More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Norman Goldman

Norman Goldman

Posted: September 7, 2010 04:43 PM

The Plan to Save America

What's Your Reaction:

In my opinion, our politics have become fossilized; even stultified. The two parties are not appealing to voters; the ranks of the unaffiliated grow and the disillusionment of the electorate gets ever larger. It is time to break out of the politics of old and create a new awakening in American politics. I offer this plan as a way to break free of the old strictures and spark a new energy. Your comments are extremely welcome! Please note these are bullet points -- you and I will flesh these out as we move forward.

This is "The Plan":

• An economic, progressive populist agenda, focused on the economic elites that have outsourced our jobs, shifted the tax burden to the middle class and destroyed the fabric of our nation with wedge issues.
• Restore tax fairness - return to the Roosevelt/Eisenhower tax structure of a true progressive income tax;
• Tax stock transactions on Wall Street;
• End all tax subsidies to corporations;
• Re-write the tax laws to strip out most, if not all, deductions, and make the tax laws simple and progressive;
• Put white collar criminals behind bars for long terms;
• Encourage "whistle blowers" who expose waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars;
• Public financing of political campaigns and outlaw private contributions to politicians;
• Use the antitrust laws to bust up the big trusts;
• Institute a "wealth tax" to recover much of the money that has been looted by the top 2%;
• Tax companies that send American jobs overseas to punish this practice;
• Get rid of "free trade agreements" and institute large tariffs on imports to level the playing field between cheap labor from overseas that has resulted from outsourcing;
• Cut the military budget by 10% per year for each of the next 5 years;
• Leave Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as possible;
• Close many of the American military bases overseas and shift the burden of being the "world's police force" to other countries on a more equitable basis;
• Build up the unions as a counterbalance to corporate power;
• Institute "Medicare for All" as either a buy-in or through a broad based group of "nickel and dime" taxes;
• Institute a massive investment in clean, renewable energy;
• Legalize marijuana, for tax revenue and to cut down on crime;
• End the ridiculous "War on Drugs";
• Re-cast "conservatism" as being for privacy rights and against intrusion into people's personal lives;
• Reclaim God as not a divisive force.

 

Follow Norman Goldman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@normangoldman

 
 
  • Comments
  • 25
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:53 AM on 09/09/2010
Your plan has some good points in it, but your tax reform proposals are a waste of time. You can restore "tax fairness" by eliminating as many taxes as you can. Start first with the income tax, followed by corporate taxes. By eliminating income taxes you put over $1 trillion a year back into the hands of consumers to spend as they wish (like on health care or food or toys). The top 2% aren't looting anyone. They do their job and are compensated for it. They don't take dollars out of peoples wallets -- that's the governments job. If you want real tax reform then abolish income taxes. If you want businesses to do business in this country then eliminate corporate taxes and make it easier for them to operate in this country. I suggest taking the Code of Federal Regulations and burning them. Instead of large tariffs institute REAL free trade. Instead of these complicated agreements that actually do nothing to free up trade just let people buy and sell with whomever they want. You've got some really good ideas in there, mixed with some terrible ones.

Before we do anything in this country we have to stop the bleeding. We've got to at least balance the federal budget. Once we get the federal budget under control then we can, with a clear understanding of our financial state, determine what further steps need to be taken.
12:14 AM on 11/06/2010
Which city in LaLaland are you from?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:16 PM on 09/08/2010
Can't argue with that Norm, but I would echo the suggestion of more (tax) incentives for businesses to operate under a more "nationalist" premise. This is quite normal in countries like France and Switzerland.

Also;

Norm will be doing his show live in Chicago tonight at the Heartland Cafe in Evanston, from 5-8 pm!

If you like politics and fun... and booze, come on down!

It should be fun!
01:45 PM on 09/08/2010
Add term limits for legislators with constituent approval required for any kind of pension or lifetime
health care for elected representatives and senators,voted on at the end of their term. This would end the "good ole boys"cliques and the ignoring of constituents concerns in favor of big industry or special interest groups.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Cindy Tregan
Proud D.F.H. Lib'rul
11:24 AM on 09/08/2010
I'd like to see a few "carrots" instead of all the "sticks".

First one that jumps to mind is a 3-year tax credit for corporations that hire American workers and keep them for 3 years. Not the Social Security break that was put into effect, but a REAL tax break that doesn't adversely affect the retirement of less wealthy Americans.

Also, I'd like to see a return of the "Fairness Doctrine" - force media to show BOTH sides (if side 2 wishes), thereby giving a TRUE "Fair and balanced" report to the people.

And extend "FICA" tax to cover ALL income of ALL Americans, regardless of income source or quantity. No cap. No "out" for investment income.
12:02 PM on 09/09/2010
You want to "force" them to air both sides of the story? Is it ok if I force you to go to a Mosque so that you can get both sides of the story? Probably not. It's the same principle. You don't have a right to force anyone to do anything. You have the right to suggest, to persuade, to admonish, to beg, to boycott and protest, but you do not have a right to use force to get your way. Didn't you learn that when you were a kid?

Where do you get the right to tell someone, who has taken the rather large financial risk to open a radio or television station, what they can or cannot air on their station? What right do you have to tell someone else how they can use their property? If you don't like what is being said on one station then you have every right to change the channel to one more your liking. You have that right -- the right to not listen to what is being said. But you have no right telling someone else what they can or cannot do with their own property.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Cindy Tregan
Proud D.F.H. Lib'rul
02:31 PM on 09/10/2010
Actually, I get the idea because the radio and TV stations operate under a license that requires them to provide programming in the public interest. As with any license, there are still rules that must be followed, or that license can be revoked. You may own your car, but you are required to use it lawfully or lose your license to drive. You may own your business, but if you operate illegally, you can have that license revoked. You may have a license to sell liquor in your restaurant, but if you are caught selling to minors, you won't be allowed to do that anymore. It's not "me" telling someone what they can or cannot air - it is the LICENSING authority... in this case, the FCC

I am going to assume you are too young to remember when the Fairness Doctrine was enforced. I'm not.

I remember very well that people would be given a short time to present a "rebuttal" to any opinion pieces, and the rebuttals were labeled as such to the audience. Kind of like how media outlets used to give free air time for charities to promo their events.

And I'd welcome the opportunity to learn how Muslims worship. But your analogy is flawed. There is no licensing requirement involved with religion.
08:39 AM on 09/08/2010
Hi Norm, Policy Wonkette is right. It would be virtually impossible to pass much of “The Plan” under current conditions. I think of odd parts were to pass they would only be watered down to the point of loosing the intended result, a la Financial Reform or Healthcare Reform. I believe we must first do the following:
O well can't post here, too many characters.
08:52 PM on 09/07/2010
"THE PLAN" throws the American worker under the bus without addressing illegal and legal immigration! Why didn't he include requiring all employers to use E-verify, so only Americans would be put to work, not illegals from Mexico. The use of E-verify could put 10+million Americans to work in a matter of months by excluding illegal aliens from working and taking American jobs.
"THE PLAN" throws the American worker under the bus a second time by not addressing legal immigration that lets approximately 1 million immigrants in each year to take American jobs! Legal immigration should be halted until every American who wants and needs a job has one, it's that simple!
Norman Goldman has to ask himself in not addressing illegal & legal immigration in his plan to put Americans back to work, "am i deliberately putting the American worker at the back of a very long line at the unemployment office by playing politics"???
08:05 PM on 09/07/2010
Norman, it's illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater; it's also illegal to advocate the overthrow of the government by force (Jefferson, Payne, et al, were of course retroactively exempted from this). After a successful coup, the rebels are of course exonerated by themselves. I would happily exonerate you and would expect you to do the same for me. However, at this juncture, the successful coup perpetrated by Reagan/Clinton is still not only in effect as the New World Order, but is steadily being tightening like a noose around the gonads (I would normally say "balls," but I think HP is a family show) of the working public - which is still unaware that a coup has taken place. "Thank God" the oligarchs cry, "for a free press that is part of the team!"
I'll send you a reference through FB that you can use in a future article that will further the argument that this former plutochracy has become an oligarchy.
Best,
Seamus O'Bannion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sinick
06:33 PM on 09/07/2010
I love it Norman and it all makes perfect sense--to some of us. However, since I am "Sinick," I say "it ain't gonna happen. In a perfect world, yes. In the real world of the United States of Ain't We Great," no.

Not going to happen until Che 2 arrives. "I'd rather die on my feet rather than spend my life on my knees."

Viva de Revolucion!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
PolicyWonkette
06:28 PM on 09/07/2010
Norm -- I can't say I disagree with any of your proposals. I like your list very much. Particularly the tax reform. I think a lot of people don't recognize the social engineering that is achieved via our tax code.

I think, with our current election laws, your list would have trouble getting passed.

I've come to believe that election reform is our best chance for getting this country back on a progressive path -- one that both dem and republican voters could support.

We could begin w campaign finance reform -- but look what the Supreme Court has done on that issue. We might need other changes before that could get passed.

What about weekend voting -- to make voting more convenient for everyone. So people don't have to leave work or risk their jobs because they stand in line to vote.

I'd like to see Instant Runoff Voting so that third and fourth party candidates have a real chance to win elections rather than just being spoilers.

I'd like a voting rights amendment to the constitution so that voter intimidation and interference become more serious crimes with severe penalties.

Paper ballots and hand counting -- no electronic voting or ballot readers.

And last but not least, a grassroots organizing strategy for bringing more progressive, non-corporate candidates to the primaries.

P.S. Love your radio show.
06:17 PM on 09/08/2010
Agree with the rest, but: Instant runoff voting still has spoilers.

45%: A > B > C
10%: B > A > C
15%: B > C > A
30%: C > B > A

If this election is just A v. B, B wins, 55% to 45%; but add C, and the winner changes to A, just like it would under plurality! This is a spoiler; IRV has spoilers.

It may LOOK like IRV should fix our problems, but that's only because 3rd parties are so small now. IRV lets them grow a bit, but then we're right back where we started: spoilers, voting for the lesser of two evils, and a two-party dominated system.

A better solution, one that ACTUALLY has no spoilers, is approval voting (or even better, score voting). Check out "Gaming the Vote" by William Poundstone, or my blog, The Least of All Evils, at http://leastevil.blogspot.com
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
PolicyWonkette
06:24 PM on 09/08/2010
A SHOULD win. A is the number one choice of 45 % of the people, and the number 2 choice of 10%.

While B is the number one choice of only 25%. B would be knocked out in the first round -- would be knocked out in a regular campaign that would require a runoff between A and C.
06:00 PM on 09/07/2010
I'm looking forward to hearing about more about "The plan" on Norm's radio show. He is a real common sense guy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tcagle
Solar and wind energy consultant
04:52 PM on 09/07/2010
Please add to the list proportional representation, which would allow minority opinions to be voiced and considered, unlike the winner-take-all system we have now that disenfranchises too many people.