| Number 193 | February 21, 2003 |
|
This Week:
|
|
Greetings, I don’t know how one would prove something like this, but it’s possible that what some people are saying is true: That the global anti-war actions held on February 15th were the largest anti-war protest in the history of the world. Think about that. I get an inordinate amount of pleasure from announcing that Nygaard Notes now has its own domain on the web. So, here I go again: Visit http://www.nygaardnotes.org. Long-time readers know that almost every issue of the Notes features at least one reference to earlier issues where I have previously discussed whatever subject we’re talking about this week. Now it's so easy to remember where to go if you want to read some of those earlier masterpieces: http://www.nygaardnotes.org./ This website is searchable, it’s easy to read, it’s got every word that’s ever been published in Nygaard Notes, and it’s got the most obvious and easy-to-remember name you could imagine. I forgot to say that last week’s Website of the Week (the one taking apart the “President’s” State of the Union speech) wasn’t a discovery I made on my own. It was sent to me by Ginger in Washington State. I don’t know how she found it, but I really appreciate you sending it along, Ginger. Many other readers send along interesting, important, and little-noticed information to the Notes, as well. I really appreciate it, and encourage the rest of you to do the same. Don’t assume I have already seen it! Part of the value of Nygaard Notes is that the view and the perspective is broad and drawn from many sources. You all help with that; please keep it up! Either next week or one very shortly after, it’ll be time for another of the semi-annual Nygaard Notes Pledge Drives. If you want to send in your donation now, then you can ignore the pleas altogether. On a sort-of related note, this week and next I’ll be talking about taxes, and what good they do. This is very important right now in the “no new taxes” environment. Hasta la semana proxima, Nygaard |
|
Historian and novelist Tariq Ali was interviewed this week by a local newspaper. He was asked, “What is the most important thing you think the American public is missing, what do they most need to know, with respect to the looming war with Iraq?” Here is part of his answer:
Tariq Ali has written over a dozen books on world history and politics and five novels. His most recent book is a collection of essays he has edited on the Balkan war: “Masters of the Universe? NATO's Balkan Crusade.” Readers in the Twin Cities have the good luck to be able to hear Mr. Ali speak this Tuesday, February 25th at the Walker Art Center. The title of his talk is “Tariq Ali on War and Empire.” This free lecture begins at 7 pm. Call 612-375-7622 for information. |
|
Anti-War Resource of the Week: The Virtual March on Washington |
|
The Coalition calling itself “Win Without War” is organizing a “Virtual March on Washington” on February 26th. The coalition describes itself as “A mainstream voice advocating alternatives to preemptive war against Iraq,” and members include the American Friends Service Committee, Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities, the NAACP, Greenpeace, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the Rainbow/Push Coalition, Unitarians, Catholics, Lutherans, The Tikkun Community, and on and on. Here is the plan, in their own words: “The Virtual March on Washington is a first-of-its-kind campaign from the Win Without War coalition. Working together, we will direct a steady stream of phone calls—about one per minute, all day—to every Senate office in the country, while at the same time delivering a constant stream of e-mails and faxes. Our message: Don’t Attack Iraq. Please help make the Virtual March a success. To register to send a free fax and make phone calls to Senate offices and the White House, visit: http://www.moveon.org/winwithoutwar/. For people who are too busy with the kids, or their jobs, or their ailing parents, or whatever, this might be just the thing you can do to help stem the tide of war. |
|
When the New York Times (“All The News That’s Fit To Print”) attempted to put a human face on the impact of the recently-announced Bush tax cuts, the blinders imposed by their class position were painfully evident. In a major article, reprinted by the Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin Cities!) on January 9th, the Times spelled out how “the president’s proposal has something for nearly everyone, especially large families and those with the highest incomes.” The three examples they gave were a family of four earning $120,000 a year, a couple with two grown sons earning $80,000, and a single woman earning $40,000. That tells you something. At least, it tells you something if you know that the median household income for families in the United States is about $52,000 (Census Bureau, 2001 figures). So two out of three of the Times’ examples are far above the median. The median income for single people (the Census Bureau refers to them as a negation: “nonfamily households”) is $25,631 a year, or about 38 percent less than the “poorest” household cited by the Times. And this, to the Times, means that there is “something for nearly everyone.” The best analyses I have seen as to who actually gets what in terms of tax “relief” under the Bush plan come from Citizens for Tax Justice. Their website is at http://www.ctj.org/. |
|
‘Way back in Nygaard Notes #190, I described something called the “Demagogue Dynamic.” I said that demagogues often utilize a simple 3-step strategy in which they:
In his State of the Union speech of January 28th, the “President” presented several wonderful examples of this dynamic. I’ll share one of them here. The “second goal” of the Bush administration (after lowering taxes) was said to be “high-quality, affordable health care for all Americans.” Here the “President” is accurately reading the massive discontent with a health-care system that exists among United Statesians. That’s Step 1 of the Demagogue Dynamic. Step 2 involves explaining the nature of the problem. Here the “President” had two answers: First, he stated that “for many people, medical care costs too much—and many have no coverage at all.” True enough. Secondly, he said that “bureaucrats and trial lawyers and HMOs” are “in charge of American medicine,” when it should be “doctors and nurses and patients.” (Trial lawyers? Yes, you’ll see.) Now, if one believes that these are the primary problems facing the U.S. health-care system, then the first thing one might do is look around the world to see if one could find a country where everyone is guaranteed access to health care, lack of money is no obstacle, and there are fewer or no “bureaucrats and trial lawyers and HMOs” running the health care show. These countries are easy to find. Almost every wealthy country in the world has a universal system of health care that is guaranteed by the national government. The easiest example to find is that of Canada. Perhaps fearing that this example might occur to some of those listening to the State of the Union, the “President” reminded us that “These problems [with U.S. health care] will not be solved with a nationalized health care system that dictates coverage and rations care.” He was no doubt counting on the prevalent and mistaken belief among most United Statesians that the Canadian system “dictates coverage and rations care.” It does not, as I pointed out in Nygaard Notes Numbers 102 and 103 “Canadian Health Care: Principles and Myths.” Still, the waving of the red flags of “nationalized” and “dictates” and “rations” got the desired result: the assembled Congress applauded. Step 3 of the Demagogue Dynamic is to offer a false solution to the problem that one has “explained.” In this case, the only specific “solution” that Mr. Bush offers is to “urge the Congress to pass medical liability reform.” This is part of the long-standing Bush priority to prevent any citizen from seeking legal redress against any business—medical or otherwise—no matter how flagrant the injustice. (This is where the “trial lawyers” bit comes from. To see what the real agenda is here, go to Nygaard Notes #62 “What the Heck is ‘Tort Reform?’”) So, there you have it. An almost perfect example of the 3-Step Demagogue Dynamic in action. 1. Take the public’s anxiety about access to health care; 2. Blame “trial lawyers,” and lawsuit-happy patients for the problem, and 3. Suggest that the solution to our health care problems is to pursue the tort reform agenda that you wanted to pursue anyway. (After ruling out any real structural change to the system.) Of course, the dominant Demagogue Dynamic of late—in the State of the Union speech and everywhere else—is seen in the drive to war against Iraq.
Health care, terror, education, poverty, you-name-it. All these problems can be solved without raising taxes, through the Magic of the Market. For a demagogue, it’s as easy as 1-2-3. |
|
There is hardly a less controversial point on the Public Radio talk shows (and elsewhere) than to say that “we are in an era of budget deficits, so no new spending is possible.” As the “President” put it in his State of the Union speech, “The best way to address the deficit and move toward a balanced budget is to encourage economic growth, and to show some spending discipline in Washington, D.C.” This was met by applause. There are two possible reasons for budget deficits, of course. One is that government is spending too much. The other is that government is not taxing enough. The first explanation seems like common sense to a lot of people, which is why the “President” put it the way he did. The second one, these days, sounds laughable. But, before we laugh too much, let’s consider that the United States is one of the lowest-taxed countries in the world, at least among other wealthy—so-called “developed”—countries. I come up with this statement by looking at statistics published by that bastion of Marxism, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a club of twenty-nine of the wealthiest countries in the world. If you were to look at some of the many handy charts published by the OECD last year, you would see that total tax revenue as a percentage of the overall economy is lower in the United States than in 26 other nations, including such backwards and primitive nations as Belgium, France, Austria, Australia, Germany, and, of course, all of the Scandinavian countries. We do have higher taxes than Mexico, however, a nation with about 4 times the poverty (officially) as in this country. While I’m on the subject, let me point out a few other fascinating facts about taxes in wealthy countries as compared to the United States. This country ranks 22nd among the wealthy nations in the rate of taxation on corporate income. In addition, eight nations have a tax on the wealth of individuals, while the U.S. does not. 19 countries have higher Social Security tax rates than does the U.S., which makes the idea that Social Security is in a huge “crisis” a little hard to believe. (Go to the Nygaard Notes website at www.nygaardnotes.org for more information on this and other fantasies about Social Security.) I talked about much of this in more depth a couple of years ago, in Nygaard Notes #42 (“Taxes and Budget Surpluses: Myth and Reality”). That was when the Minnesota State government was in the process of handing out the “largest tax cuts in the nation.” Many of us didn’t want these tax cuts then, as we could predict that they would likely wreak havoc in the lives of many of the poorest Minnesotans. They threaten to do so now, unless we fight very hard against the “no new taxes” crowd, which draws its support from comfortable classes. Rather than go on with this article, as was my original intention, I think I will let it stay brief and serve as a sort of introduction for a discussion of the relationship between taxation and a healthy economy. That relationship may not be what you think. I probably should do that next week, I imagine, as we are so immersed in irrational budget panic around the nation at the moment. Stay tuned. |