Why we need to rescind the Wealthy Level Bush Tax Cuts and Pass I1098 in WA State.

This is mainly for Washington State residents, but also important to think about nationally.

Here's one big reason why we need I1098 and the expiration of the "Bush Tax Cuts" for the wealthiest individual incomes:

"Here's something else that helps the wealthy: Though hiring is scarce, executive bonuses are flowing, and they are definitely back on Wall Street after falling sharply in 2008. And sales at Tiffany's flagship store in New York City shot up 20% over the past holiday season.

Working middle-class families, meanwhile, remain antsy about spending. And sales at the places they generally shop, like J.C. Penney (JCP, news, msgs), Target, Wal-Mart Stores (WMT, news, msgs) and Macy's (M, news, msgs), continue to languish." (by Michael Brush, "Why this is a rich man's recovery". http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/CompanyFocus/why-this-is-a-rich-mans-recovery.aspx, 3-24-2010).

Keep in mind that to those who have been given much, much is expected in return. For those who aspire to be true Christians here's a quote from the Bible, "If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother" (Deut 15:7, King James Version). The money raised by I1098 will certainly help provide medical help for the poor and the financially stressed among us, not to mention the benefits to Education.

It might also help some to remember who really made out since 2008. It wasn't the poor and it wasn't the middle class. Outlandish bonuses were paid to upper managements of banks and corporations--some of which were in major danger of bankruptcy, meaning big losses overall. This is a major failing of capitalism.

In those organizations, it was NOT upper managements who were laid off. If some were, they received large severance packages, adding to their already bloated net worth. There are many studies which show that additional wealth to the wealthy is largely held closely, not used to benefit the common weal (meaning wealth or well-being).

Had the federal government not intervened with loans, there might have been unemployment at 25% and another Great (or greater) Depression, Fortunately, as with the Savings and Loan Crises in the 1980's, it appears that much of the Government's loans will be recovered over the next few years.

If capitalism were working properly, the managers of these plutocratic organizations would have been fired, not rewarded with bonuses, for their inability to foresee the downturn in their organizations. Government itself failed in not confiscating these ill-gotten bonuses, clawing back this money, and using it to help offset the general economic decline which has caused such economic pain among the middle and lower classes. The magnitude of TARP and other emergency government measures might have been lower, given a clawback.

However, a clawback might have occurred were it not for the excessive power in our system of the corpocractic plutocracy. It will take years for this story to fully play out in the courts, but the littler Bernie Madoffs were the ones who are largely invisible and who really made out; and, the vast majority of them laugh up their sleeves at you. I1098 is an attempt to achieve a small measure of clawback in Washington State. Rescinding the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy is another small attempt on the broader stage.

If the Gates'--Sr and Jr--recognize this, why don't you? Surely, you are NOT among the 38,000 who would see a relatively small decrease in their income stream through a small tax increase--a tax increase that will not affect the lifestyle of these few, but which might possibly improve yours.

And, if you truly believe that this is just a benefit to the government, and not to you, I have a pothole out front that could use your help. I'll be looking to see if you fill it anytime soon. Money gained through I1098 will offset other state general funds that ARE necessary to get our infrastructure fixed and improved--bridges, roads, and potholes.

Bush to Putin: Well, you know, you just shouldn't go pushing them Georgians around, Vlad. I mean, they have a democracy, you know. So stop it or we're going to complain to the UN and whine to the Europeans.

What a weeny! Eastern Europe, including the Republic of Georgia, has strongly backed the US, sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to send the Russians a strong message by sending a strong naval presence into the Black Sea to make sure the Russians cannot blockade Georgia, our ally. If we lose Eastern Europe--again--to the Russians, we are fools.

This area is every bit as important to us and to Europe. Let Eastern Europe be neutral, let them be the democracy they chose to be, but in any case, Russia, Let Them Be. If Ossetia and Abkhazia want to be part of Russia, and they choose to do so in democratic elections, then so be it. But, if necessary, we must make it clear to the Russians that we will stand for no violence or occupation of Georgia proper, or any other USA ally, Eastern Europe or elsewhere. This country has to start making rational decisions.

If that means use of force, or the support of the use of force, against Russia so be it. I am not a Georgian (not even close), nor a muslim--I am an Obama supporter. I am not opposed to Russia as a country: I am opposed to their thuggery. But, if the USA is to have any credibility whatsoever, we must support our allies with more than words--with troops, naval and air support as our military deems feasible.

We screwed up royally with Iraq. We cannot afford to screw this up, too, just because some fear a confrontation with Russia--and because the ignorant American public knows nothing about anything. I do not like violence, but an existing democracy that we have given our explicit promises to, and to whom we owe a debt, deserves much more than lip service.

More Civic Hybrid

A new Civic Hybrid owner claims 39mpg in the first 3000 miles-traded in an Audi A6 and thinks the Civic is a GLC (Great Little Car--anyone else remember this?).

Note: If you drive a large pickup or any large car, over 90% of the gasoline you buy is used to move the vehicle around, not you. You and your groceries are about 5 to 10% of what's being hauled around town! The lighter the car, the more energy efficient it is. KLC

More Smiles for More Miles (Per Gallon)

I just saw the 2006 Honda Civic Hybrid in a parking lot near Magnolia in Seattle. Wow! Great styling--Honda is going to sell lots of these. And, they should, the mpg claimed are 49/51. That's no typo. This beauty also has a continously variable transmission (CVT) which shifts very smoothly--because that's like having an infinite number of gears--and increases the mpg. I haven't driven one yet, but will do so soon. There's no wagon or hatchback model yet, but that's likely in the near future. And, by the way, check out the movie "Who Killed the Electric Car"

klc

The Case Against and For, Hybrids and Other Higher Mileage Vehicles
(19 Aug 2006)

The following is from Bankrate.com (8-11-2006):

"Are you considering a hybrid because of big tax breaks that go along with the purchase? While that's true for some hybrid vehicles, others qualify for very modest tax breaks and not too far into the 2007 model year, the tax breaks for some of the most popular and fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to vanish.

What about those alternative fuel vehicles that have been the darlings of ads from General Motors, Ford and Chrysler? They can help us lessen our dependence on foreign oil, but buying a vehicle that runs on a mixture of 15 percent gasoline and 85 percent ethanol could disappoint.

And isn't it about time American drivers got in line with other parts of the world to recognizing diesel power is more fuel-efficient than gasoline? Perhaps, but 2007 may not be the year that happens because of diesel emission concerns.

But what about the savings [from hybrids]?

Even with a gallon of regular gas selling for $3-plus, the most fuel-efficient hybrids -- currently the Toyota Prius (note: about equivalent to the Honda Insight), at an EPA estimated 60 mpg highway and 51 mpg city -- will not start saving a buyer from the first fill-up. The reason is that hybrids can cost from $2,500 to $4,000 or more above a comparably sized and powered gasoline vehicle. "

There's more on Bankrate if you wish further economic analysis and more information on hybrid and standard vehicles, on Vehix.com or Edmunds.com. (Large pickups have less than 1/3 the mileage ratings of the two mentioned hybrid sedans above).

But, wait a minute: Hybrids cost more, yes, but this extra cost does not keep people from sinking the same or more into humongous SUV's and muscle cars/pickups. Isn't there something perverse about people who care so little about their impact on others, or care so much that others perceive them as somehow superior? After all, a Toyota Prius has all the creature comforts and even the goodies one finds in almost any other vehicle--and it's a safe vehicle, too, unless some drunken fool in a full-size Humvee plows into your Prius at 60-plus mph. No, it doesn't haul much cargo or tow a trailer, but how often do you see the big hogs doing that, either? (especially around town!). I find it ironic that many of these same folks sport American flags somewhere on their hogs.

There's a real problem with some Americans, and some in other countries, too, that causes them to seek status in these supersized vehicles--and it's partly a psychological one: one that seems associated with low self-esteem and its related defensiveness, and an exaggerated self-centeredness or narcissism.

I'm not talking about folks with a real need here--with work to do or even using such a vehicle on weekends for hauling stuff. I'm talking mostly about guys with a need for metallic penis enhancement (and a few women with penis envy).

(With a PhD in Psychology and more than a few years under my belt, I feel I'm qualified to make such a judgement call. Even a lay person can reach a similar conclusion by doing a little research and reading in psych--there are almost unlimited texts and books out there--mostly readable by those with a high school education). Of course, the US automobile manufacturers know this and reinforce the addiction through their ads and commercials.

In many ways, our attachment to automobiles, and desire for ever bigger ones, is an addiction that needs a twelve-step program or some other rehab strategy.

Those most addicted will be quick to attack me, no doubt as some sort of elitist enemy of capitalism and democracy. This is, of course, a defense mechanism, a self-justification of their pathological need for gratification at other's, and the environment's, expense. I happen to be a stockholder, too: An investor worried about our longer-term financial viability and the impact on it of a severely depleted and environmentally degraded environment. As Americans, we are half as energy efficient as the Europeans, or to put it another way, twice as wasteful, especially with fuel.

These druggies will also, no doubt, resort to the old saw that this guy is opposed to their freedom and so he must be unAmerican. To which I respond with another old saw, "your freedom ends when it interferes with mine". Real freedom, as we learned it in high school, entails responsibility. When the facts dictate that unfettered freedom has led to dangerous irresponsibility, we American citizens have curtailed it.

For example, we learned that smoking kills, even at secondhand, and so we have largely made smoking illegal in public spaces through democratic public action. Smokers, of course, hate these restrictions but few among them would play Russian Roulette with a three-chambered revolver, though this is essentially what they're doing--it's just that the gun doesn't fire for twenty or thirty years, in the form of lung or other cancers. Addictions are tough to beat.

As for automobiles and industry, we now have clean air laws and other environmental laws that lessen our individual freedom to the benefit of all. A true patriot understands the reason for these laws, and behaves responsibly by following them. Furthermore, we may not have fifty years to act, as we have had in the case of tobacco.

All well and good, you say, "but I can't afford a Prius, even with the tax break". OK, then take a look at the other small cars out there, especially if you need a commuter vehicle or a second, around-town car. The Toyota Corolla gets 30+ mpg and even the Ford Focus gets good mileage for a domestic manufacturer's automobile. Ditto for GM and Daimler-Chryler small products. You can buy these vehicles new for around $15-16,000 and KIA's for 2/3 that.

Oh, and by the way, by doing so you are lessening the USA's dependence on foreign oil--and doing it without drilling in environmentally sensitive areas. It might not be a bad idea to think of ANWR and the outer continental shelf and other such places in and around the USA as extra strategic petroleum reserves--available later on when we truly are desperate for oil that can be used in so many other ways besides fuel. As for diesel, not only does it cost almost as much as regular gasoline, it's also been linked to respiratory diseases, as well as causing more air pollution than gasoline in current engines.

What about ethanol and biodiesel? Too little, too late, with possible soil depletion/food competition problems. Coal liquefication? Some research says this uses more energy to produce than you get back in fuel. (usually natural gas—also getting more scarce and used in many other products. I'll have more to say about this in another segment, that's why this is only part of the case).

Chances are, though, that no matter how persuasive the arguments for more efficient vehicles, few will willingly give up their gas/oil hogs without incentives and disincentives. (Again, I would exempt here those few who truly have a need for a large vehicle and those who use their RVs for their once or twice a year vacation, See below for some suggestions). I suspect a combination of measures will be needed to accomplish the needed decrease in oil consumption. Some are already in place. More are needed to get people into higher mileage hybrids at a faster rate. Here are a few of my suggestions:

--Higher mileage CAFE standards with tax incentives for ALL vehicles that get better than 25mpg in urban driving and 35mpg on the highway. Make these mileage standards dependent on real-life testing. Raise the standard every two or three years.
--Periodic inspections in ALL states in all localities to assure that emissions are properly controlled, not just percentages but total amounts, too.
--Higher Federal taxes on largest vehicles, unless the buyer can prove need based on occupation or with a family of 3 or more children under 16.
--Force large vehicles to buy gasoline at special pumps with special nozzles that are linked to higher-priced gasoline with only one or two pumps/gas station, with exceptions for commercial vehicles or above special needs vehicles.
--Give an annual fuel allotment or ration to RVs, with any extra purchasable at the above special high-price pumps.
--Give more tax breaks for those who buy vehicles which beat the CAFE standards, and give a tax break for battery replacement on hybrids.

Some may have other ideas, but I believe we need to implement some such measures quickly in order to stretch this precious resource as long as we can, and get the American public to acknowledge its addiction, and into a rehab program.

If you still don't get it, consider this: Today (8-18-2006) the news reports tell us that Iran is giving $600-700 Million immediately in the form of $12,000 outright grants through Hezbollah to Lebanese in southern Lebanon who suffered destruction in the recent war with Israel--the money is in US dollars. Guess where it came from. Yes, from Westerners—including us--and the Japanese, who have purchased Iranian oil. Get it now?

And, here's another news flash brought to you by the oil companies and most reputable independent analysts: World oil production has likely peaked, or will in the very near future (5-20 years max).

Presenters at the International Oil Depletion Workshops included Matthew Simmons, a prominent energy-sector investment banker from Houston who advises President Bush. Simmons said, "I have studied the depletion issue intensely for too long now to have any remaining doubts as to the severity of the issue. But I am still amazed at the limited knowledge that exists, even in the U.S. or within our major oil and gas company’s senior management about this topic and its dire consequences", (Simmons (2002)

"Most serious scientists worry that the world oil supplies will peak [and then decline]. Peaking of oil can not be predicted accurately, but the event will occur. Peaking turns out to only be clear through a ’rear-view mirror’. By then, an alternative or solution is too late. My analysis leads me to worry that peaking is at hand, not years away. If I am right, the unforeseen consequences are devastating. The facts are too serious to ignore.” (Simmons (2003))

There's going to be a lot of rusting RVs, Humvees, Excaliburs and F250/350s and the like in junkyards before many years, when gasoline hits $10/gallon or more just due to lack of supply, not counting other measures like those above, imposed by the force of citizens through their governments. If you want to be a true patriot, reduce your oil addiction as soon as you economically can by buying only as much vehicle as you really need, with the best gas mileage you can afford (Maybe a Pontiac Vibe or Toyota Matrix at 36 mpg or so on the highway?).

If you can afford a hybrid, buy one as your next, or second, or urban car. One of these options will be the one I take. More to come.

KLC

Here's a couple other sources for further information—there are many of these you can find:


http://www.quaker.org/tqe/2006/TQE145-EN-Hybrids.html

http://www.aspo-australia.org.au/content/view/17/41/