To impeach, or not to impeach, that was the question

As of early December, it looks like the Democratic controlled House will impeach the President, and that the Senate will vote to acquit him.  Our country is so polarized, that no GOP Senator would risk being "primaried" because s/he voted to convict him of "high crimes and misdemeanors."  We're seeing a political hypocrisy that we haven't seen since the Clinton impeachment. And it's so sad....  

Donald Trump is a narcisist. He will revel in the House presenting the impeachment to the Senate for a trial.  At that time, political hell will break loose.  The GOP will put their wagons in a circle and defend a president that most elected officials dislike, but our powerless to control.  (Shades of 1930's Central Europe....)   But there are ways that sane men and women from both parties could prevail if they gave the process some out of the box thought.

Many in the mainstream press report that most of the GOP Senators would vote to convict if their ballots were cast in secret.  There is nothing in the constitution that prohibits the Senate from making rules to allow this to happen.  Since politicians are in the business of lying to their constituents at times, saying that they were one of the handful of GOP Senators who voted to acquit should be easy for them.  Will Mitch McConnell take this way out of trouble?

An option that involves the House would be to impeach the president, but not send the articles over to the Senate until they are complete.  The house can approve a subset of articles based on current investigatory evidence, and hold off delivering the indictments until a full investigation is complete - sometime in late 2020.  This would prevent the president from getting the Senate acquittal he wants and allow the House to continue presenting public evidence through election season.  An added benefit for the Democrats would be to allow their presidential candidate Senators to continue their campaigns without having to be in Washington, DC for the Senate trial.

This nation has a serious problem.  Adding "Democracy" to the presidential nominating process has encouraged the bases of each party to grow more and more extreme.  When I was young, there wasn't that much that separated the left and right wings of American politics.  The party leaders would allow the base to voice its opinion, and prevent "extremists" like Lester Maddox and George Wallace (who later moderated his views) from getting on a nationwide ballot.  It is no coincidence that politicians pander to the base before the primaries, and move to the center afterwards. Over time, this process served to cull the centrists from both parties and leave people who want a winner take all process - and we all lose out because of that.

Given the polarized bases, might a middle road be chosen?  The majority of people polled want our president removed from power.  But this doesn't apply to his base.  It will accept no evidence that he has gone past tolerable political limits.  Do we have still have leaders in government who know how to finesse the system to deny the narcissist in chief what he wants - an acquittal?  The jury is still out on that verdict, but I hope they figure out something, as it doesn't bode well for people who have faith in the 2020 elections.

Thoughts on Impeachment

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Off the cuff thoughts on the recent murders in Ohio and Texas

It sickens me that more people like the shooters in the recent Ohio and Texas murders are on the loose. All the talk about "thoughts and prayers" coming from the GOP is as worthless as used toilet paper. Nothing of value comes from the GOP or the gun lobby, save additional business for the undertaker.

Yet, the leftist argument that banning guns can not solve the problems that America has. We are a violent society which does a poor job of assimilating the "alienated" into the larger whole. These socially isolated people become ever more angry, as they are caught in a vicious cycle: People look for answers, find answers in extreme positions, extreme positions cause people to become isolated, isolated people look for even more extreme positions. Eventualy, they give up hope on the larger society, and either as an individual or part of an extremist group, lash out in a violent, destructive rage.

All too many people look for simplistic solutions. And the current president spouted simplistic sound bites which sounded like solutions to these people. Like religious zealots, these extremists felt they had the right to take the law into their own hands, restoring the purity of a white America.

America was never pure, and it was never an "Aryan" nation. Our first settlements, as well as our westward expansion, depended on the intermixing of peoples. Whether it was Dutch settlers developing relationships with the native Iroquois, southern whites raping their black slaves, Anglos mixing with Mexicans along our southern border, or everyone mixing with native Hawaiians, none of us are pure. And it is about time that we break the back of violent white supremacist culture.

Not having a homogenous culture has been both a great asset and a great liability for America. As an asset, we mix the best of ideas from all cultures to produce something greater than any of the originals. As a liability, the lack of consistant cultural shorthands leads us to conflicts which can escalate into violence. If our founding fathers knew then what we know now, I'm not sure if the 2nd amendment would have been ratified. But I'm sure that they would have considered it, as then, like today, many people depend on their guns for food and protection.

Is there a single definite answer to stopping gun violence - NO!   We can institute programs which cause people of different backgrounds, Rural and Urban, Black and White, Anglo and Latino, etc. to mix and develop connections with each other.  Our military does that in the field. But what about civilian life?  Might it be possible to look at our past and use FDR's employment programs (CCC, WPA, etc.) as models for ways to mix people of different backgrounds AND to give them employment when they need it most?

But first, we can start by teaching people that the last resort of the incompetent is the initial use of violence. Teach people how to communicate and assimilate into the larger society, and to gain value from that society. That might be a good start to reduce the number of these unwanted killing sprees....

The oncoming student debt crisis.

Lately, there has been a lot of noise on the internet regarding student debt. In a recent post on Forbes magazine's website, there are more than 44 million borrowers who collectively owe $1.5 trillion in student loan debt in the U.S. alone. Student loan debt is now the second highest consumer debt category - behind only mortgage debt - and higher than both credit cards and auto loans. Borrowers in the Class of 2017, on average, owe $28,650, according to the Institute for College Access and Success.  Given that too many people have borrowed too much money that they can't afford to pay back, it got me thinking about student loans, the debt that these students owe, and how to deal with this mountain of debt.

As I see it, the problem with student loan debt is:

1. It was guaranteed by the government.
2. It could not be discharged in bankruptcy.
3. It was issued without regard to whether a borrower's education would result in a job that could pay off the loan. 
4. It was a demand side education subsidy, and not a supply side subsidy. 
5. It was a major commitment made by people usually too young to understand the nature of that commitment.

Contrast issues #1, #2 & #3 with car loans and mortgages. These loans are secured by property, they can be discharged in bankruptcy, and the person's ability to pay is factored into whether the loan is issued or not. Given that the price of an education is in the same league as both a car loan and mortgage, shouldn't similar lender and borrower protections and privileges be in place? Why should the government be guaranteeing the loan and not allowing it to be discharged in bankruptcy?

Economics 101 says that if you want prices to go up, increase demand by throwing money at the consumption side of the equation. By making more money available for education without expanding the supply of "top tier" schools, students will either pay more for the same education, or buy an education of dubious quality. This is evidenced by the inflation of prices charged by good schools for an education, and the proliferation of scam, for-profit schools providing poor quality education to people who couldn't qualify to get into the good schools.

Lastly, with issue #5, we expect young adults, who are barely 18 at the time, to make the most important economic decision of their lives without much of a safety net (see issue #2 & #3). We keep the same student from buying a drink in the USA until s/he is 21. And having one underage drink is less of a life changing decision than choosing a school and borrowing the money to pay for the education.

I suggest to fix this problem, we need to do the following:

1. Eliminate government student loan guarantees.
2. Allow all student loan debts to be discharged in bankruptcy. 
3. Require that all lenders perform an analysis of whether the student's school and field of study will result in a job which allows the student to comfortably pay off the loan. They will be the risk holders, so the banks should have the right to determine who gets their loans.
4. Government subsidies to education should only be towards the expansion of the school system and for the development of new, highly qualified teachers for that system.
5. Require young adults to work for 2-3 years before applying for a student loan. These loans should not be issued to people under 21 years old.
6. Minimum standards for all schools must be set by a non-profit entity, and no student loans be issued to institutions not meeting this criteria. Graduation rates and Job Placement rates must be set high enough, so that scam, for-profit schools can not make money off of student loans.

This is a start for a longer thought experiment. But it applies real world, market principles to fix the system. However, it doesn't address what is needed for the students who have been victimized by the present dysfunctional system. For them, immediately addressing issues #1 and #2 should move things forward towards a market based system of funding higher education.

But how do we chip away at this mountain of debt incurred prior to making the above fixes without giving students a "free ride?"  Just letting existing borrowers go into bankruptcy to clear this mountain of debt can have unintended consequences.  I propose the following changes:

1. Student loan debt incurred prior to the enaction of these changes will be converted into inflation indexed, interest free loans. 
2. These loans will be paid by a separate income tax whose rate mirrors the current employee social security contribution (currently 7.5% of income), but with no upper income cap.
3. These loans will have a life span of no longer than 25 years.  If they are not paid off in full, the Federal government absorbs all losses.
4. A special inheritance tax of 10% will be imposed on all estates where the restructured loans have not been repaid out of former student incomes.  Appropriate legislation may be added to deal with legatee hardship, such as medical bills.

I have not defined all the issues needed to resolve the problems caused by our current student loan crisis.  However, this is a start - which is more than the legislative and executive branches of the Federal government have done lately....

A picture alone is not worth a thousand words

The New York City Subway. Sometimes, it's an acceptable way to travel. Sometimes, it's a tolerable way to travel. And some times more, it's a disgusting way to travel.  The other night, I had seen (and smelled) a new low in New York City Transit.

- - - - - -

In the picture above you'll note several people sleeping in the subway car.  II presume that they had the usual wintertime garden variety body odor, given the way people at the far end of the car are dressed.  This means that these riders smelled, but not bad enough to vacate the car at the next stop.  New York has always had a problem with the homeless on its subways, but most of the time, people are able to live and let live. It's hard enough for a healthy person to find work which pays enough to put a roof over one's head. But for the unlucky in our society, it's almost impossible, as there are not enough safe spaces in the shelters to go around.

I don't want to delve into the problems with NYC's homeless shelters in this entry. They are a mix of people down on their luck, where mentally ill people are mixed in with garden variety poor people who just need a place to stay the night. But I do want to talk about the subways, a place where some of the dregs of society tend to go for relative comfort.

- - - - - -

Several years ago, when I regularly commuted on the subway, I saw a derilict relieve himself at Times Square. Knowing how filthy the bathrooms are at that station, a man would want to relieve himself elsewhere. And in this case, the homeless person did.  Thankfully, he was at the far end of the station, and easy to avoid.
   

Words, Meanings, and Spin

In regard to Trump's recent statement on "Getting Tough with Democrats"....

Recently, Trump mentioned sending Bikers after Democrats. In a nutshell, It all depends on whether the bikers are law abiding or not. But how would you feel if Obama had endorsed a biker group? I know many peaceful biker groups. Yet, the image of bikers leans to modern day outlaws.

Words have meanings and harmonics of meanings. Trump knows this, and ignores the harmonics when acknowledging them doesn't serve his purpose.

As for me, I've learned to recognize when he's speaking to his choir and when he's spouting BS that are blatant lies, but reinforce the falsehoods his followers believe.

For example: Whether or not one believes his wall is needed, one can see the falsehoods in his justifications. In a recent speech, he talked of "thousands, millions" coming to the Mexican border. Even in these caravans, we're talking in the LOW thousands, not the millions. He'll stretch a number without regard to reality, and people eat it up. His followers don't care whether the number implied is true or not. They care that it reinforces their beliefs that we're being invaded by hordes of foreigners.

Trump has violated the social and political norms which normally hold a leader in check. The GOP has been emasculated by the mob, as the primaries gave Trump a legitimacy that he never would have been given in normal times. The gate keeping function of the electoral college hasn't worked from the beginning of our republic. As a result, we were ripe for a corrupt president to be elected by the "unwashed masses" (social term, not a literal term) who speaks the meta language that they want to hear, but doesn't deliver the things the common people really need.

I suggest that one do two things before making your next support of Trump. First, watch the first 15 minutes of "Triumph of the Will" which explains the humiliation of a Central European people in few words, then presents the imagery of a false messiah who promises deliverance from suffering. Then read the first 50 pages of "How Democracies Die". And finally, ask one's self, do you recognize a pattern here? No matter what you believe in regard to Trump, and no matter whether you acknowledge what you really feel to others, if you don't see what is going on, acknowledging the truth to one's self, your opinions are meaningless drivel and part of the overall problem we all face.

Please note that everyone is entitled to his or her view. But if one can't acknowledge that the other side also has its points and discuss them fairly, one's voice is meaningless spin and can easily be ignored as it is only spouting useless propaganda....

Some impromptu thoughts on healthcare and the United States

I started writing this entry because of a post I read about Canadian health care....

- - - - - -

Let's strip away all the political rhetoric and look at the facts. For goods and services whose demand can be affected by external factors such as cost (i.e. elastic demand), markets are the best way to allocate resources. Health care (a product with inelastic demands) does not behave this way, as no one bleeding to death will ask how much does it cost for a doctor to fix me? For goods and services like health care, other, more efficient methods have to be devised to best allocate resources.

Let's take away from our argument the idea of charity hospitals and doctors practicing without regard to money. The number of these people and organizations is shrinking, as states have allowed medical organizations to be profit making organizations. This has led to markets being used to allocate resources where markets are not the best way to allocate resources.

In a society that values human life more than ours, people's lives are maintained without regard to market forces. The individual receiving health care is not part of the market. So, how is care allocated? In the US, we used to have organizations called HMO's. But even they were affected by markets, and limited care when care was needed.

Many developed nations, such as Canada provide health care services with a fixed amount of money allocated for care in each province's budget. People get to see their doctors by appointment (usually more often than in America). Care provided has been vetted against "best practices" and drugs/procedures which provide the most bang per buck are usually chosen to reduce costs. In areas where there might be inflexible demands, such as needing heart transplants, they prioritize recipients of care to those who would get the greatest statistical benefit from that care. This means that a 40 y/o man might be selected for a transplant over a 90 y/o man. This takes market forces out of the decision, and allows care to be provided without regard to a person's wealth or lack of it.

America has distorted the use of markets so much, that many of us fear what might happen if we move some goods and services out of market place allocation of these goods and services. The experiences we've seen in foreign lands shows us that costs can be reduced by taking things out of markets. In fact, we're now seeing medical "tourism" where many Americans are flying to Europe and Asia for non-emergency procedures. There are many procedures that cost half as much when done in Europe than when done in the States. In Asia, the costs are even lower. And, quality is similar (or better) than what one finds in the States.

The drawback - no one likes being a gate keeper. No one likes having gate keepers. And non-market systems require gate keepers. Who wants to hear that a $500,000 procedure won't be performed that could add another year to your 90 year old grandma's life, because society has chosen to fund a rural clinic that provides 10,000 people with essential health care?

Being a decent human being means making choices. Canada and most of the developed world have made good choices. America  doesn't yet make that many good ones....

Snake Oil for Sale

I find it amazing that so many people have been conned by this two-bit snake oil salesman who occupies the office of the President.  They have given their allegiance to someone who has no loyalty to any principles, shows loyalty only to family, and exhibits a strong affinity to authoritarian regimes, only because they wish to follow a bully from his demonic pulpit. 

Most politicians have to sell some "Snake Oil" in order to get elected. Pledging allegiance to a man with few (if any) principles wouldn't be too bad if he understood how power should be used, and that he was truly making America great again.   Instead, Trump is destroying the very things that helped keep America great in the economic world we shaped after World War 2.  

- - - - - -

In their effort to extract more wealth from the populace, our nation's elites have abandoned the most vulnerable in our society. Structural unemployment is damaging both rural and urban areas in America, as it is doing in the rest of the developed world.  And the populist insurrection that brought Trump to the White House is playing all over the world with "Yellow Vest" protests in Paris, Brexit in Britain, and the shift towards autocratic rule in Eastern Europe.  Trump is acting exactly as I'd want him to do if I were Vladimir Putin.  Every action Trump takes is geared to destabilize American political institutions, American social institutions, and American economic institutions.  It only makes sense for Trump to have done what he did, if he were a puppet of the Russians.

Sadly, in its leaders' lust for power, the GOP has lost its soul.  The base no longer cares about principles.  It is mostly a populist mob led by people who will deliver meager rations of bread and entertain them with meaningless political stump speeches geared to promote tribal identity.  The base has allowed its leaders to become irresponsible, enacting a so-called tax cut which is adding more billions to the budget deficit than if they left the tax code alone.  Even more important than this is their tolerance of a leader who shows them no loyalty as long as he is willing to pursue a retrograde social agenda.

Did the swamp get drained?  No, that was only a useful political slogan.  And yet, the base ignores the lack of progress in this area. I think this illustrates a greater social problem in our society. America has divided itself into haves and have-nots. It has also divided itself into well educated people and poorly educated people.  More importantly, it is divided into compassionate people and non-compassionate people. I feel sorry for those government employees not getting paid because of a pissing match between the House and Trump.  My Dad, however, has no compassion for them - he lived a hardscrabble life, and only has enough room in his soul to care only about himself and his immediate family.  Many of Trump's supporters are very much like my Dad - life has not allowed them the luxury of caring for others who are not doing well. 

Sadly, we have only ourselves to blame if this traitor is allowed to hold the office of the President much longer.  It is no longer a luxury to be well educated or compassionate.  The world has changed from a "Win-Lose" world into a "Win-Win / Lose-Lose" world, where education, communication, and compassion will be needed for future prosperity.  That means we have a choice: Continuing to let this traitor lead us astray, or to go in the opposite direction - where we can all work together to pursue common interests, making things better to pursue our individual interests as a result....

Politics will be the death of us yet.

As I write this entry, the partial US Government shutdown is in its second week.  This is an embarrassing shame for this country, as important government functions are not being performed, people are unable to earn a living, and those "essential personnel" which remain on the job are not getting paid for their work.

- - - - - -

Government shutdowns should be rare and short.  In the first 2 years of the Trump presidency, we have already experienced 3 shutdowns.  The first 2 shutdowns were relatively harmless, as they lasted less than a week.  However, this shutdown is going into its 3rd week, and shows no sign of ending.

The nation’s largest union representing federal employees filed a lawsuit Monday afternoon against the government, seeking damages for the roughly 400,000 federal employees forced to work without pay during the partial government shutdown. To me, having the government order me to work without pay is akin to slavery, and is illegal according to the United States Constitution.  But what would happen if a court were to tell these employees that they have the right to NOT work?

In the above case, the 2 plaintiffs work at high-security prisons owned by the government.  Could you imagine if all affected employees were to walk out, leaving prisoners locked up in their cells?  What would happen in a protracted mandated shutdown?  Would we leave the prisoners to starve?  But this gets even more interesting.  The Coast Guard is affected by the shutdown as well.  Could you imagine if they started selling drugs to pay their service members?  Being serious, I could imagine what could happen if the Coast Guard were to stop functioning, and this is not a pretty picture.  And what about TSA employees walking off their jobs? What about Air Traffic Controllers? Could you imagine what would happen to interstate travel and commerce if no one were able able to fly during the shutdown?

As usual, this shutdown hurts poor people the worst.  Many of us live from paycheck to paycheck, and are less than 3 paychecks away from total financial disaster.  The Federal Government has outsourced many of tasks once done by employees.  Unlike Federal employees, most contractor employees will not get back pay when the government is fully open for business.  How will they cope with the loss of 2 (or more) weeks of salary?  What would happen if this shutdown stretches into February?  We will likely see SNAP and WIC benefit funding stop.  What will happen to the affected families?

- - - - - -

I am not in favor of Trump getting any money for his so-called wall.  He is holding many Americans hostage against their will, pawns in the game of politics. He did this with DACA "Dreamers" and screwed them anyway.  What's to say that he will not do the same thing again?  Collateral damage is part of most wars, and this is a political war where government employees are needlessly being hurt.  I am hoping for a radical ruling in the above mentioned lawsuit, allowing ALL unpaid employees to walk off their jobs at will.

Maybe it's time for the people to fight back against a body politic that is out of control....