|
Post by BoatBabe on Feb 2, 2012 23:15:50 GMT -5
I am feeling sufficiently well-informed about the erosion of our civil liberties (and angry and sad, which is why I raise cain about TSA, the most obvious offender) that I'm not going to pay $14 or even $2 to listen or read what she says, but here is the summary: The War on Liberties Program #HRMS001. Recorded in Portland, OR on October 03, 2011. //Voltaire said, "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." In the decade of fear since 9/11 the government has constructed a vast apparatus of control and surveillance. Your most obvious experience is at the airport but it extends way beyond that. Big Brother is watching. Basic liberties are under attack all in the name of protecting those liberties. National security is ritually invoked to cover a range of violations of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The beacon of freedom descends into a twilight zone of criminality. The state has 16 intelligence agencies with untold billions at their disposal in black budgets, operating in secret, carrying out black operations and following what are called presidential findings. Defending liberties is not what they are about. And they sometimes confuse dissent with disloyalty.// I am sure she is a good speaker with valid points but I am already sickened by the way most Americans roll over and play dead in the face of these disgusting incursions on our Constitution. We get the government we deserve, a Republic if we can keep it. After more than 225 years, we may not keep it, instead we end not with a bang but a whimper. "Anything for security!" Okay, I hope my "whining" comment was not taken out of context. It was directly in relationship to doc's TSA remarks. Doing what you feel and think needs to be done to get your candidate elected, whom you feel really represents you, is not whining. Doc said, "I don't think that is whining; legislators want to hear constituents' thoughts, and like-minded individuals/organizations want our support." That is a good point, and has nothing to do with my Rich American's Whining statement.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 3, 2012 10:00:56 GMT -5
Maybe you don't get why I complain about the TSA. Routine X-rays and "pat downs" are unnecessary for safety and are excessively invasive. Walk-through metal detectors and explosive detection are more effective and less invasive, but they are not used because Michael Chertoff has lobbied for the use of more expensive equipment that will enrich him. Because of his connections, he was successful at his lobbying and the public is endangered though exposure to ionizing radiation. Just another facet of the corporatocracy.
Because there has been a lot of protest, highly publicized and embarrassing to TSA, there is now a switch to MMW instead of backscatter. Radiofrequency waves used for MMW screening are less dangerous than radiation, quite possibly not dangerous at all. I think protecting pregnant women and children, as well as the unidentified 5% of the population who are susceptible to ionizing radiation, is important. IMHO, it's not "whining," and such protest appears to be successful, as it is effecting change.
I still object to the invasion of privacy, and I still think there should be probable cause or reasonable suspicion before government agents conduct body searches, although those are more subtle offenses than giving unnecessary X-rays known to cause cancer.
Having my crotch probed and my breasts squeezed by a fat, slovenly government agent who smelled bad and could barely speak English (when fluent English is a "job requirement" and the uniform should be worn neatly and with pride) just because I was wearing a skirt, was offensive to me. Certainly I did not die from that, and I did survive it without bruising, so if you want to say I am whining because I don't think I should have to go through that, just because I want to board an airplane, so be it. You are entitled to your opinion, as we all are.
But that experience, so far from what John Pistole and Janet Napolitano say it should be, is wrong. It should not be required of pax unless there has been an alarm or report of a problem or suspicious actions, ie "secondary screening." Money spent on that silly theater should be spent on real security that protects us. There is danger out there and I want my tax dollars to go to thwarting real danger.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Feb 3, 2012 10:48:52 GMT -5
Kristin, none of us thinks that is right. We are all troubled by the consequences of 9/11, and that Chertoff could have profited by decisions that should have been made with total objectivity and respect for citizens' rights is disgraceful.
I think BB's point was that, in a world where whole countries are ravaged, women and girls violently raped and beaten after seeing their husbands and fathers slain, where random explosions are a fact of daily life (not to mention the slaughter in countries where there isn't even a pretense at government), our outrage over intrusive searches may seem whiny.
We surely haven't solved the need for greater security comfortably and smoothly. Making it up as we go along has led to some untenable compromises, but loonies continue to abound. I believe the real mistakes in judgment were made when we treated this as a war, as if an enemy army were about to invade, instead of thinking through just what we needed to deter groups and individuals acting as guerrilla killers.
I heard an Israeli security expert on NPR shortly after 9/11. He was contemptuous of our outrage at what has been standard in Israel for decades. They've continued to improve their methods, but no one argues against stringent security measures. Unlike Israel, we are not a tiny country surrounded by huge, well-armed countries bent on our total destruction. Still, when I put myself back into that terrible time after 9/11, watching the mail for white powder and hearing almost daily about Westerners being tortured and beheaded, I don't think people were wrong to be frightened. Understandably, we reacted quickly and sometimes foolishly. Homeland Security was born on the fly and i'm not sure it has helped at all. Agency silos still seem uncoordinated and jealous of their turf, which leads to the myriad assaults on our liberties that the ACLU speaker addressed, not just TSA invasive searches.
When I flew last you reassured me that, for the most part, the dangers of submitting to the screening were minimal. Obviously, dangers to pregnant women and to TSA agents themselves have to be mitigated. The system does keep changing; I think they're trying to get it right.
I am not sickened by my fellow citizens nor by myself. I don't think getting on a plane without staging some act of civil disobedience means we've rolled over and played dead. I could list any number of assaults on our freedoms that have nothing to do with TSA - for starters, the national push for voter IDs that looks very much like a method of rounding up and tracking every citizen by data-mining and RFID tracking - and I know I'm not alone.
But I do get tired. I do want to listen to madrigals or Janis Joplin and not spend 90% of my life on high alert. That doesn't make me or the millions like me moribund.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 3, 2012 16:04:10 GMT -5
Excellent observations Gail, and well put (Whata weird word, put).
I have a different perspective on the erosion of civil liberties. Thirty years ago I discovered crimes of poverty and decided to maintain my ties to and friendships in the community of the impoverished. I have been broke in my life but never impoverished. I am intelligent and have always been confident enough to bully and lie my way into the best industrial jobs. I have fought some of the laws that unfairly target the poor. My protest has landed me in jail several times. But I repeat myself senselessly since people who are not poor think that crimes of poverty are really crimes.
Next week I will go to court for my stubborn nature and protests and the deal that the prosecutor has offered is Five days in jail — "Whatever costs you the most money" is my answer to that.
I will spend that time with men that are in on traffic warrants, camping, domestic violence/violating a no contact order, Shoplifting, mental illness, and a few criminals.
My point is: if you feel that you are being oppressed This is not the place for productive protest. Make yourself a cardboard sign find some fellow protesters and plant yourself in front of your favorite airport until you get arrested... And don't smile when the press gets there.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Feb 3, 2012 21:36:45 GMT -5
Gee, I've never been in jail (except visiting...)
I have spent a great part of my life working in social services though, so does that give me a pass?
I have always felt that I richly deserved affluence, but it has eluded me. I've fully explored the range of the middle class however. Now that I'm on a "fixed income", it looks like affluence won't be mine in this lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 4, 2012 2:41:54 GMT -5
Oh Jane, You are just too sweet to be human.
I'm not judging any-one. I'm just saying that there has never been a time in this countries history when the civil liberties of some portion of the population wasn't being trampled on. That is not to say that we deal with our internal problems as poorly as some of the Old Worlds anachronistic methods.
We are the New world though. The hopes and dreams of an entire species depends upon our using the resources of this continent wisely and we are wasting them on toys, squabbles over antiquated philosophies, and unreasonable fear.
I respect you for sticking up for what you believe in K But I have never heard your solution maybe I missed it.
Facebook went public today. There will be 100 new millionaires in this country tomorrow. lets hope they spend it wisely.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Feb 4, 2012 8:06:50 GMT -5
"The hopes and dreams of an entire species depends upon our using the resources of this continent wisely and we are wasting them on toys, squabbles over antiquated philosophies, and unreasonable fear."
Well said (or put), Roges! I was listening to "Science Friday" about all the wonderful new scientific discoveries being made, and thought, "All well and good, but we're going to use up the planet so it scarcely matters."
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 4, 2012 13:01:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Feb 4, 2012 15:28:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 4, 2012 18:24:27 GMT -5
Several buggers ugly to all but their mothers and lovers.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 4, 2012 20:11:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Feb 12, 2012 10:35:15 GMT -5
Today the NY Times started a series on the cost of govt. safety net programs, who benefits from them, and projected increases that will raise the debt. It's long (6 pages) and detailed, focusing in this installment on a MN country just north of the metro area that I would never have dreamed is so challenged. There are several good graphics and a poll that is enlightening. I'll just excerpt some of one family's experience.
LINDSTROM, Minn. — Ki Gulbranson owns a logo apparel shop, deals in jewelry on the side and referees youth soccer games. He makes about $39,000 a year and wants you to know that he does not need any help from the federal government.
He says that too many Americans lean on taxpayers rather than living within their means..... Yet this year, as in each of the past three years, Mr. Gulbranson, 57, is counting on a payment of several thousand dollars from the federal government, a subsidy for working families called the earned-income tax credit. He has signed up his three school-age children to eat free breakfast and lunch at federal expense. And Medicare paid for his mother, 88, to have hip surgery twice.
There is little poverty here in Chisago County, northeast of Minneapolis, where cheap housing for commuters is gradually replacing farmland. But Mr. Gulbranson and many other residents who describe themselves as self-sufficient members of the American middle class and as opponents of government largess are drawing more deeply on that government with each passing year.
Dozens of benefits programs provided an average of $6,583 for each man, woman and child in the county in 2009, a 69 percent increase from 2000 after adjusting for inflation. In Chisago, and across the nation, the government now provides almost $1 in benefits for every $4 in other income.
Older people get most of the benefits, primarily through Social Security and Medicare, but aid for the rest of the population has increased about as quickly through programs for the disabled, the unemployed, veterans and children.
The government safety net was created to keep Americans from abject poverty, but the poorest households no longer receive a majority of government benefits. A secondary mission has gradually become primary: maintaining the middle class from childhood through retirement. The share of benefits flowing to the least affluent households, the bottom fifth, has declined from 54 percent in 1979 to 36 percent in 2007, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis published last year.
And as more middle-class families like the Gulbransons land in the safety net in Chisago and similar communities, anger at the government has increased alongside.
As I said, the graphics are revealing. Most people get more than they put in, but the poll shows most people think the opposite. They also use programs they criticize. Most over 65 (like me) know they couldn't make it without Medicare, which is the program that will break the bank. It's a knotty, painful conundrum.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 12, 2012 10:50:04 GMT -5
It's something I've said many times: many of the federal benefits perceived as "for the poor" are really assisting the middle class.
While many "conservatives" rail against intrusive federal government, carry their signs advocating a drowning of the federal government, they gorge themselves at the federal trough, raking in the "free" goodies. The hypocrisy is astounding to me. The arrogance too.
Yet how could it be otherwise? Half of Americans pay no federal income tax, so by extension the vast majority receive much more than they pay in, and the bulk of income taxes are paid by a very small percentage of the population.
That is the case even though millionaires pay an average of 15% since the term "income tax" applies to "earned income" and there are different lower rates for capital gains, etc.
Of course the vast majority of people 65+ (and the 15% of Medicare beneficiaries who are under 65 but totally and permanently disabled) couldn't make it without Medicare. The average cost per year per Medicare beneficiary is well over $10,000. Only the wealth can afford that.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Feb 12, 2012 13:13:22 GMT -5
Yes, fascinating article in the Times about entitlement programs.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Feb 12, 2012 16:29:40 GMT -5
Is it really half that pay no taxes? I've always wondered about that. If people are too poor to reach the taxable income threshold, they still pay into Soc. Sec. and Medicare. They're not exactly freeloaders (though I don't think you meant that, K) so much as too old or disabled to work. Some can't find work. I have a friend (good man, but boy, does he need to stop listening to Rush) who righteously says, "everyone should pay taxes." He hasn't really thought about it at all, and as a government accountant who has had a good job with good benefits and a good pension, he doesn't know the meaning of scraping by.
That article struck me especially because the interviewees were all people who'd been buoyed up by govt. support of one kind or another. Some said they got too many benefits (the man with the disabled daughter!) but still take them. Of course, they should take them - and stop feeling guilty!
And I wonder how many of the very rich or corporations pay no taxes? Of course, everyone pays sales taxes - unless you're the woman who said she's bought no Christmas presents or even clothes for 5 years. I suppose she has to buy taxable soap, shampoo and TP. She may not have a car, so she pays gas taxes in the form of bus and cab fare. And her rent includes property taxes. Still she is barely making it under the poverty line and seen as paying no taxes.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 12, 2012 17:45:58 GMT -5
I was referring specifically to federal income taxes, so yes, half of all filers pay no federal income taxes.
I definitely was not saying they are freeloaders. In fact, I would point out the opposite: people pay SS and Medicare tax throughout their working lives with the understanding that those are the equivalent of "insurance premiums" for Medicare and "retirement savings" for Social Security. That the government has squandered their Social Security funds (to hide the extent of the deficit and to enrich their influential buddies), and erred in its actuarial calculations w/r/t Medicare is not the fault of the workers who receive the benefits they paid for.
There are also people who work for low wages, yet they pay SS, Medicare and sales taxes on every dime they earn/spend. As such, those are regressive taxes.
An "easy fix" for the alleged looming Social Security shortfall is to extend the current tax to all income, or even just earned income. Currently it cuts off at around $110,000, unlike the Medicare tax which is imposed on all earned income.
Haven't seen the stats recently but I suspect very few corporations pay "no taxes." The US corporate tax rate of 35% is among the highest of all developed nations. That is why so many companies move as much of operations as possible overseas.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 12, 2012 18:41:22 GMT -5
//I respect you for sticking up for what you believe in K But I have never heard your solution maybe I missed it. //
Roger, if you were asking about my suggestions for airport security, yes I have suggested a solution. But it bears repeating:
Return to the way security was done on September 10, 2001: Walk-through metal detectors and Explosive Trace Detection (ETD). There was no security failure on 9/11, as box cutters were not a prohibited item at the time.
Since we have already spent millions on them, MMW (or possibly backscatter machines) could be reserved for those who cannot use the WTMD (typically because they have metal implants) or as a secondary measure for those who alarm the WTMD or ETD.
The two most important and effective changes in security happened with minutes, or at most a few weeks, of the first hi-jacking:
1. Passenger and crew attitudes changed, from one of cooperation with hi-jackers until all were safely arrived in Cuba, to one of immediate resistance. This occurred in time for United 93 to be crashed into a Pennsylvania field instead of the White House or the US Capitol.
2. Reinforce aircraft cockpit doors so that no one can break in during flight.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 12, 2012 20:53:55 GMT -5
Hmm Have you ever seen ceramic knives? The sharpest cutlery available. Single shot pistols or shotguns can also be made from a single tube of carbon fiber. Explosives can be concealed from sniffing in sealed containers. I don't like being searched (not because I'm afraid to have my balls fondled) nor do I like the dangers of irradiating children and at risk people but we suffer the folly of having put all of our resources into an expensive and indefensible mode of travel. Support high speed rail if you care about the safety and economic security of your grandchildren. How about billboards with this at every airport Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 12, 2012 20:56:59 GMT -5
My bumper sticker design
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 12, 2012 22:16:28 GMT -5
Too late, TSA is already searching trains (and buses and vehicles on highways). Anyway, most studies show that outside certain urban corridors rail travel is not an economically viable alternative to air travel in the US.
And yes I have heard of ceramic knives, non-metallic guns and a variety of other devices that some believe will be detected by AIT equipment and not WTMD; unfortunately repeated Red Team testing shows AIT doesn't work. Though explosives are not an in-cabin threat, the risk remains significant in the cargo hold. But 10+ years after 9/11, most cargo is not tested for explosives.
Not to worry - a knife or a gun will not bring down a plane, as the TSA points out every time a knife or gun is discovered on a plane (at least a weekly occurrence).
The Israelis - who understand real security - laugh at our foolish obsession with strip searching at airports. They wisely do not allow terrorists to get to the airport in the first place. We should do the same, by diverting money wasted on TSA to agencies that are effective.
I think most adults are not "afraid" of having their genitalia caressed by TSA clerks; they are offended by it because most recognize that it has nothing to do with security and everything to do with an intrusive government and its money-seeking cronies.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Feb 13, 2012 1:23:50 GMT -5
Well, there was that little matter of the underwear bomber.These measures don't come out of thin air, but unfortunately we're always one step behind. I suppose there's an advantage in discouraging all the amateurs who talk big but haven't the ability or wherewithal to circumvent the current system.
Terrorists have struck trains in Spain and India (and England? I forget) so we can't really see them as less vulnerable than planes. In fact, it would seem to me that trains are more vulnerable, given the number of stops and points of access. I haven't boarded a train in 12 years, so I have no idea what security on them is like. Rog, did you ever take your train ride around the country with your mom?
Anyway, whether or not trains are as cheap as planes, we will have to get serious about new transportation that doesn't rely on fossil fuels. The time will come, so we might as well plan before costs increase even higher. Might could save the planet, too.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 13, 2012 2:17:49 GMT -5
The following should be read in moderate tones with occasional emphasis. A slight smile is required
Planes are in the air you stop a plane and everyone dies. Hijack a plane and there is no counter defense. That is not true on the ground....
Prove this statement I can find no evidence for it's validity.
High speed rail has been proven in many foriegn markets and the US has excellent terrain for it. The national highway system has already laid the ground work for it.
You don't believe anything the TSA says but you believe this? When they are obviously trying to save face.
With all due respect and caution — the Israelis have either been at war or refugees from said wars for the last 4000 years. Never in their history have they, as a people, been at peace. They have been banished no less than 5 times, maybe more. Their God allegedly granted them a little speck of moderately arid desert and they are willing to lie cheat and steal to have it. Their God also told them that they must suffer for their sins (Jesus didn't die for them).
It's racial self flagellation.
So where is the Tea Party against the TSA? Why aren't folks occupying airports. I have to assume that people are deathly afraid of being trapped in a plane at 20,000 feet with a ceramic knife to their throats that will sever their neck to their spinal cord in one stroke. Or that they are a bit leery about skydiving without a parachute because someone blew a hole in the cabin with an undetectable explosive.
Keep on protesting current methods though — someone will soon enough come up with a method to read peoples minds. That would certainly put an end to the shady gouging from Wall street.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 13, 2012 3:35:39 GMT -5
Well, there was that little matter of the underwear bomber.These measures don't come out of thin air, but unfortunately we're always one step behind. I suppose there's an advantage in discouraging all the amateurs who talk big but haven't the ability or wherewithal to circumvent the current system. Terrorists have struck trains in Spain and India (and England? I forget) so we can't really see them as less vulnerable than planes. In fact, it would seem to me that trains are more vulnerable, given the number of stops and points of access. I haven't boarded a train in 12 years, so I have no idea what security on them is like. Rog, did you ever take your train ride around the country with your mom? Anyway, whether or not trains are as cheap as planes, we will have to get serious about new transportation that doesn't rely on fossil fuels. The time will come, so we might as well plan before costs increase even higher. Might could save the planet, too. The big problem with Rail is that People do not want to sacrifice their pleasures for their grandchildren like our grandparents were willing to sacrifice for us. They were paying much more income tax when the modern highway system was built In 1950 the rate for incomes $24,000 - $28,000 was 39.13% and in 1960 it was 43% —— $52,000 - $64,000 56.42% and 62.0%. That was for individual taxes , Married filing jointly. Most of the older societies that have suffered booms and busts and overpopulation for several centuries understand that we live on a finite planet. We are still living in the wild west of unlimited resources. The system will likely have to fail utterly a couple more time in order to face reality. I have not gone on the trip. I am still trying to proactively simplify my lifestyle to accommodate my aging and income. Plus I have to get Kirby civilized. Trains have been attacked but as I said to K trains are not 20,000 feet in the air. Trains are not potential guided missiles either. This is a good discussion though. It seems to have upped our guest hit rate since doc started banging away at the TSA. Probably the CIA and the FBI monitoring key words. Hope Trusty is making a few bucks off us.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 13, 2012 9:59:05 GMT -5
As far as air security, I am far from a defender of the Israelis, having seen what they have done to the Palestinians, as well as what they have done to their environment with their agricultural techniques. But they are very good at security. The underwear bomber may have represented a security failure - he was known to be a terrorist with mal-intent but he was allowed to board anyway. There may have been a decision to let him board, even though that endangered 300 people on the flight, in order to trace his US contacts. He was actually brought down by a responsible and alert Dutch citizen on the plane. The GAO has published their conclusion that it is doubtful if the current AIT would have caught him. ETD would have been positive and an effective "catch." ETD routinely catches those who have gardened or went to the firing range yesterday(nitrates), used certain contact lens solutions and hand lotions containing glycerine, or take NTG for heart problems. There may have been FAM's (Federal Air Marshals) on that plane who could also have brought him down. They are armed and can fire their weapons, as studies have apparently determined that up to a certain number of bullet holes will not bring down a jet. FAM's are on many flights and are an effective deterrent. The actual numbers are not publicized for obvious reasons, and since they have given up wearing suits and sitting only in 1B, 1C and 2B and 2C it is harder to spot them now. One can still often see their ankle holsters and I hope many of them are now seated over the engines back in coach. Also, now that the cockpit doors are hardened steel, a gun is not helpful in hi-jacking a plane. people now know that a terrorist with a weapon should be brought down by pax. A few pax may go down, but that can save the other pax, all of whom would die otherwise. Searching everyone who has something in their underwear has been a general failure, as too many people have adult diapers, menstrual pads, and ostomy bags. Then there is "The Tampon Paradox." Regarding trains. They are now the cheapest way to ship cargo, moving a ton of product 1,000 miles on a gallon of gas. Most train tracks in the US are owned by cargo trains, meaning that they cannot be used for high speed trains; those tracks will need to be separately built. See the news about the attempts at SF to LA for the reasons why this isn't happening. TGV is very successful in France, where it is 500 miles from Paris to Marseille and the trip takes 3 hours, city center to city center. Amtrak routes from DC to Philly, NYC and Boston are also very successful, trains are full even though cars have been added. this even though there is no high-speed rail. But for NY or DC to the west coast, even high speed rail would take a full 24+ hour day. The airfare for that route ranges from $300 to $3,000 with the higher fares paid by business people who have to be there covering the lower leisure fares. To be part of a national and global economy, there are many business people who "have to be there" and taking up 3 -4 days to do that "won't fly." You are right about taxes being quite low in the US, and most politicians are all about denying that tax raises are in the near future - for paying our debts even, let alone building expensive new infrastructure. That is where the Tea Party & pols are, with the exception of Ron Paul: www.dailypaul.com/207751/official-campaign-money-bomb-end-the-tsa-is-live-nowI can't do any more research right now. You have to ask those questions when I have time to search on the weekend! But if I have time, I'll find the citations tonight. Except for the feds who helped the underwear bomber as that evidence is circumstantial, no feds will admit in public that they endangered 300 people like that.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 13, 2012 13:33:32 GMT -5
Would you think differently if Pax was your son?
Dirty Harry is a myth K. I don't care how well trained a person is; firing a weapon under stress, in a crowded space, most likely through a human shield, and against multiple determined and trained adversaries, has a minimal chance of being effective. You hear it all the time
"Police fired 20 rounds and the suspect was killed by a single shot to the chest The suspect was alone in the drivers seat in an open parking lot."
It is more likely that one or two of the FAMs would be the first to die in a well organized plot. Hell they probably do their pre-flight readiness checks in a room called the Federal Air Marshals Lounge.
Of course the tracks would have to made from scratch but the routes are already laid out by the Interstate Highway system with their 100 foot medians. There is Mag-Lev, carbon fiber, Nano tubes and roto-molded plastics. We've been re-contouring the continent for a century and a half — we can move a mountain in a week.The problem is separating Americans from their ideal of individual and private Empire — Making the American dream into the New American Reality.
You can lead a Yank to wisdom but you can't make him think.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 14, 2012 20:19:43 GMT -5
Roger, "pax" usually is my son or my daughters, as all 3 kids fly more than I do. So no, I am not worried about air travel, especially since the drive to the airport is far more dangerous.
Every day in the US, more than 2 million pax board one of 28,000 commercial flights, and the global figures are about three times higher. I just haven't heard of all these mid-air gunfights you are referring to. Since TSA publishes that they find 15 - 20 firearms every week in carry-ons, and test results suggest they miss most weapons (60 - 100%), I would imagine if anyone really wanted a shoot-out at 35,000 feet, they could have it.
I've nothing against trains, though no energy for promoting them, but if you are motivated, by all means, please have at it. You're certainly correct that the current income tax burden is relatively low and will need to be increased, but I think time crunch is more of a driving factor in air travel. For example, if I wanted to go to the funeral in Florida, I would have at most 3 days off work, so air travel is the only way I could attend.
Almost half of working Americans have no paid time off work for vacation or sick time, and of those who have paid vacation, most have only one or two weeks. If they are not going far, they'll drive so they have a convenient schedule and transportation after arrival; if it's a long distance, they'll fly
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Feb 14, 2012 20:31:18 GMT -5
Jane, I see these news reports that Santorum is leading or tied with Romney in Michigan polls and the primary is coming up very soon - Feb 28, same as Arizona.
Do you have the kind of primary where you could register Republican and vote for Romney (or Paul if you so choose, I'm assuming you would never cast a vote for Newt) as a vote against Santorum?
I missed the deadline for voter registration here in AZ, but I suspect Santorum will win big here. The Dems have been running anti-Romney ads for a long time here. They featured a clip of Romney saying that he thought home prices should be allowed to drop further, "bottom out" before recovery. That didn't go over so well in a place where up to 50% of homeowners are underwater with their mortgages.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 15, 2012 1:30:33 GMT -5
Heh hehheh, So here we are doc Two intelligent humans championing lost causes. Arguing against the ebb and flow of blind progress. You arguing against irradiation when radiation and chemical pollution have been killing people for at least a hundred years — in this country. Arguing against oppressive security tactics when that battle was lost when J. Edgar Hoover was head of the FBI.
Me I'm arguing (with myself) for mass transit when that battle was lost in the late 40s when the big three killed the public rail system and easy financing made private transportation available to everyone.
The past is our present the present is our future and ever shall we, as a people, battle. Battle is for the young though, for it is their world. In the waning quarter of our lives we can only offer wisdom if it be ours to offer.; and god help them if we fail that.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Feb 15, 2012 2:10:14 GMT -5
Merely to justify my statements as to the loss of civil rights. in 2010 there were 13,120,947 arrests in the US you can easily double that if you include traffic arrests. each one of those people were handcuffed and body searched
If you consider the number of people in the federal and state correctional facilities in the same yea • On December 31, 2010, state and federal correctional authorities had jurisdiction over 1,605,127 prisoners it means that less than 10% of them (excluding traffic) were convicted of a major crime
These are the highest arrest rates in the world and we comprise only less than 10% of the world population.
One would have to conclude that either we live in the most dangerous place in the world or civil rights are a secondary consideration.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Feb 15, 2012 10:31:35 GMT -5
Just this morning a friend sent a link to a Vanity Fair article that relates to this discussion. www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/01/Todd-Purdum-on-National-Security It's in a bigger context - the transformation of our country that began with the Cold War. A man named Kennan, a diplomat and then key architect of Cold War national security, lived to be 101 and ended up deploring what had evolved from what was originally a policy of diplomatic/political containment. Never before had we gone from war to continued militarization, and we got involved in other nations far beyond what was envisioned by the founders of our country. Kennan's papers are available for researchers, from the original Stalin era notes to letters and speeches into the 21st Century. He ties the military focus to the rise in secrecy as a constant presence in the thinking of national leaders. I want to write on and on because this piece is so compelling, but really, you must read it for yourselves. Here's just one little quote that relates to our discussion of the visible, tangible evidence of security taking over our lives. Modern Washington would be all but unrecognizable to anyone who lived or worked in it prior to World War II. Before Pearl Harbor, if you were driving down Pennsylvania Avenue in a convertible and it started to rain, you could pull under the North Portico of the White House and put your top up. Now you can’t even drive down Pennsylvania Avenue, because it has been blocked to all vehicular traffic since the Oklahoma City bombing, in 1995. When you go to the neighborhood Safeway in Bethesda, Maryland, you can’t make a cell-phone call, because the store is across the street from the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, and all service is blocked. London, Paris, and Berlin do not wrap their public buildings in such suffocating cordons of security, and the fortress-like physiognomy is merely the most obvious outward manifestation of the profound ways that Washington has changed inside.I'm reminded of why I subscribed to Vanity Fair, despite the nauseating celebrity drivel and glossy fashion ads. It carries terrific articles, and the magazine is cheap because of all those glossy ads. What a contrast! Kennan probably read VF with brown paper covers. And I agree, rog, that our determination to lock up every "criminal" is connected to the wider defensive mentality and loss of civil rights.
|
|