What would Republicans like Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower, and even Ronald Reagan think of Donald Trump and how he has taken over the Republican Party? I can just hear Ronald Reagan saying, “There you go again.”
I would think they would be appalled. Instead of Res Publica (public things) he has turned the party into Rex Donald. It’s all about him, the public be damned.
I was a Republican precinct finance chair when Reagan was nominated, I voted for John Anderson. I kept my party position next year (coming in third again in money collected). But I haven’t voted for a Republican since except Arne Carlson twice.
I really don’t care to vote for Democrats, but the current Republican Party doesn’t give me much choice. Staying away is not an option.
Showing posts with label Abraham Lincoln. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abraham Lincoln. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 21, 2019
Friday, March 29, 2019
How to tell “liberal” from a “conservative”
A conservative now seems to be anyone who calls anyone who disagrees with him or her a “liberal”.
How to tell who is a “liberal”? I don’t know. There are so ,many varieties.
In the current political climate. Abraham Lincoln and Dwight Eisenhower would be considered “liberals”. Probably even Mr. Republican, Robert Taft!!
It also seems that the “conservatives” are being very “liberal” with their interpretation of the Constitution: corporations are people and the Second Amendment means the people have no right to regulate a militia of one person. I would imagine that the conservatives that wrote these documents would be appalled at these interpretations.
How to tell who is a “liberal”? I don’t know. There are so ,many varieties.
In the current political climate. Abraham Lincoln and Dwight Eisenhower would be considered “liberals”. Probably even Mr. Republican, Robert Taft!!
It also seems that the “conservatives” are being very “liberal” with their interpretation of the Constitution: corporations are people and the Second Amendment means the people have no right to regulate a militia of one person. I would imagine that the conservatives that wrote these documents would be appalled at these interpretations.
Saturday, October 20, 2018
Politics: don’t do as I do, do as say
See comments to https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/20/opinion/sunday/nafta-mexico-trump-ambassador.html.
Many “conservatives” complain about “liberals” attacking Trump and the Republicans. Have they forgotten their obstruction of many of Obama’s initiatives and the false claims about his birth?
After years of obstruction of Obama’s appointees, why are they in such a rush to appoint judges?
It seems to me that many “conservatives” only want to conserve their power. They completely ignore the Constitution, Washington’s Farewell Address (foreign entanglements), Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address (government of the people, by the people, and for the people), and Eisenhower’s Farewell Address (military-industrial complex).
What would we call a party that considered these important thoughts in their own governance of our country?
Many “conservatives” complain about “liberals” attacking Trump and the Republicans. Have they forgotten their obstruction of many of Obama’s initiatives and the false claims about his birth?
After years of obstruction of Obama’s appointees, why are they in such a rush to appoint judges?
It seems to me that many “conservatives” only want to conserve their power. They completely ignore the Constitution, Washington’s Farewell Address (foreign entanglements), Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address (government of the people, by the people, and for the people), and Eisenhower’s Farewell Address (military-industrial complex).
What would we call a party that considered these important thoughts in their own governance of our country?
Tuesday, August 21, 2018
I had a dream
My apologies to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for using a variation of the title of one of his major speeches.
My dream early this morning was about a similar nemesis: those whose only interest is ruling with a false idea of conservatism and a misuse of religion.
The false idea of conservatism is holding on to power, irregardless of how it affects the vast majority of the citizens. This conservatism puts the interests of some large corporations over the interests of large segments of the population. The misuse of religion is to claim to have the truth even as it acts contrary to the teachings of its greatest prophet.
My dream was that teams of journalists met all over the country to unite against the attacks by false conservatives on the journalists integrity and professionalism. Interestingly, many of these journalists being attacked are real conservatives, like George Will and Jennifer Rubin.
What is a real conservative? We can start by naming a few: Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Dwight Eisenhower. All of these have given warning about the order of men that is not to be trusted.
Adam Smith warned about those who live by profit. Edmund Burke warned about the folly of not allowing the colonies to govern themselves. George Washington warned about factions and about foreign entanglements (letting both friends and enemies control our judgment). Abraham Lincoln stated that we had to think anew with new circumstances. Dwight Eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex.
The best way to counter these false conservatives is to vote in each and every election. These false conservatives do all they can to dissuade people from voting from gerrymandering to false statements about their opponents.
Until such time as real conservatives appear on the scene, I’ll just have to keep voting for Democrats. I don’t support many of the issues of the Democrats, but these issues are not so destructive of our country as the issues proclaimed by false conservatives.
My dream early this morning was about a similar nemesis: those whose only interest is ruling with a false idea of conservatism and a misuse of religion.
The false idea of conservatism is holding on to power, irregardless of how it affects the vast majority of the citizens. This conservatism puts the interests of some large corporations over the interests of large segments of the population. The misuse of religion is to claim to have the truth even as it acts contrary to the teachings of its greatest prophet.
My dream was that teams of journalists met all over the country to unite against the attacks by false conservatives on the journalists integrity and professionalism. Interestingly, many of these journalists being attacked are real conservatives, like George Will and Jennifer Rubin.
What is a real conservative? We can start by naming a few: Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Dwight Eisenhower. All of these have given warning about the order of men that is not to be trusted.
Adam Smith warned about those who live by profit. Edmund Burke warned about the folly of not allowing the colonies to govern themselves. George Washington warned about factions and about foreign entanglements (letting both friends and enemies control our judgment). Abraham Lincoln stated that we had to think anew with new circumstances. Dwight Eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex.
The best way to counter these false conservatives is to vote in each and every election. These false conservatives do all they can to dissuade people from voting from gerrymandering to false statements about their opponents.
Until such time as real conservatives appear on the scene, I’ll just have to keep voting for Democrats. I don’t support many of the issues of the Democrats, but these issues are not so destructive of our country as the issues proclaimed by false conservatives.
Friday, January 05, 2018
Quote of the day: Trump and John Wilkes Booth
“Donald Trump is the John Wilkes Booth of the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln.” - Paul A. Fleming, “With so much stupidity, question everything”, Letters to the Editor, Duluth News Tribune, 2018-01-04
Saturday, December 30, 2017
Trump is not a conservative
Are “conservatives” really conservative? About the only thing “conservatives” want to “conserve” is their power.
They are definitely not like Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, or Dwight Eisenhower. They certainly don’t take Eisenhower’s advice about the “military-industrial complex.”
And they are definitely not like the “First Conservative”, Edmund Burke. See “Edmund Burke: the first conservative” by Jesse Norman or “Great Debate: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, and the Birth of Right and Left” by Yuval Levin.
They are more like the French Revolution, tearing down everything that went before than Burke’s Whigs who made small changes to an existing order as needed.
This was intended for “Why I’m Still a Never Trumper”. Bret Stephens, New York Times, 2017-12-29, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/29/opinion/why-im-still-a-nevertrumper.html. Unfortunately, comments were cut off before I could get it sent.
Friday, June 30, 2017
Abraham Lincoln would have been a loser
I've never understood why people who don't give a dime or time to a political party get to choose the party candidates. Good thing we didn't have television or party primaries when Abe Lincoln was nominated by his party to run for president.
See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/sunday/the-problem-with-participatory-democracy-is-the-participants.html.
See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/opinion/sunday/the-problem-with-participatory-democracy-is-the-participants.html.
Monday, January 16, 2017
Ode to Obama
"Great ode! It's too bad that the Dixiecrats couldn't tolerate a ‘black' man being President. Let's just hope that what goes around comes around and that Trump is soon replaced by an articulate president who considers all legitimate views."
Comment to Charles M. Blow, "Ode to Obama", New York Times, 2017-01-11
What I didn’t explain to younger readers was that Dixiecrats were Southern politicians who were in the Democratic Party because that was not the party of Lincoln. They hobbled the Democrats on many issues. Then Richard Nixon played his Southern Strategy and its been into the swamp for Republicans ever since.
I thought the last sitting great Republican was Sen. Susan Collins of Maine. But alas, she is far from being an independent thinker.
See “Susan Collins Just Disgraced Herself at Jess Sessions’s Confirmation Hearing: The senator proved once and for all that she’s no moderate.”
- John Nichols, The Nation, 2017-01-10
Comment to Charles M. Blow, "Ode to Obama", New York Times, 2017-01-11
What I didn’t explain to younger readers was that Dixiecrats were Southern politicians who were in the Democratic Party because that was not the party of Lincoln. They hobbled the Democrats on many issues. Then Richard Nixon played his Southern Strategy and its been into the swamp for Republicans ever since.
I thought the last sitting great Republican was Sen. Susan Collins of Maine. But alas, she is far from being an independent thinker.
See “Susan Collins Just Disgraced Herself at Jess Sessions’s Confirmation Hearing: The senator proved once and for all that she’s no moderate.”
- John Nichols, The Nation, 2017-01-10
Saturday, June 20, 2015
From my clippings file
Every so often, I email an article to myself for future reference, often with the idea of writing a blog entry. Most likely I don’t get around to it. So, since I don’t have a hot topic in my head this week, I thought I’d muse about some of these clippings. Don’t worry, I won’t write about all 59, just enough to fill a Reader Weekly page.
One apropos to the attempts to take some auditing work from the State Auditor was a letter to the Duluth News Tribune by Paul and Susan Schurke of Ely. They praise Rebecca Otto for pointing out that nobody knows what the potential cost to taxpayers of new mines will be. Is it any wonder that the corporate-lovers in the Minnesota legislators want reduce Otto’s authority? Strange that this same crowd complains about taxes.
“Otto’s common sense mining position can unite us all.” Duluth News Tribune, 2013-12-09.
Pete Seeger wrote long ago that we have the best politicians: “We elect them again and again.” One of the reasons we elect them again and again is that a plutocracy finances too many elections. Plutocracy is government by the rich. “Capitalism vs. Democracy” by Thomas B. Edsall (http://nyti.ms/Msy71t) asks “Is deepening inequality inevitable? The case for a global wealth tax.” - New York Times, 2014-01-28. It is a review of Thomas Piketty’s “Capital in the Twenty-First Century”. Edsall quotes Piketty’s assertion “when pay setters set their own pay, there’s no limit”.
A reverse on a wealth tax is offered by D. J. Tice in “There’s no pot of gold for the working poor”, Star Tribune, 2014-02-09. His first suggestion is “to stop raising their taxes.” He also suggests expanding both the State and Federal Earned Income Tax Credit. He also writes that any hike in the minimum wage will probably result in fewer workers over the long term. Think of how you once bought an ice cream cone. Somebody bent over the freezer and scooped your choice into a cone. Now you can go to Chilly Billy’s and fill your own cup with your choice of frozen yogurt.
My answer to when pay setters won’t set their pay is when the sun sets in the East. Joe Nocera wrote about all the gimmicks that CEOs and their boards use to keep raising the CEOs pay to ridiculous levels. See “CEO Pay Goes Up, Up, and Away”, New York Times, 2014-04-14 (http://nyti.ms/1erLn2H). Shareholders can vote against boards that grant obscene pay, but they will probably be outvoted by institutional investors who exercise “fiduciary responsibility” by voting in management’s favor. Even if that responsibility were directed at reducing executive pay, current law says that “Say on Pay” is only an advisory; management doesn’t have to honor the shareholders vote.
Have you considered that the wealthy wield much more power than kings of old? Except they don’t need armies of soldiers to stay in power, just armies of lawyers and lobbyists.
You can know that things are out of control when a “conservative” columnist calls attention to the inequalities. My favorite “conservative” columnist, Ross Douthat, wrote “College, the Great Unequalizer”, New York Times, 2014-05-03 (http://nyti.ms/1kzuuRQ). He says that the Party Scene at many colleges benefits the well-heeled student and sucks in the “lower-status” student. The well-heeled can rescue those who practice an excess of vices, but the less-well-off can’t. The well-heeled will go on to social or economic success regardless of their performance. Others will rarely join that social class.
And the upper-class is finding many ways to get their way no matter the cost to the rest of society. It is well-known, to those who care, that the Koch Brothers through their American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are writing our laws in cahoots with Republican legislators. One of the current examples is “right-to-work” laws. Many of the laws are almost identical to what ALEC proposed. “Wisconsin’s law was a virtual copy of the 1995 model bill promoted by” ALEC. See “Scott Walker and the Fate of the Union”, New York Times, Dan Kaufman, 2015-06-12.
The article points out how the upper-class minions don’t care about much more than keeping their masters happy. The accident rate among workers is higher in right-to-work states. Scott Walker promised the president of the state-wide union of heavy machine operators that the “right-to-work bill” would not make it to his desk. Walker got his contribution and the labor guy lost Walker’s commitment.
How the Republican Party has changed! The 1956 Republican Party platform included “The protection of the right of workers to organize into unions and to bargain collectively is the firm and permanent policy of the Eisenhower administration.”
And it even gets worse. See “Energy Firms in Secretive Alliance With Attorneys General”, Eric Lipton, New York Times, 2014-12-06. The attorneys general are sending letters of complaint about air pollution to the Environmental Protection Agency that are almost duplicates of letters written by the lawyers of energy companies. These attorneys general are getting huge campaign contributions from energy companies. Thanks to these contributions, 27 of the states’ attorneys general are Republicans. Who was it that wrote, “We have the best government money can buy”?
Or to blaspheme Abraham Lincoln, “A government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations shall not perish from the earth.” Or should it be “shall destroy the earth”?
One apropos to the attempts to take some auditing work from the State Auditor was a letter to the Duluth News Tribune by Paul and Susan Schurke of Ely. They praise Rebecca Otto for pointing out that nobody knows what the potential cost to taxpayers of new mines will be. Is it any wonder that the corporate-lovers in the Minnesota legislators want reduce Otto’s authority? Strange that this same crowd complains about taxes.
“Otto’s common sense mining position can unite us all.” Duluth News Tribune, 2013-12-09.
Pete Seeger wrote long ago that we have the best politicians: “We elect them again and again.” One of the reasons we elect them again and again is that a plutocracy finances too many elections. Plutocracy is government by the rich. “Capitalism vs. Democracy” by Thomas B. Edsall (http://nyti.ms/Msy71t) asks “Is deepening inequality inevitable? The case for a global wealth tax.” - New York Times, 2014-01-28. It is a review of Thomas Piketty’s “Capital in the Twenty-First Century”. Edsall quotes Piketty’s assertion “when pay setters set their own pay, there’s no limit”.
A reverse on a wealth tax is offered by D. J. Tice in “There’s no pot of gold for the working poor”, Star Tribune, 2014-02-09. His first suggestion is “to stop raising their taxes.” He also suggests expanding both the State and Federal Earned Income Tax Credit. He also writes that any hike in the minimum wage will probably result in fewer workers over the long term. Think of how you once bought an ice cream cone. Somebody bent over the freezer and scooped your choice into a cone. Now you can go to Chilly Billy’s and fill your own cup with your choice of frozen yogurt.
My answer to when pay setters won’t set their pay is when the sun sets in the East. Joe Nocera wrote about all the gimmicks that CEOs and their boards use to keep raising the CEOs pay to ridiculous levels. See “CEO Pay Goes Up, Up, and Away”, New York Times, 2014-04-14 (http://nyti.ms/1erLn2H). Shareholders can vote against boards that grant obscene pay, but they will probably be outvoted by institutional investors who exercise “fiduciary responsibility” by voting in management’s favor. Even if that responsibility were directed at reducing executive pay, current law says that “Say on Pay” is only an advisory; management doesn’t have to honor the shareholders vote.
Have you considered that the wealthy wield much more power than kings of old? Except they don’t need armies of soldiers to stay in power, just armies of lawyers and lobbyists.
You can know that things are out of control when a “conservative” columnist calls attention to the inequalities. My favorite “conservative” columnist, Ross Douthat, wrote “College, the Great Unequalizer”, New York Times, 2014-05-03 (http://nyti.ms/1kzuuRQ). He says that the Party Scene at many colleges benefits the well-heeled student and sucks in the “lower-status” student. The well-heeled can rescue those who practice an excess of vices, but the less-well-off can’t. The well-heeled will go on to social or economic success regardless of their performance. Others will rarely join that social class.
And the upper-class is finding many ways to get their way no matter the cost to the rest of society. It is well-known, to those who care, that the Koch Brothers through their American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are writing our laws in cahoots with Republican legislators. One of the current examples is “right-to-work” laws. Many of the laws are almost identical to what ALEC proposed. “Wisconsin’s law was a virtual copy of the 1995 model bill promoted by” ALEC. See “Scott Walker and the Fate of the Union”, New York Times, Dan Kaufman, 2015-06-12.
The article points out how the upper-class minions don’t care about much more than keeping their masters happy. The accident rate among workers is higher in right-to-work states. Scott Walker promised the president of the state-wide union of heavy machine operators that the “right-to-work bill” would not make it to his desk. Walker got his contribution and the labor guy lost Walker’s commitment.
How the Republican Party has changed! The 1956 Republican Party platform included “The protection of the right of workers to organize into unions and to bargain collectively is the firm and permanent policy of the Eisenhower administration.”
And it even gets worse. See “Energy Firms in Secretive Alliance With Attorneys General”, Eric Lipton, New York Times, 2014-12-06. The attorneys general are sending letters of complaint about air pollution to the Environmental Protection Agency that are almost duplicates of letters written by the lawyers of energy companies. These attorneys general are getting huge campaign contributions from energy companies. Thanks to these contributions, 27 of the states’ attorneys general are Republicans. Who was it that wrote, “We have the best government money can buy”?
Or to blaspheme Abraham Lincoln, “A government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations shall not perish from the earth.” Or should it be “shall destroy the earth”?
Sunday, May 19, 2013
There is more to the U. S. Constitution than the 2nd Amendment
The NRA and others cite the Second Amendment as giving individuals the right to bear arms. One justification they give is "the people" need arms to protect themselves against "the government". However, they neglect Article II, Sec 8, of the Constitution: Congress has the power "to call out the militia to suppress insurrection".
If you use your guns to "protect you" from the government, then you are involved in an insurrection. If you are in an insurrection, then the Constitution gives Congress the power to suppress your insurrection. Suppressing an insurrection includes taking the guns from those in the insurrection.
George Washington was involved in putting down the Whiskey Rebellion, a tax revolt from 1791-1794. See "Whiskey Rebellion", Wikipedia. The Whiskey Rebellion was quite a complicated affair, but popular support seemed to be in favor of the suppression of the rebellion. Another interesting point that some make: it was also a conflict between large distillers who paid less per gallon than small, individual distillers who paid more per gallon.
The last great Republican President put the down the biggest insurrection of all, the Civil War.
See also "Is the N.R.A. Un-American", Stanley Fish, New York Times, 2013-05-13.
If you use your guns to "protect you" from the government, then you are involved in an insurrection. If you are in an insurrection, then the Constitution gives Congress the power to suppress your insurrection. Suppressing an insurrection includes taking the guns from those in the insurrection.
George Washington was involved in putting down the Whiskey Rebellion, a tax revolt from 1791-1794. See "Whiskey Rebellion", Wikipedia. The Whiskey Rebellion was quite a complicated affair, but popular support seemed to be in favor of the suppression of the rebellion. Another interesting point that some make: it was also a conflict between large distillers who paid less per gallon than small, individual distillers who paid more per gallon.
The last great Republican President put the down the biggest insurrection of all, the Civil War.
See also "Is the N.R.A. Un-American", Stanley Fish, New York Times, 2013-05-13.
Friday, March 08, 2013
Quote of the day: History and Religion
"I tell you, lad, that men will believe if one says, 'The Gods say…' They will believe if one says, 'I had a vision…' They will believe if one says, 'It was told me on a tablet of hidden gold…' But if one says, 'History teaches,' then they will not believe."
"The True Game: King's Blood Four", Sheri S. Tepper
And men do not believe what their historical heroes say if it does not fit their own notions. The Revolutionary General, George Washington, warned of "overbearing military" but men want the biggest military in the world. Adam Smith wrote of the importance of labor but men want to only believe about his "invisible hand". Abraham Lincoln spoke of "government of the people, by the people, for the people" but men only want to believe in "government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations".
"The True Game: King's Blood Four", Sheri S. Tepper
And men do not believe what their historical heroes say if it does not fit their own notions. The Revolutionary General, George Washington, warned of "overbearing military" but men want the biggest military in the world. Adam Smith wrote of the importance of labor but men want to only believe about his "invisible hand". Abraham Lincoln spoke of "government of the people, by the people, for the people" but men only want to believe in "government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations".
Friday, March 01, 2013
Duh idea of the day – fair trial
"Oh, but bringing these brutes to justice in the jurisdictions where they commit their crimes would be unconstitutional, says Representative Eric Cantor, the House Majority leader. A jury of Indians, well — they’re incapable of giving a white man a fair trial. Such was the view expressed by Senator Charles Grassley, the mumble-voiced Iowa senator known for his 19th-century insight."
"Science and Sensibility", Timothy Egan, NYT, 2013-03-01.
Although Abraham Lincoln let stand some death sentences for the Sioux Uprising, he also commuted many more because he didn't think the evidence merited the conviction. Could it be that these pardoned red men did not get a fair trial by white juries? Can we be sure that those hung got fair trials?
In other words, according to Cantor and Grassley, it's OK for white men to rape red women, but not OK for red men or black men to get a fair trial for being accused of raping white women.
"Science and Sensibility", Timothy Egan, NYT, 2013-03-01.
Although Abraham Lincoln let stand some death sentences for the Sioux Uprising, he also commuted many more because he didn't think the evidence merited the conviction. Could it be that these pardoned red men did not get a fair trial by white juries? Can we be sure that those hung got fair trials?
In other words, according to Cantor and Grassley, it's OK for white men to rape red women, but not OK for red men or black men to get a fair trial for being accused of raping white women.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Critical thinking not practiced
"Last year the Texas G.O.P. explicitly condemned efforts to teach 'critical thinking skills,' because, it said, such efforts “have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.”
"The Ignorance Caucus", Paul Krugman, New York Times, 2013-02-11
This sounds like something George Lakoff wrote about in "Whose Freedom? The Battle over America's Most Important Idea". Lakoff thinks that the battle is between those who have a strict father model and those who have a nurturing parent model.
Fixed beliefs are held by too many wherever they are on the political map, but the Republicans have been ossifying into ever more fixed beliefs for over ten years. They are even against some things they used to be for because those ideas don't fit the fixed belief structure they now have.
As for fixed beliefs, those who believe critical thinking can be taught, might read the critical thinking article linked above. One cognitive scientist doesn't believe critical thinking can be taught.
Surprisingly, it was the last great Republican President who said, "As our case is new, so we must think anew." New thinking does not come from fixed beliefs and parental authority.
"The Ignorance Caucus", Paul Krugman, New York Times, 2013-02-11
This sounds like something George Lakoff wrote about in "Whose Freedom? The Battle over America's Most Important Idea". Lakoff thinks that the battle is between those who have a strict father model and those who have a nurturing parent model.
Fixed beliefs are held by too many wherever they are on the political map, but the Republicans have been ossifying into ever more fixed beliefs for over ten years. They are even against some things they used to be for because those ideas don't fit the fixed belief structure they now have.
As for fixed beliefs, those who believe critical thinking can be taught, might read the critical thinking article linked above. One cognitive scientist doesn't believe critical thinking can be taught.
Surprisingly, it was the last great Republican President who said, "As our case is new, so we must think anew." New thinking does not come from fixed beliefs and parental authority.
Monday, December 17, 2012
Disconnect on subsidies
Why is it bad to subsidize an industry such as wind or solar but it is all right to subsidize a company for locating in a particular spot?
There are many who call for an end to subsidies for alternative energy, but do they complain about subsidies for fossil fuel companies? For example, Sasol is getting a $2 billion subsidy from Louisiana to build a gas-to-liquid plant. See "Sasol Betting Big on Gas-to-Liquid Technology", John M. Broder and Clifford Krauss, New York Times, 2012-12-17.
I wonder if any economist has ever done a long-term study on the value of subsidies. I know there have been subsidies to get companies to locate in a particular city or state, and many companies abandon that city or state before the locality has even recouped its investment. I also know that government subsidies have transformed the economy mostly for the benefit of many. Lincoln called for subsidies to the transcontinental railroad which greatly improved the U.S. economy. Would we have computers and the Internet without many other government subsidies?
What we really need are some metrics that show whether a government subsidy will provide a huge social benefit or will only be a drain that lines the pockets of a few.
There are many who call for an end to subsidies for alternative energy, but do they complain about subsidies for fossil fuel companies? For example, Sasol is getting a $2 billion subsidy from Louisiana to build a gas-to-liquid plant. See "Sasol Betting Big on Gas-to-Liquid Technology", John M. Broder and Clifford Krauss, New York Times, 2012-12-17.
I wonder if any economist has ever done a long-term study on the value of subsidies. I know there have been subsidies to get companies to locate in a particular city or state, and many companies abandon that city or state before the locality has even recouped its investment. I also know that government subsidies have transformed the economy mostly for the benefit of many. Lincoln called for subsidies to the transcontinental railroad which greatly improved the U.S. economy. Would we have computers and the Internet without many other government subsidies?
What we really need are some metrics that show whether a government subsidy will provide a huge social benefit or will only be a drain that lines the pockets of a few.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Solyndra loan, just the facts, ma'am
The Republicans have been jumping all over the Obama administration for the collapse of Solyndra; Paul Ryan accusing the Obama administration of "crony capitalism". Guess which administration actually approved the loan? The Bush administration! The loan was not actually made until Obama was in office. See "Clean Energy: Obama Says It's the Future, Paul Ryan Calls It a Fad", Stacy Curtin, Daily Ticker, 2012-08-16.
Meanwhile, the Republicans don't seem to notice the subsidies to oil, gas, coal, and nuclear.
Ryan also said, "We want to get Washington out of the business of picking winners and losers." He seems to forget that the last great Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, was very much in the business of picking winners and losers and providing subsidies. What would this country be like if he hadn't pushed the Transcontinental Railroad with "subsidies" of bonds and free land?
BTW: one of the commenters asked where Paul Ryan called clean energy a fad. Given how quotes of any kind get distorted and go viral, it is hard to find sources for a supposed quote. What Ryan said was "fads like Solyndra" on "60 minutes" with Bob Schieffer. I can't find a direct quote from 60 minutes, but dozens of repeats by many sites, each with its own particular bias.
Whatever, the fact is the Bush administration approved the loan. Now the Republican Party has morphed to promote only fossil fuels and nuclear energy and to disparage any alternate sources of energy.
Meanwhile, the Republicans don't seem to notice the subsidies to oil, gas, coal, and nuclear.
Ryan also said, "We want to get Washington out of the business of picking winners and losers." He seems to forget that the last great Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, was very much in the business of picking winners and losers and providing subsidies. What would this country be like if he hadn't pushed the Transcontinental Railroad with "subsidies" of bonds and free land?
BTW: one of the commenters asked where Paul Ryan called clean energy a fad. Given how quotes of any kind get distorted and go viral, it is hard to find sources for a supposed quote. What Ryan said was "fads like Solyndra" on "60 minutes" with Bob Schieffer. I can't find a direct quote from 60 minutes, but dozens of repeats by many sites, each with its own particular bias.
Whatever, the fact is the Bush administration approved the loan. Now the Republican Party has morphed to promote only fossil fuels and nuclear energy and to disparage any alternate sources of energy.
Monday, January 02, 2012
Many famous Republicans would be RINOs today
Many can make a long list of Republicans who would not be welcome in today's Republican Party. Because these Republicans of another era didn't fall in lockstep with a laundry list of "conservative" positions, they would be called RINOs – Republicans in name only. Among them would be Abraham Lincoln and Dwight Eisenhower.
Here's a surprising Republican who definitely would not be welcome in today's Republican Party. He said "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." This person was a personal secretary to Sen. William Morris Stewart, Republican, Nevada, a friend of former Republican President Ulysses S. Grant, and a supporter of James A. Garfield in the 1880 election. A forged letter was circulated that Garfield was in favor of Chinese immigration, something very unpopular at the time. You can see more about it in http://www.twainquotes.com/BillBarnum.html. This same article has a speech in which our surprising Republican praises the Republican Party and skewers the Democratic Party.
Who is this RINO who would be very disappointed in today's Republican Party? Mark Twain!!
Here's a surprising Republican who definitely would not be welcome in today's Republican Party. He said "Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul." This person was a personal secretary to Sen. William Morris Stewart, Republican, Nevada, a friend of former Republican President Ulysses S. Grant, and a supporter of James A. Garfield in the 1880 election. A forged letter was circulated that Garfield was in favor of Chinese immigration, something very unpopular at the time. You can see more about it in http://www.twainquotes.com/BillBarnum.html. This same article has a speech in which our surprising Republican praises the Republican Party and skewers the Democratic Party.
Who is this RINO who would be very disappointed in today's Republican Party? Mark Twain!!
Thursday, December 29, 2011
"More conservative"? Another form of holier than thou?
Among the Republican candidates for President there seems to be a race to be "more conservative" than the other candidates, especially "more conservative" than Mitt Romney. There also seems to be some attempts to show that they are "more Christian" than the other candidates, especially "more Christian" than Mitt Romney, a Mormon. Most of this "more Christian" seems to be quite the opposite of the teachings of Jesus: Golden Rule, "be not like the hypocrites who pray in public", "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", and many other teachings that show humility and forgiveness.
This "more conservative" seems to mean that a candidate is more following "more religiously" a laundry list of stances that seem to be more aligned with corporate and certain religious interests. "More conservative" seems to have nothing to do with more cautious consideration of issues. Or to take a definition from George Will, "more conservative" does not seem to mean "more prudent".
Electing "more conservative" officials also means electing "more dangerous" officials. If they are following a laundry list of issues, will they be able to change as circumstances change. In other words, can they follow the advice of the last great Republican President, Abraham Lincoln: "As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew."
This "more conservative" seems to mean that a candidate is more following "more religiously" a laundry list of stances that seem to be more aligned with corporate and certain religious interests. "More conservative" seems to have nothing to do with more cautious consideration of issues. Or to take a definition from George Will, "more conservative" does not seem to mean "more prudent".
Electing "more conservative" officials also means electing "more dangerous" officials. If they are following a laundry list of issues, will they be able to change as circumstances change. In other words, can they follow the advice of the last great Republican President, Abraham Lincoln: "As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew."
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Is this the time for a new major party?
In 1854, Whigs who were not happy with the party's policies formed a new party, the Republican Party. Not until 1860 did the Republicans win a presidential election. That president, Abraham Lincoln, increased the involvement of the federal government into the affairs of the United States - Homestead Act of 1862 that gave low cost land to settlers, Pacific Railway Acts of 1862 and 1864 the subsidized the building of the Transcontinental Railroad, and Morrill Act of 1862 that gave land for the land-grant colleges.
Now the Republican Party is dominated by people with a narrow understanding of the Constitution and a narrow understanding of how a vibrant economy works, an economy supported by government-provided infra-structures.
I doubt that a new party will be formed by grass-roots action, be it the Coffee Party or the Occupy Wall Street activists. I think a new party will only be formed by a dedicated group of professional politicians. I hope that there are enough "old-school, New England-type" Republicans, tired of being beholden to the corporate-sponsored Tea Party, who will form a new pragmatic party. There are plenty of Republicans who have a broader view of what needs to be done. Unfortunately, many were defeated by Tea Party candidates in 2010. These "losers" could provide a nucleus for such a party. They have small chances of fielding a popular candidate by November 2012, but who knows what could happen in 2014 and 2016.
Now the Republican Party is dominated by people with a narrow understanding of the Constitution and a narrow understanding of how a vibrant economy works, an economy supported by government-provided infra-structures.
I doubt that a new party will be formed by grass-roots action, be it the Coffee Party or the Occupy Wall Street activists. I think a new party will only be formed by a dedicated group of professional politicians. I hope that there are enough "old-school, New England-type" Republicans, tired of being beholden to the corporate-sponsored Tea Party, who will form a new pragmatic party. There are plenty of Republicans who have a broader view of what needs to be done. Unfortunately, many were defeated by Tea Party candidates in 2010. These "losers" could provide a nucleus for such a party. They have small chances of fielding a popular candidate by November 2012, but who knows what could happen in 2014 and 2016.
Wednesday, September 07, 2011
Quote of the day - labor and capital
"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."
- Abraham Lincoln, annual message to Congress, Dec. 3, 1861
- Abraham Lincoln, annual message to Congress, Dec. 3, 1861
Thursday, June 16, 2011
If we change Lake Calhoun's name, then…
we have to change the names of thousands of other places.
Once again someone is calling for changing the name of Lake Calhoun in Minneapolis because John C. Calhoun, for whom it was named, was proslavery.
If we do this then we must change the names of everything named for George Washington and Thomas Jefferson; after all, they both owned hundreds of slaves.
Even the Great Emancipator, Abraham Lincoln, waffled on the issue. He said slavery should be abolished in the District of Columbia, but only if the people wanted it. He would say in an election speech in northern Illinois that "all men are created equal" and say later in southern Illinois that "… I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of of bringing about the social and political equality of the white and black races". See "A People's History of the United States", Howard Zinn, page 188. Honest Abe?
Once again someone is calling for changing the name of Lake Calhoun in Minneapolis because John C. Calhoun, for whom it was named, was proslavery.
If we do this then we must change the names of everything named for George Washington and Thomas Jefferson; after all, they both owned hundreds of slaves.
Even the Great Emancipator, Abraham Lincoln, waffled on the issue. He said slavery should be abolished in the District of Columbia, but only if the people wanted it. He would say in an election speech in northern Illinois that "all men are created equal" and say later in southern Illinois that "… I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of of bringing about the social and political equality of the white and black races". See "A People's History of the United States", Howard Zinn, page 188. Honest Abe?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)