![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
baphnediaSo, I'm reading the Declaration from the 99%... which can be found here: http://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/
I hope that when they form their General Assembly, that they prepare to write each of these as individual bills. I, for one, do not see the benefit in some of the changes that they're demanding. However, I'll go through the list of grievances and write down my thoughts.
1. Elimination of the Corporate State (or as I call it, Separation of Business and State): I agree with the 99%.
2. Rejection of the Citizens United Case: I agree with the 99%.
3. Elimination of Private Contributions to Politicians: I mostly agree with the 99%. There is the saying where 'money talks', there are too many of us to speak with our voices to be heard; and if money cannot be our voice, then strength of arms shall be. I say this because that is how certain other governments gained power - through love - and kept power through fear and violence. Review the history of the USSR please. Especially if it's to the tune of Tetris. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWTFG3J1CP8
4. Term Limits: I agree with the 99% I think. With separation of business and state, I believe that re-electing deserving public servants would be it's own reward. However, the career-ism bit is an issue. I'm a bit on the fence in the slightest of ways here.
5. Tax Code: I agree with the 99%.
6. Healthcare: What about just a public option and nationalizing healthcare (as in, health providers and health insurance providers get to compete nationally)? Seriously, the 99% might not benefit from gov't healthcare if you're also trying to cut the national debt.
7. Protection of the Planet: This is a difficult one for me. I think the EPA can already do this - but their accountability for which companies they go after needs almost complete reform. Besides, this is too global. Do you want the EPA to go after international companies in their host countries for polluting? That sounds like Captain Planet - and while I understand the sentiment, going to war in order to protect the planet is about the best way to ensure the planet to become the biggest loser.
8. Debt Reduction: What is a sustainable percentage? Nonono... this one should read 'pay off the national debt within 100 years' or some such. Define it. Politicians in office have managed the debt throughout our lives and the percentage has always been 'manageable.' Instead of targeting industries, instead do away with the 'lowest bidder' and 'exclusive contract' practices that the Federal Business Office and Government Services Administration are allowed to do. In WWII, IIRC, Jeeps were designed by one company, their designs were given by the government to their competitors and several US auto manufacturers made Jeeps for the military. However, armored HMMWVs (Humvees) for OEF/OIF were made by one (read, '1') contractor who had exclusivity. The inability of the DOD to contract multiple companies to build these vehicles quickly enough to supply the fighters may have cost the US hundreds (or thousands?) of lives in these operations and slowed down progress in completing the mission.
9. Jobs for all Americans: I don't know about this one. Do you want the same Government that gave you Abu Ghraib and the Big Bank Bailout(s) to be trusted to control what you will do for a living? Seriously, I do not want to work in the USSA.
10. Student Loan Forgiveness: If you signed your loan paperwork, then you need to learn to meet your obligations. Likewise, if you see the problem with getting student loans, just imagine the problems inherent with getting a credit card or pay day loan.
11. Dream Act: There are just too many problems with this to begin with.
12. Ending the Perpetual War for Profit: This is declaring war on the declaration of war itself. While I like it in principle, who made the 99% strategic military experts? Otherwise, I would be very happy for the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to come to a close. The military needs time to rest, refit and retrain to maximize their effectiveness - instead of 'war for profit' we just change how we fight wars:
- Soldiers who go into battle want the battle won by their side in the most decisive and quickest manner possible. The better this is achieved, my theory is the lower the instance of long-term disabilities resulting from multiple deployments and mental conditions like PTSD.
- Therefore, if we go to war, that is what we do. We go there to kill and destroy the enemy, and leave.
- If a defeated opponent wants some recompense, we can give them money; and let them rebuild their own country in their own image - rather than prop up an unsustainable Western-style government imposed upon them.
- I consider myself a little bit of a subject matter expert on this point. I am a medically retired combat veteran who was called on (and did) invade Iraq.
13. Reforming Public Education: I agree with the 99%.
14. End Outsourcing: I would agree with this, except for the issue of taxes. See your own Grievance #5.
15. End Currency Manipulation: Uhh, how are we going to ultimately going to cause China to stop manipulating their currency? Invade them? The trade deficit itself is not, by itself, a 'bad thing' for our country. There are other forms of cash flow where money is flowing into the United States from China and other countries. See the forest, not the trees.
16. Banking and Securities Reform: I'm OK with bringing back provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act. Let's keep commercial banking separate from investment banking. What is the purpose of introducing a small fee to collect a tax on each and every financial transaction? The way I read this, it sounds like I'll have to pay taxes on money that I transfer from my checking account to my savings account, or pay a transaction tax every time my employer pays me, or someone sends me money through PMO, check, ACH or any other method. How would cash transactions be taxed? This bothers me from a perspective of 'how do you enforce and collect this?' and from the perspective of the invasion of privacy necessary to oversee this. Finally, I disagree with price ceilings and price floors in general, as they introduce inefficiency into the economy.
17. Foreclosure Moratorium: This one needs rewriting as well. Banks do not have an inherent responsibility to loan anybody any money. The inference that it is their job to loan money to small business and consumers. Granted, the underwater mortgage rescue plan does seem to be very... interesting, but it creates the wrong kind of incentive for homeowners. The best way to reduce the interest rate on your mortgage is to let your home go into foreclosure and let the Government rescue you? The same government that you want to cut spending? Now, if there is some other measure that the banks are screwing up on - then yes, the alternative credit holder might be a very viable punishment for those banks. But, aren't there lines and barriers between the Fed and private citizens for a reason?
18. Ending the Fed: Part of the reason why the United States has enjoyed it's unequal measure of prosperity in the world is due to the existence and effective management of the Fed. If a nation's monetary policy is allowed to get anywhere near it's body of government that makes it's fiscal policy, then you can count on our government turning to ridiculous measures to solve the nation's debt. My assignment for you is this: make a list of countries in the world and order it based on their inflation rate (for the past year, or past ten years). Now, make a second list of countries and order it by the amount of control their politicians have over monetary policy. You just might find that countries that have private national banks that do not answer to their governments have a much more stable and lower inflation rate overall than countries where the politicians have a hand in it. Like Zimbabwe.
19. Abolish the Electoral College, Comprehensive Campaign and Finance Reform: Oh gods no. Short of having State Television and Internet, the FCC is not going to be able to grant free air time unless they pay the stations directly, compensating them for the loss of advertising revenue. Which, come to think of it, might be more efficient. Total public financing might help things, and get our entertainment focused back on the Olympics and ESPN. Shortening the campaign period to three months might be cutting it a little short... perhaps a guideline for: 1 month for district/neighborhood, 3 months for city, 6 months for county, 9 months for state, 1 year for federal. This includes time for primaries and all the like - so if you give primaries half of the campaigning time, you'd have an effective six-month race for President. Three months just isn't long enough - both for entertainment purposes and for having time to conduct due diligence independently on those running for office if such is your wont. Voter registration cards: how are you going to issue cards to everyone who is eligible to vote - even those who don't have any form of identification - if they don't have a form of identification? Register to vote, and on your registration form, vote by mail. I have an envelope - in my hand - that contains my ballot materials for this year's elections. I have never had to go to a polling station since I first registered to vote, and I probably never will. Abolishing the electoral college... I have some misgivings on this. If we voted by popular vote on state measures in Oregon, because more than half of the population lives in the Portland metropolis, by simple majority the State will do what Portland wants. This was used in Washington State to great detriment to pay for the King Dome using state-wide taxes for a stadium that was in Seattle that everyone else in the state may have to travel many hours to enjoy (and was used for commercial purposes besides). Let's not forget that the King Dome is still being paid for - perhaps it'll be paid off by 2080 or so (I forget how long it'll take). Instead, let's hybridize this:
20% of the voting power is individual. Each individual's vote is counted for any elections they participate in.
20% of the voting power is at city level. Each city council person's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in higher elections.
20% of the voting power is at county level. Each county council member's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in higher elections.
20% of the voting power is at the state level. Each politician's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in higher elections.
20% of the voting power is at the federal level. Each politician's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in Presidential elections.
What this will do: It will prevent a popular movement from the People seizing control (like say, the Nazi Party back-in-the-day in Germany). Where there are lower-level elections, the voting power of each group will be equal (so, 20% each for Presidential elections, 25% each for Federal elections, 33% each for State level elections, 50% each for County elections, and 100% individual vote for City elections).
20. Ending the War in Afghanistan: I kinda agree here. Except that we are not the expert military strategists. That's all I'm sayin'. If nothing else, give 'em a 24 month non-extendable amount of time to complete their mission, or send everyone home.
Am I nitpicking through this declaration? Hell yes. It all looks nice and cuddly on the surface, but I do have some serious issues with a number of points on it. Maybe fewer issues than I do with certain other political parties, but still. If anything, I'm happy for presenting alternatives to some of the points that I disagree with. If you'd like to bring up any particular point, I ask that you precede it with the article number. This will make for easier referencing by yours truly. Thank you for reading.
I hope that when they form their General Assembly, that they prepare to write each of these as individual bills. I, for one, do not see the benefit in some of the changes that they're demanding. However, I'll go through the list of grievances and write down my thoughts.
1. Elimination of the Corporate State (or as I call it, Separation of Business and State): I agree with the 99%.
2. Rejection of the Citizens United Case: I agree with the 99%.
3. Elimination of Private Contributions to Politicians: I mostly agree with the 99%. There is the saying where 'money talks', there are too many of us to speak with our voices to be heard; and if money cannot be our voice, then strength of arms shall be. I say this because that is how certain other governments gained power - through love - and kept power through fear and violence. Review the history of the USSR please. Especially if it's to the tune of Tetris. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWTFG3J1CP8
4. Term Limits: I agree with the 99% I think. With separation of business and state, I believe that re-electing deserving public servants would be it's own reward. However, the career-ism bit is an issue. I'm a bit on the fence in the slightest of ways here.
5. Tax Code: I agree with the 99%.
6. Healthcare: What about just a public option and nationalizing healthcare (as in, health providers and health insurance providers get to compete nationally)? Seriously, the 99% might not benefit from gov't healthcare if you're also trying to cut the national debt.
7. Protection of the Planet: This is a difficult one for me. I think the EPA can already do this - but their accountability for which companies they go after needs almost complete reform. Besides, this is too global. Do you want the EPA to go after international companies in their host countries for polluting? That sounds like Captain Planet - and while I understand the sentiment, going to war in order to protect the planet is about the best way to ensure the planet to become the biggest loser.
8. Debt Reduction: What is a sustainable percentage? Nonono... this one should read 'pay off the national debt within 100 years' or some such. Define it. Politicians in office have managed the debt throughout our lives and the percentage has always been 'manageable.' Instead of targeting industries, instead do away with the 'lowest bidder' and 'exclusive contract' practices that the Federal Business Office and Government Services Administration are allowed to do. In WWII, IIRC, Jeeps were designed by one company, their designs were given by the government to their competitors and several US auto manufacturers made Jeeps for the military. However, armored HMMWVs (Humvees) for OEF/OIF were made by one (read, '1') contractor who had exclusivity. The inability of the DOD to contract multiple companies to build these vehicles quickly enough to supply the fighters may have cost the US hundreds (or thousands?) of lives in these operations and slowed down progress in completing the mission.
9. Jobs for all Americans: I don't know about this one. Do you want the same Government that gave you Abu Ghraib and the Big Bank Bailout(s) to be trusted to control what you will do for a living? Seriously, I do not want to work in the USSA.
10. Student Loan Forgiveness: If you signed your loan paperwork, then you need to learn to meet your obligations. Likewise, if you see the problem with getting student loans, just imagine the problems inherent with getting a credit card or pay day loan.
11. Dream Act: There are just too many problems with this to begin with.
12. Ending the Perpetual War for Profit: This is declaring war on the declaration of war itself. While I like it in principle, who made the 99% strategic military experts? Otherwise, I would be very happy for the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to come to a close. The military needs time to rest, refit and retrain to maximize their effectiveness - instead of 'war for profit' we just change how we fight wars:
- Soldiers who go into battle want the battle won by their side in the most decisive and quickest manner possible. The better this is achieved, my theory is the lower the instance of long-term disabilities resulting from multiple deployments and mental conditions like PTSD.
- Therefore, if we go to war, that is what we do. We go there to kill and destroy the enemy, and leave.
- If a defeated opponent wants some recompense, we can give them money; and let them rebuild their own country in their own image - rather than prop up an unsustainable Western-style government imposed upon them.
- I consider myself a little bit of a subject matter expert on this point. I am a medically retired combat veteran who was called on (and did) invade Iraq.
13. Reforming Public Education: I agree with the 99%.
14. End Outsourcing: I would agree with this, except for the issue of taxes. See your own Grievance #5.
15. End Currency Manipulation: Uhh, how are we going to ultimately going to cause China to stop manipulating their currency? Invade them? The trade deficit itself is not, by itself, a 'bad thing' for our country. There are other forms of cash flow where money is flowing into the United States from China and other countries. See the forest, not the trees.
16. Banking and Securities Reform: I'm OK with bringing back provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act. Let's keep commercial banking separate from investment banking. What is the purpose of introducing a small fee to collect a tax on each and every financial transaction? The way I read this, it sounds like I'll have to pay taxes on money that I transfer from my checking account to my savings account, or pay a transaction tax every time my employer pays me, or someone sends me money through PMO, check, ACH or any other method. How would cash transactions be taxed? This bothers me from a perspective of 'how do you enforce and collect this?' and from the perspective of the invasion of privacy necessary to oversee this. Finally, I disagree with price ceilings and price floors in general, as they introduce inefficiency into the economy.
17. Foreclosure Moratorium: This one needs rewriting as well. Banks do not have an inherent responsibility to loan anybody any money. The inference that it is their job to loan money to small business and consumers. Granted, the underwater mortgage rescue plan does seem to be very... interesting, but it creates the wrong kind of incentive for homeowners. The best way to reduce the interest rate on your mortgage is to let your home go into foreclosure and let the Government rescue you? The same government that you want to cut spending? Now, if there is some other measure that the banks are screwing up on - then yes, the alternative credit holder might be a very viable punishment for those banks. But, aren't there lines and barriers between the Fed and private citizens for a reason?
18. Ending the Fed: Part of the reason why the United States has enjoyed it's unequal measure of prosperity in the world is due to the existence and effective management of the Fed. If a nation's monetary policy is allowed to get anywhere near it's body of government that makes it's fiscal policy, then you can count on our government turning to ridiculous measures to solve the nation's debt. My assignment for you is this: make a list of countries in the world and order it based on their inflation rate (for the past year, or past ten years). Now, make a second list of countries and order it by the amount of control their politicians have over monetary policy. You just might find that countries that have private national banks that do not answer to their governments have a much more stable and lower inflation rate overall than countries where the politicians have a hand in it. Like Zimbabwe.
19. Abolish the Electoral College, Comprehensive Campaign and Finance Reform: Oh gods no. Short of having State Television and Internet, the FCC is not going to be able to grant free air time unless they pay the stations directly, compensating them for the loss of advertising revenue. Which, come to think of it, might be more efficient. Total public financing might help things, and get our entertainment focused back on the Olympics and ESPN. Shortening the campaign period to three months might be cutting it a little short... perhaps a guideline for: 1 month for district/neighborhood, 3 months for city, 6 months for county, 9 months for state, 1 year for federal. This includes time for primaries and all the like - so if you give primaries half of the campaigning time, you'd have an effective six-month race for President. Three months just isn't long enough - both for entertainment purposes and for having time to conduct due diligence independently on those running for office if such is your wont. Voter registration cards: how are you going to issue cards to everyone who is eligible to vote - even those who don't have any form of identification - if they don't have a form of identification? Register to vote, and on your registration form, vote by mail. I have an envelope - in my hand - that contains my ballot materials for this year's elections. I have never had to go to a polling station since I first registered to vote, and I probably never will. Abolishing the electoral college... I have some misgivings on this. If we voted by popular vote on state measures in Oregon, because more than half of the population lives in the Portland metropolis, by simple majority the State will do what Portland wants. This was used in Washington State to great detriment to pay for the King Dome using state-wide taxes for a stadium that was in Seattle that everyone else in the state may have to travel many hours to enjoy (and was used for commercial purposes besides). Let's not forget that the King Dome is still being paid for - perhaps it'll be paid off by 2080 or so (I forget how long it'll take). Instead, let's hybridize this:
20% of the voting power is individual. Each individual's vote is counted for any elections they participate in.
20% of the voting power is at city level. Each city council person's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in higher elections.
20% of the voting power is at county level. Each county council member's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in higher elections.
20% of the voting power is at the state level. Each politician's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in higher elections.
20% of the voting power is at the federal level. Each politician's vote is counted for whomever they vote for in Presidential elections.
What this will do: It will prevent a popular movement from the People seizing control (like say, the Nazi Party back-in-the-day in Germany). Where there are lower-level elections, the voting power of each group will be equal (so, 20% each for Presidential elections, 25% each for Federal elections, 33% each for State level elections, 50% each for County elections, and 100% individual vote for City elections).
20. Ending the War in Afghanistan: I kinda agree here. Except that we are not the expert military strategists. That's all I'm sayin'. If nothing else, give 'em a 24 month non-extendable amount of time to complete their mission, or send everyone home.
Am I nitpicking through this declaration? Hell yes. It all looks nice and cuddly on the surface, but I do have some serious issues with a number of points on it. Maybe fewer issues than I do with certain other political parties, but still. If anything, I'm happy for presenting alternatives to some of the points that I disagree with. If you'd like to bring up any particular point, I ask that you precede it with the article number. This will make for easier referencing by yours truly. Thank you for reading.
