Ayn Rand and the truth

http://www.businessinsider.com/ayn-rand-is-ruining-the-american-economy-2013-9

No one does it alone.

Unless people have the money to purchase, the entrepreneur will not make money.

Finally, the truth. It's just that simple.

Civic Capitalism and Why I am a big enough government liberal

Part 1

http://nonprofitquarterly.org/policysocial-context/20515-the-renewal-of-civic-capitalism.html

Please read the speech above. It summarizes why we are here economically and how we can get out of this mess.

I have cut and pasted some significant quotes below.

As Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz points out, we cannot have a system that privatizes gains, but socializes losses...that in effect allowed the private corporations to be “too big to fail,” and deemed the individual homeowner “too small to save.” 

The obvious solution was to enact strong but limited regulation, allowing firms to operate within a generally free market, and to erect ethical barriers between powerful corporations and regulators. After the dot-com and accounting scandals, and then the financial disaster of 2008, how could we miss the need for regulation that established a firm baseline for corporate and government action? But we did.

 First and foremost, the financial crisis laid bare the rift between the high and low ends of the income distribution in the United States as well as worldwide. This “dual track” system is fundamentally unsustainable and threatens not only the viability of the financial system, but also the very ability of a citizenry to engage in productive economic, civic, and social intercourse.

 Moreover, the crisis exposed the far too cozy inter-relationships between business and governments. Regulators and the regulated must be two distinct, independent entities.

 “Civic capitalism” rejects both of these extremes: neither the free market nor the government alone is the solution. The solution is democracy itself, and the values that underlie it.

This framework—in which a strong civil society is the basis of a democratic, market society—means the free market is not an end in itself. It requires (1) a government referee to establish a system of rules and laws, permitting private and public enforcement; and (2) basic democratic values such as honesty, full information, transparency, and accountability—stemming from an overarching sense of equally available opportunity.

 However, over the past decade, we have come to see the private sector—and financial markets in particular—as the engine for the progress of society, instead of the product of a free but regulated society.

 Until our core values are revived, we are only applying Band-Aid solutions to our problems. 

 To this end, we must accept that there is an important, valuable, and honorable role for government—of, by, and for the people—to play in helping people participate in a democratic society, and vice versa, an important, valuable, and honorable role for citizen engagement.

 Yet the political debate today is polarized between two camps. On the one hand, the right tends to argue for unfettered free markets and corporate and financial deregulation. Conversely, the left tends to view the government as having the solution to many social ills. This is a false dichotomy. The missing link is the essence of a constitutional democracy: citizen participation. An engaged citizenry, demanding accountability, is critical to this process. 

 Government is not the answer. Markets are not the answer. Democracy—with leaders like you—is the answer. And that’s what civic capitalism is all about.

Civic capitalism is all about a robust business community, an engaged citizenry and a government that actively promotes your ability to provide a check on large institutions, from banks to corporations, and on government itself. It is about ensuring that democratic values endure, even as politicians and movements come and go. It is about rooting out corruption and insisting on honesty, opportunity, and full information, not just because it is the right thing to do, but because markets and civil society cannot function otherwise. Civic capitalism takes the long view, and teaches us that the government has a role in minimizing risks to the system—financial and otherwise—because that civil society is the base from which entrepreneurs and firms operate.

 My next post will be my comments on why I think this speech is so important. I know this is a lot to digest so this is why I am splitting this.

Palmetto Bug

Need for NOTA Now! (June 2012)

I don’t think I can count all the primary elections that will be the de facto general election for a given office. Regardless of the party, there seems to be more than a few offices that a win in the primary will elect the official. I realize that districting has a part to play in this but don’t we deserve more?

Our Supreme Court made a ruling that has created, at best, a chaotic primary season. Incumbents are finding themselves running unopposed. There seems to be no fix quick enough to satisfy Federal compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

I don’t want to call anyone out by name, but there are races where almost all the candidates have ethical or criminal allegations against them. I do believe in innocent until proven guilty; however, we are not just talking about a citizen otherwise going about their everyday business. We are talking about people that will be elected to an office with a 2 to 4 year term. Many of these will have a salary higher than the average family income for a year and funded by our taxes. 

Can’t we do better than this? Can’t we DEMAND better than this? Certainly we deserve better than this.

I don’t know if we can do better than this but we should be able to demand better. And this is where NOTA comes in. I have posted about and will continue to post about NOTA until adoption by all political parties and our state.

NOTA is an acronym for None Of The Above. As described in a previous blog, if adopted, NOTA would be a selection for every elected office. If NOTA “won” the election, it would be re-held and losing candidates would be ineligible to run in that election. A new slate would be drawn.

The hope is we would eventually get a decent slate of candidates rather than having to “choose between the lesser of two evils.”

Had NOTA been in place, there would be no chaos. The solution would be in our hands.

Palmetto Bug

I have not received many comments on this blog so far. I am soliciting specific comments for this post.

As a comment, please list any primary or other electoral race where either:

1.      There is a lack of competition or someone is running unopposed.

2.      There are enough ethical, criminal, or other serious concerns to warrant a desire for a better choice of candidates.

If we generate enough post for this, I will send copies to elected officials, party chairmen, and to editors of daily newspapers in our state.

Maybe then we can get better choices.

Palmetto Bug

List of Links disproving the Big Lie

I list below links that tend to disprove the Big Lie (previous blog post) that giving the rich more money creates jobs.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-29/irs-finds-one-in-189-high-earners-paid-no-2009-u-s-tax.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-08/private-jobs-increase-more-with-democrats-in-white-house.html

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/01/13/its-official-wealth-gap-has-turned-america-into-a-seething-pit/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cnetscape%7Cdl16%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D128160

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/15/9461848-dismal-prospects-1-in-2-americans-are-now-poor-or-low-income

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45319319/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/#.T8VwALBfEwA

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/numbers-income-top-one-percent-skyrocketed-over-last-153005722.html

http://money.msn.com/investing/why-us-should-spread-the-wealth-fiscaltimes.aspx?GT1=33002

Some of these links have more to do with income inequality.

It seems to be that we are turning into a Third World country regarding incomes - either you are rich or you are poor. The middle class at the top of the bell curve is missing.

No one has disposable income except the rich. This is why the economic recovery is so long delayed. There will be no job creation until consumers have the money to spend. The rich will be unable to continue this trend forever. Eventually, they too, will be effected. Until then, it's the rest of us who suffer.

I worked at a food pantry for 5 years. Beginning in 2007 we began seeing the "newly poor." They were losing jobs they had been at for decades.

How many rich have suffered?

It's time to stop believing lies.

Palmetto Bug

PS, if any of the links stop working, please let me know so I can remove them.

PPS: This link came in after original publication of this post. http://money.msn.com/investing/americas-highest-paid-ceos-2012 

The BIG Lie

“The great masses will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."

-Adolph Hitler

Why do we believe these lies? I can’t understand it myself. It seems so clear to me. But some accept these lies as facts. They have been repeated over and over again. People accept them as gospel. Politicians base policy and campaigns on them. But they are lies. They have NEVER been proven true and current conditions PROVE them lies. Still, people repeat them. And believe them. And base policy and laws on them. And yet, despite the failure of these lies to product the results they claim will happen, they are still believed.

“Where’s the beef?” the old commercial asked. This could be an example of scientific thinking. If the expected result does not happen in an experiment, you must abandon the theory. If you think that if you do A and B that C will happen, and then C does not happen, then A and B are false. If C never happens, then A and B are LIES. Yet time and time again, we want our “facts” to be true, so we refuse to accept the conclusions.

Anna Anderson was proven by DNA not to be Princess Anastasia Romanoff. In fact, she was proven to be a member of a Polish peasant family as other Romanoff’s claimed. Those who believed her claims, continue to do so in spite of the evidence. DNA has freed many who were wrongly convicted, yet there are some who reject overturning their previous conviction.

Where is the evidence to suggest that not taxing the rich and lessening the taxes of corporations leads to job creation?  The rich are fighting attempts to raise their tax rates, other than those who stand with Warren Buffet. Some say this tax increase would only raise minimal funds anyway. In some instances, corporations – large, huge firms –are paying no corporate income taxes. Some of these firms borrowed taxpayer money (funny since some of them paid no taxes) to pay for million dollar bonuses at the time when our economy was at its worst since the Great Depression.

These are facts. The rich are VERY rich. They are not taxed fairly. Corporations contribute to the politicians who pass tax breaks for the corporations.

Our unemployment rate is around 8% down from over 10%.  But it is still too high. We are creating more jobs but they are not replacing the higher income jobs that were lost. The actual unemployment rate is acknowledged to be higher because there are those formerly on unemployment rolls who are still unemployed.  The jobs are not there.

Where’s the beef? IT’S NOT THERE.

There is no REASON to believe the BIG LIE anymore. To do so, is unreasonable.

So let’s stop.

I don’t claim to have the answer, I just know this lie is not creating jobs and saving the economy. So we have to try something else. Don’t believe the BIG LIE.

Palmetto Bug

Again with the Compromise

[Note: This was going to be about another topic but as writing sometime does, the topic went a different way. Palmetto Bug]

People are condemning the job the government does. Congress’s rating is low. Some conservatives are preparing for revolution – a “shooting revolution.” Some are Occupying Wall Street and other places. People challenge the government’s collection of taxes.  They search for any weakness in opposing candidates on any level. An elected official was shot and gravely injured. People died there. Both sides bemoan the lack of civility in rhetoric. People refer to the government as an enemy.

What people forget is that “WE, the people” ARE the government.

Our Founding Fathers didn’t agree, they compromised to make our government. Jefferson and John Adams were both close friends and bitter enemies. Burr and Hamilton dueled to the death. Calhoun and Lincoln would have disagreed had they been contempories.

One of my more favorite professors (I had two at the top and others really, really close) told us about recent scholarship regarding Lincoln and the Gettysburg Address. People should read the last line as, “. . .  government of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE, shall not perish from the earth.” This is instead of the usual emphasis on “of, by and the.” So if you are complaining about the government, you are complaining about yourself. Change the government; start with the person in the mirror (Yes, from MJ).

Don’t appeal to Jefferson and Adams, or Hamilton and Burr, or Calhoun and Lincoln for what we should do. They would have laughed at the idea as ridiculous and it is. They are not the government; they are dead. WE, the people are the government.

WE have the control of our destiny. WE have to compromise to live together. If our government falls apart, it is because we could not find a way to do it together. We have already had our revolution and our civil war. We don’t need another war with Americans fighting Americans, brother against brother. Nothing is inevitable.

Divide and conquer is the warriors maxim. We seem to be doing dividing ourselves. We divide ourselves by race, religion, gender and innumerable other criteria.  I have seen both liberal and conservative claim that only they are the true Christians.

Rather than divide us, we need to find ways to work together. Not your way or my way, but our way.

All of this to say if America fails, it will be your fault and my fault. I will express my views and you yours. I know I can’t change your mind and you won’t change mine. So let’s stop trying to say who is right. What’s the old saying, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle?

Isn’t that what compromise is? Isn’t that what our Founding Fathers did? Isn’t what that what Americans always do? You are not my enemy though we disagree. I am not yours. We must compromise to get along and to move our country along.

If America fails, blame the person in the mirror. My mirror, your mirror, and all the other mirrors.

Palmetto Bug

NOTA – None of the above

An electoral solution for government reform

These goof balls are our best and brightest? Another Election Day, but it seems worse this year (written in 2010 before I officially started this blog).  There are none running to get us excited. To say that we can choose from the lesser of two or more evils does not seem to accurately describe this year’s elections. In one local race, I know both candidates. It’s a choice between the devil I know and the devil I know. In fact, it is this race that prompted me to begin this article.

I am angry at the future I see for my children based on the actions of so-called adults looking to govern our nation. In SC we’ve had:

1.      Our governor admits an affair after first reporting he was going to hike alone on the Appalachian Trail.

2.      A political outsider running for US Senate that suggested that an action figure of him might kick start our failing economy.

3.      A Congressman that shouted, “You’re a liar!” to our president during his State of the Union.

4.      A lieutenant governor that could neither drive nor fly.

5.      A state treasurer was sentenced to prison cocaine possession.

6.      The state agriculture commissioner go to jail for ties to a cockfighting ring.

7.      Lt. Governor resigns after pleading guilty to mis-use of election funds.

South Carolina is not alone. Almost every state has an elected embarrassment or two (or more). From fiscal mismanagement, questionable ethics, affairs, and some prison time, we seem to have a dearth of quality, elected officials and candidates. Where are those who understand that when you are a public servant, you are the one to serve the people? The people are not there to serve you.

Being elected does not make someone instantly wise, just, or right; it just makes you a representative of a constituency. Also, you are not to represent just those who voted for you but everyone in your district.

I’ve heard people say, “Kick the bums out!” What if we just elect NONE OF THE ABOVE?

I heard of the idea of NOTA decades ago, but I think it’s time has come. Our nation is a democratic nation and we are ensured of republican (meaning representative) state governments by our US Constitution (Article 4, Section 4). We are not ensured of good government.  It is up to us to elect good representatives to get good government.

This begs the question: “How do we get good candidates?” or “What are our options if no one good runs?”

If you elect the lesser of two evils, then something evil is elected. Why should we have to settle for something so important in our daily lives? Businesses don’t have to hire the lesser of two evils. Why should we have to HIRE the lesser of two evils? Why do we have to hold our nose with one hand as we vote with the other hand?

This is why we need NOTA on the ballot. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_the_above  for more information). Spain and Bangladesh have this option. Should we take a back seat to these countries?

The idea is simple: for every elected office on a ballot,” None of the Above” would be a choice. Then if NOTA “wins” more votes than the other candidates, the election for that office is held again. NONE OF THOSE CANDIDATES CAN RUN. Parties will have to re-nominate.  Maybe that way more seats will be contested and better candidates will come forward.

So if Smith runs against Jones and NOTA wins, the election is re-held and other candidates must run. Smith and Jones cannot run. Can you imagine a sole candidate for an office being beaten by NOTA? Surely not many things could be more embarrassing.

Why he or she may never run for any office again! How could having lousy candidates not run be a bad thing?

It’s often said that anyone that want to be elected to office should be disqualified from running for that reason. We need patriots on both sides – left and right – who set aside short-term gains for long-term real solutions.

Some may say that this will be more expensive due to the cost of having more elections. I counter that having better candidates will cost us less in the long run. They will be more responsive to our will and spend only what is needed, keep government salaries in line, etc.  Maybe instead of paying for cost overruns, they will penalize companies for not delivering on time or meeting quality standards. Maybe they will be more inclined to represent all constituents and not just those partisans who elected them. Maybe they will be more inclined to see that companies treat employees and customers better and are better stewards of resources because we can vote and corporations cannot.

As a practical matter, NOTA will rarely be invoked: much like recall and initiative. But it will be a democratic solution to government reform.

The Palmetto Bug throws out this challenge to both major parties and all the other parties: Have the courage to put NOTA in primaries and push for NOTA in every election. The party that adopts this platform will truly be the party of reform.

Transparency, yes. Accountability, yes. Ethical behavior, yes.

NOTA, heck yes! Power back to “WE, the people.”

The Palmetto Bug