Running Out of Fear

Democrats have always run and found success running on fear. Even more than 150 years ago they tried to support their position against abolishing slavery by spreading fear of the economic collapse without the vile practice.

Throughout the mid-19th century there were plenty of ‘scary’ topics to assure Americans they could protect them against; unstable governments around the globe, workers being taken advantage of by big corporations (funny from the party of slavery), potential collapse of economic system due to increasing private participation. And on and on.

Into the 60’s and 70’s we saw energy crisis’ fears due to fuel costs driven by our reliance of energy from unstable Middle East. Fear of conflict from Russia. Continued fears of big corporations controlling workers and industries. 

Moving forward into the 80’s and even through turn of the century, we saw some of these same fear topics evolve into larger movements. The energy crisis of the 70’s morphed into global warming of the 90’s. Growth of private sector and market successes by more Americans took the Dems support of “workers unite” mantra to new level of class warfare, assuring lower earners that corporations continued to take advantage of employees even though standard of living and opportunities for all Americans continued to improve.

Which brings us to modern day and what I call the plateau of fear opportunities for the Democrats.

Global warming became climate change to broaden potential examples of the ‘science’ but now even with the new definitions, countless fear milestones of horrific outcomes due to climate change have come and gone. Skepticism grows.

Yesterday’s fear mongering of potential disasters due to workers relying on private pensions has become more and more of a weak argument as more Americans are reaching retirement after full careers investing in 401k and private IRA accounts that have matured creating very wealthy and financially stable retirements for millions of Americans. Not good for Democratic fear.

Bottom line, traditional fear topics are getting busted or at the very least, seriously diluted.

What to do next if you are the political party that garners support by assuring voters you will protect them from evils of free market capitalism?

You create fear topics. You enlist corporate media to help spread your fear. You take even existing topics and conditions, often very common societal conditions, and exaggerate or even fabricate potential outcomes to create fear from these common conditions that have always existed. 

This is the foundation of the Democratic Party. Without fear, fear of death from viruses, fear of economic collapse, fear of climate disasters, fear of personal economic destitution in retirement, they have no existence. They need bad things happening to convince the public that they are needed to protect you.

I’ve always had a saying about Democrats that also works for some other groups such as labor unions… They can only truly fix problems they create.

But by staying informed, mining for actual facts and data instead of simply believing statements that just don’t sound right, you can see through the BS.

As American author Herman Melville once said, “Ignorance is the parent of fear.”

Spread the word… Common Sense is real.

From Ma Bell to Tesla

Bet you have a cell phone. In fact, a good chance you are reading this blog on one right now.

You might even be one of the 70% of US adults living in a household that only has a cell phone. No landline at all. Jump back just 14 years to 2008 and that number wasn’t even 20% with about 80% of households having a landline.

The move really wasn’t too shocking. With capabilities and reach of modern mobile devices compared to the limitations of traditional analog landlines, the switch was a no-brainer once cost of ownership of the mobile devices became reasonable. 

And of course the regulations requiring migration to mobile devices away from landlines helped.

Wait, what, you don’t remember those regs? That’s because they didn’t happen.

I recall my first “mobile” phone was a bag phone. Phone in a bag about 1/2 the size of a small briefcase with a battery the size of a house brick. Limited number of talk minutes, no text messaging and roaming charges when I got out of my home area. Cost of the service was more than I pay today for 5g service with unlimited service area, unlimited data, and unlimited talk and text.

You could easily draw parallels with discussion of Electric Vehicles. EVs  have some advantages. Quiet, powerful with their high torque electric motors, and no tailpipe emissions. 

That doesn’t mean their overall impact to the environment is better than current fossil fuel internal combustion vehicles and overall cost including acquisition cost, is still very high.

Still, for a niche market, they can be desired product. Much like that bag phone. 

That’s not to say EVs will never be a viable alternative to an internal combustion fossil fuel powered vehicle. With significant improvements in battery technology and dramatic bolstering of charging infrastructure and grids, they could. But those changes will evolve over decades, not years. 

Much like that bag phone to today’s smartphone.

Point?

Capitalism works and always brings the latest and greatest at the eventual best price due to competition. But never due to forced regulation. 

Whether it’s whale oil to processed crude for lighting, landlines to cell phones, or even internal combustion fossil fuel vehicles to EVs, the only way forward is through free market capitalism.

So don’t hate EVs. Hate the regulations to force the technology on you before it’s time.

And the politicians that know better.. 

Let’s ACT. It’s Only Fair.

Midterms, new House leadership, swirling talk of candidates for next general elections. Along with political posturing and usual bs from virtually every politician in Washington, it is also time for the perennial discussion of income tax in America.

Liberals will join in with usual tactics of class warfare, claiming that the rich avoid their “fair share” while middle and lower class share the burden of the US tax burden.

Reality is that the top 50% of earners pay around 97% of all income and payroll taxes collected. The “1 per centers?” They pay around 40% of all income taxes.

Often those same complaining of tax inequality will tout a flat tax, usually 10% being the typical figure thrown around. Most ignorant of the facts, others coy and sneaky, reality is that 10% would be a dramatic increase in income tax rate for lower earners and a MASSIVE tax reduction for top earners. Fact is, with an average income tax collected of around 13% - 14%, with current budgets, this would blow up the deficit even wider, ballooning an already out of control national debt.

There is a answer. One that matches national consumption and therefore manufacturing and general employment with tax revenue. One that is fair for all and doesn’t punish anyone for success while still collecting more from those who have the resources to spend more.

Call it a fair tax, national sales tax, or whatever you like. I prefer consumption tax. Maybe an acronym like ACT, American Consumption Tax.

You’ve probably heard of it before. Recently there was chatter from GOP of a sales tax, something like 30%. Obviously that was posturing and political show. 30% is ridiculous.

The Federal government will collect around $5.5 trillion this year in income and payroll taxes. GDP is somewhere in neighborhood of $23 trillion. Strip out housing services which include things like rent and utilities and it is around $20 trillion.

A 15% consumption tax alone would bring somewhere around $3 trillion. 

Here are some added features of the ACT plan to achieve the needed revenue:

- Strip all corporate tax on all net revenue. Manufacturers would pay same consumption tax on raw goods. Again, production matches consumption. Like consumers, corporations would pay no income tax.

- Add a 1% tax to all new and existing home sales. Don’t panic. On a $250k house at today’s rates, would amount to about $17 a month on payments.

- Same with new cars. Again, no need to panic. On a $30k new car with $5k down on a 60 month note, it’s about $5 bucks a month.

Plenty of revenue and citizens have all of their income. More of your earned income to deposit in retirement accounts. If you choose. More to spend on luxury items. If you choose. 

Need to cut back? Do it. Keep your earned income. If you choose.

There are some caveats that have to be exercised for the ACT plan to work.

First and foremost, the 16th amendment must be abolished. This is the amendment that provides ability of Feds to collect income tax. We can’t trust Congress to simply stop collecting with a new law. Must be abolished.

Consumption tax wouldn’t apply to any food (groceries) or necessary utilities.

Finally, we absolutely must past a Federal balanced budget amendment. 

There ya go. We’ll collect the needed revenue, and have a system that is truly fair for everyone. No need to be envious of super rich spending millions on a new yacht. In fact, should encourage it.

Lower earners have more of their money when they need it.

You’ll hear politicians argue against consumption tax plans. Make no mistake, there is always a selfish motive to not allow US citizens to control more of their own money.

It’s time to stand up and demand a restructured, fair tax plan.

You know, ACT.