The Lone Dissenter

Where's My Tea?

2010-05-02T22:42:00.007-04:00

I believe in smaller government.

I believe in fiscal responsibility.

I believe in lower taxes for the bottom 98%.

I believe in the Bill of Rights.

I believe in democracy.

I love America.

I am a Socialist.

So why can't I come to the party?

No Change But Real Change

2008-02-24T20:29:00.005-05:00

Here’s a safe bet: the two major political parties will nominate Presidential candidates from the corporate wings of their parties.
What will that leave us in this election year?
Corporate control as usual.
If this happens, we have two choices – throw in the towel.
Or fight back.
If we choose to fight back, here’s a good option:
Join with a person whose life is one of dedicated service to the public interest.
To help him organize a political campaign in every state against corporate control over our lives.
Luckily, that person – Ralph Nader – is running such a campaign.
But he will need active and informed citizens in every Congressional district in the country.
He will need volunteers.
He will need funds.
He will need dedication.
That’s why I’ve signed on at Nader’s campaign web site at www.votenader.org.
Check it out.
And spread the word.
In 2008, it’s either sit back and watch the drift.
Or get off the couch and fight back.

Dilbert: Innocent Cartoon or Socialist Propaganda?

2008-02-01T20:36:00.000-05:00

There used to be a site out there questioning whether Scott Adam's Dilbert^TMwas really an innocuous comic strip or some form of communist propaganda. It was put up by a student out at Carnegie Mellon as I recall, and was taken down after UFS's lawyers didn't buy his "fair use" argument. Truth be told he did exaggerated the dialog to make his point, but I always thought Scott made the point all by himself even if it was unintentional. When it comes right down to it, blue and white collar workers are both cogs in the capitalist machine. To be sure their plights are different, and they are oppressed in different ways, but a worker is a worker no matter what color their collar.

So in this spirit I added the Official Dilbert Widget to The Lone Dissenter. It would be even funnier if it weren't true.

Bernie Sanders to speak at DSA National Convention

2007-09-30T20:50:00.000-04:00

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will be the keynote speaker at DSA's National Convention, addressing the convention dinner Friday, November 9th. This will mark the first time that a U.S. senator, let alone a self-identified socialist senator, has addressed a socialist organization in the United States. The convention will be held November 9-11th in Atlanta.

Each convention provides an opportunity to measure the growth of the Democratic Socialists of America. Analysis of the 2007 convention apportionment shows net growth of 28.3% over the last two years and just over 40% since the 2003 convention in Detroit.

Switching Parties

2007-06-22T22:32:00.000-04:00

After many years, with a sad heart and more than a few regrets, I’ve decided to leave the Socialist Party. My campaign last year, as well as events before and after, took a lot out of me and to say that I’m feeling burned out is putting it mildly. But there is more to the story than that.

I still consider myself a democratic socialist (which is why I remain a member of DSA) but I no longer believe that the SP USA is “America’s voice for democratic socialism.” They were at one point, but have begun to move in a different direction - a direction I do not want to go.

So this left me a voter without a home, or rather party. I did not have to look long for a new one though. Today I changed my party affiliation to Green. Like the DSA’s work, the Green Party’s 10 Key Values is something I can totally support. And besides, like a friend of mine says, before you can be Red 'ya gota be Green.

While I'm serious about wanting to take a break from politics, I've decided I'm going to keep this blog around, since I suspect I will still want to say what’s on my mind from time to time.

State Income Tax Reform

2007-04-15T22:40:00.000-04:00

Say what you will about the Democrats, at least they tax and spend. The Republicans, well, they just seem to spend. But more importantly, neither is doing anything meaningful about the growing gap between the rich and the poor.

What we need in Pennsylvania is a progressive income tax structure that would provide a source of revenue while simultaneously adjusting an individual's gross income towards the state mean. This is also referred to as an averaging tax. The beautiful thing about the averaging tax is that it has the appeal of a progressive income tax while at the same time serving as a mechanism for redistributing the wealth of society. Yet it could replace our current income tax without initially changing how much you owe the Commonwealth on April 15th. Sound intriguing?

There are only four things you need to calculate how much you owe. The first is your gross income for the previous year, which you would get from your W2s. The second is the average income for that year, which would come with your PA-40 form. The third is the mean adjustment percentage, which defines how much your gross income is adjusted towards the state mean. The last is the base tax rate, which would be a flat rate like we have now.

Here’s how the averaging tax works. Your gross income is going to differ from the state mean by some amount. The mean adjustment percentage adjusts your income towards the average income a percentage of that amount, raising it if you are below and lowering it if you are above. (If you are above the average income then this is taken out in addition. If you are below the average income then you can deduct this later on.)

You then apply the base tax rate to your adjusted income. If you were below the average income then you subtract your adjustment from this amount. If you were above the average income then you add this amount to your adjustment. The result is what you either pay or get back. It’s that simple.

As you can see the averaging tax is a progressive income tax that doesn’t use arbitrary income brackets. This eliminates the phenomenon known as bracket creep where peoples’ rate jumps when they get pushed into a higher tax bracket. Under the averaging tax, the same rate is applied equally to all people yet those with more income who can afford to pay more taxes do so.

Also notice that the averaging tax itself does not limit how much anyone can make. All it does is ensure that those at the top pay their fair share while those at the bottom do not have to shoulder a disproportionate burden. Those in the middle would be largely unaffected. The combination of the base tax rate and the mean adjustment percentage allow us to fund much needed state programs while ensuring the difference between the richest and poorest does not become too excessive, both of which are in society's best interest.

The averaging tax is easy to understand since you don’t need a booklet with pages upon pages of instructions. And it is quick and painless to figure out how much you owe since the formula isn’t that complicated. The worksheet just isn't straightforward, its literally only three lines:

Your Adjustment Amount = (Your Gross Income - State Mean Income) * Mean Adjustment Percentage

Your Adjusted Income = Your Gross Income - Your Adjustment Amount

Taxed Owed = Your Adjusted Income * Base Tax Rate + Your Adjusted Amount

Let’s look at a couple of examples. In 2004 the per capita income in Pennsylvania was $33,348. To make the math easier we’ll round that to $35,000.

Say Jane Smith’s gross income was $25,000. She is $10,000 under the mean income. If the mean adjustment percentage were 2%, her income would be adjusted up $200 (2% of the gap) to $25,200. She would then pay 3.07% of $25,200, or $932.40. So her total tax owed would be $932.40 minus $200, or $732.40. Compare this to the $925.00 she would pay under our current tax system.

John Smith’s gross income was $45,000. He is $10,000 over the mean income. If the mean adjustment percentage were again 2%, his income would be adjusted down $200 (2% of the gap) to $44,800. He would then pay 3.07% of $44,800, or $1657.60. So his total tax owed would be $1657.60 plus $200, or $1857.60. Compare this to the $1,665.00 he would pay under our current tax system.

The key to the averaging tax is the mean adjustment percentage. The larger the mean adjustment percentage is made, the more progressive the tax structure becomes. Initially, if the base tax rate were kept at the current 3.07 and the mean adjustment percentage started out at 0%, taxpayers wouldn’t notice the change at all. No tax reform has been easier on the pocket book to implement!

Slowly, over time, the mean adjustment percentage could then be increased to narrow the gap between the rich and the poor. I like to think of it as knob that can be turned to socialize society. The averaging tax is but one example of a social democratic reform measure that can bring us one step closer to a better society.

2006 Cumulative Election Results

2007-01-23T21:50:00.000-05:00

SUMMARY REPORT OFFICIAL RESULTS
RUN DATE: 01/23/07 GENERAL ELECTION, NOV. 7, 2006
RUN TIME: 03:31 PM CHESTER COUNTY, PA

REPRESENTATIVE IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 26TH DISTRICT
Vote for NOT MORE THAN 1
(WITH 33 OF 33 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
TIM HENNESSEY (REP) . . . . . . . 13,703 (81.84%)
JEFF M. BRINDLE (SPU) . . . . . . . . 2,873 (17.16%)
WRITE-IN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 (1.00%)
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,743

Planet Clutter

2006-08-24T21:28:00.000-04:00

Today the International Astronomical Union voted to adopt a new definition of what constitutes a planet. Sadly, Pluto has been demoted along with many other bodies that were vying for planetary status.

I for one applaud this decision. Our solar system was suffering from "planetary clutter." 9 planets?? Seriously, that's just way too confusing. Think of the poor school children struggling to memorize their names. I've seen more than one reduced to tears trying to figure out what comes after Mars. That's just not right...

If you read the IAU's decision carefully though, they've also increased the moon threshold. Using Jupiter and Saturn (by far the biggest and therefore most representational of our diverse system) as the rule, all planets must have at least a dozen moons to qualify as a planet. Sadly this decision will result in Mercury, Venus, Mars, and our own Earth loosing their planetary status unless they manage to collect more moons before the next election, err I mean..eclipse.

The peoples of Earth have appealed this decision, but given the slow speed of interplanetary spacecraft our appeal will likely not be heard for at least 1.2 billion years. The little green men on Mars decided not to appeal this decision, but is attempting to meet the new moon requirement. Many of its moons though are being thrown out by the court as merely being large asteroids. So it looks like Mars will loose its planetary status as well.