In a team of horses, the strongest horse does not expend more effort, it just produces more work for the same amount of effort. This in turn may lead to not having to follow the other jackasses. This may not be fair it is just a fact.
Jeffrey Schaben
thecuttax.com
The true moral to this story is not to follow jackasses. Think for yourself.
I say this even as I am trying to become one of the jackasses. Braying all the time trying to get your attention, and probably at the wrong time. After all I am trying to convince you of the value of my tax plan compared to others. And I believe that taxation is still a form of slavery, albeit a civilized less savage form of slavery. Maybe slavery is too strong a word, I should step the rhetoric down and instead call it indentured servitude. However, the horse team analogy does work well for my form of taxation. It treats all levels and forms of income as equal. We are all equals according to our constitution. why not treat us as equals. Even, if this means taxing the poor and nonprofits. There are reasons for this that I hopefully explained in a way you may understand in my book.
Part of the reason I am writing this is because I do not have the instincts for sales. There are a few people that are very talented at sales. They could sell ice cubes to Alaskans in winter. My style is closer to, here it is, you can buy it if you want to. That leads me to come up with hopefully catchy items to draw your attention to my ideas.
Recently, I have become acquainted with Twitter (@thecuttax). Twitter is a fascinating place. You can broadcast almost anything, and it is available to anyone who follows you or an entity that happens to retweet you. Or, the holy grail, become a hashtag. It is a good model of Capitalism. You can express almost any idea, your only limitation is the amount of followers you acquire, and 150 characters. Well, Shakespeare wrote. “Brevity the soul of wit.” You even have all the aspects of a Moroccan Bazaar. You have the hawkers to try and sell you their ideas. The herders, that are trying to get you to a specific stand, and the twitter farms, that are just trying to collect you for referral fees. The only problem with this is the same flaw that is in capitalism. The best ideas do not always win. It is usually the more flashy and exciting items that distract you from your original idea. Or, you are the best salesman. But, this is a flaw I will gratefully accept, nothing is perfect, all systems have flaws, and I would rather have this flaw than some state office store that only offers one item. Or maybe 4 in bronze, silver, gold, and platinum. That brings me to my thoughts on ACA (affordable care act).
Welcome to the Matrix. We are already suffering the effects of the altered reality that the ACA has implemented, as business, the medical profession, and health insurance providers have altered their business to conform to ACA. To turn it off now would not revert the system back to its previous form. So, we are left with a choice of the blue pill or red pill. The blue pill offers the promise that soon you will forget all about this unpleasant experience with only a few “minor discomforts” felt over the next few years as we are prepared for single payer health care. While the red pill offers an attempt at a complete but painful reemergence into reality, to survey the destruction of our health care program. This come with the slim promise that the damage can be reversed and we can have an even better and more responsive health care policy. Neither, one of these ideas are ideal. And both could end up as a sudden transition into single payer, so the advantage now goes to the blue pill. The reason, I am negative about this is simple. The Democratic Party has always had the long term goal of creating single payer health care. While the Republican Party has largely ignored this as an issue until it was forced upon them by a Democratic coup. There were many ways to head this coup off years in advance. However, they counted on the fierce public reaction to head off ACA like it did when Hillary Clinton worked on a health care plan. This did happened in 2010. However, they were more worried about the influence of the Tea Party than any legislation to stop ACA. It was left to the Supreme Court to rid us of this system. Failing that, they figured after winning the White House in 2012 , they would be able to deal with it then. Well it is 2013 and the plan is enacted, even with all the waivers. It’s tentacles are deep and embedded. Why else do the people that enact it want to be excluded from it. I always said they would have the same health care as everyone else, the only difference would be you get county general and they get best research hospital at the time. See all the same. But, with their new waivers I guess I missed that prophesy. It won't be the same health care.
Most of the success of implementing ACA is due to the fact that the Democratic Party always had this as a long term goal. They have been slowly pushing this for some time. My question is, what are the Republican Party's long term goals? Yes, they have short term election goals. However, not far reaching and long term goals. Not a unified vision for the future. Therefore, they have justly been labeled as a reactionary party. A party focused on the short term acquisition of power. This has created a political landscape where the Democrats make short surges towards their intended goals, as the Republicans gain small victories holding these surges down. If this was a football game. It appears as if the Republicans have an outstanding defensive lineup. However, with no offense they are slowly giving up field position. For the fans in the stands the outcome looks obvious. In any game, defending your goal is only half of the game. The only way a defensive team wins is by a recovered fumble, or interception. I don't see that here. Can always hope.
No comments:
Post a Comment