Saturday, January 03, 2009

NEW YEAR SAME OLD PROBLEMS

Happy New Year!

Here's hoping that yours (and please God OURS) is a more happy healthy and prosperous one than any of the last eight.

So long has passed and there are so many issues to address that I guess I'll attempt a scattershot drive-by. Here goes:

BLAGO-GATE

Well gee the euphoria of one Chicago politician's ascendancy sure was drowned out for a moment by the ascendancy to scandal of another wasn't it? Can you believe this guy? It never ceases to amaze me how the phrase "appearance of impropriety" is completely lost on some public figures. I mean, OK, let's assume for a thinly-stretched moment that Blagojevich was doing nothing legally wrong and that he wasn't really trying to sell Barack Obama's vacated senate seat to the highest bidder -wouldn't you want to make damn sure that you couldn't EVER be misinterpreted as doing so? Wouldn't you want to do everything possible to appear to be open and honest and to fend off any possibility of a federal investigation? Now look at the charges against Blago? WTF? I guess these guys who do this kind of stuff really are that stupid.

And the latest twist is that he still actually thinks that anyone will let him appoint Obama's successor. Unbelievable. So he simply pretends that his selection of Roland Burris will be honored and that that's that? Burris talks as though it's a done-deal and he's already the senator? What the hell are these guys thinking?

Article I Section 5 of the Constitution reads: "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members". That last "and Qualifications" pretty much puts the nail in Burris' senatorial coffin doesn't it? I.e. if the senate decides that the taint of the Bagojevich scandal disqualifies Burris' appointment, what text are they going to use to refite it?

And why oh why would Burris let himself be appointed under these circumstances? Doesn't he realize that if he hitches his career to the Blago train that he's committing political suicide? Either he doesn't really care or greed has made him stupid.

The legal challenges are just warming up so pop some popcorn and find a comfy-chair.

THE ECONOMY

Oh boy.

Well gee that Wall street bailout package Congress rushed to pass worked great didn't it? Apparently they weren't really trying to save the banks -just the bankers. No oversight. Read that again. No oversight. None. Nothing to say how the money was supposed to be spent. No guidelines. No restrictions. Nada. Great.

And now they want to bail out the automakers? HA!

The housing market isn't improving any. Unemployment is at its worst since the 80's. The stock market has lost almost 6000 points since last year. (I've never been so happy to be too poor to be a part of the investment class!)

Obama seems really ready to push this stimulus package hard. I guess the idea is to do the Bush stimulus the right way? I.e. more tax cuts but this time for the "right" people.

I'm honestly conflicted about this: in the short run it might give the intended boost -but things are so tight that I have a hard time imagining that unless it's a huge chunk of change that it'll do more than make a few weeks easier for the majority of paycheck-to-paycheck folks.

In addition I've been hearing (and am starting to believe) that tax cuts (even for the middle-class) have a negligible effect on the economy because what really drives the economy is not how much money the government takes or doesn't take, but wages, jobs and GDP etc. none of which tax cuts or even raises helps. In fact you can make a pretty decent argument that RAISING taxes is better in the long run for wages because if companies have to pay x amount of money to employees (with the assumption that a percentage will go the govt.) and taxes go up the companies have to pay more to offset the taxes so that the take home pay is the same and so over time the general salary for the job raises. Conversely, if you cut taxes, the employer is paying the same but the employee takes home more, and the employer doesn't have to raise the employees wage so that over time wages stagnate.

If the government really wants to goose the economy it should make health care universal to alleviate the expense from individual families and corporations and spread the resources over a larger pool (as Obama is planning on doing) and make raising the minimum wage to a livable (not luxurious, but livable) wage.

Both of these could be done without tinkering with the tax code which frankly needs merely to be rolled back to where it was before Bush took office and then left alone. My humble two cents.

ARE WE STILL AT WAR?

Gee weren't we supposed to be at war on two fronts or something? Seems like we've gotten so caught up in the wave of change that's coming that we've forgotten that ghastly fact. The nightly news is all but bereft of coverage and frankly I can't remember when the last time was that I saw a news story on either Iraq or Afghanistan on any of the major three networks. Maybe I'm just missing them but I'm a news junkie so what does that tell you?

Spoke with a friend over the holidays on leave from one of those fronts and he said (albeit in a tight-lipped manner) that things are getting better over there. That's good news, really. I just hope that means we can leave now. It's not like we could use the money or anything.

The inauguration can't be over soon enough IMO we need to new pols to get to work.

Cheers, you lot. -OP