Tag: Politics

Let Us Not Have Beggars in Our Land. On Inequality.

What must we do to restore fairness in our nation?

All of us should try to do our best, always.

Some people try and fail. Some try and give up. Some don’t even try.

The obstacles can be great and sometimes they are too many.

Do those who fail or give up or simply don’t even try, deserve anything?

My opinion is that our nation can afford basic support for all our citizens, regardless.

If you were born in this land or have met the requirements to stay here legally, then you’re entitled.

Our nation can afford to give everyone a certain basic income to cover food and clothing and a place to live and essential health care and a basic cell phone and a certain amount for public transportation.

Our nation can afford that now. Today. Regardless of whether a person wants to work or not.

Does it not seem wiser to believe that most people want to do their best, considering their abilities?

If we think that some people want to get away with not making their best effort, then that’s on them. But, as a nation, we can afford to carry those folks.

We can, because there are enough productive people in our nation to make it possible, so no one has to be a beggar in our land.

We’re not rich as a nation because we have tight restrictions on those at the bottom.

We’re rich because there are many amongst us with great productive capacity.

We have not become the cradle for the many industries that have arisen in our nation because we were restricting the poor.

So why be punitive toward those who are non productive? Why deprive them of the most basic needs?

Some of them may one day want more and then they will try and make the effort. We hope so. We should help motivate them to do better, but if they don’t, so be it.

To make sure we have the funds to provide that basic sustenance for the less advantaged, we will need to tax the wealthy, the better off, the most productive, the most talented, the most enlightened, the most gifted.

And why not?

Think of it this way. Who gave you those gifts? Nature did. You worked hard to develop them, yes, and thus many riches and opportunities should go to you. But nature is not fair. It does not give everyone the talents needed to compete effectively.

Do the less advantaged in life want to be poor and miserable and beggars?

No.

Do the less advantaged in life want to live in dangerous neighborhoods?

No.

Do the less advantaged in life deserve their fate?

No.

Do some people avoid work, on purpose, to live off the fat of the land? Sure. But, so what?

Will they climb to the heights of accomplishment? No.

Will they live fruitful lives?

No.

Will they have developed their capacities and experienced the joy that comes with it?

No.

So, I say to you, let them be.

It is a mistake, and a most ungenerous one, for a developed society to add to people’s disadvantages by instituting punishing governmental restrictions.

The gifted should not be punishing the less gifted.

Bloomberg Rising

It certainly looks like it.

When I first heard that he had made up his mind to jump in, I thought it was too late. But no longer. Instead, he appears very well organized (see MikeBloomberg2020) and his plans of action are likely to appeal to the mainstream of the electorate. As such, he will likely draw from ambivalent Trump supporters, particularly those who do not want to see the recent gains in the economy jeopardized by a radical democratic candidate.

Bloomberg brings to the table considerable experience as a three term mayor of New York. New York, mind you, not South Bend, Indiana.

Bloomberg also has a record of extensive commitment and support to liberal causes, not like Mr. Trump whose foundations had questionable finances and whose Trump University had to close under a cloud.

What scandal has been ascribed to Bloomberg? None that I know. Compare Trump.

Experience matters. Character matters.

A man gifted with exceptional business savvy coupled with a commitment to public service is a rare find, indeed. Why waste it?

Is Bloomberg coming forward to enrich himself some more? Absolutely not.

He is coming forward at a very important juncture in our history because he genuinely feels he can make an important contribution. One that is sorely needed at a time when our relations with longtime allies are being frayed, a time when immigration is under attack not only here in the US but in the world at large, a time when climate changes are being ignored by Mr. Trump.

At this crucial moment, Bloomberg is putting himself on the line and saying, ‘I am willing to serve the nation whose institutions and opportunities made possible my success’.

Men or women who have had the chance of savoring success because of their own efforts, are men and women who are generous. And because they are it is then reflected in their broad-minded ideas. Compare the stinginess and narrow mindedness of Mr. Trump.

Is Bloomberg buying the election?

Nonsense. People who say so are not thinking.

Bloomberg is saying that he can finance his campaign, that he does not need any contributions because he can afford it. That does not mean he can buy my vote. Or anyone’s vote.

In the court of public opinion, Bloomberg has to make his case for public support and compete with every candidate in the race.

I, for one, will not hold his wealth against him. That would be silly.

Why rebuff a highly capable and intelligent man because of his billions?

Which brings me to this next point. I have no doubt, that Bloomberg will not hesitate to show his tax returns. Compare Trump. So tell me, who would you then deem to be more trustworthy?

Remember the saying ‘don’t look a gift horse in the mouth?’

That’s where we are, folks.

We have a gift horse in the race and we ought not look him in the mouth.

Let us examine his plans, let us subject him to the greatest scrutiny, please. But let us not rule him out because he has been enormously successful.

Will he be able to go up against Trump? I think so.

Am I ready to vote for him? No.

I need to first see him in a debate. I need to see him under fire. But from what I’ve seen so far, I like Mike.

One final point. Bloomberg has good ideas on immigration. Still, I favor my proposal that we have a National Referendum on Immigration Reform. The issue is complex and should be decided by all Americans. Let us not be afraid of looking at who we are on the subject. We need Borders not Walls. With a National Referendum we will have Borders we will stand by United.

Disclosure: I do not know Bloomberg nor anyone in his circles.

The Broader View: The Importance of Restraint

Trump orders the killing of General Suleimani and top aides and on 1/3/2020, the vehicle they were traveling in after arriving in Baghdad is hit by a rocket fired from a drone. They go up in flames.

Suleimani was in charge of Iran’s military interventions in the region (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Saudi Arabia, Yemen) and thus responsible for much devastation and misery, including the death of Americans.

But how did we get there?

Deeply held rivalries in the area go back many years and have been increased by the establishment of the Israeli state, which we back.

Maintaining our commitment to supporting Israel does not mean, however, giving in to the wishes of their leaders.

The Middle East remains a cauldron of festering enmities shared by millions of people and which will require the concerted effort of enlightened local leaders to mitigate. And it will take many years for that to happen.

There will be no clear winner in that process and it is obvious that for a modicum of peace to be reached, a series of compromises and an abundance of education, restraint and economic development will be needed.

That long term view was the motivation behind the nuclear deal signed in 2015 between the US, Iran, China, France, England, Germany and Russia.

The deal called for Iran to stop the development of nuclear weapons for a 10 year period in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. The point of the deal was to gain us time. Precious time for Iran to develop economically, and for that development to take root in their people and in the surrounding area so that attitudes toward compromise became more amenable.

But that option did not seem sufficiently comforting to Netanyahu and company. They saw the nuclear deal as ‘appeasement’ of Iran. Anyway, it was an Obama idea and what did he know? It well suited Netanyahu’s bellicose instincts that the idea be scrapped.

But the nuclear deal would have been very acceptable to a man like former Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was murdered by an Israeli extremist in 1995. (even developed nations murder their best, like we did JFK and Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy)

Men and Women make a difference. Yitzhak Rabin was a leader with an intelligence, imagination and compassion that Netanyahu has been incapable of emulating.  

When Netanyahu sees Trump become president, he sees his chance to scrap the nuclear deal. And it suited Trump just as well. For Trump, anything Obama did was tainted. And Netanyahu whispered the right words into his ears. Scrap the deal! Make us safer!

Was the signing of the nuclear deal with Iran an abandonment of Israel? Of course not.

We stand by that nation in good and bad times. That commitment has been made.

While the US is strong, Israel will always have a staunch ally and we will go to their side if they are in danger.

But that does not mean that we have to stop efforts at finding a compromise.

Trump, with his limited foresight, could not get it. He does not have that imaginative reach and we are the worse for it.

Iran has vowed retaliation for Suleimani’s death. There is no question that it will come. Such retaliation could take any shape, happen in foreign soil or on our own, be directed toward military installations or toward innocent civilians. Anyone of us could be a victim.

It should give us pause.

Pause to think why we elect our leaders. Pause to remind us that our choice of leader must have the ability to think under pressure, to have compassion, to have an imagination, to care for other human beings. It is not easy to find all those qualities in a person but seek them we must. Or we will pay for the consequences.

A few days ago, I had the opportunity to view a photo exhibit of American soldiers who had died in the service of the nation. They were from all races. Men and women of various ages, who had committed to defending our nation. Each photograph was compelling. Each made me reflect.

Freedom has a price and those courageous men and women had volunteered to fight for all of us. The least they deserve is for our leaders to honor their commitment by being judicious in their choices.

Keeping such photo exhibit as a permanent installment in the White House, would help remind our presidents of what sacrifices Americans make.

Oscar Valdes

Put Immigration Up Front

The nation will not get out of this impasse we’re living in without first putting immigration up front for discussion.

Trump identified it as a source of deep resentment in dissatisfied sections of the electorate and rode it to victory. That resentment is still there.

Democratic candidates do harm to themselves and the nation by not giving immigration a central position on their agendas.

We understand that addressing inequality will need a long conversation with the country and gradual fixes introduced as we are justifiably distrustful of quick ones.  

But to give immigration less importance is to allow Trump to whip his fans into a frenzy one more time. We cannot afford it.

So long as immigration is left on the sidelines we will not defeat Trump.

Putting immigration up front will ask everyone to look at themselves and examine where they stand.

Immigration has been a powerful force in our nation. It has helped build us. We would not be who we are today without immigrants.

But we need borders too. We need limits. We need to have a say on who gets in and who doesn’t. Americans need to feel that their input has been acknowledged.

To do that we need a national referendum on immigration. A referendum on just that one issue.

Let us set aside a period of time devoted to discussing its pros and cons. Who do we let in, from what countries, with which skills, from what race?

Put every related issue up for discussion, not being afraid to look at ourselves as we know stand.

After such period then the matter would go to the entire country for a vote and then to congress who, having heard the will of the people, will put their wishes into law.

A time limit should be stipulated for the law, so that it can be revised as its effects play out.

But the nation would have had a chance to agree to something as a unit. We all would then need to abide by the results, whether we like them or not.

Why hasn’t this been discussed?

Because of what’s happened in England with Brexit. Because of it, we’re fearful that we will be painfully divided.

But we are already painfully divided. Furthermore, we are not the English.

The world owes much to that accomplished and scrappy people. In economics, in politics, in science. They were once the dominant nation in the world and yet they failed to adapt to changing circumstances and thus began their slow descent. They’re still in the thick of their downward spiral. Soon the Scots will want out of Great Britain, then the Irish, maybe even the Welsh.

The English will surely make a comeback but they have paid dearly for their mistakes. During their long downslide, they had chances to change strategy to better deal with their vast possessions but they did not. Their failures represented a failure of imagination. Let us learn from them and not make the same mistakes.

A national referendum on immigration will allow us an opportunity to examine in detail all the pros and cons of the matter and make a choice.

We are no stranger to failures of imagination in our history. The decimation of Native Americans, slavery, Jim Crow, Vietnam, and in recent history the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan stand as examples.

It will take much courage but confronting immigration will give us a chance to square with our truth, and in so doing let our imagination conceive of solutions that free up our energies to create and move forward, rather than to blame and hate.

This will be my last offering on Medium.com

I will continue to post on WordPress.com at oscarvaldes.net

A Vote Against Trump is Not a Vote for Betrayal, but a Vote for Freedom.

It will be up to 20 brave Republican senators to help redirect the course of the nation.

This next week, the full House will vote on approving the articles of impeachment – abuse of power and obstruction of congress – which will then move to the Senate where the president will be tried.

Sixty seven yes votes are needed to convict the president. Being that there are only 47 democratic senators, a full 20 Republicans are needed to switch sides to convict the president.

Can it happen? Odds are that it will not.

But there is always the possibility of a surprise.

Why?

History will not be kind to those who have sided with Trump in spite of the overwhelming evidence of improprieties during his tenure. Not just the articles of impeachment. And the perception of how history will view us matters to decent men and women who have made a long term commitment to the health of the nation.

Only 20 Republican senators are needed to turn out a president who shows no signs of standing up to despots the world over, be them Putin in Russia, Erdogan in Turkey, El-Sisi in Egypt or the Saudi prince.

Only 20 Republican senators are needed to turn out a president who could not stand up against the Saudi royal family after they butchered the distinguished journalist Jamal Khashoggi in their embassy in Ankara, Turkey.

Only 20 Republican senators are needed to turn out a president who, after 3 years in office, has not mustered the mettle to tell Putin that interference in American elections is not allowed.

So here’s an opportunity for 20 courageous Republican senators to take a stand.

Dear senator, will you be putting your career in jeopardy if you do so?

It depends on how you view yourself. If you think of yourself as someone who understands the crisis of values that the president has thrown the country into, and realizes that Trump lacks the capacity to lead the nation in these convulsed times, then you will stand up to him and join those who vote to convict.

If you lack this awareness, then you will bow to the great showman and buy into the great deception that he orchestrates daily.

Do not forget, however, that history will not be kind to you when you side with Trump.

But then, history may not be important to you. Short term gains may be what matters to you most. If so, please consult your conscience and ask, was this nation built by shortsighted men?

When Trump goes on trial in the Senate, you will have the option of choosing how do you want history to judge you.

A vote to acquit is a vote to join Trump in his poor choices and impulsivity and self promotion.

A vote to acquit is a vote to imperil the freedoms that have made us a special place in the world.

Daily courage is needed to preserve it, for freedom does not come cheap.

Will 20 brave, visionary, responsible leaders please stand up to defend our freedoms, or will you choose to pass and have the nation wait for others to muster the courage?

Oscar Valdes

The Problem of Political Correctness

It does not allow for the evolution of a person.

There’s a whole lot that can happen in a 15-20 year span.

A whole lot that can be learned,

A whole lot of transformation that can take place.

So to pillory people, of whatever political ideology

For events going back more than 15 or 20 years

Is to ask for a standard of purity that reeks of absurdity.

Life and events affect us profoundly,

Sometimes taking us in very different directions.

To not allow for this, risks filtering out people

With great ability and healing capacity.

Judging a person by their actions (unless criminal) in the last 15-20 years,

The span of a generation,

Should be enough to know where they stand.

Beware models of purity,

They come in boxes where rich imaginations cannot live.

Dear Xi Jinping

I would like to ask that you not repress the protesters in Hong Kong. They are not threatening your reign in China.

The protesters do stand, however, as examples of what China should and could become, a first class society where freedom of speech and assembly are essential to the wellbeing and creativity of the population.

It took fundamental economic reforms for China to rocket into prominence in the last 40 years. And more is to come. But it won’t happen without freedom.

It is tempting for some to say that the enormous progress China has made, is primarily the result of the rule of the Communist Party.

You know that that is not true.

You have certainly provided guidance and structure, but without the fundamental economic reforms introduced by Deng Xiaoping, and the enormous talent and determination of the Chinese people, the country would not be where it is today.

Autocracy, tight governmental control, the system you represent, will eventually become an obstacle to the continued growth of the nation.

The world, Mr Jinping, needs China’s valuable contributions. Your nation should not be held back.

To your north and to your east, by contrast, Russia and North Korea stand as examples of all that goes wrong with autocratic systems. The productivity of their people has been long stymied.

While China has benefitted in part from the regimentation it has lived under and the openness to America and the West, it now needs to move to another phase of development, a new phase that requires freedom of speech and assembly as its essential ingredient.

So let Hong Kong and Taiwan stand as showcases of what is possible.

Have the wisdom and courage to allow different systems to evolve alongside your autocracy.

And learning from their experience and yours, allow for the gradual transformation that is essential for China to continue its rise to affluence and prominence.

Learn from tolerating difference right next to the mainland and use what you learn to prepare the mainland for the challenges that lie ahead.

History will not be kind to men like Putin and Kim Jong Un. They will be remembered as mere tyrants. You, on the other hand, have the option of another outcome.

And it could start right now, with you not repressing and persecuting the courageous and idealistic Hong Kong protesters.

It could start with you showing tolerance, kindness and wisdom, and by doing so signaling to the world that your nation has the power of compassion that other nations should strive to emulate.

History will forever remind us of Tiananmen. We should never repeat it.

It’s up to you, Mr Jinping.

Your choice.

Thanks

The Hong Kong Protests: A View From Afar

It has been impressive, the courage of the protesters, the tenacity and creativity which with they have organized. The spark that set things off, the law that would have allowed for the extradition to the mainland of criminal suspects from Hong Kong, has been pulled back, and yet the protests have continued, making more demands from the Beijing appointed authorities governing Hong Kong.

Today, the protesters occupied the airport forcing the cancellation of flights.

How will it end? is the question in everyone’s mind.

What seems clear is that Xi Jinping will not make any concessions that jeopardize his control over the territory. He would prefer for the protests to die out and for the violence to cease but the dissidents are not giving any signs that that is their intention.

No one, Xi or anyone else, wants to see the repeat of Tiananmen Square 30 years ago this last June 4th.

Does the leadership of the movement have the capacity to redirect the energies of the protesters? If it does this is the time to use it so that the violence is turned down. Could they, for instance, change strategy and aim for concessions allowing political bodies run by the mainland to grant greater representation to the people of Hong Kong?

The protest organizers’ surely realize that continued violence will not advance their cause and instead invite brutal repression.

Should that happen the world may stand in solidarity with the protesters but the victims will remain victims.

Trade with China may pause briefly but eventually will continue, and the dead will not be brought back.

Hong Kong today retains economic value to the mainland – it has the 4th richest stock market, right behind Japan – but eventually that value will be transferred to the mainland. It’s a matter of time.

But there’s something unique about the struggle of the protesters. And it’s their yearning for a voice, their thirst for their freedom.

The rest of China, under the thumb of Xi Jinping and the party, must be looking at Hong Kong and, in the recesses of their minds and hearts, realize that one day they would like to have the freedom to express themselves. In the recesses of their heart and minds, they must be envying the courage of the protesters from Hong Kong, even if they may deride them in public, because deep down, every Chinese person, like every man or woman on this earth, wants to have the choice to be free.

Trump and Xi will continue with the trade war but Hong Kong should not be part of it.

Hong Kong’s protests are about the aspirations of every human being.

Guns and Mental Health

Is mental health a determining factor in shootings? Of course. But how are we going to go about addressing it?

We can’t force anyone to seek the benefits from mental health treatment. No, you have to persuade, you have to entice, you have to educate about the great healing possibilities that it offers.

Let us imagine an advertisement attempting to reach a possible shooter. “Dear sir, if you have a lot of guns and are piling up on ammunition and knives, you may be very angry about something that went wrong in your life. There is no point in giving your pain to others that have nothing to do with your own. Why hurt them? Why hurt the innocent? They have their pain to deal with, like every human being has. So please come to your neighborhood mental health center and ask to speak to a therapist. We will do what we can to help you find peace in your heart and not ruin your life. Please come see us.”

Will the person seeing or hearing such advertisement pick up the phone right away and make an appointment or go straight to the address listed?

No.

The person will take their time thinking about it, if he does at all, or will likely say, “It’s probably a ruse, a trick to take away my guns. Anyway, I can’t imagine anyone being able to help me with all this misery that I’ve been going through all of my life.”

But mental health treatment can help the person heal if they show up. If he shows up and stays in his seat, stays in the room and interacts with the person sitting across. And it will take time. Time. Which is what we don’t have.

To get us the precious time we need to reach these troubled souls we must put limits on gun purchases.

To get us the time we need to treat our fellow Americans seething with murderous rage we need restrictions on access to guns.

We need limits and restrictions on gun purchases until we find ways to educate our citizenry, ways to instill in them that no one should give their pain to others, that each person has to learn to process their own distress, and until we do so, having free access to guns is a prescription for endless suffering.

Yes, mental health is an issue. But are you willing to consent to every prospective gun owner getting a mental health screening?

I don’t think so.

So we need time. 

To all gun lovers in the land, please give us that precious time, and you will be acting responsibly to prevent the cowardly slaughter of our fellow citizens.

On China

If we had been in China’s shoes, and it had been us having to offer the cheap labor, land and tax concessions to lure a better developed nation to come in with their expertise and set up factories and the like, we would have done exactly what China has done. We would have learned all there was to learn so we could copy what the more advanced nation was doing and then improve on it. And we would have stolen ideas and pressured them so as to gain an advantage as soon as possible.

Forty years of fast development and China is now a power to contend with. More than that, they are challenging us for world dominance.

Xi Jinping had the daring to announce the 2025 project for his nation to be tops in technology and robotics.

Something wrong with that?

China can’t dare to be tops if they’re not willing to invent and surpass us doing so.

Is there something wrong with wanting to be the best you can be?

China does not have the freedoms we have but they’re choosing to forgo them in the interest of economic and military advancement. At some point they will have to reckon with that but for now they’re pushing ahead.

In response, some sections of our country have chosen to panic. ‘We can’t let them do that, no, put tariffs on them, hold them back!’

Does that sound American to you?

It does not.

It seems to me that, aside from their lack of freedoms, in terms of their sheer ambition and willingness to work for it, China has become more American than us.

And rather than see their rise as a challenge and focusing on better developing and revamping our society, we’re choosing to bellyache. Put another way, some sections of our country are filled with envy of China.

Instead of rushing to our fellow Americans who were left behind by the initial phase of globalization and say to them, ‘here we are with all the training and support needed so we can transform you into world class workers,’ we instead have decided to complain that the Chinese want too much, that they need to stay ‘in their place,’ and tariffs is just one way to keep them in check.

But that strategy is cheap and, additionally, it won’t work. Forever and ever we’ve been the champions of free trade, now the envy of China makes us give up on what we have valued dearly.

Afraid to compete? Yes.

We have freedoms that they don’t have, but we’re not using them to answer their challenge.

We have been a magnet for talent from all over the world but now are paying attention to the chant of ‘send them back’ and believing it.

Immigrants have been an engine of progress but we are paying attention to voices that say ‘why can’t our immigrants look more like Norwegians?’

We have been a cradle for relentless innovation but now, some sections, are choosing to run scared.

Enough of it!

Our openness to the world has always been a treasure. Our willingness to be creative a source of immense pride.

China’s challenge should be welcome, not scorned. We can meet the challenge. But it will take for the bold and imaginative amongst us to step front, and for the resentful and short sighted to step aside.