0541 - Errors

We begin with a round of applause for our Chief Information Officer on the Staff. Returning from Atlanta, he was faced not only with a dead main computer, but with a dead back up computer (a Dell, which had the habit of dying stone dead). A new computer had arrived, and the doughty CIO set it up, then stole the hard drive from the dead main computer, transferred it into a portable computer enclosure (brought from Atlanta) and was able to transfer almost all files into the newest Micron, and here we are, ready to provide all eager Readers with the most current and egregious Errors.

Our first and most prominent Error is, of course, the invasion of Iraq, which demonstrably and most certainly had nothing at all to do with the 9/11 attack. Nor, as former National Security Advisor Clark has just been all over the TV saying, did Saddam have the slightest connection to al Qaeda. That, Readers, is a major and fatal error and may well cost the Presidency – as perhaps it should.

Second, we select the error of oversimplification, much favored by politicians of all tints. Take, e.g., the charge that candidate K or B favors raising or lowering “Taxes”. Well, that is gross oversimplification. What taxes? As all know, there are many kinds of taxes (not in Anguilla!), and they have differing impacts, purposes, and results. High taxes on cigarettes may discourage smoking, presumably good, as well as covering medical costs for the fumers. Gas taxes might (though they don’t seem to) stimulate more efficient cars. [The Staff stayed at a hotel in Atlanta that had two black Hummers to run its customers anywhere within three miles; loved ‘em.] As for graduated income taxes, The OO confesses no belief in any simple formula for determining how much progression is too much progression. It seems fair that rates should go up in higher brackets, so executives who pull down fifty million a year pay higher rates. Yet, any tax rate over 50% gives a feeling of unease. At the same time, since great fortunes are based on the vital principle that no gains are taxed until realized (i.e., until stock or property is sold), the overpaid guys may just have to pony up relatively more from what fragments they declare as taxable.

Third, still on the subject of taxes, we declare solidarity with Bill Gates, Sr. and Warren Buffett, both of whom (with the OO) see grave dangers in totally abolishing the Estate Tax. Talk about preserving the inheritance of families in their “Small Farms” is plainly phony. If small farms (say, under $10 million valuation) are threatened, forget about them. That is no reason to threaten the country with a hereditary plutocracy, and we are proud of Messrs. Gates, Sr. and Buffett. Way to go, Messrs.

Fourth, we point out the intellectual error being repeated by Ralph Nader. He is getting tiresome, indeed and not thinking straight. Look, Ralph, there are quite a few different types of voting. In some places, there is proportional representation, and in such spots, a minority leader who thinks he has something to say is quite right to battle on in the hope of gaining a few seats in a legislature for his adherents. That is not the way U.S. elections are held. We have two parties (haven’t you noticed?) and only one can win. Thus, since a tiny Nader vote can have only a spoiling effect, he should turn his efforts toward supporting the candidate who best stands for clean air and water, energy conservation and other such causes as Nader purports to support. Get with it, babe.

Next time: ATL [OO #542]

| Printer-friendly page | Send this article to a friend |

Home