|
Edited on Sun Jun-13-04 04:50 PM by welshTerrier2
welcome to DU, Peak_Oil !!!
first, by way of introduction, i consider myself a far left Democrat ... i dislike many of the compromises the democratic party has chosen to make in the name of getting elected ... having said that, i am 100% enthusiastically supporting Kerry ... here's why ...
1. the military: i see an essential difference on this issue between Kerry and bush ... Kerry walked the walk in Vietnam ... bush did not ... I believe his experience has taught Kerry respect for the little people in the military ... bush talks a good game about "supporting the troops and strengthening America to keep us safe" but the reality he supports is very different ... most of the wars we fight require highly specialized and adaptable personnel ... yes, we do need some large scale weapons systems but they are incredibly expensive and are not very effective in the kind of role the military is now playing in Iraq ... what good are sophisticated fighter jets against political insurgencies? i think Kerry's focus will be first on upgrading personnel rather than on corporate, no bid giveaways to bloated, cost overrun weapons systems ...
2. move away from fossil fuels: put very simply, one party believes in the risks of global warming and one party does not ... you figure it out ... bush and his buddies are all from the oil industry ... they view calls for higher mileage standards to be an interruption with the free market ... not only does our dependence on oil create global political instabilities, but it is likely to lead to environmental devastation in the very near future ... one party wants to drill in the ANWR and one does not ... which party is more likely to address this issue?
3. food safety: the U.S. food supply has been one of the safest in the world (chemical additives notwithstanding) for many years ... but two trends are putting our food safety at risk ... one is the WTO and other free trade agreements ... it is becoming increasingly difficult for the U.S. to keep out food imports that may not meet our inspection standards ... the WTO gives other countries the right to consider these safety laws a restraint of trade in violation of the agreement ... the second area of concern is genetically modified foods ... again, one party believes in a minimum standard of at least labelling these foods and one party views such regulations as an unnecessary encumbrance on the free market ... you figure it out ...
4. education: it is well known that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer ... well, it's also true that the rich get good educations and the poor often do not ... most communities fund their local publice schools from the property tax ... this leads to the kinds of problems you've observed ... poorer communities cannot possibly provide the same education as richer ones ... one party believes in massive tax reductions for the wealthiest citizens and one party believes that tax cuts should go to the less wealthy ... one party even called for the elimination of the department of education ... one party wants to allow vouchers and all sorts of other gimmicks to allow people to pull their kids out of public schools and have the government and the taxpayers subsidize religious educations ...
5. elevating the poor: for too long, democrats were identified as the "welfare party" ... but this is no longer the case ... democrats have traditionally been the party of high employment ... and republicans have been the party of high UNemployment ... you've already mentioned the disparity available to rich and poor in the area of education ... that's a major part of the problem ... we also need to raise the earning standards to provide a "living wage" ... we've seen corporate CEO salaries go from a multiple of 40 times the average worker to more than 400 times the average worker and yet many full-time workers have to work two or more jobs just to make ends meet ... and who's at home guiding the children while the adults are working? free market capitalism has done nothing but widen the chasm you've identified ... and guess what, what party has traditionally fought for raises in the minimum wage and one party has opposed it ... you figure it out ...
6. illegal immigration and population pressure: sorry, i'm not knowledgeable on this subject ... i will say, however, that i would like to eliminate the tax deduction for children for earners over some level of income ... if anything, i'd like to see a deduction for those without children ... i don't assume this will be a particularly popular proposal ...
7. corporate taxes: i've heard republicans call for the complete elimination of the corporate tax ... they consider it double taxation because distributions of corporate earnings (e.g. dividends) are taxed a second time to the individuals who received them ... many corporations not only don't pay their fair share of taxes, they don't pay any taxes at all ... until we can get big money out of the political process and send all corporate lobbyists to jail for trying to influence the legislative process, we are not going to see changes in the law ... and i'm sorry to say that i don't think democrats have done much better on this issue than the republicans ... our government is for sale to those who can afford the fare and the rest of us be damned ...
8. corporate "personhood": this is really a great question ... i wish i had a great answer ... again, a major part of the problem is big money in the political process ... we really do have the "best democracy money can buy" ... i don't believe that capitalism in the form of large, multi-national corporations can co-exist with democracy ... and if you're looking for significant differences between the two major parties on this issue, good luck ... understand though, that one party wants to give the free market a "free hand", and one party believes in a balance between democratic controls on business and "free" commerce ...
9. job outsourcing: i have called for the following changes to the tax code to address this issue ... first, any company that moves it headquarters outside the U.S. will no longer be allowed to have sales of its stock qualify for lower capital gains taxes ... this would provide a major disincentive for companies to move offshore to evade paying taxes because investors would be strongly discouraged from investing in these companies ... second, the percentage of capital gains available to a company's investors would be pro-rated based on the percentage of their workforce based in the U.S. ... so, if a company decided to outsource 75% of their workforce to foreign workers (leaving 25% in the U.S.), an investor could only receive lower capital gains rates on 25% of their gain from the sale of the company's stock ... again, this would create a strong disincentive to outsource ... all of this would probably be a major violation of the WTO and other pro-corporate trade agreements ... on this issue, I fully support Kucinich's call for the U.S. withdrawal from these abusive trade agreements ... all future agreements should be handled on a bi-lateral basis ...
so, that's my best shot at your questions ... Kerry is not a perfect candidate and the democrats are not a perfect party ... but it's more than easy to see that bush is corrupt and has lead this country to the brink of environmental devastation, military devastation and economic devastation ... Kerry and the democrats are right on many critical issues ... those of us on the far left may have many strong disagreements with them, but this year too much is at stake to do anything that would risk 4 more years of bush ... it's not a case of the lesser of two evils, it's a necessary step on the journey to human dignity and world peace ...
|