Tag: government

By on

We moved. One of the onerous tasks involved in any move is changing my address with the various institutions I do business with. In the past this could be done by two simple actions. The first was making a phone call to the institution. The second was a letter to the institution.

In 2026, due to the wonders of modern technology this can be done with a quick visit to the institution’s website. Quick is the operative word here. What would seem like a quick tick of a few boxes in order to retrieve my address has turned into a major production which now involves a trouble ticket to the USA Government one logon for all agencies help desk.

The steps so far:

After my initial logon into Medicare web site, I received a message telling me they were sending a code in order to verify my identity. Done.

They then asked what I wanted to do. I told them change my address which they informed me I could do by choosing one of the four pathways into the Federal Government’s web site. I chose the one I already knew I had a log on in — the USA Government one logon for all federal agencies.

I was informed that I would have to verify my identity yet again. I had to photograph my driver’s license (both sides) and then take a photo of myself. The computer then verified that my driver’s license and photo matched.

I had to verify my social security number.

Then my address appeared on the screen with the option to edit. I tried to edit but I received an unhelpful message informing me that there was an error in my address — most likely my social security number. I checked it was correct. I reviewed my address. It was correct. I tried again to enter. The system found an error in my address but did not point to what the problem was.

I noticed that there was a chat feature. I tried. But before I could chat, I had to verify that I wasn’t a robot. I tried but for some reason I must have missed one of the squares with a car. I tried again but I kept getting a new screen with the same instruction to mark all the squares with a car. I tried several times and each time a new set of pictures appeared with an instruction to mark all the squares with a car. I couldn’t get into chat.

So I searched for a phone number. This proved more difficult than I anticipated as it was nowhere to be found. What ever page appeared on my screen also kept giving me a message that all I had to do was use their system and that it would be a whole lot quicker and easier if just used the internet to change my address. I laughed at this little joke.

Finally, after searching for a few minutes I was able to find a phone number. I called.

I was greeted with an automated message. She asked me what I wanted to do. I told her I just wanted to change my address for Medicare. She told me that I could do this on line and directed me to the USA Government one logon for all federal agencies web site. I screamed numerous times “agent” loudly and clearly. I waited. After a bit of a delay, the automated voice returned. She thanked me for my time and disconnected the line.

I went back to the website and after vigorously depressing a few keys I came upon a screen that allowed me to complete a trouble ticket to their help desk. I completed. I should have an answer within 24 hours.

All this to change my address which, if I talked to an actual human being, I am fairly certain could be done in less than a minute.

But, no, I had to use the easier and quicker web site.

My address has not been changed after about 45 minutes of trying.

By on

Why do our poor needs so little help and the rich are constantly needing help? If we don’t give the rich more, they just can’t produce the needed wave to lift all boats. The poor, on the other hand, must suffer or else they won’t come to their senses and invest their money in the Stock Market, vacation homes and crypto currencies. Right?

There are two ways to get government assistance. Government can give you assistance through programs and services or government can reduce your tax bill through tax breaks. People who have less money tend to get their assistance in government services while people who have more money receive their assistance through tax breaks. Both, however, are handouts.

But only one carries the weight of does this person deserve to be helped. The idea that if you receive government benefits you also need to prove you are deserving of these benefits. So, for example, a person who receives SNAP benefits are unable to buy alcohol and cigarettes with the money they receive while a person who receives a tax break can buy as much alcohol as they want. Nobody would dream of questioning their purchases.

Why? They are getting money from the government. Why isn’t it monitored with the same vigor that SNAP benefits are watched.

They even get a different spin on their handout — the rich are job creators who need that extra money to power the economy while the person who receives benefits is a welfare recipient — a non-productive member of society, a taker. This glaringly different view of these two handouts also has an effect on how government benefits and tax breaks are perceived so that if belts need to be tightened, it is the poorer people who are squeezed.

Tax breaks, on the other hand, are sacrosanct. Why?

Taxes are an obligation. Now, you may not like paying taxes nor the programs that taxes are used for but this doesn’t take away from the fact that taxes are an agreed upon method for us to pay the government bills. If you don’t like they way taxes are collected or the programs the government uses them for, you can take your position to the public during an election. It is an imperfect system, especially if your position always loses, but it is the one we have and, unless someone has a better idea, the fairest way for government to work.

I am not against tax breaks. I do, however, think that there should be a real verifiable return for the government for any break given. The tax breaks need to prove they are indeed more beneficial than the financial loss to the government tills. So my question is how are tax breaks measured as being successful — good for society or a good return in additional taxes. And, if they aren’t producing the desired effect, why not cut them instead of programs that help our most vulnerable citizens.

The tax breaks will, or so we are told, pay for themselves because the rich will invest in the economy which will eventually raise all boats. But, if this was the case, shouldn’t the government be rolling in dough. This isn’t the case. In fact, the biggest single expenditure in the Federal Government is tax breaks. Since the Reagan years, government has given tax breaks and cut taxes numerous times and yet we are further in debt. The income from tax breaks and tax cuts have failed to raise the promised revenue.

To get rid of these tax breaks, even some of them, would bring in enough additional money to offset some of these expenses. But, eliminating tax breaks is nearly impossible because you are hurting the job creator. They need help. But, then, so does the mother using SNAP. Who needs more help?

Herein is my question then, why do our richest citizens always seem to need so much help? Why can’t they stand on their own two feet, pull themselves up by their boot straps and just pay their taxes without any breaks? It is really sad that the rich have sunk into such dependency on government handouts. It isn’t really helping them they continue their proliferate ways — drinking alcohol, taking vacations — on the government dime. They just need to learn how to live within their means.

All I know is I am getting tired of their constant whining about how difficult it is for them as I have seen very little evidence that they are having a difficult time.

By on

Whenever I hear some talking head bemoaning the fact that there is a lack of trust in government, I always think what am I missing here. Why do these people think I should trust government? Government officials have been lying to us for years — particularly when it involves national security. Just off the top of my head — the government knew the War in Viet Nam was lost even while escalating the number of troops sent to die what they knew to be a losing cause. Or the weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq? I could go on but you get the hint.

It seems to me perfectly reasonable for the public to question any information that comes from a government official. I mean really, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

So when the government’s released UFO documents which confirmed that there have been actual sightings of UFO’s, I became a little irritated. While I am excited by the possibility of there being intelligent life beyond our planet, I am a little miffed that our government has been hiding this information and dissembling about any reports of UFO’s for the past 80 years.

Why? Oh, right the public would panic if they learned there were actual UFO’s. The relative calm that greeted this information must have been a bit of a disappointment to all those government officials who have been so worried about the public’s reaction all these years. I haven’t heard of any panic yet.

Denying it may be a reasonable reaction if there were 1 or 2 sightings over the course of 80 years, but once you got into the hundreds and thousands, what possible advantage could there be? People were actually seeing UFO’s and reporting it. At some point, you would think someone would say this is going to continue to happen maybe we should let on that this is indeed happening instead of quashing any reports.

More worrisome to me is if there are UFO visitations happening then not telling people that they were happening seems like the exact opposite of what responsible government should be doing. They would rather have people encounter UFO’s and alien beings and question their sanity than the actual truth. Right.

And then if anyone ever did run across a little green man, and weren’t content to take the government explanation of an errant weather balloon and they decide to report the UFO to the wider world, the government made it seem like that person was off their rocker with a wink wink and nudge nudge. They would rather undermine good people’s reputation as sane human beings than tell the truth of their fantastic encounter with an alien being or spacecraft. What a fucking crock of shit.

And you want me to put faith into these people? No, thank you. I’d rather live in the real world than in some imaginary one.

By on

Every day, every new outrage, and I think is this the one that is going to bring the whole rotting edifice down but, to my surprise, the rickety all structure is still standing.

Yet the rot is so pervasive that almost anything could bring it down. It is both remarkably sturdy and remarkably vulnerable at the same time. How does it survive all this rot? Then I take a deep breath and remember, oh, right, now I remember — I am the problem. The present system, as configured, is all I know. Whatever comes next is unknown. This mystery is more than a little frightening. I want the system, with all its flaws, to survive.

It isn’t encouraging that every idea I have heard regarding change now seems to involve a bit of violence. It is mostly this fear of violence that keeps me firmly on the side of the present system for all its problems. There still is the notion of democratic give and take as the best way to resolve our problems despite the rot. I maybe wrong but the risk of political violence seems, at present, unwarranted.

What I fear though is this reflexive support for democracy is waning. To what I do not know. I do know that blood on the streets is to be avoided mostly because the idea is always that it will be the bad guy’s blood (read here the people who disagree with me) and not the good guy’s (read here the people who agree with me) blood. But we all know that once blood starts flowing, both good guys and bad guys bleed the same color and it is horrible.

I don’t have the answer but I do know this — the present approach seems to be a shouting match where the only way to win is to outshout the other guy. The gerrymander wars shows two sides with little confidence that either can win through the political process so they redraw the lines to keep their power. People appear to be giving up on changing minds through persuasion and creating imperfect but workable institutions through compromise.

And all we have is the rickety and rotting system to defend us in the coming political storm. It is a bit unsettling to think about.

By on

I know I hold a minority opinion among Democrats about the shutdown but what is the point of keeping government shutdown any longer. I believe that government has a job to do and it best get back to doing it — even if it is less than perfect and it will always be less than perfect.

There is a segment of the Republican Party who hates government so much that they don’t particularly care if it is open and will use any opportunity to undermine its function and will look with glee at its destruction. This segment of the Republican party doesn’t care if people go hungry. The Rich were not being hurt by the shutdown. The Poor were.

The Democrats, being the minority party, had very little leverage to change minds. Trump holds sway with the Republicans. What he says goes. He wasn’t going to backdown and there is little evidence that there were Republicans getting ready to bolt this position.

The idea that holding out longer would create a Democratic victory was a pipe dream. The Democrats who voted to reopen government are not traitors. They looked at the facts and made a reasonable decision. Continuing the shutdown was pointless and it was hurting actual people.

The Democratic Senators that voted to reopen tended to come from Purple states where either party could win an election. You don’t get to govern unless you win elections. A lesson that Liberal Democrats need to be reminded of all the time. Yes Mamdani won New York but there is little evidence that the same holds true for say New Hampshire or Wisconsin.

Given our forefathers structure of government, this means winning in states with a more conservative electorate. These moderates are needed in order to win future elections. So I think all this talk of punishing them is incredibly unhelpful. Indeed this is how Trump is keeping his party in line — punishing the Republicans who don’t agree 100% with him.

Let’s keep everyone on board.

By on

The biggest problem I face living in San Diego is the sidewalks. I have yet to be bothered by an immigrant but I am terrorized, particularly at night, by the general disrepair of the sidewalks here. I have a trick ankle that occasionally gives out on me which means when ever I encounter uneven pavement there is a chance I will be thrown off kilter and find myself on the ground. When I was young, I just got up, dusted myself off and proceeded to where I was going. Now, at 68, I come up bruised and battered. I am increasingly afraid of breaks especially after my partner broke his ankle in a fall on a sidewalk.

That Trump’s focus is on immigrants and not sidewalks is telling. Infrastructure repair would have a bigger effect on my life than the removal of any immigrant. But criminal immigrants sell what Trump and the Republicans are pushing which is the federal government takeover of the cities. So I guess I will continue to struggle with the treacherous sidewalks while Trump rids the streets of immigrants. Something that doesn’t bother me and I don’t care about. But, anyway.

By on

I am amazed when I see posts like the one above. People who want to do away with taxes and regulations have this idea that once they are free from taxes and regulation that they will have all this extra money to spend and lead a glorious government free life. Unfortunately the tax free, regulation free past was miserable. It is only with the expansion of government which regulated the market economy and the taxes paid by the public for these changes did this general misery end.

Once you remove taxation and regulation, people will be presented with an array of new bills which have to be paid. Things like nuclear weapons, the army, the navy, the air force, the justice system, police protection, fire protection, road repair, street lights — all these things and so much more will need to be paid for. Then people will have to figure out if their restaurants meet health standards, buildings are being built so that they will stay up during earthquakes, stopping people from dumping toxins into rivers, checking to see if every household is disposing of human waste properly, to name just a few. Who will do it? How will they be paid?

Is Government perfect? Absolutely not. Could it be done better? Of course. Is this a reason to do away with it completely. No. No more than a Market Economy can’t do everything to meet all of our needs, at least, not without the help of government.

Here is the bottom line — the vast majority of people in this country want a market economy. This isn’t going to change in the near future. In order to make this market economy work, we also need a strong government presence to ensure that the rich, people who have power and money, don’t abuse this power and money to take advantage of people who do not have power and money. This also isn’t going to change in the near future.

This means that we have to figure out a way to make these two, sometimes, antagonistic systems work together. Is this perfect? No but then no system is perfect. Ever. This is our common challenge — how to make an imperfect world work for as many people as humanly possible. It will always be imperfect and we will always be working to make it better. But, given the present interlocking structures that is our system, eliminating Government is absurd and unworkable.

By on

For those still wondering why Trump got elected, look no further than the news that a lab leak was the likely cause of COVID19. Liberals and Democrats greeted this seemingly bombshell revelation with a sang froid that borders on indifference.

Now things would be different for me if the government scientists, at the time, were open to the possibility of lab leak being a possible explanation but they weren’t. They vehemently denied the possibility of a lab leak and accused any one who suggested it of being a racist. There is a big difference between an I don’t know and a they are wrong and shouldn’t be spreading such nonsense.

It is a big problem and the Left is ignoring it as if it never happened. Like if we don’t talk about it, it will somehow go away. Why would Trump and his buddies drop such a good example of government malfeasance? These people are not idiots. They also seem to have their pulse on a large segment of the American people. So I guess underestimating Trump and the wreckers will go on for the foreseeable future.

This is the only conclusion you can have when you consider:

  1. Trump was right about something very important. He claims that Dr. Fauci and the government scientists were lying about COVID and, it turns out, he was correct, at least about the lab leak theory. Yes there is still a low confidence that a lab leak is the culprit but it is now considered the most likely explanation of all the known possibilities. This isn’t what the government was saying in 2020. They were saying a Lab leak couldn’t be responsible and people who claim that a lab leak was responsible are racists. Trump has every right to gloat.
  2. It gives credence to every new crackpot theory that comes down the pike. All the crackpot has to say is well they lied about the lab leak theory. How do your respond to that? They are correct which is really bad news because too many people already listen to these crackpots. Now the voters have evidence that the crackpots are right. This is why the truth is important when dealing with people in a democracy. How does it help your cause to lie today when people will eventually discover you are in fact a liar?
  3. Belief in Government is already painfully low. This admission confirms every bad thing that the anti-government types claim our government does. If the Government wanted to momentarily placate the Chinese government while they got more information, I get it. This is a completely reasonable position. Withholding information, however, is different from a lie. The government could have said, and rightfully so, that they just don’t have enough information to determine the source of COVID and they are keeping an open mind. I can live with that. But no they aggressively denied any possibility of a lab leak. This turned into an overkill involving character assassination and dissembling. This was wrong especially since many of these scientists knew that a lab leak was the likely cause.
  4. Finally, it is an incredibly stupid lie to tell. If many scientists believed that a lab leak was responsible for COVID then this information was destined for revelation. Someone eventually was going to spill the beans. This should have been obvious as soon as scientists began sharing their suspicions with other scientists. So why lie in the first place? To keep the Chinese happy? Why? The Chinese stopped co-operating with UN officials fairly early in the crisis. Once this occurred what possible benefit could come from keeping the Chinese happy? But everybody in the know just kept their mouths shut. They may know a lot about biology but they are crap at public relations. They have damaged their reputation for being trustworthy. Why would the world believe these people when they announce the next pandemic?

This bothers me personally. I put my trust in these people because I saw no reason for them to lie and they knew more about viruses. Boy was I wrong. It is an unforced error that has done great harm to Liberalism, Science and Government — pillars of our democracy that are already under siege.

And, yes, I hold people on the Left to a higher standard which makes this so much more disappointing. I think democracy and liberalism are the best route to take for a better world. It hurts when my own side fucks up so royally. The good news is that you can’t say you don’t understand why some people voted for Trump. They believed they were being lied to and it turns out, in this case, they were right.

By on

I have been laid off twice in my career.

There is a way to do it that benefits the company eliminating the jobs while also minimizing the upset to the people losing their jobs. Donald Trump, a business genius no less, is doing it in the most careless and obnoxious way possible.

First, he and his DOGE stooges are laying off people and then discovering that they need these employees still. Musk, in his storied career, has repeatedly made this mistake. Most companies take a little time, particularly when there is no emergency, in learning what people do, assigning the tasks to retained employees so there is no gap in service and trying to put the laid off employees in the best position for a new position. Planning for the company’s sake, compassion for the people losing their jobs. Trump is doing neither. It is a shoddy mistake that gives retained employees and customers the impression that you don’t know what you are doing.

Planning requires a little more effort than looking at a spreadsheet and eliminating jobs. Doing this so quickly and without consideration to the repercussions is a costly mistake especially for businessmen of Trump and Musk’s supposed caliber. The abruptness could lead to rehires, gaps in services, and law suits. What money you saved from the layoffs will be eaten away in the chaos created by the layoffs. It isn’t they way to run a business successfully but then I doubt seriously if this is Trump or Musk’s intention. Destroying the Federal Government is much more like it.

The unalloyed glee that the DOGE boys are taking with their job is unforgivable. Laying people off is a sad task and it should be approached as a regrettable but necessary task. These guys are having way too much fun. People are losing their jobs. The DOGE boys may not like them, they may think their jobs are unnecessary, and they may think it is the right thing to do but they should respect the people they are putting out of a job. It is the very least they can do. Instead they are acting like a bunch of mean girls in high school who get to say who is in and who is out.

Trump and Musk are bullies. They enjoy laughing at others but are unable to take any ribbing at their own expense. They demand respect without giving any. The extraordinary number of people who have turned on them speaks volumes about their character. Nobody much likes Trump and Musk once they are free from their orbit. Let’s hope we all learn how to stand up to bullies in the ensuing few years.

By on

Elon Musk’s request for personal Social Security information is baffling. The Social Security system is a macro problem in which Musk is taking a distinctly micro approach. How is getting personal information from individual social security recipients in any way helpful? If social security is a problem to look into, then the problem isn’t Jane Doe getting a $2,000 social security check each month. What needs looking at is financing the whole system.

Trump, supposedly an advocate for transparency in government, needs to inform the public on why this distribution of personal information is necessary for the task Musk is undertaking. Trump is allowing a businessman with no responsibility to anyone except Trump access to the personal details of an entire country. How is Musk protecting this data? What is preventing Musk from making a copy of this information for future use?

Department Secretaries can be called before Congress to answer questions regarding their department. The problem here is that Musk is without actual government responsibility. He is acting for Trump and Trump alone. It may be all on the up and up but there is no way to know for sure unless the painful process of institutional review is practiced. It isn’t happening and that is concerning.