The phrases “income redistribution” and “socialism” are thrown around by clueless people a lot these days. Any tax system that has a welfare component probably qualifies as income redistribution so the fact that it already exists in this country shouldn’t surprise anyone. At the other extreme is the Soviet system where the Government kept 100% of the GDP and then redistributed part of it back to the citizens in the form of wages, pensions, subsidized consumer goods prices, free education and health care, etc. In between, there are many countries that struck a certain balance between the socialist and free market economies. What constitutes a good balance is still open for discussion.
Unlike many people who carefully counted other people’s money and decided that they have too much, I am a firm believer that in the market economy everyone it worth exactly what they earn and if they earn it, they should be able to keep their income and pay some reasonable amount of taxes to pay for the infrastructure, defense and certain social services.
Granted, the Soviet Union looked great from the outside, every citizen was taken care of with free social services, 30-day vacations, free or cheap childcare, summer camps for the children, subsidized trips to resorts, cheap food and consumer goods but it was achieved by keeping everyone borderline poor, with many people living in medieval conditions, WWII-era equipped hospitals, ugly, ill-conceived, unusable merchandise that wasn’t always available. Add to that food shortages, long lines everywhere and inability to do anything without prior government approval and you may see why the life behind the Iron Curtain wasn’t so peachy. I think the weakest link in the Soviet system was their attempt to remove normal human greed from the economic equation. The ideal was, of course, that the people will get motivated because they loved their country. After that didn’t work out, various other means were tried out from the New Economic Policy to confiscations and labor camps. People realized that if they can’t achieve anything within the system they were going to do it outside of the system. Soviet Union had probably the biggest shadow economy ever known, as well as the most corrupt population in the world, where everyone from a clerk, to militiamen, to doctors, teachers and government officials accepted and oftentimes demanded bribes. But even if a certain Soviet citizen somehow managed to amass a fortune he would have a hard time spending it without attracting unwanted attention from the government or from fellow concerned citizens who were busy watching out for anyone stupid enough to get ahead. A very famous Soviet-era satirical book “The Little Golden Calf” featured a character who had a suitcase full of money but was forced to live without spending any of it, once a week reuniting with his wealth at the storage.
On the other hand, Sweden is often cited as a triumph of the socialist system but even they had to adjust when it was realized that stifling entrepreneurship with high taxes led to the loss of employment and shrinkage of the GDP. Many would argue that Swedish system is not sustainable and is a myth, for an even-handed article you may want to read this one from Forbes. I think that a very important component of the Swedish model is their ability to control immigration. This way they concentrate on providing social services to their citizens.
This country somehow managed to avoid all-out income redistribution by trying to keep the people content with what they earn, convincing them the opportunity awaits if you work hard and not take any shortcuts, and selling a tempting vision of the American Dream. Theoretically many people had the same opportunity as Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet or 2 guys who invented Google, but not everyone has talent, drive or desire to take the risk, all mixed with luck which are all needed to succeed. Short of winning the lottery, the best way to get one’s hands on other people’s money is to vote. There are many rationalizations on why this is fair or how paying taxes is patriotic and the right thing to do, but most of the people who say that made sure that they are not the ones affected, instead, just like the Soviet citizens in the past they will be making sure that the other people don’t get ahead.
I am pretty sure that anything I say (or ever said) will not change anyone’s mind. Over $600 million invested in Obama’s candidacy will be repaid many-fold with the other people’s money, and to paraphrase the Communist Party’s statement “the eye is on the prize”. Make no mistake, while millions of people shed tears of joy at the rallies, someone is already calculating the profits. To be fair, the same exact process only with a more grotesque set of candidates is going on on the other side of the aisle. People will adapt, I can see a lot more taxpayers making $249,999.99 in the near future; why bother making that extra dollar if you only get to keep fifty cents. Many others will still keep doing what they are doing. Entrepreneurship doesn’t die, it just goes undercover and dedicates itself to undermining the system that’s trying to stifle it. I may sound alarmist, but 80 years ago people in Russia, the biggest grain exporter in the world wouldn’t believe that their children would be standing in bread lines.
There is still a bright side to all of this. On the Election day it would be decided by a vote, instead of this:
For people who pride themselves on being independent, Americans too often become victims of the herd mentality. Whether it’s the approval of the war in Iraq, voting for Obama or wearing Crocs, Americans latch onto some absurd idea and follow it all the way to the disastrous end. The common problem is that important and sometimes life-and-death decisions are made based on emotions and very little knowledge and common sense. To me, the question of the light rail in Kansas City falls into the same category. No one in the right state of mind would even propose the light rail as an option which would solve any transportation problems in this city. Instead of just being dismissed as a bad idea, huge waste of money and totally worthless as a means of commute, this issue is constantly being discussed, written about, voted on, studied and even taken to courts.
Kansas City has a rich history of public transportation which allowed the public to move around town before cars took over as the main commuter option.
I, of course, didn’t get a chance to see this. I was happily growing up Behind the Iron Curtain where I had a chance to ride every imaginable kind of public transport from bus to tram, from subway to trolleybus, from taxi to water ferry.It wasn’t very comfortable but it got the job done. It was crowded, hot, sometimes smelly and noisy but it allowed an average person to get around town with relatively little wait, not too much walking and very cheaply. And that’s what I consider the major criteria of the usable public transport system:
Cost. Some people will overpay just to be “green”. For the majority it has to make fiscal sense.
Convenience. I am not driving 10 miles to the terminal just to ride the light rail for 7 miles. It has to be within walking distance or it’s too much hustle.
Coverage. I am not interested in the A to B ride, unless I live in A and I am going to B. Public transportation system should blanket the area with routes that cross each other and allow passengers to jump from route to route.
Constant circulation. This is crucial – I don’t want to know bus schedules, I just want to know that the bus will show up within 10-20 minutes even if I just missed the last one. One fear that I have is to be stranded somewhere with no chance to get out.
Security. I want to arrive in one piece with all of my belongings.
In the next few installments I will try to describe the public transportation system I grew up with. It wasn’t perfect but it worked. More than I can say about the light rail that never will.
When I was growing up® beauty salon employees were not dressing up as nurses any longer, although this seems to be a fancy establishment in 1956 Moscow.
Memory is a strange thing. One minute I am reading a story about outpatient surgery in prison and the next minute it takes me back about 20 years when I was sitting in a small army hospital room and another soldier, who was supposed to be a nurse, was poking a scalpel at the infected cyst on my own foot. But this is not about some gruesome sadistic surgery forced on a newly drafted Soviet Soldier, although I still have a scar to show for it. This is a post about portyanki – a foot wrap worn in the Russian and later in the Soviet army instead of socks until just a year or two ago.
After a long and tumultuous day of saying good-byes to civilian life and traveling by train and then inside a truck in the dark, lining up, multiple counts, marching with a group of half-scared schmucks and finally arriving at a place where most of us will spend the next two years, our group of fresh draftees finally settled down for an uneasy night of exhausted sleep. In the morning we were to shed whatever else connected us to our previous lives and become bona fide soldiers in the Soviet Army. After watching in horror other soldiers jump off their bunk-beds and stampede to their morning exercise routine we proceeded to the warehouse to receive our uniforms. The Soviet military uniform changed very little since WWII and there were always rumors of giant stashes of old uniforms sitting around waiting for the time “when enemy strikes”. The boots were the heavy non-laced kind from some fake leather material called kirza (sometimes translated as canvas, I am not exactly sure), uncomplicated by lining or any other comfort features. There were no socks, instead we received two pieces of cloth about the size, shape and thickness of a tea towel (13.6 by 35 inches) and some vague instructions about how to put them on. Given the quality of boots and the fact that this was the only kind of footwear for all occasions except for the rare weekend off, portyanki were not such a bad choice. What we didn’t realize was that putting them on correctly was an art, mastering which for most people required persistence, patience and a lot of foot damage. Another useful but unavailable at that time piece of information was that although the boot may have felt tight at first, getting a larger size was a big mistake. After some trial, error and confusion I ended up with a new uniform, two portyanki and a set of boots one or two sizes too large. Everything seemed to be OK until my first 10K run in full gear. During my whole life before that day my cumulative running distance equaled to about 10 or 20 kilometers. Needless to say that I crawled back half-dead with my portyanki bunched up inside my boots and a big bloody blister on one of my feet, which then got infected, blossomed into a big cyst and brought me to the scalpel wielding failed medical student from the beginning of this post. For the next two weeks one could tell inexperienced portyanki wearer by his distinct limp and walking around in slippers instead of boots. I almost had to wear slippers to my swearing-in ceremony but after the infamous surgery I recovered enough to fit in the boots again.
I could go on and on about portyanki, about the summer and winter kinds, about the smell when everyone aired theirs at night (laundry was once a week), or about how I eventually mastered the art of putting them on and wore them until I was discharged even when I was allowed to wear normal socks. They were comfortable in the end, easier and faster to put on, warmer in winter and cooler during the summer. When I see American soldiers running around in sneakers I smile to myself: what a bunch of pussies! (I am kidding, do not write me threatening comments). For those of you who don’t believe me here is a short instructional video. And that’s, my American friends, how we won the cold war!
Every time I go to the library to look at women spin some microfilm, I am always enthralled with the simple details of daily life – ads, job section, headlines – the things I routinely overlook in today’s newspaper paint a captivating picture of the recent and not so recent past.
I didn’t live here in the 80’s, so it’s even more interesting to me, but I am sure for many of you some of these random clips of the Kansas City Star from July 19th, 1981 may feel nostalgic, curious or funny. It’s amazing how much has changed in 30 years and, at the same time, many things are still the same.
The phrases “income redistribution” and “socialism” are thrown around by clueless people a lot these days. Any tax system that has a welfare component probably qualifies as income redistribution so the fact that it already exists in this country shouldn’t surprise anyone. At the other extreme is the Soviet system where the Government kept 100% of the GDP and then redistributed part of it back to the citizens in the form of wages, pensions, subsidized consumer goods prices, free education and health care, etc. In between, there are many countries that struck a certain balance between the socialist and free market economies. What constitutes a good balance is still open for discussion.
and there were always rumors of giant stashes of old uniforms sitting around waiting for the time “when enemy strikes”. The boots were the heavy non-laced kind from some fake leather material called kirza (sometimes translated as canvas, I am not exactly sure), uncomplicated by lining or any other comfort features. 
There were no socks, instead we received two pieces of cloth about the size, shape and thickness of a tea towel (13.6 by 35 inches) and some vague instructions about how to put them on. Given the quality of boots and the fact that this was the only kind of footwear for all occasions except for the rare weekend off, portyanki were not such a bad choice. What we didn’t realize was that putting them on correctly was an art, mastering which for most people required persistence, patience and a lot of foot damage. Another useful but unavailable at that time piece of information was that although the boot may have felt tight at first, getting a larger size was a big mistake. After some trial, error and confusion I ended up with a new uniform, two portyanki and a set of boots one or two sizes too large. Everything seemed to be OK until my first 10K run in full gear. During my whole life before that day my cumulative running distance equaled to about 10 or 20 kilometers. Needless to say that I crawled back half-dead with my portyanki bunched up inside my boots and a big bloody blister on one of my feet, which then got infected, blossomed into a big cyst and brought me to the scalpel wielding failed medical student from the beginning of this post. For the next two weeks one could tell inexperienced portyanki wearer by his distinct limp and walking around in slippers instead of boots. I almost had to wear slippers to my swearing-in ceremony but after the infamous surgery I recovered enough to fit in the boots again.
