Western conservative conundrum

I am treading into dangerous territory here. Actions of politicians (at least in public), makes me believe that a decent majority of American's believe that Bible is the word of god and that it is historically correct and its predictions will become true. Especially self proclaimed conservatives don't hide the fact that they believe in the second coming of Christ and the day is not far. Based on that belief, they argue that it is OK to use up all the resources and trash the planet. After, they claim, God gave man this earth to "Be fruitful and multiply". So we have multiply, defends our right to carry arms and to shoot wolves from airplanes.

But these same people turn around and warn us, that the liberal democratic government is putting the lives of future generations in jeopardy. By doing what ? borrowing and spending too much and leaving it to the future generations to pay. I am asking why not, Judgement day is just around the corner anyways. All these tree hugging dems are going to be juded so they better enjoy whatever is left of their lives. And they should be live a life as flashy and conspicuous as possible. Produce mountains of trash, wipe out rain forests and God created specieses. When these are are perfectly fine things to do, what's the big deal about some paper money ?

While I find this conservative double talk interesting, I am for smaller and more focused "government" that does its job well. So I am not in favor of the current, out of control government spending. It is doing in America, by weakening it financially and hence reducing its power and influence.

Adjusting to humans victory over natural selection

As humans we have pretty eliminated natural as a selection factor in population growth. Our safety nets ensures that virtually every one of has, an opportunity to pass their genes on, in spite of, any genetic frailties, plain old stupidity etc. In fact we have turned natural selection on it head. Educated and affluent population, which seems to have an advantage, fails miserably when it comes procreation. At the same time, scientific (and social) advances has also resulted in ballooning population, around the world. Tilting the balance to those, who seem to want to turn the development clock backwards. In my opinion, this is paving the way for natural selection process to come back to power.

Our current social systems are failing in many ways and ensuring misery for those who don't genetically fit into it.

Example 1: Each individuals burns calories differently, but some how we universal 2000 calories a day recommendation. Here ideally we would have a system which empowers individuals to take advantage of, or overcome his/her genetic disposition to have an optimal life.

Example 2: Due population growth and lack of sufficient awareness, there is rampant over fishing and dramatic falls in fisheries around the globe. What is growing, the super trawlers with 100s of crew members, barbaric practices like culling millions of sharks for just their fins. Ideally we would have growth in population of individuals, who would not only seek benefit from the environment, but also ensure that it is available for future generations to enjoy.

What can we change or do we need to here ?

I think, the factory model, the one thing fits all model, has to go. What do I mean by the factory model ? Here is an example, each kid learns differently. But our education system resembles a factory. If you can't absorb information through the preferred text book medium in bland class rooms setting, sorry you are out of luck. Countless number of kids, who can be called extremely smart, are failed by the system. These kids are supposed to have a genetic advantage, instead many of them land up on the wrong side of the society. Another example the "correction" system, which takes in petty criminals and produce hardened criminals out of them. Even though we are long winded while exalting individuality, we provide every one with a square pant and say good luck.

I also posted this @ Facebook :Evolution is NOT a theory: it's scientific fact!.

Say cheeze .. in chinese

This is one of the most hilarious and ridiculous excuse I have heard in my life. "(Chinese) Prison officers initially claimed he died while playing a game of hide-and-seek with other inmates."

Give me a break. 24 year old prisoner was playing hide and seek with who ? the guards wife ? If he was playing hide and seek at the age of 24 may be he should not have been in a prison in the first place. Or he wasn't playing hide and seek in that dumpster after all his bones where broken. Then the same government calls Dalai Lama a terrorist.

Puppet journalists

During Rumsfeld era, it was "eye-rack". Then it changed to "ir-rack". So did "Eye-ran" a more correct sounding "ir-ron". Now it is south Asia's turn. It was "Pack-is-tan" and "Af-gan-is-tan" ("a" in afganistan is pronounced like in the word "tan") to Obama pronunciation of "Pock-is-tawn" and "Af-gan-is-tan" (still a sounds like it does in sun tan).

It is amazing how "suggestable" journalists are. They are not only affected by the sound bytes, they get from the political spin factories, it is evident that they are even affected by the pronunciation. If they are so "suggestible" can we ever expect real objective reporting ?

Directed Tax per use

Cold medicine seems to be triggering my creative juices, so I decided to write. Anyway, we hear or read often about how unfair our tax system it is, many of us think, if only there was a better system. Conservatives say people at top 20%, those who earn through hard work and innovation, pay 80% of the tax. Liberals say people become become rich by taking advantage of the system and services (government funded universities, infrastructure, low cost labor covered by medicare etc) need to pay their fair share and help out the unfortunate ones.

"I am paying too much" or "you are not paying for what you use" can be resolved by pay for what each entity uses. The problem here is multi-fold. For example a company mines for coal/oil they are "supposed" to pay royalty. Now that revenue is too fungible i.e. it goes to what ever programs the government deems necessary. This allows the government to create wasteful programs, under funded programs for political gains, budget deficits sitting on top of an unfair tax system. So the collection system is unfair and the distribution is unfair and corrupt. Here is a way to fix the collection part. We have pay-per-view boxing matches, pay-as-you-go cell phone, why can't we create a "tax per use" system. And to fix the distribution side we tie each source to a target service that created the tax revenue, followed by investments for the programs and so on. And voila we have "Directed tax per use". And to fund basic government services like defense, law enforcement, judiciary, immigration, emergency management etc the existing tax has to reduced to a graduated but lower base tax regime that nets every one.

We already have many examples Directed tax per use:

• Cigarette taxes fund expenses caused by smoking related illnesses.
• Skilled worker H1B visa fees funding education programs for US citizens.
• Restaurants and bar taxes funding sports stadiums.
• Tolls and gas tax funding roads, bridges etc

We need to identify areas that need funding with proper source that benefits from such investment.

• Coal mines could found global warming related and mitigation projects.
• Road maintenance funded miles driven per annum.
• Each educated worker employed, discoveries and inventions from government funded research programs to education and research programs.
• Number of medicare supported employees and families to medicare tax.
• Part of customs duties could fund programs help create jobs for those displaced workers.

The tax has to be tiered for example all coal is not the same, different vehicles cause different levels of wear and tear in different regions, different levels/types of educations cost different amounts of money etc.

The system will help in many ways.

• It ensures each entity pays for and pays only for, the services/resources that it uses or depletes.
• It will help sustain services that help existing and useful services.
• It will also help create replacement or modernize acquisition depleting resources.
• It will help find ways to find remedies to industrial activities that damage the environment.
• It does not tax the grandma who only drives her car 2000 miles a year at the same level as the commuter who drives 1000 miles a month.

An intangible benefit, it helps the nation define the priorities and focus on it. And we can always definitely can use a national dialogue on that topic.

It will also help us eventually get rid of some meaningless connections that exist now, like house tax funding schools in many school districts. Income tax from hard working people going to social security programs for people who have and will never contribute into the program. The tax system will hopefully lag behind new and emerging industries and hence allowing for an automatic low/no tax regime for innovative new industries.

The main point here is to create a direct channels of income between programs and the beneficiaries. It can be complemented by a well thought out VAT and a tax percentage ceiling for a well balanced and a fair tax system. Most of the tax collected will be backward looking i.e. so are most of the expenses. We need to employ some creative thinking to create funds for forward looking programs.

Gandhi is squirming in is his grave

Gandhi's personal effects auctioned off for a whopping USD 1.8 million to a pompous self promoting liquor baron. The irony doesn't end there, he wanted to buy it on behalf of who ? the Indian politicians, the new self appointed saviors of Indian heritage. The ultimate receivers are even farther removed from Gandhi than the guy who won the bid. Even though I am disgusted by this whole thing there is a silver lining. The proceeds went to a well known Pacifist, who admires Gandhi and his principles.

The government blows it again

I can't believe how the government can totally blow a simple thing like DTV transition. They blew the following:
* Estimate the number of people who would elect to get the box.
* Process claims in a timely manner
* Get funds allocated to handle additional demand.

Now lets apply this same scenario to government run health care system.
* Can we trust them to estimate number of a flu cases this season
* Can they be trusted to process Rx claims in case of an large outbreak, at least the first one. And we afford such a failure ?
* Will they get resources allocated, in time, when they found out they screwed up ?

I am still waiting to see how much of the DTV program was actually wasted in administrative costs. I know they already run medicare, medicaid and VA health system. And everyone knows they aren't models of success either. Still, I am amazed how many people argue-for/promote government run health care programs for "everyone". Can anyone expect anything other than universally lousy/horrible healthcare ?