The Democratic Message?
As "mid-term" elections approach for our lame-duck president, polls imply the democrats have fertile ground to make head-way into regaining a majority in the house and the senate perhaps. This perhaps explains why the republicans have largely abandoned their "party leader" president for their own survival.
It is a curious place to be, to have an expectation for a tail wind and progress. Ought opportunity to be MAXIMIZED by strategic "facts" and half-truths intended to pander to people's desires?
Of course my answer is no, but I admit were I a politician, I'd really like to "be positive" and make people think things can be turned around with the right leadership (me!)
I admit I'm a pessimist in terms of how things are done, and probably overly so. Still, I don't see how to "spin" our choices into anything other than a heroic "tighten our belts" and "stiff upper lip" response to the grave dangers to "life as we know it."
On the good side, if we admit the down-side, we can prepare and minimize, while if we deny the down-side, it'll just get delayed and hit harder later.
Here's what I see as "unavoidable" events best "managed" rather than avoided to the last moment:
1) The value of U.S. currency must plummet dramatically to end the trade deficits. (i.e. something like 50% value)
2) The cost of energy in this country must increase dramatically even from current highs. (i.e. something like 100% increase.)
3) The U.S. military must downsize dramatically even as possible uses will increase further in the near future. (Again another 50% downsize)
The world economy as we know it is overly dependent upon an unsustainable U.S. Debt. The crazy thing is we benefit from a world that is propping up our debt, while we have control to screw them over via a currency drop. It WILL happen, if by nothing else than a period of high inflation which WILL happen sooner or later. You can feel sorry for these foolish investors, but still more honest to deal with it sooner than later.
Cheap energy runs the economy and it remains to be seen what prices are "still cheap" and which are deal breaker to "life as we know it." What is amazing to me is that people dare complain about energy prices without considering the lack of alternatives. A lack of alternatives to me is PROOF that energy is underprices and must go up.
The last one is the one I can least see. WHEN will the U.S. citizens DEMAND a reduction of military spending? How many social programs will we cut? How much debt will we give to our children before we say "Enough"?
The "fear-mongers" are winning wholesale, and they'd still be winning if it wasn't for the little rises in energy prices over the last 2-3 years. The republicans have won the day in demonstrating that it is not only POSSIBLE but desirable to increase government debt to cover any military cost they want.
In the olden days of Empire, one Empire would invest huge sums of money in military conquest because they knew victory would allow large scale pillaging of the loser in slaves and wealth. It is amazing in a democrazy (oops, Freudian slip?) that War is even possible. Perhaps that explains why Bush must resort to selective facts to sell their cases. Even a "just" war can be opposed against short term self-interest. War now is apparently sellable because all the costs are hidden in unimaginable budget deficits and a "volunteer army".
Anyway, somehow I imagine something must oppose our military expansion. If you believe the republican "starve the beast", I suppose the military could rebel internally, if expectations exceeeded their resources. Generals might just say "No, we can't do it with available resources."
It is a frustrating reality to WANT justice and to imagine the U.S. military might even hold some value in world peace and justice, but to know we can't do it all. When faced by a "wild west town", how do you BEGIN to clean things up with limited resources?
I don't know anything about the comparisons of Iraq and Viet Nam. I'll accept we spent more in 2006 dollars in VN than Iraq, and certainly more soldiers there. I just think of English and the U.S. Revolutionary war - England lost because they had better uses for their resources than to defend the empire. If I lived in Iraq today, I'd want to leave, home and memory and all. If civil war is avoided, I'd be surprised, and I'd say better to negociate a divided ruled country that can be locally defended than a false unity that probably can be no better than Saddam's fear-domination approach to defend. There's just too much oil weath and too much incentive for violence to take. Maybe I'm wrong, but I guess I pick making defendable walls over fighting for everything.
Oops, back to my title, the "Democratic message"?
I admit I don't know. The WHOLE problem lies that we have a system that DEMANDS change, and all changes HURT SOMEONE, so PLANNED change that hurts someone will have to offer BRIBES to those harmed to a degree that the AGREED solutions don't solve the real problems.
You've got the "socialists" on one side who would use "wealth distribution" - empowering the majority against the wealth concentrations of today - basically revolutionaries! You've got the "Libertarians" on the other side who want to minimize the government, apparently assuming that "bribery" is a sufficient method of negociation to run an economy upon.
I don't know what the "middle" message is. I'd offer President Carter's moral approach and powerdown to sustainability. I'm definitely more on the "wealth distribution" side, taxing people who can afford the taxes and building infrastruture that will allow people to live without as much energy in the future. Maybe "incentives" alone might encourage change, but I don't see anything fast enough. Well, that puts me back in with the revolutionaries - impatience is a great source of evil.
You might say I'm with the libertarians as well, at least in wanting to reduce our dependence upon the federal government. I'd support empowering states and cities to do their own programs to prepare for a tighter future.
In my message, I think of the Hobbit, Gandalf coming to the battle of 3 armies after the death of Smog the Dragon, Men, Elves, and Dwarves, and a warning of a new enemy approaching:
"Dread has come upon you all! An army of goblins with claim to the treasure comes from the north. Behold! They ride on wolves!"
I can see the 4th army, and I don't know if they are goblins and ride on wolves, but their appearance may be as dramatic - the crushing expectations of 6.5 billion people in a world of declining energy resources.
I'm scared, and everyone ought to be scared. Whether we choose to find our common interests or go-it-alone, we shall see.
Okay, my message:
"Our great nation of 230 years will not survive another 23 years unless we dramatically change course. The world is changing fast and everything we've learned to dependent upon is now in doubt. There is going to be losers in the near future, and the government is not going to be able to protect us from risk. It is up to every individual to look at his expectations and cut them in half, and in half again. Then get serious and once more. If we all do this, we might find a world we like in 23 years. If not, our children may someday curse our lack of vision and prudence.
Whatever GREATER purpose this government can hold, it can be no greater than the willingness of the people to lead first. Those with wealth now have a greater responsibility to see what that wealth is worth to them and what purposes it might hold to make a future world that will support needs. Those without wealth now may contine hoping for handouts now, but must realize that things may not be the same, and if you don't do everything you can to find your own support systems, you and your children will be faced with even harder choices in the future.
The democratic party will support those who are ready to take a hard look at what makes our lives possible and willing to sacrifice for a more secure future we can't yet see.
If you want to live in a world of spin and imprudent choices in your names, vote for the others. If you want the truth, and want a future that may be a little more poor in wealth, power and ambition, but maybe greater in security, consider voting for me."
Well, I don't even think I'd vote for myself!
It is a curious place to be, to have an expectation for a tail wind and progress. Ought opportunity to be MAXIMIZED by strategic "facts" and half-truths intended to pander to people's desires?
Of course my answer is no, but I admit were I a politician, I'd really like to "be positive" and make people think things can be turned around with the right leadership (me!)
I admit I'm a pessimist in terms of how things are done, and probably overly so. Still, I don't see how to "spin" our choices into anything other than a heroic "tighten our belts" and "stiff upper lip" response to the grave dangers to "life as we know it."
On the good side, if we admit the down-side, we can prepare and minimize, while if we deny the down-side, it'll just get delayed and hit harder later.
Here's what I see as "unavoidable" events best "managed" rather than avoided to the last moment:
1) The value of U.S. currency must plummet dramatically to end the trade deficits. (i.e. something like 50% value)
2) The cost of energy in this country must increase dramatically even from current highs. (i.e. something like 100% increase.)
3) The U.S. military must downsize dramatically even as possible uses will increase further in the near future. (Again another 50% downsize)
The world economy as we know it is overly dependent upon an unsustainable U.S. Debt. The crazy thing is we benefit from a world that is propping up our debt, while we have control to screw them over via a currency drop. It WILL happen, if by nothing else than a period of high inflation which WILL happen sooner or later. You can feel sorry for these foolish investors, but still more honest to deal with it sooner than later.
Cheap energy runs the economy and it remains to be seen what prices are "still cheap" and which are deal breaker to "life as we know it." What is amazing to me is that people dare complain about energy prices without considering the lack of alternatives. A lack of alternatives to me is PROOF that energy is underprices and must go up.
The last one is the one I can least see. WHEN will the U.S. citizens DEMAND a reduction of military spending? How many social programs will we cut? How much debt will we give to our children before we say "Enough"?
The "fear-mongers" are winning wholesale, and they'd still be winning if it wasn't for the little rises in energy prices over the last 2-3 years. The republicans have won the day in demonstrating that it is not only POSSIBLE but desirable to increase government debt to cover any military cost they want.
In the olden days of Empire, one Empire would invest huge sums of money in military conquest because they knew victory would allow large scale pillaging of the loser in slaves and wealth. It is amazing in a democrazy (oops, Freudian slip?) that War is even possible. Perhaps that explains why Bush must resort to selective facts to sell their cases. Even a "just" war can be opposed against short term self-interest. War now is apparently sellable because all the costs are hidden in unimaginable budget deficits and a "volunteer army".
Anyway, somehow I imagine something must oppose our military expansion. If you believe the republican "starve the beast", I suppose the military could rebel internally, if expectations exceeeded their resources. Generals might just say "No, we can't do it with available resources."
It is a frustrating reality to WANT justice and to imagine the U.S. military might even hold some value in world peace and justice, but to know we can't do it all. When faced by a "wild west town", how do you BEGIN to clean things up with limited resources?
I don't know anything about the comparisons of Iraq and Viet Nam. I'll accept we spent more in 2006 dollars in VN than Iraq, and certainly more soldiers there. I just think of English and the U.S. Revolutionary war - England lost because they had better uses for their resources than to defend the empire. If I lived in Iraq today, I'd want to leave, home and memory and all. If civil war is avoided, I'd be surprised, and I'd say better to negociate a divided ruled country that can be locally defended than a false unity that probably can be no better than Saddam's fear-domination approach to defend. There's just too much oil weath and too much incentive for violence to take. Maybe I'm wrong, but I guess I pick making defendable walls over fighting for everything.
Oops, back to my title, the "Democratic message"?
I admit I don't know. The WHOLE problem lies that we have a system that DEMANDS change, and all changes HURT SOMEONE, so PLANNED change that hurts someone will have to offer BRIBES to those harmed to a degree that the AGREED solutions don't solve the real problems.
You've got the "socialists" on one side who would use "wealth distribution" - empowering the majority against the wealth concentrations of today - basically revolutionaries! You've got the "Libertarians" on the other side who want to minimize the government, apparently assuming that "bribery" is a sufficient method of negociation to run an economy upon.
I don't know what the "middle" message is. I'd offer President Carter's moral approach and powerdown to sustainability. I'm definitely more on the "wealth distribution" side, taxing people who can afford the taxes and building infrastruture that will allow people to live without as much energy in the future. Maybe "incentives" alone might encourage change, but I don't see anything fast enough. Well, that puts me back in with the revolutionaries - impatience is a great source of evil.
You might say I'm with the libertarians as well, at least in wanting to reduce our dependence upon the federal government. I'd support empowering states and cities to do their own programs to prepare for a tighter future.
In my message, I think of the Hobbit, Gandalf coming to the battle of 3 armies after the death of Smog the Dragon, Men, Elves, and Dwarves, and a warning of a new enemy approaching:
"Dread has come upon you all! An army of goblins with claim to the treasure comes from the north. Behold! They ride on wolves!"
I can see the 4th army, and I don't know if they are goblins and ride on wolves, but their appearance may be as dramatic - the crushing expectations of 6.5 billion people in a world of declining energy resources.
I'm scared, and everyone ought to be scared. Whether we choose to find our common interests or go-it-alone, we shall see.
Okay, my message:
"Our great nation of 230 years will not survive another 23 years unless we dramatically change course. The world is changing fast and everything we've learned to dependent upon is now in doubt. There is going to be losers in the near future, and the government is not going to be able to protect us from risk. It is up to every individual to look at his expectations and cut them in half, and in half again. Then get serious and once more. If we all do this, we might find a world we like in 23 years. If not, our children may someday curse our lack of vision and prudence.
Whatever GREATER purpose this government can hold, it can be no greater than the willingness of the people to lead first. Those with wealth now have a greater responsibility to see what that wealth is worth to them and what purposes it might hold to make a future world that will support needs. Those without wealth now may contine hoping for handouts now, but must realize that things may not be the same, and if you don't do everything you can to find your own support systems, you and your children will be faced with even harder choices in the future.
The democratic party will support those who are ready to take a hard look at what makes our lives possible and willing to sacrifice for a more secure future we can't yet see.
If you want to live in a world of spin and imprudent choices in your names, vote for the others. If you want the truth, and want a future that may be a little more poor in wealth, power and ambition, but maybe greater in security, consider voting for me."
Well, I don't even think I'd vote for myself!
posted by Ares Olympus at 6:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home