More aptly named 2009, not 1984

My God, George Orwell must be spinning in his grave … maybe he should have titled his classic book about Big Brother 2009 instead of 1984.  As if giving a Nobel peace prize to the manmade global warming alarmist and film propagandist Al Gore weren’t bad enough, the panel decided to completely toss their credibility into the gutter by awarding this joke-of-a-prize to the current Warmonger-In-Chief:  Barack Obama!  And, he was nominated hardly two weeks into his new job!  Then again, they also gave it to the warmongering “progressive” Woodrow Wilson for turning a European border conflict into World War I. 

In Barack Obama, we have a president who is continuing, if not actively expanding, every single one of Bush II’s policy initiatives. From going back on his campaign promise to withdraw from Iraq, intensifying the war in Afghanistan, expanding the war into Pakistan, blowing up innocent civilians with unmanned aerial drones, saber-rattling against Iran, leaving Guantanamo open, presiding over another military budget increase, to the continuation of internal civil rights abuses (Patriot Act) … with no end in sight to any of it. 

What has been most incredible to witness is how quickly the Left flipped a u-turn once a Democrat was propelled into the White House! Where did all of the peaceniks disappear to? Where’d all the righteous anger about “immoral and illegal wars” go? Even Code Pink has jumped on board the war bandwagon! Does the Left have no shame? No principles?  Are they really such cheap whores? 

I would call it “unbelievable” if I weren’t so well-acquainted with the hypocrisy of the Left. Man, you Obamatons really take the care — congratulations to your idol for being showered with more undeserved praise! Or should we be calling you people “Obamacons,” since you seem to have morphed into a Leftist version of the neocons? By awarding this prize to such a blatant warmonger the Nobel panel has affirmed that “war is peace.” You tried to warn us Mr. Orwell, you tried …  

Shane Solano, Ventura

How to pay for a national health care
Few Americans deny the desperate need for health care reform. No bills have been voted upon by Congress, but we do hear, almost every day fear of proposed legislation by one group or another. One of the groups giving Congress persons big, really big, headaches are the seniors. 

When many seniors hear that some in Congress want health care reform to be revenue neutral, (meaning the reforms will pay for themselves), they become frightened. When these same seniors hear that billions of dollars can be saved out of the projected growth of Medicare, their frights often turns to anger.

One might ask, “Why do seniors act this way?”  It is because they do not hear, “revenue neutral”.  They do not hear “savings”. What they do hear is, “Cuts to your benefits or increased costs to you, or both.”  They are afraid and angry that their benefits will be reduced while their access to important medications will be further curtailed.

People, other than seniors, hear similar, scary phrases.

“Where will the dollars come from to pay for these services if not from cutting my benefits, raising my costs, or both? “

Thinking outside the box of “acceptable” alternatives is often a good place to start. M. Brian O’Shaughnessy, co-chair of the Coalition for a Prosperous America, has suggested co-coordinating trade policy with health care reform. One possible tool would be a border adjustment tax on imported goods. The dollars generated would be used to fund the new national health care system. What does this really mean to you and your family?

In 2008, the U.S. imported about $2.5 trillion worth of manufactured goods. We exported about $1.8 trillion worth of manufactured products. This trade deficit represents a national loss of about $700 billion. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, our 2009 trade deficit, as of June 30, was about $173 billion in manufactured goods. The “border adjustment tax” mentioned above should have a new name, and I am going to call it a Value Added Tax or VAT. A VAT would raise revenue from foreign businesses and producers rather than push the tax burden onto the backs of American taxpayers.

Who has this sort of tax? Well, everyone, save for the good old U.S.A. When U.S. companies sell manufactured items to our English cousins, the American companies pay a VAT to London. When U.S. corporations sell high end, (or any end for that matter), to our Chinese friends they, the U.S. corporations, pay a VAT to Beijing. The very same story is true for France, Germany, Japan, Italy and others.

What do our trading partners do with the VAT dollars they receive? Most of those dollars help pay the costs of their social programs, which include … health care. What irony! Americans do not yet have a national health plan, but American businesses help pay the costs of such programs, in wealthy Western Europe, every time we sell them a manufactured item!  

Most of the other nations use an 18 percent tax rate on their VAT. If the United States had used an 18 percent VAT in 2008, the treasury would have received some $450 billion. If we had used, say a 10 percent tax rate, we would have received, from Jan.1 to June 30, 2009, some $14 billion toward health care reform. The direct cost to the American taxpayer — $0.

What is holding our country back? Would our trading partners be angry with us? Maybe — but it is difficult to imagine them being too angry if we do to them just what they have been doing to us. Might this produce the ever feared “trade war”?
Possibly, but the U.S. is the world’s largest single market for consumer goods. Would there be a trade war if the U.S. does what the Japanese do, but do it with a lower VAT? Not likely.

Aside from helping to pay for social programs, such as health care, are there other potential benefits to a VAT? Yes! An American VAT would certainly drive up the prices of most foreign manufactured goods by a very small amount.

This would help level the playing field in industries that have been nearly wiped out by subsidized foreign competition. Now you know about thinking outside the box. We can provide insurance to the millions that do not have it, without raising your taxes.

The Chinese have a wonderful saying: “A journey of a thousand miles starts with but one small step.” Maybe the VAT will be our “small step”.

Art Isgur, Oak View

Rehab, not prisons
Re: Intoxication is not temporary insanity (Letters, 10/8)

The thing that affected my understanding of the people I worked with while they were court-ordered patients at the Camarillo State Hospital was the incredibly difficult circumstances they were born into — physical and sexual abuse the most common factor. Danger, violence and abandonment were facts of life. It is not unusual for someone born into these undesirable circumstances to acquire beliefs and attitudes that result in anti-social behaviors.

Unless someone or something intervenes to let such people know that they are loved and cared for, they will most likely gravitate to drugs and alcohol and eventually commit criminal acts. When your experience of life is predominately devoid of love or caring, drugs seem to provide a satisfactory substitute because you actually “feel good” for a change. All the hurt, anger and self-loathing is gone … for a while. You are content in your illusion of peace, worth, love and meaning, until the drug wears off. Now what do you do? Use more drugs, of course. What would you do?

I hate the fact that we have to put these people in jail because we don’t have anything else. Jails and prisons are not places known for compassion, and this kind of treatment simply verifies the feelings of worthlessness and self-loathing that precipitated the criminal behavior in the first place. The problem is therefore perpetuated.

Our prisons are stuffed with people like this, and more than 70 percent of those who eventually get out will re-offend in some way and return to prison within a short period. This is the highest recidivism rate in the country! Drug and alcohol counseling should be a priority, along with educational opportunities, job training and life counseling. I would hope that we are smart enough and compassionate enough to find a way to reverse these numbers and help more people to succeed than to fail.

Gary R. Ryan
author of Blessings in Disguise
Ventura