"European Tax Rates"

I'm hearing folks say that Bernie Sanders would bring "European tax levels" to America...

Unfortunately, we already pay "European tax levels". And we don't even get free healthcare or free college out of it (and many European countries actually pay you to live while you go to college or raise children).

The total "tax burden" for the United States as a country is 26.9%, which ranks us behind European countries like Switzerland (29.4%), Greece (30.0%) and Ireland (30.8%). (BTW, Canada is at 32.2%).

BUT ... that 26.9% doesn't include all of our state and local taxes! Because we are the only country in the world with 50 different tax systems. In Connecticut, for example, we add another 13.05% in income tax and sales tax. Plus another 6.452% in property taxes (as an average spread out over the state population). That brings the overall tax burden up to 46.4% for those of us in the Nutmeg State.

That's more than Germany (40.6%), France (44.6), Norway (43.6%), Finland (43.6%) or even Sweden (45.8%). In fact there is only ONE country in the world (Denmark) with higher taxes.

BTW, these tax rates are even worse for the middle class, because the one place where the U.S. *does* have low tax rates is for millionaires and billionaires. (As business owners, and actual "job creators", my wife and paid more than 50% of our income in taxes in 2014).

So, why do we pay so much and get so little?

The biggest reason is "defense". We spent $596 billion on the Department of Defense in 2014 and another $98.8 billion on "Homeland Security". We might think "defense" is a good thing -- that we are supporting our troops and veterans. But the VA is an entirely separate budget (~$150 billion) and most of the $596 billion isn't going to pay our soldiers. Our army is the smallest it's been since 1940 and the navy is the smallest since 1915. Instead, we are spending $400 billion on projects like the F-35 Strike Fighter, which can't fly in bad weather or at night, and still has never been used in combat.

The 2nd biggest reason is healthcare. Our GOVERNMENT spends more on healthcare than any other country in the world. That doesn't even include the amount that we are all paying for PRIVATE health insurance. The reasons for high medical costs are too much to go into here (the Affordable Care Act was 1000+ pages and it only started to tackle the problem). But, compared to other countries we are completely wasting the 24% of that money that goes directly to insurance companies instead of treating patients. And we have the highest-paid doctors in the world thanks to a monopoly (the AMA) that limits the total number of doctors.

The 3rd biggest reason is prisons. It costs more to keep an 18-year-old kid in prison than to send him to Harvard. But as a country we've decided that violent crime is "rampant" (it's not) and "drugs are bad" (even though marijuana is now decrimalized in 20 states, and yet it's the #1 reason we send people to jail).

Sources:

http://norml.org/aboutmarijuana/item/states-that-have-decriminalized

https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Appendix

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=724209

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/oct/05/lindsey-graham/lindsey-graham-army-smallest-1940-navy-smallest-19/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-high-price-of-americas-incarceration-80-billion/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

The Real Reason Middle-Aged White Men Are Dying

Last week, Dr. Anne Case and Dr. Angus Deaton published a paper analyzing the change in American death rates over the last 15 years. The good news is that, thanks to improvements in the economy and the delivery of health care, the mortality rate has fallen in almost all demographic groups. The bad news is that middle-aged white men have bucked this trend. Among non-hispanic white men ages 45 to 54, the mortality rate has risen from 380 to 415 (per 100,000 Americans in that age group).

Dr. Case and Dr. Deaton were able to identify the direct cause of these additional premature deaths: suicide, drug overdoses, and liver disease (from alcohol abuse). However, they were on shakier ground when trying to explain the root cause of the increase in suicide and substance abuse in this demographic. Dr. Deaton believes that middle-aged white men are dying because they have "lost the narrative of their lives" (whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean). Since then, everyone from Paul Krugman to Mother Jones to the The Daily Caller have chimed in. Krugman goes on for fourteen paragraphs, blaming everything from rising inequality to "traditional religion" and America's relatively weak welfare system. Sweden, for example, has a stronger welfare state and places less emphasis on religion -- and Sweden's middle-aged mortality rate is about 50% lower than white America's.

Alas, Krugman completely misses the mark. While America's higher poverty rate might affect overall mortality, there's no reason that it would hit middle-aged white men the hardest. White men in their 40s and 50s are among the highest earners in the U.S. (and the world).

Dartmouth economists Ellen Meara and Jonathan S. Skinner point to more "pessimism" among whites about their financial futures; Olga Khazan of The Atlantic concludes that "Middle-Aged White Americans Are Dying of Despair"; and Canadian epidemiologist Atif Kukaswadia says that "we have no idea" what is killing middle-age white Americans.

It's hard to believe that all these "experts" are completely ignoring the real reason. It's right in front of their eyes ... if they would just look down at their calendar:

White men aren't drawing our attention because they have become more pessimistic or "lost their narrative". Middle-aged white men are exceptional for the simple reason that they have volunteered for military service at a level higher than other demographic groups, and at a level much higher than that found in any European country.

Sweden doesn't have the level of income inequality that we have. But Sweden also doesn't have the world's largest military. The United States has more than 26 million military veterans. Ninety-three percent of them are male. Veterans are at much higher risk for suicide and substance abuse. According to the VA's own report, suicide kills 22 veterans every day.

Do The Numbers Add Up?

Of course, this theory is only true to the extent that the increased mortality rate among veterans can explain the increased mortality among middle-aged white men. The basic facts do show that it is primarily white middle-aged veterans that are dying from suicide:

• Among veterans, 92.6% of suicide deaths are white (compared with 87.7% among non-veterans).
• Among veterans, 91.5% of suicide deaths are classified as non-hispanic (compared with 87.2% in non-veterans).
• Among veterans, 85.3% of suicide deaths occur in those over age 40 (compared with only 55.6% among non-veterans).

From 1998 to 2014, the suicide rate among white non-Hispanics ages 45-54 rose from 16 to 25 (per 100,000). This is the increase that two different Nobel Laureates (Krugman and Deaton) are trying to attribute to a "weak welfare state" and a "lost narrative", respectively.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 12,752,000 white non-hispanic Americans between the ages of 45 and 54. This means that an increase in mortality of 9 per 100,000 translates to an additional 1100-1200 deaths per year.

According to the VA, more than 4.9 million veterans are between the ages of 45 and 54. Ninety-five percent of the veterans in this age group are male; ninety-two percent are non-white and ninety-four percent are non-hispanic. This leaves us with 4.02 million non-hispanic white male veterans between 45 and 54. The suicide rate in this cohort is 38 per 100,000 -- higher than the rate among all middle-aged men, and higher than the rate among all veterans. If we do the math, we see that non-hispanic white male veterans in this age cohort account for more than 1500 suicides every year.

Conclusion

The rise in premature deaths among white Amercian men in the 45-54 age group can be completely explained (and then some) by the number of military veterans in this cohort. If you remove U.S. military veterans from the data, the suicide rate among middle-aged white men is actually falling.

We can argue about why military service leads to increased rates of suicide, alcoholism and drug addiciton, But that argument shouldn't include an attempt to diagnose an entire generation with ennui. We are not having a crisis among middle-aged white men. We are having a crisis among veterans and they need (and deserve) our focus and continued (and increased) support.

Dear Liberals; Dear Conservatives

Cartoon by Dave Granlund

Dear Liberals, Please stop saying that because the Second Amendment was written in 1789, it only protects the right to carry muskets. It doesn't say "the right to bear muskets shall not be infringed". It says "the right to bear arms". Arms. Swords, guns, land mines, rocket-propelled grenades, fighter jets, nukes, sharks, lasers, sharks with lasers. Those are all "arms". Those are what "arms dealers" sell. Liberals more than anyone should understand that the Constitution evolves over time. In 1789, "citizen" referred to a white male. Today, it applies to men and women, black and white, brown and yellow, rich and poor. In 1789, "arms" referred to muskets. Today, it refers to AR-15s and M-1 tanks. This is the reason you seriously need to stop playing the "musket" card. Eventually, you will give your rifle-owning neighbor the idea to fight for his right to own all arms: machine guns, biological weapons, you name it. And when his case goes to the Supreme Court, to the Roberts Court, there's a good chance he'll win. Because the Second Amendment doesn't say "muskets"; it says "arms". Also, stop picking on the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment played no role in the Senate's recent failure to pass meaningful legislation to reduce gun violence. This battle isn't being fought in the courts; it's being fought in the legislature. If you want to write an angry letter, tell Harry Reid to grow some balls and fix the filibuster.

Dear Conservatives, Please stop saying that gun registries and background checks "treat law-abiding gun owners like criminals". I keep hearing that background checks are asking the gun buyer to "prove" that she isn't a criminal, instead of starting with the premise that the gun buyer is innocent until proven guilty. Well, guess what? When I buy lumber at my local hardware store, the cashier checks the signature on the back of my credit card. Am I offended? Nope. I'm happy that they are making sure I'm not a criminal, running up fraudulent charges and passing the blame along to me. As gun buyers, we should be ecstatic that we get to prove that we are not criminals. We don't want actual criminals shooting up schools and focusing the blame on law-abiding gun owners. When I board an airplane, I go through a fucking x-ray machine that can see my testicles. All to prove that I'm not a criminal. I'm 42 years old and I still get carded when I buy beer. Do I go bat-shit crazy and accuse the convenience store clerk of "treating me like a criminal"? No. I do not. When the next Dick Cheney comes to take all our guns, we don't want him to have a list of where all the gun owners live. That is a valid argument against gun registries. But please stop complaining that you are being "treated like a criminal" just because you have to fill out a fucking form. It's not a valid argument, and it serves to invalidate any other arguments you try to make. If you want to be treated like a criminal in this country, you don't need a gun. You just need to have dark skin and a hoodie.

Fixing the NBA Draft

On May 20th, almost three million people tuned in to watch the NBA Draft Lottery. That's right -- more people watched this year's NBA Draft Lottery than have attended Miami Heat games since they signed LeBron James.

The draft lottery consists of twelve ping-pong balls getting pulled from a spinning plastic drum. But the really pathetic thing is that we don't even get to see the balls bounce around. The ping-pong balls are drawn off-camera, and then the results are put in an envelope. And then three million Americans turn on their TV to watch the envelopes get opened.

It's like bingo, but worse. It's like waiting for your grandmother to go play bingo. Then, when she gets home, asking her what happened. As an American, that makes me sad. We have nothing better to do than watch a TV show that reveals, second-hand, the results of "Bingo For Billionaires".

The good news is that we can fix it. We don't have to allocate draft picks like a church pastor calling out bingo numbers. We can replace the NBA Draft Lottery with the NBA Draft Tournament.

The NBA Draft Tournament

Instead of putting all 14 non-playoff teams into a big bucket and playing bingo, we put all 14 teams into a single-elimination tournament bracket. All the excitement of March Madness, but with the future of your favorite NBA team resting in the balance.

Here's how it works:

1) Divide the 14 non-playoff teams into two brackets containing 7 teams each (one bracket for each conference).

2) In each bracket, the teams with the most regular-season wins play each other in a 1-game playoff. The loser goes home and the winner advances to play the team with the next best regular-season record.

3) Continue until you have one winner from each conference. These two teams play for the #1 pick.

4) Award the remaining picks according to how far each team advanced in the NBA Draft Tournament.

For example, these are what the brackets would have been for the 2014 NBA Draft Tournament:

	Western Conference		Eastern Conference
Game #1	Phoenix Suns (48-34) at Minnesota Timberwolves (40-42)	Game #2	New York Knicks (37-45) at Cleveland Cavaliers (33-49)
Game #3	Winner of Game #1 (above) at   Denver Nuggets (36-46)	Game #4	Winner of Game #2 (above) at Detroit Pistons (29-53)
Game #5	Winner of Game #3 (above) at  New Orleans Pelicans (33-49)	Game #6	Winner of Game #4 (above) at Boston Celtics (25-57)
Game #7	Winner of Game #5 (above) at  Sacramento Kings (28-54)	Game #8	Winner of Game #6 (above) at Orlando Magic (23-59)
Game #9	Winner of Game #7 (above) at Los Angeles Lakers (27-55)	Game #10	Winner of Game #8 (above) at Philadelphia 76ers (19-63)
Game #11	Winner of Game #9 (above) at  Utah Jazz (25-57)	Game #12	Winner of Game #10 (above) at Milwaukee Bucks (15-67)

Championship Game

Winner of Game #11 vs. Winner of Game #12

But Is It "Fair"?

This tournament model has the advantage of maintaining the "integrity" of current system. In other words, the worst teams still have the best chance to earn the #1 pick. But they actually have to earn it -- on the basketball court.

This table shows the chance of each team getting the #1 pick using this tournament format, compared to the chance currently given to them by the NBA in the lottery:

Lottery	Tournament	Western Conference	Eastern Conference	Tournament	Lottery
0.5%	0.6%	Suns (48-34)	Knicks (37-45)	0.7%	0.7%
0.6%	0.6%	Timberwolves (40-42)	Cavaliers (33-49)	0.8%	1.7%
0.8%	1.0%	Nuggets (36-46)	Pistons (29-53)	1.5%	2.8%
1.1%	2.3%	Pelicans (33-49)	Celtics (25-57)	2.9%	10.3%
4.3%	4.4%	Kings (28-54)	Magic (23-59)	6.6%	15.6%
6.3%	10.7%	Lakers (27-55)	76ers (19-63)	13.6%	19.9%
10.4%	24.3%	Jazz (25-57)	Bucks (15-67)	29.4%	25.0%

The End of Tanking?

Because the tournament format requires that you actually win at least 2 games in order to win the #1 pick, tanking is discouraged. A bad record gives you a better position in the tournament, but you still need a team good enough to win.

It's Finally Time For The Redskins To Change Their Name

Europeans came to America, committed genocide against the societies that lived here, adopted a racial slur for these people, and then assigned that slur to the NFL team in our nation's capital. Even political conservatives like Charles Krauthammer believe that the team's name is "unmistakably patronizing and demeaning".

It's sad and horrible and shameful. It's as if the capital of Germany had a soccer team called the Berlin Kikes. Yes, it really is that bad. If you don't think it's that bad, it's only because you've gotten used to it.

But until now, we haven't had the cojones to change the name, because the Redskins haven't sucked badly enough. Nobody wants to change the name of their team when they make the playoffs and have the league's most exciting player under center (as was true in 2012, with a healthy Robert Griffin III at quarterback).

But after you go 3-13 and lose your last 8 games, your team is an embarrassment. And a name change starts to look pretty good. The last-place Seattle Supersonics changed their name (and city) in 2009. Two years later, they were in the NBA finals.

The Western Conference Champion Oklahoma Thunder (formerly the last-place Seattle Supersonics)

Picking a New Name

Thankfully, the Redskins' new name is obvious: the Washington Pitbulls.

The NFL team in our nation's capital needs to have a distinctly American name. We can't call them the "Eagles" or the "Patriots", because those names are already taken by teams within a 6-hour train ride. And we don't want to end up with a uniquely uninspiring name like the "Nationals" or "Senators" or "Capitals".

If you have been to D.C., you know that it is not a city about nature. Washington D.C. is not a showcase for pristine lakes and mountain views. It is not Portland or Denver or San Diego. You can't refer to a team from our nation's capital as the "Grizzlies" or the "Rockies". At the least, you can't do it with a straight face.

Washington is a city built around people: politicians and pundits, lobbyists and lawyers. It is a city of stubborn partisans who pick a cause, clamp down, and don't let go. It is, simply put, a city of pit bulls.

And a city of pit bulls is the appropriate capital for a country that revolves around our dogs. We love our dogs more than we love our people. We just cut $5 billion from SNAP (aka "food stamps") but we spend more than $30 billion each year on our dogs.

Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election because he strapped the family dog to the roof of his car. If he had done the same thing to one of his five sons, he would probably be in the White House right now.

          

The pit bull is the only truly American dog. "Pit bull" isn't even an official breed. Instead, the name refers to a variety of mutts that are loosely related to the American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier or the American Bulldog.

And just like Americans, pit bulls can be white or black, yellow or brown, large or small, energetic or lazy. It's time for the Redskins to change their name, and there is only one logical choice.

Unnecessary Quotation Marks

Photo by "Camille" at UnnecessaryQuotes.com

In writing e-mails to people for whom English is not their "native language", I have found it quite useful to use "unnecessary quotation marks" to "emphasize a point" or demarcate an "important term". 

Quotes have proven more useful than capitalization or italicization, because Korean doesn't have capital letters or italics. Wikipedia claims that Koreans puts dots above each syllable block for emphasis but it also says "[citation needed]". And I certainly don't want to SCREAM at a colleague, just because THEY DON'T HAVE THE COMMON COURTESY TO SPEAK ENGLISH.

So the next time you are driving through Alabama and you see a sign for "pickled eggs" at a "restaurant", consider the fact that for Sally May Jenkins of Tuscaloosa, English may not be her native tongue. You don't have to get out of the car and "urinate" on her "sign" just because you are "very angry".

Simply go inside and kindly inquire as to what Sally May's first language is. Then "listen" to her. This will go a "long way" towards mending the "antipathy" that currently "exists" between the "educated elite" and the "ignorant pig fuckers".

You're welcome.

P.S. My reference above to "common courtesy" was taken from this Steve Martin bit.

Making The Pro Bowl Matter

If the NFL wants to boost ratings for the Pro Bowl, they need to make it count for something.

NFL fans are serious. They will show up in sub-zero weather to root for a last-place team. But they won't bother to turn on the TV for an exhibition game that doesn't have any effect on the actual season.

The solution: Give the top draft picks to the conference that wins the Pro Bowl.

Won-Loss records would still be used to rank teams within each conference. But the Pro Bowl winner is guaranteed to get the #1 pick.

For example, this is the current draft order for the 2014 NFL draft:

Pick #	Team	Pick #	Team
1	Houston Texans (AFC)	17	Dallas Cowboys (NFC)
2	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	18	New York Jets (AFC)
3	Jacksonville Jaguars (AFC)	19	Miami Dolphins (AFC)
4	Cleveland Browns (NFC)	20	Arizona Cardinals (NFC)
5	Oakland Raiders (AFC)	21	Green Bay Packers (NFC)
6	Atlanta Falcons (NFC)	22	Philadelphia Eagles (NFC)
7	Tampa Bay Buccaneers (NFC)	23	Kansas City Chiefs (AFC)
8	Minnesota Vikings (NFC)	24	Cincinnati Bengals (AFC)
9	Buffalo Bills (AFC)	25	San Diego Chargers (AFC)
10	Detroit Lions (NFC)	26	Indianapolis Colts (AFC)
11	Tennessee Titans (AFC)	27	New Orleans Saints (NFC)
12	New York Giants (NFC)	28	Carolina Panthers (NFC)
13	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	29	New England Patriots (AFC)
14	Chicago Bears (NFC)	30	San Francisco 49ers (NFC)
15	Pittsburgh Steelers (AFC)	31	Denver Broncos (AFC)
16	Baltimore Ravens (AFC)	32	Seattle Seahawks (NFC)

If this rule had been in place, and the AFC had won, this would be the resulting draft order:

Pick #	Team	Pick #	Team
1	Houston Texans (AFC)	17	St. Louis Rams (NFC)
2	Jacksonville Jaguars (AFC)	18	Atlanta Falcons (NFC)
3	Cleveland Browns (AFC)	19	Tampa Bay Buccaneers (NFC)
4	Oakland Raiders (AFC)	20	Minnesota Vikings (NFC)
5	Buffalo Bills (AFC)	21	Detroit Lions (NFC)
6	Tennessee Titans (AFC)	22	New York Giants (NFC)
7	Pittsburgh Steelers (AFC)	23	St. Louis Rams (NFC)
8	Baltimore Ravens (AFC)	24	Chicago Bears (NFC)
9	New York Jets (AFC)	25	Dallas Cowboys (NFC)
10	Miami Dolphins (AFC)	26	Arizona Cardinals (NFC)
11	Kansas City Chiefs (AFC)	27	Green Bay Packers (NFC)
12	Cincinnati Bengals (AFC)	28	Philadelphia Eagles (NFC)
13	San Diego Chargers (AFC)	29	New Orleans Saints (NFC)
14	Indianapolis Colts (AFC)	30	Carolina Panthers (NFC)
15	New England Patriots (AFC)	31	San Francisco 49ers (NFC)
16	Denver Broncos (AFC)	32	Seattle Seahawks (NFC)

And this would be the draft order if the NFC had won:

Pick #	Team	Pick #	Team
1	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	17	Houston Texans (AFC)
2	Atlanta Falcons (NFC)	18	Jacksonville Jaguars (AFC)
3	Tampa Bay Buccaneers (NFC)	19	Cleveland Browns (AFC)
4	Minnesota Vikings (NFC)	20	Oakland Raiders (AFC)
5	Detroit Lions (NFC)	21	Buffalo Bills (AFC)
6	New York Giants (NFC)	22	Tennessee Titans (AFC)
7	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	23	Pittsburgh Steelers (AFC)
8	Chicago Bears (NFC)	24	Baltimore Ravens (AFC)
9	Dallas Cowboys (NFC)	25	New York Jets (AFC)
10	Arizona Cardinals (NFC)	26	Miami Dolphins (AFC)
11	Green Bay Packers (NFC)	27	Kansas City Chiefs (AFC)
12	Philadelphia Eagles (NFC)	28	Cincinnati Bengals (AFC)
13	New Orleans Saints (NFC)	29	San Diego Chargers (AFC)
14	Carolina Panthers (NFC)	30	Indianapolis Colts (AFC)
15	San Francisco 49ers (NFC)	31	New England Patriots (AFC)
16	Seattle Seahawks (NFC)	32	Denver Broncos (AFC)

This has the additional advantage of eliminating worries about teams "tanking". There's no point in intentionally losing games to get the #1 pick if you might drop to pick #17 after the Pro Bowl.

But, unlike some other other anti-tanking ideas, this system continues to give better picks to weaker teams, to help create parity.