WARNING: Political discussion ahead. Please feel free to skip if you lack the ability to disagree with someone and still embrace them as a friend.
Arizona. That is all I need to say today and you know exactly what I am referring to. Ten years from now that may or may not be the case, however today you can get updates on the tragedy as often as you can hit refresh. But should that be the case?
The first soap box I am going to hop up on is the speed of the news cycle today. In these modern times (for which I am grateful, as I am fond of most advancements in technology,) information can be found instantaneously. It takes mere moments to go from a question about something to a Google result of 100k pages with answers, and that is clearly amazing. Moreover, possibly without knowing Douglas Adams was making an amazing prediction with “The Hitchhikers’ Guide to the Galaxy.” The worlds knowledge all within the confines of an electronic book? Have you looked at your smart phone recently, the only thing missing is a bright read cover saying “Don’t Panic.”
However, in this day of instant information, the news cycle has become instant as well. Now this instant news cycle has some positive attributes. News is now reported by more people in more ways than ever before. It is often uncensored and unedited as directly from the source. This means that it is harder and harder for any person or group to unilaterally manipulate the raw news information. However, it also means that the information that we are presented with has not been critically analyzed.
Combine this lack of critical analysis with the attempt by the professional news reporters attempting to stay ahead of the story, buy getting response to reports rather than analyzing the reports, and you can very quickly run into “mob mentality” in the intellectual realm along with the physical realm.
A perfect example of this is the Arizona shooting. The factual report was that there was a shooting at Gabby Giffords’ personal appearance, and that the shooter had been stopped at the scene. The shooter was identified as a young man. That becomes where the factual information stopped and reaction and assumptions began. A critical analysis of the situation would lead you to ask, was the shooting politically motivated? So you would then look to see what the Congresswoman’s political leanings were. But you would also have to look to see what the shooter’s political leanings were, not just assume that they were diametrically opposed to the Congresswoman’s. These were the questions I asked myself. But because of the speed of the news cycle when the idea that the shooter was motivated by the Tea Party, or extremist radio, or even the general vitriol was floated all the news sources were more interested in being the first to report it, rather than asking the logical question, is there any evidence that any of those things motivated the shooter?
Unfortunately, now, since the claims were given affect thorough the repeated reporting without questioning, and then the necessity of those blamed for this, outside of the shooter themselves, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to find the answers to what should have been simple questions. Why is it so difficult? Human nature. Once someone takes a stance, even without evidence, then they have a natural tendency to find evidence to support their stance.
If we accept a slower news cycle, and don’t rush to re-post everything that is said that supports what we already believe, THEN we could potentially have some chance of coming to some truth.
NEXT SOAPBOX:
Rep. Robert Brady apparently was intending to purpose legislation to outlaw speech that could be “perceived” as threatening a federal government official. There are so many problems with that, and that type of thinking that I don’t know if I can even outline it all here.
First, there is a standard in the law that threats or words can never be a defense for assault or battery. What that means simply is that it does not matter what anyone says, an individual has the choice to act, and is responsible themselves for that act, regardless of the provocation. That is called personal responsibility. If the person using only language to taunt goes beyond taunting and wanders in to actual threats, then there is legal action that can be taken by the authorities. So too, if that person wanders beyond just taunting and makes libelous statements against you, and there is harm, again there is legal action that can be taken. So, if you take physical action against them, you, not them are liable.
Why is this the case? Because what one person perceives as a threat, or something that might insight violence is very different from one person to another. So there is no line that can be drawn for what is improper in the speech area. However, the act of physically striking out has a very bright line.
MOREOVER, the 1st amendment’s freedom of speech clause has to mean something. It is this freedom of speech that allows the U.S. to survive the pendulum swings of political mood without the necessity of a violent coup.
Wow, I’m tired of talking about this already. Maybe that is why I don’t do a lot of political commentary.
IN CLOSING:
The blame for the Arizona shooting goes directly on the shoulders of the shooter himself. Now if this causes us to look at ourselves and realize that there is a gap in Mental Health treatment, how we parent, what imagery we put out to the world, that is all great. But again, that is not the CAUSE, and that is to be introspective.
STEPPING OFF THE SOAP BOX
Clint
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Friday, January 14, 2011
Monday, April 19, 2010
Finding Zen after Tax Day
I know it has been almost a week since I blogged. Forgive me, I was recovering following the shock I received after tax day.
Admitting that I procrastinated way too long in doing my taxes that still did not account for the shocking revelation that I was going to owe additional rather than get a refund this year. But worse than just owing additional is the shear amount in additional that I owe. I have to take some blame in this, for not paying full attention to my paychecks. See I, in years past have claimed “Married” with 4 exemptions, for myself, my wife and my two sons. This has never been a problem, because we make so little, with those claims we still overpaid and received a refund.
This year however was different. In my inattention I did not realize several things; first that with my paltry salary (not complaining, because I love what I do, just pointing out that it is small) and that claim configuration most of the time the amount withheld from my checks was exactly $0.00. Second, with my oldest finally moving out of the house and us not “officially” providing ½ of his support for the year he was no longer a dependent. Third, because my youngest became 17 this year he no longer qualifies for a child credit. Finally, because I was able to get a deferral for my student loan, there was no large interest payment on student loans this year. The result of all of these changes is a tax bill between state and federal of about $5500.
Now before anyone reading this begins to think that I make some large amount that I just think is paltry, let me say that $5500 represents about 20% of everything I make in a year. Moreover, there was some that was paid in, specifically the proper withholding from my wife’s paychecks.
So what is my response to this…. After the shock wore off, I realized that I owe it, and will pay it because that is what I am supposed to do. The government provides services that have to be paid for, specifically national defense and interstate transportation, among a few others. But, I am not happy with the process. I have not been happy with the process for a long time, but it was more an academic disagreement, rather than a personal one.
I have known over the years, due to my practice as an attorney, many people who have gotten themselves in trouble with the IRS. Most often this trouble comes not from them trying to avoid taxes, or cheat the system in any way, but rather from the absolute inability for anyone to fully understand the tax system in this country. I have a couple of classmates who went on to specialize in tax law, and they agree that the system is a joke, there are so many exceptions to the rules, that the rules are impossible to understand and truly predict. They are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars each year by businesses, for whom a tax error could mean the end of the business, because without the tax advantages built into the system for specific things, the base taxes are so onerous that it is impossible for a business to exist ignoring the tax consequences of every decision they make.
That last statement is just SAD! It means that at this point in time the effect of government on businesses drives decisions and not the effect of the marketplace. What is so sad about that for the individual is that for anyone who just wants to live their life, and pay their taxes, they can’t do it. Like me, I just worked and wanted to pay my taxes, but because I don’t own a home, I don’t get the discount given for home mortgage interest, and because I raised my kids and they are no longer under my roof, no deduction, and because I drive a motorcycle everywhere (which is more fuel efficient than most hybrids and almost all “alternative fuel” vehicles) rather than a “green” car I don’t get the credit given to those people. So, because I did not take specific steps that the government, and not the market, thought were important, I lost all the deductions that I might have otherwise been able to take advantage of. And, because the tax code is written to promote specific activities, it becomes burdensome on anyone who doesn’t want to practice those activities, thus I am now paying much greater % of my income in taxes than I otherwise would with my limited income. But then, I don’t want to live my life by what a politician wants me to do, rather I would like to pursue my own happiness.
So, now that this is personal, rather than academic, what options are there to resolve this issue. After all, I cannot be the only person dealing with this dilemma. The answer is to take the power to direct every single little portion of our lives out of the hands of politicians. No, I am not advocating disbanding the idea of taxation, after all we have to have $ to pay for those necessary services. What we don’t need is a big brother government entity snooping into every private aspect of our lives to see where we spend every penny we make. It is ludicrous that tax forms take more than 10 min to fill out, and that we have to tell some bureaucrat how much we spent on food, gas, insurance, and even how much we gave away in order to keep from having to pay an inordinate more than our shares. Because I have, academically, had problems with the tax code in the past I have looked into several options to take that power out of the hands of politicians.
My personal preference is a flat tax percentage. Tax time would take 10 min max. How much did you make? Multiply that by X% and send it in. But the big problem with such a system is that people don’t save, and it becomes onerous on those in the very bottom of the income curve. Thus, the best actually workable solution I have found it the Fair Tax as promoted by congressman John Linder, or more famously promoted by Neal Boortz, the talk radio jockey.
The Fair Tax, as a plan is about as workable and sensible as I have seen. It is a national sales tax. It moves the entire tax burden to purchasers, that is everyone of us. It is progressive in nature because obviously those who earn more spend more. And the best part is that it moves the power, and noses of politicians out of my pocketbook and life and returns the power to the people with the purse (that would be the citizen in case you didn’t get that.) Moreover, it would make the most onerous federal administration a friend to the poor, and a welcome part of everyone’s lives. This is because the IRS becomes a vehicle for issuing refunds for the taxes spent on necessities, rather than the long arm of big brother collecting by threat of imprisonment. So, for a family of four (and these numbers are completely made up, but are used as an example to make a point,) it is a necessity to eat. So the IRS determines that a family of four, shopping economically can eat for a month for $500, and when they did so they spent $125 on the taxes, making their total food bill $625. Well, because that is a necessity the IRS would send a check back to the family for $125. But obviously that $500 would not buy filet for every meal, and would not allow for caviar, or even several nice bottles of wine. If you have the income to splurge on such extravagances, you may spend $1000 a month on food, and pay $250 in taxes, you would still get a refund check for $125, and the rest would go to taxes. Thus, the poorest in the country don’t pay an unfair share of the tax burden, because they can’t afford anything more than the necessities, for which the tax is refunded.
The beauty of this system is that when a politician starts talking about how much something will cost in Washington, or even in your state capital, it will not be some “billions of dollars” that doesn’t register with you and your pocketbook. The politician will have to come to the people and say, this measure will cost you an extra 10th of a penny every time you spend a dollar. You want to see people get involved in politics, make them see what effect every action has on their pocketbook.
OK, stepping off the soap box with this last statement, if any of this makes sense to you, please go to www.fairtax.org and offer your support, and if it doesn’t make any sense to you please go to www.fairtax.org and read up on the plan, at least get informed.
Thank you for this dalliance, I know this post was long, but when I start talking politics it can sometimes take a bit to explain what I want to say. I will try to get back to less heated topics in future posts.
Retro
Admitting that I procrastinated way too long in doing my taxes that still did not account for the shocking revelation that I was going to owe additional rather than get a refund this year. But worse than just owing additional is the shear amount in additional that I owe. I have to take some blame in this, for not paying full attention to my paychecks. See I, in years past have claimed “Married” with 4 exemptions, for myself, my wife and my two sons. This has never been a problem, because we make so little, with those claims we still overpaid and received a refund.
This year however was different. In my inattention I did not realize several things; first that with my paltry salary (not complaining, because I love what I do, just pointing out that it is small) and that claim configuration most of the time the amount withheld from my checks was exactly $0.00. Second, with my oldest finally moving out of the house and us not “officially” providing ½ of his support for the year he was no longer a dependent. Third, because my youngest became 17 this year he no longer qualifies for a child credit. Finally, because I was able to get a deferral for my student loan, there was no large interest payment on student loans this year. The result of all of these changes is a tax bill between state and federal of about $5500.
Now before anyone reading this begins to think that I make some large amount that I just think is paltry, let me say that $5500 represents about 20% of everything I make in a year. Moreover, there was some that was paid in, specifically the proper withholding from my wife’s paychecks.
So what is my response to this…. After the shock wore off, I realized that I owe it, and will pay it because that is what I am supposed to do. The government provides services that have to be paid for, specifically national defense and interstate transportation, among a few others. But, I am not happy with the process. I have not been happy with the process for a long time, but it was more an academic disagreement, rather than a personal one.
I have known over the years, due to my practice as an attorney, many people who have gotten themselves in trouble with the IRS. Most often this trouble comes not from them trying to avoid taxes, or cheat the system in any way, but rather from the absolute inability for anyone to fully understand the tax system in this country. I have a couple of classmates who went on to specialize in tax law, and they agree that the system is a joke, there are so many exceptions to the rules, that the rules are impossible to understand and truly predict. They are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars each year by businesses, for whom a tax error could mean the end of the business, because without the tax advantages built into the system for specific things, the base taxes are so onerous that it is impossible for a business to exist ignoring the tax consequences of every decision they make.
That last statement is just SAD! It means that at this point in time the effect of government on businesses drives decisions and not the effect of the marketplace. What is so sad about that for the individual is that for anyone who just wants to live their life, and pay their taxes, they can’t do it. Like me, I just worked and wanted to pay my taxes, but because I don’t own a home, I don’t get the discount given for home mortgage interest, and because I raised my kids and they are no longer under my roof, no deduction, and because I drive a motorcycle everywhere (which is more fuel efficient than most hybrids and almost all “alternative fuel” vehicles) rather than a “green” car I don’t get the credit given to those people. So, because I did not take specific steps that the government, and not the market, thought were important, I lost all the deductions that I might have otherwise been able to take advantage of. And, because the tax code is written to promote specific activities, it becomes burdensome on anyone who doesn’t want to practice those activities, thus I am now paying much greater % of my income in taxes than I otherwise would with my limited income. But then, I don’t want to live my life by what a politician wants me to do, rather I would like to pursue my own happiness.
So, now that this is personal, rather than academic, what options are there to resolve this issue. After all, I cannot be the only person dealing with this dilemma. The answer is to take the power to direct every single little portion of our lives out of the hands of politicians. No, I am not advocating disbanding the idea of taxation, after all we have to have $ to pay for those necessary services. What we don’t need is a big brother government entity snooping into every private aspect of our lives to see where we spend every penny we make. It is ludicrous that tax forms take more than 10 min to fill out, and that we have to tell some bureaucrat how much we spent on food, gas, insurance, and even how much we gave away in order to keep from having to pay an inordinate more than our shares. Because I have, academically, had problems with the tax code in the past I have looked into several options to take that power out of the hands of politicians.
My personal preference is a flat tax percentage. Tax time would take 10 min max. How much did you make? Multiply that by X% and send it in. But the big problem with such a system is that people don’t save, and it becomes onerous on those in the very bottom of the income curve. Thus, the best actually workable solution I have found it the Fair Tax as promoted by congressman John Linder, or more famously promoted by Neal Boortz, the talk radio jockey.
The Fair Tax, as a plan is about as workable and sensible as I have seen. It is a national sales tax. It moves the entire tax burden to purchasers, that is everyone of us. It is progressive in nature because obviously those who earn more spend more. And the best part is that it moves the power, and noses of politicians out of my pocketbook and life and returns the power to the people with the purse (that would be the citizen in case you didn’t get that.) Moreover, it would make the most onerous federal administration a friend to the poor, and a welcome part of everyone’s lives. This is because the IRS becomes a vehicle for issuing refunds for the taxes spent on necessities, rather than the long arm of big brother collecting by threat of imprisonment. So, for a family of four (and these numbers are completely made up, but are used as an example to make a point,) it is a necessity to eat. So the IRS determines that a family of four, shopping economically can eat for a month for $500, and when they did so they spent $125 on the taxes, making their total food bill $625. Well, because that is a necessity the IRS would send a check back to the family for $125. But obviously that $500 would not buy filet for every meal, and would not allow for caviar, or even several nice bottles of wine. If you have the income to splurge on such extravagances, you may spend $1000 a month on food, and pay $250 in taxes, you would still get a refund check for $125, and the rest would go to taxes. Thus, the poorest in the country don’t pay an unfair share of the tax burden, because they can’t afford anything more than the necessities, for which the tax is refunded.
The beauty of this system is that when a politician starts talking about how much something will cost in Washington, or even in your state capital, it will not be some “billions of dollars” that doesn’t register with you and your pocketbook. The politician will have to come to the people and say, this measure will cost you an extra 10th of a penny every time you spend a dollar. You want to see people get involved in politics, make them see what effect every action has on their pocketbook.
OK, stepping off the soap box with this last statement, if any of this makes sense to you, please go to www.fairtax.org and offer your support, and if it doesn’t make any sense to you please go to www.fairtax.org and read up on the plan, at least get informed.
Thank you for this dalliance, I know this post was long, but when I start talking politics it can sometimes take a bit to explain what I want to say. I will try to get back to less heated topics in future posts.
Retro
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
