A critical review of Lewis M. Simons' Opinon Column in USA Today

(photo by lewismsimmons.com)

Lewis M. Simons is an author and Pulitzer prize winning journalist.  He has written for the Knight-Ridder Newspapers, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and written two books.  The majority of Mr. Simons' work has been on economic and civil issues of Asian countries.  "Simons' op-ed and analytical articles have appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, Foreign Affairs, Atlantic and Smithsonian magazines. He has contributed to National Geographic and his work also has appeared in USA Today, The Huffington Post, The Daily Beast and Daily Kos. He has appeared on ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN." (Amazon.com)  He is obviously an accomplished and a well established journalist.

Mr. Simons' Column: Why Americans don't just 'let them die' is addressing reactions during a GOP debate hosted by the Tea Party on September 12, 2011.  Texas Rep. Ron Paul was asked whether society should allow for an uninsured person to die rather than receive any form of Government intervention.  People in attendance cheered in favor of letting the hypothetical person die.

Simons is obviously upset by the reaction to the question as reflected in his arguments against the Republican party. He argues that their position of being the 'the party of life' is no longer valid because of this specific reaction and that Republicans are just plain mean spirited.

Though I could agree with his opinion, his argument is lacking any valid supporting points.  Instead he seeks to solicit an emotional response from his liberal audience by attacking Sarah Palin's comments on "death panels" and Michele Bachmann's uninformed statements about the HPV vaccine. Simons presents statistics from The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to prove Bachmann's statements about HPV were wrong, but fails to provide any evidence on why the GOP has lost it's position or is mean spirited.  Both, Palin and Bauchmann are two subjects that could be described as disliked, if not hated by most liberals. These two think tanks are easy targets that should stir up emotions in an effort to get the audience on his side.  Simons then veers from his argument once again by speaking generally of how Europeans and the Japanese are baffled by American's "emphasis on the individual at the cost of society".  A statement based on assumption and generalization of an entire country's societal view, not fact.  He then closes his argument with a slippery slope fallacy saying that any opposing argument will cause "a return to the not-so-grand old days when hundreds of thousands of Americans were disabled, disfigured or died of measles, polio, tuberculosis and a host of other diseases."

In all, Simons appealed to emotions and lacked any tangible evidence to support his argument that conservatives are meanies who hate life.  This column reads more like a person venting frustrations by pointing fingers and name calling.  Activities that are all too common in our political climate.

Rich getting richer, you... not so much

 Capital Gains Tax Rates Benefiting Wealthy Feed Growing Gap Between Rich and Poor by Steven Mufson and Jia Lynn Yang, Published: September 11

       This article published by the Washington Post is an example of how money and lobbyist have influenced public policy, specifically the tax code.  The current tax code allows for people like billionaire Warren Buffet to be taxed significantly less than the people that work for him.  These lower taxes are not lower income taxes (35%) but rather a lower capital gains tax (15%).  Capital gains is money made through investment.  The majority of money generated by the wealthy is considered capital gains.  Most Americans rely on salaries for their income, salaries that are taxed at more than double than that of capital gains.
      
       Buffet is advocating for a more fair tax system, but his position is not a popular one.  The vast majority of the mega-rich would like to lower or eliminate capital gains taxes all together.  They have enlisted economist, politicians, and the media to convince the average voter that these lower taxes are necessary in order to create jobs. All this effort has worked.  Their success is directly reflected by the lower percentage of taxes they pay on overall income.


        Republicans have a well an established platform of low/no taxes for the wealthy (or job creators as they put it). A platform not generally shared by Democrats, but with aggressive lobbying and generous campaign contributions the wealthy have drawn bi-partisan support.  This has created a void, leaving a select few in Government pushing for equality in the tax system.  So who represents the middle class/poor?  Not many, its simply more profitable to support the rich.

       This lack of representation for the average citizen is widening the gap them and the rich.  This is a classic example how money can buy influence and over representation of a minority group.

(Picture via Washingtonpost.com)

Wall Street Protest Sept 17th

I stumbled upon something interesting, #OccupyWallStreet is starting to trend on twitter.  It's an effort to organize a mass protest against the massive wealth gap in America and voice people's displeasure with Wall Street greed.  It's going to be interesting to see how the Government, Banks, and Walls Street react to these protests.

There are also hints that the "anonymous" may hack banking systems.

#Occupywallstreet #Sept17 #antibanks #anonymous