Plans for the future

I have been listening to Al Frankin on radio Air America to catch up with some of the more “left wing” political rhetoric.  Last week Mr. Frankin presented some great ideas for a Democratic Plan for the future.  We keep hearing that the Republicans are off base, but the Democrats have no direction.  I wonder why that might be.  Maybe it is that they just don’t have the nerve to say what they think.  In any case, here are some suggestions that he had concerning what we should be aiming for in the next admistration.

“First insure all kids.”  He is referring to health insurance.  Personally, I disagree with him.  We shouldn’t be insuring kids, we should be eliminating insurance!  Everyone should have excellent, free, health care.  This will eliminate the disparity in health care, take a huge burden off of the shoulders of American businesses (who keep saying that the reason that they can’t compete worldwide is that their health insurance is too expensive.  I say, “Fine, let the government pay for the health care out of tax money.”  This has been shown over and over again to be hugely less expensive than our current plan, will save money for all portions of the economy (except of course the insurance industry), will provide the type of health care that we all believe is appropriate.  Just do it, not just “insurance for kids” but health care for all.
Second, restore fiscal sanity.  Start by repealing the tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans. I am probably in the income bracket that benefits from the tax cuts, but I don’t want the cuts – I want the services from the government that we need , not a cut in my taxes or the taxes of the very rich.  The current approach is just inconceivable, especially in a time of war, problems with health care and problems with education.
Three.  Corruption.  Restore honor and integrity to government.  No outing CIA agents.  Clean up Congress.  Real lobbying reform.  Clean elections – meaning public financing of federal elections.  It will save the American taxpayer billions and billions of dollars a year that get eaten up by special interest tax breaks, earmarks for contributors, and special exemptions from environmental and workplace safety rules.  It’ll save us so much money – get Congress working for us instead of their donors.  Make sure our election results can be trusted.  Meaning a paper trail.
I have no new comments on number three.  It of course makes perfectly good sense – however the corruption is what drives politics and the politicians control the honor and integrity of government.  Fat chance!
Four.  Education.  Really Leave No Child Behind.  Understand that the poorest kids in this country need MORE resources, not less.  Pay teachers more to teach in at risk areas.  Make the best teachers compete to work in at risk neighborhoods.  Don’t make districts rely entirely on their tax base to fund schools.  Lower property taxes, but let’s get serious about education about funding it from general revenues and training the best teachers possible.   

Once again, this sounds right to me.
Five.  Science.  We have to recognize that global climate change exists, and do something about it.  An Apollo program for renewable energy.  Wind, solar, yes, switch grass, ethanol.  Conservation.  Energy independence.  Higher fuel efficiency standards.  Stem cell research.  Adult and embryonic.  Let’s not throw out 400,000 frozen embryos.  Which are made up of about 12 cells.  Let’s use them to find the cure for juvenile diabetes.  For Parkinsons.  For spinal injuries.  MS.
He is of course correct, but actually the list is much longer.  There are some odd things like the need to regulate energy costs and the cost of things like conservation tools, the cost of solar installations, the cost of alternative energy techniques, etc.  We need to further regulate the gas mileage requirements for autos, trucks and other vehicles.  As it is we are in a “what the market will bear” mode on all of these things, not an economy that is based upon supply and demand.  What this means is that large portions of our economy is basically a monopoly, with the providers using all sorts of techniques to prevent a free and open market.  As long as that is the situation, we need to regulate them to make sure we get a fair price and they get enough profits to stay in business.
Six.  Real National Security.  Real port security.  Secure the loose nukes in the former Soviet Union.  WORK WITH OUR ALLIES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST GLOBAL TERRORISM. 
Good idea, we need to work with our global partners, not against them.
Seven.  Stop lying.  Tell the American people the truth.  Especially before leading us into war.
I don’t know if it is especially anything.  I think it is important to not lie to us on everything.  Otherwise we cannot know what to believe or who to trust.  Therefore we can’t know how to make decisions.  Therefore, we cannot vote and express ourselves in a valid way.  Hence, our democracy cannot work.  Honesty and trust are central to the success of our form of government.
Eight.  Fair trade.  Let’s make sure that our trade laws contain labor and environmental standards – so that workers at home and abroad aren’t exploited and the environment isn’t destroyed.
Nine – Pensions.  Make sure that Americans retirements are secure.
I find this list to be a pretty good list of items.  It is a bit short, there are many more things that need to be done, but it gets to some of the key items.  If we could actually accomplish the items on the list we would all be much better off.

Red versus Blue

I woke up this morning with a question floating through my head.  I got to wondering about the difference between “liberals” and “conservatives.”  The first thing that became obvious is that the terms really have little or no intrinsic meaning any longer.  Maybe “red” and “blue” is just as meaningful.  
It feels to me that the difference is something like “compassionate and loving” versus “mean, nasty and greedy.”  This clearly is isn’t the difference between Democrats and Republicans because both of these kinds of people populate both parties.  I think that this is not a useful, or true, distinction – it is merely what it feels like to me most of the time.
It dawned on me that maybe the issue has something to do with an opinion about the differences between people.  As a liberal, I believe that people come with all kinds of built in differences, and that in addition to that the environment that they are raised in causes many more changes in their capabilities.  Some people are very capable, some are not very capable, but much of the difference is inherited by the person (either by nature or nurture).  I believe that generally people do the best that they can.  Some succeed much better than others, but that is just the way the bell curve goes.  I think this opinion that people are not always in control of their lives, compassion and assistance is appropriate.
It seems that conservatives believe that all people are created equal and that any differences in abilities or actions are caused by choices that the person has made.  Those who succeed are more willing to work hard, and are somehow “better” than people who don’t succeed.  Since their condition is created by choices that they have made, there is little reason to do anything to help out.  Since they are of the opinion that people get to the position that they are in because of their decisions there is no reason for compassion or assistance.  In some odd cases it is clear that people really couldn’t avoid the problems that they are in (acts of God such as earthquakes come to mind), there is sometimes a place for compassion and assistance.
Conservatives that are successful seem to think that they got that way because they worked hard and deserve it.  They seem to figure that all other people have the same abilities, options and support and therefore could have been successful too if they were only good enough or worked hard enough.  Since people who aren’t doing so well decided to do that on purpose, then there is no reason for helping.
There is also a bit of a difference having to do with how people work together.  Liberals tend to believe that people want to do good things and work together, finding ways to be friendly and peaceful to each other.  Conservatives seem to believe that people want to do bad things, and need to be forced to obey and be good.  One side acts as if people are basically good, the other as if people are basically bad.
The trick is that there are obviously a lot of “bad guys” out there.  In many cases there is a need to control people with force.  However, there are also lots of instances where other approaches work better.  If you go hard to either end of the spectrum it won’t work.  Therefore, the problem is one of degree.  
If given the choice, I would rather trust people and help out if needed until it is clear that this approach won’t work.  Other people seem to think it is best to distrust and avoid helping unless it has been proven that they can trust the other and that they need help because of problems that are really outside of their control.
I guess I still haven’t gotten very far with this issue.  I still can’t figure out the differences, but it seems to be tied to the idea of whether others have done something to “deserve” their situation.  Do rich and powerful people deserve it, or did it just happen to them? Do poor and sick people deserve it, or did it just happen to them?