Ellington and Coltrane

Back when saxophone players didn't sound so God-awful cheesy. Coltrane coming back in at about the 3:30 mark and Ellington's finish on this version is gorgeous.

Duped by Obama?

Quite possibly. Andrew Sullivan makes the case.

The [fiscal] crisis is the cost of future entitlements and defense, about which Obama proposes nothing. Yes, there's some blather. But Obama will not risk in any way any vulnerability on taxes to his right or entitlement spending to his left. He convened a deficit commission in order to throw it in the trash. If I were Alan Simpson or Erskine Bowles, I'd feel duped. And they were duped. All of us who took Obama's pitch as fiscally responsible were duped.

We can hope for something substantial to happen after the 2012 elections, perhaps, but I am more and more resigned to the likelihood that nothing substantial will change in our fiscal policy unless and until it becomes completely unavoidable. ('Unavoidable' as in when the US just can't borrow money because no one will lend it to us at a reasonable rate and almost all tax dollars go to interest and entitlements). I sincerely hope that both Sullivan and I are wrong.

Kucinich

The American Left arguing with itself over a Progressive 'hero' here.  

I always though Kucinich was largely a self-absorbed bag o'douche, but I can see how many on the Left would like him if only because he speaks loud and proud for issues from the Left.  Still, the accusation stands: Ineffective.

What has he accomplished?  What has he done?  What can he point to and say 'I did that for America' (or even his constituents)?  Turns out, not much of anything.  

Pat Moynihan was a progressive that got things done.  Ted Kennedy was a progressive that got things done.  Anthony Weiner is the most promising progressive legislator I've seen since Obama and he wants to get things done (including this current Health Care proposal).  Dennis Kucinich is a gimmic.  And, quite frankly, his threat to vote against the current bill because it isn't to his liking is repulsive.  

Of course, it's far from ideal.  Of course, it is flawed.  But to vote against the first real chance at universal health care for Americans after almost 100 years of effort, a bill that covers 10s of millions of America's most vulnerable, a bill that will save the lives of 40,000 Americans every year, a bill that most experts believe to actually be pretty good...positively unforgivable for any self-styled progressive to vote against it.  The aggressive stupidity and arrogance that would take is mind-numbing and Kucinich should be rightly lambasted if he does such a thing.

Tax Questions/Options

I wouldn't pretend to have a solid plan to repair our tax system and get back to fiscal sanity, but would it really be impossible to do some variation of the following?

• First, say, 30K is yours--keep it (per individual, so 60K for married couples)
• Remainder of income over 30K taxed at a flat rate of 20% up to 500K
• Taxable income over 500K taxed at flat rate of 25%

A sample of income levels and their tax liability would break out as follows:

Salary          Tax           % of Income

50,ooo          3,600        7.2%
75,000         8,100       10.8%
100,000      12,600      12.6%
150,000      22,200      14.8%
250,000      43,200      17.3%
500,000      95,700      19.1%
1 mil           217,500   21.75%

No deductions--period.  I could see an exception made for charity, but I don't think people give to charity primarily for a write-off and charitable contributions can be--and sometimes are--abused.  

As for child deductions, do we really need to subsidize having more children?  With a system like the one above, a family of 4 (or 3 or 6, for that matter), wouldn't have to pay a penny in income taxes up to $60K.  That seems pretty reasonable.  Having children is a very personal choice that can be effected by numerous different factors.  The government shouldn't be involved in either rewarding or penalizing the decision to have or not have children--and certainly not the number of children.

For mortgage deductions, it needs to go--which might make this a highly unpopular proposal. But it doesn't make sense to subsidize borrowing (particularly very leveraged borrowing) and the recent housing debacle seems to prove that point yet again.

Additionally, why not institute a national sales tax of about 8-10% that goes primarily to the welfare state (food, medicine, and housing would be exempt--including mortgages :-))?  Though regressive, it would be progressive in effect and go toward things like public housing, food stamps, Pell grants, and the like--though infrastructure, education, and public safety would be reasonable programs to fund with the tax as well, depending on the nature of it.  

Between Social Security, Medicare/Medicade, and a VAT tax of 8%, even someone making only 30K/yr would still be paying about 12-15% of their income in taxes (assuming they spend the majority of their income, which they likely would of course).  This VAT tax would ensure that everyone is paying into the social safety net as well, including those benefiting most from it (10s of millions of Americans pay no income tax at all).

The VAT tax would likely bring in close to a trillion dollars a year, quite possibly more (US GDP in 2009 was $14.4 Trillion), and one should hope that such a figure would be enough to take care of the social safety net ($1 trillion is over $3,000 for every man, woman, and child in the US).

The VAT tax would also, at least presumably, encourage saving and investment vs. consumption.  Though the argument could well be made that it might hurt business in that, effectively, it raises the prices of their goods and services, people will still need products and every vendor would be treated equally.  Additionally, if overall tax rates are lower, it gives more Americans more money to spend should they need/want to and, at least hopefully, mitigate the extra VAT tax expense.

I fully realize that my numbers may well be off and that the rates might work better with other numbers.  Additionally, this system could almost double the tax rate for the very poorest in our society.  But the very poorest would be receiving almost all the benefits of such a system--I don't see another way to do it, practically.

The main idea is to develop a system that is both easy and effective and, perhaps most importantly, neutralizes  most of the arguments from both the left and the right.  It would be hard to complain much with a very-near flat tax system that both protects the poor but does not completely exempt anyone at the same time.  Another huge benefit would be the reduction of lobbying power.  If there is nothing to gain in the way of tax codes or preferential tax treatment, why lobby?  Lobbying would obviously continue, but I can only think it would very substantially be reduced.

Just a thought.  I very conspicuously left off entitlements and corporate taxes, but this post is too long as is.  I'll leave that for another day though, in short, I would favor a reduced flat corporate rate with little to no exemptions and I favor a partial privatization of Social Security.

Hernia

I believe I may well have an umbilical hernia. How's that for feeling old? Better news...can't find a doc that has an opening before October. My best bet at quick diagnosis would be to go to an urgent care facility like people with no insurance. How's that for irony?

Rogue Rabbis

From the Truth is Stranger than Fiction Department. WTF?

GOP Personality that a D Can Fear

She asked to be quoted...

"Joe the Plumber -- you can quote me -- is a dumbass. He should stick to plumbing."

This is the spirit of McCain that was missing in Senator McCain last year.

CIA and Pelosi

Gasp! The CIA might have been misleading?

I honestly don't understand Panetta's take/behavior on this. I understand that he represents the CIA, but does he have to deny something less-than-professional/good (or even potentially illegal) happened years before he ran the organization?

I don't doubt for a second that Pelosi was briefed. What I do doubt is what they actually said to her. I wouldn't expect them to give a detailed description of everything they are doing, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if they left out almost all (if not all) details about what exactly "enhanced interrogations" entailed. My guess is that antiseptic briefings were given because the CIA reps were talking to dolts like Pelosi. I have no idea, obviously, but when talking to vacant executives like Pelosi, that's what I do--keep it simple, with lots of cliches and buzzwords, then leave.

So shame on the CIA if they didn't explain things more fully, but shame on Pelosi (and the other members of Congress) for not getting more details early on and trying to do something to stop it. The term, and the subject, of 'enhanced interrogations' has been around for quite sometime in the public, but I don't remember her speaking out against them. (Nor did I see her or many the Ds do anything to stop the suspension of Habeus Corpus).

Sad to see that her new-found outrage is really more based upon potentially being busted vs. being against the legally sanctioned torture of human beings. Even more sad...she far outclasses Harry Reid (but who doesn't?).

Not Exactly what Ghandi had in Mind

But interesting, nonetheless. Jaguar has released its new XJ model. Jaguar, the company sold to Ford, has been sold to Tata--an Indian based company. The global economic wheels keep on turning. Maybe Brasil will make Camaros one day...

Happy 4th III

And the obligatory Jimi Hendrix:

Happy 4th II

Not trying to top, Marvin Gaye, but still one of my faves:

Happy 4th

Hard to top Marvin Gaye:

Stay Safe...but not quite that safe

So my baby brother is off to Qatar as a Zoomie (aka US Air Force) officer and I told him I would give him $100 for a picture of him posing in front of a mosque wearing an enormous Star of David piece of bling. I was hoping for a Rhinestone version, but haven't been able to find it on the intertubes. I have found a couple possibles, though. I'm torn, atm, between this one and this one. Suggestions/help welcome.

For the record, our family isn't Jewish, so I could use some help...

Back in the USA

Three years ago today I was eating Indian food in the Glasgow, Scotland area. 10 years ago today I was eating spicy squid in Ouigongbu, S. Korea. Today, I am missing out on burgers and ribs at a friend's house due to IT drama (my profession). Makes me a little sad... Oh well, at least I'm not bored like this guy.

Back at it

Ok, I'm sincere this time (promise), I'm back at it. And.....leading off, Mrs./Gov. Palin's resignation speech transcript here.

Regular people

Much is venerated and derided about the 'average guy/gal' but, particularly in the US, the view seems to lean much more heavily toward veneration. I understand it and I don't.

There is a group of women about 30 yards away from me that meet every description of average. 30s-50s, not all that apparently intelligent, not that attractive, sneaking glances at every guy in the place trying to measure them up, average chicks. They are annoying, vulnerable, predictive, and beautiful. But, withal, I suppose the leaning toward veneration of them is genetic/instinctive ;-).

Keep dancing to Social Distortion, Ladies. My day is better watching you act the fool after a long day. And if I'm honest, as much as I will make special efforts to avoid you all, I'm a little jealous...

--Your semi-average Blogger

Douchebaggery Watch

One is reminded of Goethe's famous quote of "There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity." Here it is: link

Octuplets

Yes, 8 babies in one pregnancy. From the article:

The babies will be in incubators for at least six weeks and the mother is planning to breast feed them all, the hospital officials said.

I'm not a woman, but I think that plan might have to be reassessed.

Obama Street in SF

Heh. Note the beat cop posing with them.

A Great Obamalama Ding Dong Day

Rule of law, and a tradition set forth by then General Washington, is restored.

My favorite part:

Key components of the secret structure developed under Bush are being swept away: The military's Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, facility, where the rights of habeas corpus and due process had been denied detainees, will close, and the CIA is now prohibited from maintaining its own overseas prisons. And in a broad swipe at the Bush administration's lawyers, Obama nullified every legal order and opinion on interrogations issued by any lawyer in the executive branch after Sept. 11, 2001.

Italics mine. Ahhhhhh, I'm home again.