6. Smoking in Indian Casinos Is Wrong – Vote No on Ballot Measures 94 through 97.

California already collects substantial taxes from Indian casinos and Governor Schwarzenegger expects to get billions more with Ballot Measures 94 through 97.  But, even if tax inflated projections are correct which is very, very dubious, the $ billions and billions of medical costs to California taxpayers caused by the Indian casinos allowing smoking in the gaming areas must be subtracted from the tax income from gambling.

 

It’s terrible that even one person smokes in this day and age, addicted by the uncaring cigarette industry.  Smoking eventually kills most of those who smoke.  That anyone smokes of their own free will is tragic at best!  It’s even worse for those who suffer seeing their loved ones who smoke sick and dying from cancer or emphysema.  The lucky smokers die quickly and painfully from cancer.  The unlucky die over many years slowly suffocating from emphysema – you see them almost every day with their oxygen bottles and breathing tubes.   And, in many cases, if not most, the enormous associated medical costs are borne by taxpayers.

But the tragedy doe not end there.  Second-hand smoke such as in every Indian casino is a worse killer than smoking itself.  Due to the dangers of second-hand smoke, it’s now illegal in California to smoke in a car containing children.  About the only legal public place to smoke is an Indian Casino.

Right now, employees and gamblers in Indian casinos are being sickened from second-hand smoke and many will die terrible expensive deaths.  Many if not most of the employees and gamblers sickened by second-hand smoke in these casinos are not Indians, and many if not most of them will look to the state to pay their medical bills as their second-hand smoke induced illnesses kill them.

It’s for sure that employees of Indian casinos should not have to suffer working in a smoke-filled environment – the State of California should ensure that every California employee has a safe work place.  For the non-smoking gamblers who stupidly enter smoky environments, the State of California should prohibit smoking so the State is not forced to assume the costs of their second-hand smoke-induced illness.

  Only 21 percent of Californians smoke.  If they were provided smoke-free casinos in California, many would forsake the smoke-filled casinos of Las Vegas and Laughlin.  Remember the stories that the California bar industry would go bankrupt when they were forced to be smoke free, but business turned out to be better than ever, and Californians are much healthier as a result.

Californians should vote NO on ballot measures 94 through 97 because the Indian casinos will still allow smoking causing illness and premature death to all Californians who frequent them and expect the state of California to pay the enormous medical costs resulting from smoking induced illnesses.

5. How the Massacres at Columbine School, Virginia Tech, and Westroads Mall Could Have Been Prevented

For over 50 years, I have pursued ways to make information and skills easier to understand, learn, and remember with printed, verbal, audio, video, and interactive electronic media.

As an extension of my work, I learned that communicating with the mentally ill was just a slight extension of the communication skills I had studied, developed, and used over my career.

I also learned that stress due to acts of poor communication is an exacerbating factor in mental illness (along with causes such as viruses contracted early in life and genetic predisposition).  Similarly, acts of poor communication may contribute to later relapses.  And, I determined, as is becoming widely recognized, that acts of poor communication contribute to, and actually cause, workplace violence where disgruntled workers murder fellow employees and supervisors, school violence where frustrated students massacre teachers and other students, and domestic violence where jealous or possessive husbands beat and kill their wives.

Because of the great harm of poor communication skills and the extensive benefits of good skills, it’s vital that everyone, regardless of age, learn to be a successful communicator.  I resolved to help others avoid the disasters and heartbreak that poor communication can cause.  Fortunately, successful communication techniques apply to all situations whether communicating with a person with a mental illness or anyone else.

As everyone you communicate with is unique, it’s not possible to predict the outcome of poor communication for any specific one of the hundreds of millions of individuals you could potentially interact with.  Some people will laugh off ineptness in communicating.  Others will ignore the persons involved.  A very few others will drastically retaliate – such as two students at Columbine School in Littleton kill 13 and wound 21 students and teachers, Seung-Hui Cho at Virginia Tech kills 32 students and a professor, and Robert Hawkins kills 8 at an Omaha Mall.

The potential benefits of good communication are so rewarding and the potential harm of poor communication is so devastating, that everyone should and can master good communication skills.  Good communication skills should be taught to everyone starting in the first year of school – no one should be able to graduate without learning, demonstrating, and using them.

The episodes at Columbine and Virginia Tech are not the fault of anyone.  But, everyone who ever came in contact with the Columbine murderers, Seung-Hui Cho, or Robert Hawkins had the opportunity to “communicate successfully” and contribute to the prevention of tragedy.  Am I my Brother’s keeper?  Perhaps not, but if we all would have communicated successfully with our Brothers (and Sisters), then the tragedies of Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Omaha may well have been prevented.

Stay on the right side.  For truly successful communication to take place, you must have a person’s full cooperation.  A person will fully cooperate with you only if the person trusts you and perceives you are “with” the person and not “against” the person.  In other words, you must be “on the right side” of the person, rather than “on the wrong side.”

You can’t force people to be fully cooperative so they do their best for you and are loyal to you.  (They can’t force you to be either.)  Neither can bosses, politicians, dictators, judges, parents, police, spouses, supervisors, nor teachers.  They can use and misuse their power, but can’t force anyone to do more than the bare minimum needed to escape punishment, criticism, or other wrath.

Until you give them a reason to do otherwise, most people will give you the benefit of the doubt as to whether you’re with them on their right side or against them on their wrong side.  At first encounter, a person will usually place you on their right side, but cautiously.  First impressions are critical as the person will give you less latitude early in the relationship and even a small transgression may put you on the person’s wrong side.  Asking for something too early in a relationship may be considered to be presumptuous and viewed as working against the person, ending cooperation.

Staying on the right side of a person is like walking along a cliff.  As long as you remain on the right side, you have some latitude and everything is okay.  But, if you go too close to the edge and fall over, that’s the end of you. Each act (however small) which the person interprets as working against the person will move you closer to the edge of the communication cliff.  Each act, even the first, might be the one that puts you over the edge and puts you on the wrong side of a person. Falling off the communication cliff with a person gave rise to the expression, “Now you’ve gone too far!”  If you’re lucky and not seriously injured nor dead, you may be able to climb back up to the top with much effort and get back on the right side of the person.  So stay on the right side of a person; don’t get too close to the edge of the “communication cliff” and fall off.

Be assured, an enemy will get even with you, no matter how long it takes.  If you’re on the wrong side of a person, the person will take advantage of any situation to get even with you.  Sometimes when you go over the edge, the person may do nothing.  Another time, the person may kill you.  One thing is certain, you have made an enemy who may try to get back at you.  When you go over the edge, the person will not cooperate with you, truly successful communication will not happen, and you have created an enemy who may retaliate.  In some cases, your punishment may fit the crime:

- A wife maims her unfaithful husband.

- A wife spends more than her neglectful husband can afford.

- The teenage daughter of a rarely home mayor is arrested for drug possession.

- The teenage son of a dictatorial police chief is arrested for theft.

- The daughter of a self-righteous minister becomes a prostitute.

- An overworked employee doesn’t get a critical job done on time.

- A son abuses his elderly parents who were abusive to him as a child.  In some cases, the punishment far exceeds the crime:

- A cult of high-school students kills 13 snobbish fellow students and teachers.

- A disgruntled mechanic overlooks a very serious defect.  (No wonder pilots are always very, very nice to their mechanics!)

- A lonely college student kills 32 classmates and a professor.

- A bounced around high-school student kills 8 shoppers in a mall.

Unfortunately, in many cases, numerous innocent victims are punished for the communications crimes of others.

The key to convincing a person you are working with them is by communicating over a period of time in ways that give them the proper clues.  Giving proper clues has many names:  establishing rapport, networking, blending, fitting in, being on the team, joining the club, singing out of the same hymnal, and so on.

Build trust.  It would be truly wonderful if, when you told your wife, “You’re a nag,” or your subordinate, “You’re incompetent,”  then you could undue your stupidity and cancel out your act of poor communication with a single act of good communication by saying, “I’m sorry.”  Unfortunately, it takes several acts (usually 10 or more) of good communication to cancel out one act of poor communication.  Depending on the seriousness with which the person views the act of poor communication, it may take dozens of acts of good communication to cancel one act of poor communication, or you may never be able to atone no matter how much you do.

Some people are resilient.  They may have been born with strong egos and personalities.  They may have lots of self-esteem created by years of successes.  They may have extensive physical gifts, gifted mental capabilities, a secure financial situation, or many acts of good communication by parents, siblings, friends, and teachers in.  They may have stored lots of self-esteem “in the bank.”  A few acts of poor communication will have little or no effect on their self-esteem and except in extreme situations, they do not find it necessary to defend their egos with defensive coping strategies.

Other people are not as resilient and have a lesser self-esteem for various reasons which appear to them to thwart their ability to accomplish their life goals, dreams, and aspirations.  Maybe they were born with very fragile egos and personalities which overreact to stress, or limited physical and mental gifts.  Maybe the have become severely handicapped or disabled by a serious accident or illness, grew up in poverty, grew up with parents who had an unfriendly divorce, or had parents or teachers with poor (communication) skills.  Some people in these situations can readily rise above them; others cannot.  These people have received few acts of good communication and may have little self-esteem in the bank.  A few acts of poor communication may be devastating to their self-esteem.  They defend their self-esteem with one or more of the defensive coping strategies even rarely including murder.

Build self esteem.  At this point, you can probably think of situations where your acts of poor communication have had a very detrimental effect on others.  Don’t blame yourself for what you didn’t know.  But now you know, so promise yourself to end your acts of poor communication which put you on a person’s wrong side, destroy the other person’s self-esteem, force them to use defensive coping strategies, and may have serious consequences for you, the other person, and other people.  In every interaction with another person, ask yourself, “Am I building the other person’s self-esteem?”  If not, change your approach so you do.

A good place to start is to always be diplomatic.  Find something good to say in every situation.  Never lie, but don’t feel you always have to blurt out the whole truth and everything you know if it hurts or devastates the other person.  Employ tact and conciliation.  Don’t say or do hurtful things; if you do, the person will never forget and most likely will never forgive you.  Even a person with a mental illness in the throes of delusions and hallucinations will remember all your abuse, ridicule, and mistreatment, just as you remember everything that happens to you.

Use praise.  Give praise, recognize effort and improvement, and show appreciation.  Everyone, no matter how old (less than one day, or more than one hundred years), needs praise.  Use praise to encourage any progress, no matter how small.   When possible, give the praise in front of other people.  Don’t give praise in glowing generalities; people won’t believe you. Be specific.  Don’t say, “You did a great job.”   Describe what you see, how you feel, or what exactly was done.  Say, “You did a great job.  You finished two days ahead of schedule.”  If you have to, dig deep (very, very deep if necessary) and find something specific that is nice or good to say.  Say, for example, “You are wearing a great shirt.”  “You have a wonderfully unique way of writing.”

Surgeon:  “When I was an emergency room surgeon, I saved hundreds of lives; no one ever thanked me.  Now that I’m a plastic surgeon, I never save anyone’s life; everyone thanks me.  I like being a plastic surgeon!”

Listen, listen, listen.  Do not judge, criticize, or provide advice.  People want to be heard.  People want to talk about themselves.  If you listen carefully, the other person will tell you what the person wants, needs, feels, and thinks is most important about a situation.  Remember, you are not agreeing with the other person.  You are taking time to acknowledge the person’s experience and feelings without jumping in to disagree with or correct beliefs or opinions.  This builds rapport with the person and increases your understanding of the situation the person is in.

Good responses to use are: Oh, mm, hmmm, and I see.  Let the person know that you acknowledge what was said to you and accept the person’s underlying and usually unstated feelings.  People need this.  Doing so builds rapport and trust by showing that you care about the person, recognize how the person feels, accept the person’s feelings, value the person’s opinions, and think the person is important and of value to you.  Focus on what the person is feeling and experiencing.   Express empathy for and recognition of the person’s feelings. Do not judge, criticize, nor provide advice.  (All feelings are acceptable, but not all behaviors.)  If you comfortably accept bad feelings, the other person won’t get stuck on them and can move on 

Little Girl:  “Let’s play house.  I’ll pretend to be the Mommy.  You pretend to be the Daddy.”Little Boy:  “Okay, you talk and I’ll pretend to listen.”

Next, tell what you’ve heard.  Even if you can’t do anything about it, the other person wants to know that they have been heard.  To do this, tell what the other person wants, how the person feels, and what the other person thinks is most important.  Make sure that the other person is satisfied that: you know what the other person wants, feels, and thinks is most important and the problem or situation has been fully voiced.  If a person says, “I’m not being paid fairly.”  You say, “It must be very upsetting to you to feel you are not being paid fairly.”  If your daughter says, “I’m running away.”  You say, “It must be very difficult for you to live here.”  If someone says, “I was kidnapped by aliens.”  You say, “It must be very frightening to be kidnapped by aliens.”  If your child says “I want a new toy.”  You say, “You want a new toy don’t you?”

State your support.  Mirror what the other person thinks is most important about the situation.

- “I want you to be paid fairly too.”

- “I want you to be happy here too.”

- “I want you to come home too.”

- “I want you to be independent too.”

- “I want you to get the praise you deserve for your hard work too.”

- “I want you to get the recognition you deserve too.”

- “I want you to feel safe too.” - “I want you to have a new toy too – I’ll get one for you as soon as you earn it.”

If you are trying to help a person who is sad or depressed, don’t be afraid to talk about the situation.  The person is probably too sad or depressed to bring it up if you don’t ask.  Don’t doubt that the person is serious and don’t make the person feel worse.  Don’t say, “You are being illogical,” or “You are hurting others who worry about you.”  Reframe the logic of the sad or depressed person by saying, “What can I do to help?  I don’t want you to be unhappy or sad.”

Negotiate.  After you have heard the other person, if the other person wants something or you want something then it’s time to negotiate.  There are many negotiating techniques. (Many are described in my book). Techniques for negotiation include compromise.  However, never compromise on bad behavior.  Ending your acts of poor communication and getting on the right side of another person do not mean tolerating person’s bad behavior.  Bad behavior should never be tolerated.  Tantrums, violence, drug use, lying, stealing, threatening, laziness, and cheating are not acceptable either to you or society.  Never give in to them.  (If you give in once, the other person will know that you are negotiable, and will keep raising the ante until you give in again.)   Techniques for ending bad behavior include limit setting.

Change the world.  Wouldn’t a world be a great place if everyone treated everyone else with dignity, respect and consideration – just the way you want to be treated?  If in every encounter, starting at birth, everyone was respected and listened to – never humiliated, wouldn’t lives have been saved at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Omaha?  The road to this utopia starts with all of us using good communication skills with everyone in every encounter.     

4. Respect and Disrespect of Religions – a Two-Way Street.

Millions thanked God that Gillian Gibbons was home safely after creating an international stir in Sudan over her unintentional disrespect of Islam by allowing her grade-school students to use the name of Islam’s prophet to name a teddy bear – an action considered a sacrilege by Muslims.  And rightly so, this ignorant disrespect should have been reasonably resolved.

Respect and disrespect are two-way streets.  Just as Muslims should rightfully and strongly object to disrespect and demand respect of their religion and its beliefs, they should just as rightfully and strongly object to disrespect and demand respect of other religions and beliefs.

Respect the religions of others and they will respect yours.  Disrespect the religions of others and they will disrespect yours.

   

3. Salt is addictive and dangerous.

It’s hard to think of salt as an addictive substance, but it is.  And you thought that a small can of Campbell’s tomato soup had over 1700 mg of salt just to make it taste good.  No, it’s to get you hooked on their salt-laden soup, so you buy, buy, buy.

And that would be alright except, too much salt isn’t good for you.  Fifty percent (50 %) of the white race is sensitive to salt, seventy-five percent (75 %) of the black race.  Sensitive to salt means that it can kill you with high blood pressure, heart disease, and strokes.  Don’t think that this is news to Campbell’s, they are and have been well aware of what has going on and the dangers of a high sodium diet – yet they continued to knowingly ply you with their addictive and dangerous product to protect their profits and because it was legal.

Human Beans and human beings need about 400 mg of salt per day.  More than about 1500 mg per day is dangerous, especially if you are salt sensitive, over 50, or black.

Getting on a low-salt diet of 400-1500 mg per day will bring your blood pressure down to about 115 over 75 if you are otherwise healthy.  (If you have high cholesterol, you may need to be on an unsaturated fat diet as well.)

Obviously, Campbell’s soup company doesn’t care much about me or you because they could make good tasting soup with much less salt – but then we wouldn’t get addicted to their soups would we?  (And if you are addicted to salt, you wouldn’t buy low salt products, would you?)  Well, Campbell’s, take your salt-laden, salt-addicting, deadly soups and keep them, I make my own soups with little or no salt and they are truly delicious.  Yum, yum!

Since most of you are addicted to salt, almost all soup makers as well as well as makers of most other foods you buy, put in lots of salt and go along with your addiction and their bottom lines.

Well, 40 years ago, I decided that I wasn’t going to be addicted to salt-laden, deadly food, so I have been on a low-salt diet ever since.  It just really ticked me off to have some money grubber try to addict me to their product and not care if it killed me or not.  Now, the rest of the world may catch up (see below) with the money-grubbing purveyors of salt-laden addictive foods.

Actually, It looks to me that it may be 40 more years before any effective government action is taken to stop the poisoning and killing by excessive, addicting  salt, so each of you is going to have to take matters into your own hands and conquer your addiction to salt on your own. 

But, if your blood pressure is 115 over 75 or lower, and you’re not on any blood-pressure lowering medicine that has horrendous side effects, why worry?

Here are some Quotes from an article by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 29, 2007

WASHINGTON — Best known for deciding whether medications are safe and effective, the Food and Drug Administration is weighing whether to crack down on plain old salt, which doctors say is harmful in the quantities most Americans consume.An increasingly vocal medical community has joined consumer groups to demand government intervention, and the review could lead to federal limits on the salt content of processed foods such as canned soups and breakfast cereals.

At issue is whether the FDA should change its official classification of salt as “GRAS” — Generally Recognized as Safe — and instead declare it a food additive subject to limitations.

FDA officials say they view excess salt in the diet as a serious public health issue, but the agency is keeping its options open.“We certainly recognize that it’s a big problem for a lot of people, and consumers should have choices if they want to reduce their salt intake,” said Laura Tarantino, director of the FDA’s office of food additive safety, who is taking a leading role in the agency’s review.Too much sodium has been linked in scientific studies to high blood pressure, a major risk factor for heart disease and stroke.The National Academy of Sciences recommends that adults consume no more than 2,300 milligrams of sodium daily, roughly the amount in a teaspoon of salt. The target is lower — 1,500 milligrams — for people at higher risk for high blood pressure, including those over 50 and African Americans.

The AMA cites estimates that 150,000 lives could be saved annually if the nation were to reduce its sodium consumption by 50%, a goal the doctors’ group says can be attained within a decade.

But Jacobson said his group’s research shows that the sodium content of the same types of packaged foods can vary dramatically. For example, Contadina tomato paste has 237% more salt than Hunt’s — although Contadina tomato sauce has 33% less sodium than Hunt’s. Such findings suggest there’s room to lower sodium levels without affecting taste, Jacobson said.

In Finland, government and industry have collaborated to bring about a 40% decrease in sodium consumption since the late 1970s, according to the AMA. In the United Kingdom, government regulators set voluntary sodium reduction targets for about 70 kinds of processed foods.

ricardo.alonso-zaldivar@latimes.com

2. Socialized Medicine in America – The Facts about Medicare

Medicare is socialized medicine.  It’s great!  Millions of Americans have it.  They all think that it’s the best deal around.  So do I.  If we didn’t, we would spend our Medicare fees on something else.  If someone isn’t happy with Medicare (outside of it’s cost), I’d like to know why.

No matter what you have heard about socialized medicine in England and how poorly it is working,  Medicare works just fine thank you.

Under Medicare, I go to only the best doctors in the country.  I usually go directly to a specialist if I feel it’s indicated such as when I tore up my knee playing racquetball.  All of the doctors that I want to go to accept Medicare as their total allowable fee.  Medicare pays 80%, I pay 20%, after a small annual deductable.  Many Medicare-approved HMOs offer even less cost, but they usually add in lots of restrictions such as who I can go to and gatekeepers.

Prior to me being Medicare eligible, Northrop Grumman took care of my medical insurance, and I really haven’t noticed any difference under Medicare.

Medicare protects me from the unsavory price gougers that swindle and bankrupt patients without insurance – Medicare may allow $500 for a procedure, but someone without Medicare or other insurance may be billed $15,000 with no recourse other than an dubious explanation, “We have to charge so much to make up for all our indigent patients and the low prices that we are ‘forced’ to accept by Medicare and insurance companies.”  Before 2004, when Medicare started covering emergency room treatment, even Medicare patients were always grossly overcharged by emergency rooms unless they were checked in to the hospital at least overnight.  Fortunately that loophole has been closed.

Another thing that I like, unlike commercial health insurers, Medicare doesn’t spend time and resources trying to cancel my insurance for whatever reason.  I know It’ always there no matter what!

Now Medicare offers prescription drug coverage.  I’m very happy with it.  I don’t have much experience with this because Northrop Grumman has always provided this coverage for me, but everyone I know that has it seems very satisfied.

All the scare tactics about socialized medicine in America are baloney. Medicare is great!  Let’s give everyone in America Medicare and let them pay as they are able.  Our costs to treat the poor will go down drastically as the poor are no longer forced to wait until their illness is out of control before going to a price-gouging emergency room instead of a $50 clinic.  Right now the clinics won’t accept poor patients because they have no way to get paid, and instead route the poor to expensive emergency rooms that can bill exorbitant fees to the local governments.  Maybe this explains why there is great opposition to Medicare for the poor by for-fee emergency rooms.

   

1. Tax on the Rich – the Facts.

Nobody likes taxes!  Not the Republicans, not the Democrats, not the conservatives, not the liberals, not the rationalists, not nobody, no how!  Anyone who paints any one of these as liking taxes or wanting tax increases is a low-life pandering to an uneducated electorate.   However, we all do want our governments to provide the necessary services and essential functions – and we know that we have to pay for them.  What we all want is a fair and reasonable tax system that is optimum for our country and all Americans.

All I know about taxes, I learned from the Old Testament.  The story goes that Joseph’s ten older brothers were jealous of their younger brother Joseph, who was his father Jacob’s favorite.  So one day they sold Joseph into slavery, an act that led to him ending up in Egypt.  Being a very bright Jewish boy, one thing led to another and at age 30 the Pharaoh appointed him Governor of all of Egypt.  Joseph’s tax policy was to increase taxes in the years of plenty, pay off all of Egypt’s debts and deficits, and build a big surplus (much like President Clinton did during his terms in office).  Joseph then cut taxes in the lean years and spent off the accumulated surplus to put the country back to work building pyramids and other infrastructure.  This tax strategy was very successful – set a tax level that pays for essential government services and functions, in times of plenty raise taxes on all and accumulate surpluses, and in lean times cut taxes on all and spend off the surpluses.  Good, sound economic principles.  Violate them at your peril, and pay the piper.  That’s why we are paying the piper now.

Using this tax strategy, we would not have relied on the Fed to cut interest rates to bail us out of a recession – creating a terrible 100% inflation of property values, extensive turmoil in the financial markets, despicable lending practices, and dreadful suffering of the last buyers into the game.  Now all are paying the piper.  Cutting interest rates again to bail out the financial markets that caused the current situation and to rescue the unthinking come-lately buyers will just compound the problems that are catching up with us.

I have a lot of rich friends.  Many are millionaires.  Many are multimillionaires.  Many are multi-multimillionaires.  Many were like me and were dirt poor growing up.   Some of the rich (not necessarily my friends or acquaintances) have annual incomes of over $50 million, over $100 million, or even over $1 billion.  And that’s great!  What a wonderful country we live in that provides and allows this kind of opportunity for those who are blessed with wonderful genetic talents or wealthy parents.  Those of us who have achieved some measure of wealth owe something extra to the country that enabled our success.  That something extra usually takes the form of paying taxes – a progressive tax that increases as income and wealth increases – the more we benefit from America, the more tax we pay.  On the other hand, someone who has not participated in our blessings perhaps because of illness or disability (mental or physical) is not expected to pay as big a tax bite as we do – in some cases, someone who works but does not earn a living, may actually receive a subsidy at tax time.

The worst taxes of all are the flat and sales taxes where rich and poor pay the same tax rate (8.25% in California).  The poor who can afford to buy only necessities may go hungry because of this regressive tax.  At least in California, food and medicine are exempted from this tax – unfortunately, the rich (who have plenty of money to pay it) are exempted as well.

Here are the facts of our current tax system (2006).  The super rich after running out of tax shelters pay the long-term capital gains tax rate of 15%.  The not so super rich who have incomes primarily from employment or short term non-qualified dividend gains over $61,300 pay a tax rate of 25% (married filing jointly) or over $336,550 pay a tax rate of 35%.  Thirty-five percent (35%) is the top federal rate – but don’t forget the state rate of 9.5% max in California, – 44.5% total tax federal and state combined.

So the problem is that the rich pay federal taxes of 35% but the super rich pay only 15%.  Is that fair?  Obviously not!

So what to do?  Right now the tax burden is falling on the shoulders of the middle class and near rich.  More of the burden should be placed on the super rich giving them an opportunity to pay back America for creating the environment that allowed or enabled them to be super rich.  But care must be taken that the incentive remains for purchase of dividend paying stocks – after all, isn’t that why we own stock, to share in a company’s annual profit?  Prior to recent tax changes, qualified short-term dividends were taxed as ordinary income so the incentive was to buy only stocks that appreciated for long term capital gains; dividends were out of favor so the stock market became badly skewed as a result.  (Bush got this one right!)

What’s best for America is a progressive tax system that increases as income and wealth increases yet incentivizes buying dividend-paying stocks.  Tax cuts for only the super wealthy hurt our economy – look at what happened when a large tax cut for the super wealthy was made just before the great depression – soon thereafter America sank into the great depression that lasted until FDR created jobs (but didn’t go as far as he should have) and WWII federal spending finally ended joblessness.   Look where we are today after the recent huge Bush tax cut for the super rich.  Soon thereafter, the country slipped into a deep recession and the Fed had to drastically cut interest rates and thus caused huge real estate inflation where home prices doubled in three years, gasoline prices tripled, and food prices almost doubled.  (Read any newspaper and it will cover the fiasco the mortgage lending institutions have made out of these drastic interest rate cuts.)

Now we are to sliding back into recession with some hoping that the Fed will again bail us out with ill-advised interest cuts and forgive the excesses of the mortgage lenders –which won’t fix the problem.  Now, at least, no one is stupid enough to want to give the super rich another tax cut – thank goodness!  The way to get our economy going is to raise taxes on the super rich so they pay their fair share and spend the money creating jobs that benefit all Americans – roads, water supplies, power, transportation, research, education, and health care.  Whatever we do, we shouldn’t cut interest rates again – they are already at historic lows.