So this issue has been slipping out the forefront of a lot of people's minds, probably because of the dramatics as of late about just how terrible the economy is and how much we need to spend our way out of this recession to fix it. Since that's what 90% normal people do when things get tight at home, they go on a spending spree!!! so that should definitely work on the macro level too!!! (if you don't know my sarcasm yet, insert sarcasm here).
So I heard somewhere that last week Rick Perry put the state on high alert for the situation on the Texas Mexico border, which is what inspired me to write about this issue this week. So all weekend I went looking for his statement and found nothing. Neither could the person that told me. That doesn't mean it's not an important issue though. So I will share what I did find.
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/83729 Has a posting that the Texas National Guard has been put on Red Alert and that Texas State Senator Dan Patrick went on Fox news the morning of Feb 20 to discuss this. Look at the article (which is identically posted on many blogs) to see what he supposedly said. Did any of you see this appearance? I did not so until I find definate proof of this appearance, I remain skeptical that the Texas National Guard is on red alert etc etc etc.
While I didn't find that appearance, I did find a link to an appearance he made on the Glen Beck show on Feb 16. But it appears to be different than what is referenced above since the points they say he laid out weren't in the Glen Beck discussion.
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3624924&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,494984,00.html
Or a link to the transcript of the discussion.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,494984,00.html
Take a look at one of them.
This is the link to the Texas Border Security Council Report to Governor Rick Perry in September 2008. Since it's kind of lengthy, you'll want to pay particular attention to the executive summary and the Recommendations.
http://governor.state.tx.us/files/homeland/Border-Security-Report.pdf
Here's the deal, this is the federal government's responsibility to take care of and they aren't doing anything about it. One reason for this is referenced in my last post relating to the census. Illegals flood our country and somehow gain the right to vote, and let the party promising a bunch of free stuff with the tax money of the "wealthy" buy their votes.
But you should all be concerned. http://www.cfirusa.org/facts.htm Look at California. They also share a border with Mexico and look where they are today. They are a notorious welfare state and probably have more illegals than Texas. And yet with all the filthy rich people that live their, they can't stay within their budget.
There is a huge problem with illegal births taking place here. As anyone who works in a hospital in Texas or any other border state. That is because the constitution has been improperly misinterpreted to give legal citizenship based on illegal acts. So that has been going on for years and who can blame them when we seem to be allowing it. A hospital is in no position to enforce this, especially when they have been put in the position of not turning away anyone that comes into the emergency room. And labor is usually considered an emergency.
There is a book you should read or listen to on cd if you're not a reader. "State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America" by Patrick J. Buchanan. It address this issue and just how badly it is out of hand and needs to be addressed immediately. He addresses how many have come over and not assimilated to our culture and the threat it creates as they are taught that we stole part of Mexico from them and they need to get it back.
I don't know about you all, but I love the United States of America. And I don't think this is an issue we should let go by the wayside. I think Rick Perry ought to take the Texas share of the stimulus spending bill and use it on the border since the feds won't take responsibility for it. It's supposed to create jobs right? He can hire a bunch of people immediately to patrol the border 24 hrs a day. Let's line up a militia all the way across the Texas/Mexico border and heavily arm them to discourage anyone that would enter illegally as long as the money lasts. When it runs out maybe the Federal Gov will feel bad about the jobs that are lost and see the results and send more funding down there. It would be nice if the other border states would do the same thing. Maybe they'll see how serious we are about things being done legally around here and revert to legal methods of entry into our country.
What's you're opinion of this issue??
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Commerce Secretary Nomination Withdrawal
http://www.wmur.com/politics/18702350/detail.html
This is as good of a link as any to the story about the nomination withdrawal by Judd Gregg. It covers his statement. For those of you that don't know this was Obama's Republican pick after Bill Richardson withdrew his nomination for the position over potential follow the money scandal. Some feel that a republican pick for this position was a flimsy attempt "reach across the aisle" and have both democrats and republicans in his cabinet.
If you aren't sure what the department of commerce does, here is a link to their mission and organization.
http://dms.osec.doc.gov/cgi-bin/doit.cgi?204:112:f23c40e440fd58af1c94886c8dafe2a0115c34e0e318d0b74b9aa67fc54ea5be:288
Here's the deal. One of the big responsibilities over for this department was to handle the census. However Obama decided to take this responsibility away from the department of commerce and create a Census Bureau with a separate director. This is apparently one of the triggers that contributed to Gregg's decision to withdraw his name from the nomination.
Here's where I see a problem with census policy. If you give it to someone you have fundamental policy differences with, charge over the census, you might not get the numbers you want. For example we have a big issue with illegals in this country or people that are here on work visas only, depending on your beliefs you might think they ought to count towards the census or you might not. If you start to count them in the census as citizens, then you are setting legal precedence to allow them full citizenship even if they broke the law to get here. Which leads to the right to vote in elections. Hence why you would take that responsibility away from someone you appointed that you generally disagree with for political cooperation and give it to someone who's on board with your policies. That's just one problem I see offhand. I might be way off base and welcome any correction from anyone. I'm no expert. But neither has any other president been on every subject, so don't hold that against me in the next election.
As for the commerce department, other than the census, this might be one of the departments that I would dissolve when I get in office. I don't see much of a point of it and at this point think it is likely a bloated government bureaucracy that is not serving much purpose to the tax payers. I will have to do some more research over the next few years to determine if my initial assessment is a good one.
I'd like to know your opinion of Judd Gregg's action. Do you agree or disagree with it? Is it more complicated than that? do you care? I suppose if you don't care you didn't bother to read this far.
This is as good of a link as any to the story about the nomination withdrawal by Judd Gregg. It covers his statement. For those of you that don't know this was Obama's Republican pick after Bill Richardson withdrew his nomination for the position over potential follow the money scandal. Some feel that a republican pick for this position was a flimsy attempt "reach across the aisle" and have both democrats and republicans in his cabinet.
If you aren't sure what the department of commerce does, here is a link to their mission and organization.
http://dms.osec.doc.gov/cgi-bin/doit.cgi?204:112:f23c40e440fd58af1c94886c8dafe2a0115c34e0e318d0b74b9aa67fc54ea5be:288
Here's the deal. One of the big responsibilities over for this department was to handle the census. However Obama decided to take this responsibility away from the department of commerce and create a Census Bureau with a separate director. This is apparently one of the triggers that contributed to Gregg's decision to withdraw his name from the nomination.
Here's where I see a problem with census policy. If you give it to someone you have fundamental policy differences with, charge over the census, you might not get the numbers you want. For example we have a big issue with illegals in this country or people that are here on work visas only, depending on your beliefs you might think they ought to count towards the census or you might not. If you start to count them in the census as citizens, then you are setting legal precedence to allow them full citizenship even if they broke the law to get here. Which leads to the right to vote in elections. Hence why you would take that responsibility away from someone you appointed that you generally disagree with for political cooperation and give it to someone who's on board with your policies. That's just one problem I see offhand. I might be way off base and welcome any correction from anyone. I'm no expert. But neither has any other president been on every subject, so don't hold that against me in the next election.
As for the commerce department, other than the census, this might be one of the departments that I would dissolve when I get in office. I don't see much of a point of it and at this point think it is likely a bloated government bureaucracy that is not serving much purpose to the tax payers. I will have to do some more research over the next few years to determine if my initial assessment is a good one.
I'd like to know your opinion of Judd Gregg's action. Do you agree or disagree with it? Is it more complicated than that? do you care? I suppose if you don't care you didn't bother to read this far.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Emergency Post!!! A Compromise Stimulus???
Word is that republican Senators Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe will cross over to vote with the democrats in a compromise bill that is still at $780 Billion!!!(update may actually be more like $830 Billion give or take) Ohh what a compromise...that was a VERY Generous compromise. 42% Tax cuts and 58% new spending. But we don't know what what the cuts are and what the spending is. If you still oppose this stimulus contact these senators and let them know. They are announcing this on Friday night since America isn't paying attention over the weekend. They will likely vote on it before the weekend is up.
This is the link to the congressional budget office's assessment of the bill that passed the house.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9968/hr1.pdf
To sum it up, it basically says that the money that goes to the states for programs and infrastructure will not be realized immediately due to the time it takes to plan, solicit bids, enter into contracts, and conduct regulatory review. Also some business/work is seasonal in nature ie schools do repairs in the summer when school is out, and road work is generally not done in winter in many parts of the country. Brand new programs require planning, developing procedures, criteria, regulations, etc. "Throughout the federal government, spending for new programs has frequently been slower than expected and rarely been faster."
"CBO expects that many of the larger projects initiated with funds provided by H.R. 1 would take up to five to seven years to complete." If it's not spent immediately, how is this stimulating the economy?
One final thing to note, but you should go check it out.
"CBO estimates that the costs to the private sector of complying with H.R. 1's new
requirements and conditions would likely exceed the annual threshold established in
UMRA for private-sector mandates ($139 million in 2009, adjusted annually for
inflation)."
Just because they don't represent your state, doesn't mean you can't write them and let them know your opinion.
http://collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCollins.EmailIssue&CFID=5075464&CFTOKEN=11385212
http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm
http://snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorSnowe.Email
For a list of any other senators you might want to contact
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
It's a shame that we have let our senators and representative get away with not representing us. It's time to get involved and take action and contact them in some way shape or form. Next time they are up for reelection, VOTE THEM OUT!!!!
This is the link to the congressional budget office's assessment of the bill that passed the house.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9968/hr1.pdf
To sum it up, it basically says that the money that goes to the states for programs and infrastructure will not be realized immediately due to the time it takes to plan, solicit bids, enter into contracts, and conduct regulatory review. Also some business/work is seasonal in nature ie schools do repairs in the summer when school is out, and road work is generally not done in winter in many parts of the country. Brand new programs require planning, developing procedures, criteria, regulations, etc. "Throughout the federal government, spending for new programs has frequently been slower than expected and rarely been faster."
"CBO expects that many of the larger projects initiated with funds provided by H.R. 1 would take up to five to seven years to complete." If it's not spent immediately, how is this stimulating the economy?
One final thing to note, but you should go check it out.
"CBO estimates that the costs to the private sector of complying with H.R. 1's new
requirements and conditions would likely exceed the annual threshold established in
UMRA for private-sector mandates ($139 million in 2009, adjusted annually for
inflation)."
Just because they don't represent your state, doesn't mean you can't write them and let them know your opinion.
http://collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCollins.EmailIssue&CFID=5075464&CFTOKEN=11385212
http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm
http://snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorSnowe.Email
For a list of any other senators you might want to contact
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
It's a shame that we have let our senators and representative get away with not representing us. It's time to get involved and take action and contact them in some way shape or form. Next time they are up for reelection, VOTE THEM OUT!!!!
Sunday, February 1, 2009
The Economic Stimulus Plan
Link to the House bill.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:h.r.00001:
$819 billion which is almost equal to the cost of an entire year of federal spending according to Wall Street Journal.
The Senate bill version is almost $900 billion at the time of that article.
We know that the no Republicans voted for it in the house version. My question is where were they on the bailout? Are they suddenly supporting fiscal restraint since their guy didn't win? Don't get me wrong, they need to oppose this to the grave and they need to oppose it in the senate. But that's from my perspective. Democrats should also be opposing this and taking into considerating the effects of such excessive spending.
Let me tell you what happens when the government's goal is to "create more jobs." Big fat bureaucracy that grows and grows and grows. How is that being fiscally responsible with the tax payers dollars? I'd rather leave it to the private sector to create more jobs by cutting corporate taxes. At least that doesn't cost the taxpayers anything. Right I know "big evil corporations" we have to "stick it to them." The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. I think we could afford to put this theory to the test.
It's important for us as Americans to know what's in the bill. I know what you're thinking, "it's really long!!!! How am I supposed to get through that?" Find summaries of it. The above link to the bill will bring up a table of contents that you can go through and look for sections of interest. Also the above link as the letter from the Congressional Budget Office that discusses the estimates of how much it will cost. Let's remember that's just an estimate. Leave it to the government to reserve the right to let spending get out of control.
I am of the view point that the government needs to stay out of the economy to let it recover and instead work towards paying off the national debt and encourage policies of personal responsibility and minimal debt, thereby setting an example to the general public.
Just remember if the strong middle class becomes dependent on the government, they are no longer strong. The government has succeeded at making them weak, ignorant, and oblivious. If we want to maintain a strong middle class, we must take personal responsiblity to stay educated and to fight government intrusion in our lives.
I know this is not eloquently written today, but I wanted to bring up the topic to encourage discussion and to encourage you all to write your Senators to let them know your opinion. Even if you don't agree with mine.
Please take the time to vote in the poll on the left as well. Previous poll results can be seen below.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:h.r.00001:
$819 billion which is almost equal to the cost of an entire year of federal spending according to Wall Street Journal.
The Senate bill version is almost $900 billion at the time of that article.
We know that the no Republicans voted for it in the house version. My question is where were they on the bailout? Are they suddenly supporting fiscal restraint since their guy didn't win? Don't get me wrong, they need to oppose this to the grave and they need to oppose it in the senate. But that's from my perspective. Democrats should also be opposing this and taking into considerating the effects of such excessive spending.
Let me tell you what happens when the government's goal is to "create more jobs." Big fat bureaucracy that grows and grows and grows. How is that being fiscally responsible with the tax payers dollars? I'd rather leave it to the private sector to create more jobs by cutting corporate taxes. At least that doesn't cost the taxpayers anything. Right I know "big evil corporations" we have to "stick it to them." The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. I think we could afford to put this theory to the test.
It's important for us as Americans to know what's in the bill. I know what you're thinking, "it's really long!!!! How am I supposed to get through that?" Find summaries of it. The above link to the bill will bring up a table of contents that you can go through and look for sections of interest. Also the above link as the letter from the Congressional Budget Office that discusses the estimates of how much it will cost. Let's remember that's just an estimate. Leave it to the government to reserve the right to let spending get out of control.
I am of the view point that the government needs to stay out of the economy to let it recover and instead work towards paying off the national debt and encourage policies of personal responsibility and minimal debt, thereby setting an example to the general public.
Just remember if the strong middle class becomes dependent on the government, they are no longer strong. The government has succeeded at making them weak, ignorant, and oblivious. If we want to maintain a strong middle class, we must take personal responsiblity to stay educated and to fight government intrusion in our lives.
I know this is not eloquently written today, but I wanted to bring up the topic to encourage discussion and to encourage you all to write your Senators to let them know your opinion. Even if you don't agree with mine.
Please take the time to vote in the poll on the left as well. Previous poll results can be seen below.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Political Parties - Socialist
I'm going to start these weekly posts with some recaps of the week the President and/or congress had and what I think about what he did. Unless I don't find anything I worth commenting on. So this week 2 points of interest happened. Actually more, but 2 that I'm going to comment on because they will give you insight into my thinking on policy.
Let's start with Guantanamo. I think it's a terrible idea to declare an executive order to shut down a prison that is holding, or potentially holding for you skeptics, terrorist threats to our country and the world without knowing what kind of people you are working with and having a plan of action for what you will do with them. I don't think it's good for them to be placed in general population prisons inside our borders, nor do I think releasing them to return to their terroristic ways is a good idea. So what is your plan President Obama? What I will say, is at least he gave it a year to change his mind.
Next issue is the executive order for federal funding of abortions domestically and abroad. What??? I don't care if you are pro-choice or pro-life, abortion is a very private choice and should be funded privately. And if we are going to assist foreign countries with anything, shouldn't it be on things that are more pressing such as hunger and disease? I'm much less offended at my tax dollars going for these issues than abortion. I actually heard a celebrity say that this was her most important issue that she hoped to see the president act on quickly. Really??? You care more about paying for the abortions of non-U.S. citizens than you do about getting them the basics they need to survive? I'm sorry but that is shameful. She should donate her own personal money to this cause if she feels that strongly about it, rather than hope, wish, and pray that the U.S. government spend tax dollars on it, when our economy is recessing. Just my opinion. And I would never spend public dollars on private decisions. I would encourage the private charity of citizens to the causes they feel strongly about.
Incidentally I emailed the White House on this topic (my key-board has large keys for my large paws...How do you think I write this blog?), and you are now limited to 500 characters. That's about enough for 2 short paragraphs or one medium one. You must choose your words wisely.
Now onto the Socialist party platform.
Labor
1. We support the right of any number of interested workers in a workplace to form a union with no limits on the subjects upon which employees and unions may bargain with employers.
....there are several other union related statements. See the website for the details.
Sure I support the right of the worker to unionize, but I also support the right of employers not to negotiate with unions if they choose not to. I support the right of the worker to find work wherever their skills are useful to the employer regardless of unionization.
9. We call for the same benefits for part-time workers as for full-time workers.
NO! This cannot be mandated. If a company wants to make this choice on their own, there's nothing wrong with that. But this adds expense to companies that make it difficult for them to compete in the free market or end up hurting the American consumer as the price of goods and services will rise to account for this added expense.
11. We support the creation of a fund for workers which would pay a worker’s full wages and health insurance as well as necessary educational and/or retraining costs if that worker loses a job due to environmental transition, down-sizing, corporate dismantlement, or capital flight.
It sounds ideal, but No. For further explanation, see the previous answer.
12. We call for a 30 hour work week at no loss of pay, with six weeks annual paid vacation.
What are we? Europe? No. No worker is worth 6 weeks of vacation after 1 day of work. The way companies choose to handle their vacation policies is fine now. Do you just expect them to close down for 6 weeks at a time? How are they supposed to pay for that vacation if their is zero productivity? And 30 hours full time? Again leave it up to the companies but 40 hours isn't asking too much.
13. We call for unions to stop using union funds for electing candidates from the Democratic and Republican parties.
Yes, I would agree with this as long as that extends to all political parties.
Economics
2. We call for worker and community ownership and control of corporations within the framework of a decentralized and democratically determined economic plan.
5. We call for all financial and insurance institutions to be socially owned and operated by a democratically-controlled national banking authority, which should include credit unions, mutual insurance cooperatives, and cooperative state banks. In the meantime, we call for re-regulation of the banking and insurance industries.
No. I believe in free market Capitalism. If you want ownership, buy stock.
3. We call for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living.
The cost of living goes up as the minimum wage goes up, so raising the minimum wage will be a never ending process. I oppose this. Besides most of the people actually making minimum wage are in high school. If you can't improve your skills to make more than minimum wage, then you aren't worth more than minimum wage and you certainly aren't worth a $15 an hour minimum wage.
4. We call for a full employment policy. We support the provision of a livable guaranteed annual income.
Sounds ideal but is impossible. I refuse to fund those that refuse to work, Austin is a good example of this. Just about every intersection has someone standing on a corner holding a sign asking for money. When the McDonald's in front of them has a "hiring" sign in the window. Nor do I think companies should have to continue to pay employees that aren't productive.
6. We call for a steeply graduated income tax and a steeply graduated estate tax, and a maximum income of no more than ten times the minimum. We oppose regressive taxes such as payroll tax, sales tax, and property taxes.
7. We call for the restoration of the capital gains tax and luxury tax on a progressive, graduated scale.
11. We call for a National Pension Authority to hold the assets of private pension funds, and a levy against corporate assets for any pension fund deficits.
I'm opposed to the nationalization of anything private. Give me an example of something private that should be nationalized and good reasons for it, and I'll consider changing my mind. But very few things if any should be nationalized.
12. We call for increased and expanded welfare assistance and increased and expanded unemployment compensation at 100% of a worker's previous income or the minimum wage, whichever is higher, for the full period of unemployment or re-training, whichever is longer.
I call for an end to preposterous statements (just kidding I value free speech). Let's be honest here, I'm going to get fired from my job and remain "unemployed" for the rest of my life if you put no limits on unemployment. This isn't practical and doesn't encourage the reemployment of anyone.
15. We call for the elimination of subsidies and tax breaks that benefit corporations and all other forms of corporate welfare.
I'll agree with this since I support the Fair Tax.
Human Rights
Arts and Culture
The Socialist Party believes that art is an integral part of daily life, and should not be treated as a commodity produced by the activity of an elite group. All members of society should have ample opportunities for participation in art and cultural activities.
1. We support the formation of collectives, arts centers and schools, independent media, theaters and festivals to advance such cultural endeavors as music, poetry, prose, drama, dance, storytelling, visual art, and videography.
I support various art forms in public schools. On larger level I oppose federal funding of these centers, festivals, etc., but encourage the private funding (private donations) to make these things happen as they do now.
2. We support guaranteed incomes and grants for artists and performers.
Absolutely not. Otherwise we'll have a country full of unemployed artists based on unemployment benefits at 100% of their income.
4. We call for full funding of community and school arts programs for people of all ages.
No, outside of regular schooling, this is a private activity and I oppose the public funding of private activities.
Education
The Socialist Party recognizes the right of students of all ages to a free, quality education in a safe and supportive environment, and of all school employees to good wages, benefits, and working conditions.
1. We call for full and equal funding of public education; for the restoration of a comprehensive K-12 curriculum, including art, music, world languages, and physical education; for an end to all public funding of private schools; and for free tuition and full-time teachers with full benefits (not "adjuncts") at the post-secondary level.
Let's remember, nothing is free.
2. We support public child care starting from infancy, and public education starting at age three, with caregivers and teachers of young children receiving training, wages, and benefits comparable to that of teachers at every other level of the educational system.
Absolutely not. This discourages personal responsibility and once again having a child is a private choice. Just as putting them in daycare is a private choice that should not be paid for with public funds.
3. We oppose merit pay for teachers, standardized testing, competition between schools within the same district, the sale of on-campus advertising in order to raise funds, and the increasing dependence of post-secondary institutions on corporate funding.
This is ridiculous. I support competition between teachers and schools. Pay the good teachers more. I also support the money following the child not the child following the money. This means parents can choose what school to send their kids to, public, private or otherwise. This encourages competition.
Health Care
The Socialist Party stands for a socialized health care system based on universal coverage, salaried doctors and health care workers, and revenues derived from a steeply graduated income tax.
With their ideas on taxes and income, funding coverage and doctors will be virtually impossible. They will have to limit who goes to the doctor and what kinds of conditions deserve treatment. And if you're over the age of oh 45 or 50, forget it.
3. We call for full funding for AIDS research, prevention, and treatment. We demand full civil rights for people living with AIDS.
Why are people so focused on AIDS when Cancer is a much larger problem that isn't always based on poor behavior. I oppose the public funding of anymore AIDS research as it is now a disease you can live with for a very long time. But I encourage the private research. Same with Cancer. Private funding of research. You should all donate to St. Jude's, or some other research cause. This also goes for stem cell research. Private funding.
Housing
The Socialist Party recognizes the right of all people to high quality, low cost housing.
I recognize the right to find a place you can afford within your means. But I oppose any increase in section 8 funding. In fact I tend to think it ought to be eliminated.
5. We call for an end to home foreclosures
I call for an end to people taking out and getting loans that they can't afford. No they should not be able to keep them if they can't afford them.
Immigration
The Socialist Party works to build a world in which everyone will be able to freely move across borders, to visit and to live wherever they choose.
We recognize the central role global capitalism plays in forcing the immigration of people from the less developed to the more industrialized countries, often leading to further economic and social injustice.
1. We support secular democratic states, assuring equal rights to every citizen and resident in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2. We oppose the militarization of the United States/Mexican border, and an increase in the service budget instead of the "military" budget of the INS.
3. We defend the rights of all immigrants to education, health care, and full civil and legal rights and call for an unconditional amnesty program for all undocumented people. We oppose the imposition of any fees on those receiving amnesty.
4. We call for an end to the use of "secret evidence" in deportation hearings, a ban on all immigration detentions and military tribunals, and full due process and habeus corpus rights in U.S. courts for all non-citizens on U.S. territory or in U.S. custody.
5. We demand an end to police raids in areas where immigrants congregate.
6. We oppose "guest worker" programs. We call for full citizenship rights upon demonstrating residency for six months.
I oppose this. In an perfect world this would be fine but this isn't a perfect world and we will loose our identity as the United States and are already in danger of this now. For more information on this, read "State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America" by Patrick J. Buchanan.
Media and Intellectual Property
An ever-smaller band of huge corporations controls virtually all news and entertainment media. The Socialist Party stands for the right of ordinary people to express opinions and communicate freely by vastly extending the public sector of all forms of mass media. Ultimately, a genuine democratization of the mass media will require a democratic socialist transformation of society. Within such a society, free expression will flourish, allowing for the broadest expression of viewpoints and perspectives.
1. We support the breakup of large media companies so that no one company or individual owns more than one newspaper, radio or television station, or television channel. We call for the re-regulation of the communications industry (in particular, the assertion of public ownership rights over radio and television frequencies).
2. We call for government ownership of satellite and cable companies with revenues generated by these operations allocated to a publicly controlled fund to finance innovative visual and audio programming (including movies), over the air radio and television, and cable and satellite programming. The fund would also greatly increase the money going to community cable programming.
3. We support public funding of newspapers and magazines. Any non-profit organization that publishes a journal would receive public funding in proportion to its paid subscriber list.
4. We oppose all efforts to trim "fair use" rights, such as the right to excerpt a copyrighted work in a review.
5. We call for the repeal of all existing copyright extension laws.
6. We oppose legislation to force electronics manufacturers to build "Digital Rights Management" into computers and appliances.
7. We oppose private ownership of the Internet backbone. We call for direct public ownership of at least 50% of the total bandwidth and for democratic ownership and control of the Internet domain naming system.
Here's what happens when the government owns and controls all forms of media, it feeds the public a bunch of propaganda, brainwashing them to follow/depend on the government because they will tell you only what they approve for you to know even if they make it up. And you'd have no means of verifying what they are telling you. And repealing copyright laws takes away private ownership of any publication and the government ultimately becomes the final say on what gets printed. I know this sounds extreme but learn from history. Doesn't anyone remember a man called Adolf Hitler? These policies are a slippery slope setting things up for a leader who happens to be that corrupt. I don't know that any of us believe our leaders don't all have a certain amount of corruption in them. Well except for their representative that they keep reelecting.
Civil Rights
Bill of Rights
The Socialist Party is committed to the rights of free speech, free press, free assembly, and personal privacy, and the freedom of religious choice through the separation of church and state.
1. We condemn the so-called War on Terrorism and call for the immediate repeal of the U.S.A.P.A.T.R.I.O.T Acts and the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.
I think Terrorism is real against the US and other countries and I don't condemn the war on Terror.
2. We call for the elimination of the Dept.of Homeland Security and the sweeping police powers accorded to it.
I actually agree with this, but because it's role should be covered in the Department of Defence and is therefore a redundant function with a bloated beauracracy.
4. We call for the abolition of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
I might actually support this as I believe in states rights. But I'd have to further research the role of the FBI related to the duties of state and local police agencies.
There are more issues they list on the website, and as always if you'd like to to expand on an issue, or talk about something I didn't put in this post, just ask me to in the comments and I will.
As we have found from today the socialist party is not my party. Here is what I will say about their ideas and policies. They are very utopian and might work in a world without sin and the inherent selfishness of people. But we don't live in that world. Perhaps heaven will be a bit socialistic, but without the economy issues. We will work together for the good of each other rather than worry about how much we are getting paid. But God is much bigger than the government and can provide us with all we need there. The governments only solution is to take from its personally responsible citizens to share with those who don't put in their fair share. So socialism in this world is not the ideal. Look at the declining population in much of Europe. You can't support socialism/social programs with a declining population. Our social programs are in danger of collapsing and we still have positive population growth. Think what happens if we extend our social programs to every single person. These will not be the policies of my presidency.
Let's start with Guantanamo. I think it's a terrible idea to declare an executive order to shut down a prison that is holding, or potentially holding for you skeptics, terrorist threats to our country and the world without knowing what kind of people you are working with and having a plan of action for what you will do with them. I don't think it's good for them to be placed in general population prisons inside our borders, nor do I think releasing them to return to their terroristic ways is a good idea. So what is your plan President Obama? What I will say, is at least he gave it a year to change his mind.
Next issue is the executive order for federal funding of abortions domestically and abroad. What??? I don't care if you are pro-choice or pro-life, abortion is a very private choice and should be funded privately. And if we are going to assist foreign countries with anything, shouldn't it be on things that are more pressing such as hunger and disease? I'm much less offended at my tax dollars going for these issues than abortion. I actually heard a celebrity say that this was her most important issue that she hoped to see the president act on quickly. Really??? You care more about paying for the abortions of non-U.S. citizens than you do about getting them the basics they need to survive? I'm sorry but that is shameful. She should donate her own personal money to this cause if she feels that strongly about it, rather than hope, wish, and pray that the U.S. government spend tax dollars on it, when our economy is recessing. Just my opinion. And I would never spend public dollars on private decisions. I would encourage the private charity of citizens to the causes they feel strongly about.
Incidentally I emailed the White House on this topic (my key-board has large keys for my large paws...How do you think I write this blog?), and you are now limited to 500 characters. That's about enough for 2 short paragraphs or one medium one. You must choose your words wisely.
Now onto the Socialist party platform.
Labor
1. We support the right of any number of interested workers in a workplace to form a union with no limits on the subjects upon which employees and unions may bargain with employers.
....there are several other union related statements. See the website for the details.
Sure I support the right of the worker to unionize, but I also support the right of employers not to negotiate with unions if they choose not to. I support the right of the worker to find work wherever their skills are useful to the employer regardless of unionization.
9. We call for the same benefits for part-time workers as for full-time workers.
NO! This cannot be mandated. If a company wants to make this choice on their own, there's nothing wrong with that. But this adds expense to companies that make it difficult for them to compete in the free market or end up hurting the American consumer as the price of goods and services will rise to account for this added expense.
11. We support the creation of a fund for workers which would pay a worker’s full wages and health insurance as well as necessary educational and/or retraining costs if that worker loses a job due to environmental transition, down-sizing, corporate dismantlement, or capital flight.
It sounds ideal, but No. For further explanation, see the previous answer.
12. We call for a 30 hour work week at no loss of pay, with six weeks annual paid vacation.
What are we? Europe? No. No worker is worth 6 weeks of vacation after 1 day of work. The way companies choose to handle their vacation policies is fine now. Do you just expect them to close down for 6 weeks at a time? How are they supposed to pay for that vacation if their is zero productivity? And 30 hours full time? Again leave it up to the companies but 40 hours isn't asking too much.
13. We call for unions to stop using union funds for electing candidates from the Democratic and Republican parties.
Yes, I would agree with this as long as that extends to all political parties.
Economics
2. We call for worker and community ownership and control of corporations within the framework of a decentralized and democratically determined economic plan.
5. We call for all financial and insurance institutions to be socially owned and operated by a democratically-controlled national banking authority, which should include credit unions, mutual insurance cooperatives, and cooperative state banks. In the meantime, we call for re-regulation of the banking and insurance industries.
No. I believe in free market Capitalism. If you want ownership, buy stock.
3. We call for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living.
The cost of living goes up as the minimum wage goes up, so raising the minimum wage will be a never ending process. I oppose this. Besides most of the people actually making minimum wage are in high school. If you can't improve your skills to make more than minimum wage, then you aren't worth more than minimum wage and you certainly aren't worth a $15 an hour minimum wage.
4. We call for a full employment policy. We support the provision of a livable guaranteed annual income.
Sounds ideal but is impossible. I refuse to fund those that refuse to work, Austin is a good example of this. Just about every intersection has someone standing on a corner holding a sign asking for money. When the McDonald's in front of them has a "hiring" sign in the window. Nor do I think companies should have to continue to pay employees that aren't productive.
6. We call for a steeply graduated income tax and a steeply graduated estate tax, and a maximum income of no more than ten times the minimum. We oppose regressive taxes such as payroll tax, sales tax, and property taxes.
7. We call for the restoration of the capital gains tax and luxury tax on a progressive, graduated scale.
If you think this one is a good idea, reread it. That means the most any one person can make is $150/hr. Calculate that out to the 30 hr work week and it is $234,000/year. That doesn't sound bad if you make less than that but with that steeply graduated income tax that will put those income earners closer in line with the minimum wage earners in take home pay. When you limit income, you limit tax revenue. What good will highly graduated capital gains and luxury taxes do after that highly graduated income tax on a maximum income greatly reduces the income of that family to no longer be able to afford to invest or buy luxuries? Also where's the incentive for investing if the government is going to take most of it.
I support the Fair Tax, and unrestricted income.
11. We call for a National Pension Authority to hold the assets of private pension funds, and a levy against corporate assets for any pension fund deficits.
I'm opposed to the nationalization of anything private. Give me an example of something private that should be nationalized and good reasons for it, and I'll consider changing my mind. But very few things if any should be nationalized.
12. We call for increased and expanded welfare assistance and increased and expanded unemployment compensation at 100% of a worker's previous income or the minimum wage, whichever is higher, for the full period of unemployment or re-training, whichever is longer.
I call for an end to preposterous statements (just kidding I value free speech). Let's be honest here, I'm going to get fired from my job and remain "unemployed" for the rest of my life if you put no limits on unemployment. This isn't practical and doesn't encourage the reemployment of anyone.
15. We call for the elimination of subsidies and tax breaks that benefit corporations and all other forms of corporate welfare.
I'll agree with this since I support the Fair Tax.
Human Rights
Arts and Culture
The Socialist Party believes that art is an integral part of daily life, and should not be treated as a commodity produced by the activity of an elite group. All members of society should have ample opportunities for participation in art and cultural activities.
1. We support the formation of collectives, arts centers and schools, independent media, theaters and festivals to advance such cultural endeavors as music, poetry, prose, drama, dance, storytelling, visual art, and videography.
I support various art forms in public schools. On larger level I oppose federal funding of these centers, festivals, etc., but encourage the private funding (private donations) to make these things happen as they do now.
2. We support guaranteed incomes and grants for artists and performers.
Absolutely not. Otherwise we'll have a country full of unemployed artists based on unemployment benefits at 100% of their income.
4. We call for full funding of community and school arts programs for people of all ages.
No, outside of regular schooling, this is a private activity and I oppose the public funding of private activities.
Education
The Socialist Party recognizes the right of students of all ages to a free, quality education in a safe and supportive environment, and of all school employees to good wages, benefits, and working conditions.
1. We call for full and equal funding of public education; for the restoration of a comprehensive K-12 curriculum, including art, music, world languages, and physical education; for an end to all public funding of private schools; and for free tuition and full-time teachers with full benefits (not "adjuncts") at the post-secondary level.
Let's remember, nothing is free.
2. We support public child care starting from infancy, and public education starting at age three, with caregivers and teachers of young children receiving training, wages, and benefits comparable to that of teachers at every other level of the educational system.
Absolutely not. This discourages personal responsibility and once again having a child is a private choice. Just as putting them in daycare is a private choice that should not be paid for with public funds.
3. We oppose merit pay for teachers, standardized testing, competition between schools within the same district, the sale of on-campus advertising in order to raise funds, and the increasing dependence of post-secondary institutions on corporate funding.
This is ridiculous. I support competition between teachers and schools. Pay the good teachers more. I also support the money following the child not the child following the money. This means parents can choose what school to send their kids to, public, private or otherwise. This encourages competition.
Health Care
The Socialist Party stands for a socialized health care system based on universal coverage, salaried doctors and health care workers, and revenues derived from a steeply graduated income tax.
With their ideas on taxes and income, funding coverage and doctors will be virtually impossible. They will have to limit who goes to the doctor and what kinds of conditions deserve treatment. And if you're over the age of oh 45 or 50, forget it.
3. We call for full funding for AIDS research, prevention, and treatment. We demand full civil rights for people living with AIDS.
Why are people so focused on AIDS when Cancer is a much larger problem that isn't always based on poor behavior. I oppose the public funding of anymore AIDS research as it is now a disease you can live with for a very long time. But I encourage the private research. Same with Cancer. Private funding of research. You should all donate to St. Jude's, or some other research cause. This also goes for stem cell research. Private funding.
Housing
The Socialist Party recognizes the right of all people to high quality, low cost housing.
I recognize the right to find a place you can afford within your means. But I oppose any increase in section 8 funding. In fact I tend to think it ought to be eliminated.
5. We call for an end to home foreclosures
I call for an end to people taking out and getting loans that they can't afford. No they should not be able to keep them if they can't afford them.
Immigration
The Socialist Party works to build a world in which everyone will be able to freely move across borders, to visit and to live wherever they choose.
We recognize the central role global capitalism plays in forcing the immigration of people from the less developed to the more industrialized countries, often leading to further economic and social injustice.
1. We support secular democratic states, assuring equal rights to every citizen and resident in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2. We oppose the militarization of the United States/Mexican border, and an increase in the service budget instead of the "military" budget of the INS.
3. We defend the rights of all immigrants to education, health care, and full civil and legal rights and call for an unconditional amnesty program for all undocumented people. We oppose the imposition of any fees on those receiving amnesty.
4. We call for an end to the use of "secret evidence" in deportation hearings, a ban on all immigration detentions and military tribunals, and full due process and habeus corpus rights in U.S. courts for all non-citizens on U.S. territory or in U.S. custody.
5. We demand an end to police raids in areas where immigrants congregate.
6. We oppose "guest worker" programs. We call for full citizenship rights upon demonstrating residency for six months.
I oppose this. In an perfect world this would be fine but this isn't a perfect world and we will loose our identity as the United States and are already in danger of this now. For more information on this, read "State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America" by Patrick J. Buchanan.
Media and Intellectual Property
An ever-smaller band of huge corporations controls virtually all news and entertainment media. The Socialist Party stands for the right of ordinary people to express opinions and communicate freely by vastly extending the public sector of all forms of mass media. Ultimately, a genuine democratization of the mass media will require a democratic socialist transformation of society. Within such a society, free expression will flourish, allowing for the broadest expression of viewpoints and perspectives.
1. We support the breakup of large media companies so that no one company or individual owns more than one newspaper, radio or television station, or television channel. We call for the re-regulation of the communications industry (in particular, the assertion of public ownership rights over radio and television frequencies).
2. We call for government ownership of satellite and cable companies with revenues generated by these operations allocated to a publicly controlled fund to finance innovative visual and audio programming (including movies), over the air radio and television, and cable and satellite programming. The fund would also greatly increase the money going to community cable programming.
3. We support public funding of newspapers and magazines. Any non-profit organization that publishes a journal would receive public funding in proportion to its paid subscriber list.
4. We oppose all efforts to trim "fair use" rights, such as the right to excerpt a copyrighted work in a review.
5. We call for the repeal of all existing copyright extension laws.
6. We oppose legislation to force electronics manufacturers to build "Digital Rights Management" into computers and appliances.
7. We oppose private ownership of the Internet backbone. We call for direct public ownership of at least 50% of the total bandwidth and for democratic ownership and control of the Internet domain naming system.
Here's what happens when the government owns and controls all forms of media, it feeds the public a bunch of propaganda, brainwashing them to follow/depend on the government because they will tell you only what they approve for you to know even if they make it up. And you'd have no means of verifying what they are telling you. And repealing copyright laws takes away private ownership of any publication and the government ultimately becomes the final say on what gets printed. I know this sounds extreme but learn from history. Doesn't anyone remember a man called Adolf Hitler? These policies are a slippery slope setting things up for a leader who happens to be that corrupt. I don't know that any of us believe our leaders don't all have a certain amount of corruption in them. Well except for their representative that they keep reelecting.
Civil Rights
Bill of Rights
The Socialist Party is committed to the rights of free speech, free press, free assembly, and personal privacy, and the freedom of religious choice through the separation of church and state.
1. We condemn the so-called War on Terrorism and call for the immediate repeal of the U.S.A.P.A.T.R.I.O.T Acts and the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.
I think Terrorism is real against the US and other countries and I don't condemn the war on Terror.
2. We call for the elimination of the Dept.of Homeland Security and the sweeping police powers accorded to it.
I actually agree with this, but because it's role should be covered in the Department of Defence and is therefore a redundant function with a bloated beauracracy.
4. We call for the abolition of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
I might actually support this as I believe in states rights. But I'd have to further research the role of the FBI related to the duties of state and local police agencies.
There are more issues they list on the website, and as always if you'd like to to expand on an issue, or talk about something I didn't put in this post, just ask me to in the comments and I will.
As we have found from today the socialist party is not my party. Here is what I will say about their ideas and policies. They are very utopian and might work in a world without sin and the inherent selfishness of people. But we don't live in that world. Perhaps heaven will be a bit socialistic, but without the economy issues. We will work together for the good of each other rather than worry about how much we are getting paid. But God is much bigger than the government and can provide us with all we need there. The governments only solution is to take from its personally responsible citizens to share with those who don't put in their fair share. So socialism in this world is not the ideal. Look at the declining population in much of Europe. You can't support socialism/social programs with a declining population. Our social programs are in danger of collapsing and we still have positive population growth. Think what happens if we extend our social programs to every single person. These will not be the policies of my presidency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
