Outrage Over the VA

Reading about the spreading outrage over the VA systems failures and the coverup of said failures ought to make us think.

It sounds a lot like the school systems where test cheating was going on. Wrong, yes. But might it also be a logical response to impossible standards, huge demands and reduced budgets? The VA and our vets have both been victimized by the budget cutting mania. So have all parts of the public sphere, schools, roads, regulatory bodies like the IRS and FDA and SEC and EPA, all have been put on a crash diet. But their jobs have gotten bigger.

It's illogical to raise standards and reduce budgets at the same time, but this kind of magical thinking is far too common these days. It's part of our national love affair with businessthink. It's always about getting more for less, an impractical idea to begin with. Running engines without oil isn’t good for those engines, but it saves money in the short run. There are consequences. We shouldn’t be surprised when it ends in catastrophe..

We had an unfunded, off-budget, poorly audited, unnecessary war, waged with insufficient manpower and poor planning. It sent men and women with insufficient body armor and inadequate equipment into a catastrophe that should have been foreseen and might have been avoided. (The pre-planning was more about the oil than about the people.) The whole disaster was then covered up, the consequences ignored and denied, the human damage hidden and the liabilities passed on to the taxpayer or onto the veterans who were permanently harmed, and onto the next president. The costs were not fully disclosed until Bush had left office, and then the payment of those costs was blocked by the Republican side of Congress who had helped him launch the war.

This is a fiasco but we shouldn’t be surprised by it any more than we ought to be surprised by an unrepaired bridge falling down or an unprepared student failing an unreasonably rigorous examination.

The VA is as full of flaws and insufficiencies as our infrastructure. Of course we blame the infrastructure. We should blame the jerks who shifted the necessary dollars into tax cuts to billionaires for the past fifteen years.

It is a religious dogma among Republicans that no problem exists unless it costs money. So if you ignore a problem it doesn’t exist. Ignore the VA’s need for funding and there’s no problem. Road repair spending is the problem, not the holes in the roads or the fallen bridges. Healthcare spending is the problem, not the poor health of Americans. Poverty programs are the problem, not poverty. Paying people a living wage is a problem, so cut their pay and there’s no problem. If poor people could just hide themselves we would have no poverty at all. If maimed veterans could suffer quietly in a dark room the consequences of this stupid war would stop embarrassing all of us, but more importantly it would stop costing taxpayers money, especially the wealthy taxpayers who complain to their Republican proxies. They are the ones we most need to take care of, aren't they?

After a war we should expect a rising cost in veterans’ care, but damned if Republicans will agree to pay for that care. Costs are the problem, not the lack of a leg or the serious unending repercussions of brain injuries caused when a soldier was blown up in an insufficiently armored vehicle. So they cut the costs; problem solved. That is the contradiction faced by many government departments. It’s not wasteful to give enormous tax cuts to billionaires so they can own a dozen luxury homes, but it is apparently wasteful to fund the VA sufficiently.

It’s false economy to calculate efficiencies with a bias against the people who do the work, but that is the new religion in this country. Whatever saves billionaires a dime is efficient. Whatever supplies necessary care or service or pay to someone at the other end of the income scale is automatically inefficient because it subtracts from the billionaire’s tax savings. Hell, most of those billionaires evade taxes already. We pay for them.

Americans are angry at the wrong people. It isn’t the first time.

Jon Stewart arm wrestles Grover Norquist (and wins)

Here's the Jon Stewart interview. (Dontcha wish actual newspeople interviewed this well?)

I have a pledge for you. And I bet it'd work.

"Any congressional district that elects anyone who signs Grover Norquist's pledge shall have its federal funding adjusted to equal its federal taxes paid."

This would affect mostly Republican districts who get more than they pay in. And it would balance the budget almost immediately.

Take it a step further: all congressional districts that elect a Democrat shall not have to pay more in taxes than they receive in federal funding. This would affect most Democratic districts who tend to pay more in taxes than they receive in federal dollars.

Ya see, here's the Big Hypocrisy: the districts that get the most from the federal government are Republican districts. And Republican districts nationwide, on average, get more from the federal government than they pay in.

So we'd be doing them a favor. We'd be helping them be honest, helping them be true to their ideals. No more federal gravy train for Republican districts who signed Grover's pledge (which he thought up when he was twelve–––I'm not making this up, it's on tape.) And Democrat taxpayers would stop being ripped off by the lazy, tax evading Republican parts of the country.

Anyway, Jon Stewart does a pretty fair job of outdebating Norquist. He points out that Reagan raised taxes a dozen or so times. He points out Clinton raised taxes and created a budget surplus and a boom, and Bush cut them and destroyed the global economy and bankrupted the country. Norquist doesn't blink or argue because it's all true.

Stewart does miss one big fat opportunity. When Norquist says we should get rid of public pensions and replace them with 401K's because then everyone knows exactly what they are going to get, Jon should have pointed out that 401K's are the accounts that Wall Street cleaned out over the past four years. The money went away. (Well, it didn't go away as much as it went into Goldman Sachs executive bonuses.)

Retirees under the privatized system have to pray really hard that the economy is up when they retire.

The thing Norquist hates about pensions is they are promises that have to be kept even if the market is being wiped out by pirates. Norquist doesn't like promises made to working people. Only promises made to pirates and CEOs, who are sometimes the same thing.

Two Speeches-Two Romneys-one for taxing rich people-one against

One day, two audiences, two contradictory stands on tax cuts for rich people, same Republican.

First, Romney opposes tax cuts for the rich

"I'm not for tax cuts for the rich," Romney said. "The rich can take care of themselves. I want to get America working again. And so I want to make sure that whatever we do in the tax code, we're not giving a windfall to the very wealthy."

Then, Romney supports tax cuts for the rich

...several times today, he was asked about the New York Times opinion piece by billionaire Warren Buffett calling for increased taxes on the wealthy as a way to cut the deficit. “I disagree with Warren. And I do want to keep the Bush tax cuts in place,” Romney said.

The Tax Evasion Industry

Everybody hates the tax man, so people tend to laugh when tax evaders get away with it. Never mind that Jesus advised people to pay their taxes, and President George Washington personally led an army to go after tax evaders in western Pennsylvania.

Taxation is both Christian and patriotic. So how do flag wavers and bible thumpers get away with their evasions? Plain and simple? They cheat. They leave honest citizens to carry their burden. They sit at the table and order food, they eat and drink, and they leave before the check arrives. They may be good at business, but mostly they're good at avoiding their responsibilities as citizens and neighbors. They are lowlifes. We shouldn't admire them. We shouldn't allow what they do. Mostly we shouldn't be paying their debts for them.

Here's a very good article by Chuck Collins in Sojourners.

Tax evasion is a big business model, and the biggest tax evaders are corporations. Companies like Amazon.com outcompete the small independent bookstores by evading sales taxes. There's an excellent article about this in Mother Jones.

The "Double Irish" maneuver corporations use to avoid paying taxes. Clever them, poor us. Here's a useful diagram.

The U.S. may have a high rate of corporate tax, but corporations don't pay it. The Daily Beast has a list. It's worth sharing with your conservative friends.

The top corporate tax dodgers include GE, Eli Lilly, Google, Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp (FoxNews and the Wall Street Journal), Boeing, Pfizer, Oracle, Altria (Philip Morris), IBM, Goodrich, TimeWarner, Morgan Stanley, the Hartford, Devon Engergy, Hewlett Packard and Microsoft.

Cost rising/life expectancy dropping in US relative to "socialist" Europe

The Washington Post reported that life expectancy is dropping in the U.S. relative to Europe. And we spend considerably more per capita in America to do considerably worse.

Of course the small percentage holding most of America's wealth are worried that their wealth may be taxed to pay for public obligations like Medicare and Social Security, as they once were in the bad old Communist days of Eisenhower and Reagan. Their private hope is that people who need help will quietly die off first, that working people will die earlier and cheaply and not become "a burden." If the middle class becomes poorer, they too will die earlier and cost less, their retirement will be shorter meaning less will be drained from corporate pension and insurance funds, leaving more money for the people who now have most of it.

This is a cynical strategy, but, let's face it, wealth is cynical. If wealthy people don't like to think this way they hire people to think this way for them. Wealth takes a cold view of things. Wealth owes its loyalty to narrow calculations of money and its preservation. We shouldn't kid ourselves that these calculations aren't being made. Recall the cynical sale of securities that were designed to fail, securities which the bankers were simultaneously shorting on the market, earning millions from their customers' losses. These calculations do take place.

Is it "Socialist" to recognize this? Is it "Socialist" to honor pledges to American citizens? Is it "Socialist" to make sure the healthcare system delivers its care, including the miraculous advances funded by tax dollars, to all of its citizens?

Make no mistake, there are still extremely wealthy people in Europe and Scandinavia, and they show no indication of wanting to move here. In most modern industrialized countries there is a social contract and a strong sense of the public good, things we seem to have abandoned in this country.

If there is a protected class that everyone seems eager to protect it isn't the middle class or the working class or even the poor; it is the very rich. (Here in Minnesota the Republican Party is hoping to eliminate 36,000 public sector jobs to preserve the special low tax rates of 48,000 very wealthy Minnesotans. And they have the support of millions of average people to do this. Republicans are also dumping thousands of poor people from their state funded health plans.)

When you see what is happening, it's no wonder life expectancy is dropping in America. The losses have only begun. And who is it benefiting? The irony is that the money saved isn't being invested here in America. The "patriotic" tax cutters and entitlement slashers are quietly taking those savings and investing them in China and other emerging markets. They certainly aren't creating jobs in America. How patriotic is that?

Feed the Rich

Where did all the tax cut money go? It went into very few pockets and from there to emerging markets where it is busy creating low-wage jobs and a future of non-American economic power. Why would those tax cuts create jobs here when the big plan was to ship the work somewhere cheaper, someplace without the nuisance safety regulations, and workers' rights and benefits? In another era this strategy would have been called UnAmerican, but it's hard to call a party unAmerican when they are wrapped in the flag.

You can read Krugman every week, or Joseph Stiglitz every once in a while, to get a sharp mature assessment of the GOP bullshit. But sometimes it's interesting to go at the b.s. one talking point at a time, like economist Brad DeLong does, and see how quickly the right wing arguments fall apart. And they do. Sadly, it takes a brain and a bit of patient thought to see how fragile the GOP material is.

The GOP arguments fall apart because they are saying one thing while carefully planning something completely different. At moments of contradiction you will usually see John Boehner burst into tears, which is a helpful distraction. The Republicans have their game plan and it doesn't do most of us any good. It wasn't meant to.

Their strategy is to make sure the economy screws most of us over and hands the fruits of that screwing over to the handful of people up top. The plan is to streamline the narrowest possible delivery of wealth. Efficiency for the very few. This is the economy they want. This is the economy they planned. An overseas economy of underpaid, eager, frightened people with no rights. A Dickensian economy, a Scrooge economy. If it makes Americans angry the Republicans are assuming that most will blame Obama. To make sure of that, there is talk radio and Fox"News".