Worshipping at the Altar of Capitalism.

Don't get the wrong idea straight off here, I'm not advocating socialism or communism, in fact, I believe that capitalism is the default nature of the human economic construct. It only makes sense, I make a product, I get paid based on the value of that product. The proof is in the history, there is no nation that has been able to get rid of a capitalist system completely, even communists can't get rid of it. There is always somebody who wants something and is willing to do something proportional to the value he ascribes to the object to obtain it. That is capitalism, and it has existed since humans have.

But what happens when we take hold of something, we take it to heart, we use it, we ascribe success to it, we ascribe failure to things that work against it, we give it value in our lives, we tell others about it, we think others without it are missing something, that they will be happier with it, we work towards its goals, we give it our time, we have faith in it to provide us success, wealth, fulfillment and happiness. Am I talking about religion? It certainly sounds as if I could be. No, I'm talking about American capitalism.

Conservatives claiming to be Christians talk about it all the time. True, more of the ones old enough to remember the Cold War talk about it than others, but those are the ones with the loudest voices right? But what kind of system would better lend itself to true Christian values? What kind of system would better fit the societal goals of Jesus himself? Is it winner take all brutish capitalism? Somehow I don't think so.

I heard a great idea come from Warren Buffet I think it was the other day, don't quote me, I have a notoriously bad memory. He said our current system as evidenced by the big bailouts is one where the rich live in a system of socialism, while the poor live in capitalism. His point? The rich receive all the help, while the poor not only pay for it, but receive nothing. I believe this is what the Bible is talking about when it decries the rich taking advantage of the poor. So our values now in this country are to make sure the rich keep their wealth so that their grape vines can hang over their marble walls to provide us with a few grapes now and then? That's not the ideal I live to support.

Am I trying to stoke some sort of class warfare? Absolutely not, I think the phrase is overused. I hear it from Hannity all the time, but he uses it as a catch phrase to deflect criticism of the current tax policy. But let the current trend continue, let the disparity between rich and poor continue to broaden, and you'll see real class warfare, you'll see the have nots rise up and take from the haves, and no one is gonna like the result. All existing examples are complete bloodbaths and gigantic horrific messes.

So we know what doesn't work, especially if our goal is to be prosperous as a country. We know that a policy of trickle down economics, Reaganomics doesn't work to bring prosperity to the country at large, it only serves to redistribute wealth to those who already have it. So the conservatives decrying wealth distribution are doing so to their own hypocrisy for they already support it as long as it is directed toward them and their ideals. But try to "spread the wealth" a code phrase for offering relief to those who need it, and suddenly there are cries of class warfare and socialism. Just today Hannity was whining about someone basically having his hand in your pocket because you make more, but that is a gross distortion. Like the welfare system doesn't do that already?

What we need is a system such that the playing field is much more level, where the rich do not suffer the injustice of losing all their hard (right) earned money, but the poor still have the chance to work hard and make something, but also so that no one is "living off the state" anymore than the amount it takes to feed one's self. We certainly do not want to be a country where people starve to death, no matter how much they don't work, but we should not be required to provide them a luxurious dwelling.

One way I think we can do this is by making the capital gains tax the same as the income tax, taxed the same way. No matter how you make money, whether you work for it, or whether you have enough money to make interest from your money, it should be taxed in the same manner. That's only fair. It is absolutely not fair for the rich who are able to make money from money to get to pay a lower tax than those not having enough money to do that. It makes no sense. I'm not saying this out of any kind of envy, I'm saying all income should be taxed in the same way. In fact, it would be even more fair if a ditch digger had to pay fewer taxes because his work is harder, but I'm not trying to put anyone ahead, it should be equal. No matter how you make your money, it should be taxed equally.

That is not to say however that however much money you make, it should be taxed equally, no, that is far worse, and in fact, we can see what steps toward that have done in the past eight years. The gap between rich and poor has widened by great leaps and bounds, so we know that is obviously a step in the wrong direction. The gap between the haves and have nots should never get bigger, it should get smaller or stay the same. You can't tell me that every single one of the millions of families living below the poverty line is there because they are lazy welfare society suckers. If there is one thing I have learned about poverty in my travels from there to the middle class, it is this: Poverty has very little to do with money. It is about knowledge, attitude, class, and culture. My neighbors live in a decrepit trailer, drive trashy cars, and yet have now as I speak probably $350 worth of Halloween decorations in their front yard. But I digress, back to taxes.

Taxes are in this country progressive, that is to say, the more money you make, the greater percent of it is taxed (to a point.) This is as it should be, but as the last eight years have borne out, the progressiveness is not quite at the point it needs to be to level the playing field. The rich are getting richer, and in perspective, the poor are getting poorer. We need to re-angle the graph of tax rates to better level off the changes between rich and poor. It can't be disputed that the more a person makes, the more taxes they can afford with out cutting into the fruits of their labors, there is no such thing as an income cap. Ideally what we should be seeing is that if the rich get richer, the working poor get richer as well, not that we should be taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor, but that the working poor should not be saddled with a burden they are not able to shoulder. If you lower the rates of taxes on the rich, you drop a weight on the working poor. You tip the playing field, and you don't de-penalize the rich for making money, you penalize the poor for not making money.

So what are our choices? McCain wants to lower taxes on the rich including the capital gains tax to "create jobs." This is "startlingly retrogressive" as I've heard it said. This is making a false assumption, what it basically says is this. If you have alot of money, I will lower your taxes, so you can expand your business and make a whole bunch load more money. It keeps the people low on the ladder low on the ladder. We are just surviving now because the dream of climbing that ladder has been dashed by the the tax policy, we look up and realize that the rungs of the ladder are missing. Our employers are offered the chance of getting richer for employing more of us at the same wages, see the difference?

I was reading Habakkuk this evening and God suggested I blog about it, the verse was this: "He brings all of them up with a hook; he drags them out with his net; he gathers them in his dragnet; so he rejoices and is glad. Therefore he sacrifices to his net and makes offerings to his dragnet; for by them he lives in luxury, and his food is rich. Is he then to keep on emptying his net and mercilessly killing nations forever?" Hab. 1:15-17. And this is the capitalism that Americans worship for by it they live in luxury, and in pursuit of it we destroy nations, and the rich trample the poor.

I suggest we abandon bare cruel capitalism in the name of Christ.
WiredForStereo

An American Electric Car on the Horizon.

What you see to the left is the Chevy Volt, GM's new range extended electric vehicle set to be released in November 2010. I say good. With GM's stock price hovering at about $6, they better finally do something right. You can't lose tens of billions of dollars a year forever and expect to stay in business, unless you're the US government, in which case, that would be a time known as the "good years."

Why do I own Toyotas? Because in my opinion they offer a superior product. I would be happy to be a supporter of all-American products, but there aren't many that are worth buying. I took care of a small fleet of vehicles containing Toyotas, Fords, a Mercedes, and a GM. Which vehicles had problems and Toyotas ever had a problem, whereas every on of the others did, in fact, we sold one of the Fords because we had to fix it so often. We haven't had to take our own Toyota in for anything other than being struck by large objects moving at speed.

So while I'd absolutely love to have a moderately sized efficient reliable American vehicle, I just haven't seen one around lately. And the only people I hear advertizing for GM on the radio all drive Escalades, a vehicle which I feel represents a great number of things wrong with our country. Anyway, I hope that GM can pull it off, and just a stock tip from me, buy GM stock, it's REAL cheap and it can't exactly go down any further.

I think a lot of good things could happen if vehicles like the Volt become popular. I was thinking about one of them this evening. The Volt is supposed to be able to go 40 miles on a charge before using any gasoline. That means I think that trips will get on average shorter than that, our wasteful habit of travelling all over the place will hopefully diminish. Maybe we'll form tighter knit communities and be more interdependent on one another. And I was thinking that the gasoline preserver companies will probably make a few extra bucks because there is a much bigger chance the people's gas will go stale while it's not being used, and they'll have to use gas preserver.

Great cars change the world, look up some history.
WiredForStereo

Funny thing...

I don't know if any of you have been to California, but in case you didn't know, the apocalypse happens about every other week there. Here's an example of a wall of hell fire consuming the sinners, if you look close enough you can see the four horsemen in the background on the left.

Don't worry, I will write about some good stuff soon.

Why we need higher taxes.

See the Debt Clock ticker to the left.

End of post.

WiredForStereo

Free Membership

I just got a membership offer from PADI and though I know what it means it's poorly worded and seems to say at I'm going to be receiving a 12 month membership that seems to be "a free gift with your paid membership."

Anyway, I'm not buying it, no matter how free $29 ends up being.
WiredForStereo

Clean Coal, like Non Sticky Super Glue!!! Also, a Pickens Plan Followup.

Well, I'm sitting here at the U of A typing this up on a Mac, listening to dcTalk and Spoken Groove on my iPhone, I look like an Apple commercial.  Honestly, this is the first time I've ever used a Mac, and yes, I'm 25 years old.  The only two problems I'm seeing right now is that this thing doesn't have a wave keyboard and the screen is so huge, I .... wait, there's only one problem after all, seriously, the screen is bigger than my living room TV.  I'd by a Mac, if they didn't cost more than my truck... zing! 

Anyway, as you have, I've been hearing stuff about clean coal on TV and in the debates, and in the non-official debates, and spewed by the Republicans.  I'd just like to go ahead and say that clean coal sits right down there with hydrogen technology as far as feasibility and the possibility of actually coming to fruition.

I'll tell ya why.  Just like hydrogen, if the technology did suddenly and magically appear to make the idea even possible, there's boatloads of other problems that still don't follow the dot to dot.  If the technology did suddenly show up to capture carbon (which I could care less about) there's still all the other stuff I do care about, and you should too, sulphur, NOx's, mercury, lead, cadmium, and fly ash which under continuingly restrictive restrictions, is gonna be toxic waste soon.  There's still the problem of mining, mountaintop removal mining, processing and transportation of all that coal.  Just like hydrogen, if you can figure out how to make hydrogen economically, you still have to figure out how to transport and store it which so far still has big problems since hydrogen can LEAK THROUGH SOLID METAL.  Then of course, you have to use it again which is equally or more inefficient that making it in the first place.

These technologies have been 40 years from economic feasibility for 50 years now.

And that's the simple facts.

Addendum to the Pickens Plan, I've recently learned that the US already imports nearly a quarter of its natural gas.  So, Mr. Pickens, I really like the wind turbine idea, but I'm still coming up with the conclusion that you'd like to trade an oil addiction for a NG addiction.  Trading one import for another now.  NG like oil gets traded on the open market, which means as other countries use more of it, our price goes up.

Electricity on the other hand can't easily be exported to other countries, and can be used in infinite ways.  We make it here, we use it here, and other countries can't easily buy it from us.  Plus there's always the fact that I can make it in my back yard, which I can't do with oil, NG, or hydrogen.  Concerned about the limited range of electric cars?  I live 6 miles from town, how far away do you live?

I did think of one other bad thing about this Mac, the screen's so big, I can only use about a quarter of it to write this post because of the size of Blogger's typing window.  All this wasted space and electricity.  But I guess if I bought one and used it as my TV it could be economical.  Of course, for the same price, I could have a rockin' awesome PC and a big screen HDTV.  Plus, I wouldn't look like so much of an elitist. ;-)

Go with what works.

WiredForStereo