It's April 15th, and depending where you are, you still have time to file your taxes here in the United States. (Either on your computer or by dropping it off at an open post office.) And not to worry if you've somehow forgotten about tax seasons end. You can still file tomorrow. As long as you don't owe you shouldn't have to worry about penalties, otherwise...
But it is our annual process. We balance out the books. We had the government withhold some of our income, and it now learns how much of that it should keep to pay into supporting our society, and how much it should return to us. Unless you didn't do withholding on your wages, and then you get to pay in now. (But really it is a matter of taste. You can either put the money at the start, or you can plan a year ahead and save the money to pay in. Whatever works best for you.) W-4's matter.
Sadly people have a visceral hate for our system to handle the funding of our country. Love the armed forces, fixed roads, border protection. Hate actually having to pay for these things. Hating on the IRS is an easy way to get some cheers. It's an honest reaction. But it's not altogether a rational one. It can be tragically irrational.
So...This what you do when you owe money?
A collection of accountants and bureaucrats, that some how get painted as evil for doing vital work, The IRS is given a function. Make sure people pay in what we as a society agree to do. Sure not everyone does pay in...But we all need to make changes to get billionaires, corporations, and ministries to get with it. (How is it that the powerful who skip out on taxes aren't painted as the villains?)
Fighting for America by moving profits overseas, and living
the good life (while having it's workforce live on Medicaid
and Food Snap).
Yes. It's that time every year where all of us math nerds can get giddy at the date, March 14th. As in 3/14. (Yeah, in Europe it's 14/3. Don't point that out to us. It's magic!)
3/14. Or, 3.14. Pi! Woo!!! ...I. Said. Woo!!!
Let's hear it for the circumference of a circle divided by it's diameter! Oh yeah!
Still...It's only semi-amazing. Wait until 2015. 3/14/15?
Mathematicians will be going mental.
...Okay. If you aren't in a country that lists the month followed by the day and then the year, it isn't as cool. But that's why we rock! (I always knew there was a reason!)
But if you need some math puns today, check out the Tumblr link to a slew of them.
So be sure to party like your an irrational number with a seemingly unending nonrepeating decimal value! ...WOO!!!
Yes. It's that time every year where all of us math nerds can get giddy at the date, March 14th. As in 3/14. (Yeah, in Europe it's 14/3. Don't point that out to us. It's magic!)
3/14. Or, 3.14. Pi! Woo!!! ...I. Said. Woo!!!
Let's hear it for the circumference of a circle divided by it's diameter! Oh yeah!
Still...It's only semi-amazing. Wait until 2015. 3/14/15?
It is interesting to look at just how the United States rates against other countries, when it comes to how business is run and affected by government. Their are many regulatory issues.
But a useful one to consider is how workers are treated.
So consider how much paid leave you are required to receive.
Notice how we compare to the competition? We don't mandate time off. You may get it at your work, but you may also be denied any time off with pay, or have it suddenly revoked. Much of the rest of the world, who we are seriously competing with find it important to address. But we don't. And China. (Though this Wikipedia page suggests that China does have some level of mandatory paid leave.)
Add to this, how maternity leave handled.
So, again, US has no mandatory leave for childbirth. Which is why we do often see parents racing to get back into the workflow post-birth. And, again, we see our main competitors are giving weeks to half a year of paid leave. It makes the US look like it's trying to push new mothers out of the workforce.
But at least we get good pay from top to bottom, right? We make sure people, if they may not get any leave, can actually afford to live, right?
In many of our large population centers, a person at minimum wage cannot work 6 AM - 5 PM Monday to Sunday and pay rent. But look at the bright side you'll be working so hard to keep a home, you won't have time to vacation, or use vacation as a verb.
American workers deserve better.
But, sadly, many of us don't even know.
We easily fail to realize how out of sync the country is on matters of wealth. The top echelons of the country hold most of our wealth. And the next group down holds far far little, but still a nice chunk of the wealth. And that leaves the middle class and those below fighting for the crumbs left at the end of the table. And we often don't see how amazingly unequal it is. And when some of us do see how the scales are tipped out of our reach, we are reassured. Don't worry. It's for the best. The rich will invest in us or us.
1% of entrepreneurs are from the richest of us. Most of that cash sits in accounts, safe and accruing interest.
The equivalent of half of the US's GDP is held overseas and untaxed. That's up to $12 trillion hidden overseas.
Since the recession started, corporations have been avoiding paying around $250 billion every year in taxes.
Around a trillion dollars is lost to revenue in tax deductions for the richest.
$4 trillion was given to bail out the banks.
Securities trading goes untaxed. In the US, there is 100's of trillions of dollars of it.
Those in poverty on food stamps, including the elderly and disabled, receive around $4.30 a day in support.
The rich take money, tuck it away, seek ways to avoiding paying out, and ask for gifts. How else do you get and stay stinking rich? Money doesn't come to these people by big investments in the country. When the rich have done this, it has been a major pay out. Carnegie, Gates, Rowling. These people are forgoing chunks of their wealth to make the world around them better.
Same happens with business efforts. Business leaders have to give up some profits to benefit and motivate workers, to help the community, to protect the environment. Now, there are times that these investment can lead to financial profit, but often it doesn't. For example, Walmart may not see profits soar just as high as they do now, if it gives workers health care and a living wage. But the benefits to the community at large, and the harm being done should not be ignored. But business minds often have trouble seeing passed their piles of gold.
That's why we need to mandate things like paid leave, and minimum wage.
In case you are not readying or hearing about the recent analysis of Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight, he doesn't see an easy or obvious victorious run come 2014. 2014? You know, the next election...? You know, how we the United States has elections every 2 YEARS...? ...
...
...Okay, breathe. Yes, we do in fact vote every 2 years. I know, we just started a new Congressional session AND inaugurated the president. But, next year, 620 days from now, we are doing this again...Well, some of us are. We don't all really get involved, leaving older and more conservative people.
Which takes us back to Nate Silver. Looking at the data available and history, he is seeing real dangers coming in 2014. It is possible that the Senate could go to the Republicans. Not a sure thing. But they are in a real positions, if they pull themselves together this year, to put up an effort that could shift 6 or more seats in their favor. (Read Silver for the number crunching.)
Among the issues that most intensely threaten Democratic control in the Senate is that it's a midterm election. And on these occasions, we don't all get out, we don't all pay attention, and we don't all...bother caring.
2010 is a good example of what can happen, with shifts in power and momentum in Washington D.C. leading to Tea Party headaches and an imperiled health care reform. There are many factors that played into the election. Insane conservative anger and paranoia. Frustration with positions that the president and Democrats in Congress were taking. But, the results were that liberals were underrepresented at the polls. And we've seen the results with the likes of Senator Scott Brown, Governor Scott Walker, Governor Rick Snyder and Representative Allen West.
Now some of these people were ousted last year. But some are still around, and enacting harmful policies on the public. And the repercussions of 2010 still are hitting and hurting us. 2014 can't be allowed to go the same way.
So, yeah. 620 days to the next election. It's a long time, and too soon.
But you are needed. Your vote. Your interest. Your engagement in the process. We can't let conservatives drag government to a halt by taking both branches of Congress. We can't pretend the results of midterms don't hold weight. We can't let the Right Wing set the narrative for 2014 and 2016. We can't sit things out until the next presidential election.
It's not the most fun you'll ever have, but welcome to representative democracy.
Consider this your early alarm call. I know you'll be hitting the snooze and getting back to political slumber. But don't ignore it for too long, you don't want to be late. We are counting on you.
...You didn't find the Nate Silver math interesting enough to justify the title? ...Fine!
The image of the country, showing how each district went in the presidential vote, has been getting passed around.
Some look at the country and see the vast swaths of the country that are red and translate that into the country being almost entirely being red. And that is true if you decide politics and elections by miles taken up, and not by the numbers that vote. The country is very red across much of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, and Missouri. But that area is also not a very large part of the total population. It, like Oklahoma, Kansas, and Montana, are smaller populations compared to other parts of the country. And in those places, at their larger population points, they tend towards being more liberal (Like in Omaha, Nebraska. As seen on the map above.).
It's like in the state of New York. New York City is large population centers. It's massive. The result in New York state is that it holds a great deal of sway. People living in Albany might not like it. But if much of the state's population lives in that city and it's boroughs, then that is were the electorate is.
And if in California, New York, Illinois, and various large cities around the country hold a significant chunk of the nation's population, that is where the electorate is. And if these people are more liberal, that is where the electorate is.
As you can see outside whites, Obama won over every racial group. And lost men, but clearly won over women. And among age groups, Obama won clearly among people 44 years and younger.
So, Obama won over a minority of whites, men, and people over 44 years. And he clearly won the popular vote in this country.
That is how this country has changed, and will be continuing to change. Old, white, and male are no longer the key to electoral success. The changes in this country make it unwise to cater just to this part of the population, if only for the sake of the maths.
Likewise, Hispanics and Asians clearly support Democratic interests at present, despite anger from some conservatives that racial groups they deem conservative should vote and align themselves to GOP interests exclusively. Democrats need to continue to work to ensure this connection.
The risk to Democrats is that the GOP could learn to better communicate and drive out vote in minority communities. Or, they could actually change some and be a genuinely more palpable option for these voters. Trouble for us the GOP is that they are the GOP. And they are too easily driven to become angry and enraged at blacks and Hispanics, and voice the feeling and push law to enact suffering.
And the GOP is so heavily made up of people who too dearly love the power of white people in America. They do a great job of reminding us all just what lies behind any friendly Republican facade.
And then we had Rush Limbaugh throwing his fit about how Santa Claus won. Apparently women and the various minority groups that supported Obama only did it because we are just children, who love free gifts and toys. You embrace Limbaugh's vision, or your a spoiled baby. This is a major Republicans voice, loved by the Conservative base, sought for support by Republican politicians.
This is the GOP that can't quite figure why it can't garner votes from minority groups.
The GOP is a great ally to liberals in uniting minority groups.
_____________ ADDENDUM:
David Simon has an interesting look at the change in demographics to consider. Jessica Valenti considered the power of women in voting.
It would be nice to say now, that the Right in this country have sagely taken some lessons away from this election. That they see where some ideological extremes they embraced were too far. That some of their attacks on rights were morally wrong. That the Tea Party, the Religious Right, and the billionaire backers asked for things no one should agree to do.
Let's pretend for a moment that happen. Steve Schimdt, a one time adviser to John McCain says the GOP needs to break from reactionary angry voices like Rush Limbaugh. Good. Frum is also unhappy with conservative media (which booted him). But they seem to be a minority.
Among the conservative voice online, we heard a very loud message. "That!@$#ing #!@&*+has done it to us again." At the University of Mississippi students went out into the street screaming and throwing rocks in anger.
In a more established grouping, as seen in the piece on Steve Schimdt's concerns, it was also noted that the Tea Party Patriots had a message. WAR. They will not stand for "moderates" like Mitt Romney leading anymore. They are naming themselves the rightful heirs of the conservative movement. This group is eager to fight, Republicans, and they have many billionaire backers to help. Not a good start for change, except a shift further Right.
An odd addendum to the Tea Party right comes from Boehner who acted like their was no Tea Party caucus in the House. Seems like a disconnect, but will the Tea Party make life easy if Boehner were to actually break? He's already been made to walk with back a bit.
For the Family Research Council their is an eagerness to increase it's aggression against what it deems as an attack on morality. With the passage in multiple states of marriage equality, they want more aggressive civil disobedience against these rights. What then? Will they be ruining people's weddings. Will they be trying to humiliate and terrorize newlyweds? Yeah. That's a winning strategy, isn't it?
On the business front, we are hearing now that a number of CEO's are cutting jobs and trying to blame it on Obama. Pathetic. From coal magnates to the owner of Red Lobster, they took this electoral loss, and punished their employees. They took the risk of a loss of ANY profits, and decided to take it out of the hides of the workers. This is how they do business. I wouldn't care to do business with them.
Among advisers, Grover Norquist wants everyone to believe that the election was good and positive for the GOP, on many levels. Others have tried to go as far as saying that Republicans have a mandate coming out of the election. I know, it is crazy. A lot of sad opinions.
Some want to reach out to Latinos by doing a little immigration reform. Put Rubio up to talk it up, and then have him run for president. So, it's not about helping Latinos or understand their issues or concerns, just buy them off.
Some also are saying that the GOP needs to reach out to women. Karen Hughes wants to cut the tongues out of GOP representatives if they talk like Akins. That is great. Except, they aren't upset at the ideas. They are still pushing the denial of reproductive rights. They still oppose equal pay. They still think of women who use the Pill as sluts. As I heard today they think open talk on this costs votes. It's a strategic pain. They aren't growing and learning about their mistaken policy positions, as we see in Ohio.
Melina Mara/ The Washington Post via Getty Images
In Ohio the Republican party has now decided, post-election to renew an attack on the reproductive health care access of women. Wednesday, the 14th, they will be voting on restricting access to abortion. That is the reaction, "Onward, damn those women."
And in Florida, the governor still is avoiding the media and now is refusing to acknowledge the utter failure his election day was.
And in the Congress? In talking about the coming budget fight, Speaker Boehner offers as a way forward, effectively, the plan that Romney ran and lost on. They are complaining that the president must meet their expectations. How is that moving things forwards? How is that finding answers to our problems?
How is any of this showing that ANY lessons were learned?
The Conservatives are active in these days following the election. They are prepping for in four years. Hell, they are looking for the soonest local election where you are. They want to put the usual suspects from their clique on your school board. They want to put a pal in the mayor's office, or on the city council. They are grooming a like minded fellow ready to be voted onto the PUC or onto a court.
This is what Nordquist was hinting at. They can loose a presidency. They cannot take the Senate. But they are establishing bases of power lower, they are writing law to keep liberals out, or to get to the US Supreme Court to get desired rulings.
The key reason that their was little change in the House of Representatives is all the states that the GOP gained control of State Legislatures. With that power they redid the shapes of districts, limiting the places that Democrats could win House races, and bolstering the ability of Republicans to hold and keep seats across the country. Those state races that they fought for were pivotal. We can't let them keep them.
We have to be active on the ground. We need to find people to run against Republicans for all offices. We need to be seeing the decisions they are making in office NOW. We need to not decide that the elections over and now we get to disengage.
Don't disengage now. Don't let others. We all have to care what happens on the school board. We have to care what the city council is doing. We have to care what out legislature is up to. AND we need to bother to be heard with what will be happening in Congress.
Stay active and engaged.
_____________ ADDENDUM:
In Texas, the treasurer of the Hardin County Republican Party is calling for Texas to secede from the the nation.
...“We must contest every single inch of ground and delay the baby-murdering, tax-raising socialists at every opportunity,” Morrison wrote. “But in due time, the maggots will have eaten every morsel of flesh off of the rotting corpse of the Republic, and therein lies our opportunity.”
“Texas was once its own country, and many Texans already think in nationalist terms about their state. We need to do everything possible to encourage a long-term shift in thinking on this issue. Why should Vermont and Texas live under the same government? Let each go her own way in peace, sign a free trade agreement among the states and we can avoid this gut-wrenching spectacle every four years,” he wrote.
The contents of the letter were first reported by the Texas Observer and TFN Insider.
Morrison also wrote that “many members of minority groups are simply racist against the party most white people happen to vote for.” He singled out Asian Americans, who he said should be Republican “as they earn more money and pay more in taxes than white Americans.”...
WOW! That is some hardcore racist BS. The party head in the county said he didn't know what the treasurer was thinking or writing. But that isn't to say he disagrees. Like with the rape talk they are upset at, how does their rhetoric or legislating differ? Maybe in coarseness. But I have seen a lot of resentment towards business Hispanics already, for not getting in place with Republicans.
But this is how the GOP is acting and reacting now. They are pissed the country didn't go the way they want. And they are pissed the demographics they deem to be theirs won't just do and vote as the party wants.
It was amusing to watch the Stephanie Miller Show (on twitter as @SMShow) note Election Day that some astrologers were warning of November the 6th. It was a vague warning of a redux of 2000. Based on what the media was telling us, about horse races and nail biters, it might have been a safe bet.
Now, if you actually could see the future, or were doing good sound polling, you should have been able to tell otherwise.
But astrologers aren't serious (They AREN'T.). Neither are many of the poll takers, pundits, and analyst that wanted to push the the horse race or the indominance of the conservative position. And that we've been confidently fed.
Newt Gingrich - The Great Gingrino, who, if given a name, will tell you what that person does that is worse than any other in history.
Joe Scarborough - Mr. "Like The Rat Pack, If You Subtract The Pack."
Glenn Beck - The Friendly Neighborhood Thunderbucket
Peggy Noonan - Ms. "I Remember A Day When Old Fashion Values Were Respected, And Ladies' Drink Was Always Refreshed."
George Will - Made bow ties uncool.
Larry Kudlow - Mr, "No, I'm Not A Camp 70's Character Actor."
Rush Limbaugh - Lives in a bunker, rambles on incoherently, screams mad order through the radio waves to his fanatical followers...Just saying.
And to be fair. Jim Kramer - Jim "I May Be Mad, But Give Me Your Money" Kramer, who said Obama was going to sweep the country...He invests money for people.
Of course there's Karl Rove, Mr. "Slur Isn't A Dirty Word." who acted throughout the campaign like a man who had a lot of money riding on the results...for some reason.
And they were loud and sure.
And then the 6th came. And even as the night progressed...
Yeah. This guy is paid a lot to make this stuff up. In the months leading up to the election he railed about the bad people doing polling saying Obama was in a strong position. He made wild claim about secret polling he had seen that showed Romney being wildly popular in the country. He was ridiculous...and wildly well played.
And he will continue to get paid very well. As will all the others, who help feed the Right Wing beast's sense of Righteous Certainty. Election Night they were left bare, and shocked at Conservatism's HQ.
And when they were faced with a realization that they had been utterly wrong, they refused to see it as such. They yelled at the egg heads looking at the numbers, they spit at the system they had set up to call the election. It just wasn't supposed to go this way.
And FOX was left confused as to what to do. They had built up a sense of certainty. They had a script in hand, like every night. Events, reality, is expected to work a certain way, and no other. Reality begged to disagree. America begs to disagree.
No matter how certain things had been inside the FOX/Right Wing bubble, the sound polling was born out. As Nate Silver was seeing in the polls, Obama's reelection was a near certainty. Not guaranteed. But it was something that should have been expected. Conservatives rejected reality, substituted it, and found reality wouldn't go away.
Any conservative coming out of the bubble now, welcome. The light is a bit brighter. The air may smell different. But I am sure you will get used to it.
Those still in the bubble though, they still don't know what happen, but they have their suspicions.
Obama ran a mean nasty negative campaign against the good virtuous candidate...who is far too liberal and should never have been the candidate
Obama blocked the military vote.
Hurricane Sandy made people want to vote for Obama.
Obama just bribed the minorities.
Whites are loosing their rightful place.
So many of the Right Wing base have learned nothing. They are confused that their bad arguments, bad policy, and bad social views aren't being rallied to. They are confused that the country isn't falling in line. But, they see the real problem is the rest of the country, unwilling to do as told.
But let's look at what lessons the Right Wing have learned next.
If you haven’t vote, if you haven’t gotten involved…WAKE UP!!!
It’s time to get out to your polling place. Commit to voting.
As busy as the president is he’s gotten around to voting.
Yeah. He’s traveling the country, talking to everyone, dealing with natural disasters, AND…voting.
Michelle Obama does a beautiful job breaking down the numbers. A few votes on one block could tilt this election. Every vote matters. You matter.
And remember all the people affected by this election and benefiting from President Obama’s leadership. Including, but not limited to…
LGBT:
Women:
College students:
Latinos:
Republicans:
Those concerned about foreign policy:
Every tax payer:
Get out and vote by tomorrow. It matters. You matter. And to continue through recovery, and protect and guarantee the rights of all Americans, vote for Obama and help hold back a roll back of progress, reform, and rights.
Republicans. They do love their big declarative statements. What is vexing about this is that so often when they do make their statements, it is so much bull. (When they are not, it's scary to realize they are serious.) But they do talk loudly, and carry their wiffle bat proudly.
We wanted the president to succeed./We tried to work with the president.
Republicans have tried to pretend that since November of 2008 that they had not been working and striving to disable the Obama administration from functioning or that they've worked to sabotage programs and projects. It is a lot to expect everyone to forget what they've been up to.
Mitch McConnell - Make him a one term president.
Chuck Grassley - How he worked with the president, to slow down, and, hopefully, prevent Obamacare passing.
Again and again. They've striven to pull down President Obama, they worked to stop the stimulus Obamacare, and anything else he supported. It feels almost pathological.
Birth control only leads to sex and more abortions.
Conservatives have been wrong on birth control since...it was first come up with. Safe sex is a good thing. And more important, when people have access to contraception, they don't have unwanted pregnancies. And when they don't have unwanted pregnancies they are just that less likely to look to abortion. And what do I mean by that less likely? 75%. Approximately. That is a significant effect. But that won't change a think for Conservatives, will it?
Helping the poor causes them not to work.
Conservatives often push to be harsher and crueler to those that are in financial hardship. They love terms like Welfare Queens, to describe this vision of a race (and they are thinking of a race) of shiftless good for nothings stealing their hard earned money. If reality was so simple. Their are some who take advantage. But to say all or most are, is ridiculous. I am glad I haven't been put in a position yet to need help, but I also am so thankful to know it is there, if my situation was worse.
But to explain the ridiculousness of saying the social safety net makes the poor lazy, I hand you over to John Quiggin and Paul Krugman.
If you own a microwave/TV/cellphone/Computer/DVD player you're not poor.
It is sad how Conservatives loose track of time. A microwave is a sign of success in life? Maybe in the 1960's, but today they are basic AND cheap. It is a simple, fast, low cost, and space friendly way to cook. It is, sadly, how a lot of us cook, prepackaged food. And cell phones and computers? How are people supposed to get and keep jobs without, what are today, basic methods of communication, getting information, and learning? What seems to shock Conservatives is that the poor aren't living in shanty towns, with no power or front doors. Thankfully, most poor in the country are not in that situation. But still the Conservatives turn up their noses.
I've heard Hannity be in utter shock that the poor in America aren't living on rice and beans alone. He thinks the poor of America have it to good.
But that's the Conservative view. They look away when the real burden on the poor is in actual basic necessities.
... “the real everyday basics such as quality child care and out-of-pocket medical costs” are “squeezing the budgetsof the poor and middle-class alike.”
Hassett argues that safety net programs like “unemployment insurance, food stamps, Medicaid” help families afford basic needs, further shrinking the nation’s income gap.
...
Not having a place you can have your kids go seems like a big obstacle to being able to work. And getting sick, when you are poor, when you have no insurance, that's a nightmare.
But the real trouble is that someone owns a smart phone, and stares at it waiting for that business to call back to tell them if they got the job.
Conservatives can be so clueless.
Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to benefit everyone.
This is really an old gem for conservatives. The trickle down economy. If we allow the rich to pay less into the system, everyone does better. A rising tide lifts all boats. If it only reality was actually so simple, for the rich. But it isn't.
...
The Congressional Research Service has withdrawn an economic report that found no correlation between top tax rates and economic growth after Senate Republicans -- including the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell -- raised a litany of concerns with the paper's findings and wording.
...
(Bolding added.)
Studies seem to find that Conservative conventional wisdom never holds up. The results show that when you cut taxes for the rich, the money they save stays with them. It does not filter into the economy, it is put aside, moved out the country, etc.
The study, which TPM and others reported on at the time, delved into the last 65 years of U.S. tax policy — specifically how marginal rates on high incomes and capital gains taxes impact decision-making. It concluded that reducing effective taxes on the rich does not generate economic growth, but that it does correlate with rising income inequality in the short term.
...
It doesn't grow the economy at all. In fact it hurts those at the other end of the spectrum to the rich. This, as opposed to the benefit from people down the bracket, who use the money to buy goods they can now afford, or pay bills off. And as the quote notes, Republicans just wanted to silence this data. They don't like the facts, so they suppress them. Other times they ignore them.
It reminds me of an argument I saw between podcast host Sam Seder and a libertarian radio host. In it the libertarian was lecturing on how a business paying for health care benefits for women is bad for them. And Sam Seder pointed him to studies done that show paying out this little amount to help female workers actually was a boon to business, not a negative. But the libertarian wouldn't accept it. He just kept saying it was a bad thing, and Seder kept trying to explain that it was being studied and shown to be otherwise. Being offered such evidence, the libertarian chose to ignore it and keep to his economic belief.
That is something we see too often with conservatives. Taxes on the rich are bad, because. Spending on the poor is bad, because. It does a country no good if policy is set by ideology, and ideology alone.
These are failed ideas. And one Republicans after another rises to try them out yet again. And we pay.
If you want a bit more, here's a video with some Ohio Romney supporters. Listen to all the lies they've been fed. It is sad.
As I write the east coast prepares for a likely battering from it is being called a "frankenstorm." (And the news media sighed, and knew it was love.) Ah, Sandy. (Que a Grease reference, if you got one.)
The government is at work as a result. FEMA is preparing. The states are gearing up. And local services are on the move. It is a nice reminder of just why we bother with this whole society/civilization thing in the first place.
But as we brace to see what the forces of nature have in mind for us this time around, it is worth remembering just how conservatives have been looking at and using emergency services in the United States, in particular FEMA.
You can look to earlier in the year when Mitt Romney was still trying to become the nominee:
He looked at the idea of a national disaster relief program, FEMA, and said it was just better to shunt it down to the states. Or better, turn it over to business.
How does this work then? Each states struggles to support it's own disaster situations and tries to recover as best it can, on it's own. As it is, particularly in events like Katrina, the states are in desperate need for federal aid to get running again. But, for Mitt Romney, that's just a money loser. Bye, Louisiana, we have to cut you off. It is a stunningly simplistic and ill-conceived approach to governance.
And, hand it over to business? What corporate force will we be giving this power to? How much will they be charging people who's businesses and homes have been wiped from the map for a box of crackers and a branded towel?
FEMA is EXACTLY the kind of thing the government is made to do. But for conservatives, that is a bad thing. It makes government look good, it makes people's lives better (after tragedy), so it is a hinderance to the conservative agenda.
Mitt Romney wanted us to ponder what we should keep in a federal budget. FEMA is not on his list of keepers (with plenty of other vital services). It should give us all pause.
Now, his campaign is trying to claim that he won't do that, kind of:
...
"Gov. Romney wants to ensure states, who are the first responders and are in the best position to aid impacted individuals and communities, have the resources and assistance they need to cope with natural disasters," the Romney official said.
Romney says it is better to clear out this expense from the federal budget. So he wants to put it on the states to deal with and pay for. But he wants to be sure responders have the best resources and assistance to work...Which means it would be in the stay in the federal budget? So it will still be an expense problem. Or he will cut paying out, and that leaves states already struggling economically exceedingly vulnerable. Which answer is Romney's? Does any of this really make sense? ...Let's be honest, I doubt Mitt Romney even knows, or cares if it does. But these are lives and livelihoods he's playing with.
What Mitt has said quite clearly is that he will put in an across the board 5% cut, that will hit FEMA, come inauguration (If it comes to that.). It sounds good at a podium, so he promises it. What will be left when he's done?
Romney's stance also follows on a consistent conservative attack on FEMA and emergency preparedness. This includes the House Republican "success" in cutting 43% from grants FEMA gave to deal with preparation for disaster. Also, there's Eric Cantor's leadership to try and stymie FEMA disaster relief funding in the wake of disasters, to use as leverage to force cuts in government. (He also, oddly, pushed for aid to his own district, not very interested in cost offsets then. Funny, hmm?)
Eric Cantor:
"When a family is struck with tragedy -- like the family of Joplin ... let's say if they had $10,000 set aside to do something else with, to buy a new car ... and then they were struck with a sick member of the family or something, and needed to take that money to apply it to that, that's what they would do, because families don't have unlimited money. And, really, neither does the federal government."
There are few lazier economic arguments than trying to compare a family budget to a national economy. Yes, you can analogize. But only so far. They ARE NOT the same thing. A family cannot print money. A family cannot just make use of debt. And Cantor wants to talk about being wise about not buying a new car. Yet the man won't save a penny on forgoing new private planes and motorboats. (See, I can make B.S. analogies to family as well.) It's a sad conservative weakness. But the family analogy sounds nice, and if not thought on too hard it makes sense. If you actually study economics you realize though, the comparison is silly rhetoric.
But understand, this stupid comparison is how Cantor and the GOP think. To pay for Grandma to get a new house after the quake, they will pull you out of school and put the dog to sleep, but dad's still getting his new boat. You can add to Romney and the rest of the GOP's games with numbers and lives, Paul Ryan's own game of maths. As he has tried to create his own vision of a proper conservative budget, he has put in vague yet massive cuts to spending which will have to include FEMA services. And he's made clear funding, post-disaster, aid would only be paid for if another part of the budget was axed to pay for it. So, if Atlanta floods, no new naval cruiser class...Sorry, that'd never happen. No heating allowance for grandma? That Romney/Ryan would sign off on.
You'd hope they'd have more sense on this. But they seem only to see "big government" standing in their way. And that can't be allowed. So, look forward to Halliburton Luxury Emergency Services, and Koch Industrial Disaster Recovery. Because, conservatives love to give you choices...in who is going to gouge you on a basic survival support.
Now, some are trying to offer up defenses of what Romney has been saying, like David Frum:
Yes. He was evading the question. Why? Because he knew clearly answering it would make him look bad? Because trying to give a more populace answer would tick off the party base? Both of those answers?
What should we do with FEMA? Make it work. Simple answer. But that is not what the GOP plans. From Cantor to Ryan to Romney, FEMA is DOA in their eyes.
And while Frum wants to play at the dream of a Moderate Mitt. They both are part of a party and ideology that has made it clear they do not see disaster relief this way. Hell, Mitt seems to clearly see it as a way for him or his friends to make a tidy profit, off the suffering and tragedy of Americans.
That just is not right.
We, the American People, deserve far better than this lot.
_____________ ADDENDUM:
Let's not forget what Mitt Romney has said on our other emergency workers, the police.
Romney said of Obama, “he wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”
...
Cut. That is always the Go To answer for Mitt Romney. Just cut it. When he became governor that is all he thought of. Education? Cut it. Hospitals? Cut them. Taxes? DEFINITELY, cut them.
And, as governor, when they had a flood, and the legislature wanted to invest to prevent flooding destruction in the future, Mitt said NO. He vetoed. That was his reaction. Sorry about what happen to Peabody, but he isn't going to spend millions to prevent some hypothetical future flood.
That is how Mitt Romney sees things. Of course, after days of dithering, Mitt wants to play nice. Of course he would support FEMA, he says now. But what of the waste of it? What of the immortality of it? He doesn't want it around. And, like with social security, medicare, and the rest, he'll try to sluff it onto states to pay for when he can. And, if he can, he'll just hand it over to corporate friends.
And what about repairs and federal investment prevention after events? Peabody, MA says it all. He is going to fight paying out and investing, like an insurance company trying to dodge a claim from a customer.
The idea of American presidents who are in certain criteria are never popular. You know, non-citizens, teenagers, felons...non-Christians... undesirables.
S.E. Cupp, on her MSNBC show made a point, as an atheist, to say she couldn't and people shouldn't welcome an atheist to the presidency. The idea of a president not beholden to some idea of a supernatural higher power is somehow dangerous...I don't know if she's just this dumb, has this great a level of cognitive dissonance, or is just that blindly loyal to her right wing roots.
But, it's an accepted fact, that we each have problems with "others."
... While more than nine in 10 Americans would vote for a presidential candidate who is black, a woman, Catholic, Hispanic, or Jewish, significantly smaller percentages would vote for one who is an atheist (54%) or Muslim (58%). Americans' willingness to vote for a Mormon (80%) or gay or lesbian (68%) candidate falls between these two extremes....
It isn't surprising, as people often are uncomfortable with groups outside there own assumed peer group. But it is nice to see all groups are in fact improving, in the polling. From the 1950's and today, woman have gone from 54% support to 95%, blacks have gone from 38% to 96%, Jews have gone from 63% to 91%, and Catholics have gone from 67% to 94%.
And while numbers for atheists and others is far behind this, it is changing. Atheist had 18% support in the 1950's and now it is at 54%. ...It's a start. And as women saw, over the decades this can change (Granted, women have yet to see one of their subgroup elected to the presidency. But Hillary could've done it.). Also, for gays they've seen support, starting in the 1970's, go from 26% to 68%. Society is changing, regardless of how conservatives bleat about the horror of inclusiveness of "them" that they irrationally fear.
Hopefully you've seen the nice graph presented on The Rachel Maddow Show over the last 2 years. It was given the cutie name Bikini Graph. It showed the ever growing unemployment in the United States under President Bush, and how, as President Obama began his stimulus programs, things began to reverse. It is illuminating.
And as we go into this election it is informative on what we have to decide on now.
Today, on the road, trailing Obama, Mitt Romney has continued his claim that President Obama has not acted to grow jobs across the country. It is trying to bolster a sense that the president isn't doing the job and can't do the job. (That is an undercurrent to Romney's remarks that I see, the idea that Obama just can't handle being president. Question is, does he say that to try and not sound hostile, or to imply something of Obama's capacities.)
But what is Romney going to do different? What we see so far is that he continues to welcome the old friends, allies, and advisers of President Bush. He's a man of a like background to Bush, and of a like education. There are no signs of a new approach, just more of the same from the last decade. So what George Bush helped usher in is instructive on what likely Romney can offer.
Political Carnival has taken the Bikini Graph and extended it to now. This nicely reminds us how far President Obama has ushered us in four years.
I did a little, unnecessary, modifying. The side marked A is the period of Bush style policy. The side marked B is the period of Obama style policy.
When Romney says Obama is not doing enough, it is false. It is taking time, and conservatives are working quite hard to stifle progress, but things are moving forward. In turn, the policies we are likely to see under Romney, the Bush style ones, show promise no boost to employment. Remember, many industry saw record profits under Bush, it was a good time for CEO's. For the rest of us...it was shit.
And that's what Romney is liable to drop us in again.
Pollster.com has been looking at polling on support for the Stimulus package. Newsreaders and conservative pundits have been harping on a drop in support. Though the Gallup poll has remained steady, but that one isn't fitting the media narrative.
Of note:
...
Second, notice that both CBS and Gallup changed the dollar amounts, Gallup on their second of three surveys and CBS this week. Perhaps more important: CBS also made a subtle change in their verbiage. The old CBS question references a "775 billion dollar economic stimulus package." The new question calls it an "economic stimulus bill costing more than 800 billion dollars" (emphasis added). They needed to change the amount, but why change the sentence structure? And more important, does adding "costing" make some respondents realize that proposal is not a government giveaway but rather something they might have to pay for someday? Without a split-form experiment, it is hard to know for certain.
...
... Thanks to the reader who caught something I missed. Rasmussen also changed the wording of their stimulus question. In their first test in early January, the question identified only "Barack Obama" as the sponsor. Beginning with their 1/27-28 survey, that changed to "Barack Obama and the Congressional Democrats" (emphasis added). I have corrected the table above to reflect the changed wording
That change is important: While "congressional Democrats" are earning slightly better ratings than their Republican counterparts, their numbers are nowhere near as positive as Obama's. On the CBS survey, or example, Obama 62% approve of his performance as president, but only 48% rate the "congressional Democrats" favorably. Nancy Pelosi's favorable rating, using the tougher CBS format (that encourages respondents to report when they are unfamiliar), has dropped to just 10% favorable, 30% unfavorable).
Regular readers of this blog may have noticed that I seem to have taken on the role of the primary vaccine blogger of this little group of bloggers trying desperately to hold the forces of pseudoscience and magical thinking at bay in the face of powerful forces trying to “integrate” prescientific belief systems with science- and evidence-based medicine, a process that would be unthinkable in just about any other field of applied science, such as aeronautics or the physics used in engineering, just as creationists try to “integrate” religion with biology. Although I do have a strong interest in the antivaccination movement in general and the claim that vaccines, or the mercury in the thimerosal preservatives that was in many childhood vaccines in the U.S. until late 2001 or early 2002 (when they were taken out) are a major cause or contributor to autism, such had not been my intention. When I started here on SBM, I had intended to be a lot more diverse. Indeed, I had even had another topic entirely in mind for this week’s post, but, as happens far too often, news events have overtaken me in the form of a story that was widely reported at the end of last week. It was all over the media on Thursday evening and Friday, showing up on CNN, Larry King Live, the New York Times, and NPR.
One of the most successful propaganda campaigns within health care in the last few decades has been the re-branding of nutrition as “alternative” or out of the mainstream of scientific medicine. I have marveled at how successful this campaign has been, despite all the historical evidence to the contrary. I suppose this is partly a manifestation of the public’s short-term memory, but it also seems to reflect basic psychology.
After the previous posting on the Bayesian approach to clinical trial data, several new comments made it clear to me that more needed to be said. This posting addresses those comments and adds a few more observations regarding the unfortunate consequences of EBM’s neglect of prior probability as it applies to “complementary and alternative medicine” (”CAM”).
South Africa’s Health Minister, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, is fighting to protect the traditional healers of her country from having their methods tested scientifically. She warns that, “We cannot use Western models of protocols for research and development,” and that she does not want the incorporation of traditional healing to get “bogged down in clinical trials.” Her arguments are anti-scientific and represent a health tragedy for South Africa. However, such attitudes are not uncommon within the community of sectarian medicine and represent some of the common rhetoric used to disguise anti-scientific positions.
In the comments to a previous blog entry, a chiropractor made the following statements:
1. Chiropractic is a science. 2. Chiropractic is based on neurology, anatomy and physiology. 3. Chiropractors are doctors of the nervous system. 4. Chiropractic improves health and quality of life.
I offered to write a blog entry on the “science” of chiropractic, and I asked him, both in the comments section and by personal e-mail, to educate me first by providing me whatever evidence he could find to support those claims. I never heard back from him, so I was left to do my own research as best I could. Here’s what I found.
Some people ask me, "Jack? What's this whole thing about?" And I tell them the truth. The hell if I know.
But sometimes you are on a sugar high. And you take some nerdiness. And you take some geekiness. And you grab some politics. And then you stuff some skepticism into it...and you crash.
When you make up you don't know what it is, but it's attached itself to your jugular, and you decide it's best not to fuss.
A curmudgeon and soft-heart. A pessimist and optimist. A loner and joiner. Even I get sick of me.
I'm...
A Neophyte Negotiator of all the Nonsense. An Ornate Opponent of…Oh, you know. A Lover of Levity and the Lectern. An Irreconcilably Irate Idyllist. The Eternal Enemy of Erratum. Just a Solitary Serrated Soul. I'm sorry, what was the question?
Posts
