Posts (page 2)
Interesting article on Salon.com about the FairTax plan as supported by Mike Huckabee. What I can't get over in this instance is the brazenness with which proponents use the '23%' figure when (by the convention with which all other tax rates are quoted) this figure should read as 30%!
The devil in this plan is clearly in the detail, let's hope we have a real debate about this should this ever come within coo-ee of passing.
Well I mgiht as well return to one of my favourite topics: politics. And given that the first primary of the election year finally took place today I might as well blog about that.
So it seems that Huckabee and Obama got up today for the Republicans and Democrats, respectively, and by decisive margins. I think I'll reserve for another day my observations of the Democrat candidates, seeing as how I've blogged about them here and there before, except to say that the Hopemonger proved the cynics (including myself) wrong and romped home to victory. I did think that Edwards would perform slightly better than he did, but that's a blog post for another day.
On the Republican side, I'm not terribly surprised by the Huckabee victory. Given that it's Iowa we're talking about, a rural state with conservative sensibilities, was Mormon Romney (no matter how qualified) seriously going to romp home with the nomination? When someone like McCain who didn't even bother campaigning hard in Iowa can get equal third shows how iffy that state is about the candidates they had to choose from. I watched Huckabee on Meet the Press recently, and in spite of the fact that I oppose 90% of his policy positions (if not more), it's hard to dislike the man. He's affable, can crack a joke, speaks well and is non-threatening. He is probably the embodiment of the compassionate conservative Dubya claimed to be but fell far short of. If anyone is going to bring out the evangelical vote, Huckabee is it. Whether his actual policies are friendly enough to the Reaganista crowd to appeal to the Republicans who have silently been disappointed by Bush 43 is another story.
One thing I find funny, and I'm not the first person to comment on this, is the relative unsophistication of American election commentary. Where we have virtuoso psephologists like Antony Green and Malcolm McKerras studying marginal electorates and analysing swings and pendulums, American elections are typically just about this day's poll, or red states vs blue states, simplifications that make for easier digestion rather than any kind of serious analysis. On the other hand, the American system is simplified greatly by first-past-the-post voting, not to mention that voting is not compulsory in the first place!
The other thing that strikes me about American Presidential campaigns is the heavy emphasis on such intangibles as "character", "likeability", and "strength". I doubt America would elect a technocrat like Kevin Rudd to the Presidency, in spite of how "presidential" the most recent campaign seemed to be. Certainly, if Bush 43 is any guide, having the qualifications and intellect to run the most powerful country in the world are not prerequisites. Policies seem to run secondary, and are presented at the broadest brushstroke level without the level of detail and scrutiny we saw in the Australian election. And the differences are usually fairly stark, and fairly constant too. Where Kevin was accused of playing me-too with John Howard, here it's a few fairly simple positions that are prominent for each side:
Democrats: pro-choice, pro-universal healthcare, pro-gay rights, anti-Iraq war.
Republicans: pro-life, anti-government intervention on healthcare, anti-gay, pro-Iraq war, pro-gun.
Notice that I didn't mention anti-gun on the Democrat side of the ledger. Doubtless pretty much all the Democrat candidates actually are pro-gun control, but no one has said anything of significance for fear of putting offside the hick vote.
Another thing that hasn't gotten much of a guernsey here: the environment. Both sides haven't been rushing headlong to ratify Kyoto. No one even speaks of it, even as concern for the environment at the grassroots level here is impressively high. Nationally though, it's being presented as an economic issue, and mainly in the context of oil and energy security. Develop alternative energy sources within the US, whether it's biofuels or wind or solar or whatever else (so the story goes), and fewer American dollars end up in Middle Eastern countries who can both hold the US to ransom through higher oil prices, and state-sponsor terrorism.
I'm getting Satellite TV hooked up on Saturday, so hopefully I can get my political junkie fix soon. In the meantime, I'll simply have to enjoy wading through reams and reams of endless mindless analysis online saying the same old junk about this primary when in reality we've got 49 more states to go and a long long year ahead...
Well I mgiht as well return to one of my favourite topics: politics. And given that the first primary of the election year finally took place today I might as well blog about that.
So it seems that Huckabee and Obama got up today for the Republicans and Democrats, respectively, and by decisive margins. I think I'll reserve for another day my observations of the Democrat candidates, seeing as how I've blogged about them here and there before, except to say that the Hopemonger proved the cynics (including myself) wrong and romped home to victory. I did think that Edwards would perform slightly better than he did, but that's a blog post for another day.
On the Republican side, I'm not terribly surprised by the Huckabee victory. Given that it's Iowa we're talking about, a rural state with conservative sensibilities, was Mormon Romney (no matter how qualified) seriously going to romp home with the nomination? When someone like McCain who didn't even bother campaigning hard in Iowa can get equal third shows how iffy that state is about the candidates they had to choose from. I watched Huckabee on Meet the Press recently, and in spite of the fact that I oppose 90% of his policy positions (if not more), it's hard to dislike the man. He's affable, can crack a joke, speaks well and is non-threatening. He is probably the embodiment of the compassionate conservative Dubya claimed to be but fell far short of. If anyone is going to bring out the evangelical vote, Huckabee is it. Whether his actual policies are friendly enough to the Reaganista crowd to appeal to the Republicans who have silently been disappointed by Bush 43 is another story.
One thing I find funny, and I'm not the first person to comment on this, is the relative unsophistication of American election commentary. Where we have virtuoso psephologists like Antony Green and Malcolm McKerras studying marginal electorates and analysing swings and pendulums, American elections are typically just about this day's poll, or red states vs blue states, simplifications that make for easier digestion rather than any kind of serious analysis. On the other hand, the American system is simplified greatly by first-past-the-post voting, not to mention that voting is not compulsory in the first place!
The other thing that strikes me about American Presidential campaigns is the heavy emphasis on such intangibles as "character", "likeability", and "strength". I doubt America would elect a technocrat like Kevin Rudd to the Presidency, in spite of how "presidential" the most recent campaign seemed to be. Certainly, if Bush 43 is any guide, having the qualifications and intellect to run the most powerful country in the world are not prerequisites. Policies seem to run secondary, and are presented at the broadest brushstroke level without the level of detail and scrutiny we saw in the Australian election. And the differences are usually fairly stark, and fairly constant too. Where Kevin was accused of playing me-too with John Howard, here it's a few fairly simple positions that are prominent for each side:
Democrats: pro-choice, pro-universal healthcare, pro-gay rights, anti-Iraq war.
Republicans: pro-life, anti-government intervention on healthcare, anti-gay, pro-Iraq war, pro-gun.
Notice that I didn't mention anti-gun on the Democrat side of the ledger. Doubtless pretty much all the Democrat candidates actually are pro-gun control, but no one has said anything of significance for fear of putting offside the hick vote.
Another thing that hasn't gotten much of a guernsey here: the environment. Both sides haven't been rushing headlong to ratify Kyoto. No one even speaks of it, even as concern for the environment at the grassroots level here is impressively high. Nationally though, it's being presented as an economic issue, and mainly in the context of oil and energy security. Develop alternative energy sources within the US, whether it's biofuels or wind or solar or whatever else (so the story goes), and fewer American dollars end up in Middle Eastern countries who can both hold the US to ransom through higher oil prices, and state-sponsor terrorism.
I'm getting Satellite TV hooked up on Saturday, so hopefully I can get my political junkie fix soon. In the meantime, I'll simply have to enjoy wading through reams and reams of endless mindless analysis online saying the same old junk about this primary when in reality we've got 49 more states to go and a long long year ahead...
You would have to have been under a rock not to have heard or read about the news of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, former Prime Minister of Pakistan, who had recently returned from exile for a chance to reclaim the job. It brings into stark relief the peacefulness with which Australia and the US conduct their politics, especially in this season of madness with the Iowa primaries just around the corner. It also points to the precariousness with which some peoples of the world must conduct their daily lives. Some colleagues of mine are from Pakistan, and while it may be intellectual grist to discuss the politics of another country in the abstract, it becomes far less so when it is people you know who are directly affected by such events.
The jury is still out on who or which group was responsible, so there is plenty of news coverage still to be had. However, if you want to have a look at the somewhat more human side of it, I recommend this photo essay from the New York Times website.
When I find an album I like, I tend to play it over and over until I get sick of it. So far my iPhone has seen many, many repeat plays of Eddie Vedder's latest from the Into the Wild soundtrack, which I highly recommend. (Guess I'm a sucker for folksy acoustic guitar stuff.) There are two tracks on the Deluxe edition that I bought from iTunes though that I particularly like but which were not featured in the film (in fact they were written for a documentary about the Iraq war). I thought I'd share a couple YouTube vids of Eddie playing them live. The first one is "Here's to the State":
And the second one, "No More":
Oh and the movie Into the Wild is worth watching too :).
It's been awhile since I last blogged, but it's official, I'm now back to urban living after almost 18 months in the wilderness. Actually Redmond's not that bad, but it's a good example of the suburban car culture, so-called bedroom communities, dotted with sprawling apartment/condo complexes and everything requiring a car to get to if you want to do your shopping, go out to eat or for entertainment (unless you live right in downtown).
I'm now living in First Hill, right on the cusp of downtown Seattle. I can walk a few blocks and I'm in the heart of it, a few blocks more and I'm at the bus stop where I catch the 545 to work. In the other direction, I'm half a dozen blocks from Broadway and the nightlife of Capitol Hill, which is handy for not having to worry about either parking or the 15 mile drive back to Redmond after a night out.
It's somewhat akin to how and where I used to live in South Yarra, but now I'm even closer to the CBD. I suppose this at least in part is a reflection of the fact Seattle is much smaller and hence more compact than Melbourne. I don't know if this is symptom or cause of a public transport system that's not up to par with 21st century cities, because back at Domain Road I had a choice of walking, tramming or training to pretty much anywhere I needed to go.
So this proximity to people and activity is a welcome thing, even if it means I'm paying more for rent, but spending less on petrol as I save the earth and reduce my carbon footprint by taking the bus to work. Some things I've noticed:
- You are more conscious of people and places when you walk. In a car you're insulated from your environment and tend to concentrate on a point-to-point journey and ignore the diversity of your surroundings.
- You need to plan your time more, particularly on the return leg from work -- the bus tends to run less frequently at those hours so you need to stay focused on which bus to catch, and therefore when you need to wrap up what you're doing.
- Natural light makes a big difference to mood. Ironically, since I'm living in a loft with big 15ft windows, I get more light living in the city than when I was living in wide open suburbia. (My previous place was below ground level on one side, so the bedroom was quite dark; and the living area -- while situated to face the Cascades -- was also not that well exposed to sunlight...)
...again, the day before I move to Seattle... I hope the snow clears by the time the 'removalists' need to come ('movers' to all you North Americans out there).
Thanks to the magic of the Internet, I'm currently watching the ABC's election coverage live early Saturday morning Seattle time. My adherence to superstition by not declaring victory early has paid off. Now I feel it's safe for me to finally say that Australia has decided: welcome to a Rudd government, and welcome back to the fundamental values that I always felt Australia represented, but which were repressed and eroded over the past 11 years -- a belief in the fair go, and a progressive, forward-looking and unselfish nation.
Now that victory is sealed, one wonders what will become of the Howard legacy -- the man who stayed too long, the man whose reputation among his followers was built more on winning elections rather than any core principles or vision that one could speak of. The gravy will be if Maxine McKew can pull off a stunning upset and dislodge a sitting PM in only the second time in Australian history.
As some commentators have pointed out, people in my age range have never known a federal government that didn't have John Howard at the helm. I regret I couldn't be in Australia for this moment, it's always an exciting thing to be a part of change -- not quite the Berlin Wall coming down, but certainly a turning point for my country that will hopefully result in a return to balance after lurching too far to the right.
What an incredible state of affairs: a PM and a treasurer from Queensland, my home state; for the first time a woman deputy PM in Julia Gillard; the prospect of the sitting PM losing his seat; and not a single Liberal government in power anywhere in Australia. Now for a perverse bit of schadenfreude: is Costello going to be elected Opposition leader unopposed once the dust has settled?
Tim Dunlop gives a nice summary (albeit a lengthy one) of why the Coalition needs to be kicked out:
http://blogs.news.com.au/news/blogocracy/index.php/news/comments/voting_for_change1/
Exactly what I wish I could say, but have neither the time nor the talent to express quite so well :).
Well it's hard to believe it's the final week of this interminable campaign (which admittedly has not been as long and protracted as the current American Presidential one). Jason Koutsoukis of The Age gives a nice summary of the disasters that have befallen the Liberal Party (oops sorry the Coalition) in their losing battle to cling onto power. This is not to say that the outcome is a foregone conclusion, but you'd be a brave man to bet on the incumbents right now.
While I'm basing my vibes on what I read in the online versions of the print papers and the excellent vidcasts courtesy of the ABC, my impressions of Howard have been of a hectoring old man whose main appeal to the Australian people is "don't trust the other mob", which directly plays into the hands of Rudd's lines about Howard not having any fresh ideas for the future. Instead, he resorts to negativity and scaremongering.
What's worse is, what policies they have released add further vindication to the "no new ideas" and "stale government" line -- more tax cuts and more (non-means-tested) handouts. It must seem like a gross injustice to the Coalition in that "more of the same" ought to be a good thing, since that means we should be expecting continued economic prosperity and rising wealth. And yet Australians on the whole (based on the polls) don't seem to be buying it anymore, and certainly not on the back of consecutive interest rate rises.
Perhaps voters can finally see through the fact that tax cuts and handouts are byproducts of prosperity, but the more this largess gets distributed back to them, the more it's likely to simply push up prices for non-productive assets like real estate and essentials like education fees thus cancelling out any benefit they might have seen in the first place.
The greatest irony of the campaign has been the one-two sucker punch the Government delivered to themselves in relation to containing inflation and therefore interest rates. Howard likes to claim that the industrial relations reform no one except big business wanted, WorkChoices, has contained wages growth, thereby placing downward pressure on inflation and hence interest rates. But try explaining to punters how receiving _less_ money in your pay packet only to _still_ be paying a rising monthly mortgage bill is a good thing... How's that for out of touch?
