Dave Cullen blogged about No blank check without concessions. For as far as he went, I thought it was great and made a good point. But then he stopped abruptly with this cliffhanger of a remark:

Yes, we'll save you, and here's the price to you.

Dave was saying if we're going to foot the bill on this bailout, we should ask for something and not just give in freely. But what to ask for? (No doubt the answer is to tune in next time for another installment.)

But, never one to back down from rewriting others' cliffhangers (I used to write alternate endings of TV soap operas and publish them to the web), I figured this was my opening. Since Dave didn't say what concession he thought we should ask for, I figure I'd just blunder forth with my own suggestions. If he later offers his own, too, so much the better. His basic premise is right and we need all the suggestions we can get.

Moving ahead, my first thought was that the things we ask for have to be things that, if granted, don't increase the national debt. And yet, they need to be things that matter to real people. So, for example, we can't all ask for free toasters (that was one of Bill Maher's light-hearted suggestions) both because it's not a big enough thing to ask and because it costs money no one can afford to spend.

So, working with that constraint, here are some things that occur to me:

• Rescind the Patriot Act. Need I say more on this one? The Constitution has taken a serious beating in these last two Presidential terms. Enough is enough. If you want us to go into serious hock, restore this country to its the so-called “original intent”: the rule of law. Heck, I would consider it a major concession for Bush to publicly admit he has overstepped as he was restoring our rights.

• Restore the Estate Tax. The standard justification for why people should be allowed to become rich in the United States is that such wealth is the engine of prosperity that makes the nation rich. Well, that experiment has failed. So here's a new idea: Give anyone who gets rich legally exactly one generation to use that wealth for the public good. That money may be used by them and their spouse but is otherwise transferrable only in a limited fashion. They can raise their kids to the age of majority in whatever style they like, and can assure that beyond that the kids have money for a proper education, a lifetime of good health care, and any additional accommodations as are appropriate to those with special needs who cannot care for themselves. Make exceptions for specific family businesses like family-owned farms, if you like. But beyond that, no dynasties. Kids of wealthy people have to make their own fortunes and cannot live off the wealth of parents. Wealth returns to the general funds after that, for use in education and health care, for example.

  And make a point of noting publicly that this is what is expected of good citizens. If you want your money spent efficiently in service of other ways, use your lifetime to set that up. The Republicans have spent years talking about patriotism: Let them know that making your fellow citizens better off is patriotism, and failing to is not.

• Admit that progressive taxation is fair. If the average person is going to be footing the bill for fiascos like this that were clearly out of their control, then it should be made clear that the tax structure needs to lean heavily toward the high end.

  In fact, why not just say that the tax on poor people is "being poor". Say that while we are willing to offer services to help people, every individual is to try to help themselves before asking for help, but that in order to make that easier, we won't tax anyone until they have demonstrated they can take care of themselves. Make taxation a privilege of the rich, an honor that people can aspire to. Say that every adult is entitled to earn up to $100,000 of savings on a tax-free basis (with perhaps an additional allowance for children that can be transferred to them upon majority).

  No income tax, no tax on the interest. And when they have filled that up, then money they make above that is what's taxed. The point is to acknowledge that when people aren't making their own way in the world, there's no point in tapping them for extra money. The operating budget of the United States is to be taken from the people who are more well-to-do than that.

  That doesn't mean that the poor aren't paying tax. The tax on them is that companies can't afford to pay everyone luxury salaries. They have to make do with less. That's already taxing.

  Make a law that says that anyone who is ever caught saying otherwise must give up their savings and their high-paying job and start over with a low-paying job and no savings so they can enjoy the luxury accommodations they are so sure people are getting away with. (I'm mostly kidding here, since I don't really favor content restrictions on free speech, and yet I stand by the sentiment.)

  This suggestion also doesn't mean we don't pay social security at some level, if the US can even afford it after these other liabilities we've taken on. It's just that we stop taxing the poor to pay for it. Instead of stopping charging payroll tax at around $100K, we start charging for it around there.

• Restrict the Maximum Salary. We ordinary citizens that don't have golden parachutes and full retirement benefits get a little tired of watching others who have a lot use words like "we're doing all we can".

  How about this: Designate that a corporation can pay a maximum salary of, say, 10x what the lowest paid employee makes. One way to raise the CEO's wages then would be to raise the lowest paid worker's wages.

  But beyond that, allow no more salary, only bonus plans: Make a specific objectively testable criterion for what benefit is to be provided in exchange for that amount, and to offer it as a bonus if that objectively testable criterion is met, not as salary. In that way, everyone knows what is being purchased and when it is and is not delivered. Further, say that such income is not ordinary income, but is “extraordinary income”, and assign it a tax rate that is above the ordinary rate of income.

• Create tax-incentives for companies that keep employment on shore. Companies are outsourcing jobs to make a profit. This doesn't benefit the US and we should not be subsidizing the practice.

• Gay Marriage. Fair is fair.  If gays are going to have to carry this tax burden along with the rest of us, let's finally let them marry anywhere they like. If not, let's exempt them from taxes, too.  (If enough people declare themselves gay to avoid taxes, some Republican will come up with some explanation soon enough about why gay marriage is ok after all.)

These ideas I've suggested are authored somewhat hastily, and might require some refinement. But I think one has to start somewhere. And maybe others can suggest other ideas of this kind. The ideas we choose should not be those that increase our debt, but rather those that acknowledge the pain that the upcoming bailouts will cause, and that distribute the pain where it can best be shouldered.

 p.s. Don't forget to rate this if you thought it worth reading.  Thanks!