.

Doctor's In: The silent majority always wins!

Both parties need to control their extremists and move toward the center to solve America's problems.

At the end of the classic movie, The Magnificent 7, the late Yul Brynner laments that we always lose, it's the farmers that win. That's very profound, it can also be said, that it is never the extremists of either party that get their way but those, unspoken and unseen voters who see though the manure and craziness and sensibly vote for what is right. Frankly, that is the only force that has kept this country viable for decades.

In spite of conservative pundits claiming the dollar will go to zero, it has never been stronger. The stock market continues its "Bull" ride upward. Both gold and silver are rapidly sliding to lower more sensible levels, in spite of the hoopla by Obama haters that gold was heading to $5,000.00 an ounce. I am not making this up; just follow the markets. I continue to bet on the markets and I have the profits to prove it.

Both Democrat and Republican parties have "life support" problems.  Supporters don't trust them.  Extremists are ruling the day in both parties and the result is a growing number of independent voters. I am one of them. Both parties need to move toward the center and advocate for sanity.  The Republicans are in much worse shape than the Democrats but neither has bragging rights.

The first order of the day for Republicans, and it is a painful one, is to send the Tea Party and the religious right-wing packing. It will be costly but it will allow the party to regroup with sensible moderates that will find acceptance with the independent voter. No politician will win important elections in the future without the independent voter.

The Democrats have to return to their basic ideals understanding and supporting the importance of the balance between necessary government services and the partnership with the private sector.  Both are needed to sustain a growing middle class.  Slashing government jobs is not the way to improve spending and reduce unemployment.  The private sector can only do so much to hold the economy together. 

That's a formula that has worked and should not be abandoned. I call this part one of Yacht's rule for this country to get beyond gridlock. Stay tuned!

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Mary in LOL February 21, 2013 at 01:33 PM
Marc, according to the Federal Reserve, ( http://www.minneapolisfed.org/ ) it now takes $120.44 to purchase what $20 bought in 1970. Thus, if you invested $20 in the stock market in 1970, that stock would have to be worth $120.44 today just to maintain the SAME value. If you go back 100 years, you would need $473.38 to cover what $20 bought in 1913. So clearly, the VALUE of the dollar has dropped, and if you have visited your local supermarket or filled your tank with gasoline recently, you will see the value is dropping faster and faster as our government prints more and more money to cover its debts. The value of a gallon of milk or a gallon of gasoline or an ounce of gold or a share of stock hasn't changed very much - it just takes more dollars to purchase these things. That does not make the dollar "stronger". Quite the opposite.
Mary in LOL February 21, 2013 at 02:12 PM
As for extremists... The traditional leftist view of political extremes places the far left at one end, and the far right at the other end. Thus "moderates" support the same big government/wealth redistribution philosophy shared by both extremes. Since our educational system and political research centers are statistically (80% or more) liberal, most tests and charts are biased. Steven Pratt's chart places both left and right extremes to one side as they both share collectivist ideas, while anarchy occupies the other end. His centrist is the person who balances government oversight with personal freedom. David Nolan goes further with a four sided chart that places libertarians against statists, and left/liberals against right/conservatives. This provides a place for people who may have liberal social views but are economic conservatives, etc. If you look through Google Images you will find many modifications of Nolan's chart. There are even sites where you can take a test to determine where you fall in the political spectrum. The foundational political philosophy of America, and most of our founding fathers (except Hamilton) is centrist/libertarian, ie, a "Republic". However, the vast majority of people who view themselves as centrist show up on political philosophy tests as left statists - hard leaning socialists and communists - while most of the world's political leaders gather both to the left and right in the statist/totalitarian end of the chart.
Marc J. Yacht MD, MPH February 21, 2013 at 04:03 PM
Mary: Yes, when you look through the decades the value of the dollar has deteriorated for a lot of reasons including inflation. Remember,though salaries have pretty much kept pace. As an administraotor in 1968, I made $12,000 annually. A good salary then. When I retired my income was 12x that old salary. Much of that income equity protects the middle class. Unions are critical to keep incomes on par with a devaluated dollar as inflation continues. That devaluation of the dollar was essential to the equitable distribution of wealth. ERGO - viable middle class. The centrists are practical in thinking. They don't hang onto rigid ideologies. The thinking is - What will work? No one ideology or set of rules will solve the problem. Flexibility is required. People on the extreme (left and right) stay entrenched in their point of view. Rigid ideology and chest beating talking points will never successfully solve problems. Defining the problem, understanding the issues, appreciating what makes America work, then formulating decisions will resolve issues. That means a post office, national health plan, strong infrastructure dollars for schools, bridges, and utilities etc, safety nets for the poor and so on. This country is a dynamic organism and "W" Bush got it right - NO One can be left behind. Its tough and expensive but that is where a successful future lies. The other path leads to increased poverty, a crushed middle class, and the rule and wealth of the few.
Mary in LOL February 21, 2013 at 09:33 PM
Marc, the salaries of those in medical fields have far outpaced all other occupations. An extensive report from the Brookings Institution states: “Health care pays higher than average wages regardless of workers’ skills and demographic characteristics.” While salaries in general have barely kept up with inflation (100.6%), deductibles have increased so the end result is 10-20% less purchasing power for most, and significantly less purchasing power for those in lower income tiers. According to the National Employment Law Project, "If our standard for minimum wages had kept pace with overall income growth in the American economy, it would now be $21.16 per hour." The sad fact is, MOST of America is dealing with 20-75% reduction in purchasing power than the generation before us. You need to look up the definition of centrist, because, to paraphrase Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." "Equitable distribution of wealth" and nationalizing services are not centrist. These are extremist political philosophies of Socialism, Communism and Fascism. As the violent history of the 21st century has proven, those ideologies do not ever produce a viable middle class. We don't have to guess what will happen if we follow your path, we know : the all powerful and privileged oligarchs of statism crushes the middle class into poverty, starvation, and slavery.
Marc J. Yacht MD, MPH February 22, 2013 at 03:30 AM
Perhhaps "Centrist" is the wrong word . Sometimes we get caught up in the semantics. The context of what I am saying is clear. We need to move to the center away from extreme positions. Although, years ago I was in private practice I spent my medical career working for the State of Florida - no big money there. It is true that purchasing power is not what it was but we also have to understand that not everyone can be a millionaire and much of America's problems stem from people taking on too much debt. How much do we need? I live very modestly with no debt. I have no fear that our country is heading toward Socialism, Fascism or Communism - those are talking points by the anti Obama crowd. Scaring people into believing that our government is somehow working against their interests has been done before in efforts to overthrow FDR. That is a subject for another day. My message is simple, we need cooperation among our elected officials to move our country forward by protecting its greatest asset - the middle class. The hard right and that one percent that control so much wealth have never been supporters of equity. That's not who they are. That goes back to the "SILENT MAJORITY" that is the central theme of my blog. Anyone can quote their experts and writings defending their positions. However, the key is simple common sense and doing what is right for the overall good. So far, the voting Silent Majority has done just that. I pray it continues.
Mary in LOL February 22, 2013 at 12:28 PM
Marc, using words correctly is important if we want to communicate our intent to readers. You say we need to move to the center, away from extreme positions - and I agree with that. There is a huge movement in the US to correct the path we're on and bring our country back to a political center. However, "center" is not where you think it is. You are calling collectivism (also called statism, or totalitarian rule) "center", when collectivism is an extreme political ideology that has been embraced by both left and right factions for their own ends. Extreme Left collectivism is Communism, where the State controls the means of production. Public education, the motor vehicle agency, Social Security, Disability, and Welfare are all communist programs. Extreme right is Fascism, where the state promotes private ownership but exerts full control via regulation. I am sure you are familiar with the effects of the Medicare and Medicaid systems on private health care services. Insurance, utilities, transportation, and private education are all heavily state regulated. There is very little difference between the two ideologies. Does it matter if the State or a private company owns something if the government has full control over it? Left or Right is irrelevant. A centrist position between two forms of collectivism is still collectivism. America, as a political system, has been successful precisely because it was founded as centrist.
Mary in LOL February 22, 2013 at 12:46 PM
...more Not YOUR definition of centrist. The real definition: Equidistant between left and right and anarchy and collectivism. The opposite of collectivism is anarchy - no central government or power. The closest example I can think of is, the internet. Millions of people on hundreds of thousands of servers around the globe, and no central governing authority. The United States was not founded as a collectivist society. It is actually north of true centrist, a Republic with a Libertarian bent. Our Constitution sharply limits the Federal Government and gives almost unlimited power to the individual and States. There are no provisions for our government to own or control the means of production, or oversee education, or give grants to farmers, or support the disabled. Our government exists to protect the rights of the individual, guard our borders, and establish trade with friendly nations - and not much more. A true centrist position falls somewhere between the state doing everything for us, and the state doing nothing for us at all. It balances personal liberty with economic conservatism. Marc, what would you say to me if I said, germs are nonsense! Bleeding a patient, having them smoke a cigarette, and swallow radium, are, in my opinion, sound medical practice! You would tell me that these ideas are outdated - they have been tried, found lacking and even dangerous, and abandoned decades ago. Collectivism ALWAYS sounds great, and ALWAYS fails.
Marc J. Yacht MD, MPH February 22, 2013 at 05:49 PM
Your comments show an indepth understanding of ideologies. No argument. I favor a blending that seeks solutions to continue a viable society. As seen by stock market fluctuations we need Social Security to assure a decent living standard for our seniors. We need Medicare, I remember when we didn't have it and low income seniors had no decent access to health care. Here we may differ. I strongly support the government regulating banks and other fnancial markets and if necessary running essential services that have no place for a profit motif. Such as, National and State Parks, the Post office, Education, and Health Care. There are others. The profit motif of the private sector is corrupting when it comes to essential services. As always your comments are very well argued and have impacted my views on a number of issues. I have a greater trust of government than many of those who oppose my point of view. I worked in Goverment services for 25 years. Of course it was civil service with a minimum of polical hacks. Unfortunately in Florida, since my retirement, the system I worked so proudly in for so many years has been seriously damaged by Republican conservatives. Whatever our point of view the largest danger the nation faces relate to corruption exploding at many levels of goverment and obscene profiteering in the private sector. There's a need to clean house in both private and goverment sectors. I am not optimistic. My best as always. Marc
Mary in LOL February 22, 2013 at 07:00 PM
Marc, I always enjoy our discussions. It is nice to debate someone with opposing views in a civil manner. If you and I were creating a new government, then socialist programs would have a place at the table. But we are not creating a new government. We are working within the framework of an existing government that considered and rejected a powerful Federal authority at its inception. I once asked if your solution was to remove our current government and establish something that has the legal authority to do what you want. That was a bit tongue in cheek because the fact is, our government almost immediately usurped powers not granted to it and built a behemoth Federal State. Nathan Kleffman, a Libertarian candidate, wrote an interesting article about America's road to collectivism. http://www.nathankleffman.com/2011_12_01_archive.html Politicians gain power by creating problems and then offering a solution that can only come from the government. Inflation and taxation robbed people of the personal savings and property they needed to fund their elderly unproductive years. The government's solution was Social Security. The government created the Federal Reserve, the Fed's poor monetary policy created the Great Depression, and FDR created Unemployment and Welfare. This is known as the Hegelian Dialectic. Please, read: http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm Marxist solutions are not the only solutions. Their "solutions" are our path to slavery.
Patriot March 05, 2013 at 05:54 AM
Nailed it ! Very good post !
Patriot March 05, 2013 at 05:56 AM
Mary...You are awesome!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something