Tax Day Plastic

Happy April 18^th. It's also the anniversary of Paul Revere's ride. Actually it was Paul Revere, William Dawes and Samuel Prescott who rode, and only Prescott made it to Concord to warn the troops. Revere and Dawes were captured by the Redcoats.

And it's tax day. But you knew that. Anyway, don't wait to pay. We're all depending on you. Today's the day that we make our annual offering to Uncle Sam so he can pay for all the things he's decided we need. Like the military, roads, supervision of the food and drugs we buy, paying the salaries of bureaucrats, welfare, and other similar expenses.

Most of the year, however, we don't think about it. We only consider what the government should be doing, without giving a second thought to how it's financed. It's only on tax day that it becomes obvious that we are paying for it. For only on tax day does it become clear who is responsible for the bill. On any other day all governmental expenses are jake (or cool, or acceptable, copacetic, agreeable, or whatever other term you like). They have nothing to do with us.

So when, on some other day, we join in the demands that the government help us out with whatever we need, that it support this or that group, establish some particular program, or increase its payments to some organization (for example, the United Nations), we give no thought to the financing. The government is accountable to us and we demand that it do what is right and equitable.

And it should.

But we don't always agree on what is right and equitable. No matter. That will get worked out, and in the meantime we've been the agents of moral excellence. It's our Constitutional right to speak out, to demand that it follow whatever path we find proper. Cost is no object. We mustn't deny our country's needs, and those of our fellows who should receive the support to which they're entitled by virtue of being in this country – legally or illegally. After all, the government is paying and the government has plenty of money. Besides, those making the demands want the money to come from the rich (read: “anyone but me”). It's like paying with a credit card. It doesn't hurt until much later, and by the time the bill comes due it's hard to associate it with any particular expense. It's easier just to pay it – even if that means not having something else. There's no correlation with a specific purchase.

We spend most of the year in complete denial – we're in willful disregard of the implications of people's demands – and their ignorance of anything but what they want. (And they're entitled to whatever they desire, whether it's for themselves, or for whatever they consider just.) Very much like children they are cognizant only of their own wants – and, of course, virtue – not considering what it may cost, and who will pay. Very much like a credit card, it doesn't hurt. Someday the bill will come due, but that's not the day of the demands, so there's nothing to worry about. The problem is that, as in the case of a credit card, it's easy to overspend, and that's what we've done. Right now, March 1^st, 2017, as I write this, the national debt, according to “US Debt Clock.org, is approaching twenty trillion (yes, trillion) dollars – that's almost one hundred and sixty-seven thousand dollars per taxpayer. Eventually, however, someone is going to have to pay it, no matter how far down the road we kick the can. And the main funder of the debt will be you – the taxpayer. (Maybe we can delay it long enough to be our grandchildren's problem. I'm sure they won't mind.) It's just like a credit card, only there isn't anyone or any organization that will be able to get you off the hook.

Personally and nationally we spend a good deal of time deciding what we want, not what we can afford. Sooner or later, though, we have to give some thought to what we have done. That day is today – tax day – and however righteous our demands, we have to be prepared to pay for them. Are you ready?


Many happy returns.








March 1, 2017

Oh, Give Me A Home

                                                                            

What's the point of the whole internet project as it relates to our debt? Wrong question. It's in the singular, and there's no single solution to our economic problem, so there are several different points involved. In fact the project can't possibly solve it alone, and wasn't intended to. Indeed, though it will provide an important start, many additional projects will be necessary. But there are certain gains that can achieved through the use of a nationwide internet capability and it's worth rehearsing them.  So here are some suggestions.

The first is the backbone of the proposal – internet and telephone service from wherever you are in the United States and its territories.ⁱ With whatever device you own you can have internetⁱⁱ service wherever you are, even in a moving car or train. And there will be no dead areas between towers.

Next will be the availability of a state-provided computer for everyone. True, that computer will only get material distributed by the government, but governmental “connectedness” will allow for greater participation by all – from the President to the average citizen – in those activities that make our country unique. Only a few are mentioned, but American ingenuity can certainly bring us many more applications.

The various applications have advantages, however, besides promoting good citizenship. As was demonstrated, they also offer us, among other advantages, the opportunity for more efficient and less costly operation of the government. The elimination of a need for congressional buildings with congressmen and Executive employeesⁱⁱⁱ working from their homes will result in lowering governmental costs, as will the implementation of a cloud-based IRS. There would also be better tracking of taxpayers resulting in greater revenues at a lower cost.

It has to be remembered that an important impetus for the entire project is the desire to lessen, and, perhaps, ultimately eliminate, the National Debt. The outsourcing of many governmental functions will contribute to that goal. And that brings us to the final piece of this aspect of the puzzle. Once we have sent Congress and the President home, and the other criminals to foreign countries, once we have outsourced most of our functions and moved the rest to inexpensive parts of the country, and once we have limited the use of paper, saving huge forests while maximizing the returns from such natural resources as shale-oil, we'll possess one of the most valuable commodities that exists anywhere – one on which our country was founded – property. The Federal government is the largest land owner in the country with nearly 65o million acres. While some has to be retained as Indian reservations or military bases,^iv a lot becomes available when the functions served are exported, and some simply serve as park land. Many claim that the flora and fauna are a heritage we should leave for our children (along with the massive debt we're piling up for them now), but that could be accomplished by building an area where some of them can live and be displayed in their natural habitat, and the remainder could provide us with a large injection of capital, capital that could be used in small part to maintain those new habitats but would largely be transferred to payments on what we owe. Development of that property would also provide us with many, many jobs. And with the current economic situation, the prices of new homes in the beautiful settings available are likely to be quite attractive, providing residences amid America's spacious skies where we can dream our patriots' dreams, and simultaneously end current land management costs while putting the property on the tax roles.

But in addition to land, we'd have a lot more to offer. Were we to outsource our correctional functions, to India for example, many properties would become available. Some could be converted into condominiums or other housing. And the ample surrounding property, properly landscaped and provided with suitable amenities might make the new residences quite desirable. Imagine living in a beautifully remodeled National Historic Landmark with an unobstructed and stunning view of San Francisco Bay, with rock pools and a colony of seabirds, and with access by the nation's first hybrid propulsion ferry. It's a dream, and no security will be necessary. And despite its name, the development would be a windfall, rather than an albatross. Occupy Alcatraz! It gives the “occupy” movement a whole new meaning. And the governments – Federal and State – have many properties already developed and only in need of a little freshening up to become sources of income rather than burdens on the taxpayers.

Moreover we, the taxpayers, own many other developed properties around the country that could be sold with their land to private developers at large profits, and they could benefit us all by their annual tax payments to the Treasury. Additionally, some of what already exists should be considered for increased tourist potential. Washington DC, for example.

Once DC is emptied of politicians, outsourced services, and unneeded bureaucrats,^v many buildings and open land would be available for “repurposing.” Because of its history as the nation's capital, it is already an important tourist destination, but, with the internet in place and the government moved elsewhere, let me describe a District of Columbia that would be far more popular with both Americans and foreign visitors:

The White House would be converted into a luxury hotel. The congressional office buildings, printing office, and other unnecessary and abandoned buildings, would be leased to banks and to major corporations, foreign and domestic, as home offices. The Library of Congress would be subdivided into countless fancy restaurants, large and small, serving the finest cuisines from all over the world to people with a broad range of budgets. The National Mall, almost a mile and a quarter from the Capitol steps to the Washington Monument, would serve ideally as the world's largest outdoor mall,^vi while the Pentagon would be subdivided as an indoor mall. While the footprint of the Pentagon is not as large as the Mall of America, it has seven stories to the Mall's four, and combined with the proposed outdoor National Mall mall, and the giant food court at the Library of Congress,^vii there will be plenty of action for all who come to visit – and it's far more convenient than Minnesota.

The various national museums would remain, since the American heritage is sacrosanct, but they would be supplemented by additional facilities to emphasize our heritage. The Lincoln Memorial, for example, would be turned into an expanded version of Madame Tussauds with tributes to all our heroes from Pocahontas to Wolfman Jack. The Viet Nam Memorial would be a superb outdoor cafe. And most important, especially for tourists, a large theme/amusement park would be constructed. “DC Adventure Park” would, of course, be managed by DC Comics^viii, although Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck are certainly part of our national heritage. A mechanical George Washington could throw dollars across the Potomac, Booth can assassinate President Lincoln, Michelle Rhee would distribute school vouchers, there's no end of sites that can be used as fun houses or chambers of horrors, and, as pièce de résistance, the Washington Monument could be converted into a parachute jump more than twice the height of the fabled ride in Coney Island.

And there's little doubt that, utilizing American know-how, we can come up with many additional projects for turning government owned and managed land into taxable private holdings, using the savings, as well as the sale prices, to cut our debt. (For example, wouldn't it make sense to transfer all the graves in Arlington National Cemetery^ix to some unused land in Iowa or North Dakota and build town houses on the site? And we could offer boat rides on the Potomac.^x) That's the goal. And a national internet will allow many additional projects to take place while promoting greater participation of all our citizens in America the Beautiful.

Keeping up with the times pays. And deer and antelope play more intelligently than elephants and donkeys.

Next episode: “All I Know” – And if you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

i      One of the many points not mentioned earlier was that additional charges can be applied for faster service.

ii     And GBS.

iii    Including the President.

iv     Though many of these functions could be merged with tremendous savings. According to WikiPedia,there are 149 active military facilities in the United States, 115 that are closed, and 94 overseas. Even if the numbers are a little off, it is hard to believe some cannot be merged. Except for the need for particular political members of Congress to have facilities in their districts, despite the cost.

v      That's almost all of them.

vi     If it isn't converted into a flea market.

vii   The Supreme Court can eat there. It would be inappropriate to move the Justices and turn them into the circuit riders they used to be. And how much harm can the jokers do with Batman there to watch them? (See following text.)

viii   You know – Batman, Superman, the Green Lantern and all that crowd.

ix     We should probably leave the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier for old time's sake and because it's a good tourist attraction.

x      If you catch one of George Washington's dollars your next ride is free.

Vote Early

                                                                                   

We've reviewed a few of the services that might be provided by a nationwide internet system, but there are many more – and most of them would provide additional revenues for us, although that should not be a sine qua non to justify them.

For example, the hallmark of a democracy is participation of the governed. In a “true democracy,” every citizen would have the opportunity to vote on every issue. While that may have been possible in small communities like the ancient Greek city-states, it is not practical in our modern republic, and representative democracy forms a part of a larger and more complicated system. The issues and the problems we face are far more complex and numerous than they were then,ⁱ making the casting of informed ballots on all the issues impossible. Learning all we would need to know to do so would be more than a full-time job. When citizenship was limited to the propertied with ample leisure time, and voting was considered a privilege and expectedⁱⁱ of every good citizen, and there were fewer and more clearly stated questions, that ideal was far easier to achieve.

Not so in a twenty-first century America. It's too much work to keep abreast of the issues. There are far too many of them and they're more complexⁱⁱⁱ than we can handle. So we hire full-time “representatives” – our Executive and Legislative branches – to do the learning and thinking^iv for us. That way we can ignore whatever we choose, with the knowledge that we can vote out of office anyone is “wrong” on issues important to us. That is, if we vote at all. And, unfortunately, after demanding paid time off from work in order to exercise our right to vote, too many of our citizens, whose ability to do so is not limited by the strictures of the ancients, are not motivated to cast ballots.^v Only about sixty percent of eligible voters do so in a presidential election^vi for a variety of reasons – long lines, poorly functioning voting machines,^vii a belief that one's vote doesn't really count,^viii and ignorance about the candidates and issues are among them.^ix And, of course, there are those who are lazy or simply don't care.^x

Most of th0se problems could be addressed by internet availability of whatever information is needed^xi to make an informed choice, and the ability to vote more easily and within seconds of^xii the decision to do so.^xiii A constitutional amendment eliminating the Electoral College might also give voters a greater feeling that their vote counts. And using computers issued by the government to specific individuals, there is less chance of voter fraud.^xiv The importance of the franchise, a privilege that is not universal, might be emphasized by a nominal charge (perhaps a dime, perhaps some other arbitrary amount, or even a sliding scheduled linked to your income)^xv to vote. But because voting is ordained by the Constitution, those who cannot afford the cost or are opposed to a charge on principle should be able to opt out and still vote.

A final module in the voting program should lock the machine on election day to any capability other than voting after a certain time – if that has not already been done – and only unlock it thereafter. While the votes of those who don't care or would prefer not to vote, shouldn't be forced, they should be asked to declare that in some polite way. For many who intended to vote but have forgotten, this will be a good reminder. The use of the machine should again be possible after the polls have closed so after that even those who don't vote, and don't want to say so, will be back on line.

There are numerous other potential functions that could be satisfied by a governmental internet service and I can't mention them all, and certainly not dilate on their full extent, but I must mention a few. The first is the census. At present we only conduct it every ten years but this might give us more opportunities to count thus providing us with a more up-to-date data base. Even if we keep the spacing as it is, however, it would take a lot less time and cost much less to do so. That's sure to make the Secretary of the Treasury happy. And we can also use the system to apply for passports and for other government documents. Whether they're gun permits or driver's licenses, whether Federal or State, making it possible to do some or all of the work from home will make it easier for the applicant and cheaper for the government. Win-win.

Additionally, the internet can be used for draft registration and application Social Security coverage.  And a daily National Lottery, playable at home, could be instituted.  With participation by all states and territories, the payouts would be huge.  A cut for the Federal government would make an important contribution to the Treasury.  Ideally the prizes will be smaller and much more numerous to promote spending – and that will help the economy in general.

You probably noticed that I haven't said much about everyone's favorite government agency: the IRS. I'll do that tomorrow in the penultimate installment of this series.^xvi

Until then, be a good citizen. No matter how much it hurts.

Next episode: “Taxation Without Representation” – You get what you pay for. So if we pay the IRS less … If only.

i       In large part by design.

ii      Or required.

iii    So that voters won't recognize that their tax money is being stolen and squandered, or that the authors of the various bills are as confused as they are.

iv     Imagine. We pay people to think for us. That, in itself, is worth thinking about. Let's hire a consultant.

v      The United States ranks 120th of the 169 countries for which data exists on voter turnout, falling between the Dominican Republic and Benin, according to a January 2012 study from the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.

vi   According to Michael McDonald, a political scientist at George Mason University. Citation by LiveScience.

vii   All kinds of regulations and specifications have been imposed recently to ensure greater efficiency in the voting process. Maybe it's just me, but they seem to be slower and more dinosaur-like than ever before, and they seem to require more (paid) staff than in the past. Perhaps that was the intent.

viii   The Electoral College is among the reasons for that. Because the President is not elected by popular vote, and the candidates and their fiscal supporters focus primarily on “swing” states, there are many votes that really don't count. That's one reason, but not the only one. In some states the “result” is announced by the media in advance of the election. Of course it's only an educated (or wishful) guess, but it's enough to convince many people not to “waste” their time.

ix    There are some who don't believe there's much of a difference between the parties and they don't wish to vote for the lesser of evils.

x     One individual commented on the internet that he didn't vote so the government wouldn't get his name for the jury list. He didn't want to participate in the judging of others in as evil a judicial system as there is in this country. He then spent several paragraphs expounding on all of America's faults. It was sad that he was forced to stay here when he could be an illegal immigrant in some more honorable country.

xi      Including political statements and other propaganda.

xii     At home.

xiii  Since the computers will be portable, absentee ballots won't be needed. You can vote wherever you are. And if you won't be carrying your machine, you can program it, before you leave home, to cast your ballot on Election Day. Even the military can set up computer voting stations so a delayed count will not be required and the results can be tabulated as soon as voting hours are over.

xiv   The program should include the opportunity for other family members to register and vote, and there must be a voting program that assures that there will be anonymity. Who can vote will be limited, but the choices will never be connected with the individuals.

xv    That's not likely to bring in very much to the government, but a penny here and a penny there … Senator Everett Dirkson is reputed to have said: “A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon it adds up to real money.” That kind of thinking by our representatives is how we got into this mess.

xvi   The last – which will discuss some of the profits to be made by ridding ourselves of a few of our functions – will appear on March 17, 2013. Stay tuned.

Go Tell It On The Mountain

                                                                         

With the passing of every moment our national debt increases,ⁱ and with it the need for cutting our expenses and increasing our revenue. I've already suggested that we outsource large parts of our government in the interests of saving money, but I noted that there were certain functions that we'd have to retain and execute ourselves. Certainly our military must remain local, and its control maintained in a secure facility. But that is only one among several such functions. For example, the Sixteenth Amendment has presented us all with the treasured gift of an income tax, and we surely wouldn't want anyone else laying hands on our money.ⁱⁱ

The Constitution that made us a nation designated three primary branches of government – the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial branches – and specified the responsibilities of each.ⁱⁱⁱ Our founding document was quite explicit about those responsibilities,^iv but was less concerned about the location of their performance. Indeed, the first Presidential inauguration was held in New York, our Supreme Court Justices used to “ride circuit,” and Congress, itself, has moved around since our Constitution was written in Philadelphia.

All the branches settled down, however, with the establishment of a national capital in the District of Columbia – Washington, D.C. And for more than two centuries that has been our center of government, where the offices of the President, Congress, and the Supreme Court are located. It's beautiful, dignified, centralized, symbolic, and very costly. But in addition it's a tempting target.^v

In the mid-1940s came the initial recommendations that the Air Defense Command (ADC) move its headquarters to a protected location. Although the ADC no longer exists, the move took place and currently a successor, NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defense Command), has placed its Alternate^vi Control Center in the Cheyenne Mountain nuclear bunker. It's secure and compact, underground, and protected by a mountain. It's the site from which our response to attack would be coordinated.

Mountains have always held some kind of mystical and spiritual connection for Mankind, even before Thomas Mann wrote “The Magic Mountain.” Religions ancient and modern have pictured mountains as the source of inspiration. Ancient pagan rites were held on mountains, while ranking high in western literature and culture is Mount Olympus, the home of the Greek gods. And the source of most of western religion was Mount Sinai, where the Law was given to the Israelites when they left Egypt. Even now the mystique of the mountain persists in our fantasy movies.^vii

For this reason we should consider moving our government – the part remaining after we outsource most functions – to a secure location somewhere in or under a mountain in the west, possibly in the Cheyenne Mountain complex itself. Roads are already built there, as are support facilities. And we already own the property. A pared-down government could be located in a single location and we could sell all our property in Washington.^viii What is clear, though, is that the cost of property in the west will be far lower than the value of our holdings in the east, so this will be of great help in lowering our debt. The space should be more than adequate, although some construction will be necessary. Even so, however, the costs of construction and maintenance over time will be far less there than what we pay in a big city. Our government will be far safer, and able to meet doomsday in style.

The idea of underground security, whether under a mountain^ix or not, isn't new. We bury the dead and build underground bomb shelters for protection against enemy attacks. In fact that's the nature of the Cheyenne Mountain facility itself. Saddam Hussein hid underground, though his bunker didn't offer all the protection he would have liked. And the Iranians are building their nuclear facilities underground in hardened facilities capable of surviving attack. We're America though, we're the best, and we can make our sub-sierran government hard and fast. No one can threaten us or beat us. They can kill us all but our government will remain safe and able to retaliate against anyone.

Our defense is already largely underground, and whatever isn't can be added to aerospace complex, or others like it. The outsourcing of many governmental functions along with the centralization of the rest should lower costs significantly and be an important part of lowering our national debt. And who wouldn't love the idea of burying the IRS and the rest of our government?

Next episode: “Safety Net” – And other applications as well.

i      At this moment – 1 PM on February 1, 2013 – it's close to sixteen and a half trillion dollars. That's even bigger than the Power-Ball jackpot.

ii     That, of course, excludes our own politicians. They're certainly entitled to dip in whenever they're short.

iii   Those branches may not always follow the guidelines set by the Constitution (our officials certainly don't) but they're there, and our President and representatives have sworn to uphold them. We're smart enough not to believe the politicians.

iv     Even though the writing of the Constitution itself was illegal – those present had been authorized to make some changes in the Articles of Confederation – our Founding Fathers didn't hesitate to set rules for future officials to obey slavishly.

v      It was invaded during the War of 1812, and, more recently, the Pentagon was damaged by Al Qaeda in 2001, on September 11th. More damage was planned but, fortunately, not accomplished in that action. As missile attacks become more feasible, even for smaller powers, a protected inland location would provide greater safety for our leaders.

vi     The primary command center for the NORAD/USNORTHCOM command center is at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado.

vii    You've seen them. Don't pretend you're above all that.

viii   I have a lot more to say on this, but it will be the subject of a future essay.

ix   According to the Jewish tradition, Mount Sinai was raised over the heads of the Israelites when they were being asked to accept the Law. In that case the security of the divine teachings was considered preferable to the security of the grave.

“ ... and for other purposes ”

(another in the series of essays purporting to illustrate governmental changes

that would help us in our battle against our National Debt.)

                                                                           

The quotation above cites the frequently used code words marking the end of the title of a congressional bill, indicating that it contains a lot more than anyone wants to advertise. I first saw it as a part of the title of the “Paperwork Control Act of 1995” which, as I noted last week, doesn't lessenⁱ governmental paperwork but sounds good to the public. Legislative titles, and the bills they represent, remind me of carriers for viruses that trick our bodies into believing that they want something that turns out to be harmful to them. (They're Trojan Horses.) But very few people know that, since the titles are so appealing and the laws, themselves, are so hard to read. And our representatives vote for them even if they've spotted the pork, “set-asides,” exceptions, redundancy, and the creation of featherbedding and unnecessary regulations the proposals contain. After all, their own bills will have the same “other purposes” and the favorable vote they cast today will be reciprocated. Somewhere along the line their constituents will be benefitedⁱⁱ with the ultimate cost dumped on the taxpayers. Greater rewards, however, will come to those who have made campaign fund contributions or have otherwise warmed the hearts of the legislators.

But the rest of us really lose out: even assuming the putative purpose of the legislation is worthy, the cost of its regulations and its implementation simply increase our debt. And all too often the new law doesn't accomplish what the advertisements say (see text above, end-note number 1, and last week's essay), or it results in unanticipated consequences which are similarly costly and require additional legislation, regulations, and “other purposes.” But that's the way the game is played and that's the way the bills are paid. But don't worry. The taxpayerⁱⁱⁱ can afford it.

Still, I'd like to offer some suggestions about lowering costs and increasing the ability of citizens to understand what's happening. While the Constitution informs us of the powers that each branch of government has, it doesn't bar us from formulating processes that simplify, and possibly improve their performance. And Congress, with its legislative outpourings, seems a good place to start. If there are limits placed on the laws they can promote, it's likely that our representatives will become more representative. As the saying goes, “When you grab them by the bills, their hearts and minds will follow.”

To begin, it would be useful to limit all proposals to 10,000 words. Any legislator^iv who cannot, or doesn't want to, spell out the purpose of a law in a document that length either doesn't understand what he wants, or he's hiding something. The proposal should be preceded by an”executive summary” containing, in short bulleted statements, the specific intent of the bill. Any provision that does not conform to the bill's stated objectives should be removed and dealt with in separate legislation. And the document submitted for consideration should list, on a separate page, the names of all organizations, businesses, and individuals who will benefit from it.^v Any omitted beneficiaries, when identified by an outside review committee (see below) should be publicized in the district(s) of the bill's sponsor(s). All bills should be voted on by named voters – not by acclamation or other anonymous vote. A copy of every bill, with the executive summary and a listing of how each Senator and Representative voted on it, should be available on the internet at all times. Similarly upcoming bills should be listed as well as tools to assist the voter in stating his views to his representatives.

It is recognized that many pieces of legislation, in order to achieve a majority, may require compromises. Fine. But it's not always possible, and the most direct solution is to link proposals of the two parties that wouldn't get bipartisan support otherwise. They should be stated in two separate short bills, both following the principles described. The two resulting bills, could be linked for the congressional vote and the voter would cast a ballot separately on each of the two parts (for the sake of showing his “true” views to his constituents) along with a vote on the package, which will be the one that counts.

There should be a media team possibly selected and/or paid by Congress which will read the bills to determine and report on whether they meet criteria. That determination, along with a fact check, and an indication of the fiscal repercussions of the act, should be reported to the public.

These guidelines should make the writing of our laws less time-consuming, require less paper, and be less expensive; they should make the reading and understanding of each bill's purposes easier; and they should discourage the incorporation of pork. Legislative review should take less time and, in addition, it would be easier afterward to evaluate the success or failure of understood goals.^vi That may not be what the politicians want, but it will save the rest of us a lot of money.

As I've mentioned before, however, bills are often followed by regulations. These should also be limited in length and complexity. They should be written in clear language and the author of each individual rule should be identified.^vii Congress should vote on the regulations and their votes recorded on this issue as well. And these regulations should be reviewed by the same kind of checkers as the original bills. Individual news teams, newspapers, other media, will probably have teams reviewing as well, but the ones set up by Congress should report to all the media, and available on the internet, so everyone has the reports simultaneously and we'll all be kept aware of the bills, the regulations, and the pork.

Of course Congress will find a way around the new guidelines, but it will take a little time and in the meantime we'll save some money, especially by decreasing the benefits that accrue to the few, and we'll use a lot less paper. And although the taxpayer is of little concern to our representatives, there'll be a better chance to understand and react intelligently to Congress's shenanigans. It may not be their goal, but it's a good start in dealing with the mess our representatives have created.

Next episode: “Three Little Words” – The times, they are a-changin'.

i      Actually it increases it. See last week's essay.

ii     And that benefit will be loudly trumpeted and milked for every vote possible.

iii    Or his grandchildren.

iv    Preferably it will be written by an aide – one who is not a lawyer – and it will be written in understandable language.

v     It is likely that the author will argue that the main beneficiary is the public. That's a given, even if it may not be true. But every other organization or individual who gains from the legislation should be spelled out so we can decide if that's where we want our tax money to go.

vi     And that's something that should be done and publicized.

vii    Perhaps this will discourage self-important “cowboys” from including provisions not intended by Congress but important to the bureaucrat.

Fiscal Cliff Notes

                                                                                         

Well, we're still here. We dealt with a little of the taxing issue, but there's still a lot to do. We finessed on some of the major problems, leaving their solution to the new Congress, although it's not clear that they won't delay a decision and kick the can even further down the temporal road. As for the taxes, the President got nearly all he wanted even though he raised the threshold for increasesⁱ a little. But the “one percent”ⁱⁱ won't be able to pay off the National Debt.ⁱⁱⁱ Unfortunately that debt is increasing all the time, and one of the upcoming debates will center on it – its size, the need to increase it, how much, and how will we ever pay it back. And the President has vowed not to compromise on that issue.

So I've decided, in a series of essays,^iv to oversimplify^v the situation we're in and to suggest some solutions for consideration. It doesn't seem likely that any of them will be attempted since no one will read this, and I'm not going offer my brilliant ideas to politicians who have already shown their inability to do anything other than to make the hole in which we find ourselves even deeper. It's their problem and they have to solve it.^vi

In today's offering I'd like to summarize the factors that have contributed to our current dilemma – to try to figure out how we got this way. It doesn't take a Nobel Prize winner in Economics to determine that we have a problem.^vii We spend more than we have or take in. That leaves us with a debt.^viii That's not complicated. If we handled our personal finances this way the banks would have foreclosed on us long ago. It would be Chapter 11 writ large.

CHAPTER 11

Like that. There. I feel better.

But the government's credit rating is better than ours. They^ix can borrow whatever they see fit, as long as they stay within the credit limit. And if there is a threat of needing more, they can simply raise that limit or print money to pay it down. Of course the latter solution means that the value of our savings will go down since, with more money in circulation backed by the same assets, that's the inevitable result. But we won't have to do that if we raise the debt limit. That, however, means that we taxpayers will owe more. Heads you lose, tails you lose. And because raising the debt limit can go on for a long time, your losses will continue to increase.

But that can't go on forever. Greece has shown us what can happen. If you were dealing with your own assets, your creditors would have taken them from you. And that would be disastrous, but it would stop you from continuing your profligacy. You'd have to work out a way to make the balance sheet balance. The government may not have to do that^x but you do. Fortunately there are some bankruptcy laws that will help you start over, but with your credit rating damaged.

So that's the problem we must solve. And I'll offer some proposals beginning next week. They won't be in any logical order (except the first couple – sort of) – not by feasibility, not by the amount of money concerned, and certainly not by popular appeal. But the hole is deep and getting deeper, and no possibility should be overlooked.

See you around the quad.

Next episode: “Paper And People” – A start at lowering costs.

i      Actually it's the expiration of a “temporary” lowering of taxes rather than a rise from preexisting levels. Either way, it was a clear victory over the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. Raising the number may have given the Republicans a way to save face, but they were clearly the losers in this fight.

ii     Full disclosure: I'm not in the one percent. Even so, I know that they can't handle our bills.

iii    Even if the number wouldn't have been changed the problem wouldn't have been solved, but this was a face-saving solution for the Republicans and, when the debt keeps increasing as it surely will, the President can blame the opposition for not giving him all he had demanded. In fact he'll be better off with a scapegoat remaining.

   

iv    I have no idea how long the series will be, or whether the essays will be consecutive. (Probably not.) I'll continue as long as I can come up with hare-brained (apologies to the Easter bunny and all his kin) ideas for dealing with our economic problems.

v     This is a version of Cliff Notes after all.

vi     In reality it's my problem. And that of every other taxpayer. We, or our descendants, will eventually have to foot the bill for our government's folly. We'll also have to pay the salaries and support the benefits packages of those who have created this situation.

vii    Nor newspaper and other political spin artists and the public who tell us that it's all the fault of the one percent (and most of them have bought lottery tickets so they can be in that group) or the rich (who only care about themselves) or the Republicans (who only care about the rich and the NRA). And everyone knows that President Bush got us into this mess.

viii   In order to have some perspective on the size of the debt, look at http://www.usdebtclock.org/ It's complex, but you'll be able to get an idea of where we are.

ix      Whoever “they” are. I usually think of the government as kind of anonymous and faceless plural. It's big enough and seemingly not answerable to anyone.

x      For the present.