|
CliveatFive
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Name: "Clive at Five"
Country: United States
State: Minnesota
Gender: Male
Interests: Ultimate Frisbee, Cooking, Politics, Trivia, Writing, Music, Writing music (go figure), Computers (especially Macs, duh), "Hacking", getting pwned at StarCraft, Rollerblading, Caribou Coffee, arson... the usual.
Expertise: Physics, Math, restaurants, finding awesome places, scaring away the ladies
Occupation: Aspiring awesome person
Message: message meEmail: email me
Member Since:
3/6/2003
 True
|
|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| Letter to Amy Klobuchar RE: Cap & TradeHello, Amy.
I will be brief: You and I share the belief that respecting & protecting our environment is very important - call it a "Natural Law" if you will. There are other Natural Laws, however, which must be concurrently obeyed, such as the laws of Mathematics.
Simply put, our country is suffering financially, and we don't have the capability of supporting another tax a la Cap & Trade, especially into a recession.
That is why I must recommend that you either use C&T as an equal-value replacement for an existing tax (say, cutting the regressive payroll tax, or reducing the income tax) or vote against it altogether.
There are many economically-friendly ways to "Be Green." These are just a couple thoughts, but there are certainly ways to be environmentally-friendly without further damaging our economy. The Democratic party would be well-served to embrace a more fiscally responsible stance and this is one way to do it.
Thank you for your time.
-- -- -- -- --
A similar letter will follow for Franken once his senate site is up.
If you agree, please forward this letter or a similar letter to your senators! This is important, people!
-Clive | | |
| Freedom v. Equality? Holistic PoliticsI've had an unbelievably difficult time explaining where I stand on a political spectrum. Since I make an effort to examine issues on an a la carte basis, I end up having stances from a wide range of political camps. While most people would just call me a "moderate," I cannot adopt that term because it is imprecise: Take two "moderates" and give them a list of ten issues. Each could choose five liberal stances and five conservative stances and still have nothing in common. I had to consider another benchmark.
After taking "The World's Smallest Political Quiz" that I discovered the two-dimensional Nolan Chart:
For a while I was content thinking of myself as a Libertarian but after riding that train for a while, I started to notice a curious lack of support from left-leaning centrists. Nearly every political debate opponent would lambaste the LP for their lack of compassion for the needy and their disregard for the environment. This is when the cogs began to turn. To left-leaning individuals, the Nolan Chart makes no sense. It only measures freedom v. government. Lefties don't think of themselves as compromising economic freedom to achieve personal freedom. This chart is designed specifically to lure in disenfranchised conservatives like myself.
This revelation led me to another: Conservatives see the political spectrum as a battle for Freedom and against Big Government but what about Liberals? Obviously they aren't fighting for bigger government and against freedom. No, Liberals fight for equality and against favoritism / elitism.
So when asked by an outsider for what each side is fighting, the left shouts "EQUALITY!" and the right shouts "FREEDOM!" Really? A battle between equality and freedom? How ridiculous!
Freedom and Equality are obviously not mutually exclusive, but engineering policy to maximize both is difficult. Even more difficult is crafting policy that is agreeable to both liberals AND conservatives! This is my goal, nonetheless, and as such, I've loosely adopted the term "Egalibertarian" to describe myself as one who seeks to maximize equality AND freedom.
Recently, I stumbled upon a website, "Holistic Politics.org," the creation of a former Libertarian, Physics PhD -- this guy is like my double but smarter; fathom that if you can ;). His writings have not only corroborated my feelings on the differences between liberals and conservatives but offers a wealth of fresh, insightful ideas on how to maximize Freedom and Equality, pulling in ideas from all sorts of positions on the political spectrum.
I'll link some articles in future posts; they're all extremely interesting - especially the ones about environmentalism. Coming from a skeptic of *human-caused* Global Warming like myself, that's really saying something.
Hopefully this post made sense. It's taken me years to understand where I stand, politically, so I don't expect you to understand simply by reading a blog entry...
Anyway... who wants to be my lieutenant governor?
-Clive | | |
| 1984If six years ago I had told you that President Bush would be commandeering a major media outlet to plug his agenda (say, a war in Iraq), you would have been outraged. If that media outlet announced that it would not carry opposing views during the programming, steam would jet from your ears. If that media outlet announced that it would not sell ad-space for those to voice opposing views before, during, or after the programming, blood would have shot from your eyes.
Fast forward to 2009: ABC surrenders its programming to the Obama Administration, which intends to plug its controversial socialized health care plan. Hello 1984.
-Clive | | |
| ATTN: Nation's LeadershipAn open letter from a man in Arizona to our nation's leadership:
-- -- -- -- --
I'm a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you're willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?
Well, these are briefly my views and issues for which I seek representation:
One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. P.S., I'm not a racist. This isn't to be confused with legal immigration.
Two, the TARP bill, I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you no, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.
Three: Czars, I want the circumvention of our checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution and honor it.
Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There is more to say.
Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision. Don't you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night and then go on break. Slow down!
Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real obligations. Why don't you start there.
Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes. Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census over with our taxpayer money. I don't trust them with our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.
Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs. That is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person. Why do you want me to hate my employers? Why ‑‑ what do you have against shareholders making a profit?
Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.
Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we'll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. Have you ever ripped off a Band‑Aid? We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.
Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let's have it. Let's say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk. Please try ‑‑ please stop manipulating and trying to appease me with clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.
Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.
Take a breath. Listen to the people. Let's just slow down and get some input from some nonpoliticians on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed reading our bills into law. I am not an activist. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I'm busy. I'm busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.
I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not. It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is such urgency and recklessness in all of the recent spending.
From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on you to bring our concerns to Washington.
[...]
Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don't care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution and that is all that matters to us now.
-- -- -- -- --
No one who supports 1 - 12 should be considered an extremist, but that's all the media can think to do. This guy would be smeared into oblivion... called a "right-wing nut-job," a "hate-monger" and then completely disregarded. RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP IS NOT AN EXTREME POLITICAL VIEW!
What is going on in this country.
Seriously.
What is going on?
-Clive | | |
| Pro-govt interevention opinions needed, RE: BondholdersI need to understand something and I need some who agrees with the government's handling of the Chrysler bondholders situation to explain it to me.
In normal Bankruptcy, the bondholders who purchased the secured debt of a company are the first to get their investment back. That's what "secured debt" means. If there aren't enough funds on-hand, assets are liquidated to cover the debt owed. Only if there aren't enough assets to cover the debt do the bondholders get short return on their investment.
Chrysler's bankruptcy would have been the same, except that the bondholders were forced into a swap-deal of $2B when they were entitled $6.9B. In their own words, they could not "withstand the enormous pressure and machinery of the US government." This is based on criticism from Obama who said the lenders were seeking an "unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout."
So here are my questions:
1) While the Bondholders are financial institutions, the assets from those bonds contribute to mutual funds of many "common peoples'" holdings, perhaps in their 401ks or private retirement funds. This in mind, how does the demand of financial institutions to receive the full value of the bond imply a "unjustified taxpayer-funded bail-out" when the money would directly end up in Americans' 401ks? Instead, it's a double-whammy: Taxpayers overwhelmingly disapproved of the TARP bail-out but were forced into it anyway, then they get docked again in their retirement accounts because of how the bailout was/wasn't spent.
2) Why is government allowed to break those financial contracts, especially when the Constitution forbids State modification of Private contracts (see "Contract Clause")? Even modern interpretations of the Contract Clause are pretty clear. A situation must pass this "test":
(i) Does the state legislation substantially impair a party's rights under an existing contract? Since it means the seizing of private property, the answer is yes.
(ii) Does it serve an important and legitimate public interest? a) The public unanimously disapproved of bailing out failing companies. b) As I've explained many times, the bankruptcy of GM or Chrysler would not lead to a massive economic collapse. The sale of Chrysler to FIAT to maintain American jobs proves this.
(iii) Is it a reasonable and narrowly tailored means of promoting that public interest? Maintaining the strength of our domestic auto business by allowing it to be sold it to an Italian company is not a "reasonable" way to promote the public interest. If the argument is that it will maintain jobs in America, it only goes to prove that my reasoning in the above link is correct, and therefore the contract serves no real purpose but to subsidize the sale of Chrysler to another company, covered by the American tax-payer. Again, it's a burden on the public to subsidize something that would just sell to some other company eventually.
Have I misinterpreted the answers to this test? If yes, how so?
3) If the above test is answered correctly, as I believe it is, please justify why didn't the Supreme Court stop the contract intervention since it is their responsibility to block the Legislative branch from acting Unconstitutionally?
I'm honestly not trying to be an ass. I'm looking for serious answers from people who agree with what is going on here. I am asking these questions because I need to understand more about the reasons people support this. It is the only way I can stop going completely mad over something which only seems so obviously flawed to me and the crazy nut-jobs they talk about on the news. Am I, too, a crazy nut-job for thinking that government is overreaching here or are my feelings well-founded?
-Clive | | |
|
