In The Long Run

I had a long technology-assisted political conversation with my son yesterday. We disagreed on a lot. He made some good points. I made some good points. But, we still disagreed. Our disagreement wasn't on strategy, but rather tactics. We both want mostly the same thing...a better country. Our differences come with how best to make the country better. My primary concern seems always to be the precarious, house-of-cards condition of our national finances. He, on the other hand, always assures me that his favored solutions will either actually save us money, or will be cheaper in the long run. Ahh yes...the long run.

I have been paying attention to politics and finance for the better part of 35 years now, and if I had a dime for every time I heard a politician promise that his bill would wind up saving money in the long run, I could retire right now. To give but one example, back when Medicare was introduced in 1965, its proponents predicted that by 1990 the total cost for the program would run around 19 billion dollars. It wound up being 110 billion, but luckily most of the politicians who made the 1965 prediction were all safely dead. 

So when your preferred presidential candidate in 2015 begins touting his or her proposals as "cost savers" you better grab ahold of your wallet. History hasn't been kind to government budget forecasters from either party. What evidence do I have for this? Well, I've got 18 trillion articles of evidence. Right now the bill for the interest on that debt gobbles up 7% of the budget. Imagine how fast that percentage will climb when the FED has to start raising interest rates? Right now the Congressional Budget Office projects (there's that word again! ) that interest payments on the debt will be the fastest growing part of the federal budget. Nice.

Despite our debt woes and our inability to balance our budget, politicians from both parties are still quite eager to dream up more wonderful ways to spend money on an entire laundry list of projects, all that will actually save us money in the long run. Ok, alright. I get it, I really do. If you make your living driving trucks, you...drive trucks. If you make your living as a politician, you...spend other people's money. So, since that fact of Washington life will never change, how about we add a new requirement for all politicians. Any new government program that requires new spending authorization will only be permitted to the extent that an existing spending authorization is eliminated. For example, if candidate A. proposes a 10 billion dollar plan to provide, oh, I don't know...flat screen televisions to the blind working poor, then in order for the bill to pass, he  or she will have to propose eliminating a 10 billion dollar military base in Guam, or cancel 10 billion dollars from the IRS Christmas party budget. Now, this won't  actually pay down the debt, but it will stop the bleeding and force our leaders to prioritize. Are there constructive things that the government can do to help people? Yes, of course, but first how about we shut down the Federal Helium Reserve, or maybe stop spending 300 million dollars on a blimp for the Army, only to decide we didn't need it after all? Or how about we ask General Electric, one of the richest companies in the world to actually pay taxes, or maybe Facebook shouldn't be getting 300 million dollar tax refunds from the IRS.

But Doug, but Doug, you're talking about 10 billion dollars in a 3.4 Trillion dollar budget. That's peanuts! Yes, I know. But, 10 billion here, 10 billion there and pretty soon you're talking about some real money! And in the long run, you wake up one day and you're $18,000,000,000,000.00 in the hole.

Momentum

Over the years I have learned that life is largely about...momentum, at least my life seems to be. I get swept up in an idea or some interest and the newness of it captivates me, resulting in a burst of energy and enthusiasm. That energy can last weeks or even months, but the minute it leaves me, the project is done, dead as a door nail.

This time last year I had just finished writing a novel. I started in February and finished it in August. For those seven months it was never very far from my thoughts. It didn't feel like work. It was as much fun as I've ever had writing anything. Loved every minute of it. When I was done, a two month proof reading and editing phase began during which time I plotted and schemed trying to find a way to get it published.

Then something amazing happened. The momentum that had carried the project forward for nine months disappeared into thin air. I never saw it coming and to this day can't remember how it happened. All I know is, my other life came roaring back with a vengeance. I got busy with other things. One of the other things was the book I wrote about my parents, Finishing Well. I was in a rush to get that one self published to have it ready to give to my family at Christmas. But when that was done, I never followed through with doing anything with the novel. It was as if after building it into a finished product, it was now too heavy to get moving again from a dead stop, kind of like a freight train full of coal that's sitting still. Momentum.

Now, the manuscript sits in the bottom drawer of my nightstand, neatly typed, held together with a mighty black metal clip. The cover page has the title...A Life of Dreams, and that's exactly what it feels like to me now...a dream. Now, I've got the itch to write another one. Why? Because it's incredibly exciting and great fun to create something. But inspiration meets up with perspiration rarely in this life, so most of the time nothing gets followed through. That's why the old prophets said, "the end of a thing is better than it's beginning." After all is said and done, more gets said than done.

So, there it sits, safely in my night stand. Maybe, twenty years after my death, my kids will find the thing in an attic somewhere, get it published and I'll become a famous and celebrated dead novelist!

Walker's Out. Who's Next?

Scott Walker, Govenor of Wisconsin has "suspended" his campaign for President, which is the new word candidates use instead of "quit." He joins another Govenor, Rick Perry of Texas, who suspended his campaign a few weeks ago. The whittling down of the  republican field has begun.

That leaves us with 13 official candidates if you count Lindsey Graham who swears up and down that he's running for President and has a web site and everything! It also includes a former Governor of my state, Jim Gilmore, who may or may not have a website, since absolutely no one has ever checked.

So, the question then becomes, who will drop out next? When I casually informed my wife of the news that Scott Walker was out, her reply was, "Scott..who?" I hold my wife's political instincts in high regard precisely because she isn't all that interested in it and because of that she is very much like the average voter. She isn't totally disinterested, or even uninformed, she just has a life outside of politics, like most of us who don't live inside the beltway. She is the type of person that all of these candidates have to win over if they want to become President. They can win the nomination without people like her, but not the big prize. So, when Pam can't remember Scott Walker's last name despite watching both debates...well, that explains his exit. So, who "suspends their campaign" next?

The easy answer would be the less than 1% guys like Graham, Gilmore, Pataki, etc.. But they can be tricky. When you're that pathetic, you don't have much of a payroll to start with, so you can last a bit longer. Plus, these people aren't really running to win, they're running for a variety of other reasons. For some, it's to enhance their speaking fees,(Graham), or help them sell a book,(Huckabee), or the burning desire to be relevant again,(Pataki). For a guy like Gilmore, it's something to do to get him out of the house.

Of the top tier candidates then:

1. Rand Paul. He looks miserable on the stump, like he can hardly stand having to compete with an idiot like Mike Huckabee for campaign cash. And speaking of money, his has about dried up. His libertarian moment has passed, and the American people will never elect a guy who never smiles. We prefer happy warriors. Paul smirks too much, and it's hard for people to connect with a smirker, no matter how smart or right he is.

2. John Kascich. He's the John Huntsman of 2016, every democrat's favorite republican. He's got lots of experience in government, as both a Congressman and Governor, which is good or bad, I suppose,
depending on how well connected you want your President to be. As a moderate, he's that rare republican candidate that gets sympathetic press coverage, but republican voters have always been rightly suspicious of any candidate that the press likes, sensing that it's a trap.

3. Chris Christie. Again, my wife had a great observation the other night.."How is it that Chris Christie is damaged goods because of that bridge-gate thing, and yet Hillary Clinton mishandles classified e-mails and the press hardly bats an eye?" Why indeed? Actually the question answers itself. Quick, name the last republican candidate to be endorsed by the New York Times? Times up! Christie showed a lot of promise in 2015, but that was a long time ago in politics. 

4. Mike Huckabee will finally bow out after he thinks he has sold enough books or put himself in a better negotiating position with Fox for a new show...and not a minute earlier!! His exit from the campaign will be mourned by... no one.

That leaves us with six serious candidates...Trump, Bush, Carson, Fiorina, Cruz and Rubio.

You heard it here first.

Pam Was Right. I Was Wrong....Again!

 I know this will be very difficult for many of you to believe, but apparently I have a couple of annoying personality traits that irritate the dickens out of my wife. This past weekend one of them was on full display. The annoying personality trait of which I speak concerns my tendency towards over confidence, especially when it comes to self-diagnosing. Let me try to explain...

Ok, readers of this blog are aware that the past few months have visited upon me a plague of back, neck and shoulder problems. The most recent visitation involves a mysteriously cranky right shoulder, which feels an awful lot like my left shoulder felt two years ago right before I had rotator cuff surgery. For a week and a half now, the shoulder has started out the day virtually pain free only to gradually get tighter and more painful as the day wears on until by bedtime I am about ready to bite down firmly on stick while Pam saws my arm off! Well...this past Friday, I had a very good day. No, I had not been divinely healed, but searing pain had been transformed to mildly annoying discomfort. So, when I woke up Saturday morning pain free, my over confident, self diagnosing thing kicked in. I informed the wife that I was planning to take Lucy over to the track behind Pocohontas Middle School and throw the frisbee, then come home and cut the grass. It was then when she shot me...the look. 

My wife is too kind of a person to truly launch into someone, so she starts out with a heavy sigh and begins shaking her head from side to side, "Honey, just because you've had one decent day doesn't mean that the last eight days of pain didn't happen! There's something wrong with your shoulder, and you're not helping it by doing everything you always do on a Saturday! You need to REST YOUR SHOULDER!" At that point I began assuring her that I would take it easy and not try to do too much, which to her ears sounds an awful lot like...lies.

After around twenty minutes or so at the track the shoulder began to hurt a little. I made what I felt was an adult, mature, responsible decision to cut our play time short and head back home. When I came into the house Pam was getting ready to go for her morning walk. I smiled and told her that she had been right, but hadn't I been smart for coming home instead of pushing it? Oddly, she was not happy with what I thought was quite a victory. Instead, she huffed past me, without so much as an "it's about time!!"

Then, I made a really stupid decision. There's probably nothing I enjoy more than working on my yard. I know it sounds weird, but I love to cut the grass...and my lawn was crying out to me. But then I remembered Pam's warning about doing too much. It was then that I came up with what in hindsight was a pretty stupid idea. What I was searching for was a way to cut the grass without violating the letter of the law that Pam had laid down. So, my brilliant solution was...I'll cut the entire yard...LEFT HANDED.

There probably isn't any need for me to tell you what happened next. Pam was NOT happy when she returned from her walk to find me mowing the lawn awkwardly with my left hand on the handle, struggling to keep the mower in a straight line. Let's just say that it made for some tense moments later at dinner on date night.

I really don't know what's wrong with me when it comes to this sort of thing. I always manage to convince myself that I am cured of any ailment the minute I can go ten minutes without any symptoms. Part of it is from personal experience, since in ancient times it used to sometimes work...back when I was twenty. The hardest thing on earth for me to do, besides sitting still in church and/or business meetings, is convalescing. Rest isn't as easy as it sounds. 

But, unfortunately, Pam was right. Sunday morning, the shoulder pain was back and it got steadily worse throughout the day and this morning it's unpleasant as well. So, she was right. I was wrong. Again. To her everlasting credit, she hasn't yet started with the "I told you so's"

Debate #Two. My Take.

Two Republican televised debates are now in the can, and although neither of them were actual, debates, we do know much more about these candidates than we did before. Thanks to the insufferable Donald Trump, they have also been the two must watched cable TV shows in history, which is either a good or bad thing, depending on whether you are an optimist or a pessimist. Nevertheless, here's my up to date analysis of the candidates in no particular order:

1. Donald Trump will eventual get bored with this race and find some idiotic excuse to beg out.

2. John Kascich is angling for the job of token Republican in Hillary Clinton's cabinet.

3. Marco Rubio is looking more and more like the Republican's answer to JFK.

4. Mike Huckabee is an artful rube.

5. Ted Cruz needs to learn how to answer questions instead of making speeches.

6. Rand Paul looks so unhappy. Smile man, you're smart and right on most of the issues!

7. Chris Christie comes across as way too New Jerseyian.

8. Carly Fiorina is one bad-a## woman. She has the cahones that Jeb Bush is looking for.

9. Jeb Bush. See #8 above.

10. Scott Walker is a disappointment.

11. Ben Carson is a wonderful person and might even be a good President, but he's just a bit too soft spoken and deliberate for my tastes.

So, there you have it. My ideal ticket for 2016 at this point would be Rubio/Fiorina...in any order you prefer. Time will tell.

Ghost Letter

Yesterday I received a large envelope from the Veterens Administration. This was inside:

Yes, a full fifteen months after my father's death, the VA gets around to sending me what is obviously a ritualized acknowledgement of his service in the military. Despite the predictable government ineptitude that this represents, I must admit that I had a lump in my throat as I held it in my hand. It felt like some kind of otherworldly communication. To see my Dad's name on parchment with a gold embossed eagle at the top signed by the reproduced signature of the President of the United States...was moving. It was as if I was holding in my hand proof that the world knew who my Dad was, someone besides his family acknowledging that he was a fine and decent man, a man who did his duty. I think I will have it framed and give it to my sister Linda. It needs to hang on a wall somewhere, and Linda deserves the honor. 

It's funny, I can go days without thinking of Mom and Dad, and then out of nowhere, something like this happens and suddenly they are all I think about. It's no longer sadness, but rather a sense that we all have been reduced, lessened, diminished by their absence. Something powerful has been lost, but thankfully, not forever.

So, What's So Bad About Socialism?

Today has been a difficult day for me. The shoulder has suddenly become a monster of a thing. I ate my lunch entirely with my left hand today for the first time since, probably ever. The simple motion of raising my fork to my mouth was too much for the right shoulder to bear. Typing this blog must be done carefully, with my right hand firmly planted on the table or pain shoots directly into the middle of the shoulder socket. I have no explanation other than what my Chriopractor called it today in his diagnosis...adhesive capsulitis. I Googled it when I got back to the office and quietly cursed myself for not paying better attention in anatomy class.

I am currently medicated within an inch of my life so bear this in mind while reading the remainder of this blog which is going to be about the latest craze in American politics...democratic socialism. This is what Bernie Sanders self-identifies himself as. The difference between regular old socialism, and the democratic variety seems to be the vote...as in we get socialism only if we vote for it, not by totalitarian compulsion. I, for one, am very relieved to hear that!

But, when discussing the pros and cons of socialism it's hard not to get tangled up in labels. Some draw no distinction between socialism and communism, for example. Others only seem to want to talk about the glories of successful Scandnavian socialism, with no mention of Cuba or Venezuala. Still others view socialism as the mortal enemy of capitalism. It's all a giant mess of accusations and vitriol. So, here's my take.

First of all, I believe and assert confidently, that capitalism is the greatest system of economic organization in the history of the world, in that its adoption has produced more wealth for more people than any other system known to man. However, I believe it safe to say that we do not have capitalism any longer in the United States. We used to, for a while, but no longer. What we have now is an unholy brew of cronyism, influence peddling giant mega corporations, and crooked politicians making the world safe for their oligarchy. Why have politicians been so empowered? Because when we allowed them to construct a 70,000 page tax code, WE empowered them. He who writes the rules...senators, congressmen, and big business lobbyists, have the power.

So, instead of making a product that people want and are willing to pay for, the way to really get rich in this country is to buy a couple of congressmen, hire a team of the best lobbyist that money will buy,( the best of whom used to be congressmen), and have a sweet tax break added at the last minute to some appropriations bill that will give your company an unfair advantage in the market place. 

So, does this mean that I would be in favor of a more socialism-friendly approach to government? Actually, it means the exact opposite. What I would like to see is power taken away from politicians by doing away with the entire tax code and replacing it with a flat tax with ZERO deductions and ZERO tax breaks for anything or anyone. But, that's a discussion for another time. Let's get back to thewhole  socialism thing.

I will admit to being a bit put off when I see the word socialist. Part of it is that I was born in 1958 and can still remember those stupid duck and cover drills in elementary schools. I remember the Cold War like it was yesterday, the epic struggle between the freedom and democracy of the west with the totalitarianism of communist China and The Soviet Union, and especially the Soviet client state 90 miles from Key West. And sure, I understand that the democratic socialism of Bernie Sanders is a far cry from the gulags of Siberia, still, it's a powerfully evocative word with special power to anyone born before 1960. But the real issue I have with socialism is their blind faith in the gloriously transformative, potential of government. To hear a socialist describe any problem we face, the answer is always, and I mean always, an expansion of centralized government power. None of them seem even mildly concerned that a government so empowered could ever become so powerful that it controls...everything. The solutions that they offer throw around other people's money as if it were an infinite commodity. "Pay everyone $15 an hour, give them free, universal health care, pay for their college education, and we'll do it all with money to spare!" We'll just tax people making X amount at the rate of XX percent. And this wealth redistribution will have no impact on the economy because people won't change their behavior once we start taxing them at higher rates. It all seems so insufferably naive to me.

So, if the question becomes, which do you fear more, a muscular, monstrously powerful government, or a muscular and monstrously powerful oligarchy, well...that's a harder question. The ideals of socialism are quite seductive. Who doesn't want everyone to make $15, $25, $50 dollars an hour? Who wouldn't want everyone to get a free college education? Why shouldn't everyone get all the free health care they need or want? Some even suggest that if you don't want all of these things to come true, you are either a selfish, greedy bastard, or a Christian hypocrite. For me, it's not a question of what I wish were the case, it's more a question of what is sustainable and possible when human nature is factored into the equation and the boring economic laws of plenty and scarcity.

Yes, but Doug, you say...look at the Scandanavian countries. They have wonderful economies and they do all of these things for their citizens. Ok, let's look at the Danes, the Norwegians and any other Nordic state you might have in mind. Those countries are small states and they all have a couple of things in common that make them more amenable to socialistic schemes. First of all, they are homogeneous nations with virtually no significant minority communities. Secondly, they are able to provide the bounty of cradle to grave welfare to their citizens largely because none of them have ever been asked to rid Europe of totalitarian bullies in the past 75 years or fight a Cold War with the Soviet Union. Not having much of a defense budget will do that. Of course, you could say, well maybe we should scale back our military. Again, a nice thought and one that I might entertain, but to not mention its relevance when touting the examples of socialism's successes there is disingenuous.

I guess for me, although I know that something is dreadfully wrong in our country and that the way things are now is unacceptable, I'm not ready to turn my back on capitalism. And I resent people like Bernie Sanders always telling everyone that the entire game is rigged. It simply isn't true. Not every success story is tainted by malfeasance. There is a reason that every year over half of the inventions in the world come from here. There's a reason Americans win so many Nobel prizes. The free enterprise system and its exalted view of private property rights is what has built this country. Any self respecting socialist would almost automatically be suspicious of private property, and would certainly not insist on it as a fundamental right of a citizen. The heart of any decent socialist beats for empowered government control of society, not individual private property rights. So, therein lies the delimma.

Many of you know my story and the humble beginnings of my family. For any candidate to suggest that if I turned out to have started a profitable business, that I somehow won life's lottery is something that eats at me. To try to suggest that because of my race, or any other alleged natural advantage I was born with, anything, besides my willingness to work my ass off doing the difficult things that less successful people were always unwilling to do, to suggest that anything else made me successful will never be a big seller in my world.

If you're still optimistic about what an empowered, benevolent government might do for you, remember what it's like at the DMV. Walk into one of the offices where they hand out unemployment checks and take a look around. Feel the love, feel the efficiency. Now imagine a government responsible for not only unemployment benefits but all of your health care, the college education of all your kids, and providing you with a job. (It takes a lot of folks to run a cradle to grave welfare state, my friend). If you're still excited at the prospect of democratic socialism, then go for it. If it comes to that, I'll have to pray that I'm wrong and you're all right.

.......Wow, what a meandering mess of a post this turned out to be. Sorry!!