Skip to main content

Sadly, we have seen the evolution (devolution) of the discussion of the nation's finances to a battle over government debt. And, with a passable imitation to two-year olds screaming "no" when faced with a healthy dinner option (in this case, a mix of revenue enhancements (mainly through reduced tax expenditures) and reasoned program cuts), the Republican Party (and its Tea-Hadist wing) have driven the nation toward the brink of one of the most profoundly flawed decisions ever in the national politics (yes, ever) that will create an illusion of reducing the debt on the future while, in fact, it fosters conditions that will worsen -- across essentially all fabric of society and the economy -- the debt burden that we are creating for ourselves and others into the indefinite future.

We have, in America and elsewhere, been living off our capital and borrowing off tomorrow (both near and long term) for too long.  And, the costs are coming home to roost -- and this agreement will only worsen these debts.

When it comes to the situation, today, the 'tea-hadists' have it right to focus the discussion about the future and the burdens we are creating for tomorrow. Sadly, however, their rhetoric doesn't confront the reality of the debts we are creating through our spendthrift habits.

We are living off our capital: our air, our water, our natural resources, our past infrastructure (schools, roads, rail, sanitation) investments, and, yes, even our fundamental fiscal credit worthiness.

This "deal" will exacerbate all of these. The government needs to present the world a rational budget and budgetary process.  The national economy needs stimulus, not budgetary cuts.  And, we need to stop eating up our capital -- of all types.  

Reality-based policies can do all of this and more.

See after the fold for just a few of the items that a rational policy world would be discussing and embracing that are simply not on the table in 'polite company' of Washington, DC, bipartisanship compromise uber alles world.

We should look for Win-Win-Win policies  that help put the nation on a more solid fiscal footing (WIN) while improving lives today (WIN) and creating a path toward a more secure tomorrow (WIN).  

(see W6: Win to the Sixth for a longer explanation)

Here are just three specific policy options that, between them, could provide greater deficit reduction that proposed by Senator Reid while strengthening American society rather than undermining it.

Single-Payer Healthcare

Simply put, America has the best emergency medical care system in the developed world while having -- essentially -- the worst preventive care system.  Responding to disasters, that emergency care, is more expensive than working to prevent them. And, it is hard to 'manage' that disaster relief especially in an environment that puts profits above people.  A simple truth:  America overpays for an under-performing health "care" system.

Nation after nation -- from France to Australia to ... -- have variations on single-payer medical care systems and are delivering universal care with better results at a lower total cost to the economy.  

Want to improve America's debt situation and American economic competitiveness and improve Americans' lives?  Move, ASAP, to a single-payer medical care system.

What have we just delivered?  Over $1 trillion in reduced costs to the economy within the decade (and likely even more than that) while improving international economic competitiveness, strengthening the social infrastructure, and making our lives (MUCH) better.

Decriminalize (and tax) marijuana

Face facts:  the biggest winners of the decades-long "bipartisan" "Drug War"?  The international drug rings and America's (privately-owned/operated) prison system.  The losers:  the economy, the stability of too many nations (especially to America's south), the destruction of too many local communities, and havoc in the lives of millions of Americans.

Estimates of the Federal revenue from taxing marijuana like cigarettes are range from  $2.5 to $50 billion a year with an additional $3 to $50 billion a year in estimated reduced government expenditures. Here is an estimate of about $50 billion a year in Federal budget improvement. Over a decade: $500 billion cut from the deficit.

This stove-piped analysis leaves out of the equation the millions of Americans whose sole 'felony' criminal activity is marijuana use (including involvement in the buying and selling of illegal substances).  How many Americans have criminal records and are unable to find suitable work (e.g,. are un- or under-employed) at what cost to the general economy (and the Federal tax base)?  (Let's take an arbitrary number of 2.5 million Americans who lose, for a variety of reasons, $20,000 off their contribution to the American economy each year due to this: that is $50 billion in economic activity lost with, at a 20% tax rate, $10 billion in lost federal revenue.)

It also leaves out of the equation that this would cut off major revenue streams for illegal activities around the country and the globe. And, it doesn't consider the economic enhancement of spending $50 billion (and more) per year on things more productive than 'black helicopters' overflying people's homes and locking up people who really are no threat to others (and likely not even themselves).

What have we just delivered? A situation where $500 billion in budget assistance likely understates the real value of the equation and we have funding for drug treatment programs (within that efficient single-payer health care system) and we have a huge number of our fellow Americans (e.g., US Citizens) restored to full citizenship rights as we depopulate the prison system and we have a basis for helping contain drug violence in America (e.g., this hemisphere).

NOTE: This is an arena where libertarian and progressive are united and one would think (with the exception of 'taxing' marijuana) even many Tea-Hadists could be on board.

Charge people for damaging others

Imagine a "Damage Fee".  Your actions, otherwise legal and undertaken for decent reasons, helps cause your neighbor's cancer or is a contributing factor in your high school football star's dropping out due to acute asthma.  

If you water your lawn and, well, forget to turn off the hose when you take a nap and it floods your neighbor's yard and causes damage, we have many remedies to this: from polite neighborly discussion, to insurance, to lawsuits. The idea that you have responsibility for the damage your actions cause, even inadvertently, seems rather basic to a functioning society ... no?

Well, every time that we turn the key in the ignition of an internal combustion engine (e.g., your car), we turn off a big-screen TV powered by coal electricity, or buy plastic wrapped organic kiwis flown in from New Zealand, we are causing such damage to our neighbor's health and future prospects.  

Yet ... yet ... this damage are simply "externalities" that aren't part of the equation.  Sort of like the cigarette smoker who smoked 10 brands and strives to sue just one company, it isn't possible to link my car's exhaust pipe to your cancer even though it is quite clear that there is a correlation with cancer and fossil-fuel pollution (see how high cancer rates are, for example, near major highways compare to areas with 'cleaner' air).  It is rather hard to show a legally binding causal linkage between the pollution from airline flight for a safari vacation in Kenya to the baby starving to death in the Horn of Africa amid a Climate Disruption heightened drought.  

The linkages exist, in the aggregate rather than specific, between our (every single person who can read this is part of that our -- how do you think the server farms are powered?) use (and abuse) of fossil fuels and damage caused to others.  Yet, those linkages remain outside (the American) the costs directly associated with using these fuels. They are "externalities" that we all pay for and cause others to pay for, but not in the use of these fuels but through other means.

Thus, a gradually increasing "Damage Fee" should be introduced on polluting energy uses.  This Damage Fee would (a) raise revenue while (b) helping motivate governments, businesses, communities, individuals to move off polluting energy options and (c) thus reduce the costs over time.  

Let us use Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions as the surrogate for all this pollution and all these costs.  Quite roughly, the US emits 5.5 billion tons of GHGs per year.  A reasonable Social Cost of Carbon puts the real costs into the range of $80 per ton (and more recent work suggests that this grossly underestimates the real costs).  $80 per ton as a "Damage Fee" against 5.5 billion tons and we are at $440 billion, per year.  Honestly, this is too strong a shock to the system, too quickly.

Let's start at $15 per ton (about one-fifth the actual costs) and increase this rate by 5 per cent per year.  That would mean revenue of about $80 billion in the first year.  With $40 billion (that will go up five percent per year) in a "lock box" to develop and help people (government, businesses, individuals) pay for reducing their carbon emissions and assuming that pollution loads would fall, this would mean at least $400 billion in Federal "Damage Fee" revenue that could be use to lower the deficit.

What have we just delivered? A situation where $400 billion in budget assistance likely understates the real value of the equation as we have funding for clean energy programs that will boost economic performance, improve international competitiveness (if, for no other reason, only through cutting oil imports), improve health (and lower the costs of that single-payer system) due to lower pollution, and help address the most serious way in which creating a burden on (today's and) future generations:  Climate Disruption.

How have we done?

Take these three and we are above $2 trillion in improvement to the Federal budget situation -- even without considering the potential that the systems-of-systems benefits of these would have even greater value for the economy and Federal budget than stove-piped analysis suggests.

And, we have created a whole range of those systems-of-systems benefits that would improve individual's lives, create a stronger social fabric, improve our health, increase our international economic competitiveness, and ... AND would all function to lower the debts that we are creating for future generations.

REMINDER TO MYSELF:  Reality Based Policy concepts simply do not, it seems, have a place in polite company ...

Poll

Do you support these paths to address our fiscal challenges?

0%0 votes
0%0 votes
0%0 votes
16%2 votes
75%9 votes
0%0 votes
8%1 votes

| 12 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip jar ... (14+ / 0-)

    These are just three ideas ... and this is already a long discussion.

    Other ideas?

    Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

    by A Siegel on Sun Jul 31, 2011 at 05:45:21 PM PDT

  •  Real pots of money: financial transaction tax (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    A Siegel, John Crapper, RunawayRose

    and taxing earned and unearned income at the same rates.

    That's going to be $200+ billion tax revenue ANNUALLY.

  •  i was going to add stop minting the penny (4+ / 0-)

    but when I went to add some research ... well, it actually got way too political ...

    Hopes to be Reporting LIVE from Durban @COP17 ...

    by boatsie on Sun Jul 31, 2011 at 07:42:07 PM PDT

  •  Agree with all your points! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    A Siegel

    I humbly offer 3 more of the many out there.  

    A gasoline tax.
    A moratorium on new car model improvements except in the area of fuel efficiency.
    A "New Deal" type effort to promote non-polluting renewable energy.  

    Politicians are like diapers....they should be changed frequently.....and for the same reason.

    by John Crapper on Sun Jul 31, 2011 at 08:38:43 PM PDT

    •  Writ large ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      John Crapper, HeyMikey

      I view the first and third of your points incorporated in the Damage Fee.

      If we have a Damage Fee put onto carbon that translates into a fee on all fossil fuel uses that cause damage to the common good -- that includes gasoline.  Although, that $15 would be less than 30 cents per gallon which is not enough to change daily behavior for most people but is enough to impact long-range planning choices.

      The second: what about better seat belts?  Or, what about navigation systems? Or, better braking? Or, well, the additional efficiency per gallon burned has gone to making vehicles more luxurious, so I understand the sentiment but can come up with many (legitimate) 'what about' items.  What about, for example, a better paint product that is more sustainable through its life-cycle?

      Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

      by A Siegel on Sun Jul 31, 2011 at 10:41:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  On the second point - you're right!n/t (0+ / 0-)

        Politicians are like diapers....they should be changed frequently.....and for the same reason.

        by John Crapper on Sun Jul 31, 2011 at 10:47:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not to mention... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          A Siegel

          ...there may well be something of a public-acceptance problem for the smaller, slower cars that will likely be needed to meet the higher CAFE standards. If a spoonful of styling/audio/navigation/etc. sugar helps the CAFE medicine go down, that's OK with me.

          "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

          by HeyMikey on Mon Aug 01, 2011 at 05:15:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Hey A Siegel: why don't you run for Senate? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    A Siegel

    We're defending 23 seats, the GOP just 10. We have 6 retiring, the GOP just 2.

    There is a real possibility we could end up without the 41 seats we need to hold a filibuster.

    And I don't have the math on the Blue Dogs, but certainly there must be a few who badly need to be primaried.

    Hire a snappy speechwriter...get Stewart or Colbert to loan you one of their writers. Or what's Dave Chappelle doing these days?

    You'd be dynamite. I'm serious.

    "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

    by HeyMikey on Mon Aug 01, 2011 at 05:20:09 PM PDT

    •  Thank you very much for the compliment (0+ / 0-)

      but it is important to know strengths and weaknesses.

      I couldn't survive the rubber chicken dinner circuit -- it would chew me up and spit me out.

      Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

      by A Siegel on Mon Aug 01, 2011 at 08:59:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The bush is burning, A Siegel... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        A Siegel, Odysseus
        13 But Moses said, “Pardon your servant, Lord. Please send someone else.”

         14 Then the LORD’s anger burned against Moses and he said, “What about your brother, Aaron the Levite? I know he can speak well. He is already on his way to meet you, and he will be glad to see you. 15 You shall speak to him and put words in his mouth; I will help both of you speak and will teach you what to do. 16 He will speak to the people for you, and it will be as if he were your mouth and as if you were God to him.”

        Go tell ol' Pharaoh Boehner, A Siegel...tell him HeyMikey sent you, and says, "Let our people go."

        If you meet a Colbert writer, it's definitely a sign.

        If Al Gore or John Kerry had had the sense to hire Al Franken and Molly Ivins as speechwriters, we'd be living in a different world today.

        "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

        by HeyMikey on Mon Aug 01, 2011 at 09:19:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site