My Republican senator, Rob Portman, is soliciting public input for the congressional supercommittee in charge of cutting the federal budget and (mostly likely) ripping our economy to shreds in the process. Channeling Don Quixote, I wrote him to say what I’d do if Empress Sungold were put in charge. It’s more wonky - and more earnest – than is typical for Kittywampus. If you get through it without snoozing, I’m interested in what you would do as a member of the supercommittee. (If you’re an Ohio resident, you can give Senator Portman a piece of your mind, too.)
Here’s Empress Sungold’s plan (edited to add a few links):
In a word: Jobs. Reviving our economy and stimulating employment has to come before austerity.
Our economy is still stagnating. Unemployment remains very high, both in Ohio and nationally. It would be a dire mistake to introduce spending cuts right now. In the short run, we need revenue increases. Please listen to Warren Buffett and Bill Gates when they say that the very rich must pony up; they’re right! There is no excuse for tax breaks for corporate jets when Medicaid and school funding are being cut.
In addition to closing loopholes and raising taxes on those who make at least a half-million per year, we need targeted stimulus. There’s much still to be done for our conventional infrastracture (just check out the potholes here in Athens sometime). We also need a massive forward-looking investment in non-conventional infrastructure, including renewable energy. We already have great solar and wind companies right here in Ohio, but the sector needs to be vastly scaled up, with your S. 1000 being a good start, but only a start. We need investments in our schools. We need to fully fund Medicaid, Head Start, and women’s health services such as Planned Parenthood, because an emerging generation of sickly and ignorant Americans will not be able to build a strong country – and because short-term cuts too often lead to greater expenses in the long run, when diseases are diagnosed and treated only at a later stage. These are just a few of the areas where investing in our country through a second stimulus program will both address structural weaknesses in our economy and society, and put people back to work.
We need to bring unemployment down not only because it’s right and humane, but also because our economy requires a kick-start. As Henry Ford knew way back in the early 1900s, workers are also consumers who will drive demand. Without a rise in consumer demand our economy is doomed to years more of stagnation.
To address the crisis that brought down our economy in the first place and prevent a reprise of it, we need more stringent controls on Wall Street. Unbelievably, the big firms are more deeply invested in derivatives now than they were in 2008! At the same time, we need relief for homeowners facing foreclosure, helping them refinance their mortgages and possibly also write off part of the mortgage in cases where they’re underwater. This, too, would enable consumers to spend, helping stimulate a recovery, while also reducing the burden of toxic securities on the banks.
Plans should be made to control the deficit over the long-term, with deficit reduction taking a backseat to recharging our economy. An aggressive short-term policy of austerity would kill any chance at recovery; this is basic macroeconomics.
Deficit reduction must be done through a combination of revenue increases and selective cuts. Revenue should come primarily through raising taxes on the rich (as described above) and through the increased tax receipts that will come with people being back to work. The current payroll tax cuts should be maintained past January for their stimulatory effect; once the economy is growing again, the regular rates should be reinstated, and the ceiling above which income is exempt from FICA should be raised, perhaps to $150,000.
The main area where we can cut without harming our citizens is military spending. No country in the world spends anywhere near what we do on “defense,” which has become a code word for empire. We need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to scrutinize which military expenditures really help keep us safe within our borders, and which ones predominantly allow us to project our power.
Thanks for listening to my ideas, Senator Portman! I wish you luck with your difficult task.
Patron cat of Kittywampus (1985-2001)
The “Super Committee” members have a pretty sweet deal. They will be bombarded by PAC $$$$$$ and the decisions that need to be taken will continue to be avoided. The military-industrial complex, big pharma, big oil, banksters and insurance companies will see to that. All we will do is keep inflating the money supply. Despite what we are being told, we are in continuous QE3 already, too.
So what would I do?
As a first step, I would close ALL military bases overseas and frame defense spending within Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution:
“……To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy;…..”
So I would use the Navy and Marines for “force projection” and gradually wind down/assimilate the Army and Air Force into the remaining branches. The Founders well recognized the dangers of militarism.
I would also immediately stop all spending on mercenaries (whoops, that really should be spelled as “civilian contractors”), overseas military aid and begin to wind down the organs of the national security state.
I would look at and revise how money is spent on so-called healthcare. Much of Federal support and Medicare expenditure is little more than a massive profit center for big pharma and insurance conglomerates. We cannot avoid dealing with this problem. We spend way more on healthcare per capita than anyone else in the world, but where is this getting us? In terms of life expectancy, according to the “CIA Factbook”, we rank 50th; Albania ranks 51st!!!! I would rather that my tax $$$ went to the building of local clinics rather than to support the bottom line for AETNA, CIGNA, Humana, etc. Medicare part D is also a total train wreck and legalizes price gouging..
We need to also have a serious change in terms of how we look at energy projects, these have big potential to improve our employment situation. That means that we need to have proper risk assessments and rigorous analyses, rather than emotionalism, when it comes to decision making. Not attempting to do it right in our own jurisdiction doesn’t just hurt us in term of local employment, it means we are also exporting problems (Chad, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, etc.). Does our nimbyism actually plays into the hands of “big oil”?
Finally, much of what passes for “Free Trade” is little more than a mechanism whereby multinationals can transfer their manufacturing overseas, import into the US without incurring tariffs and sell domestically. Given the minimal/lax environmental regulation in say, Vietnam, are we not just outsourcing environmental damage, too? Are we facilitating the circumvention of employment laws? These “Free Trade” deals did way more to help Corporatism than, say, the East African farmer growing plants for natural insecticide production (this is a pet peeve). Much of what passes for “Free Trade” needs to be challenged and deals potentially abrogated. This would inevitably lead to price inflation, but we are heading that way anyways through currency debasement.
Oh, and what about letting people grow industrial hemp? Bet you could reestablish hemp-based industry locally in short order.
The sad fact is that none of the above will happen until the Corporatism that dominates American politics is challenged.
I approve this plan.
I think a majority of Americans would support your approach, Sungold.
Seconding all that’s been said, especially by Hydraargyrum. I wish I had some hope. But in allowing ourselves to be ruled by the Politburo (“super committee”), we’re screwed. Still, I’m at least going down fighting.
http://october2011.org
As I understand it, the supercommittee will be charged with deficit reduction, not economic recovery. Agree that taxes should be increased but only if democrats agree to Medicare and Social Security cuts. Of course, logic, reason and the spirit of compromise will prevail here, right. And cows will fly too.
What I really want to know though is your thoughts on this little gem: http://jezebel.com/5837577/should-women-get-to-choose-c+sections