The Electoral College Allows Institutionalized Coup

 
In this last presidential election, I am beginning to think of the electoral college as the device that allowed Trump to become president by an institutionalized coup.

He didn't win the popular vote, Hillary did. But, the electoral college allowed him to push aside the vote of the people and take power.

If this happen in another country, such as Belarus that is having its own troubles right now, the United States and countries around the world would not recognized the new power.

At the Supreme Court, Trump and the GOP have solidified a decades long battle to place judges on the court that agree with the institutionalized coup.

Finally, with Trump stopping the census count early, he is hoping to take power away from congressional districts and states that tend not to support him his co-conspirators the GOP, thereby ensuring the GOP will be able to continue with their coup into the foreseeable future.

Tariffs Are an Indirect Tax on Consumers, Not China

Tariffs are an indirect tax on consumers, despite what Trump and the GOP tell you.

When there are tariffs in place, consumer goods coming into the United States are charged a tariff. 

The tax received from the tariff goes to the United States treasury.

The retailer who purchases the consumer goods pays the additional cost that the tariff caused.

The retailer then will raise the price of the product to cover the cost of the tariff.

When the consumer purchases the product, the price includes the cost of the tariff. 

Therefore, as simple as this is, the consumer is paying for the tariff tax. 

There should be no increase in taxes, direct or indirect, without specific approval of the voters.

Since the Constitution specifies that all revenue bills are to be introduced in the House of Representatives, it is the House and only the House that should be able to raise revenues.

Socialism is Not a Failed Economic Policy

One of the big myths in politics today supported by the right is that socialism is a failure and that it has failed in every country that embraced it.  They give many examples of countries that a have failed in a big way.

What the right doesn’t talk about are those countries were socialism has been successful.  Take for example just a few, The Netherlands, Ireland, England, Sweden and Norway.  In any list of successful socialist countries, you must also include Israel, even if the right says it is not a socialist country.

They make sure their supporters focus on Venezuela, Cuba and a host of other failed countries. Those countries didn’t fail because their economies were based on socialism but because of the politicians and despots that managed those countries. 

The managers of those failed socialist countries were despots that were looking to increase their own wealth and the wealth of their supporters.  They were also just giving the citizens anything they wanted to win their support as opposed what is needed, that which the country was able to provide and they failed to manage their systems in an honest and practical manner. 

Another reason for their failure was the United States’ policies toward socialist countries in general and some specifically.  We cut off not only aide but also trade and business relationships. 

Cuba is a great example of the United States policies that forced the countries to fail.  Not only did we stop trade with them by preventing American citizens and businesses doing business with them, we also worked with small countries in the hemisphere that depended on the United States for a large share of their economies from doing business with Cuba.

In the end, there are successful socialist countries.  They are countries that don’t feel the wrath of the United States policy toward them and that have managed their economies in a responsible manner.

Don’t forget that when you hear the right talking about how socialist countries fail, because they don’t fail.

Note:  It should be stated here that I didn’t provide a definition for socialism.  The point of the blog post was not to provide the clearest and most precise definition of the economic theory but provide an example of the deceit of the right when it comes to socialism.