J.C. Moore Online

Current events from a science perspective.

As the article explains, ” revenue collected through payroll taxes, plus interest, will be sufficient to fund retirement benefits until 2023. After that, Social Security will have to dip into the Trust Fund until the trust fund runs dry around 2036.” That is true, but the Social Security Trust Fund was set up to pay for the surge in baby boomers who will go into the system the next few years, and when it is exhausted, its job will be done.  After 2036, Social Security will be able to pay 77% of its obligations through collections, which is hardly going broke.

Just as Social Security was changed in the 80′s to allow for the surge of baby boomers, it can also be changed to allow for the short-fall that will start occurring in 2036. Currently, wages over $106,800 are not subject to SS withholding taxes. A recent  poll  found that the change most Americans prefer is to also subject wages over $106,800 to Social Security taxes  - which would extend the Trust Fund through 2083.

Claiming Social Security is going broke is a wrong and harmful idea as it plays into the hands of those who want to change Social Security for political and special interest purposes.  

(c) 2011 J.C. Moore

This link is to a Tulsa World Cartoon showing Congress playing President Obama like a fiddle. Many who commented on it used it as an excuse to criticize Obama. They need to stop and think.

Yes, Congress is playing Obama like a fiddle. However, it reminds me of the story of Solomon. When two women came before him, both claiming the same son, Solomon ordered the boy cut in two and each woman given half. When one woman, cried “No”, she would give up her claim, Solomon awarded her the child, as she obviously cared more for it.

When Congress demanded Obama extend the tax cuts or they would cut benefits to the unemployed, Obama compromised. When Congress would have let us default on our debts, causing untold damage to our financil institutions and our citizens, Obama compromised. You may criticize Obama for compromising, but I think it is clear who cares more for America.

Democracy is based on the idea that in a free exchange of ideas, the truth will win out. Speech designed to mislead, misinform, or intimidate is an anathema to our purpose. We are guaranteed a right to free speech and we should use it wisely.

Free Speech: We won our independence from England and established a democracy that allows for a peaceful change of laws and leadership by ballot. The one time we tried another path, we had the Civil War, the most destructive war in our history. Recently, we seem to have forgotten our motto “E Pluribus Unum”. There are some who wish to divide us for their own purposes. Speech designed to mislead, misinform, or intimidate is an anathema to our purpose. Democracy is based on the idea that in a free exchange of ideas, the truth will win out. We are guaranteed a right to free speech and we should use it wisely. -

Free Speech And Responsibility: “It is absolutely the responsibility of every political figure, media personality, inclusive of all social media outlets and inclusive of all their respective contributors to use their freedom of speech wisely and in a manner that is considerate of the fact that there are delusional and unbalanced people in our midst who may interpret some statements too literally and seek to act upon them in a tragic way.” by Tom Vermillion

Discourage Hate Speech: There have been a number of articles and posts in the aftermath of Congresswoman Giffords being shot. Many wonder if it may have been the result of hate speech by some of our public figures and media entertainers. Whether the incident turns out to be caused by hate speech or not, now is a good time to try to put an end to hate speech. Several people have suggested things we may do. The one we can surely do something about is to stop using or encouraging hate speech ourselves.

The Americans United for Civility Petition below is a nonpartisan effort to encourage civility in our private and public speech.
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
WE THE UNDERSIGNED American citizens,

Mournful of the deaths of many at the hands of one in Tucson,

Inspired by the bravery of heroes who risked their lives to save others, and

Mindful of the present state of incivility which exists in public discourse;

Do hereby call upon elected officials, all media, and fellow citizens to:

Reflect upon the recent tragedy,

Examine their contribution to our present political climate, and

Commit to discourse that is civil and does honor to the United States of America.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
.                                                                            by Stephanie Hampton

If you think this is a worthwhile cause, you may sign the petition online at: The Americans United for Civility Petition. And, please pass it on to others.

More You Can Do: No matter your affiliation, hateful, misleading, or disrespectful speech by our leaders and representatives is unacceptable. Write your representatives and ask them to go on record as condemning it. Let those who do it know it is not acceptable. Speak up when it comes up at town hall and campaign meetings. Point it out in letters to the editors or on your local newspaper’s web sites. Stop supporting candidates that use hate speech and let them know why. Refrain from using inflammatory language in your replies and focus on the issues and the facts. Our nation has many problems that need workable solutions. We must join together to solve them.

(C) 2011 J.C. Moore

V   Share this.

My qualifications. You may think the title is unusual,  but science is about using observation and reason to understand the world.  I think some reason is needed in the Second Amendment debate.  I have some qualifications as I grew up in Oklahoma where camouflage is the unofficial state color and most everyone owns a gun, or two, or more. I own several and have hunted and shot targets since I was old enough, that’s 12 in my family. My dad thoroughly trained me in gun safety and I was warned if I ever violated a safety rule, I would be 21 before I ever touched another gun. I have  known many gun owners who are fine men  and women and I was an NRA member back in the days when it encouraged marksmanship, sportsmanship and gun safety.  The observations   are  significant events  chosen to illustrate that recent attempts to remove some restrictions on gun laws may be a bad idea.

Humorous Observations. I’ve observed a lot of use and misuse of guns in my life. For instance, I have a neighbor who shoots his AK-47 off his back porch into the lake. He doesn’t have a proper backstop and there are at least 20 houses in range of a ricochet. I’ve talked to him about that and the disturbance but he insists it’s his right and perfectly legal. I’m not sure that’s so as neither the bullets nor the noise stop at the edge of his property, but it’s not a good idea argue too much with a man holding an AK-47. I’ve learned to adapt, though I feel a little conspicuous wearing my orange hat when I go for a walk or work in the yard. I’ve noticed that guns tend to boost people’s egos, which might be a good thing. But it also seems to make some people feel invincible and take chances a reasonable person wouldn’t take. Some of my neighbors recently marched on Washington with their guns to “take back our country”. They either trust the government more than they let on or they have lost it. The government has tanks and planes and nuclear weapons.

Not so Humorous Observations. In Nevada recently, a Sheriff’s Deputy and National Guardsman just back from Afghanistan, was called to check on a domestic disturbance. He was gunned down as he stepped from his patrol car by a man wielding an assault rifle. Last year, two deputies in a small town in Oklahoma went to serve a man a warrant for a minor offense. The man opened up on them with an automatic rifle as they stood at the door, killing both and wounding a passerby across the street. A witness said the shots came too fast to count so I looked up the rifle. The ad says it is not good for hunting but might be useful for self-defense or to take to work.   Those officers never had a chance. In my hometown, a man got upset by an editorial a woman wrote in the local paper. He bought a handgun at the local pawnshop and the owner showed him how to load it and fire it. He then went to the cafe where the woman worked and shot her dead right in front of all the customers.

Politics. Unfortunately, the 2nd amendment has become a hot political issue and some of our politicians have used it to the limit – and then some. If one politician wants to allow concealed carry, another will see that and raise him an open carry, and another will up that by an open carry in bars. An important rule of gun safety is that guns and alcohol don’t mix. The Oklahoma Legislature has topped all that by passing a bill exempting the state from Federal gun laws. The Governor vetoed the bill and the override attempt failed, but the sponsors have vowed to keep trying – at least until the next election. A legislator who is a former state trooper, says that it is a “bad, bad, bill that will make law enforcement in Oklahoma a very dangerous job”. He’s right. The supporters must have forgotten that Timothy McVeigh, the terrorist who blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, was stopped for a traffic violation but was held when the patrolman noticed he had a concealed  handgun loaded with Black Talon ammunition. McVeigh was still in jail when they traced the bombing to him.

Rights. We are guaranteed our Second Amendment rights and no one is really trying to take those away. While considering our gun rights, we need to also consider the rights and safety of our peace officers and our citizens. Registration of handguns, background checks, safety training, and a cooling off  period for buying handguns seem to be good ideas. No one really needs to own an assault rifle or bullets designed to  penetrate an officer’s safety vest. If we truly respect our officers, we will give them the regulations they need to prevent crime and have some safety in their work. Other amendments, such as the First Amendment, have reasonable restrictions to insure public safety and  protect the rights of others. It should be no different for gun rights.

There was quite a contrast between the Tea Party and the Coffee Party meetings. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck were at the Tulsa Convention Center this month to kick off their “Take Back the Country Program.” In front of about 6,000 enthusiastic Tea Partiers, they criticized President Obama’s administration, Washington politicians, progressives, journalists, Democrats, liberals, moderates, and conservatives who actually want to conserve something. The ex-governor of Alaska took shots at Obama — whom the crowd booed — and made fun of the Democratic congressional leaders. An animated Beck attacked progressives, saying they are for revolutionary government intrusion and they misinterpret the Constitution as a living document. (He is apparently unaware of the 27 Amendments). The crowd was really upset that they are subject to taxes and regulations and they want to take their country back. A small group of protesters stood outside the Convention Center holding American flags and signs saying “Take our Country Forward” and “Say no to hate and fear-mongering.” That’s not likely as Palin and Beck have found the power of hate and fear -and also the profitability. They each received a large, but undisclosed, fee for their performance.

In contrast, across town was the organizational meeting of the Coffee Party. They are people also unhappy about how things are going in Washington, but they have a very different plan for addressing the problem. The Coffee Party is a National movement being formed from citizens who think that government has a proper role in our lives and who just want it to function. The goals of the Coffee Party are to end the partisanship that has kept the government from functioning, to halt the flow of misinformation, and to end the hate some people have against those who disagree with them. To join the Coffee Party, you just have to agree with the pledge:

I agree to conduct myself in a way that is civil, honest, and respectful toward people with whom I disagree. I value people from different cultures, I value people with different ideas, and I value and cherish the democratic process.

Issues brought up at the Coffee Party meeting were partisanship, health care, the environment, banking reform, the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, job creation, corporate lobbying, the national debt, and the flow of misinformation. The group agreed that an individual could not solve these problems alone, but that we should take “E Pluribus Unum” seriously. We may have very different ideas and viewpoints, but we must put those aside and work together to solve the problems facing us as a country. The most important thing that we can do as individuals is to abide by our pledge and to support candidates, both Democrat and Republican, who are willing to work with the other party in a civil fashion to solve the problems confronting us.