Homework Assignment: Songs You Likely Never Heard

 Taking a break from politics and all the crap that is modern life.  Here are some songs that i was kind of "feeling" today that most of you probably never heard of (though some were singles).  i could give you hypertext links, but that would be too easy. i think you can find most of these on YouTube.

In the old days, i used to spend hours a day singing along with CDs/records tapes.  Sadly, i cannot do that anymore (and i lost a bunch of range).  There are a lot of worthy songs i can't think of now.

Now for the list of infamy plus one bonus. 

My Conservative Manifesto Rewrite Part VII: Social Issues: Part 3: Big Ones

Social Issues: Part 3: Some of the Big Ones.

Abortion

Now i get to weigh in on some the big social issues. The first one is abortion

My Conservative Manifesto Part VII: Social Issues: Part II

 Social Issues Continued...

Health Care/Insurance (original post 2011 or earlier)

There has been much coverage of the government taking on healthcare "reform".  Most of this is really talking about a way to reduce the cost of insurance (and their massive 3.9% profit margin.  The goals of healthcare reform are not clearly stated.  

Do they want to reduce total cost (that can be done in three main ways: increasing costs - pricing care out of the market, limiting or rationing care, and reducing inefficiencies and capitalizing on economies of scale)?  

Do they want to increase coverage percent, another thinly veiled attempt at income redistribution?  It is not responsible to cover everyone.  Another question being why does the government think it can spend this money now when the country has such a large (soon to be crushing) debt?   

Goals of healthcare: the government has proposed health care with an eye mainly on insuring the uninsured.  Sure, some of the uninsured can be added but attempting to add all is foolish.  Especially with a public option that will undercut private concerns.  Not everyone can be employed and not everyone can have health insurance.  

Most of the things i saw on health care i see are trying to spend nearly a trillion dollars to cover an additional 10-15% of the population.  Sure, the raw numbers look huge, 30-50 million people, but when you consider the US is a country of 310 million people, that doesn't seem horrible (that amount being uninsured).  

Some factions of the government want to force health insurance coverage.  i am definitely not a fan of the government mandating that a consumer must purchase a service (even if it were privately or publicly provided).    

My idea of health care reform is a little different.  i want medical malpractice tort reform.  Lawsuits, settlements and insurance costs against them are costly and have spelled the end of some private practice doctors.  Furthermore, i want health insurance to be sold across state lines.  Getting access to a larger base of customers can help diversify risk and potentially reduce premiums (through economies of scale).  

There are health insurance companies that are being propped up by being shielded from competition.  This isn't good for the populace.  i also believe that there needs to be some consolidation in insurers that is being prevented by the state-by-state regulations.  i want as much cost as possible (like overhead) to be taken out of the system (provider level, medicine and medical supply level - but never interfering with free market interactions).  Also, the timing and interactions between insurers and medical providers needs to be better implemented.

This is an example of the government stating it wants to fix something when the current system is not broken (though it does have its problems and there is room for improvement in operations) in order to potentially control votes in the future.

In other words, seek market solutions to problems with as little government intervention as possible.  Encourage innovation and efficiency, not bureaucracy.  Afterall, a commercial service is not a right.

Government Dependence/Addiction 

What is one of the biggest problems with government spending programs (other than irresponsibility and layers of bureaucracy)?   Dependence.  Spending programs are often started under the guise of a short-term fix to a specific social problem.  

Unfortunately, government spending is kind of sticky (the Pringles way: once you pop, you can't stop).  In other words, once a program (especially a social program) is enacted, cutting it becomes difficult - even if it has outlived its usefulness.

The risk of any government program is that people will depend on the program or alter their behavior because the government will somehow solve their problems/monetarily support them.  We have seen this with welfare programs.  Every government social program has an inherent dependency potential, though maybe that is the point.  

i know this may sound jaded, but wouldn't it be in a particular party's best interest to have people depend on programs (as if they depend on your program they are more likely to have your vote - and any threat to that program becomes an existential threat to them).  Of course, this is a failure condition of democracy (vote buying through the use of taxpayer dollars).         

My Conservative Manifesto Rewrite Part VII: Social Issues

 Social Issues

Introduction

This is the section where i briefly mention some domestic (government) type issues.  Many of the social issues should be addressed at the state level, definitely not the federal level.  

Social Security, the health care/insurance debate, abortion, gay marriage, and maybe more will be mentioned in some way.  There may be light economic components to some of the sections.  Some of this is about money, some of it is not.

Super Cereal Post

Every once in a while, i have to cover issues of a supreme importance. What is the best Monster Cereal?

After a hiatus, Frute Brute is temporarily back on shelves (maybe).  i got this off AMZN.  So, what is the best Monster Cereal? They are all the same except for flavor (shapes, marshmallows).  The mascot designs are kind of cool.    

1) Yummy Mummy (Orange)

2a) Fruit Brute (Cherry)

2b) Franken Berry (Strawberry)

4) Count Chocula (Chocolate. Outside Lindor Milk Chocolate, i don't like straight chocolate)

Sometimes, i think it would be cool to get replicas of some of the cereal/food mascots (maybe Funko), but only if i had tons of money.  If everyone in the world (on average) would just give me $1...

The designs of these were kind of cool.  Then there was Cap'n Crunch, Tony the Tiger, Toucan Sam, Trix Rabbit, Lucky, etc.

Growing up (if such a thing actually happened), it was mostly stuff like Kix, Rice Chex and occasionally kid's cereal.  This would be mostly Lucky Charms, Fruit Loops, Trix, Cap'n Crunch, or whatever was on sale at any given time. Yes, i still eat kid's cereal to this day. It tastes so much better than bland bran (though i do like frosted mini wheats). i've always had a sweet tooth. 

Labor Day

 (in US) Well, it's Labor Day again...

Another totally useless "holiday" that shouldn't exist.  

Or as Hermes Conrad correctly stated: "That phony-baloney holiday crammed down our throats by fat-cat union gangsters".

Am i a fan of unions?  Not at all. You work for the employer, not the union (yet the union wants a cut).  They actually restrict opportunity. They are an unnecessarily interference in market forces.

Furthermore, they only care about those on the top of the pay scale - they will throw the lower tier workers under the bus every single time.  They actually reduce employment levels.  Yes, unions have a long colorful history with organized crime and violence.  They are also one of the top donors to the democratic party (oh, i already said ties to organized crime).    

My Conservative Manifesto Rewrite: Part II: Loose Background: Part II Political Tests

Political Spectrum Tests

Just for fun, i decided to do a series of political spectrum tests.  Admittedly, they usually have issues with leading questions and evocative wording. Also, i rarely like to select things like "strongly disagree".  Some questions are more nuanced than they allow.  

My Conservative Manifesto Rewrite Part VI: Taxation

 Taxation

Introduction

On this section i will touch on some of the types of taxation and the issues involved. 

What is Fair, What Isn't

So of course, there is going to be some debate over what is "fair" in the taxation field - with some of the people saying if you make more you should be taxed at a higher percentage (the "progressive" taxers) and those saying that everyone should pay the same percentage (flat tax proponents).  

To be perfectly clear, i am in the flat tax camp.  i do not believe someone making more money should be punished for making more money, nor am assuming an obligation by those people to pay a higher percentage of their incomes because they have more disposable income (ability to pay principal).  

What you are seeing in today's world is the lower class getting off completely free (if not negative), yet getting benefits, and the middle class not playing their fair share - thanks to the tax code.  Taking income tax apart from all other taxes (like FICA, state taxes, etc - which are irrelevant to this discussion).

There are things that should not be taxed.  Dividends, capital gains, non-cashflow "income" and investment income are among them.  There should be as little double taxation as possible (preferably none).  A good example of double taxation is the dividend tax.  The dividends come out of the corporate profits/earnings that are taxed, then the recipient of the dividend has to pay tax when they receive it.  

Keeping this in mind, taxes like the estate/inheritance and gift taxes are morally reprehensible.  You should be able to transfer your resources (or receive resources, providing the transaction is mutually agreed upon with no coercion) yourself without the government taking a cut for itself.  

It is not fair or equitable to use the tax code as the government's Robin Hood - stealing from the rich and giving to the poor (or special interest groups).  Actually, it seems more of a mix of Robin Hood and Robin Brain (stealing from the rich and giving to yourself).  

The tax code should never be about redistribution of wealth (something the government should never be a part of).  If a person earns the money, they are not indebted to their fellow man.  

Methods of Taxation 

The two main forms of taxation i mentioned are the "progressive" tax and the flat tax.  Of course, there are going to be subdivisions. To help drive the point home, i will give some pointless examples.  i guess i should mention some other things.  

There is usage taxation, like a gas tax, those who use goods/service pay for it with an associated tax.  There is also a nefarious taxation called ability to pay - this is based off the theory that as income goes up a person has more disposable income (and the government being an insatiable spending beast it is wants as much as possible).  This particular principal of taxation is more than a little socialist. 

Progressive tax: my least favorite method, based off of the ability to pay principal (if you have the money government thinks you should give it to them).  As income level increases, so does tax bracket (of course up to a point) - the percentage of your income the government claims as its own.  The usual example of this in the US is the income tax. Really, the only reason you do this is to shift the burden of funding of government to the people less likely to use its "services". 

Flat tax: called "regressive" by some because, apparently, they think it taxes the poorer groups more.  This is fairer, everyone paying the same percentage of their income (regardless of income level).  i do not care about "income inequality", neither should the tax code.  "Income inequality" is a necessary part of Capitalism designed to reward those who invest, innovate, and take risks.  At least it doesn't have the punitive success penalty like progressive taxes do.  

Examples of this are sales tax, VAT/GST taxes, and some usage taxes.

The Role of Taxation

The role of taxation is to fund the government (at least the basics).  Funding anything beyond that is a de facto tax. Unfortunately, restraint is not something congress actively uses when it comes to spending.  

The government has lost sight of many things.  For one they use vote buying schemes (usually social programs).  The biggest thing they lost sight of is that it is not their money they are spending.  Therefore, they have to keep looking for ways to fund their spending habit.

Taxation is appropriation at best, theft at worst.  

The role of taxation should not be punitive or redistributive (taxes used to promote "income equality").  The point is not to look for "free cash" (in this case disposable income available) and tax to get everything the government can.  Taxes should not be used for social engineering (child, mortage credits, encouraging debt, etc).  

The people are not supposed to be working for the government (outside those actively employed by them), the government is supposed to be working for the good of the people.  Many times, the best solution is to do absolutely nothing.

Sharing the Burden   

Every citizen (at least working ones) have the responsibility to help fund the government. Unfortunately, government does not live up to its part by showing restraint (government wastes money and the budget is probably 4X what it should be).  If everyone has the duty to fund the government, wouldn't the most equitable way be for everyone to pay the same amount (percentage).  i would say yes.

It is not like the wealthier citizens get more services from the government (but they certainly have to pay for them), it is the opposite with poorer people seeing benefits with little or no cost to themselves.  The top 1% of taxpayers paid over 40% of the whole income tax bill (at least in 2007 - The Tax Foundation), supposedly it was more than the bottom 95% combined.   Some people say the US has the most progressive taxes of any nation (a OECD study somewhere).  

Tax Reform i Would Like to See

Since eliminating the 16th Amendment seems highly unlikely... (i'd go VAT, probably)

So, what would i like to see done with the tax code and taxation at the federal level in the US.  i want a flat tax where everybody pays the same percentage of their income without any deductions or tax credits (estate taxes eliminated, gift taxes eliminated. Also, no tax on capital gains, dividends, or interest.)  i also want to see income tax withholding discontinued and people paying their taxes on a quarterly or annual basis.

No, tax refunds should not be a thing.  Though if you want to overpay the government, you can.

The current tax codes are needlessly complicated. You should never have to outsource your tax preparation because you don't know how to do it.  In other words, the average citizen should not have to use H&R Block or Turbo Tax to file their returns.  

Ideally, your taxes should be able to be filled out on a postcard. Usually, i would lean into the concept of using cashflows, but in this case, i'm not a fan (especially if there is some kind of capital gains component, without it and maybe double taxation).  

The numbers i played around with in Excel showed that the average tax rate (per household for 1970-2007) was 13.4%, the median rate was 16.89%.  My plan (on a blog post if i can find it) was for a 15% flat tax. i also had a 20% flat tax with no deductions, exemptions, non-cashflow expenditure write-offs for business).

Disillusioned: Taxation Revisited: Previous Blog Posts (dft-disillusioned.blogspot.com)

Honestly, i'm not sure i can still do some of the data stuff i used to do back then (and i'm sure i don't have the original Excel files).   

My Conservative Manifesto Rewrite: Part V: Government: Part II

 Government Part 2: 

Representative Government: Not So Fast...

Apparently, the US has a representative government.  One of the problems though, is that the representatives seem to have forgotten who they are representing.  Much is made about campaign finance.  Politics is an expensive game/occupation, it takes an ever-growing amount of money to stay competitive (or at least it seems that way, even grassroots movements seem to be well funded).  

Sometimes in order to secure funding a politician has to align themselves with a specific group (a group who probably expects a degree of input in the decision process).  In order to keep the money spigots flowing, they have to meet with groups during their time in office.  

Another trend is strict partisanship.  It seems you are voting more for the party line than the candidate (usually tied to funding).  As a consequence, the representatives don't tend to deviate too far from the platform.  So, between the party and the backers, it is hard to tell who the candidate is really representing.  It is one thing to have a brand identity/platform (Republican or Democrat), but the slavishness is a new twist.     

Happy Birthday to Evil

When do you think the birthday of evil is (limited to the Gregorian calendar)?

i say September 20th. 

No real reason why... 

Just Saying 4

 i "survived" the month of death.  Yeah, for some strange reason i associate August with death.  i had another birthday.  This would be easier if my stupid computer/programs would let me use them without crashing.  Just Saying... you know the drill.