Friday, October 17, 2008
(Portions of this entry have been taken from the NYTimes. To see the full article, you can visit http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/us/politics/17innovate.html?pagewanted=1&ref=science.)
There have been questionable messages from both Presidential campaigns in recent weeks designed to instill negativity about one another. This has the harmful effect of taking attention away from what matters: how you feel about the issues. In many cases, this effect is deliberate.
As Election Day fast approaches, I want to ask a favor of you: As you prepare to vote, please decide what matters most to you for our country. Try your hardest to block out the fluff being thrown at you and vote based on what you feel will most impact our nation.
Case in point on the fluff versus the issues: Joe the Plumber (fluff) and American Innovation (issue).
We’ve all heard of Joe the Plumber. He is the icon of Senator McCain’s argument that Senator Obama’s tax policies will harm small businesses and jobs in America. (Obama argues that his tax policy will reduce taxes for 95% of Americans - those who earn less than $250,000 per year). It is now known that Joe is actually Samuel; he is not a licensed plumber; not only does he not make the $250,000 that would see a tax increase under Obama, he actually owes back taxes; and he is a registered Republican. The bottom line is this: this is fluff designed to take your eyes of the ball. This guy isn’t the issue; tax policy is. Vote based on the tax policy you want. This likely means that if you make less than $250,000 Obama’s your guy; and if you make more than $250,000 McCain is your guy.
Now consider America’s eroding position at the leading edge of global innovation. Our nation – once the Tiger Woods of science and invention – will have a high tech trade deficit in the neighborhood of $60 billion this year. Realizing this trend, in 2005 the National Academies released a report called “Rising Above the Gathering Storm” that proposed the government sponsor scholarships for math and science teaching careers and college students studying science, math and engineering; increase the budget for basic research by 10% for seven years; and establish programs that make broadband access available nationwide at low cost. This is an issue I care about, and the candidates have very different approaches to resolving this issue.
McCain proposes deregulation and lower corporate taxes – providing businesses with more resources for research. He also favors limiting exports of certain high tech items to countries like China for security reasons. According the journal Science, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former economic adviser and head of the Congressional Budget Office under Mr. Bush, serves as McCain’s “point man” on science, having been in touch with experts on climate, space and “science in general.” (He also stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.)
Obama feels cutting costs and shrinking government won’t cut it, and supports increased government funding of basic research and education in math and science. He worked with other Senators (McCain not among them) to introduce a bill built on the recommendations from the National Academies. He has also established a science advisory committee led by Dr. Harold Varmus, a Nobel laureate who is president of the Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and this month has the endorsement of 61 American Nobel laureates in science.
The era of American technological dominance was fueled by government investment in research and education. Would U.S. companies invest resources into R & D or pad employee salaries? These are things you must consider for yourself. And, most importantly, vote based on the approach you support.
6 comments:
When the USA has the 2nd highest corp tax rate in the world,if BO raises the corp tax rate he will prob make us nr one. Will that help keep jobs in this country?How can BO reduce taxes on 95% of the country when 50% don't pay any taxes anyway?
(He also stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.) This sounds arrogant and could have been excluded from the blog. If it was meant to be funny, it wasn't.
I do not want a socialist country! I want to be different than the world. That is why the people I used to work with came here. They came from a socialist Poland and they don't want to go back!
I feel sorry for the growing companies that will be hit with this tax of Obama. It will cause them to stop and the jobs that it would have created will no longer be there.
I am very glad and interested to have some anonymous comments on here! Discussion is a wonderful thing and I hope to see more of it.
In response to #1: I am very interested in where you are basing your '50% don't pay taxes' on. If you could please send me some info, I'd appreciate it. All I've heard regarding corp tax during the debates is that there are loopholes that make the effective corp tax rate lower than the number listed on paper. Again, if you've got info, send it my way! My email is matthewtimothydavis@gmail.com.
In response to #2: I apologize if I offended you with my attempt at humor regarding the Holiday Inn Express. But I did find it funny that McCain's point man on science has an economic background and only associates with scientists. As noted atop this entry, there are parts of this entry taken from the NYTimes. (I believe the NYTimes is an Obama-leaning paper.) My point was simply that when it comes to instilling a new sense of American innovation and supporting science, Obama seems to have a more concrete idea in mind while McCain does not. If you have some info that contradicts what I found in the article, I'd be glad to see it!
Most importantly, during either the VP debate factcheck.org noted that less than 2% of small businesses report more than $250,000 (in response to gov. palin repeatedly sticking to the republican attack that obama is hurting job growth) - so it's cool to feel sorry for the 2%, but understand that the other 98% count too.
Since you question some of the statments in the comments, where do you get the fact that McCain's science man only talks to other scientists? Of all federal taxpayers, the top 25% pay 86% of all federal income taxes. The bottom 50% pay only 3% of all federal income taxes. (ref RushLimbaugh.com about taxes) It sounds to me that you are a Lib, and probably won't believe anything on his web site anyway. While McCains people use Holiday Inn, Michelle orders lobsters and caviar at her hotel.
I am an independent voter and have been listening to the candidates for the past year and a half. As yet, I have made no decision. You seem to be well learned, so I am asking for your help. Could you please give me your opinion on both candidates. I would like to know your pros and cons on each one. The time is getting short and I do want to make sure I'm going in the right direction.I am worried about what is in store for our country.
In response to #4:
1.) As I mentioned in my post, some sections were based largely on an article from the NYTimes. The link to the article is posted atop the entry, and you will find breakdowns of each candidate's scientific communities there.
2.) I in no way challenge the fact that the wealthiest few pay a huge portion of taxes - while different studies provide different exact numbers, the fact remains unquestionably true. But the 'Obama tax increase' that McCain's campaign is trying to scare up votes with is a discontinuation of a tax cut for $250,000+ earners in 2010.
3.) The 'Holiday Inn Express' comment was a reference to the Holiday Inn Express advertisements where people say something brilliant in a given area not because they are experts, but because they were smart by staying at a Holiday Inn Express. Your comment about caviar was equally as smug, so thank you for stooping to my level.
4.) I voted for W. This election, I am voting for Obama for exactly the reasons I asked others to do in my entry: based on the issues I feel are most important and which candidate I feel best addresses them. I am supporting a candidate - not a party.
In response to #5:
Regarding pros and cons for each candidate, I strongly believe that if you have been following each candidate for the last 18 months you are likely equally (if not more!) informed than I am. Remember that regardless of who wins, he will have to work with the other branches of government to pass legislation - meaning some of the ideas we have been hearing of may not come to fruition. Each idea will have to gain the approval of the House and Senate. So ultimately, it's about whose overall approach you support.
I think that the best thing for you to do is to decide what issues matter most to you, such as taxes, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, alternative energy and reliance on foreign oil, education, and many others to choose from. You can even make a list on paper. Next to each issue, you can write which candidate you support most for that issue. After all is said and done, you might vote for the candidate who you support most often.
If you would like to talk more about this, please do continue to comment. Either way, I am very glad to see that you plan to cast your vote!
Post a Comment