Obama Tax Cuts, Large Science and Environmentalism Philosophically Considered

Hegelian dialects and Darwinian evolution may be abstracted synthetically by Marx towards a general millenarian idea of progress. Obviously homo faber is a theme of hierarchical advance. The reasons for dialectical or tri-electical neuro-technique invention by homo sapiens are fairly well understood now. It is possible to create cultures of synthetic reasoning for technical and scientifically founded innovation. These do not oppose empiricism or environmental sciences obviously; neither does large or small science presuppose or validate a given political-social epistemological theory such as Marxism. I like C.S. Pierce's tri-electical theory of mind's synthetic promulgation of new concepts as well an others of the 19th century. neuro-cognitive epistemological nominalism is a more existential introspection field than physical as is possible today.

In reading Dr. Henry Pollack's 2009 book; 'A World Without Ice' I found that Pollack mentioned the peer reviewed screening of the generally validated scientific finding of global warming. He compared that to the anti-global warming polemics distributed by the corporatist broadcast media outlets. That point is fascinating and an example of how science is while objective simultaneously non-political so far as it is scientific.

A question about the world being made a better place through knowledge and scientific method rightly should also consider if it isn't politics and democracy in particular that should select what of science should be applied broadly to the world. I mention this because the world assuredly is at several simultaneously challenging empirical-environmental crossroads from which to choose political directions.

We find the Obama tax cuts and January meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao an abnegation of democracy and surrender to global corporatism. In U.S. history high taxes on the wealthy was an effective and essential way to pay for war and recession especially concurrently. Abe Lincoln started income taxes on the rich (those making more than $800 a year) during the civil war. Roosevelt wanted a 100% tax on the rich during the Second World War and got 93%. President Eisenhower benefited the U.S.with a tax rate higher than 70% on the rich-not until President Reagan's 1981 tax cuts did the rate on the rich in the most of the 20th century fall below 70%. With a 14 billion dollar public debt-scheduled to reach 20 billion or so in four years, and likely to triple in 20 years without tax increases and more effective publics pending in the United States the role of science will continue to increasingly be selected by elite corporate leadership and concentrated powers of wealth.

I believe that politics rather than science determines the social well-being of the public and affect of science on the public. A selection criterion of greed rather than empirical good for mankind tends to produce a bad environment patched up a little post hoc by government action against substantial media-corporate opposition. Instead of blaming science or knowledge for the mal-adaptations of technology to the environment and society it is more accurate to give politics the credit for destroying the health of the world environment.

I have no difficulty in imagining a 70% tax rate on those earning more than $250,000.annually in the United States with the excess, after the public debt is paid off, being invested in environmental restoration. I believe the restoration of the environment such as filtering out unnatural pollutants from watersheds would cost at least 150 trillion dollars. That would create a lot of jobs as well as new scientific research.

Democracy must be able to take the bull by the horns and rope it down. The rich and corporate concentrations of wealth allowed to increase unchecked can entirely subvert the free market and the freedom of then people of the United States through networking ownership and universal effective power. Democracy can adapt to a modern world being wary of corporations taking over government as Jefferson anticipated.

Corporations could be limited in size of employees and financial endowment as a percentage of the national wealth. Individuals too could be limited on capital concentration too a percent of the national wealth. Stock ownership by an individual might be restricted to just three corporations.

It is unlikely that any sort of social reformation returning to a realistic democratic environment without vast corporate networks owning and corrupting democracy nationally and internationally will occur. That fact seems to doom social evolution away from ecological restoration and toward a number of dystopian futures not so far off. it is a challenge to envision how a rectification toward a real democracy and free enterprise individualism might be actualized.

One wonders how erroneous apostles of Adam Smith as Karl Marx evolving through capitalism's trial, error and invisible hand of multilateral dialectic evolutionary utilitarianism can be distracted from such metaphysical rubbish when technological engines pay so well in material output providing comfort and power beyond necessity. Such security in comfort redundantly recurring along with the glory of scientifically and socially ignorant acquisitivness make the prospects for large science goading public politics into working for the public good in a more effective and efficient manner, unlikely.