I used to have a fun hobby. I would sit at home in the evening and play poker online with people from around the world. Sometimes I'd make a little money. Sometimes I'd lose a little money. But I had fun, in the safety of my home, playing a game that I enjoyed.
On April 15, 2011, Black Friday, the US government took this away from me.
How did they do this? Several years ago, the Republican controlled government passed some legislation making it illegal for financial institutions to transfer money related to gambling (leaving the issue of whether poker is considered gambling open). Several online poker companies stopped accepting US players at that time, but several continued to service the US and came up with mechanisms for US players to still deposit money in their accounts. then, on Black Friday, the Democratic controlled government enforced this law and shut down the 3 primary poker sites that US players could use. Thus ended my hobby, and for many professionals, their livelihood.
Why did they do this? I assume the Republicans passed the law because they're always trying to appear to morally conservative constituents. I have no idea why Democrats decided to enforce it. Perhaps it's stemming from their patronizing view of the public, that they need the government to protect people from things people are incapable of resisting on their own. The net result is that the US government, in a rare bipartisan show of power, shut down an industry, put people out of work, and reduced the pleasure of large numbers of Americans. The government did not benefit in any way. The public was hurt in many ways. It is pretty much evil for evil's sake.
Sunday, August 7, 2011
US Revenue and Spending
Enough introductory crap. I'm very concerned about the United States federal debt. We spend too much and we take in too little. Here's a web page that gives the raw figures for federal revenue and spending historically: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200
2008 to 2009 was the recent turning point from seemingly manageable to unmanageable:
2008: Revenue 2.5 trillion, Spending 3.0 trillion, Deficit 458 billion
2009: Revenue 2.1 trillion, Spending 3.5 trillion, Deficit 1.4 trillion
In one year, we went from spending 20% more than we took in to spending 67% more. Why did that happen? Well, due to the recession, tax revenue was much lower. And due to the "stimulus" plan to combat the recession, spending was much higher. But what concerns me more is that the politicians are not as freaked out by this as any sane person would be.
I could generate some supporting numbers, but it is intuitive that this kind of discrepancy can't go on. So what do the politicians want to do? The Democrats want to raise taxes. The Republicans want to lower spending. Don't we need to do both? We're out of whack by 67 freaking percent!
President Obama has given lip service to a "balanced approach", his way of saying "do both". But I haven't seen any serious spending reduction proposals from him in the near term. His approach seems to be "raise taxes now, and we'll lower spending eventually."
Republicans seem burdened by a pledge not to raise taxes. Never trust a politician who makes pledges. Either they won't stick to them, in which case they are liars, or they will stick to them, in which case they are very poor politicians, not willing to adjust to changes in the world and the political situation. I think that it's important to keep taxes low, but I'll discuss my tax perspective at another time. It just seems obvious that we need more tax revenue now.
Democrats don't want to cut anything. The recent debt ceiling compromise is a joke, planning to cut 2 trillion of mostly unidentified expenses over 10 years, during which time we're expecting the debt to grow 10 trillion. Just go back to 2008 spending numbers and you'll save many times more than that. Is that so far in the past that it's absurd, that we couldn't possibly live that way?
No one in Washington is taking this seriously enough. It looks like we need a new crew there ASAP.
2008 to 2009 was the recent turning point from seemingly manageable to unmanageable:
2008: Revenue 2.5 trillion, Spending 3.0 trillion, Deficit 458 billion
2009: Revenue 2.1 trillion, Spending 3.5 trillion, Deficit 1.4 trillion
In one year, we went from spending 20% more than we took in to spending 67% more. Why did that happen? Well, due to the recession, tax revenue was much lower. And due to the "stimulus" plan to combat the recession, spending was much higher. But what concerns me more is that the politicians are not as freaked out by this as any sane person would be.
I could generate some supporting numbers, but it is intuitive that this kind of discrepancy can't go on. So what do the politicians want to do? The Democrats want to raise taxes. The Republicans want to lower spending. Don't we need to do both? We're out of whack by 67 freaking percent!
President Obama has given lip service to a "balanced approach", his way of saying "do both". But I haven't seen any serious spending reduction proposals from him in the near term. His approach seems to be "raise taxes now, and we'll lower spending eventually."
Republicans seem burdened by a pledge not to raise taxes. Never trust a politician who makes pledges. Either they won't stick to them, in which case they are liars, or they will stick to them, in which case they are very poor politicians, not willing to adjust to changes in the world and the political situation. I think that it's important to keep taxes low, but I'll discuss my tax perspective at another time. It just seems obvious that we need more tax revenue now.
Democrats don't want to cut anything. The recent debt ceiling compromise is a joke, planning to cut 2 trillion of mostly unidentified expenses over 10 years, during which time we're expecting the debt to grow 10 trillion. Just go back to 2008 spending numbers and you'll save many times more than that. Is that so far in the past that it's absurd, that we couldn't possibly live that way?
No one in Washington is taking this seriously enough. It looks like we need a new crew there ASAP.
Who Am I?
I'm Jean Valjean!
No, wait. I'm Dan Spear, software developer, son/brother/husband/father, Philadelphia sports fan, poker player. I've written some pretty popular consumer software. Politically, I considered myself liberal until about15 years ago. Now, my liberal friends consider me conservative, but I'm sure many conservatives would consider me liberal. I think of myself as more libertarian, but not as extreme. We can go more into that over time.
No, wait. I'm Dan Spear, software developer, son/brother/husband/father, Philadelphia sports fan, poker player. I've written some pretty popular consumer software. Politically, I considered myself liberal until about15 years ago. Now, my liberal friends consider me conservative, but I'm sure many conservatives would consider me liberal. I think of myself as more libertarian, but not as extreme. We can go more into that over time.
This is Dan's Perspective
This blog is a place for you to see and for me to post my perspective on topics that interest me. I will not be posting personal information about my family, and probably not much personal information about me. Some of the topics that I expect to discuss are:
- Politics
- Sports
- Computer technology
- Poker
- Science
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)