We at the TSAP have long been pushing for a carbon tax-and-dividend (aka fee-and-dividend, feebate, fee with rebate, revenue-neutral tax, or Alaska Permanent Fund) since we first heard about the idea. Steve Stoft, James Hansen, Elon Musk, and even some very unlikely supporters like the recently ousted Secretary of State and former ExxonMobil CEO Rex "Ruthor" Tillerson are known to support it to one degree or another. And the list is growing.
Aside from the primary (and urgent!) reason for it-- mitigation of climate cataclysm--there is also another pressing reason for it: simple justice. The distributional impacts of a straight carbon tax (without any rebates) would be highly regressive, hitting poor people the hardest, and studies show that simply having the carbon tax replace other taxes would also be quite regressive as well. And ignoring that fact would be a major intersectionality fail, to put it mildly. But refunding 100% of the revenue to everyone in equal amounts would effectively make the tax quite progressive in practice. And even better, it can also double as a Universal Basic Income (UBI) Guarantee for all, or at least a viable gateway to such a thing. Once it becomes normal for every citizen to receive even a small amount money unconditionally with no exceptions, then the Overton window of political acceptability would have shifted enough to make it possible to simply increase the amount and/or finance a larger UBI through other revenue sources as well. After all, if everyone's on the dole, then no one's really on the dole. And if everyone's a rentier, then no one's really a rentier. Thus, the idea transcends the left-right political spectrum and becomes an idea that even hardcore libertarians and right-wing populists/producerists can support, not just the left.
What better time than now?
Sunday, March 18, 2018
Saturday, March 10, 2018
Our Position on Tariffs and Trade
With Donald Trump essentially starting a trade war with his latest import tariffs (25% on steel, 10% on aluminum), the TSAP must clarify our often ambiguous position on tariffs and trade. Unlike both corporate political parties, we have always rejected the so-called "free trade" scam as the neoliberals typically define it (we aren't called the True Spirit of America Party for nothing, you know), but have nonetheless gone back and forth over the years on the question of just how protectionist we ought to be.
We believe that protectionism is indeed a razor-sharp, double-edged sword, and can backfire if done excessively or improperly, but if done wisely and properly (unlike Trump's bass-ackwards version) it can work well. No one really wins a trade war, so trade policy must be based on more than beggar-thy-neighbor policies. Thom Hartmann wrote an excellent article on how properly implemented tariffs can, in conjuction with subsidies and other important measures, contribute to the goal of protecting vital American industries and the jobs that go with them.
While we are not against tariffs, protective or otherwise, any tariffs should be carefully targeted to those essential goods and countries for which we have a significant trade deficit today. Unlike Trump's rash and hamhanded version of protectionism that is prone to backfiring, tariffs should not be applied to raw materials that American industry uses to make finished goods, nor should they apply indiscriminately to unnecessarily include our allies as well. They should apply primarily to situations where workers in other countries are grossly underpaid to make the good in question and/or environmental standards are more lax than ours. And they should never be done in isolation, but rather other measures should be done along with it, such as subsidies for crucial domestic industries, "Buy American" clauses in government stimulus packages, and even more importantly, closing the ludicrous loopholes in the corporate tax code that encourage outsourcing and offshoring of American jobs. The latter tactic is the basis for Bernie Sanders' Outsourcing Prevention Act, which would also end or claw back subsidies for American corporations that send jobs overseas. Note that Bernie was not against tariffs, and even advocated for some level of protective tariffs in 2016 before Trump cribbed his idea, bastardized it, and successfully stole his thunder as a result.
Alternatively, or in addition to the above, the TSAP also supports the Buffett Plan. In 2003, the legendary Warren Buffett came up with a simple and very clever idea to close America's yawning trade gap by issuing tradeable Import Certificates (IC) to American exporters equal to the dollar value of exports. And anyone holding these tradeable certificates would be allowed to import the same dollar amount of these certificates, thus being a similar idea to cap-and-trade. The inevitable result would be trade balance, as every dollar worth of imports would have to be offset by a dollar worth of exports. While the downside is that prices will inevitably go up somewhat as a result, the upside is that jobs will return to America and workers' wages would also go up as well, so the net effect would be beneficial overall. And if tariffs still exist and/or ICs are auctioned by the government, the revenue could be directly refunded to the people to further help offset the price hikes for any affected goods and services.
But make no mistake. Our nation's once-great manufacturing base has been hollowed out for decades, and much of it is currently rotting and rusting thanks to the neoliberal "free trade" scam brought to us by Reagan (and Thatcher in the UK) and embraced by both corporate parties ever since. We ignore it at our own peril. And the left would do well to abandon this highly corrosive ideology yesterday.
We believe that protectionism is indeed a razor-sharp, double-edged sword, and can backfire if done excessively or improperly, but if done wisely and properly (unlike Trump's bass-ackwards version) it can work well. No one really wins a trade war, so trade policy must be based on more than beggar-thy-neighbor policies. Thom Hartmann wrote an excellent article on how properly implemented tariffs can, in conjuction with subsidies and other important measures, contribute to the goal of protecting vital American industries and the jobs that go with them.
While we are not against tariffs, protective or otherwise, any tariffs should be carefully targeted to those essential goods and countries for which we have a significant trade deficit today. Unlike Trump's rash and hamhanded version of protectionism that is prone to backfiring, tariffs should not be applied to raw materials that American industry uses to make finished goods, nor should they apply indiscriminately to unnecessarily include our allies as well. They should apply primarily to situations where workers in other countries are grossly underpaid to make the good in question and/or environmental standards are more lax than ours. And they should never be done in isolation, but rather other measures should be done along with it, such as subsidies for crucial domestic industries, "Buy American" clauses in government stimulus packages, and even more importantly, closing the ludicrous loopholes in the corporate tax code that encourage outsourcing and offshoring of American jobs. The latter tactic is the basis for Bernie Sanders' Outsourcing Prevention Act, which would also end or claw back subsidies for American corporations that send jobs overseas. Note that Bernie was not against tariffs, and even advocated for some level of protective tariffs in 2016 before Trump cribbed his idea, bastardized it, and successfully stole his thunder as a result.
Alternatively, or in addition to the above, the TSAP also supports the Buffett Plan. In 2003, the legendary Warren Buffett came up with a simple and very clever idea to close America's yawning trade gap by issuing tradeable Import Certificates (IC) to American exporters equal to the dollar value of exports. And anyone holding these tradeable certificates would be allowed to import the same dollar amount of these certificates, thus being a similar idea to cap-and-trade. The inevitable result would be trade balance, as every dollar worth of imports would have to be offset by a dollar worth of exports. While the downside is that prices will inevitably go up somewhat as a result, the upside is that jobs will return to America and workers' wages would also go up as well, so the net effect would be beneficial overall. And if tariffs still exist and/or ICs are auctioned by the government, the revenue could be directly refunded to the people to further help offset the price hikes for any affected goods and services.
But make no mistake. Our nation's once-great manufacturing base has been hollowed out for decades, and much of it is currently rotting and rusting thanks to the neoliberal "free trade" scam brought to us by Reagan (and Thatcher in the UK) and embraced by both corporate parties ever since. We ignore it at our own peril. And the left would do well to abandon this highly corrosive ideology yesterday.
Wednesday, February 14, 2018
Enough Is Enough Already! (Yet Again)
Another day, another horrible mass shooting. Another week, another horrible school shooting--this time a Florida high school by an armed-to-the-teeth 19 year old former student that had been previously expelled from that school, killing 17 victims and injuring countless others--more so than even Columbine (1999) and almost as many as Virginia Tech (2007). On Valentine's Day, no less. How evil can one get? Seems that mass shootings in general have become an almost daily occurrence in recent years, and school shootings in particular an almost weekly occurrence--in the USA at least. But the rest of the industrialized world doesn't really seem to have this kind of problem. Why is that? Well, there's always....
GUNS.
America is the land of 300 million guns, and combined with a culture that is crazier and more violent than most other "developed" countries, and much more extreme inequality, it is a very lethal combination indeed. And some states, such as Florida, have particularly lax gun laws compared to other states. Of course, the biggest elephant in the room is the fact that at least 98% of mass shooters are MEN. Thanks to the patriarchy and the sort of "toxic masculinity" that it creates, combined with the above factors, too many men end up resorting to violence. Like the Iron Maiden song says, "a briefcase, a lunch, and a man on the edge". With a gun. I mean, what could possibly go wrong, right?
There should be no doubt at this point that something needs to be done. However, we do not believe that banning all guns for everyone, or adopting British or European-style gun laws, is the solution, as the genie is already out of the bottle, and there is also that whole Constitution thingy as well. Thus, the TSAP recommends that the following measures be taken:
While we don't know why this particular mass murderer did what he did, it was most likely due to a combination of toxic masculinity, easy access to weapons of war (including the obligatory AR-15), and some sort of grudge with the school that kicked him out. He was also known to do reckless stuff, wanted to join the military (most likely for the wrong reasons), and apparently enjoyed hunting. Regardless of the motive, the first two factors are absolutely essential for virtually all mass shootings, whether in schools or otherwise.
And before anyone starts getting on their anti-youth high horse about this, keep in mind that the zero-tolerance school policies put in place in the wake of Columbine, along with the increasingly prison-like atmosphere in schools these days, have done absolutely nothing to stop school shootings from increasing dramatically since then. Such tragic events went from occurring an average of once or twice a year in the 1990s and early 2000s to nearly once a WEEK this year so far as well as the past few years. If anything, one can argue that the "powder keg" atmosphere made things worse in the long run. And of course, most mass shooters in general are over 21 and the vast, vast majority are over 18.
I don't know about you, but my favorite part of the Second Amendment is where it says "well-regulated". Too bad so many Republican Congresscritters who are bought and paid for by the NRA can't seem to read the first half of the freaking sentence. Oh, and nevermind that when it was written, guns at that time fired at most one round per minute, not 600+ per minute like so many of today's killing machines. Not like the gun lobby and their lackeys really do nuance.
UPDATE: Looks like the killer in this case may have been a white nationalist (i.e. "alt-right" white supremacist, or at least a fellow traveler) of some sort despite being at least part Latino. And it appears that he had quite a dark side for a while: a troublemaker, kicked out of school for fighting, stalked a girl, fascinated with guns, and enjoyed killing animals for fun. The FBI was even warned last year that he posted online that he wanted to be "a professional school shooter". But no red flags there, right? Apparently not enough to keep him from getting his hands on an AR-15 and plenty of ammo, at least.
GUNS.
America is the land of 300 million guns, and combined with a culture that is crazier and more violent than most other "developed" countries, and much more extreme inequality, it is a very lethal combination indeed. And some states, such as Florida, have particularly lax gun laws compared to other states. Of course, the biggest elephant in the room is the fact that at least 98% of mass shooters are MEN. Thanks to the patriarchy and the sort of "toxic masculinity" that it creates, combined with the above factors, too many men end up resorting to violence. Like the Iron Maiden song says, "a briefcase, a lunch, and a man on the edge". With a gun. I mean, what could possibly go wrong, right?
There should be no doubt at this point that something needs to be done. However, we do not believe that banning all guns for everyone, or adopting British or European-style gun laws, is the solution, as the genie is already out of the bottle, and there is also that whole Constitution thingy as well. Thus, the TSAP recommends that the following measures be taken:
- Bring back a new and improved 1994 assault-weapons ban yesterday, this time with more teeth. This time, include all rapid-fire devices and all magazines with more than ten rounds in the ban as well as the previously-banned types of semi-automatic rifles and their knockoffs.
- Remove the 20-year ban on gun violence research, yesterday.
- End the gun-show loophole and implement universal background checks, yesterday.
- Put a significant excise tax on all bullets/ammo, like Chris Rock recommended. (Seriously)
- Treat ammo sales the same as gun sales. Or better yet, treat bullets like Sudafed: must show ID, limit on the number that one can buy, the number bought would be recorded, and if you do buy too many, you will be investigated.
- Pass a "one gun a month" law at the federal level. And consider perhaps putting a limit on the number of guns that an individual can own at a given time, except for antiques/relics/curios.
- Require reporting of lost or stolen guns.
- Regulate firearms like other consumer products in terms of health and safety standards--currently such standards are nonexistent.
- Improve enforcement of existing gun laws, which tend not to be enforced very well these days, and improve state reporting of prohibited persons to NICS. Also, prohibit anyone on the terrorism watch list from buying any guns, period.
- Consider a massive gun buyback program, one that pays significantly more than what the guns are worth on the street. Voluntary for any still-legal weapons, mandatory for any newly-banned ones.
- And last but not least, improve our woefully-inadequate mental healthcare system.
While we don't know why this particular mass murderer did what he did, it was most likely due to a combination of toxic masculinity, easy access to weapons of war (including the obligatory AR-15), and some sort of grudge with the school that kicked him out. He was also known to do reckless stuff, wanted to join the military (most likely for the wrong reasons), and apparently enjoyed hunting. Regardless of the motive, the first two factors are absolutely essential for virtually all mass shootings, whether in schools or otherwise.
And before anyone starts getting on their anti-youth high horse about this, keep in mind that the zero-tolerance school policies put in place in the wake of Columbine, along with the increasingly prison-like atmosphere in schools these days, have done absolutely nothing to stop school shootings from increasing dramatically since then. Such tragic events went from occurring an average of once or twice a year in the 1990s and early 2000s to nearly once a WEEK this year so far as well as the past few years. If anything, one can argue that the "powder keg" atmosphere made things worse in the long run. And of course, most mass shooters in general are over 21 and the vast, vast majority are over 18.
I don't know about you, but my favorite part of the Second Amendment is where it says "well-regulated". Too bad so many Republican Congresscritters who are bought and paid for by the NRA can't seem to read the first half of the freaking sentence. Oh, and nevermind that when it was written, guns at that time fired at most one round per minute, not 600+ per minute like so many of today's killing machines. Not like the gun lobby and their lackeys really do nuance.
UPDATE: Looks like the killer in this case may have been a white nationalist (i.e. "alt-right" white supremacist, or at least a fellow traveler) of some sort despite being at least part Latino. And it appears that he had quite a dark side for a while: a troublemaker, kicked out of school for fighting, stalked a girl, fascinated with guns, and enjoyed killing animals for fun. The FBI was even warned last year that he posted online that he wanted to be "a professional school shooter". But no red flags there, right? Apparently not enough to keep him from getting his hands on an AR-15 and plenty of ammo, at least.
Saturday, February 10, 2018
The $20+ Trillion Question
Now that the government shutdown and debt-ceiling brinksmanship has been averted (for now), the $20+ TRILLION question remains: what are we going to do about the national debt? Especially now that it is set to skyrocket even further into the stratosphere due to both massive tax cuts (mainly for the rich and mega-corporations) and spending increases, including on our already over-bloated and over-extended military. It is now mathematically impossible to pay it off at this point. So what is the solution, then?
Obviously, if we find ourselves in a hole (especially one as deep as this), the first thing we should do is stop digging. That is known as the First Law of Holes. That means no more deficit spending for the foreseeable future, period. But unfortunately, that's a lot easier said than done. Taxes will have to go up and spending will have to go down--dramatically. And that would do more harm than good at the levels it would need to be done. There is really no way around that.
However, there actually is a painless (albeit unconventional) method of paying off the debt in one fell swoop. Not just this year's deficit, but ALL of the cumulative $20 trillion of the debt. It's called the Noble Solution (named after its creator, Richard E. Noble) and does not involve any significant tax hikes or spending cuts. So what is it? It's something we never would have advocated just a few years ago: printing (electronically creating) money out of thin air to pay it off all at once. Alas, the genie is out of the bottle now, as the Feral Reserve has been creating money out of thin air for decades (including that recent whopping $16 trillion secret bailout of the banks, which eventually rose to nearly $30 trillion) so we might as well put this practice to productive use. Money is really nothing more than an accounting entry nowadays, so let's make the entry and be done with it for good.
But wouldn't that lead to hyperinflation? Not if it is properly done with due diligence. Noble points out that while creating money is undoubtedly inflationary, using it to pay off the debt (which is in Treasury bonds and is thus already part of the money supply) would be deflationary in that it would shrink the money supply by an equal amount. Thus, the two effects would cancel each other out, as paper (electronic data) would be exchanged for paper (data). Of course, we would have to bypass the Feral Reserve to avoid creating more debt in the process, such as #MintTheCoin. Or better yet, abolish or nationalize the Feral Reserve entirely and return the power of money creation to its rightful owners, our elected representatives in Congress and the Department of the Treasury. America would then be free and clear for the first time in history since Thomas Jefferson.
Of course, while doing it once may not be harmful, doing it regularly can be. To make sure we never have to do this again, we must make sure the debt never, ever, reaches such stratospheric levels again, period. In addition to nationalizing the Feral Reserve to make it a public national bank that creates interest-free currency, fiscal policy must be tightened after the Noble Solution is implemented and the debt is paid off. We have already outlined in previous posts what must be done as far as taxes and spending are concerned. We should also have a Balanced Budget Amendment added to the Constitution as well, albeit with a "safety valve" allowing deficit spending during legitimately declared wars of necessity, national emergencies, recessions, or any time the U3 unemployment rate exceeds 6% and/or the U6 rate exceeds 12%. Without that safety valve, such an amendment can easily do more harm than good. Alternatively, or in addition to the above, there is also the legendary Warren Buffett's clever idea: make a law that anytime the budget deficit exceeds 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election, period. Problem solved.
Of course, the longer-term drivers of future debt obligations are the programs that make up so-called "entitlement" spending, mainly Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. But even here, there is less than meets the eye. For Social Security, that can be resolved by 1) scrapping the wage cap on FICA taxes (or raising it to an arbitrarily high level like $1 million or $10 million), 2) indexing initial benefits to prices or median wages instead of average wages, and 3) very gradually raising the full retirement age to 70 for those born after 1980 or so. In fact, if we did all those things plus a very slight 0.2% hike in the FICA tax, we could even expand Social Security (and perhaps briefly lower the retirement age a bit in the short term) while still keeping it solvent for the foreseeable future. For Medicare and Medicaid, the only real long-term solution to their burgeoning fiscal woes is a truly universal single-payer healthcare system that can bend the cost curve downward by taking the profit out of healthcare and especially tackling the price-gouging of Big Pharma. And other proposed solutions are mere window-dressing at best.
But the bottom line is that the debt must be defeated, and soon. We simply cannot afford to continue kicking this can further down the road. Otherwise we may very well go the way of the Romans.
However, there actually is a painless (albeit unconventional) method of paying off the debt in one fell swoop. Not just this year's deficit, but ALL of the cumulative $20 trillion of the debt. It's called the Noble Solution (named after its creator, Richard E. Noble) and does not involve any significant tax hikes or spending cuts. So what is it? It's something we never would have advocated just a few years ago: printing (electronically creating) money out of thin air to pay it off all at once. Alas, the genie is out of the bottle now, as the Feral Reserve has been creating money out of thin air for decades (including that recent whopping $16 trillion secret bailout of the banks, which eventually rose to nearly $30 trillion) so we might as well put this practice to productive use. Money is really nothing more than an accounting entry nowadays, so let's make the entry and be done with it for good.
But wouldn't that lead to hyperinflation? Not if it is properly done with due diligence. Noble points out that while creating money is undoubtedly inflationary, using it to pay off the debt (which is in Treasury bonds and is thus already part of the money supply) would be deflationary in that it would shrink the money supply by an equal amount. Thus, the two effects would cancel each other out, as paper (electronic data) would be exchanged for paper (data). Of course, we would have to bypass the Feral Reserve to avoid creating more debt in the process, such as #MintTheCoin. Or better yet, abolish or nationalize the Feral Reserve entirely and return the power of money creation to its rightful owners, our elected representatives in Congress and the Department of the Treasury. America would then be free and clear for the first time in history since Thomas Jefferson.
Of course, while doing it once may not be harmful, doing it regularly can be. To make sure we never have to do this again, we must make sure the debt never, ever, reaches such stratospheric levels again, period. In addition to nationalizing the Feral Reserve to make it a public national bank that creates interest-free currency, fiscal policy must be tightened after the Noble Solution is implemented and the debt is paid off. We have already outlined in previous posts what must be done as far as taxes and spending are concerned. We should also have a Balanced Budget Amendment added to the Constitution as well, albeit with a "safety valve" allowing deficit spending during legitimately declared wars of necessity, national emergencies, recessions, or any time the U3 unemployment rate exceeds 6% and/or the U6 rate exceeds 12%. Without that safety valve, such an amendment can easily do more harm than good. Alternatively, or in addition to the above, there is also the legendary Warren Buffett's clever idea: make a law that anytime the budget deficit exceeds 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election, period. Problem solved.
Of course, the longer-term drivers of future debt obligations are the programs that make up so-called "entitlement" spending, mainly Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. But even here, there is less than meets the eye. For Social Security, that can be resolved by 1) scrapping the wage cap on FICA taxes (or raising it to an arbitrarily high level like $1 million or $10 million), 2) indexing initial benefits to prices or median wages instead of average wages, and 3) very gradually raising the full retirement age to 70 for those born after 1980 or so. In fact, if we did all those things plus a very slight 0.2% hike in the FICA tax, we could even expand Social Security (and perhaps briefly lower the retirement age a bit in the short term) while still keeping it solvent for the foreseeable future. For Medicare and Medicaid, the only real long-term solution to their burgeoning fiscal woes is a truly universal single-payer healthcare system that can bend the cost curve downward by taking the profit out of healthcare and especially tackling the price-gouging of Big Pharma. And other proposed solutions are mere window-dressing at best.
But the bottom line is that the debt must be defeated, and soon. We simply cannot afford to continue kicking this can further down the road. Otherwise we may very well go the way of the Romans.
Friday, February 9, 2018
Dear Congress (and Trump): YOU'RE FIRED! (Again)
Though this time it was brief and over within a matter of hours, there was nonetheless yet another government shutdown last night. Just three weeks after the first one. All because Congress couldn't get their act together and pass even a very brief stopgap funding bill in time, though they did ultimately come to a longer-term two-year budget deal once the perennial gadfly Rand Paul finally got out of the way.
Like the shutdown in 2013, as well as the one three weeks ago, the blame lies primarily with Republicans. This time around, like last time, it was initially their refusal to negotiate with Democrats about several pressing issues, most notably DACA, in the past several weeks that led to the current impasse, though they did finally come to a deal that Rand Paul held up for hours. Specifically, he vehemently disagreed with the increase in government spending, a point that was really not too far off the mark. Granted with a Republican president this time, the roles of offense and defense have been reversed, but Trump has clearly sent mixed signals and has essentially been engaging in chaos manufacture all this time, though he did favor this deal and sign it into law. Regardless, this Congress and the Trump regime both put the "funk" back in "dysfunctional"!
The new two-year deal, however, is also quite problematic in that it massively increases government spending, especially on "defense" (read: our already over-bloated and over-extended military), on the heels of that massive tax cut mostly for the rich and corpoations, at a time when the national debt already exceeds $20 TRILLION, which is just over 100% of GDP. The deficit alone will thus most likely exceed a trillion next year, if not sooner. There are some good things in the deal (such as disaster relief and healthcare), to be sure, but now is absolutely NOT the time to spend like a bunch of sailors and make the national debt skyrocket even further into the stratosphere. With an unemployment rate around 4%, which is basically "full employment" by today's standards, now is the time to start running budget surpluses, NOT yawning deficits. It's called "countercyclical finance", folks. John Maynard Keynes must be spinning in his grave right now!
That said, the TSAP hereby gives virtually all 535 members of this most dysfunctional Congress in history, especially (but not limited to) Republicans, a vote of "no confidence", and we will take their government shutdown to imply the resignation of such members. We also do the same for Trump as well, obviously. We thus encourage every reader of this blog to sign the following petitions:
Dear Congress: We Accept Your Resignation
No Pay for Congress During Shutdown
No Budget, No Pay
Minimum Wage for Congress
Impeach Donald Trump Now
Let them know that We the People have had ENOUGH of the gridlock, grandstanding, backstabbing, corruption, venality, follies, lies, recklessness, childishness, and otherwise outrageous behavior of Congress, along with the mendacity, recklessness, instability, incompetence, hate, chaos manufacture, grift, graft, and scandals of the orange menace in the White House. If we weren't clear, we'll say it again:
YOU'RE FIRED!!!
So what's the opposite of "progress" again? You guessed it.
Like the shutdown in 2013, as well as the one three weeks ago, the blame lies primarily with Republicans. This time around, like last time, it was initially their refusal to negotiate with Democrats about several pressing issues, most notably DACA, in the past several weeks that led to the current impasse, though they did finally come to a deal that Rand Paul held up for hours. Specifically, he vehemently disagreed with the increase in government spending, a point that was really not too far off the mark. Granted with a Republican president this time, the roles of offense and defense have been reversed, but Trump has clearly sent mixed signals and has essentially been engaging in chaos manufacture all this time, though he did favor this deal and sign it into law. Regardless, this Congress and the Trump regime both put the "funk" back in "dysfunctional"!
The new two-year deal, however, is also quite problematic in that it massively increases government spending, especially on "defense" (read: our already over-bloated and over-extended military), on the heels of that massive tax cut mostly for the rich and corpoations, at a time when the national debt already exceeds $20 TRILLION, which is just over 100% of GDP. The deficit alone will thus most likely exceed a trillion next year, if not sooner. There are some good things in the deal (such as disaster relief and healthcare), to be sure, but now is absolutely NOT the time to spend like a bunch of sailors and make the national debt skyrocket even further into the stratosphere. With an unemployment rate around 4%, which is basically "full employment" by today's standards, now is the time to start running budget surpluses, NOT yawning deficits. It's called "countercyclical finance", folks. John Maynard Keynes must be spinning in his grave right now!
That said, the TSAP hereby gives virtually all 535 members of this most dysfunctional Congress in history, especially (but not limited to) Republicans, a vote of "no confidence", and we will take their government shutdown to imply the resignation of such members. We also do the same for Trump as well, obviously. We thus encourage every reader of this blog to sign the following petitions:
Dear Congress: We Accept Your Resignation
No Pay for Congress During Shutdown
No Budget, No Pay
Minimum Wage for Congress
Impeach Donald Trump Now
Let them know that We the People have had ENOUGH of the gridlock, grandstanding, backstabbing, corruption, venality, follies, lies, recklessness, childishness, and otherwise outrageous behavior of Congress, along with the mendacity, recklessness, instability, incompetence, hate, chaos manufacture, grift, graft, and scandals of the orange menace in the White House. If we weren't clear, we'll say it again:
YOU'RE FIRED!!!
So what's the opposite of "progress" again? You guessed it.
Monday, January 29, 2018
State of the Planet Address 2018
Every year since 2011, the TSAP has been giving our annual State of the Planet Address in mid-to-late January. Yes, we know it is a bit of a downer to say the least. So sit down, take off your rose-colored glasses, and read on:
Our planet is in grave danger, and has been for quite some time now. We face several serious long term problems: climate change, deforestation, desertification, loss of biodiversity, overharvesting, energy crises, and of course pollution of many kinds. Polar ice caps are melting. Rainforests have been shrinking by 50 acres per minute. Numerous species are going extinct every year. Soil is eroding rapidly. Food shortages have occurred in several countries in recent years. Weather has been getting crazier each year thanks to climate change. We have had numerous wildfires, floods followed by long periods of drought, and a "storm of the century" at least once a year for the past few years. And it is only getting worse every year. In fact, 2016 has been the hottest year on record, and 2017 was the hottest year without an El Nino. Look no further than the three record-breaking storms in the past dozen years: Katrina (2005, highest storm surge), Sandy (2012, largest diameter), and now Harvey (2017, a 1000-year flood, and overall worst hurricane on record), followed by Irma and Maria which devastated Puerto Rico, for a taste of the not-too-distant future.
In fact, on the other side of the world, the worst monsoon season in recent memory has recently displaced 41 million people due to record flooding. Thus for many, the future is sadly already here to one degree or another.
None of this is an accident of course. These problems are man-made, and their solutions must also begin and end with humans. We cannot afford to sit idly by any longer, lest we face hell and high water in the not-too-distant future. Our unsustainable scorched-earth policy towards the planet has to end. Yesterday.
While we do not invoke the precautionary principle for all issues, we unequivocally do for the issue of climate change and any other environmental issues of comparable magnitude. In fact, for something as dire as climate change, as of 2015 we now support a strong "no regrets" approach. With no apologies to hardcore libertarians or paleoconservatives, in fact. We are not fazed one bit by the naysayers' pseudoscience as it does not really "debunk" the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming. The only serious debate is about how fast it will happen, and when the tipping point (or points) will occur. It is not a matter of if, but when. And the less precarious position is to assume it is a real and urgent problem. We need to reduce CO2 emissions to the point where the CO2 concentration is at or below 350 ppm, ASAP. And it is currently at an unsustainably high level of 400+ ppm, and growing.
Solving the problem of climate change will also help to solve the other ecological crises we are facing, for they all ultimately have the same root causes, not least of which is our insatiable addiction to dirty energy. However, there is a right way to solve it, and several wrong ways. Technology is important, but it won't be decisive on its own (economics geeks may recall Jevons Paradox). The real problem is the paradigm that our society has been following, and that system is based on wetiko, the parasite of the mind and cancer of the soul. It often seems that the only difference between capitalism and cannibalism is the spelling.
The TSAP endorses the ideas embodied in Steve Stoft's new book Carbonomics, most notably a tax-and-dividend system that would tax carbon (i.e. fossil fuels) at the source, and give all Americans an equal share of the revenue generated from this tax. (Note that our proposal to tax natural resources and pay out an Alaska-like citizen's dividend already includes this.) Yes, prices for various things would undoubtedly rise due to this tax, all else being equal, but the dividend will allow Americans to pay for this increase. The average American would in fact break even, but those who (directly or indirectly) use less energy than average will effectively pay less tax, while the energy hogs will effectively be taxed more, as they should be. Thus it is certainly not a regressive tax, and may even be mildly progressive. This is both the simplest and most equitable way to reduce carbon emissions as well as other forms of pollution, not to mention waste of dwindling non-renewable resources. The real challenge is getting the feds to accept something that won't directly benefit them (in the short term). Carbonomics also includes other good ideas, such as improving how fuel economy standards are done, and crafting a better verison of the Kyoto treaty.
In addition to the ideas in Carbonomics, we also support several other measures to help us end our addiction to fossil fuels once and for all. Our Great American Phase-Out plan would phase out all fossil fuels by 2030 at the latest, via alternative energy, efficiency, and conservation. One good idea to further the development of alternative energy would be the use of feed-in tariffs for renewable power sources.
We support ending net deforestation completely, and putting carbon back in the ground through carbon sequestration. One method is known as biochar, a type of charcoal made from plants that remove carbon dioxide from the air, that is subsequently buried. This is also an ancient method of soil fertilization and conservation, originally called terra preta. It also helps preserve biodiversity. Another crucial method would be regenerative organic farming, which also turns the soil into an effective carbon sink as well.
We've said this before, and we'll say it again. Our ultimate goal is 100% renewable energy by 2030, but we need to hedge our bets. We can phase out fossil fuels, or we can phase out nuclear power, but we can't do both at the same time--and fossil fuels need to be phased out first, and quickly. Nuclear is doing a pretty good job of phasing itself out as it is. So let's not get rid of it prematurely.
But the biggest elephant in the room (make that the elephant in the Volkswagen) is overpopulation. It does not make for pleasant dinner conversation, but it must be addressed or else all other causes become lost causes in the long run. We absolutely need to have fewer kids, or nature will reduce our population for us, and the latter will NOT be pleasant to say the least. The TSAP believes in voluntarily reducing the total fertility rate (TFR) to 1.5-1.9 children per woman to do so, but let us be clear that we do NOT support draconian and/or coercive measures of population control (like China has used). We believe that more liberty is the answer, not less. In fact, the two most effective means of reducing the birthrate are poverty reduction and female empowerment. Fortunately, America's TFR has recently dropped to below 1.9, with no indication of rising back above replacement rate in the near term. But clearly we cannot keep growing and growing, that's for sure (in fact, we need to shrink). And our insatiable addiction to economic growth (despite being decoupled from well-being) is also every bit as harmful as overpopulation as well, if not more so. Growth for the sake of growth, the ideology of the cancer cell, is clearly one of the most asinine obsessions our nation (and world) has ever had. We clearly need to transition to a steady-state economy, most likely following a period of what Naomi Klein calls "selective degrowth" as well. And to do that, we need a radical paradigm shift to happen yesterday. Put another way, we need to leave room for Nature, lest Nature not leave room for us. We have been warned, decades ago in fact. Unfortunately, such warnings have largely fallen of deaf ears until very recently.
Last but not least, the TSAP now believes that as long as men remain in charge, we are all merely rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Let's face it, it ain't gonna be us fellas who will save the world, as the past 7000 years or so have shown. We paved paradise and put up a parking lot, we created a desert and called it peace. We devoured and suffocated our own empire, and our proverbial 15 minutes of fame is almost up. Only when women finally take over and reclaim their rightful position as the new leaders of the free world--and they will--will there be any real permanent solution.
Bottom line: we need to take the environment much more seriously than we do now. We ignore it at our own peril. And while the current administration in DC clearly doesn't care, We the People must act nonetheless. With no apologies to the deniosaurs or Big Oil or Big Gas, or Dirty Coal.
Oh, by the way, wanna hear a joke? Peak Oil. Not saying it won't happen, of course--it will eventually peak and decline at some point--but climate change kinda supersedes it. While conventional oil most likely has already peaked, there is more than enough total oil (including unconventional) to deep-fry the Earth--and most of which needs to stay in the ground if we wish to avoid catastrophic climate change. Fossil fuels are, after all, what Buckminster Fuller referred to as our planet's "energy savings account", which we need to wean ourselves off of and save just in case of a planetary emergency--and he first said this in 1941!
So quibble all you want, but the truth must be faced head-on. We have a planet to save. So let's roll!
Our planet is in grave danger, and has been for quite some time now. We face several serious long term problems: climate change, deforestation, desertification, loss of biodiversity, overharvesting, energy crises, and of course pollution of many kinds. Polar ice caps are melting. Rainforests have been shrinking by 50 acres per minute. Numerous species are going extinct every year. Soil is eroding rapidly. Food shortages have occurred in several countries in recent years. Weather has been getting crazier each year thanks to climate change. We have had numerous wildfires, floods followed by long periods of drought, and a "storm of the century" at least once a year for the past few years. And it is only getting worse every year. In fact, 2016 has been the hottest year on record, and 2017 was the hottest year without an El Nino. Look no further than the three record-breaking storms in the past dozen years: Katrina (2005, highest storm surge), Sandy (2012, largest diameter), and now Harvey (2017, a 1000-year flood, and overall worst hurricane on record), followed by Irma and Maria which devastated Puerto Rico, for a taste of the not-too-distant future.
In fact, on the other side of the world, the worst monsoon season in recent memory has recently displaced 41 million people due to record flooding. Thus for many, the future is sadly already here to one degree or another.
None of this is an accident of course. These problems are man-made, and their solutions must also begin and end with humans. We cannot afford to sit idly by any longer, lest we face hell and high water in the not-too-distant future. Our unsustainable scorched-earth policy towards the planet has to end. Yesterday.
While we do not invoke the precautionary principle for all issues, we unequivocally do for the issue of climate change and any other environmental issues of comparable magnitude. In fact, for something as dire as climate change, as of 2015 we now support a strong "no regrets" approach. With no apologies to hardcore libertarians or paleoconservatives, in fact. We are not fazed one bit by the naysayers' pseudoscience as it does not really "debunk" the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming. The only serious debate is about how fast it will happen, and when the tipping point (or points) will occur. It is not a matter of if, but when. And the less precarious position is to assume it is a real and urgent problem. We need to reduce CO2 emissions to the point where the CO2 concentration is at or below 350 ppm, ASAP. And it is currently at an unsustainably high level of 400+ ppm, and growing.
Solving the problem of climate change will also help to solve the other ecological crises we are facing, for they all ultimately have the same root causes, not least of which is our insatiable addiction to dirty energy. However, there is a right way to solve it, and several wrong ways. Technology is important, but it won't be decisive on its own (economics geeks may recall Jevons Paradox). The real problem is the paradigm that our society has been following, and that system is based on wetiko, the parasite of the mind and cancer of the soul. It often seems that the only difference between capitalism and cannibalism is the spelling.
The TSAP endorses the ideas embodied in Steve Stoft's new book Carbonomics, most notably a tax-and-dividend system that would tax carbon (i.e. fossil fuels) at the source, and give all Americans an equal share of the revenue generated from this tax. (Note that our proposal to tax natural resources and pay out an Alaska-like citizen's dividend already includes this.) Yes, prices for various things would undoubtedly rise due to this tax, all else being equal, but the dividend will allow Americans to pay for this increase. The average American would in fact break even, but those who (directly or indirectly) use less energy than average will effectively pay less tax, while the energy hogs will effectively be taxed more, as they should be. Thus it is certainly not a regressive tax, and may even be mildly progressive. This is both the simplest and most equitable way to reduce carbon emissions as well as other forms of pollution, not to mention waste of dwindling non-renewable resources. The real challenge is getting the feds to accept something that won't directly benefit them (in the short term). Carbonomics also includes other good ideas, such as improving how fuel economy standards are done, and crafting a better verison of the Kyoto treaty.
In addition to the ideas in Carbonomics, we also support several other measures to help us end our addiction to fossil fuels once and for all. Our Great American Phase-Out plan would phase out all fossil fuels by 2030 at the latest, via alternative energy, efficiency, and conservation. One good idea to further the development of alternative energy would be the use of feed-in tariffs for renewable power sources.
We support ending net deforestation completely, and putting carbon back in the ground through carbon sequestration. One method is known as biochar, a type of charcoal made from plants that remove carbon dioxide from the air, that is subsequently buried. This is also an ancient method of soil fertilization and conservation, originally called terra preta. It also helps preserve biodiversity. Another crucial method would be regenerative organic farming, which also turns the soil into an effective carbon sink as well.
We've said this before, and we'll say it again. Our ultimate goal is 100% renewable energy by 2030, but we need to hedge our bets. We can phase out fossil fuels, or we can phase out nuclear power, but we can't do both at the same time--and fossil fuels need to be phased out first, and quickly. Nuclear is doing a pretty good job of phasing itself out as it is. So let's not get rid of it prematurely.
But the biggest elephant in the room (make that the elephant in the Volkswagen) is overpopulation. It does not make for pleasant dinner conversation, but it must be addressed or else all other causes become lost causes in the long run. We absolutely need to have fewer kids, or nature will reduce our population for us, and the latter will NOT be pleasant to say the least. The TSAP believes in voluntarily reducing the total fertility rate (TFR) to 1.5-1.9 children per woman to do so, but let us be clear that we do NOT support draconian and/or coercive measures of population control (like China has used). We believe that more liberty is the answer, not less. In fact, the two most effective means of reducing the birthrate are poverty reduction and female empowerment. Fortunately, America's TFR has recently dropped to below 1.9, with no indication of rising back above replacement rate in the near term. But clearly we cannot keep growing and growing, that's for sure (in fact, we need to shrink). And our insatiable addiction to economic growth (despite being decoupled from well-being) is also every bit as harmful as overpopulation as well, if not more so. Growth for the sake of growth, the ideology of the cancer cell, is clearly one of the most asinine obsessions our nation (and world) has ever had. We clearly need to transition to a steady-state economy, most likely following a period of what Naomi Klein calls "selective degrowth" as well. And to do that, we need a radical paradigm shift to happen yesterday. Put another way, we need to leave room for Nature, lest Nature not leave room for us. We have been warned, decades ago in fact. Unfortunately, such warnings have largely fallen of deaf ears until very recently.
Last but not least, the TSAP now believes that as long as men remain in charge, we are all merely rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Let's face it, it ain't gonna be us fellas who will save the world, as the past 7000 years or so have shown. We paved paradise and put up a parking lot, we created a desert and called it peace. We devoured and suffocated our own empire, and our proverbial 15 minutes of fame is almost up. Only when women finally take over and reclaim their rightful position as the new leaders of the free world--and they will--will there be any real permanent solution.
Bottom line: we need to take the environment much more seriously than we do now. We ignore it at our own peril. And while the current administration in DC clearly doesn't care, We the People must act nonetheless. With no apologies to the deniosaurs or Big Oil or Big Gas, or Dirty Coal.
Oh, by the way, wanna hear a joke? Peak Oil. Not saying it won't happen, of course--it will eventually peak and decline at some point--but climate change kinda supersedes it. While conventional oil most likely has already peaked, there is more than enough total oil (including unconventional) to deep-fry the Earth--and most of which needs to stay in the ground if we wish to avoid catastrophic climate change. Fossil fuels are, after all, what Buckminster Fuller referred to as our planet's "energy savings account", which we need to wean ourselves off of and save just in case of a planetary emergency--and he first said this in 1941!
So quibble all you want, but the truth must be faced head-on. We have a planet to save. So let's roll!
Saturday, January 20, 2018
Dear Congress (and Trump): YOU'RE FIRED!
It's official. The much-feared government shutdown has now begun as of midnight on January 20, 2018--exactly one year after Trump was inaugurated. All because Congress couldn't get their act together and pass even a very brief stopgap funding bill in time, let alone come to a longer-term budget deal.
Like the previous shutdown in 2013, the blame lies primarily with Republicans. This time around, it was their refusal to negotiate with Democrats about several pressing issues, most notably DACA, in the past several weeks that led to the current impasse. Granted with a Republican president this time, the roles of offense and defense have been reversed, but Trump has clearly sent mixed signals and has essentially been engaging in chaos manufacture all this time. And while the Democrats are not entirely blameless (after all, they did overwhelmingly block the stopgap funding measure), the lion's share of the blame clearly goes to the party that controls not only both houses of Congress, but in fact controls all three branches of government--REPUBLICANS.
That said, the TSAP hereby gives virtually all 535 members of this most dysfunctional Congress in history, especially (but not limited to) Republicans, a vote of "no confidence", and we will take their government shutdown to imply the resignation of such members. We also do the same for Trump as well, obviously. We thus encourage every reader of this blog to sign the following petitions:
Dear Congress: We Accept Your Resignation
No Pay for Congress During Shutdown
No Budget, No Pay
Minimum Wage for Congress
Impeach Donald Trump Now
Let them know that We the People have had ENOUGH of the gridlock, grandstanding, backstabbing, corruption, venality, follies, lies, recklessness, childishness, and otherwise outrageous behavior of Congress, along with the mendacity, recklessness, instability, incompetence, hate, chaos manufacture, grift, graft, and scandals of the orange menace in the White House. If we weren't clear, we'll say it again:
YOU'RE FIRED!!!
So what's the opposite of "progress" again? You guessed it.
Like the previous shutdown in 2013, the blame lies primarily with Republicans. This time around, it was their refusal to negotiate with Democrats about several pressing issues, most notably DACA, in the past several weeks that led to the current impasse. Granted with a Republican president this time, the roles of offense and defense have been reversed, but Trump has clearly sent mixed signals and has essentially been engaging in chaos manufacture all this time. And while the Democrats are not entirely blameless (after all, they did overwhelmingly block the stopgap funding measure), the lion's share of the blame clearly goes to the party that controls not only both houses of Congress, but in fact controls all three branches of government--REPUBLICANS.
That said, the TSAP hereby gives virtually all 535 members of this most dysfunctional Congress in history, especially (but not limited to) Republicans, a vote of "no confidence", and we will take their government shutdown to imply the resignation of such members. We also do the same for Trump as well, obviously. We thus encourage every reader of this blog to sign the following petitions:
Dear Congress: We Accept Your Resignation
No Pay for Congress During Shutdown
No Budget, No Pay
Minimum Wage for Congress
Impeach Donald Trump Now
Let them know that We the People have had ENOUGH of the gridlock, grandstanding, backstabbing, corruption, venality, follies, lies, recklessness, childishness, and otherwise outrageous behavior of Congress, along with the mendacity, recklessness, instability, incompetence, hate, chaos manufacture, grift, graft, and scandals of the orange menace in the White House. If we weren't clear, we'll say it again:
YOU'RE FIRED!!!
So what's the opposite of "progress" again? You guessed it.
Tuesday, January 2, 2018
California Dreaming Has Finally Become A Reality
Well, it's official now. Cannabis is now fully legal for recreational use California, with the first legal recreational sales having begun on January 1, 2018. The Golden State now joins seven other states and DC where recreational weed is currently legal to one degree or another, though medical use (now legal in a whoppoing 29 states now) has in fact been legal in California since 1996.
While Trump and especially Jeff Sessions are unlikely to take very kindly to this development, the fact remains that the proverbial dam has now finally broken, and the anti-legalization forces are becoming increasingly impotent despite the occasional rear-guard crackdown here and there. Prohibition is quickly unraveling as we speak. Legalization at the federal level has really become inevitable at this point--it's no longer a matter of if, but when.
Are there some flaws with California's system of legalization and regulation? Yes, it's not perfect, but if we make the perfect the enemy of the good, we ultimately end up with neither. For example, no matter how much we as both TSAP and Twenty-One Debunked loathe the 21 age limit, we nonetheless grudgingly supported it since we knew it would not have had a prayer of a chance at passing during the crucial years of 2012-2016. Once the dust settles, though, and national legalization really is a foregone conclusion, we will increasingly take all states to task for not lowering the age limit for cannabis to 18, just as we currently take all states to task for not lowering the drinking age to 18 and recently some states and localities for raising the tobacco smoking age to 21.
Canada, for example, already plans to set it at 18 federally, while at the provincial level it will be 18 or 19 depending on the province, as is the case with alcohol. Uruguay chose 18 as well. And the Netherlands has set it at 18 since 1996. No good reason why it should be any higher than 18 in what should be the land of the free as well.
In the meantime, we shall nonetheless rejoice at one of the very few bright spots in America's increasingly dark night of the soul that began on November 9, 2016 and began in earnest on January 20, 2017.
While Trump and especially Jeff Sessions are unlikely to take very kindly to this development, the fact remains that the proverbial dam has now finally broken, and the anti-legalization forces are becoming increasingly impotent despite the occasional rear-guard crackdown here and there. Prohibition is quickly unraveling as we speak. Legalization at the federal level has really become inevitable at this point--it's no longer a matter of if, but when.
Are there some flaws with California's system of legalization and regulation? Yes, it's not perfect, but if we make the perfect the enemy of the good, we ultimately end up with neither. For example, no matter how much we as both TSAP and Twenty-One Debunked loathe the 21 age limit, we nonetheless grudgingly supported it since we knew it would not have had a prayer of a chance at passing during the crucial years of 2012-2016. Once the dust settles, though, and national legalization really is a foregone conclusion, we will increasingly take all states to task for not lowering the age limit for cannabis to 18, just as we currently take all states to task for not lowering the drinking age to 18 and recently some states and localities for raising the tobacco smoking age to 21.
Canada, for example, already plans to set it at 18 federally, while at the provincial level it will be 18 or 19 depending on the province, as is the case with alcohol. Uruguay chose 18 as well. And the Netherlands has set it at 18 since 1996. No good reason why it should be any higher than 18 in what should be the land of the free as well.
In the meantime, we shall nonetheless rejoice at one of the very few bright spots in America's increasingly dark night of the soul that began on November 9, 2016 and began in earnest on January 20, 2017.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
