The news in Michigan is that Hillary is one of four Democrats listed on their Jan 15 Primary, but all other leading Dem. Candidates have refused to put themselves on the ballot as part of the DNC stripping MI of their delegates for advancing their Dem. primary date.

What's going on?

MI needs the greatest help with their economy, but they won't have any democratic delegates and hope that if Hillary wins, she'll reinstate their delegates...but once the Dem Primar is over, what's the purpose of restoring their delegates, since the only vote left is the actual Pres. Election?

Need help understanding this. I'm relatively new to MI and ay keep my voting priviledges in my former state if I satisfy the residency rules while I've maintained a residency there as well.

Need help to understand what is going on with those states that have advanced their primaries and why they won't have delegates, and how it effects the Dem. Primary

Signed, HELP, Polar Capsule

Happy Holidays to everyone & Quick Thanks to those that picked up on the last blog by posting their thoughts re: Health Care that stemmed from the earlier post re: wage inequality in America. Please continue to share your thoughts and references on this topic. I'll offer by last thoughts on HealthCare here and progress to Education & Economy to keep our discussions moving through the highly valued topics.
_________________________________________________
Topic: Economy: Wage Inequality, Benefit Inequality
Book Ref: State of Working America 2006/2007,by Economic Policy Institute. (SWA '06-'07, EIP)
Links to referenced statistical charts for this book can be found at the authors site: www.StateofWorkingAmerica.org or www.epi.org
___________________________________________________
Intro:
Health Care benefits have not always been entitlements or fringe benefits of employment. They began after WWII to attract the best employees. Republicans use this as a reason for terminating and reducing government and employer allocations for healthcare benefits-Medicare, Medicaid, Employer Provided Benefits.
Given we live in extraordinary times
Extraordinary Times: 1995-2005:
1)productivity gained speed to 2.5% /year (twice the rate of the prior 22 years (since 1973)
2)Productivity accelerated in the early 200s to 3.3%/year, and overall from '95-'05, prod. increased 33.4%
3)wages for the time period were the same in 2005 as in 2001. Pay rose from 1996-2001 and unemployment lowered to 4.0%of increased productivity,

the jobless recession recovery( when tight labor markets of the late '90's disappeared and fast productivity growth no longer translated into strong wage growth), unparallel growth in productivity/wage growth(fig 3A,3B), and employees absorbed half the rise in costs for employer provided health premiums.
__________________________________________________________
Please see extended post for the collection of organized facts from this text (SWA '06-'07, EIP)
___________________________________________________________
How this has influenced my perception of our Presidential Candidates:
Fundamentally, the middle class is beyond carrying the burden of taxes and experiencing further reductions in their take home pay in stark contrast to the producitivy the middle class produces while the higher percentile classes experience unprecedented income growth (wage, capital gains, benefits, other). The middle and lower classes are experiencing an increase in the overhead of their family budget while wages stagnate and decline in current dollar values, while those of the upper percentiles increase rapidly. The growing inequality of health care fringe benefits plateaued during the BILL Clinton Administration, then picked up again under the Repub. ,Bush Admin. This should emphasize the importance of those candidates whose election platforms promote universal health care or at least greater, more affordable, health care coverage for those who value having greater health care coverage at a lower cost and at a lower percentage of your family budget, or even hoping to afford health insurance if it is currently cost prohibitive for you today. Acknowledging employers pay less for lower wage earner's who are even able to afford the cost of their companies coverage, employers should not excuse themselves from providing a greater percentage of coverage for their employees or make it more affordable for lower wage earners. Employers may argue the volume of large wage earners may cause them as a class to cost more, than higher wage/salary earning workers, but this disparity most likely is not attributable to a reasonable reluctance of responsibility. Furthermore, Universal Health Care plans that merely offer greater variety of plans or Mandate Health Insurance by Law will not promote nor enable the 81% of low wage earners to buy into their private employers health care plans. The objective of Universal Health Care through a capitalistic model requires the ability of those demanding (asking) for health care to afford the supply. Health Care may be an inverted Supply-Demand model,as there are more that want it than can afford it, but the model can be flipped upright by acknowledging that the better capitalistic model is not to outprice the population as a scarce, valued resource, but my reducing the cost through the volume of contributors, at least for preventive medicine that can offset the need and risk of more severe, costly health care.

How this effects my view of the candidates:
Since buying into health care plans is cost prohibitive for the lower wage earners, and more difficult for lower-middle wage earners due to sharing a greater burden of the cost today compared to 1992, it is my conclusion that Universal Health Care plans that provide non-profit plans, that do not appease Shareholders but are driven by values of Board Members may be wiser since the overhead for Non-Profits are typically lower, which would reduce the cost barrier for low wage earners to buy into their private employer's plans. A mix of Non-profit and private HC providers would optimize, balance those that need a reduced barrier into health care insurance plans versus those than can reliably budget for it or for those that are financially independent. An affordable, widely available plan will reverse the growing trend of income concentration and inequality and the negative impact on society by retarding class warfare by reduction of the middle class and polarization of those that have affordable health care options and those that legitimately don't have affordable health care options. Yes, the abuse by users and exploitation by providers of entitlement programs is a concerns, but a first defense to such offenses are the line workers in health care, the primary care physicians, nurses, nurse assistants that are critical for proper allocation of health care resources, engaging patients through preventive medicine options & education, and restriction of false claims.

Regards, PC Polar Capsule.   Read More »

Bill Moyers disc. re: Impeachment:
Suggest: 1) it sh ould be done, 2) congress needs to exercise the opwer of the purse, 3) the media are not asking questions that the founder father's would have them ask on behalf of the people:

part 1 Link
part 2
Link
part 3
Link

Hillary's Response to news of Bill's Impeachment: Link

Link

I am confused.
Dem's tied Iraq to Terrorism during Clinton-Gore presidency and criticized Reagan-Bush, Bush Quayle's complacency with Saddam as well as Iraq's pursuit of Nuclear weapons.

These are the same arguments that Bush-Cheney...old grumpy men with sticks, had recently made.

In keeping with presenting both sides of a debate, I am thoroughly confused and this type of footage will be used by the Repub's as a trump card on Iraq after the Primary's are over, you just know it, and that will effect the independent and swing voters.

Please watch the YouTube video and respond with comments. I'm feeling uncomfortable with this whole Iraq, Iran issue. I don't think we know the real deal, or the real deal is the pattern of behavior of the US toward Iraq, Iran.

Regards, PC Polar Capsule

Now....that would be the turning of the tide and a definitive moment in U.S. History. The roses in the garden would bloom and return from their wilted states and every American citizen and those across the globe wouls sigh in relief and tremendous, supportive awe for hope and validated, poetic justice. The right time for a return to reason.

Link

well we could dream, but I'd like a front row ticket to Bush congratulating Gore for his success with the UN committee.

Regards, PC Polar Capsule   Read More »

Now....that would be the turning of the tide and a definitive moment in U.S. History. The roses in the garden would bloom and return from their wilted states and every American citizen and those across the globe wouls sigh in relief and tremendous, supportive awe for hope and validated, poetic justice. The right time for a return to reason.

Link

well we could dream, but I'd like a front row ticket to Bush congratulating Gore for his success with the UN committee.

Regards, PC Polar Capsule

Link

Three texts that have been helpful to understand our economy are
1) Greenspan, The Age of Turbulence
(This tells us where we were, and how we got to where we are)
2)The State of Working Class America, Economic Policy Institute
(This tells us where we are ate and what we face)
3) Congressman Jim Cooper's text,
(tells us what we don't know, DC Beltway poltics that have permitted the Deficit to grow, bad faith governance and the need to act now)

4) A series on Philanthropy in the U.S. ( a first of its kind research study reported in several (I think a 7 volume set) I read one book 8 years ago and I saw how and why the wealth top 2% donate and how tax write offs permit the bread winners to promote social programs and justice they value rather than the government. Its' an interesting, interesting read to connect and close the dots. I'll find the title when I have a chance.

Three points that I need to overcome before allowing myself to consider her.
1) Her ethanol policy (Obama was right, I sent a link proving so)
2) Flip, flopping, we all know it
3)When she described a memory of herself praying as a little gir she stuttered and stumbled throughout the entire interview, characteristicaly in a manner that HR tells mgrs to look out for when personnel lie to them.


So...bring it on Hillary lovers, convince me if you can, I'm on the fence but I'm seeing both sides push me one way or another.

Regards, PC Polar Capsule

In keeping with the ELECTION LIBRARY format, this blog cites Age of Turbulene, Greenspan, Chapter 7, A Democrat's Agenda, p.162 (see the Extended post which follows).

-----------------
so you can skip to the Extended post, read and form your own opinion or skim my reflections regarding the appropriate, the right type of candidate (I won't specify a preferred candidate...flame wars are so passe and ugly)
------------------

Influence of Text:

For me, my take home point is that a candidate with the raw intelligence of former Pres. Bill Clinton who can grasp the impact of small details up through the Big Picture, and to apply previous knowledge and experience as an expert to new situation with a substantial, successful outcome is the President for our current times, especially during the emergence of the "New Economy" and increased productivity resulting from computer and information technologies. A general conclusion from the few chapters of Greenspan's historical account indicates many people wanted to make decisions according to traditional choices independent of intelligent decision making, where the former methods and traditional policy choices would not have lead to the constructive prosperity and more equal sharing of that prosperity across the socioeconomic classes.
-----------------
So yes, Greenspans text is influencing the raw skill sets which I would like our next president to have. It may not be influencing the rankings of my candidates as I can line them up 1,2,3... yet, but at least can begin to put them into different sets of leadership experience, raw skill & intelligence, and influence on those political/industry/eduction/social/justice cogs that turn the wheels in the U.S.A. Perhaps by the primary I'll be able to deduce my preferred candidate by the intersection of those sets to see which emerges.

Maybe for the friends of the Election Library group we can discuss candidates individually, as I'm learning alot from those sharing their blogs in this Election Library group and appreciate, without teamwork to understand what's going on and each of the candidates...casting an educated vote is difficult and for as much as I'd like to cast a vote on gut instinct or morality...candidates with those above characteristics that maintain their morality without discrimination of one for another is difficult, but NOT an excuse. Can you imagine trying to please everybody in a melting pot or every 37+ American group profiles in Penny's "Microtrends"???? Unfortunately, for the sake of time, I ruled out even reading the section for convicted felons since they can no longer vote (which is odd, once restitution is paid, don't you get your full civil rights back ???)

Which is why I chose to include the excerpt describing a former President who ardently wanted the new growth to reach the middle class. In light of the Economic Policy Institutes statistical presentation showing the extremely reduced size of the middle class during the current administration (pushin us from a 3 level socioeconomic group to a 2 class (have and have not)) I felt a moment of confidence and relief that there were too good, moral citizen leaders, that formed an economic Odd Couple that exacted positive benefits for everyone.

To soften the polarity between Dem's and Repub's, perhaps some of the Repub's money management policy decisions are appropriate to increase productivity during stagnate periods of productivity and technology, essentially during a dead society, but are certainly wrong for the "New Economy" and when the rate and magnitude of change is accelerated it is a prime time to influence and direct change, and the comments by Greenspan with respect to Bushes' and Bill Clinton are clearly bifurcated.   Read More »

Why is it that the previous Dem. President's have become successful authors regarding society and change while there are none by the previous, recent Rep. Presidents ( I think this became another reason I'm glad to have forego the Repub. party and embrace the Repub. Party.

Please offer any corrections or your own observations to that of my own.

IF it's 'ture.. then damn it, I want to see that tag line used in the campaigns. It's a simple, eloquent and more than illuminating quality that differentiates the party's and the value the party's hold for U.S. Citizens.

Regards, PC Polar Capsule   Read More »

t’s noteworthy that impeachment pressure is coming from the home states of the two Democratic leaders in Congress, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

Pelosi said last year that impeachment “is off the table.” Under the Constitution, the House impeaches; the Senate then decides whether to convict and remove from office.

It’s also interesting that one of the resolutions came from Detroit, home to Rep. John Conyers, who as the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee would lead any impeachment hearings.

The Detroit resolution was co-authored by Monica Conyers, the congressman’s wife. But she hasn’t had any noticeable clout at home: Conyers said last year that he wasn’t interested in impeachment - just oversight investigations - and he hasn’t changed his stand.

Maybe the Conyers are like Eleanore and Theodore Roosevelt, good guy-bad guy. Eleanore dare to speak what her husband couldn't say directly...great team.   Read More »

Good info for you to know is in the extended post from the Apri 2007 edition of Working Class in America 2006/2007 by the Economic Policy Institute


Candidates under the light: Universal health care is acheivable and made more possible under the increased producitivey and GDP of the "New Economy", so I favor candidates that want to install National Health Care. It will impact the privatized system, professionals won't like it, because if you can publicize (not socialize) any professional group - physicians, all others' will fear they can be as well. However, the private health care infrastructure currently coexists with socialized hlth services. National Health Care can be implemented by protecting the choice, the plurialism of the patient and the practitioner and competitive market pricing with perhaps better care. The revenue savings of continued implementation of Health Care IT (The New Economy factor applied to health care) will increase producitivity, hence profits, which if applied appropriately are one of several factors that can absorb the cost of a National Health Care service, as well as restoring wage & income equality.

(also, while reading this text side by side with Greenspan's, there is not an agreement the effect of the income inequality they both cite) Next Blog, Greenspan vs. Economic Policy Institute.... Regards, PC Polar Capsule.   Read More »

Link

Shopman's post was ranked third highest and disappeared within the 2 minutes I used to scan the link content....
how does that happen???

here are some excerpts to think about. Ask yourself how it influences your views of the candidate and which has the magic to make changes for the better.

...Cricital income challenges facing working families, including periods of relatively slow income growth, greate inequality, and the stress of increased family work hours.
The reality in the U.S. shows much less mobility than such American Dream stories suggest. Int'l comparisons reveal less mobility in the U.S. than other comparable countries-Germany, Canada, Scandinavian...each one has universal health coverage.

Chapter 2: FAMILY INCOME.
(page 45) Family income probably rose slightly in real terms in 2005, but not nearly enought to make up for the losses since 2000 (e.g. median family income would have to go up by 3% real, or over 6% nominal to regain prior peak). Thus it will be at least six (6) years before median family income returns to its pre-recession level.

p44. The bursting of the financial and investment bubbles led to sharp real declines in the incomes of wealthy households in 2001 and 2002, with the biggest losses among the richest. By 2003, however, the earlier pattern was returning, and in 2004, a year when the economy expanded by 4.2% and the productivity grew 3.4%, the bottom 90% got a mere 1.4% boost in their income. The rest accrued to the top 10%, and the gains were the lrgest at the top off the income scale.

p78. Regarding Sharing of U.S. Income:
...this pattern of increased shares on either side of the middle meanas a decling share in the middle-income families, and this share fell from 71.2% in '69 to 60.7% in 2002. By this measure, America's broad middle clasas has been shrinking, with shares shifting upward and downward.

Candidates under the light: Universal health care is acheivable and made more possible under the increased producitivey and GDP of the "New Economy", so I favor candidates that want to install National Health Care. It will impact the privatized system, professionals won't like it, because if you can publicize (not socialize) any professional group - physicians, all others' will fear they can be as well. However, the private health care infrastructure currently coexists with socialized hlth services. National Health Care can be implemented by protecting the choice, the plurialism of the patient and the practitioner and competitive market pricing with perhaps better care. The revenue savings of continued implementation of Health Care IT (The New Economy factor applied to health care) will increase producitivity, hence profits, which if applied appropriately are one of several factors that can absorb the cost of a National Health Care service, as well as restoring wage & income equality.

There are a lot of blogs scapegoating the tabling of the impeachment vote. The most common response is that the inner Democrats are already bought and sold and the morals, leadership and law are drowned by re-election interests, special intersts and mediocrity.

If the people want it to happen, writing their reps is helpful, but the visual and the presence of people in the street, on the march, in a peaceful demonstration is what our reps would need to vote for impeachment....are people ready to do it?

I've contemplated a silent stand in for some values and illegal behavior that will have a direct effect on young people. Perhaps if you're concerned our country has already gone to the dogs, you'll take the chance to file your own pro se suit, or take the day off work to STAND IN infront of your Federal Court house.

Ask yourself and your friend, what are you willing to do, and potentially sacrifice, because you will be labeled one way or another once you cast your own vote and if you're not with the majority you will suffer financially on a day to day basis. It takes alot to say what another should do, but what have you done, hopefully more than a blog?!

Is this a way to polarize the U.S. and is it achieved by shrinking the middle class, boost the top half, drown the bottom half?

John Warner Defense Authorization Act, Section 1076

that allows the president to declare a public emergency and dispatch federal troops to take over Nat'l Guard and local police if deemed unfit (...aren't both the cops and fed. troops our "good guys" and what could possibly divide their good faith interpretation of their duties to protect U.S. citizens??)

Thoughts anyone??
The implications are aweful.   Read More »

This group was created yesterday so friends of PartyBuilder can recommend texts, news articles, publications and literature that are readily availble to help readers understand the current issues in greater depth without emotional opinion to help sort through the facts. After reading 2-3 topics on each major issue in the past 12 months, every book brings new epiphanies, realizations, hopeful and fearful moments of awe of the current state of the U.S.A. (Please no autobio's or bio's of the candidates).   Read More »

Just after posting the previous blog re: Fred Thompson, I conducted a little exercise with my football Sat. group, they thought I was a little off the wall, but when we calmed ourselves with breathing, and said each candidates name while laughing to encourage the rush of good endorphins and mental affinity for each candidate, we each felt greater affinity for a candidate that we did not expect to value as much. The point, if we picked a candidate on our gut instinct but what we freely associate with each candidate, we'd pick a different candidate other than who we've deductively reasoned should be President.

Yet again, my cheeriest laughs came with Edwards, Obama, Thompson and Giuliani...where did my Richardson go. When Gore's name was mentioned, he was given a standing ovation... A stupid pseudo psychology experiment, but it's alerted us that we don't have a clue, but how much more intent we are on casting our best vote.

Regards, PC Polar Capsule.