I'm not making this, it's from a story on today's Bike To Work Day, emphasis mine:
"At DC's Freedom Plaza, Under Secretary for Policy Roy Kienitz spoke about why we are so keen on putting bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure on an even footing with roads and transit--and laid out a number of practical points to bike skeptics:
"We have some cold, logical reasons for this policy. We believe all transportation investments should justify themselves based on how effective they are in meeting overall goals like safety, environmental sustainability, convenience, etc. And it turns out that travel by bike helps us achieve all of these things. Plus, bike infrastructure is flat-out less expensive."
Also at Freedom Plaza, Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff spoke about the role that bikes and transit can play in fostering livable communities. "When I'm not riding public transportation," he added, "I'm on my bike!"
Many of my old colleagues in Congress agree, especially Rep. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon who has been a passionate biking advocate for as long as I can remember. Rep. Blumenauer and 23 members of Congress--from both sides of the aisle--sent me a very kind letter yesterday thanking me for and DOT for "recognizing biking and walking as important components of our transportation system that deserve dedicated funding." Rep. Blumenauer has a great op-ed in the Huffington Post today on this subject as well.
Exciting things were also happening closer to DOT headquarters this morning. Next door, at Nationals Park, the Federal Highway Administration's Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Manager Gabe Rousseau spoke about the $1.2 billion federal investment in bicycle-pedestrian projects this fiscal year. He also reminded attendees that over 4 billion trips last year were taken by bicycle. Both of these are new records."
See more on this fantastic development at http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2010/bicycle-ped.html
These are quotes from people with the power to make the profound changes they now advocate. This is an exciting and overdue change in the way transportation dollars are allocated.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Sunday, May 16, 2010
California Proposition 13 in 1978, and 2010
Calif. bill seeks to close property tax loopholes
By CATHY BUSSEWITZ, Associated Press Writer
Sunday, May 9, 2010 at 10 a.m.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Democratic lawmakers are determined to close tax loopholes they say cost state and local governments hundreds of millions of dollars each year, as they search for ways to trim California's enormous deficit.
A report by the union-funded California Tax Reform Association found that the share of property tax paid on residential property has increased since two-thirds of voters approved California's landmark Proposition 13 tax law in 1978, while the share paid on commercial property has decreased.
In Contra Costa County, for example, taxes on residential properties now make up 73 percent of property taxes collected, up from 48 percent in 1978.
Democrats and unions say many corporations are using loopholes when they buy and sell properties to avoid having them reassessed and their property taxes go up.
"The system is an incredible mess," said the association's executive director, Lenny Goldberg. "People are constantly changing their share of ownerships, figuring out ways to avoid reassessment."
So, a great idea, stopping senior citizens from being forced to sell their homes due to rising value, has been corrupted by corporations, nor real surprise here. The fact that our government, and I use the term 'our' loosely, has taken so long to even begin to do something about this corruption. The Republicans are opposed to 'tinkering' with the law, again no surpise here.
Why is it so hard for government to make things right? Of course this law needs to be fine-tuned, getting rid of the 50% rule regarding ownership. Doing so will take away a property tax excemption, provide more taxes to government coffers, and regain the spirit of the law.
For details on the report, follow the link.California Tax Reform Association Report on Prop 13
By CATHY BUSSEWITZ, Associated Press Writer
Sunday, May 9, 2010 at 10 a.m.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Democratic lawmakers are determined to close tax loopholes they say cost state and local governments hundreds of millions of dollars each year, as they search for ways to trim California's enormous deficit.
A report by the union-funded California Tax Reform Association found that the share of property tax paid on residential property has increased since two-thirds of voters approved California's landmark Proposition 13 tax law in 1978, while the share paid on commercial property has decreased.
In Contra Costa County, for example, taxes on residential properties now make up 73 percent of property taxes collected, up from 48 percent in 1978.
Democrats and unions say many corporations are using loopholes when they buy and sell properties to avoid having them reassessed and their property taxes go up.
"The system is an incredible mess," said the association's executive director, Lenny Goldberg. "People are constantly changing their share of ownerships, figuring out ways to avoid reassessment."
So, a great idea, stopping senior citizens from being forced to sell their homes due to rising value, has been corrupted by corporations, nor real surprise here. The fact that our government, and I use the term 'our' loosely, has taken so long to even begin to do something about this corruption. The Republicans are opposed to 'tinkering' with the law, again no surpise here.
Why is it so hard for government to make things right? Of course this law needs to be fine-tuned, getting rid of the 50% rule regarding ownership. Doing so will take away a property tax excemption, provide more taxes to government coffers, and regain the spirit of the law.
For details on the report, follow the link.California Tax Reform Association Report on Prop 13
How Much Government?
On the Back Page feature of Parade Magazine, May 9, 2010, David Gergen has an article about government spending. Here are some scary facts from that article:
- Public spending by federal, state, and local government was 24% of the GDP in 1950, 35% before the Great Depression, and could hit 44% this year.
- The European Union has agreed that it is dangerous for a country to allow its publicly held debt to exceed 60% of its GDP. The Congressional Budget Office says that the U.S. could hit 60% by the end of this year, and on it's current course could hit 100% by 2020.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
'(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction,' 45 Years Later
ABCNEWS ended their newscast tonight with a tribute to the anniversary of the greatest rock n roll song of all time, born 45 years ago. Nice tribute, ABCNEWS. After 45 years of hearing it over and over, it's still one of my favorite songs of alltime. ABCNEWS Story on Satisfaction
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Cheap Energy Addiction Leads to Human and Environmental Disaster
The recent tragic deaths of coal miners offshore oil rig workers and the growing environmental disaster have everyone from Credo Mobile/Working Assets to the President talking about knee-jerk reactions.
Let me present an alternative view. We demand cheap energy, and then go nuts when this produces death and destruction in the production of that cheap energy. Suppose that when the cost of gasoline was so high a couple of years ago, the federal and state policy makers had enacted new tax policy, something along the lines of gasoline will never sell for less than $3.90 per gallon, with the federal tax floating up and down to keep the gas at that price. Extra taxes would have been collected to help pay for our deficits, safety features in mines and oil rigs, damage repair for energy disasters like the one in the Gulf, mine disasters, etc. At the very same time, we would have reduced our demand, as happened when the price was so high. The high price helps incorporate the true cost of energy, and makes alternative energy forms more competitive price-wise. It also reduces the pressure to build new oil rigs, dig out more coal, and build new nuclear power plants.
Of course, higher costs of energy and the resulting reduction in demand will also decrease the need for war abroad.
Our problem is an addiction to cheap energy, pure and simple. When the true cost of energy is built into the price, we will all make better judgements, from demand to increasing supply of then cost-effective alternative energy. This is the message that we need to shout from the rooftops, continuously, instead of knee-jerk reactions to once-in-25-year catastrophic events.
That's my observation, what's yours?
Let me present an alternative view. We demand cheap energy, and then go nuts when this produces death and destruction in the production of that cheap energy. Suppose that when the cost of gasoline was so high a couple of years ago, the federal and state policy makers had enacted new tax policy, something along the lines of gasoline will never sell for less than $3.90 per gallon, with the federal tax floating up and down to keep the gas at that price. Extra taxes would have been collected to help pay for our deficits, safety features in mines and oil rigs, damage repair for energy disasters like the one in the Gulf, mine disasters, etc. At the very same time, we would have reduced our demand, as happened when the price was so high. The high price helps incorporate the true cost of energy, and makes alternative energy forms more competitive price-wise. It also reduces the pressure to build new oil rigs, dig out more coal, and build new nuclear power plants.
Of course, higher costs of energy and the resulting reduction in demand will also decrease the need for war abroad.
Our problem is an addiction to cheap energy, pure and simple. When the true cost of energy is built into the price, we will all make better judgements, from demand to increasing supply of then cost-effective alternative energy. This is the message that we need to shout from the rooftops, continuously, instead of knee-jerk reactions to once-in-25-year catastrophic events.
That's my observation, what's yours?
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Income Gap Grows During Recession - Not exactly a news flash
According to an article in today's Parade Magazine: Even as the economy shrank last year, the income gap—the divide between the country’s richest and poorest citizens—kept growing. In 1978, CEOs at the largest U.S. companies earned 35 times as much as the average worker. Today, that figure is more than 300:1, according to the Harvard Business Review.
In 2008, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that income inequality had reached a modern high, with the wealthiest 10% of the population earning 11.4 times as much as the poorest 10%. Research by Kevin Hallock, a professor at Cornell University, indicates that the trend persists: “From 1979 to 2009, after adjusting for inflation, the highest earners in the U.S. saw dramatic growth in their earnings while the lowest earners now make less than they did 30 years ago.”
Income inequality tends to be high in places with large populations of the very rich, like southern Connecticut, or the very poor, like Brownsville, Tex. It is also high in cities like New York, Miami, and Chicago, where middle-class people have fled to the suburbs over the years.
A gap between society’s rich and poor can have ugly consequences. Countries with greater income inequality have higher rates of teen pregnancy, infant mortality, obesity, mental illness, drug use, imprisonment, and homicide than countries where wealth is more evenly distributed, according to research by epidemiologists Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett.
In the U.S., measures like the progressive income tax, Medicaid, and welfare are used to address income inequality, but some economists and advocates say that we should go further. Nations like Austria, Belgium, and the Netherlands spend 7% to 8% of national income on social services for working-age people, compared to 2% in the U.S.
That figure is unlikely to change, however, as polls show that Americans believe people get ahead in life by virtue of their own efforts. “If you think the process is just, you might think the outcome is just, even though some people are homeless and others are very comfortable,” says Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution.
— Rebecca Webber
There is a balance between coddling people and investing in people. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and the full potential of each individual, are the responsibility and should be the goal, selfish and otherwise, of every member of our society. Why would any one want anything less?
In 2008, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that income inequality had reached a modern high, with the wealthiest 10% of the population earning 11.4 times as much as the poorest 10%. Research by Kevin Hallock, a professor at Cornell University, indicates that the trend persists: “From 1979 to 2009, after adjusting for inflation, the highest earners in the U.S. saw dramatic growth in their earnings while the lowest earners now make less than they did 30 years ago.”
Income inequality tends to be high in places with large populations of the very rich, like southern Connecticut, or the very poor, like Brownsville, Tex. It is also high in cities like New York, Miami, and Chicago, where middle-class people have fled to the suburbs over the years.
A gap between society’s rich and poor can have ugly consequences. Countries with greater income inequality have higher rates of teen pregnancy, infant mortality, obesity, mental illness, drug use, imprisonment, and homicide than countries where wealth is more evenly distributed, according to research by epidemiologists Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett.
In the U.S., measures like the progressive income tax, Medicaid, and welfare are used to address income inequality, but some economists and advocates say that we should go further. Nations like Austria, Belgium, and the Netherlands spend 7% to 8% of national income on social services for working-age people, compared to 2% in the U.S.
That figure is unlikely to change, however, as polls show that Americans believe people get ahead in life by virtue of their own efforts. “If you think the process is just, you might think the outcome is just, even though some people are homeless and others are very comfortable,” says Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution.
— Rebecca Webber
There is a balance between coddling people and investing in people. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and the full potential of each individual, are the responsibility and should be the goal, selfish and otherwise, of every member of our society. Why would any one want anything less?
Sunday, April 4, 2010
First Quarter 2010
My trip to Vermont was greatly successful. I met several cousins for the first time, including one who lives near Rutland, which is where my research has led. I found a new, oldest gravesite for an ancestor, in a very small town outside Rutland. Later I found a photo of this same headstone in The Westcott Family History book, or what I call The Big Red Book.
Today, Easter, is the first family holiday without Kathy's Mom Eileen and her oldest brother Michael, both of whom died since March 12, and only six days apart. A blessing for both of them, their quality of life had deteriorated greatly, especially for Eileen. They are now free of pain and suffering, and have joined Kathy's Dad Hank.
Today, Easter, is the first family holiday without Kathy's Mom Eileen and her oldest brother Michael, both of whom died since March 12, and only six days apart. A blessing for both of them, their quality of life had deteriorated greatly, especially for Eileen. They are now free of pain and suffering, and have joined Kathy's Dad Hank.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)