A Not So Modest Proposal

Social Support Programs: Address the Root

People Need Assistance in Accessing Support Programs. Will is a 61-year-old alcoholic who has managed to support himself through his excellent construction skills. After his work partner died four years ago, he lived in the attic of the man’s house until summer 2024 when the man’s 26-year-old son was jailed for beating up Will. When the son was released after four months, the widow chose to protect her son from future conflicts by telling Will he had to move out. He is currently living in a camper on a rural property by the generosity of an acquaintance. A wheel broke off his truck and he has no money to fix it, but without transportation, he can’t earn any money. He needs food stamps but has no computer or other means of applying. His phone ran out of minutes back in August.

Will is just one example of the problems facing people who need social support. What’s needed for Will and many others is an advocate who can assist him through the process but also, more importantly, to assess the person’s situation, capabilities, and needs and to assist that person in moving beyond their current status. Education, job training, mental health care, and/or medical treatment are among the needs often experienced by those seeking government assistance, but rather than actually helping people get the help they need, current programs throw out random packages of aid without any comprehensive effort at addressing the root causes.

An advocate for such applicants could assist in the process of seeking help as minimal as obtaining food stamps, but also gaining access to the full array of needed services, completing the application process properly, or assigning a counselor to help the applicant sort out his/her current life situation (in which case the advocate and counselor become a team). Without expert advocates to steer each applicant through an increasingly complex system, we risk wasting billions on systemic inefficiencies and do nothing to solve the problems that cause these people to need help in the first place.

Dispose of Outdated Laws

Drug laws: The drug war, like alcohol prohibition before it, frames the use of certain intoxicants as a moral failing. The result has been mass incarceration for private behavior.

All natural drugs should be immediately legalized, regulated like alcohol, and taxed. Tax proceeds for legal sales in Colorado, for example, have paid for homeless housing while reducing expenditures for law enforcement and prisons. This should include marijuana, coca leaf, psilocybin mushrooms, peyote, opium, and Ayahuasca, among others. Persons wishing to consume any of these substances should be able to walk into a retail establishment like a liquor store anywhere in the country and buy a product that’s been certified for purity and dosage. Such products should not be controlled by pharmaceutical companies. Individual production of such substances for personal consumption should be allowed without taxation or regulation. Public venues which serve psychoactive drugs should be licensed in the same manner as establishments for consuming alcohol.

Anyone previously convicted or imprisoned for possession, “manufacture,” or sale of these substances should be released from incarceration and their convictions expunged from the record. Unfortunately, due to the massive numbers of persons involved, any compensation for their loss of income or other social costs is not feasible.

Substance abuse, like alcoholism, can become a serious problem for certain people. Currently, only the very rich can afford treatment programs that address the whole person through nutrition, counseling, and exercise, among other things. Tax revenues derived from retail sales should first provide for comprehensive treatment centers in every community where anyone suffering from addiction can be immediately admitted.

Performance testing for job safety should take the place of current drug testing. A brief interface with a computer terminal for tests tailored to immediately show competency to meet job requirements—attention, dexterity, coordination, etc.—should be part of the employee’s work day. A test failure, no matter what the cause of impairment—hangover, intoxication, fight with the spouse—could become part of that employee’s record with appropriate consequences for repeated failure. Intoxicated driving will be prosecuted.

Sex Laws: Prostitution should be legalized, regulated, and taxed as any other business. If a person wants to sell the use of his/her body for sexual gratification, it should be within his or her right to do so. Government licensing should include regular health inspections to ensure public safety. Houses of prostitution could include luxurious settings, the most attractive employees, or the most innovative approach – for example, offer an immersive experience in an establishment with fantasy themes (medieval, harem, S&M dungeon, etc.). There should be no restriction on how houses of prostitution or individual practitioners might combine their services with other services such as massage, restaurants, intoxication venues (alcohol and/or drugs), or even mental health counseling.

Nudity Laws: Allocation of designated locations where people can go without clothing should be legal in all states.

Facilities/Resources: Eliminating drug and sex laws will result in decreased need for jails and prisons as well as employees of the criminal justice system. Freed-up resources should be redirected to improving public defender salaries and providing for persons prosecuted for other offenses.

Reining in Corporate Greedmasters

CEOs and other top executives should receive pay based on the pay their workers receive. If the company is profitable enough to pay at CEO $27 million a year, workers should be earning far more than $15-$20 per hour. Likewise, prices for products that serve a lifesaving role for consumers should be regulated by the government just as utilities and other vital public services are regulated.

Healthcare: Medicare for everyone. Eliminate insurance companies unless they are non-profit. Hospitals and pharmaceutical companies must be non-profit. Drugs would be price controlled. Research for new treatments and new drugs would operate under federal grants.

Legal Services: Expand funding for free legal aid so that injured parties have full recourse to legal action.

Everyone is responsible

National service: Everyone reaching age 18 must serve whether Peace Corps, military, domestic infrastructure, civic duties or whatever else would benefit the public at large. No exceptions except for significant disability. Higher education, either college or vocational, can wait until the completion of two years’ public service. Serving in such duties should be in a location away from the family home, should provide food, shelter, and a minimal wage, and should result in free college/vocational training at its conclusion similar to the G.I. Bill.

Education

All secondary schools should be required to offer a curriculum that includes literature/language, basic math, basic science, state and national history, speech/debate, music, art, and domestic duties including balancing a checkbook, changing a tire, and nutrition/how to cook. Males and females need the same courses. Domestic duty classes would include thorough sex education with a segment where kids have to carry a baby (doll) around 24-7. Dolls used for this teaching experience should be computerized to function as close to human behavior as possible including messy diapers, hunger, and crying. Birth control pills should be freely dispensed at school health clinics with or without parental permission.

Teacher salaries should be competitive with other professions requiring college degrees even in the most impoverished districts.

States which allow religious schools and home schooling should be required to regularly test home schooled and religious school students for the same course requirements as public schools students. Non-public school students who can’t pass the exams cannot receive a diploma. Repeated failure to pass exams would require the student to enter public schools. Public school students who fail to pass exams would be entered into a special unit of the school system and assessed for need of nutrition, mental health, and family problems, among other things, and individually tutored until learning improves. Vocational training for all trades should be available and affordable as should college.

Homeless Population

An estimated 25-30% of homeless people suffer mental illness. Yet few programs addressing homelessness provide for treatment. Often these individuals end up in local jails because they can’t take care of themselves and there are no longer facilities dedicated to treating them.

“…during the Reagan administration, Federal funding for such institutions was shut down so that our wealthy class could pay less in taxes, and that put many thousands of mentally ill people out on the street corner. We have done nothing since to remedy this. A compassionate nation would care for these unfortunate people, and provide the mental facilities to house them where they could get the help they need that their conditions require.”[1]

Most homeless programs exhaust their resources in simply trying to feed and shelter the homeless. Most of them fall short even of that. Successful efforts to address homelessness are based on meeting physical needs as well as mental health concerns. Addiction is another illness at the root of many homeless situations. Until systemic remedies are put into place, homelessness will continue to plague us.

The more successful programs for the homeless are centered in tiny home villages or converted industrial/commercial properties. As shopping malls have become less viable, some cities and nonprofits have converted these sprawling spaces to homeless housing. Facilities serving the homeless would offer food service, counseling, health care, and job training.

Taxes

Poverty levels should be adjusted annually to meet the real costs of housing, food, and transportation. Persons earning above poverty level should pay income taxes on a sliding scale. Income at some level, say above five million, should pay a very high rate, as much as 70% of income.

In addition to legalized ‘sin’ transactions (drugs, sex) that would generate significant tax revenues, churches should be taxed like any other business. Penalties and additional taxes should be assessed against any corporation or individual found to be hiding income in foreign countries. No tax shelters.

[1] https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-most-successful-homeless-program

What Democrats Did Wrong

Party leaders failed to see the long term need for younger, more vigorous candidates. The bulk of Biden’s term suffered from his shuffling gait, whispery voice, and apparent mental decline. Not that Trump is so much younger, but his demeanor as a bully conveys a message of strength. Sadly.

Dems also failed to foresee Biden’s inability to win a second term and consequently failed to hold a 2024 primary that would have introduced all best possible candidates. Call it allegiance to a venerable old warrior (Biden) or inability to break out of an established order of candidate precedence, or fear of the unknown, this lack of a so-called ‘fair’ fight in selecting a presidential candidate played a significant role in Harris’ defeat.

Sorry, but Kamala Harris was not popular in the 2020 primaries from which she withdrew for lack of funding. Built-in negatives aside from her mixed race and being female included her speech affectations which make her seem smug. One would think that the defeat of Hillary would have been lesson enough. For now, the fight is still between present day realities which are incomprehensible to conservatives and the “good old days” when men were ‘successful’ if they knew how to saddle a horse.

During Biden’s term, there was no apparent coherent approach to illegal immigration. This played into Harris’ weakness on this issue, which Biden appointed her to address. Whatever policy recommendations she made failed to make news cycles. As noted by the Washington Post, “Harris, in fact, has never been in charge of the border. The Department of Homeland Security manages migration. Her immigration role for the Biden administration has included boosting U.S. aid to Central America, traveling to the region and discouraging potential migrants from making the dangerous journey to the United States.” Be that as it may, if there had been a strong Biden policy on illegal immigration and prominent promotion of those policies, Trump wouldn’t have been able to make that topic a centerpiece of his campaign.

https://abc13.com/migrant-caravan-immigrations-and-customs-story-migrants/4690683/

Yes, boosting U.S. aid to Central America is foundational to stemming the tide, as Harris knew. Sadly, the fact is that coherent immigration policies addressing root causes aren’t enough to stop people seeking better opportunities for themselves and their children. If your children are starving and your home and livelihood are daily threatened by violent gangs rampaging through neighborhoods, you too would leave behind everything you’ve ever known and walk to the promised land.

THERE IS NO GOOD SOLUTION to illegal immigration. There is no fence high enough, or military/border guard personnel vast enough to make illegal entry impossible. As climate change advances, more and more populations will face starvation and violent domestic turmoil. The U.S. cannot take them all. No one can. This message must be made clear. Trump’s plan to deport millions WILL NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM. This is whack-a-mole thinking.

Biden, in the seeming tradition of Democrats and, in the words of Michelle Obama, “went high” when the Republicans “went low.” But we’re dealing with primitive thinking where the hero bashes the villain over the head. With no head bashing, there’s no hero. The villain wins. It’s past time for the Democrats to develop more than one track and start bashing. To greatest possible extent, yes, don’t give up the vision of a better world—peace, love, good vibes. But we also must carry a big stick and when somebody needs to get bashed over the head, bash the son of a bitch. The Biden administration’s justice department took waaaay too long quibbling over how/when/why to prosecute Trump for his shocking illegal acts. He should never have been free to run for re-election.

Not that Biden or the justice department had control over local and state prosecutions, but the failure of appropriate federal action left the door open for Trump to escape from prosecution in lower courts, as is now obvious. It was the first Trump presidency which allowed him to stack the Supreme Court, and that will be the case again. His sponsors are playing the long game, moves that have been feverishly planned since at least the 1950s. The strategy is to whip up fear and hatred to drive conservative voters to the polls, desperate to buy God’s favor by forcing the entire nation into a theocracy. None of this matters to Trump, whose entire plan involves self-enrichment, self-aggrandizement, and eluding justice.

True to their religious belief system, conservatives prefer government which regulates what the population does in their bedrooms and allows the business segment to run wild. The opposite is true for liberals, who believe what people do in their bedrooms is no one’s business and what the business community does can ONLY be regulated by government. Who else can force corporations not to dump industrial waste in our rivers? Ensure clean drinking water and safe food supplies? Mitigate the onslaught of pandemics? Enforce design and construction standards for roadways, bridges, and buildings?

These requirements of government are easily forgotten by a fearful, angry electorate who is not educated to understand these fundamental duties, an electorate even more distracted by a wannabe dictator whose success depends on agitating division with lies and false promises. This can only be effectively countered by an equally vociferous Democrat whose presence and actions meet the pseudo-strength of a candidate like Trump. Potential right-wing demagogues have the advantage of money flowing from a huge array of business interests. Liberals have only the People to carry on the framework for freedom established by the Founding Fathers:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Foundational to this vision was EDUCATION. Public education was not an afterthought of the American Revolution – it was a core ideal of our Founders. They maintained that a well-educated population was the only means of ensuring America’s future. The roots of taxpayer-funded public education in the United States can be traced back to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1647. The colony passed a law that required towns to establish schools, made children attend school, and allowed the state to levy taxes to support schools. This traditional determination now stands at risk from religious forces who have managed to divert tax dollars into support for private, religious schools which often slant their programs to fit a religious agenda.[1]

Could Obama have warded off this SCOTUS situation with his nomination of Merrick Garland for the post by steamrolling the Senate?

It is in full accord with traditional notions of waiver to say that the Senate, having been given a reasonable opportunity to provide advice and consent to the president with respect to the [Supreme Court] nomination of [Judge Merrick] Garland, and having failed to do so, can fairly be deemed to have waived its right. Here’s how that would work. The president has nominated Garland and submitted his nomination to the Senate. The president should advise the Senate that he will deem its failure to act by a specified reasonable date in the future to constitute a deliberate waiver of the right to give advice and consent. What date?…90 days is a perfectly reasonable amount of time.

– Excerpt from an op-ed column in The Washington Post on April 10 by Washington, D.C., lawyer Gregory L. Diskant, who is in private practice and also serves as a member of the national governing board of the liberal advocacy group, Common Cause.

“The Appointments Clause [of Article II] clearly implies a power of the Senate to give advice on and, if it chooses to do so, to consent to a nomination, but it says nothing about how the Senate should go about exercising that power. The text of the Constitution thus leaves the Senate free to exercise that power however it sees fit. Throughout American history, the Senate has frequently – surely, thousands of times – exercised its power over nominations by declining to act on them.

– Excerpt from a commentary about the Diskant column by M. Edward Whalen, president of the conservative advocacy group, the Washington-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, published April 10 on the National Review Online’s Bench Memo.[2]

Equally appalling was the lack of foresight by none other than Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg who refused to retire during Obama’s presidency, which would have allowed another justice to step in on her coattails. Despite her excellent record and unfailing support for liberal causes, a bit of hubris caused her to cheat the future of a suitable replacement.

Democrats need to wake up! Making nice is not always the best course of action when we’re dealing with not only ignorant tyrants like Trump but also foreign bad actors with their thumbs on the scales.

[1] In June 2022, in Carson v. Makin, the high court held that when governments choose to subsidize private schools, they must allow such funds to pay for religious schools. A majority of current justices appear to believe that excluding religious groups from government programs is a violation of the First Amendment’s free exercise clause. Although court precedents prohibit direct funding of religion under the establishment clause, the current court could decide that if the state funds secular public charter schools, religious public charter schools cannot be excluded from such funding.  See https://www.freedomforum.org/government-fund-religious-schools/

[2] https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/constitution-check-could-obama-bypass-the-senate-on-garland-nomination

What Trump Will Bring

In the pending Trump presidency, there will be no support for Ukraine or Palestinians, and it will be the desperate people of those countries who suffer. That suffering will spill over, from Ukraine into more of Europe, from Palestinian lands into Lebanon and the broader Middle East. Trump’s buddy Vladimir Putin is thrilled. The wealth of Ukraine in natural resources and rich cropland will strengthen the weaknesses of Russia and move Putin closer to seeing his lifelong dream realized, the re-creation of the Soviet empire.

If Trump et al succeed in tearing down the U.S. Constitution and all we stand for, pretty soon the war will be on our land, in our towns and farmland. Communist nations like Russia, Iran, and China will simply walk in through the doors Trump is leaving open.

There will be no acknowledgement of climate change or its inevitable, already-apparent crises as insurance rates skyrocket in a futile effort to mitigate losses from flooding, storms, and other weather extremes. If we’re troubled by immigration now, wait a few more years of uncontrolled climate change when entire nations are unable to house or feed their populations due to floods or lack of agriculture. Do we shoot them at the border? Let them starve?

What would Jesus do?

Most telling will be the nosedive of our economy, not just in the four years of Trump’s legal term of office, but thereafter as his exploitation of U.S. oil reserves undermines our future energy independence. Trump’s ‘drill baby drill’ cries ignore the wisdom of alternative energy. He is simply too stupid to understand why we should use anything but oil even though all known reserves will run out by 2070. Theoretically, we may never run out of oil because, given the depth of the Earth’s core, there will be new wells to discover. That said, it’s highly unlikely that the practice of mining such depths will become economically viable.

Trump’s second presidency will expand on his previous dismissal of health crises preparation which left us vulnerable to the COVID outbreak after he liquidated the pandemic preparedness established by previous presidents. What will happen with the next pandemic? Researchers say there’s as much as a 50 percent chance that we’ll see something like this again in the next twenty-five years. Trump’s lack of intellect leaves the entire nation unprepared.

Even more concerning is his ignorance of history, which allows him to pursue his fantasy of shifting civil service jobs to political appointments in direct violation of the United States Constitution. Traditionally, the civil service has been a sector of government that operates under a merit-based system to ensure that government jobs are filled by the most qualified individuals. This system protects civil servants from political influence and allows them to make independent decisions without fear of reprisal. The civil service is a key part of the constitutional framework because it helps to uphold the rule of law and ensure that the government is run by merit, not political affiliation. Trump’s affection for the idea of government work force composed of loyalists completely overturns this tradition.

Trump doesn’t care what happens in the future as long as he stays out of prison for his multitude of felonies. He doesn’t care about the lives of anyone besides himself. He’s eager to turn over the economy to people like Elon Musk, who acknowledges he is autistic, a condition marked by impaired social interactions, verbal and nonverbal communication deficits, and restricted, repetitive behavior patterns and associated with poor emotional control. To place the future of the U.S. economy in the hands of such a person means loss of critical social support for the weakest and neediest among us. Such suffering would not be a concern to Musk. Or Trump, who, when confronted with the disability of his nephew’s son, famously told his nephew ““Those people…” Donald said, trailing off. “The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.”

Similarly, Trump has nominated Robert Kennedy Jr. to head the U. S. departments in charge of public health including the Department of Health and Human Services, the Center for Disease Control, and the Food and Drug Administration. But Kennedy has no science or medical background, other than claiming to have had worms in his brain. He also reported that at one point, mercury poisoning in his body reached ten times safe levels. Studies show that high exposure to mercury induces changes in the central nervous system, potentially resulting in irritability, fatigue, behavioral changes, tremors, headaches, hearing and cognitive loss, and dysarthria (a speech disorder that makes it difficult to speak due to issues with the muscles, nerves, or brain that control speech). Kennedy’s negative attitude about vaccines no doubt attracted voters who were petulantly annoyed by public health measures enforced during COVID like wearing masks and being vaccinated to prevent spread of the virus.

Perhaps the most immediately dangerous is Pete Hegseth, a FOX News commentator and host of “Fox & Friends” now nominated to be Secretary of Defense. An Army veteran of eight years, he plans a “frontal assault” to reform the Department of Defense from the top down, including by purging “woke” generals, limiting women from some combat roles, eliminating diversity goals and utilizing the ‘real threat of violence’ to reassert the United States as a global power.” (ABC News) He has called the United Nations a ‘farce’ and “giant joke’ and believes military action is the best plan to solve world problems. Aside from his warmongering ideas, he has advocated for the pardon of war criminals. He holds no sympathy for Palestinians and embraces Israelis as “God’s chosen people” with “Zionism and Americanism at the front lines of Western civilization.” (Wikipedia) His concept of “civilization” apparently follows the same moral codes as Trump. “Hegseth and his first wife, Meredith Schwarz, divorced in 2009. He married his second wife, Samantha Deering, in 2010; they have three children. In August 2017, while still married to Deering, Hegseth had a daughter with Fox executive producer Jennifer Rauchet, with whom he was having an extramarital relationship. He and Deering divorced in August 2017. Hegseth and Rauchet, who has three young children from her first marriage, married in August 2019.” (Wiki)

Even if the new Republican majority in the Senate rejects one or more of these nominations, there’s little likelihood that Trump’s subsequent appointments would be any less unsuitable for government positions. He has already put extremist Stephen Miller in a position that will control immigration, our very own Joseph Goebbels, a German Nazi politician who was the chief propagandist for the Nazi Party and then Reich Minister of Propaganda from 1933 to 1945. He was one of Adolf Hitler’s closest and most devoted followers, known for his deeply virulent antisemitism which was evident in his publicly voiced views. He advocated progressively harsher discrimination, including the extermination of the Jews in the Holocaust.

Finally, there is the nomination of Tulsi Gabbard as the head of our national intelligence agencies. As noted by news media, Gabbard’s record “reflects an alarming pattern of siding with Russia and other authoritarian regimes, raising questions about whether she should serve as America’s top-ranking intelligence official. Her selection has alarmed lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, though most Republicans have refrained from public criticism. …[She] lacks deep intelligence experience and is seen as soft on Russia and Syria. …Among the risks, say current and former intelligence officials and independent experts, are that top advisers could feed the incoming Republican president a distorted view of global threats based on what they believe will please him and that foreign allies may be reluctant to share vital information.” (Reuters)

But Trump’s voters don’t care about such details. He was elected because he made promises to enact policies which reflect old prejudices and enshrine ignorance under an authoritarian ruler. Old habits don’t vanish simply because new opportunities are presented, not when those habits have been ingrained for tens of thousands of years. The brain wiring isn’t there. The ‘conservative’ clings to the past because it is familiar.

Not better.

Coming soon: What the Democrats Did Wrong

In the United States today, apparently…

https://carolbodensteiner.com/2014/01/13/what-did-rural-life-look-like-1910/

Progress came too fast for the evolutionary capabilities of humans. Suddenly, within one hundred years, men were expected to accept women as equals after millennia of their submission. Men were expected to adjust to working with their minds instead of their hands, their bodies eager and waiting for the first throw of the spear, the first clubbing of an enemy. The majority of men needed those physical triumphs to feel like man, and they still do.

A significant percentage of women still believe men are their superiors, the representative of their male god who tells them how to live in submission. It’s too much to expect that suddenly after only 100 years of having the right to vote and the right to contraception, women would universally embrace the responsibility of citizenship, of bodily autonomy.

Sadly, an official return to policies constructed of old fears and prejudices destroys people, most of whom have worked for decades—lifetimes—to ensure that Americans are able to pursue our personal needs and dreams, to become who we want and need to be despite centuries of repression and exploitation. Progress means making the world a better place where people don’t suffer from old hatreds and fears. Now women are losing the right to control what happens to their own bodies. Men and women risk losing their right to live and love as they are—gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and more. Anyone who isn’t white need not exist.

While attempting to fling us backwards to a time without electricity, running water, or air conditioning, not to mention television, cell phones, and antibiotics, conservatives seem to think society could obtain all those things WITHOUT concurrent changes in social norms. That’s not how it works. Advances in technologies and sciences go hand in hand with social change. In a democratic society, education sufficient to produce people who invent cell phones also produces realization of our innate value as individuals—no matter what gender, skin color, or ethnic background.

Back in the ‘good ole days’ women made the cloth. “Heagerty family members demonstrating the steps needed to spin cotton, Cave Springs (Benton County), about 1900. From right: removing the seeds, carding the fibers, spinning the thread, and winding it on a reel.” Jerry Ritter Collection (S-2004-20-6)

Irony is when people vote for policies that are oppositional to their personal needs. Irony occurs when those voters cherish their cell phones while remaining ignorant of the high levels of education required for their invention or the vast technological network that serves them. Irony occurs when those voters flock to doctors to deal with cancer and other life-threatening conditions whose increasingly successful treatments come about at the hands of highly educated scientists who understand the cellular function of DNA and RNA, terms about which those voters are utterly ignorant. Undoubtedly, key figures in those fields are women and/or LBGTQ+.

It’s called shooting yourself in the foot.

Next: What Trump Will Bring

NEW RELEASE!

Today, mail seems almost quaint, often referred to as “snail mail” as we become more dependent on the easy flow of electronic email, texts, and messages. But in earlier times, as recently as 1900, communication beyond the in-person conversation or perhaps a written message sent across town by courier, mail was the only means of contact. The faithful transit of mail from place to place became an almost sacred duty for the people who established post offices.

Rural delivery to homes was not made available by the U.S. Postal Service until 1890. Even then, in the rugged landscape of parts of Washington County, mail delivery came by horse or mule to remote post offices into the early years of the 20^th century. These post offices were gathering places, usually housed in small stores where a person might pick up mail and trade eggs for a fresh batch of crackers while catching up on news. As such, post offices served more than mail, also forging interpersonal connections and a sense of community.

A total of 104 post offices were established in Washington County, of which only fifteen survive today. The other 85 came and then vanished along with the community they served. The men (and a few women) who took the responsibility to provide mail service often became leaders in the county, holding the public trust, letter by letter, at their station at a dusty crossroads.

Nab your copy today! https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DJJDD5M4

The Rich and Social Security

I’m sorry to burst everyone’s bubble about the rich and Social Security, but I believe it’s flat out wrong to think it’s as simple as the rich should pay “their fair share.” Compared to everyone else, they already pay their fair share because what each of us pays in Social Security tax is based on our income. The rich earn more, so they pay more.

The sticking point is the cap, the amount of the tax to be collected before the assessment stops. So what “pay their share” actually means to those hoping for reform is “get rid of the cap.”

But what would that mean?

“In 2024, the maximum amount of earnings subject to Social Security tax is $168,600, which is up from $160,200 in 2023. This limit [cap] is also known as the contribution and benefit base or the taxable maximum. The tax rate for wages paid in 2024 is set by statute at 6.2 percent for employees and employers, each. This means that an individual with wages equal to or larger than $168,600 would contribute $10,453.20 to the OASDI program in 2024.” And no more.

“The federal government adjusts the Social Security cap annually to keep pace with inflation based on changes in the National Average Wage Index. Earnings above this amount are not subject to Social Security tax or factored into Social Security payments in retirement.”

So at the maximum level of taxation this year, a person would pay a total $10,453.20 into the system.

And what does this person draw in benefits?

“The maximum Social Security benefit depends on age, earnings, and when benefits are taken. In 2024, the maximum benefit is $3,822 per month for those who retire at full retirement age, which is between 66 and 67. For those who retire at age 62, the maximum benefit is $2,710 per month, and for those who retire at age 70, the maximum benefit is $4,873 per month.”

To earn the maximum Social Security benefit, individuals must have been a high earner for 35 years and wait until full retirement age to claim benefits.

The ‘high earner’ contributing to the fund based on $168,600 for 35 years would have a pension balance of over $5,901,000 by retirement. At the $4,873 maximum monthly payout for the retiree, this amount would be depleted in 100.87 years, hardly a likely remaining life span after retirement age. Even living 20 years past retirement age, that person would only recoup about 20% of what he paid in.

On the other end of the tax calculation, a low income earner of $35,000/year might contribute far less than he/she will actually be able to receive at retirement. An employee sees 6.2% of his earnings withheld from his paycheck while his employer pays another 6.2%, for a total of $4,340/year based on $35,000/year. A self-employed person has to pay the entire 12.4% into the fund. Either way, thirty-five years later, that person will have accumulated $151,900 in his benefit fund.

Depending on the age at retirement, let’s say 66 years, his monthly benefit amount would be $1,846. Fortunately for him, if he lives twenty years after retirement, he will receive a total of $443,040 in benefits, a total of $291,140 MORE than he paid into the system.

Yes, there are significant numbers of men who die before they can claim any benefits, although their widows and/or minor children can draw on those accounts. A widow who never earned an income can live on her dead spouse’s benefits for the rest of her life, an amount which can easily skyrocket into large sums as about 16% of the men and about 34% of the women live to ninety or beyond.

Currently, life expectancy for women is 80.2 years while for men, it is 74.8 years. About half of women drawing benefits receive amounts based on their husbands’ earnings. Calculating by averages alone, the 5.4 years that women live past the male average death age creates a disproportionate amount of benefits paid that exceeds taxed earnings.

There is no cap on how many years a person can receive benefits. The benefits continue until death. The longer we live, the more benefits we receive.

So there’s no method by which the “rich must pay their fair share” when it comes to Social Security. Nor is the equity in promising widows a lifetime of benefits based on the husband’s contributions.

But wait! Aside from Social Security, a far simpler method of taxing excessive wealth is a more effective income tax rate. Consider the following:

According to a 2021 White House study, the wealthiest 400 billionaire families in the U.S. paid an average federal individual tax rate of just 8.2 percent. For comparison, the average American taxpayer in the same year paid 13 percent.
According to leaked tax returns highlighted in a ProPublica investigation, the 25 richest Americans paid $13.6 billion in taxes from 2014-2018—a “true” tax rate of just 3.4 percent on $401 billion of income.[1]

That’s not paying your fair share. Instead of rewarding wealth over work, our tax system should ensure that billionaires play by the same set of rules as the rest of us. It’s good for the planet, and it’s essential to the preservation of our democracy.[2] An easy method of capturing a greater portion of excessive income is the wealth tax plan advocated by Sen. Bernie Sanders:

Key Points:

Establish an annual tax on the extreme wealth of the top 0.1 percent of U.S. households.
It would only apply to net worth of over $32 million. Anyone who has a net worth of less than $32 million would not see their taxes go up at all under this plan.
This would raise an estimated $4.35 trillion over the next decade and cut the wealth of billionaires in half over 15 years, which would substantially break up the concentration of wealth and power of this small privileged class.
Ensure that the wealthy are not able to evade the tax by implementing strong enforcement policies.[3]

Aside from higher income taxes on the 1% super wealthy, another major misconception about Social Security is the idea that the government has “borrowed” money from the fund and that’s why it seems to be running out. Yes, the federal government borrows Social Security funds. This is a mechanism that was built in when the program began. The point being, the government is required to pay the money back with interest.

Social Security income is deposited into two financial accounts called trust funds – the Old-Age Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund and the Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund. The trust funds are used to pay out Social Security benefits and cover administrative costs.
The trust funds hold money that isn’t needed in the current year to pay benefits and other expenses. By law, that money is invested in special Treasury bonds that are guaranteed by the U.S. government and earn interest. This adds to the fund. The Treasury is obligated to pay back the money it borrows with interest, according to AARP and the Congressional Research Service, and the SSA says the federal government has never failed to do so.[4]

Another misunderstood program is the Supplemental Security Income, or SSI, similar to Social Security, which guarantees a minimum level of income for aged, blind, or disabled individuals. It acts as a safety net for individuals who have limited resources and little or no Social Security or other income. Individual States have the option to supplement Federal payments for SSI. Currently, states fund about 33% of the program while the federal government puts up the remaining 66% ($55.4 billion in 2021). SSI is financed by general funds of the U.S. Treasury — personal income taxes, corporate taxes, and other taxes. Social Security taxes collected under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) or the Self-Employment Contributions Act (SECA) do not fund the SSI program.[5]

We can and should argue for change. But we need to start out with the facts.

[1] https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/stories/do-the-rich-pay-their-fair-share/

[2] Ibid

[3] https://berniesanders.com/issues/tax-extreme-wealth/

[4] https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/social-security-verify/how-government-borrows-social-security-trust-funds/

[5] https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-17-008.pdf

Another NEW Release: Winslow–Before & After

Most folks who live around these parts know the story of Winslow, Arkansas, a tiny village perched in the highest elevations of the Boston Mountains. They know about the railroad tunnel built back in 1881 that blasted through 1,700 feet of stubborn rock and shale. They know about the all-female city council, the so-called Petticoat Government, back in 1925. And most of them know about the pre-air conditioning turn-of-the-century influx of wealthy summer visitors eager to live in the cooler air found at that elevation.

But what most folks don’t know is what came before the railroad. And what came after the boom years ended in the 1930s. Winslow today is, in many ways, just as interesting and vital as it was in those boom years between 1881 and 1930. Its population remains steady at around 365 people, not counting the hundreds residing in the rugged hills and hollers surrounding the place, both groups peppered with eccentrics, artists, and others typical of the Arkansas Ozarks reputation. Sit a spell and visit.

Great companion read to the new WINFEST book! Check it out at Amazon!

NEW RELEASE! WINFEST!

WINFEST! Celebrating 40 years of music and fun, this little book showcases each year’s performers and T-shirts in full color! Whoever dreamed in 1983 that forty years later this upstart music festival would still be going strong, a beloved event treasured by locals and regional fans alike, not to mention the many musicians and performers who have graced the stage with their talent and sense of adventure! Each year, a new, colorful t-shirt design featuring the performer names as well as the event date have preserved the legend of Winfest and are now presented for posterity in the pages of this booklet. Created as a labor of love by those who saw a need to find financial support for local nonprofit ventures, Winfest has stood the test of time, weather, and changes in the culture, truly a testament to the determination and dedication of the entire community of Winslow, Arkansas. Buy now at Amazon!

Award!

I am grateful for this award from the Arkansas Historical Association, and for the many helpers and sources of information for this article about an amazing woman, Forrestina Bradley Campbell (no kin), otherwise known as White River Red. May she rest in peace. This article may be found in my book, “Around the County,” (available at https://www.amazon.com/Around-County…/dp/B0C126KF23) or in the Spring 2023 issue of “Flashback,” the quarterly journal of the Washington County Historical Society.

Next Step

On Thursday, May 9, 2024, Senators Katie Britt (R-AL), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Kevin Cramer (R-ND) introduced the More Opportunities for Moms to Succeed (MOMS) act. Britt … said the measure would provide a federal database of resources for pregnant women and women parenting young children, but that information excludes anything that touches on abortion. The measure is clear that it enlists the government in opposition to abortion, but more than that, it establishes that the government will create a database of the names and contact information of pregnant women, which the government can then use “to follow up with users on additional resources that would be helpful for the users to review.” Heather Cox Richardson, May 13, 2024 (Monday)

Then,

Create a database of all females of child bearing age.
Require monthly reports of pregnancy tests from all females in the database, on penalty of felony prosecution.
Once pregnancy is reported, the female will be confined in a gestation facility.
Any employment or domestic duties of that female will be suspended until she gives birth.
If complications occur in the pregnancy, the embryo/fetus will be the priority consideration.
Upon birthing, the female and newborn will be returned to her former place in the community.