Third, the government must guarantee our long-term viability in the global economy. The only way to do this is by pouring resources into education. The system of schooling we have right now is broken, but not for the reasons everyone on Michelle Rhee's Christmas list thinks: it's broken because it matters far too much where a child is born and what their parents do.
Our system is based on property taxes for funding, which means that the richest areas have the best schools and the poorest areas have the worst. There are a large number of complicated variables, but the one thing that is consistent is that economics matter. The land of opportunity should include opportunity for everyone. I am lucky enough to work in a district where resources are available, but it is not true everywhere. In order to be prepared to survive and thrive in the modern, ever-changing world, students need to have access to technology and they need to have teachers who are highly trained and constantly developing. Want higher quality teachers? Raise the standards for certification, increase pay, and give teachers regular opportunities to learn and improve their practice. It's definitely expensive, but it can't possibly be as expensive as not doing it.
Our system is based on property taxes for funding, which means that the richest areas have the best schools and the poorest areas have the worst. There are a large number of complicated variables, but the one thing that is consistent is that economics matter. The land of opportunity should include opportunity for everyone. I am lucky enough to work in a district where resources are available, but it is not true everywhere. In order to be prepared to survive and thrive in the modern, ever-changing world, students need to have access to technology and they need to have teachers who are highly trained and constantly developing. Want higher quality teachers? Raise the standards for certification, increase pay, and give teachers regular opportunities to learn and improve their practice. It's definitely expensive, but it can't possibly be as expensive as not doing it.
Fourth, government has to ensure that the nation's infrastructure is sound. Bridges, highways, dams, power grids, water conduits, and other infrastructure in this country is collapsing. It's not sexy to get funding for repairing an old bridge, but as the people in Minnesota will tell you, the cost of not fixing the infrastructure is too high to bear. The cost of maintaining our current shoddy infrastructure is trillions of dollars. The cost of replacing it, far higher. However, one thing that we can be sure of is that it's only going to get more expensive.
Fifth, part of guaranteeing that the nation is viable long-term is protecting the environment. It's appalling to me that businesses and the right are so opposed to this. A well-designed plan would ensure that the needs of American business and commerce are met, while still protecting ourselves for the future. In the grand scheme of things, it wasn't long ago that coal and oil were unnecessary and worthless. Now they power the world. What resource are we destroying today that we may need tomorrow? Additionally, the idea that clean air and water are too expensive to fight for is appalling. Even if climate change is not driven by human activity--and the scientific community agrees that it is--we should still be able to agree that pouring poison gasses into the air can only have negative effects. Which brings me to...
Sixth, trust the experts. There has been a trend in America against intellectuals and intelligence. There are a host of areas where the political process is supplanting expert analysis and study. Three come to mind:
- Science: Science has always been a target. Scientists are not always right, and science is subject to the same human tendencies as all other fields, but the current claim from the right that science itself is corrupt and interested only in supporting the status quo is misguided and intentionally ignorant. Scientists make their name and their money by finding evidence that overthrows the contemporary norm, not by supporting it. So when scientists present such a united front on topics such as evolution and climate change, it's certainly not because there's a massive conspiracy to maintain the current beliefs.
- Education: Everyone went to school, so everyone assumes they're an expert on education. We don't assume that because we drives cars, we can all be mechanics, but that is the thought when we comes to schools. Want comprehensive education reform? Give professional educators time and resources and get out of the way. Just because you won one of the 435 seats in the House of Representatives does not mean that you are a scholar in all areas.
- Economics: No one serious would make the claim that economists all agree on anything. However, economists are experts in the field, and replacing their know-how with sound bites and folksy wisdom is no way to run a 300 million person economy. The United States is not a family of five, so claiming that families can't run a deficit so neither can a nation is specious. It's also ridiculous. I own a house, have two credit cards, and two college degrees. I've got plenty of debt. How many families really don't have debt? Back to the initial point: economists understand that the economics of the United States of America is different than the economics of Ken Susman. Trust the experts. (As a not-unrelated side note, a well-maintained national debt is critical to national health. In both World Wars, we were able to borrow the vast sums of money needed because we had an excellent credit history. If the United States had defaulted on its loans after the Spanish-American War, who would have lent us money in 1917?)
Seventh, we must understand that business regulations are not a restriction of rights: they're the rules of the road. Well written regulations ensure that all parties are playing the game the same way. Strong regulation should be a centerpiece of a well-functioning government, and the first priority should be protecting employees and consumers. If employees want to collectively bargain, why should there be legal ramifications for that? Banks committed fraud? Why shouldn't they be punished? American business has socialized risk and privatized profit. Why did the government spend hundreds of billions of dollars bailing out banks and companies instead of bailing out citizens? If the economy tanked (partially) because of bad mortgages, why not bail out the homeowners instead of the mortgage holders? Here's a thought: if your mortgage is found to be fraudulent, your debt is eliminated. The bank takes the loss. Did a bank defraud too many buyers? Then I guess they go out of business. Would that hurt the economy? Undoubtedly. But with no disincentive to act responsibly, American business is pushing to return to the good old Gilded Age. However, if careful, consumer-centered regulation is passed and enforced, the economy can be returned to the true capitalist idea of enlightened self-interest. In addition, it will create what economists, politicians, and CEOs alike agree is critically important to an economy and investment: stability.
Finally, the tax system must be progressive and fair. Progressive taxation is a hallmark of a society that is functioning properly. Progressive taxation helps society run smoothly by ensuring that the government can help people at all levels of society. The wealthy business owner may claim that she gets nothing from the government, so why should she pay? She has an educated workforce, access to the legal system, transportation and communication infrastructure, intellectual property rights, real property rights, etc etc etc. Plus, study after study has shown that higher tax rates on the wealthy actually is linked to greater economic growth for the country than the opposite. Additionally, closing loopholes would seem to be no-brainer. I have a tax break because I have a mortgage. Why? If I sell my house and make a profit, there's my financial incentive. The typical example, of course, is yachts, and the reasons for cutting those tax breaks should be obvious. But another piece of it is tax subsidies. I understand paying farmers not to grow food (protecting the soil is incredibly important for the long-term health of the country), but what are we paying the oil companies for?
To summarize, America must become a place where people are what matter most and where the government is focused on ensuring that the basic needs, both long-term and short, of all of its citizens are met and opportunity is provided for all, not those born in the right neighborhood. This is not socialism--it is the logical extension of the American Dream. The Dream American politicians talk so much about is not dead, and it's not the idea that anyone who tries hard enough can become rich regardless of the cards stacked against them. The Dream is that America provides the opportunity and a level playing field that allows those with the drive and determination to reap the rewards. Right now, that is not case. But there is no reason at all that it can't be. The real question becomes whether we have the drive and determination to make that Dream possible once again.
No comments:
Post a Comment