A public record of some of my thoughts. Feel free to comment, but don't expect me to respond.
P&C discuss the Georgia elections and the prospect of Democrats controlling the Senate, then address the big story — the attack on the Capitol.
There are a few important points to be made. First, this kind of violence needs to be condemned in no uncertain terms. Second, Trump’s behavior and language was completely unacceptable. Third, the long-term implications of this event are hard to predict, but will be very negative for Trump.
The title might change a little, and I’d have a professional do the actual layout, but I’m curious what you think of the general concept. Does it look interesting?
The boys drink and review Midnight Lager by Stella Artois, then discuss the disproportionate impact of fines on the poor.
A fine that is a nuisance for your average person can push a poor person into a spiral that results in prison — the so-called “ticket to prison pipeline.” What’s the right reaction to that? A judge recently proposed that the poor should be exempt from some fines. Is that the right answer? P&C don’t think so.
I’m reading reports that Trump supporters have torn down metal security barricades at the bottom of the Capitol steps and have skirmished with police.
I sympathize with anyone who wants an open and public investigation into allegations the election was stolen. I am not convinced there was enough fraud to change the results, but I also reject out of hand the claim that there is “no evidence,” or that “the courts have already vetted these allegations.” Both claims are false. Whether the allegations of cheating have merit or not, there is no question there has been a conspiracy of silence and cover-up about the allegations, and that is bad for the country. There needs to be a fair, public and honest investigation.
These people do have a right peaceably to assemble and petition the government. But when protests get out of hand, the police need to intervene.
It’s a dead certainty that the media will magnify the threat of pro-Trump demonstrators, just as they minimize the threat of leftwing demonstrators, so don’t believe everything you hear. But as a matter of principle, protests that become violent need to be shut down and people need to go to jail.
I sympathize with people who say the rich should pay more in taxes. A country needs money to operate, that money has to come from somewhere, and it makes sense for those who are the most fortunate to kick in a little extra. How much extra is always a matter of debate, but I think most people agree that some form of progressive income tax is appropriate, and we are all frustrated when we hear that some big corporation is paying little or no tax.
A lot of people believe the U.S. doesn’t impose enough tax on the wealthy, and with the changes coming in our national politics, this will be one the agenda again.
I’m not an expert on taxation, but it seems to me that a major problem with this idea is that it’s often easy for the rich to move. Countries and states and cities compete to attract new businesses so they can get the tax revenue, and one of the ways they do this is to lower taxes — because a lower portion of a big number is often better than a higher portion of a small number. If California decides the rich aren’t paying enough and raises the tax rate, people (and companies) will move to more tax-friendly states. And if the United States raises its taxes, people (and companies) will move to more tax-friendly countries.
Do the people who want to raise taxes believe they can force the rich to stay where they are?