $99.62 per barrel. What caused the price jolts? No one in a position to know is talking publicly.

Television news, Business Week, Newsweek and most other media outlets have been telling Americans that the cause of the higher prices is the growing demand in China, India, and elsewhere. After all, they told us, those countries now have growing middle class societies that drive cars and they have industries that require the use of oil. Ted Koppel’s: People’s Republic on the Discovery Channel showed American style freeways filled with cars that helped to reinforce this image. Many of us thought, “Wow! The rest of the world is catching up with America. That’s why we are paying more at the pump.” So, what happened? Perhaps Big Oil, Big Lies is the best we will ever know.

Remember when the cost of electricity in California spiked dramatically? It seemed that we had to blame the state legislature for the mess. Actually it was a manipulation of power generating equipment led by Enron. A recording was made of an oil trader laughing about how they had manipulated the cost of electricity. That manipulated shortage went away as quickly as it arrived.

The problem is the gullibility of the American public. What is worse about this current manipulation is that the media, for the most part, has gone along with the explanations offered by oil companies and the Federal government. I am not in a position to do the investigation of this hoax. This item from CBS on May 29, 2008 has not received any follow-up. Manipulation is not the same as speculation. Will anyone do the investigation?

Need Health Care? Vote for Barack Obama

There is no guarantee that any proposed legislation will ever be passed by Congress. I am sure that many good ideas have never been enacted into law. The reasons are probably more than I know. However, I do know that politics, religion and lobbyists do impact which laws are passed and which never get beyond a hearing committee.

The current fight over oil drilling off the coast of the United States is a good example of politics impacting the granting of those rights. When Nancy Peolsi, Speaker of the House, proposes that the government should release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to lower gasoline prices, you know she is playing a political card. Those reserves will only last for two months of American demand. This action is no more likely to reduce gasoline prices than John McCain’s proposal to grant oil drilling rights that will take 10 years until there is delivered results.

Many religious groups oppose gay marriage. It’s not just conservative Christians who oppose these marriages. On the Reform Jewish web site “Traditional Judaism has seen – and continues to see – homosexuality as an abomination.” We all know that Islam does not accept homosexuality. These same groups have positions on many other topics too. The Republican Party is swayed by those religious conservatives in their voting patterns. John McCain thinks about the religious right quite a bite. Just recall his refusal to take a position on birth control pills when asked about the use of Viagra vs. those pills .

Lobbyists are everywhere. Those hired mouth pieces that attempt to sway the vote on everything from farm subsidies to support for national public radio. Big pharma, big oil, auto manufacturers, etc. all have their hired lobbyists. Those lobbyists would not have those high paying jobs if they were not successful. Just enter “K Street Lobbyists” in your search engine and you find all kinds of interesting things.

Will there be universal health care in this country? Honestly, I doubt it. Hospitals, doctors, and insurance companies will send a legion of lobbyists to fight the idea. The scare tactic will be the words “socialized medicine.” Still, Barack Obama does support the idea of universal health care <http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/#coverage-for-all>. John McCain is opposed to universal health care <http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm>. Check their web sites and you will see their positions.

This highlights the difference between Barack Obama and John McCain. Barack Obama says he will fight for change. This is just one of many issues where Americans need this fight.

An Incompetent Government

Republicans always told us that those Democrats are only going to devastate America by spending too much money, creating too much bureaucracy, and destroying the American way of life. So George W. Bush was elected president.

What did we get in return?

The highest debt in America’s history (there was a surplus in the year 2000 but now the debt has grown by $5trillion).
We have a war that most Americans now believe needs to be ended but the president and his men/women (including John McCain) want an undefined victory before withdrawing.
The city of New Orleans was devastated by Hurricane Katrina but no aid was sent to its victims (the president sat in a meeting where he was advised of the coming storm but did nothing).
A year after the worst U.S. bridge collapse occurred and no work has been done to check or reinforce any other bridges throughout the country.
One of the worst financial disasters in history has impacted our nation (bank closures and home foreclosures have impacted many Americans).
Inflation for 2008 to date is 4.28%. It was 3.38% for all of the year 2000.
Gasoline has now has reached a new high this year and there is no indication that $3.00 a gallon fuel will ever return.
Limits on stem cell research.
Unlimited entry of illegal aliens.
High cost of medical care.

How many more items can you add to this list?

John McCain wants us to believe that his “Country First” theme will address any of these issues. Take just one issue, healthcare, and you quickly understand that he has no clue about paying for the cost and obtaining reliable coverage. This one statement from his web site says it better than I

John McCain Will Reform The Tax Code To Offer More Choices Beyond Employer-Based Health Insurance Coverage. While still having the option of employer-based coverage, every family will receive a direct refundable tax credit – effectively cash – of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance. Families will be able to choose the insurance provider that suits them best and the money would be sent directly to the insurance provider. Those obtaining innovative insurance that costs less than the credit can deposit the remainder in expanded Health Savings Accounts.

Barack Obama has many fine ideas but he unrealistically believes that the lobbyists will all bow to his wishes. Whether it is health insurance, reducing the unbelievably high debt or the myriad of other issues, the many interest groups will block most of his well intentioned plans.

Socialism For The Rich, Free Markets For The Poor

These are not my words. They were the words of Adrian Woodridge of The Economist on “Fareed Zakaria GPS”, broadcast on CNN. John Médaille has written a similar post on his blog < http://distributism.blogspot.com/2007/08/socialism-for-rich-capitalism-for-rest.html>. There was a commentary in a Los Angles Time blog and another at alternet.org. <http://www.alternet.org/story/92426/the_u.s._economy_is_socialism_for_the_rich/>They are so very true.

The George W. Bush administration has done an outstanding job of giving breaks to the rich at the expense of the rest.

The most glaring example is the income taxes paid by the wealthy of Wall Street (or wherever they live). These people receive their pay in the form of capital gains <

http://whippersnapper.wordpress.com/2008/05/11/capital-gains-facts/ >. Capital gains are taxed at 15%. The consequence is that a couple earning $100,000 per year as the result of wages pays taxes at the 25% rate. That same couple earning their income from capital gains pays 15%.

From the Citizens for Tax Justice:

In 2005, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans received almost 70 percent of all long-term capital gains—and paid 72 percent of the tax on these capital gains.

The wealthiest 10 percent of taxpayers enjoyed 90 percent of the capital gains eligible for this special tax break.

The poorest sixty percent of Americans, by contrast, collectively received just 2 percent of the capital gains eligible for the lower capital gains rates.

This situation is nothing compared to the bail out of big corporations. Bear Sterns is the best example of an action by the government to protect all of us less fortunate. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae might well be saved by the government buying stock in those companies. In all three of these instances it was the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department contending that they are saving home owners and other small investors from a crisis that will make their actions seem well worthwhile. There has been talk of saving General Motors and/or Ford if the U.S. government finds it necessary.

Then there are the federal subsidies. The U.S, government subsidizes many industries. Farming is one of the oldest. The government subsidizes corporate farmers as well family farms. There are subsidies going to oil companies for adding ethanol to gasoline and the latest are the subsidies for renewable energy. I once worked for a company that manufactured solar panels and they received a federal subsidy.

————————

Feb 7,2011

Another blog on the same subject

http://distributism.blogspot.com/2007/08/socialism-for-rich-capitalism-for-rest.html

—————————–

The answer is a new kind of federal government that really does concern itself with the rest of us. The problem is that most Americans believe in their government. They believe the U.S. government can do no wrong. That is probably the reason that John McCain will be elected president. He seems like one of us. He seems like a good guy. He has government experience too.

Barack Obama’s Presumptuous Speech

Mr. Obama’s speech in Berlin was, to use on his own wording, audacious. I would use the word chutzpa. I like the man because he is so well spoken. John McCain will never be as adept as Barack Obama in delivering a speech. My problem with him is that he told us that on his trip to Iraq, the Middle East, and Europe he would be listening. Giving a political speech in Berlin was inappropriate for an American presidential candidate.

Yes, he did speak in Israel but it was for the purpose of reassuring Israelis that he would support that nation. The speech in Berlin was similar to many of the rousing campaign speeches he has presented throughout his race to obtain the Democratic Party nomination. Do Berliners care? They were probably curious about his views and he has taken on a star quality and they wanted to hear him and perhaps obtain a picture. It’s as if he might appear on German television in their version of Access Hollywood.

Barack Obama needs to return to the United States and focus on the economy. He needs to tell us details of his plans to restore the jobs and wealth that many American have lost during the past eight years. He needs to tell us precisely how he will deal with the growing energy crises and the world environmental crises. That means no vague “yes we can” mottos.

The Gangs of Los Angeles

The problem of gangs in Los Angeles has reached a point that it has finally received the attention it should have received decades ago. Black Street Gangs in Los Angeles: A History is a new book being written by Alex Alonso, PhD Candidate, describes gangs in 1940. Why has it taken so long? I believe there are three reasons. First we have constant coverage of the news on television. Second the internet is an opportunity to spread the word of everything happening. Third the middle class public has become upset enough to voice its concern to the city council.

We have had the benefit of many studies in just the past few years that have yielded no action by the city. The most well publicized studies were by Connie Rice, a civil rights attorney and a second report complied by Laura Chick, city controller.

The mayor, who was a gang member himself in his teen years, certainly knows what gangs are all about. He has appointed a “gang czar”, who also has gang fighting experience to head the city’s new effort. Considering this is a problem that is over 60 years old this anti-gang effort will be long and hard.

Tessa Charnofsky, a dedicated social worker in the mayor’s office and part of the gang reduction program, wrote this to me about gangs.

The Gang Reduction, Youth Development program will address the core causes of gangs. In fact, the largest portion of these dollars will go towards prevention programming at parks, schools, and community centers, and will include parenting programs. There will also be dollars for gang intervention and re-entry programming.
What is new about these dollars is that they are targeting the areas hardest hit by gang activity and so services will be more intense in those areas. Outcomes and results will also be closely tracked.

I cannot comment on the parcel tax except to say that existing dollars do not nearly cover the need in this city. Where I live, for instance, there are tagging crews, poverty, and lots of kids roaming about with not much to do. But there has not been a shooting in many years. So, there is no funding for prevention programs.

It would make sense to have programming throughout the city to effectively prevent these kids from getting drawn in.

The city wants to add a $36 parcel tax to fight gangs. It will be on the November ballot. Should I vote for this?

Political Parties Matter

On July 14, 1933, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party officially declared itself the only political party in Germany and outlawed the formation of any other parties. Hitler had already become Chancellor of Germany and the Reichstag building, home of the German parliament, had burned. Everyone in the world should have known that something very terrible was evolving.

Throughout America’s history we have had many different political parties that have provided our nation with a wide range of opinion. From the Federalists and Anti-Federalist to today’s Democratic and Republican parties that variation of opinion has made our country safe and strong.

Despite our differences the nation has evolved. Founders of this country could not foresee the 21^st century any more than we can know the future of our world even 50 years from now.

Our differences of opinion make us a stronger nation. A friend who says he won’t vote in the next election is incorrect in that decision. It is our participation that makes this country strong. Blogging is our 21^st century way of making this country a real democracy.