The Definitive Corey Political Primer, Part 2

Here you go, folks. The second and final part of my vast political screed. Comments are welcome.

National Security

I covered some of my feelings here in Part 1 in my section on foreign policy. America’s behavior overseas necessarily has a direct effect on national security. If we do do unpopular things, we have to be prepared to accept the consequences. In simple terms, we should keep our own safety in mind when making decisions about foreign policy.

Domestically, I think law enforcement and agencies like the TSA get a bit of a bum rap. Yes, it’s very true that things like incompetence and abuse of power are big concerns, but just because something is broken doesn’t mean it should be thrown out. It just needs to be fixed.

Since it’s the object of so much debate, I’ll take the TSA as an example.

I’d be a hell of a lot more afraid for my safety if I was able to just walk into an airport and go straight to the plane than I am standing in line and taking my shoes off. Yes, it’s inconvenient and stressful, but it’s a lot less stressful to me than worrying I might get blown up. I’m sorry if you can’t bring a full tube of toothpaste or your Colt 1911 in your carryon bag. Suck it up or take a bus.

(Maybe if it gets inconvenient enough the airlines will actually improve the in-flight experience to compensate, but I’m not holding my breath on that one.)

The most common rebuttal to that is that the TSA security policies don’t actually make flying any safer. I find that hard to believe. But if it’s true in any capacity then fine, work to fix it. If you don’t like the TSA, then come up with something better. And “nothing” is not better.

The other common criticism is that Americans are trading their privacy for safety, and even then it’s only the perception of safety.

I personally don’t mind a little inconvenience when it comes to safety. And I’m not terribly worried about my privacy. If there’s something I don’t want somebody sticking his nose in, I don’t bring it on the damn plane. I fall pretty squarely in the “why should you care if you have nothing to hide” camp. If you want to see my ID to get on a plane, then fine, great. Here it is. Write it down if you want. Take a picture. If a robot wants to scrape my email to see if I used the word “bomb” I’m not particularly worried about that. If the cable company wants to know what TV shows I watch so it can serve me better ads, then great. It just means I won’t have to sit through any more ads for Boniva or Summer’s Eve.

(It’s fodder for another post, but I believe privacy is dying if not dead already, and I believe in that future anonymity will come from being a face in the crowd. Metaphorically speaking, if there’s a naked guy in a crowd of 40,000, then most of that crowd won’t even know he’s naked, or even that there’s a naked guy there in the first place.)

Immigration Policy

Here I’m pretty sure we’re all talking about Mexicans coming over the border.

Firstly I don’t think they’re stealing that many jobs from Americans. Why? Because Americans are lazy and spoiled. I know whereof I speak because I myself am lazy and spoiled. There just aren’t that many people willing to work that hard for that little money. And if they aren’t lazy or spoiled, then they end up getting better jobs anyway.

The laws should be tightened, yes, and the border should be strengthened. That being said, I’m in favor of amnesty for anyone who’s already here, and if their children were born here then those children should enjoy the rights of any naturally-born American. Just say “Hey, everybody who was here as of one year ago? You’re in! Come on down and sign some papers, take a test, and you’re good to go.”

I’d consider it a personal favor if they’d learn some English, too, but I won’t split hairs.

I just don’t think it’s practical to try and round up every illegal immigrant in the country, especially when they’re contributing to the economy. Could they contribute more? Sure they could. Let’s get them sworn in and start collecting some taxes. That’s a money-making proposition whereas hunting them down and deporting them is a a money-losing proposition.

Taxes

The very existence of a thriving specialized industry based solely on filling out the paperwork so we can give our money to the gov’t is ample proof that the system is broken.

What does Bank of America do when I owe them money? They send me a bill and tell me how I can pay and where I can send it. Blam! Done!

What they don’t do is send me forms to fill out and make me either waste an evening with a calculator or pay somebody else to help me figure out how much I owe them.

I hear a lot of talk about FairTax, which sounds pretty good on the face of it, but I haven’t read up enough to have an opinion. However, I do know that one of the common criticisms is that it would depress the economy if there was a federal sales tax. But you know, I think we’d be fine if suddenly everybody in America got a 30% raise.

If not that, I’ve never heard what I’d call a reasonable objection to a flat tax. Paying a higher percentage based on making a higher income smacks of the “Robin Hood economics” I mentioned in my intro to Part 1. I don’t make more than 250k a year, but I still think it’s wrong to raise the taxes of anyone who does.

The point is, the system is in major need of an overhaul. Whatever form that takes, just please make it easier to pay!

I know H&R Block doesn’t want to hear that, but you know, sorry. The guys who made cotton gins had to figure out something else to do, too.

The Election Process

You’d think that with what happened in 2000 this would have come up, but it sure as Hell didn’t

I question whether the Electoral College is relevant these days. I know the original intent was to basically hedge against some sort of crazy mob rule, but I think we can agree that’s never going to happen. The effect it seems to have to most people I’ve talked to is to disenfranchise them. It gives them impression that their votes only count if their state goes for the same guy they voted for.

I also don’t think it’s fair that the same handful of states get courted every four years. If it all comes down to then, hell, why even bother voting in the rest?

I don’t pretend to have a better answer. I just think it needs to be discussed. And nobody is discussing it.

My second issue with politics is the two-party system, which is something the electoral college helps perpetrate. It’s virtually impossible, no, it is impossible for anyone not in the Big Two to get elected. Hell, they can’t even get on the ballot in some states. There needs to be a way to open up the field. I’m tired of having to pick between two guys I don’t even like.

Lastly, there’s the role of lobbyists and donors. (And really, their effect on politics in general, not just elections.) Again, I don’t know enough about things to have a totally informed opinion, but for an off-the-top idea, how about putting all the donations in one pile and handing it out evenly? If that’s a bad idea, tell me why.

Tort Reform

I hate to sound like a broken record, but the fact that this can even happen is proof that the system is broken.

Can’t we come up with some sort of “pre-court” or some method to decide whether a case is even worth bringing to court and wasting taxpayer money?

Also, speed things up. Set dates sooner, make trials shorter, carry out sentences faster, streamline the appeals process, give lawyers less to do!

And if we can cut through the bullshit that actually gets to court, then things ought to go faster anyway.

Health Care

I don’t believe in universal health care because if we get it it will be universally worse. Or at least worse for the people who can afford it. And I’m not interested in subsidizing health care for people who don’t earn their keep. All you need in this country to get good health care is a job. Yes, many employers don’t offer what I’d call adequate health care. So instead of instituting universal health care, I say the gov’t should incentivize businesses to support a certain base level of health care. I stop short of saying the gov’t should mandate it, but it’s worth discussing

There’s also the problem that even universal health care won’t necessarily pay for everything. So it’s possible that we’d pay higher taxes in addition to having to pay for health insurance anyway.

I’ve also heard the gripe that people who own their own business pay more for health care than a worker employed by something else. To that I say that if you’re an employee, having your health care partially (or completely, depending on the company) subsidized is part of your compensation for working. You lack freedom in that you work for somebody else, but you get the benefit of cheaper health care. If you work for yourself, your bonus is freedom but your cost is the higher cost of health care. You can’t have your cake and eat it, too.

Economic Policy

I’ve already said a lot that falls into this category, so there are just a few things I really want to add.

First is that politicians seem to behave as if companies exist in a vacuum and won’t object in any way to what the gov’t makes them do.

We have to strike a balance. It’s reasonable to ask certain things of a business in exchange for operating in America, but if the gov’t makes doing business here too onerous, then companies will move to greener pastures.

Tax breaks are good rewards for various behaviors, and keeping jobs in America is a good behavior. Creating socially beneficial products (such as hybrid cars) is another good one. I’m sure there are more but you take my point.

By the same token, you need a good reason to raise taxes, and “because they made too much money” is not a good reason. Why on Earth do we want to penalize success? If a company has made money by breaking the law, then fine, punish that, but if they’ve made money and abided by the law, then I don’t see any problem. (And if taxes were calculated as a flat percentage, more profit would result in more taxes anyway, right?)

Lastly, I really object to the bailout of the financial industry that’s now taking place. It rewards terrible corporate behavior and it’s only going to cause trouble down the road. If anything, the financial crisis was proof that the market is resistant to such artificial manipulation.

A criticism of big business is that the crisis came up as a result of “letting the market run free,” but that’s only true up to a point. The situation arose primarily because of conditions that the gov’t helped create.

If the gov’t had left well enough alone in the first place, we wouldn’t be in this mess. So I think the best thing the gov’t can do is get out of the way and let it all sort itself out. It would be rough, but a stronger economy would be the end result.

In Conclusion

That, as they say, is that.

If I didn’t write about it here, then I don’t really have an opinion on it. Try asking me.

Does this make me A Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or other? You tell me, ’cause I have no idea. I registered as an Independent.

And now at any point in the future somebody asks me what I believe, I can point here and say “That. That’s what I believe.”