Tomorrow is the start of the Republican convention. So I like to talk about one big issue the democrats and republicans are fighting over. Taxes. To me the American tax system is terrible. The tax code is thousands of pages long and is criticized by both sides. Yet nobody really want to make it simple because it is the tax laws, loopholes and exceptions to the tax laws that give politicians the power. By making and amending laws and creating loopholes, powerful politicians can help the people who support them. These complicated laws also keep big accounting firms and tax law attorneys in business. So if I am king I would make the following tax codes.

I would propose a flat tax maybe similar to the 16% Hong Kong has. There would be a line below which those people would not have to pay. Anything above that line everybody pays the same percentage. In order for this to work there can't be any deductions and nobody can write into law new deductions. There will be higher taxes on alcohol and tobacco. Th flat tax usually favors higher income earner. To offset that there should be no sales tax for "normal" priced products. For example a chair priced at $50 will not be taxed. But a $5000 couch would be taxed. Cars will be taxed according its mileage per gallon and sales price. A $20000 first car for a family will be taxed free. A gas guzzler or a Rolls Royce will be highly taxed. Putting money into the Cayman Islands or Swiss banks will be highly taxed as well. Sorry Mitt!

There are kinks that need to be worked out but you get the idea. Since I am not really the king, there is also 0% chance of something like this ever passing.

Yesterday CNN had an article which says that Hong Kong women have the longest life expectancy in the world, 86.7 years. They have surpassed Japanese women who had lived the longest for the last 25 years. Hong Kong men comes in at 80 years, not too shabby. My take on this is that obviously Asian men sacrifice themselves in taking care of their spouses. OK, I will admit there may be other factors involved. One thing is that Asian cities tend to be very crowded so it is difficult to drive. Most people walk to a lot everyday. Tai chi which is very popular helps elderly people with balance and thus avoid hip fractures which can lead to high mortality. The Asian food is less fattening than western diet which decrease heart diseases and breast cancer in women. But there are also disadvantages living in Hong Kong and elsewhere in Asia. Air pollution is worse and infectious disease tend to spread more quickly in crowded places. So given all these pluses and minuses, does Hong Kong's health system make a difference?

I think the Hong Kong system does make a difference. How much I don't know. The basic system is modeled after the British system. There are public hospitals and clinics one can go for free or very cheap. There are long waits in some specialties just like in Britain. These long waits are always pointed out by opponents of socialize medicine. Unlike the British, however, Hong Kong allows and encourages private hospitals and clinics where if you can pay, you can bypass the long wait. Unlike many countries with socialized medicine, paying to get to the front of the line is not frowned upon in Hong Kong. So emergencies and regular primary care are given to anybody quickly by doctors who are among the best trained in the world. But if want a new knee or hip or lasik surgery, you wait couple of years if you are poor or pay to get them right away if you are rich. The British and Canadians make the latter difficult for the rich. The end result is that some end up going to the U.S. for treatment. Is Hong Kong better? It is a matter of opinion but I think you can't always be completely fair and the Hong Kong system seems good to me.

This is my post Olympic review. First I would like to say that I did not like the closing ceremony. It felt like an Emmy award show. I understand that the British gave us a lot of excellent rock music but to base the entire show on that seems not to do right by the Olympic games. After all we can see the Emmy every year, not to mention the American and World music awards etc. And there were very few great British stars in person. I know Freddy Mercury can't be there but a woman taking his place? Who are the people pretending to be the Who? David Bowie didn't show up. Annie Lennox and George Michael did not sing their most famous songs. I know they are not rockers but if music is the only thing they are going to give us, at least bring on Katherine Jenkins and Susan Boyle. Given that London is maybe the most diverse city in the world, what happens to ethnic group participation? Maybe the Brits don't want to remind others of their colonial days?

They are still talking about the badminton scandal in the papers. But nobody noticed that Spain, after losing to Russia in group play, managed to lose the Brazil thus ensuring that they finish 3rd in the group. This way they would be in a different bracket as the U.S. in the knock out round. If they were 2nd they would have played the U.S. in the semi-finals. This way they don't play the U.S. until the finals. Sort of like the 76ers lost the last regular season game so they play the #1 seed Bulls who are without Rose instead of the full strength Miami Heat. The badminton players were doing the same thing as Spain and the 76ers did. It is just easier to hide it in team sports.

I noticed that South Korea gives exemptions to athletes who win Olympic medals from serving their mandatory military service. I don't know if it is a good idea to deprive your military the fastest and strongest people of your country. How about the shooters? Wouldn't they be useful. I bet they could have use their archers even though we don't fight with bow and arrow anymore. By the way West Point finished 3rd in a recent NCAA shooting championship. I think they should draft all the members of #1 and 2.

The U.S. women did much better than the men. The women won 29 golds vs 17 for the men. In fact the men were tied by Britain and China in gold medals. I think there is a more even playing field among the men in world competition. Even in basketball the world competition is getting closer. With all the stars from the NBA the U.S. had couple of scares including the final. The women, on the other hand, have benefited by Title IX. Compare to women in other countries the U.S. women have great advantages. The women's basketball team is much farther ahead of other countries than the men' team. The volleyball and water polo team did way better than the men's teams. The men's soccer and field hockey teams did not even qualify. In all these sports there are way more scholarships for women than men. UCLA used to be a power house in men's gymnastics but it does not even have a program now. Football takes up much of the scholarships for men but football is not in the Olympics. So if things do not change pretty soon we will depend on the women alone to fend off challenges from China.

There are arguments about whether Usain Bolt or Michael Phelps is the greater Olympian. If you are talking about life time achievement then there is no argument, Phelps win easily at this point. If Bolt 3 peats in 2016 then we can open the discussion. If you are talking about this Olympic I would say Bolt since he went undefeated in a more glamorous sport. In fact I don't think Phelps is the best male swimmer this year. I would pick Sun Yang of China who won the 1500 and 400 free plus silver in 200 free. He also anchored China's 4x200 relay to a bronze medal. All of those had never been done by Chinese men before. In individual events Phelps won 2 gold and a silver also. But he also finished 4th in one event. He got 3 medals in relays but the U.S. would have won those without him. China would not get the bronze without Sun. Sun also broke his own world record in the 1500 and beat Ryan Lochte in the 200. There is a big difference between the distances of 200 and 1500 and I don't think anyone had done that well in such different distances.

Did anyone notice that when the Japanese gymnastic coach went to the judges to protest the score that put Japan in 4th place in the competition, he was holding some American money in his hand? Since he is Japanese and is in England why would he be holding American money? I guess the greenback is still the international money of trade or bribe.

I predict that Brazil's economy will shrink in the next 4 years due to China decreasing its demand for soybean and raw materials. This will lead to speculation and worry that Brazil will not be ready by 2016. Eventually Brazil will pull it off and everybody will have a great time. I will have learned the samba by then.

In regard to the last comment on the last blog: No, the complain about Obama changing the welfare law is unfounded. He was just giving the states more flexibility to administer the work laws. This was requested in the past by GOP governors. It is another example of taking things out of context which both sides are guilty of.

Mitt Romney has picked Paul Ryan to be his running mate. By making the choice now ahead of the convention, Romney appears to be changing strategy. He has decided that he can no longer just point the finger at Obama's record and win. By selecting Ryan, who has made extensive proposals on social security, medicare and medicaid reforms, he will have to put out specific ideas to the voters. If your running mate has put out specific proposals, you can't just say things like "I am going to create a million jobs and cut the deficit" without telling us how you are going to do it.

The Democrats like the Ryan choice because now they have something specific to attack. It is hard to know how this will play out. I think in most states, the vp choice will not make much difference. Ryan can energize the Republican base and the Tea party people to be more enthusiastic for Romney. I think that Ryan will only make a difference in two states: Wisconsin where Ryan would help Romney and Florida where he would hurt him because the large number of seniors who don't want big changes in their social security and medicare. Since Florida has 29 votes to 10 for Wisconsin, I think Ryan will be a negative for Romney overall. A better choice, politically, would be Rob Portman of Ohio since that is a toss up state with more votes than Wisconsin and Portman would not alienate the seniors in Florida.