Friday, August 17 , 2018, 1:47 am | Overcast 69º

 
 
 

Harris Sherline: Random Observations

From seizing the assets of the rich to support the poor to the lack of progress in the wars on drugs and poverty, indulge in some food for thought.

The miracle of information and knowledge that’s available through modern media and the Internet also has brought with it the curse of overload and misinformation.

image
Harris R. Sherline

The many commercials that push cleaning agents imply that we are all at risk of being infected by some awful disease if we don’t use their products. But, if that were true, how is it that man has survived all these years without them? Can it be that we really don’t need the cleansers that kill 98.5 percent of all the germs on the surfaces on which they are used?

Pharmaceutical manufacturers push prescription drugs as if they are selling health foods. Buy their products and avoid the terrible consequences of just about every disease or ailment known to man, most of which we never knew existed.

If taxing the rich is the way to provide benefits for the poor and low-income workers, why don’t we simply confiscate the assets of the wealthiest among us, say, just the billionaires? After all, they really don’t need to live such opulent lifestyles, with private jets, mansions, yachts, etc. If you think that’s a good idea, consider this: According to Forbes magazine, the 400 richest Americans have a combined net worth of about $1.25 trillion. So, how effective would it be if their “excess” net worth were taken for the good of society? A little simple math gives us a clue:

» The proposed U.S. federal budget for the 2009 fiscal year is about $3.1 trillion. If we were to confiscate the entire wealth of America’s 400 richest citizens (278 of whom are billionaires), it would pay the cost of operating national the government for only about 147 days.

» Extending the analysis a bit further, if the entire net worth of the two richest Americans, Bill Gates at $48 billion and Warren Buffett at $41 billion, were confiscated, it would pay only the cost of running the government for a little more than 10 days.

» The proposed 2009 federal budget is projected to have a deficit of $407 billion. If we expropriate just enough money from the 400 richest Americans to cover the shortfall, it would be about one-third of their combined net worth.

Instead of confiscating the net worth of America’s richest citizens, how about taking the earnings of some of the nation’s most profitable companies to fund the government or to cover the budget deficit?  The Fortune 500 list of the most profitable businesses noted that the top 20 companies had combined net earnings (after taxes) of $266.21 billion. However, that’s only enough to run the federal government for about 26 days. Even if we confiscated their total combined earnings, it still would fund only a little more than 55 percent of the projected 2009 budget deficit.

Why is it that since 1964, when President Lyndon Johnson declared war on poverty, the federal government has spent $8 trillion to $10 trillion on the effort to eradicate poverty, but the number of Americans who are considered poor is still about the same as it was more than 40 years ago?

Has the war on drugs been successful? The Drug War Clock offers the following information (as of May 18):

» Money spent on the war on drugs this year: federal, $7.7 billion; state, $11.8 billion; total, $19.5 billion. “The U.S. federal government spent $19 billion in 2003 on the war on drugs, at a rate of about $600 per second.”

» “Arrests for drug law violations in 2008 are expected to exceed the 1,889,810 arrests of 2006. ... Someone is arrested for violating a drug law every 17 seconds.”

» “Police arrested an estimated 829,625 persons for cannabis violations in 2006, the highest annual total ever recorded in the United States, according to statistics compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

» “Since Dec. 31, 1995, the U.S. prison population has grown an average of 43,266 inmates per year. About 25 percent are sentenced for drug law violations.”

Why do we continue this war? There must be a better way.

The California Supreme Court recently ruled that same-sex marriage is a constitutionally protected right in the state. Does that mean polygamy is or should also be a right? Commenting in the Sacramento Bee, columnist Dan Walters noted, “Declaring that one is free to marry whomever one chooses makes it at least conceivable that plural marriages — polygamy — could be equally valid.”

Harris R. Sherline is a retired CPA and former chairman and CEO of Santa Ynez Valley Hospital who has lived in Santa Barbara County for more than 30 years. He stays active writing opinion columns and his own blog, Opinionfest.com.

 

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through Stripe below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Enter your email
Select your membership level
×

Payment Information

You are purchasing:

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >