Archive for December, 2010

December 23, 2010

A Moderate Proposal: Too Small to Succeed

by nkwilczy

First things first, if you’re reading this Jack Black, then you should know that we are all disappointed in you and the times require a much more… accurate… portrayal of the biting wit of Swift’s poetic philosophy than your cartoonish 3 dimensional parody could possibly offer.

“It [capitalism] has drowned the most heavenly ecstacies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconciousable freedom – free trade. In one word, for exploitation veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.”
-generally attributed to an obscure and thoroughly discredited German Economist

There has been, since the Obama election in America, a triumph of moderation. People will dismiss this, and judging from the hype their dismissal isn’t totally unfounded. At the time of the election I thought I was voting for an African Muslim Socialist and at the time was excited about the possibility that he could win. But after evaluating the policies that have been adopted by this administration I have little recourse but to dub them moderate. They have neither closed Guantanamo or ended the war in Afghanistan, they offered healthcare reform that fit entirely within existing free market constructs and which caters to influential lobbies in that industry, and an attempt at net neutrality that leaves corporations with control of bandwidth access. These things are either the erratic policies of a disjointed administration that lacks integrity, or, and this is more frightening, the signs of a moderate.

In the spirit of this bipartisanship, from the Bush Tax cuts to the spending freeze, that I propose a truly moderate, free market policy that politicians of any stripe can get behind, or at least slander on cable. Considering the state of the American economy, with banks already flush with liquidity without reliable investment opportunities, privatizing social security is not the attractive option that it may have seemed only a few years ago, in fact since the modern federal structure is more or less dependent on the payroll taxes that it would eliminate, this would not represent the sort of spending cut to fix the deficit. We instead have to address the root source of the problem.

You see, by eliminating Social Security we are taking benefits from those most used to receiving them. The generation that currently receives those payments has always had government support throughout their lives, and is accustomed to it. To solve the long-term problem we must prepare a new generation for a world where the Federal government is not looking out for them, and the only way to do that is to eliminate the department of education.

Things have gotten so bad in our freeloading society that these children eat lunch, on a daily basis, on the taxpayer’s dime, and we pay huge sums of money in an attempt to convince them that they will be able to obtain jobs once they receive their certifications. If we eliminated this entire tedious process then the people who grow up in the new, more market oriented model, will most likely not even seek gainful employ in a manner that would register with existing unemployment statistics, thus reducing those numbers.

Let’s face it, these people will not be able to afford a government of any sort by the time they reach maturity, taxes will be cut, our credit rating will decline. The only option is for this coming generation to learn fast and hard that there are no easy breaks in this life, and that nobody intends to protect them. With all of the sincerity to be found in this post I ask each of my readers to find a child, any child, and to firmly inform them that the free ride is over. By the time they grow up, it will be. It is the responsibility of the children to prepare themselves for this brave new world that many of us may not join them in. Through the power of innovation and the hand of the free market I trust that some will utilize their free time to learn important trapping and literacy skills, those who do not spend this new free time educating and preparing themselves for a harsh post-apocalyptic hell scape were simply too small to succeed anyway and would only, under the present system, have contributed to unemployment numbers and upsetting reports about the state of consumer spending.

By eliminating education we can cut the deficit, and also better prepare our children for a future without government handouts, but the advantages don’t stop there. In the present system we seek to retain our best talent by offering them advantages, but what does that mean when any child without political connections or start up capital can get the same education that the children of high GDP and political campaign contributors can. You can argue that the present system already accounts for this, with private schools receiving better funding and poaching the best teachers and with school systems in districts that have generated less GDP they receive the disadvantage of poorly administered and funded systems, and that this in itself serves to reward the best talent. Of course the obvious flaw to this argument is simple, if the education being given at those schools is so much less adequate than the well funded alternative then why pay for them at all? By eliminating even the possibility of opportunity to economically stagnant school districts where it is underutilized we will only increase the relative value of the reward that our top GDP producers receive!

And past that, when these children grow up, they will not expect Medicare or Social Security, the political will to preserve them will disappear in the face of a sea of unemployed uneducated poverty statistics that will resolve all taxation into direct class warfare. Despite all appearances this is surely an idea that everyone can get behind Republicans can get behind this plan for the deficit and government size reduction, and Democrats are known to rally enthusiastically to participate in capitulations. Oh Beautiful, for spacious skies without even a drop of pity in them. In the Land of the Free you’ve got to teach them young, no handouts.

December 21, 2010

The Obama FCC

by nkwilczy

What did you expect? Something other than a borderlin capitulation?

The FCC will not allow broadband providers to discriminate against legal websites, for instance through pay for prioritization plans. This is the heart of net neutrality and represents a positive direction, it is supposed to stop things like Comcast’s attempts to shut down Netflix.

At the same time, nobody even in the FCC seems to be sure they have the legal authority to do it and all of them seem to see the courts in opposition. And also, I mean, it’s not like you can use PayPal to support Wikileaks again, so the internet is not, you know, totally neutral. And wireless devices aren’t covered.

So enjoy the semi-neutral internet from your PC for the next few months, before it gets totally dismantled by *cough* activist conservative judges *cough*

December 14, 2010

Andean Night Monkeys

by nkwilczy

http://twinenterprises.com/the_fear_of_monkeys/issue_eight/index.htm

In it you will find a wide variety of fascinating political writings. I liked the Doomsday poem, personally, but I also contributed ‘And Justice for All,’ an extremely short story. I don’t know what to say about their labelling system, my intention was never that a cleanup crew would be seen as legitimate law enforcers, it was just about a critical mistake and panic and the inevitably dirty and unjust consequences, but I guess I’ll let you decide for yourself.

December 14, 2010

Negotiating with Terrorists

by nkwilczy

So, I’ve been reading Griftopia by Matt Taibbi. As I mentioned his blog is one of my blogging influences, he’s an editor for the Rolling Stone and I personally think that the Great Derangement is one of the best books available on the subject of modern American politics. Derangement is better, Griftopia is not quite so plain simple or readable, but it tells an important story. Although it works better in magazine article format, Taibbi is also known for his straighforward, plain english explanations of the financial crisis. That is the subject of Griftopia, that point in history where Goldman Sachs and AIG threatened to collapse the US economy unless they were given a trillion dollars.

But reading it in that context, where it just sounded so supervillan-ey, I had a sort of revelation. You see, usually when I think about the common psychological problem that weaves through all of America’s modern struggles I would say that it is apathy. Apathy is why we haven’t solved any of these things yet, why we let W go to Iraq, who cares, why we haven’t fixed global warming or international terrorism, who cares? But when you think about us literally giving into terrorist supervilians demands for ransom maybe the answer is simpler than that. Maybe we’re just a bunch of cowards.

Maybe that’s why we’re afraid to change the focus of our economy to clean domestic eneregy, allow illegal immigrants a path to citizenship or to lower millitary spending. This is a more optimistic appraisal though, because cowardice is much more easily remedied than apathy. You can’t do anything about apathy, who cares?

But there is a political actor or two who learned this lesson before me. And once they figured it out they started taking hostages. So I guess what I’m saying is, call your senator or representative and with regards to the Bush Tax cuts, remind them that here in America we don’t negotiate with terrorists.

%d bloggers like this: