Here is a real world example of a socialist policy and the difficulty that comes in making a reasoned decision between individual liberty and common good. The fire department in nearby Idyllwild, California has hired (no-bid) a San Diego company to make "forced-abatements" on private property within this small mountain community. The forested neighborhood is under the constant threat of wildfire - some overgrown properties increase the threat to the entire community. The San Diego company has the right to clear private property, to make whatever "improvements" they alone deem necessary and to charge the property owner for these "improvements." Failure to pay the "improvement" bill can lead to a lien on the property and the loss of a home. An army of strangers with chainsaws unilaterally "improving" my front lawn would not be welcome. A firestorm whipped up by my neighbor's unkempt yard would not be welcome. Self or society?

"The Tapeworm - A socialist perspective of the capitalist"

The McCain campaign, Fox "News" and other shills for the McCain campaign have joined in a collective spasm over the coming tide of socialism led by Barack Obama.

The flailing about began with Obama's "spread the wealth" comment to Joe the Plumber.  It is a testament to both the desperation of the McCain campaign and the bloodlust of the 24 hour news cycle the last major theme of this election has become a false debate over Socialism versus Capitalism.

Just in time for Halloween, the legacy of the shiny, happy, shoulder-padded 1980s has come back to haunt the U.S.   Remember the Trickle Down Theory of economics?  (This spooky tale is great, for all those connoisseurs of busted policy theories.)

Once upon a time, a certain high ranking government official -- who just so happened to be a revered conservative -- President Reagan, peddled the idea that the uber rich could and would help the poor.  Aside from putting Robin Hood out of business, the theory helped create a permanent divide between the Left and the Right.  To this day, those who choose to deny the eloquence of Trickle Down are considered Socialists or Communists.  Those who embrace it are true-blue Capitalists or free-market "progressives".

The treat was the public's trust in the aforementioned politician's status as a straight-talking icon who, although governor of California, was still regarded as a Washington outsider and maverick. His ghost haunts 2008 along with his economic plans. The trick in this tale has been played on the working poor and middle-class.  The only way this theory worked was by selling the idea that the collective American goodwill and trust should be placed in big business.

The Trickle Down Theory and its ideological progeny, supply-side or "Voodoo" Economics, might help explain the recent Wall Street and corporate fiascos.  The government's bailouts certainly date back at least as far as the 80s, beginning with the federal government's marketplace participation in helping airlines, and both theories continue to haunt the present. 

And the story developed through the ‘90s.

Today, the economy has unseated the occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan as the most important topic in this year's presidential campaign.  Though the ghost of Vodoo Economics sounds more like "no new taxes," the trick stays the same.  This year, voters should seriously consider the validity of Trickle Down. 

Isn't it time to permanently debunk this tall tale? 

No one besides libertarians actually believes in the ultimate good of individual choices rather than developing ways to work en masse.  But libertarians believe this is an end to itself, not a beneficent plan for helping society.  Compassionate conservatives may not be myth makers but this economic theory ends in more poverty, fewer jobs, and greater mistrust of the businesses government has protected over time.

Last night's presidential debate was decidedly... unenlightening and boring. Although the town hall format could have brought something new to the table, the game remained virtually unchanged. McCain had a tough job to do, as he entered the debate nine points down in the polls by some reports. Many Americans are now scrutinizing Obama more closely in light of the view that he is the more probable future president, and this is something McCain could have capitalized on - but he didn't, at least not as much as he could have. Both candidates presented their positions rather well, but this is old news - especially when Obama seemed to avoid directly answering questions in favor of steering the debate towards prepped talking points. Important issues came up, but the responses given could have been directly taken from campaign speeches. In what turned out to be a highly conventional debate, we heard the candidates reiterate their positions on health care, taxation, Iran, Russia, and energy. There remained much divergence and some agreement. The economy and current economic conditions were understandably a time-consuming focus.

But despite the need to address the economy in light of significant changes that have taken place since the last time the candidates faced off, I think Tom Brokaw could have made some more interesting decisions regarding question choices. When citizens, and not journalists, are given the opportunity to ask the questions, fascinating issues are bound to come up - and we can get a unique insight into our politicians' characters and lives. In this debate, however, if you agree with Obama's positions, you probably felt like Obama won; likewise, if you went into it a McCain fan, you more than likely believed him to be the winner (case in point: both the FoxNews on-screen poll following the debate and the Drudge Report online poll declared McCain the winner). Did it do anything for the undecideds? I've made up my mind, so I can't be certain, but my guess would be that it didn't do a whole lot in terms of issues.

But maybe the spotlight wasn't on the issues. Maybe the goal was to see the next president being, well, presidential - a goal both candidates succeeded in. Obama was comfortable, said things a lot of people want to hear, and presented himself as empathetic. But as McCain repeatedly brought up, it comes down to rhetoric versus record. So keeping that in mind, and in light of this rather promising debate format that failed to live up to my hopes, I've assembled a list of my own questions, specifically for Senator Obama. Some of these contain issues that I wish McCain had brought up, and some require more than a two-minute response, so poor Tom needs to stop looking at the timer.

The Bush Administration's plans for a speedy bailout of Wall Street seem to have hit a speed bump with a Congress possessing a newly installed spine, or at least a sense of curiosity about what they're being asked to approve. The administration's proponants of the plan are being compared to used-car dealers and there are reactions of disgust and distrust from both parties in both houses of Congress.

Senators McCain and Obama both gave speeches today outlining their problems with the plan. McCain broke his objections down to five points, where Obama focussed on four. I was particularly happy with Senator McCain's insistance that the management of those companies seeking assistance commit to capping their income at the appropriate level for federal employees.

In my view, the problems with the administration's proposals came in two areas. First, their repeatedly inaccurate crying of wolf for the last seven years, has left them with zero credibility. Second, there were no consequences for anyone but the taxpayers.

Fortunately, Congressional ears now seem to finally be resistant to the crying of wolf. Additionally, everyone running for office seems to understand that the consequences of this economic disaster must be laid somewhere, anywhere, but at the feet of the voting taxpayers. Yes, we'll all pay in the long run, whether or not any kind of bailout passes, but Congress seems to understand that we should not be alone.

More on this topic is in a particularly good piece by Washington Post op-ed columnist Eugene Robinson.

Back in the day, Republicans were champions of the free market.  At least in theory they favored laissez-faire economics.  Given time the markets would sort themselves out in a reasonably efficient manner.

Economic theory took a back seat to political expediency in several notable examples during the last seven years.  The airlines (and their security contractors) couldn't be held accountable for the failures of 9/11 because the airlines constituted a vital sector of the economy.  The telecoms needed and received civil immunity for whatever it did to the American people on behalf of the Terrorist Surveillance Program, because their cooperation was vital to our national security.  Just this month, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac needed taxpayer dollars to protect their role in the home mortgage crisis industry, which some say is vital to the economy.  

Last Thursday, April 24, 2008, State Assemblymember Lori Saldaña (D-San Diego, 76th District) hosted a Home-Ownership and Mortgage Resource Fair held at the CalTrans building on Taylor Street. Assemblymember's Saldaña's seat is up for reelection on the June 3rd ballot, although she runs uncontested this election year. 

With every major presidential candidate forced to speak all over the country about the economy, (i.e., NAFTA, ethanol and corn crop production in conflict, rice shortages, food prices rising, gasoline prices soaring), the housing crisis could arguably be called, along with high oil prices, a major component in why the country faces a tough economic road ahead.

I was pleased to see a local Democrat take initiative and organize an informational event such as this, even though it might not affect me personally the same way as it will those people choosing to remain in California. (My husband and I plan to move out of California to improve the cost of living.) Still, the event impressed me enough to convince me to cast my affirmative vote for Assemblymember Lori Saldaña.

Just listened to San Diego mayoral candidate Steve Francis be interviewed by Tom Fudge on These Days. It was interesting to hear Francis's views on what San Diego needs and how he'll improve the situation.

What a week we’ve had since my last blog post… soaring fuel costs, a credit crisis, job losses, deflated dollar, Wall Street woes, mortgage defaults, and political scandals.

A storm is brewing over this land. Throw in a terrorist attack or a pandemic and our country could be seriously crippled.

Doom and gloom? No. Reality? Yes.