Justice at Guantanamo. When?

Mr. Carroll is one of many calling for the closure of Guantanamo where over 80 people cleared of terrorist activity languish still. Eighty innocent people in jail, this is unconscionable

However, he remains confined by the thinking that requires these people to be sent to "foreign countries willing to receive them."  ( It's your turn. Boston Globe, May 6, 2013). But there may not be any willing countries.

If we cannot release them into the est of the world, then they should be released into the United States. That, after all, is the full implication of Colin Powell's dictum: "If you broke it, you own it." We have broken these people's lives and are continuing to do so. It is time to stop and to provide some restitution.

Mr President, let these people go.

As for those who are awaiting trial, the President should defy Congress -- just as it defies the President -- and issue an executive order to bring them all to the United States for trial in our Courts, which are well capable of providing a fair trial.

Mr Obama should have done this on the first day of his Presidency, but better now than further delay.

Sent to Boston Globe

I was distressed to read in your editorial (Boston Globe, April 29, 2013: A10) an attack on one of the few remaining protections for state workers: the anti-privatizing laws (Pacheco Law).

In a world in which private sector wages, except for top management, have been beaten down, it is worth keeping in mind that public sector jobs provide a buffer against severe declines. Since 2000, according the the Bureau of Labor Statistics, income for the lowest 10% of wage earners has declined by 3% (corrected for inflation); while wages for the top 10% have risen 9% (also corrected for inflation).

So, do we really want the work that needs to be done on behalf of the Commonwealth to be done by workers who are exploited by their employers, or do we want to ensure that the work is done by our public servants who, despite the publicity about patronage and corruption, are in the main honest and competent workers.

The House did well to preserve these protections.


Sent to Boston Globe

Over 80 people are being held in  Guantanamo after being cleared of any terrorist involvement. This is unconscionable.

Mr. President, Let These People Go.

If we cannot release them into their own countries, then they should be released into the United States. That, after all, is the full implication of Colin Powell's dictum: "If you broke it, you own it." We have broken these people and are continuing to do so. It is time to stop.

As for those who are awaiting trial, the President should defy Congress -- just as it defies the President -- and bring them all to the United States for trial in our Courts, which are well capable of providing a fair trial.

Mr Obama should have done this on the first day of his Presidency, but better now than further delay.

Congress Members need to hear from Everybody (Electronically)

Op-Ed in MetroWest Daily News

Your Editorial , Social Security, Present and Future (New York Times Weekly Review, March 31, 2013: 10) is correct in dismissing the chained CPI as a solution. The adoption of the chained-CPI would be most regressive. Chained-CPI lags the regular CPI by 0.25%. Worse, the regular CPI lags an experimental elderly-CPI by 0.3%. The impact would be most severe on the poorest of seniors. As you suggest a firm elderly CPI should be developed.

There are other alternatives to ensure a solvent Social Security fund on both the paying in  side and at the paying out side.

As you suggest, paying in, we could lift or abolish the cap.

Paying out, we could change the tax treatment of Social Security. Rich Americans only pay income tax on 85% of their Social Security income. One hundred percent of social security income should be included in gross income. The impact on low income seniors would be negligible; on rich Americans it would be a modest increase in taxes.

Paying out we can also look at the payout rate. Despite being regressive at the paying in stage, Social Security is quite progressive when paying out.  Right now the Social Security formula for computing one's pension depends on Average Lifetime Earnings (ALE). Each year's earnings are converted into constant dollars and then a monthly average is calculated. Based on this, Social Security pays you:

- 90 percent of the first $767 of monthly ALE

- 32 percent of monthly ALE between $768 and $4,624,

- 15 percent of monthly  ALE above $4,625 to the cap of $9,475.

Changing the breakpoints, increasing the number of breakpoints (say new breakpoints at $3,000, at $6,000, and at $8000), or reducing the percentage payout at the highest level would maintain payouts for the poorest in our society, but reduce expenditures to those who can most afford it.

Could both Democrats and Republicans agree to such a scheme?

Fix the Broken Tax System.

The corporate tax system is broken, badly broken (Tax lobbyists help businesses reap windfalls. Boston Globe, March 17, 2013: A1, A8, A9).

The fix is simple: abolish the corporate tax. If many corporations are not paying it, then it does not serve as a reliable source of revenue. If many fine minds are engaged in counterproductive legal and lobbying activities to reduce taxes, a better use could be made of their talents.

The corporation tax should be replaced by a financial transaction tax. Such taxes are being introduced in Europe's financial centers so that such a tax imposed in the US would be unlikely to result in a flight of trading to foreign bourses.

A very small tax applied to the multitude of financial transactions would generate the funds to replace the lost corporate taxes and might even reduce the speculative frenzy that sometimes inflames stock and bond markets.

I am very disturbed by one phrase in your description of this agreement (Big Hedge Fund Pays $616 Million in Trading Cases, New York Times, March 16, 2013: A1,A3).

You say: "SAC ... holds one of the best investment records on Wall Street..."

I, too, could have a good investment record if I was able to enjoy multiple instances of trading on the basis of insider information.

With that kind of information it is easy to buy low, sell high, and short stocks with no danger of losses.