SALT

In these United States, power over each of us is passed up on a limited bases to our communities, to each state, and finally and ultimately to the Federal Government. Thus, each of our communities and states may free choose different levels of services. We Virginians may choose whatever level of services we are willing to pay for and the same for those of you in New York or Illinois. Deducting the state and local taxes that we pay for the service levels we choose from our federal income taxes passes on some of that financing to those in other states that might have choses less expensive service levels for themselves. Such deductions are a clear violation of the principles outlined above. Fairness and adherence to these principles requires that State and Local Tax deductions (SALT) from federal income taxes be zero. We are at risk of moving in the wrong direction.

Trump’s second go

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon recently stated that:  “I don’t think people are voting for Trump because of his family values. If you just take a step back and are honest, he’s kind of right about NATO, kind of right on immigration, he grew the economy quite well, tax reform worked. He was right about some of China….  I don’t like how Trump said things, but he wasn’t wrong about those critical issues. That’s why they’re voting for him. People should be more respectful of our fellow citizens. When you guys have people up here [on a CNBC panel] you always ask them why — not like it’s a binary thing that you’re supporting Trump or you’re not supporting him– but why are you supporting him.” “Jamie Dimon on Trump

In addition, during Trump’s administration many excessive regulations were revoked or reduced. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos promoted school choice and restore due process to college rape cases. Andrew Wheeler, Trump’s administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reduced greenhouse gas emissions, improved water quality, and cleaned up contaminated sites while strengthening cost benefit assessments of environmental regulations. And much more.

His administration did many bad things as well.  His advisors Stephen Miller and Peter Navarro implemented protectionist, buy American trade policies that hurt our economy. His crazy withdrawal from the Trans Pacific Partnership was an ill advised gift to China. He Imposed a travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries, rescinded the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Program, separated families at the US-Mexico border and withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement and the Iran Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), which was designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Trump’s promise to leave Afghanistan was not kept (and was later very badly executed by President Biden). His initial love affairs with North Korea’s President Kim Jong Un and China’s Xi Jinping exploded into hostility. If reelected Trump promises revenge against his enemies. He promises to strip tens of thousands of career employees of their civil service protections in order to dismantle the “deep state.” He promises to impose tariffs on all imported good and to revoke the visas of students studying in the U.S. who are critical of the U.S. None of these is keeping with the traditions and policies that have helped make America great.

On the other hand, I hope that he would keep his promise not to send American soldiers to Taiwan should China attack it militarily, which would be insane. Whether we would get the better or worse policies under another Trump administration would also depend on the team that he would bring with him.

Trump’s small-minded pettiness, dishonesty, vindictiveness, and egotism are on daily display. He is not someone I would invite into my home. But we are right to look at the policies he pledges and is likely to pursue if elected President again in 2024. As with his previous administration, his next one, if reelected, will depend on those who join and run his administration.

My expectation is that Trump will be more careful next time to choose loyalists rather than the most capable. It is also likely that the most capable people would refuse to be part of another Trump administration. I expect the worst.

The Houthi’s and Us

After almost a decade of trying to end Saudi Arabian bombing of the Houthi government in Northern Yemen, President Biden has ordered multiple American bombing attacks on Northern Yemen because of Houthi attacks on ships sending arms to Israel in support of its genocide in Gaza. You might need to read that sentence again to get all its parts.

The first point is that once again the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that the Congress must authorize war before the President can launch one, has been violated. And why did Biden think it necessary to bomb Yemen? Because the Houthi attacks were interfering with our shipment of weapons to Israel in support of Israel’s vicious murder of Palestinians by bombing and starvation. “The group’s official spokesman reiterated that attacks on vessels transiting the Bab el-Mandeb Strait toward the Suez Canal will continue until “Gaza [receives] the food and medicine it needs.” That shouldn’t be hard to accomplish.

Even if the US Congress authorized the American bombing of Yemen, it would be bad policy for the U.S., for the Palestinians, and for Israel. “Weighing additional US responses to Houthi Red Sea attacks” America’s interest should be peace and prosperity for all in the Middle East (and all the world). Supporting Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza does not serve that goal and makes the U.S. complicit in Israel’s genocide. Moreover, Europe’s relative silence and the silence of any of us to Israel’s inhuman war in Gaza (including Biden, Trump and Nikki Haley) makes them all complicit. “War in Gaza exposes European philosophy ethically bankrupt”

The march toward the aridification of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank is too unbelievably savage to spell out. Such a fate should not be wished on any people. “Unfolding genocide as ever single person in Gaza goes hungry” “Israel’s Netanyahu its Cromwell”

But this war, following a century of Zionist mistreatment of Palestinians in their homeland, is destroying Israel. “Israel is facing existential threats from inside and out-there’s one solution” Israel is committing suicide. To survive, Israel must become a secular democratic state that give equal rights and fair treatment to all who inhabit it. “One state solution for Palestine/Israel”

U.S. leadership is failing once again and is waning. The lust for war by the hawks has overpowered American self-interest once again. War with Iran can’t be far behind. Taiwan can wait (a bit).  “Gaza and Yemen sound death knell for US led rules based global order”

One State Solution for Palestine/Israel

I have long supported the “two state solution” for the Levant envisioned by the Oslo Accords. I led IMF technical assistance teams that launched the Palestine Monetary Authority as called for in the Oslo Accords. “Oslo-the Play”   After listening to the following presentation by two very knowledgeable Jews, I have changed my mind: Max Blumenthal & Miko Peled 

In supporting a Two State Solution I had assumed that the alternative One State Solution had to be a democratic Jewish state as sought by Zionists, which would have required that Israel eliminate, one way or another, enough Palestinians to establish and retain a large Jewish majority. This is, of course, exactly the policy Israel had followed since its founding and most conspicuously in its current devastating attack on Palestinians in Gaza.  “A one state solution”

Miko Peled, the son of a distinguished Israeli general, proposes a One State Solution in which Israel’s Jews give up its being a Jewish State. Rather Israel, from the River to the Sea, would be a democratic state in which all residence would enjoy equal treatment under the law. But can Zionists be convinced to support a secular Israel of Jews and Palestinian, both the descendance of Abraham. In a recent meeting of the Committee for the Republic, Rabbi Yaakov Shapiroargued that Zionism is antisemitic and should be repudiated:  “Antizionism is not Antisemitic”

In a realistic assessment of the current situation, Natan Sachs argues that neither a one state nor two state solution is possible any time soon because of the lack of trust on both sides after 70 years of oppressive Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and the vicious attack on Israel by Hamas on Oct 7. However, he argues that continuing to kick the can down the road has been a disaster and must end. The U.S., now providing the bombs with which Israel is slaughtering innocent Palestinian men, women, and children, must order an immediate ceasefire before millions in Gaza starve to death and the war escalates to Lebanon and beyond.  “UN Human Rights Experts warm of unfolding Genocide in Gaza”

The U.S. must also use it considerable leverage to end new Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Settler (and Israeli Army) abuse of Palestinians living there and strengthen the Palestinian Authority. Since WWII the U.S. has given Israel more than $260 billion in foreign assistance (over $3.3 billion annually in recent years), more than to any other country.

“It is time, rather, to couple a political horizon with serious, transformative, solution-oriented yet hard-nosed conflict management: imperfect, messy, halting, unsatisfactory for all, and yet preferable by far to the current reality…. The United States must set the ground rules for the long interim period before true conflict resolution might be possible and enforce these rules vigorously…. Even if a solution to the conflict is currently unavailable, aimlessly kicking the can down the road is not a reasonable strategy. That approach was not conflict management; it was a strategy that allowed the conflict to manage both sides.”  “Peace between Israelis and Palestinian remains possible”

In my view a single state with full citizenship with equal rights for all inhabitance would be the best long run outcome but it will not be easy and will take time for interim Israeli occupation to build mutual confidence for drafting and adopting such a constitution (like England, Israel does not have a written constitution). Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and other parts of greater Israel housing important Jewish, Islamic and Christian sites must be fully protected by religious liberty provisions of the constitution.  While such an outcome will take many years to achieve, interim measures must build to that outcome.