The Culture Crisis

I recently read a letter posted on the internet that was also sent to the President in regard to the health care dilemma. The letter was from a young doctor that claimed the United States had a “culture crisis” as opposed to a “health care crisis.”

 

As I have stated before, when a nation pays more for health care than any other country in the world and still has 40 million citizens without health insurance, I’d say that qualifies as a crisis.

 

The doctor recalled an account of a patient that entered his emergency room, who was a young man with gold-capped teeth, a cell phone, and an expensive pair of sneakers on his feet. He then stated he was shocked to find the patient’s chart showed his insurance coverage as Medicaid. He then went on to ask why he should have to pay for the health care of such an obviously irresponsible person, because he should have purchased insurance as opposed to cell phones and sneakers.

 

I can partially see the logic behind this doctor’s argument, but I also believe that such a judgmental attitude has no place in medicine. On balance, the doctor is a flawed human being just like the rest of us, and to expect him to be unemotional about his job is unrealistic.

 

In rebuttal to his views, I would ask if he really thought the expense of a cell phone and sneakers would cover any insurance policy he knows of. The last I checked, the most inexpensive coverage my daughter and her husband have been able to find is in the $200/month range. A mid-range cell phone and a pair of high end sneakers would cover one month’s premium or maybe two if the patient in question found a cheaper policy. However, I would be willing to wager the co-pays and deductibles on such a policy would easily cover the cost difference in one visit to the hospital.

 

This whole notion of “why should I have to pay for someone else’s this or that” is a mentality that is ripping this country asunder, and like so many other issues, it can be a double edged sword.

 

My previous blog post, “Socialism for Profit” expounded on the point of the insurance industry and how we all have been paying for others for many years. The concept is not new, and the doctors and medical insurance companies have been stabbing each other in the back for so long over pricing that the public can’t keep up.

 

If this young patient was either unemployed or working a minimum wage job, the chances of him maintaining medical insurance is fairly slim. If that is still considered to be irresponsible, then I am forced to ask how irresponsible it is when young doctors default on student loans even when they have good paying jobs?

 

While the percentage of doctors that do this is small on the grand scale, it still represents an amount of money significant enough for the government to stop Medicare and Medicaid payments to such doctors until their debts are satisfied. So then the question becomes out of the two examples cited, who is the more irresponsible? The young man who can afford a couple of month’s coverage or the doctor who refuses to pay for his education?

 

On a television news segment I watched a reporter ask one of these young doctors in question why he refused to pay his student debt. The doctor replied that he had given up six years of his life for school and felt that was payment enough. I would assume he knew medical school was highly demanding, and the profession he was entering into was as well. There is also little doubt he knew how expensive it was going to be, and while this is an explanation of a single culprit, one is forced to wonder how many others agree with him in some fashion.

 

On a more personal note, I was admitted to the emergency room last year for an intense headache, one far worse than any I had ever known. I was in the emergency room for about three hours, was given a CAT scan, and saw a doctor for all of 10 minutes, but for the sake of my upcoming point I’ll generously say 15 minutes.

 

I was told I had experienced a migraine, which had been brought on by exhaustion due to long work hours and insufficient sleep. Sixteen hours days leave only so much time for sleep so the diagnosis wasn’t a surprise.

 

The real shocker came later with my insurance billing statement. The hospital billed my carrier $675 dollars for my stay, which did not include the CAT scan. I could see the logic in this amount since a hospital is an enormous operation to run with nurses, assistants, medications, other staff and utilities to factor in. The next day I received another statement showing the doctor had billed the carrier for $650 for his services.

 

Personally, I have never been in an emergency room that was vacant, it is usually quite the opposite, so I have little doubt that the doctor on shift that night easily saw four patients for each hour he was on duty. That works out to a whopping $2600 an hour, and I don’t care who you are, that’s a stout fee. How is it an entire hospital can be run for what a doctor charges all on his own? I don’t pretend to know all the inner workings and expenses of running such a facility, but as the old saying goes, “somebody is making a lot of money.”

 

Insurance has always worked on the basis of the more input from members the cheaper the prices can be. That’s free enterprise, yet why would 40 million people be willfully turned away? Even the paltry sum of $10 a month generates $400 million, and that’s not enough to help cover such pricing? I’d be willing to guarantee that if Democrats in Congress suggested an expenditure of $400 million a year it would draw the ire of doctors, conservatives, and everyone else who would jump on the bandwagon of spiraling socialism. Yet these same people scoff at the expense of a pair of sneakers on someone else’s feet, but that’s fine because the elderly woman who chooses between groceries and prescription co-pays scoffs at the doctor’s expensive house or car. Why should she have to pay for your extravagant lifestyle?

 

This also forces me to ask another question. While anyone has to respect the hard work and dedication it takes to become a doctor, and we also recognize the valuable asset they are to every community, but why do we as a country tolerate these outlandish fees that drive people to the brink of bankruptcy? I’m sure many will immediately respond that this is no-brainer because it involves life and death. What price do you put on life and death?

 

We as communities ask police officers and firefighters to put their lives on the line for our safety every single day, and we ask them to do so for an insulting sum of money. While the doctor certainly has much more schooling for his profession, the gap in pay scale still shames the Grand Canyon. If your house is ablaze or the thief is breaking your window, what price do you put on life and death then?

 

Teachers fall into a similar category as we trust them with the education of our children, and while it used to be unheard of that any teacher risked their lives on the job, that perspective has certainly changed. I have heard opponents of this kind of questioning say that such professions should be paid as they are because it attracts people who do so because they love the work and not the pay. To that I am forced to ask if a doctor shouldn’t love his profession at least as much as any of the people mentioned above?

 

For every example of finger pointing toward those who are labeled as lazy and irresponsible, or taking advantage of the system, one doesn’t have to look far to find those who play in the gray areas of finance to find the other end of the scale. Derivatives, pit and cause, and insider trading go on every day and precious few of those people have any regret over what they do, despite the fact that they are throwing about the hard earned funds of numerous others. Actions like these cast a shadowy blanket over every person who works in finance, just like the single mother who is barely above the poverty line is labeled as this country’s liability because she may be getting food stamps to supplement her two minimum wage, part-time jobs.

 

Polls show a huge discontent with Congress for its actions, or lack thereof, depending on your point of view. There is also a great deal of frustration over the lack of getting things done, but should we really be so surprised at the attitudes of our elected officials when the same division of ideals is so prominent in our own communities?

 

When we begin to find ways to compromise and solve problems as opposed to standing in the trenches and firing salvos of mud balls, then and only then will the ‘culture crisis’ have its solution.

 

The root of this argument always boils down to “my money,” and while that is true, I often recall my father reminding me that things in life will cost you one way or the other. If conservatives have their way and privatize everything, then consider the higher cost of heath care when there is no Medicare. The cost of caring fully for your own parents when there is no Social Security except for those who can afford to save. Private funding for police and fire departments can prompt similar incidents like the one in Tennessee where nearby houses were protected while another burned to the ground. Some will say I’m over-reacting, but certainly no worse than pundits who claim we are on the verge of turning into Soviet Russia over universal health care.

 

Personally I don’t care if they call it a tax or a premium, either one is still dollars out of my pocket. If higher tax rates mean more people get the care they need, especially children and the elderly, then I’m on board.

 

I’m presently paying out funds for taxes and premiums, so if that total amount provided care for millions more citizens then I’m fine with that, more so than I am with the “medical industry” (i.e. doctors, insurance, pharmaceuticals) posting record profits. I simply believe it is more human and compassionate to care for our nation as a whole than for a select few.

 

When I hear people decry the idea of raising taxes, I am forced to wonder how men like Warren Buffet survived, and managed to become so wealthy under tax rates twice what they are today. When people make five times the national average income, isn’t that the reward for your labor, effort and education it took to get there? By percentage, those tax dollar figures are going to be much higher, but those same people also enjoy many tax breaks to shelter their funds that many others do not benefit from, so I would venture to say that few people with incomes above $250k/yr actually pay a full 35% tax burden, yet they still enjoy the higher take home pay.

 

Not long ago I read a blog post on the internet by a man who earned a combined $350k/yr salary, and he complained that it wasn’t enough to make ends meet. I would submit that if you cant get by on $350K/yr then you have absolutely no business ridiculing others for their monetary habits, be they the elected government or poverty line citizen.

 

I’m quite sure my forefather’s income taxes went to help build the interstate highway system, and while I may never travel most of those roads myself, they serve countless others, no matter if they drive a limousine or a jalopy. Did building a universal road system for everyone’s use drive us to the brink of communism? No, because many people back then saw it as our country growing and not the blatant misuse of tax dollars.

 

For all of the clamoring over money, I find it ironic that the back of the One Dollar Bill holds a symbolic key to our nation. The pyramid overseen by the Great Eye bears a Latin text meaning, “God favors our undertaking.” The Pyramid is also uncapped, signifying that our nation is unfinished, and as history has proven the only constant is change, then we are sure to remain that way. Benjamin Franklin also believed that no man could do it alone, but a group under the watchful Eye of God could do anything. There are many examples in scripture when Christ told others the Way to His Kingdom was not through riches, but to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This phrase can be found in several forms in both the Old and New Testaments. I have also noted this to be a common thread in many other religions, so it is all the more disturbing when a nation that hopes to be watched over by God seems to place the “Golden Rule” fairly low on the priority scale.

 

The young doctor who wrote the letter to the President is right about one thing, there is a “culture crisis” in America, and it extends far beyond the examples cited in his letter. The culture of profit and greed above all else is rampant in this country, and there is as much contempt from the top down as there is from the bottom up.

 

Just Work Hard

The three word title is a phrase I have heard uttered more times than I can count, and while it does have a level of merit, hard work alone will not always get the job done.

My father expended a good deal of effort teaching us the value of not just hard work, but the good work ethic that is required for it to be effective. I was often told to learn from the mistakes of others as opposed to my own experience; that requires observation of the actions of others and how they pan out. From an ethics standpoint, results are not always achieved by the most reasonable or decent means, but for some, the profit for themselves is all that matters.

Greed is called one of the seven deadly sins, but more accurately, it is a part of the darker side of human nature. All of us have a certain level of greed within us, and it is an inner demon we must learn to deal with.

There are many in our society today that have rationalized greed into a level of self worth by calling it “achievement” or “value,” and any comment to the contrary is regarded as “class warfare.” However a quick look back through history easily shows that the wealthy have waged silent war on less fortunate people for centuries.

There are many examples of slavery down through the years, and any such practice is nothing more than wanting work accomplished for little or nothing. While this inhumane practice still exists in some parts of the world today, there are far more examples where the label of slavery is skirted by the payment of pennies a day for labor given.

Virtually everyone knows the Biblical story of Moses, raised as a son of Egypt, and later a prophet and leader of the Hebrew people from their four hundred year bondage. In Cecil B. DeMille’s classic film, “The Ten Commandments,” Moses is depicted as a vibrant young man that is growing into a natural leader. The young Prince Moses is shown on several occasions as being a wise and compassionate man despite his royal status. The chief example of this trait was showcased when he was tasked by his Pharaoh to build a treasure city. While the example I am about to cite is a fictional account, its intent is worthy one.

The city rises under the leadership of Moses, but he is accused of treason by Ramases for giving the Hebrew slaves a daily ration of grain, and one day in seven to rest. Since the grain was taken from the temple stores, which was undoubtedly a resource for the royalty, this was viewed as a crime against the gods. When confronted by Pharaoh to explain his actions, Moses response was one of great conviction. As Ramases dropped small weights onto a tilting scale with each accusation, Moses answered with a single clay brick.

“A city is built from bricks, Great Pharaoh. The strong make many, the starving make few, and the dead make none!”

Moses then placed the clay brick on the opposite scale dish, easily countering Ramases collection of weights.

I have to give Charlton Heston great credit for delivering a performance with such class and style, but the underlying message was a simple one. A strong workforce benefits everyone and not just a select few. While this example still did not dispel the issue of Hebrew slavery, it did showcase the benefit of a more human attitude.

The iconic pyramids of Egypt are also a metaphor for our society. The fewer stones near the peak representing the wealthy portion of our population and as the number of stones increase toward the base, the income level decreases accordingly. Poverty is the enemy of the foundation, and the deterioration of that foundation threatens the stability of the entire structure.

Another analogy that is easier to understand can be found in the world of sports. There will be hundreds of thousands of young boys that will play high school football, and then thousands that will go on to play in college, and out of that figure, only about three hundred will succeed in being drafted by the professional leagues each year.

So imagine the arrogance it would take to tell every player that failed to make the cut, “just work hard and you’ll get there,” when the reality is that most will not.

Obviously the job market of our country represents a much larger scale, but many of the same realities still exist. There are many paths to success, and many levels of success, depending on what the individual considers each of those to be. Although I’m sure any level of “success” would at least include the ability to own a home, provide for a family and offer some provision for retirement.

The average household income for this country last year was $41k, while the average individual income was $26k, and I can almost guarantee that anyone making $26k/yr isn’t buying a home, paying for a car, raising children and stuffing away money for retirement. Those households making $41k might be heading toward that goal, but they are doing so at a meager rate.

“The American Dream” had always been to be able to “climb the ladder” and work your way up to a higher level of success, and while that is still possible, the number of those who will achieve that level are few. There are those who say it is the fault of government that more people fail to reach higher levels, and they are the same people who tout free enterprise as the golden solution. The bottom line is that free enterprise isn’t what it used to be.

The private sector run amok has brought us exported jobs, outsourcing, a ridiculously inflated housing market (which has now collapsed) and massive unemployment. Not to mention insane practices on Wall Street, insurance companies and a medical community that stab each other in the back pushing costs ever higher, and an unrealistic attitude that every worthwhile investment pays for itself in 12 months or less. To top all this madness off, they also seem to think none of this activity should be taxed, despite the fact that businessmen in the 1950s and 60s flourished under tax rates that were more than twice what they are now.

The bottom end of the income scale sighted by President Obama is a household income of $250k/yr or individual of $200k, and while that household figure is five times the national average, they still bemoan a 4% increase, even if that increase is only on funds over $250k. Many argue this puts boot on the throat of small business, yet with all the proposed cuts given to small business it should be easy to offset a 4% increase.

I have read and heard all manner of outcry against the increase on capital gains, as if it doesn’t qualify as income. The law on capital gains has long been that if you re-invest the funds within 12 months, the taxable amount is ZERO. Since so many things are expected to pay for themselves in 12 months it seems that is a fair time frame in my view. If any of those capital funds are kept as profits, then that sounds like income to me.

I have worked plenty of overtime hours in my life and I never got a tax break on the first one. The young mother working two jobs for barely over minimum wage gets no tax break for her second income, so just who is getting punished for their efforts?

I’m quite sure if that same young mother got five paychecks every week, she could find more time to spend at home with her children, pay her bills, and stash funds away for their college future. Yet her critics point their fingers and say, “She should have gotten an education, and she should have been smarter.” Tell that to the college graduate working two jobs trying to repay student loans and still make a living.

Executive and CEO pay scales in the United States have risen over 400% in the last decade, while only 50% in foreign countries. So who has been handsomely rewarding themselves of late? So much so that they ran the ship aground and then had the nerve to ask the government they seem to despise so badly to bail them out.

I recently saw a hedge fund manager on television saying he was tired of the government and the media demonizing his kind for their actions. Maybe if those actions were not so blatantly self-centered then others wouldn’t think so.

Some will read this and call me a socialist. To them I say take hard look at your accusation. Never have I advocated a single monarch for our form of government, nor have I suggested that none of us should own personal property. I also have never suggested that we all should earn the same salary no matter our station, but I find it ironic that the same people who shout against the so-called “redistribution of wealth” have no problem moving it from the pockets of wage earners into their own, no matter the human consequences.

I have often heard it said that we should not burden the wealthy because they give so much to charity. I am forced to ask the hard question of how much would they still give if it wasn’t tax deductible?  I have also heard time and again how lowering the tax burden on the wealthy will trickle down through business and create jobs. What, more minimum wage jobs in high end shopping malls? Is this supposed to be what sustains the families of our country?

Republicans have long been the party that trumpets such a game plan, and in the thirty years since Reagan took office it has yet to bear fruit. Reagan cut taxes and exploded a deficit bomb that has spread like wildfire, yet even he knew it wasn’t working out since he raised the Social Security tax and eliminated personal interest deductions. His successor continued the trend, as did his son.

Now despite a thirty year track record of spending, the Republicans lay claim to being the beacon of fiscal responsibility, which is the rough equivalent of betting the house on perennial loser at the horse race.

There are a massive number of people in this country that are working hard. I call 80 hour weeks, two jobs and shift work all pretty demanding levels of work. I see plenty of people who risk their lives on their jobs and get paid pitiful amounts for doing so. So for the groaning hedge fund manager, think about your local police and fire department the next time you arm is sore from patting yourself on the back.

The chant of “just work hard” as though it will stand the proverbial pyramid upside down on its peak is an illusion. Not would it be unstable but it is doomed to come crashing down, and that makes it an unrealistic goal. The country has flourished whenever the middle class, working families have done so, because jobs with living wages make it possible.

This country knows how to work hard, and they are doing so more than they ever have and getting paid less for their efforts.

Socialism for Profit

I find it ironic that so many conservative pundits constantly make the outcry that everything directed at helping citizens is labeled as socialism. I also find it strange that any one particular effort, such as health care, is not addressed directly but instead a set of connect-the-dots is drawn to point towards Soviet Russia or Red China as an ultimate result. The defense of such accusation is always justified with freedom and liberty.

Let’s set aside the fact that United States is the only civilized, industrialized nation left on Earth that does not have universal health care. The defense of this argument is usually countered with saying that we have the best health care in the world. I don’t deny that the quality of the care can be superior, but with 40 million citizens without coverage, I’d say our system has some flaws.

Many will immediately admit that we have our share of problems, and that other countries do as well, but the health care here is still far superior to anywhere else.

I would agree partially with that assessment, given that students come from all over the world to be educated in our medical schools, but the only people who benefit from that are those who can afford it. In addition, many of the foreign students who stay here after their schooling is finished do so more for the money than for medical experience. I say this only because I have heard it directly from more than one doctor who admitted it was the truth.

I am personally fortunate enough to have a job that has made good medical coverage available for the majority of my adult life, but I don’t have to look very far to find many who don’t have a chance of receiving the medical care I get.

Socialism as it applies to a society virtually eliminates to concept of owning personal property, and is usually ruled over by a monarch or small group of totalitarian leaders. Opponents of universal health care are forever pointing towards this type of existence as the eventual destination of our country. I personally find that hard to believe since none of the other developed countries that presently use some version of public medicine have yet to plunge into anarchy, or suffer a major political coup as a result.

If our cause is freedom, then what freedom is there in denying so many of our citizens access to medical care? Where is the freedom in knowing that if you are sick or hurt that a trip to the doctor could mean financial disaster?

Many will discount the previous statement as being over-reaction or fear mongering, even as they warn of the evils of public medical care. The reality is that there are no greater bloodhounds in this country that those of collection agencies, and they will pursue people no matter their situation until they receive compensation. The records of every bankruptcy court in the land will solidly prove that point.

This whole set of circumstances hit very close to home for me quite recently when my mother was hospitalized for back surgery. Her procedure went well but her recovery afterward was a hard and slow process. At her age, she falls under the coverage of Medicare, but even that could not dodge the bullet of the medical machine.

Her surgeon was an exceptional, brilliant and attentive man, but the resident doctor in the rehab center where her recovery took place left much to be desired. Fortunately for us, my sister has spent her entire career in nursing and was equipped to ask the right questions to the right people, and force changes to be made in my mothers care so she would improve. If an elderly person such as my mother had no one like my sister to speak for them, what kind of horrid result would have followed?

Once she was released and returned home, then came the storm of medical bills. Given the amount of money billed to Medicare per day, I was astonished that such an immense figure remained. If my mother did not have three gainfully employed children to support her in such a situation, do you think the collection department would have any reservations about seizing her home or whatever means were necessary to satisfy the debt? I’m thinking they would do so in the blink of an eye. So our medical system can fix your ailment but chances are good that your quality of life afterward will border on destitute, especially if you live on a fixed income.

So this is how the nation who claims to hold such high values so dear treats its elderly citizens?

I have heard the arrogant response to such issues phrased like, “She should have planned better, worked harder and been smarter so she wouldn’t be in this mess.”

Noble if not crass words to be sure, and easily spoken by some who have been fortunate in their lives. I personally would like to know exactly what my mother should have done better. She was a housewife and raised three children; she suffered through years of my father’s disabling injury and subsequent illness that eventually took his life. She dealt with insurance issues and the remaining medical bills of his passing, and she continued to work past retirement age. So what part of her life was so squandered? Making a living alone was hard enough, so the concept of investing or other such matters in order to finance a comfortable retirement wasn’t exactly in the cards. So because her life was not overflowing with monetary opportunity, she is to be punished for doing the best she could?

We pay more for health care in this country than anywhere else in the world, bar none. To the tune of over two trillion dollars per year, and yet despite that astronomical cost, we still have 40 million citizens left out.

I overheard a man in a restaurant the other night tell his dinner partner, “No liberal bastard is going to take my money and use it to pay someone else’s bills!”

I have sad news for you good sir; I would venture a guess that you have already been doing just that for many years. If anyone is paying for insurance of any kind, and chances are you do since in many cases it is required by law, then you are already a participant in a form of socialism, and one that isn’t exactly driven by fairness.

Let’s take auto insurance for example, if you are a young male driver under 25 years of age, your insurance premiums will be enormous. You can have an absolutely clean driving record, but your rates will easily exceed those of any other age group or gender. You don’t have to be involved in any incident whatsoever, but your high premiums will help pay the cost of other young men who are reckless and irresponsible. So you are held accountable for the acts of others through no fault of your own, except that you were born male. So is socialism of this nature acceptable simply because it means there is a profit involved?

Some will rebut and say that free markets will drive the price down through competition. That sounds like a wonderful concept if it were only true, but for all the television commercials you see touting lower car insurance, you will find precious little difference in the cost of insuring a young male driver. This is price fixing masquerading as competition, and car insurance isn’t the only area of the so-called free market where it takes place.

I have been paying insurance premiums for health, life, car and home for the bulk of my adult life, and thank God, I have had very little cause to make claims on any of them. For all of the dollars that I have contributed, is there some growing little account with my name on it? No, there isn’t, and I’ve known all along there was not such an account because that’s just how the system works.

So if a similar system were applied to health care, with less focus on profit and more on the well-being of a nation that was paying into it, then wouldn’t that be a more compassionate and moral course of action?

For those who shout that we need greater values, and that we should have more religious oriented leaders, is compassion, mercy and helpfulness only available if it can be paid for? Not even simply paid, but done so at the level demanded by some corporate business executive?

There are those who say I should fear my government, but if those same people who tout the benefits of free markets and the private sector think for one second that the business world isn’t ruthless then they have been drinking a very strong brand of kool-aid.

For as long as this land has elected officials instead of a hereditary monarch, we will not plunge into a version of communism that is so often forecast by pundits who talk much but seem to be too afraid to run for office themselves.

If we didn’t fall into socialism when top tax rates were almost triple what they are today then I think we have survived the worst of things. But as long as this country is driven by profit above all, above people, above humanity, then we will fall as surely as other empires have done before us, and the hollow cry of socialism will be the least of our worries.

Cut Government by Half

I recently returned from a two week road trip across the Midwest and several Rocky Mountain states. I saw many billboards with various messages but the title of this entry was absent from those locations. Instead, I saw this message painted onto what looked like sheets of plywood, staked into the ground near the highway. There was never any political affiliation noted, just the simple message alone. There is one of these signs near my home, and I pass by it on my daily commute to work, and I am always forced to ask myself, “Which half?”

Every time I hear a state Governor complain about budget shortfalls, somewhere in the mix is, “A reduction of Federal funding.” So which public funded programs where you live are you ready to cut in half?

I believe all of this has stemmed from the press and the GOP speaking out harshly regarding the size of the Federal deficit. What I haven’t heard is a viable answer to the problem, aside from “stop spending.”

I’m quite sure that if I could stop making my house payment I could easily pay off my other debts quickly, but that isn’t realistic or advisable. This country is in the worst slump since the Great Depression, and oddly enough spending was how we got out of that fix. Some credit the private sector, but they have certainly had their chances to invest in our future, but just like following WWII they are reluctant because they don’t see short term profit, which in turn forces the government to take action where they will not.

The top income brackets have had no problem rewarding themselves handsomely despite the economic decline. There will always be this separation of wealth and control, and history has proven that to be true, but the tilt of the scale is the cause of concern. This is what helped postulate Pareto’s 80-20 theory, which states that 80% of the wealth is controlled by 20% of the people. (As it applies to this subject)

Pareto’s rule of 80-20 used to apply to our economy, but there are many other factors involved. Today 80% of our wealth is held by the top 6%, which is far lower than 20.

Bonuses have evolved into a new way of pay that doesn’t create a higher salary, which is nothing more than a numbers game. I can agree with the concept of a bonus being earned due to increased company performance, but even when our market recently crashed, execs got paid bonus money for companies that failed, and that is ludicrous. I’ve never heard of bankruptcy court that gives you check and pat on the back when you leave. Not to mention the sheer size of some bonuses borders on preposterous. If someone was given a bonus that was 100% of their salary, I would call that a generous amount. Yet even in these tough and uncertain times, bonus money of 500% or more is not unheard of, and actions such as these are pure hypocrisy in the light of taxpayer funded bailouts.

Some say that cutting corporate taxes is the key to helping to bring jobs back to our shores, and therefore boost our economy. I think it would help in some cases, especially in small business where the owner has a larger vested interest (which is why some have sacrificed their own funds) but I think many of the larger businesses would simply reward themselves handsomely unless stipulations were attached to those tax cuts.

Much noise is always made by the GOP and those on the right over tax cuts and how they help, yet the tax rate now is less than half what it was during the most prosperous time in our history.

When Pres. Reagan took office, he inherited a sagging economy, which was mostly due to Pres. Carter’s choices on the oil embargo and other factors, but he also came into the lowest deficit in 50 years. Reagan made no secret that he planned to deficit spend, and even said so during the debates, to which Mondale replied, “How will you pay for these things?”

Reagan’s response was the oft repeated catch line, “There you go again!”

Pres. Reagan cut the top tax rate in HALF, from 70% down to 35% and removed numerous restrictions on Wall Street, all of which had been put in place to prevent a repeat of the Great Depression. But Pres. Reagan’s huge tax cut didn’t do as much to stimulate the economy as the tremendous amount of tax dollars he pumped into the defense budget. The building of planes, ships and other supplies for the military put a lot of people to work, and their wages boosted the economy.

If the tax cuts were so beneficial for the economy then why did the deficit still skyrocket the way it did during his two terms? This caused major pain for Pres. George Bush when he campaigned saying constantly, “No New Taxes”…yet during his tenure the deficit climbed steadily.

Pres. Clinton has been the only White House occupant in the past 40 years to reduce the deficit, and he did so by “pay as you go” and a whopping tax increase of 4%.

Pres George W. Bush continued the trend of his predecessors by cutting taxes and borrowing money, driving the deficit even higher. Granted he had the economic crash of 9/11 to deal with, and the subsequent wars that followed, even though his motivations for invading Iraq are still dubious at best.

FDR raised taxes to finance a war effort and spent an enormous figure, while Truman followed suit and spent even more pumping the economy into overdrive after WWII was over…as high as 120% over the GDP.

This chart shows those numbers…

My point from all of this is that I have yet to see how cutting taxes has boosted the economy significantly. I see the tilt of the wealthy getting farther apart than it has ever been. If there is an accusation of class warfare, then I see the wealthy warring on the middle and lower class pretty heavily by taking all they can in the short term with no thought for long term benefit of the nation. This is why there are over 600 steel mills in this country owned by foreign companies, because their investors are willing to make the 3 to 5 year commitment for profitability, when domestic investors demand 12 to 18 months.

This unwillingness of the private sector to invest is why Pres. Truman spent as much as he did to push the economy and create jobs. Pres. Eisenhower did more of the same with huge projects such as the interstate highway system.
If corporate taxes are unmercifully high, then they got that way trying to make up for the lost revenue of cutting taxes in other places when the economy did not respond. Pres George W. Bush actually gave businesses tax incentives to send jobs overseas. Now how exactly did that benefit us?

Anyone who can do simple math or balance a checkbook knows if you cut the income in one place, you must supplement elsewhere, cut spending or both. Pres. Clinton managed to pull this off and our nation wasn’t crippled, in fact it flourished.

I weary of hearing the defense of modern business practice that is benefiting the upper 6% and they still cry foul. I am also weary of hearing how the GOP in November is to be our fiscal savior when their track record is anything but.

I have heard many conservatives tout the accomplishments of former President Reagan, saying he is the kind of man we need today. I am forced to wonder how much different Pres. Reagan’s game plan would be if he inherited the highest deficit in 50 years as opposed to the lowest. I think Pres. Reagan did well for his time, but he left a tough set of nuts for his Vice President to crack when he took office. Neither Pres. Bush Sr. or his son were ever able to curb spending or solve problems by cutting taxes, so I don’t see any magic left in that formula now.

If the Tea Party candidates or the “New Republicans” are to make any impact if they fare well in the upcoming elections, they had better bring a better game plan along. If their only objective is to attempt to repeal any and all measures that Pres. Obama has worked to put in place, then the economy will not gain an inch, and we will most likely return to a recession. Especially given the prospect that the GOP may regain the majority in both House and Senate, Pres. Obama would veto any repeal effort that comes to his desk, and since a veto override requires a two thirds vote to succeed, the American public will endure two years of stalemate.

I find it sad that no one in Washington is willing to try and find the middle ground, to try and find the way that may not be perfect, but is at least progress. This kind of behavior is exactly what has driven the American public to such apathy in regard to voting, because they feel as though no elected official has their interest at heart. We send them to Washington to speak for us, but effecting any change in the present partisan environment is like trying to turn an aircraft carrier with a rowboat. Anyone who voted for Pres. Obama and expected that he could pivot this country single handedly is not living in this realm.

So much clamor has been made of late over the words “Under God” in our Pledge of Allegiance, and while I certainly believe those words should remain, I don’t think a little more attention to the rest of the Pledge would do any harm. “Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for ALL,” immediately springs to mind.