Deficit Negotiations Collapse — Are Progressives Cheering?
Politico’s Mike Allen, in an e-mail this morning, reported that the White House stances “infuriate Senate Democrats, who complain that the president’s chief of staff, Bill Daley, is too quick to make concessions to Boehner.”
SEIU union President May Kay Henry has called reports of a deal with Republicans “morally wrong.” She told The Nation that with most of the the deals publicly floated “Medicaid will be eviscerated, access to healthcare for millions of Americans will be gutted.”
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) steamed that “[i]t would concern me greatly if these folks – the tea party group – have been able to convince the president to go along with a deal that basically gives them everything they want.”
Corn also warned that “House Democrats are poised to go ballistic should Obama reach an agreement with Republicans to squeeze the entitlement programs.”
Unions are taking aim at the “Gang of Six” proposal being crafted by three Senate Democrats and three Republicans. They bought a full a page ad around the nation denouncing it. Earlier in the week President Obama praised the Gang of Six proposal, which would cut Medicare and Social Security. The ad says that the compromise “is bad for working families.” It was paid for by the AFL-CIO, the National Education Association, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the Food and Commercial Workers Union, and SEIU.
MoveOn.org director Justin Rubin called upon Democrats in Congress to stop the Gang of Six deal. He called it a “total non-starter and Democrats in Congress should rule it out immediately.”
The level of discouragement among liberal Democrats became clearer when today CNN released its latest public opinion poll that showed President Obama’s approval rating fell to 45%.
CNN’s pollsters said the continuing downward spiral for the president was ”driven in part by growing dissatisfaction on the left with the president’s track record in office.”
The news organization did not publish it anywhere on its CNN home page. It was buried on a separate web site at its specialized CNN Politics page.
CNN Polling Director Keating Holland explained that one major source of the dissatisfaction are reports that the president will concede to Republicans on entitlements: “It’s likely that this is a reaction to some of Obama’s recent actions, including his willingness to discuss major changes in Social Security and Medicare as part of the debt ceiling negotiations,” he concluded.
The president’s retreat means he is throwing the dice that public opinion will support the White House if there is no deal.
No one still knows what kind of plan will emerge. But if Democratic insiders who have an ear into the White House are clanging alarm bells, it’s possible Obama, hoping for a second term, may have been close to securing a Grand Bargain with congressional Republicans.
But it was not to be. Apparently he believes that it is more important to secure his own base rather than continue to see the continued slide in popularity among his supporters.
In the end, the nation loses.
Boehner did not announce the collapse in talks until the stock market closed. If there is no more movement over the weekend, expect a massive sell off on Wall Street.
The tons of ink aren’t worth the price.
Everybody knows the debt ceiling will be lifted for the usual fake promise of budget cuts that will never happen, plus some budgetary pea movement from shell A to shell B. I have the press release on my favorites list already. I just pretend the date is different.
They can’t be defeated when the marxist sits in the presidency and controls the senate, since the republicans have the quaint notion that rules must be followed, a notion long-ago laughed out of town by the marxists.
The solution is to sweep in 2012. That’s the only solution.
The GOP has no desire to govern. The GOP has no desire to assist in fixing the economy that they broke (both literally and figuratively).
Lawrence O’Donnell said it weeks ago – President Obama is playing rope-a-dope with Republicans. President Obama will take action using Emergency Powers to protect the full faith and credit of the United States.
What’s the effect – no change in Medicare, no change in Social Security, and a repeal of Bush tax cuts in 2013. It’s a $4trillion deficit reduction plan.
That’s what you call leadership. Don’t like it? WTF are you going to do about it?
I’m stuck on the part where you say it is the Republicans who broke the economy. No hint of shared responsibility, no recognition of who got elected in 2006? No recollection of Fannie and Freddie, Goldman Sachs – or an essentially Democratic Congress since 1958?
So you’re just, oh, into pounding your chest and saying My Tribe Good! Other Tribe Bad!
Come to think of it, that’s pretty much what the Democrats quoted here are doing here as well – no mention of what might be good for the country, just the horse race commentary on what would be good for Obama, or for progressives. Pathetic.
Oh, right. It’s implied that having you guys in charge will automatically be good for the country, because…because…well, there was something said about why, but I think it’s just Progressive Specialness that will save us.
Anosognosia. Look it up. Then try really hard to consider the 1% chance it might apply to you.
I smell a bad case of sour grapes. I know, I know, you want yur Amurikka back. Tough. We don’t like fascism in this neck of the woods.
Nice argument, Praetentious! Do you really see such a large difference between corporations controlling the government (fascism) and the reverse? It’s not a left-right spectrum, it’s a circle, and people like you are at its far end hobnobbing with your ostensible opposites.
In other words, don’t dis on the fascist standing next to you, and don’t mistake those who despise fascism in any form for the actual fascists. It serves only to make you look dumber than God intended.
Then why do you keep implementing it?
I don’t think fascism means what you think it means.
“Praetorian”?! What a perfect cyber name for one of Obama’s little brown-nosers! Can you define “fascism” for us, or is it just your word for “doo-doo”? And didn’t you leave out a K when you misspelled America?
And we don’t like slavers, Copperhead.
I don’t care who started it. Really. The issue may be really a lot of fun to dissect and play the blame game but isn’t it more important to a) stop any new taxes and b) cut existing spending ? Right now, it appears that this president is drumming loudly the “we need new taxes” beat. And why is that? No, really, ask yourself why we “need” new taxes. Oh, yeah, Obamacare. See, first you spend all the money you can, then create a pathetic argument that without new taxes, you can’t pay for that which you shouldn’t have spent in the first place. It’s like giving a kid an allowance and watching them spend it on crap, then acquiescing to giving them more so they can have the money to buy lunch.
At the end of the argument, said parent is taken for a guilt trip for the irresponsible actions of the child.
Praetorian, do you know what a fasces is? Do you know where that term, ‘fascism’, comes from? Also, look up ‘praetorian’. And then, savor with me the irony of someone calling himself Praetorian complaining about fascism.
“President Obama will take action using Emergency Powers … That’s what you call leadership. Don’t like it? WTF are you going to do about it?”
“We don’t like fascism in this neck of the woods.”
Are you having a dialogue with yourself?
“We don’t like fascism in this neck of the woods.”
That’s funny – Progressives are textbook versions of leftists ranging from communists to fascists.
Isaac Don Levine introduced two defectors from Stalin’s underground in around 1939. One had accurately predicted the Nazi-Soviet pact, a lapsed Jew General Walter Krivitsky (his nom de guerre) who had recently published a book through Levine about his escape from Stalin’s Secret Service where he served as one of Stalin’s top European spies. The other was a recently converted Quaker and ex-homosexual linguist Whittaker Chambers, also an ex-spy for Stalin (along with the Hiss brothers, Henry Wadleigh, J. Peters, Harry Dexter White and others. Both Krivitzky and Chambers were then targeted by Stalin and neither trusted the other. Krivitsky thought of a solution, to build trust, as reported by Chambers in his great memoir “Witness:” (p. 459 of 799) from Chapter Ten Part V:
“By way of handshake, Krivitsky touched my hand. Then he sat down at the far end of the couch on which I was sitting. He did not look at me. He stared straight ahead. Then he asked in German (the only language that we ever spoke): ‘Ist die Sowjetregiurung eine faschisticshe Reigiurung?’ — Is the Soviet Government a fascist government?” . . . [After a pause and some thought] all the emotions that had ever bound me to Communism rose in a final spasm to stop my mouth. I sat silent for some moments. Then I said: ‘Ja, die Sowjetregierung ist eine faschistische Regierung — The Soviet Government is a fascist government.’ Later on that night, Krivitsky told me that if I had answered yes at once, he would have distrusted me. Because I hesitated, and he felt the force of my struggle, he was convinced that I was sincere.”
“Witness” here boils down the key liberating question that divides Right from Left over the last 100 years or so. Only when you realize that all government power, to control the little people and prevent their rise through the free market, usually in the name of “helping” those “trapped” in poverty (help that never comes except in less than useless drips that are the real trap) is fascistic in its origins, and that fascism and leftism are indistinguishable, and that Stalin was as much a fascist as Hitler, and that Hitler was as much a Nationalist Socialist and leftist as Stalin was, then only then will you realize that the answer is to allow government to give freedom to the little people in the form of untaxed capital which they can use to compete against the oligopolists. This true untethered capitalism is the only real anti-fascism there is and is what those true believers on the right really believe in. Fascism is left (full gov’t power). Anti-fascism is right. (Weak government, free markets, all power to the little people freely competing in the free market with low taxes and low regulation, and with government only active to cramp and limit the overbearing power of the oligopolists and monopolists with hard free-market competition. This additional capitalistic competition without compulsion in the markets makes the free market freer without any crony fascistic capitalism such as the stuff that Obama loves and practices.
This is the answer against fascism. Learn it, teach it and do it and down with the Fascists like Praetorian on the left. We don’t like leftist fascism in this neck of the woods, just as we didn’t like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim Jung Il, Castro, Hussein, Bin Ladin, Ahmadinejad and Khomeini, Fascists all.
Tax cuts for the wealthy, a war in Afghanistan, and a war in Iraq racked up trillions in deficits. This out of control spending all happened under a Republican President with a Majority Republican Congress. And while Fannie and Freddie contributed to the disbursement of toxic loans, the fact is that the majority of toxic loans were lent by private companies with zero government ties. Additionally, the actual financial crisis was caused by Wall Street packaging said toxic loans it knew to be turds and selling them on the market as AAA rated when they clearly were ticking time bombs. If Wall Street hadn’t packaged and sold those toxic CDOs, the crisis would have been limited to those individuals who couldn’t pay their loans back, and would not have crashed the entire financial sector.
delusion must be bliss as well
Well, you have you fact wrong yet again. The GOP did not “break the economy”, the Democrats did. You really need to get your facts straight. After 911, If the Democrats would have been in charge we would have had this disaster way back then. The GOP, lead by GWB, deftly turned around the Dot Bomb recession inherited from Clinton and prevented what could well have been depression following the harrowing days of 911, in what were truely desperate times, times you seem all to eager to avoid mentioning. Mover, during the Bush years, the economy had one of the greatest expansions in the post war years, and certainly the greatest in the last twenty years. America consistently and constantly lead the world in GDP growth, employment and productivity gains.
Some of our Commiecrats want to blame this current crisis on the Bush tax cuts, but actually, they raised tax revenue. Ideologues of the Left 1) do not understand the difference between tax rates and tax revenues, and 2) Have a ideological and psychological, noy to mention psychtic, harted fr the successful and the dreaded “bourgeois”, view them as “class enemies” and therefore wish to punish them irrespective of any larger revenue issues. Beyond that, they can never take any responsibility for their own action or the hideous results of their loony project. Thus this whole bit of agitprop that the current crisis is due to the Bush Tax Cuts or deficit spending on the part of Bush is deeply dishonest, is an attempt at deflection and, in the end, is an textbook case of projection.
See here and here for the real story of the Bush tax cuts and the economy under Bush. The facts are, as always, quite the opposite of the lying propaganda of the Democrats.
No, the blame lies clearly at the feet of the Democrats, starting in 2006 and clearly ratcheting up during Obama’s term.. To be more concise: 1) The ponzi scheme caused government intervention in financial markets to create credit/risk instruments to cover idiotic redistribution real estate hustles are the primary cause of the problems in 2008, and Bush (and the GOP) indeed warned abut this and attempt reform, which the Democrats, of course, stonewalled. 2) Had the original TARP plan been stuck to, only the original tranche of abut 300 billion would have been used, and it would have been used for it original purpose, which was to temporary settle ad support markets by dealing with toxic assets in a few institutions. Instead Obama turned it in into a couple of trillion n wealth transfer from middle class America to Wall street, and 3) On top of that, Obama spent trillions of “stimulus” that were really just about stealing money from the productive to reward his supporters and clients. Add to that truly communist takeovers, such as the GM debacle, Obamacare, and regulatory agencies gone wild and one quickly arrives in our current pickle.
So no, you are quite wrong here: It has little to do with the GOP and much to do with the Democrats. Actually “wrong” is not quite right: what is the case is that your lies are so grossly off as to expose you for what you are: A Marxist shill and “useful idiot”.
The big lie has been exposed by two New York Times reporters in their book Reckless Endangerment. The Democrats rigged the housing market and stymied President Bush’s reform efforts. It took over 40 years for the failure of the Hoover-Roosevelt economic policy to be exposed. It has taken a mere three years to expose the corrupt Dodd-Frank-Pelosi caused financial collapse.
What we need is a cut of all unconstitutional government functions. Education, Energy, HUD, Health and Human Services should be cut 100%, and funded, if at all, by states. States are not limited by enumerated powers in the federal constitution, and don’t have the ability to create pretended money from nothing.
We have been saddled to this train on its way to a train wreck since the time of the uber progressive Woodrow Wilson. The 16th amendment allowing income taxes and the 17th amendment allowing direct elections of senators sealed our fate. Yes the country club GOP made up of DICC’s (Democrats in Conservative Clothing) are complicit but aren’t solely to blame.
The people are really to blame since they decided that be independent and self sufficient was too hard and sought out all sorts of government assistance. Take a deep look in the mirror and determine what blame lies with you also.
The GOP broke the economy?
Goebbels was wrong you know. Repeating a lie doesn’t make people believe it.
Every expert on the planet says the crises was caused by a housing bobble fueled by sub prime loans.
The quote below is the pretty much the crux of the matter.
Wikipedia:
“In 1999, Fannie Mae came under pressure from the Clinton administration to expand mortgage loans to low and moderate income borrowers by increasing the ratios of their loan portfolios in distressed inner city areas designated in the CRA of 1977.”
Last time I checked, Clinton was Democratic.
Praetorian, I realize that you are not strong on complicated issues like economy and such. But since your claims defy both logic and common sense, I would ask you to please flesh out your claims in more concrete terms? I would like to see some kind of evidence that the sub prime crises was caused by legislation enacted by a Republican majority. Or administrative decisions by a Republican president. Please make an effort to back up your claims.
You are wrong about who caused the financial mess. It began in 1977 when Jimmy Carter signed into law The Community Reinvestment Act. Bill Clinton reinforced the terms of this act during his second term in office. This nasty law required banks to give mortgages to people who had no jobs, no income, no investments, no money in the bank, and no prospects for any of the former. Government goons threatened bank presidents into complying. As a result, foreclosure rates soared. The banks knew they were holding bad paper and sold it to other financial institutions. What would you have done? Allow yourself to be left holding the bag? This snowballed for 30 years until the meltdown in 2008.
I bought a home in June 2005. Apparently, the Community Reinvestment Act did not apply to me. I am white, was making $70,000 a year, had a 401K account and other investments, had $14,000 in a savings account, and a credit score of 815. I had to show three months of bank statements, three months of employment pay stubs, and had to release information about my investments. If I had been black or hispanic and unemployed, I would not have had to produce this information, and I would have gotten the loan straightaway. Is this equality under the law?
George Bush tried FIVE times to get Congress to enact legislation to rein in the mortgage and financial institutions. Democrats blocked each attempt. Search on youtube and you can find a video of Chris Dodd filibustering the only one of these bills that reached the senate floor for debate. The debate never happened and the bill went away.
This whole mess we’re in was caused by democrats, starting with Jimmy Carter. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd promoted these disastrous policies and claimed ignorance when the bubble burst. You don’t hear much about it today, but the Obama administration is still pushing these risky loans.
Read Thomas Sowell’s book, “The Housing Boom and Bust” for the TRUE story of what happened and get your facts straight. It was the democrats, NOT the republicans, who caused this bad economy and continue to destroy what’s left of it.
MJ
Accurate on almost all points. In GB auto biography he states trying to reform Fannie Freddie (FNMA/FHLMC) 17 times
Glass Steigel was approved by both Ds and Rs
Allowing 5 institutions to lever at 40 to 1 was obviously a mistake (morgan/merrill/goldman/lehman/BS
Regulation on Mark to Market after Enron was the real killer
The true idiots are letting Frank and Dodd off the hook. Can’t believe the same guys who helped create the problem were put back in charge of regulation.
And of course we have Nerobama fiddling while spending almost $5trillion on NOTHING. FYI thats the same amount of total GDP for China for a year
The problem with your simplistic solution, praetorian, is that you are not acknowledging several basic realities:
1) Medicare and Social security can’t be left, as you wish, with ‘no change’ because they are not fundable ‘as is’. They are destroying the economy as they give out more than the economy can sustain.
Question to Praetorian: Are you aware that a govt service that costs more than the taxpayer can afford is untenable?
2) Increasing taxes won’t solve this problem, since by taking investment money away from the investors – this kills the private economy.
Question to Praetorian: Are you aware that a govt does not produce wealth; it only consumes wealth. Do you know where wealth comes from? It comes from the PRIVATE SECTOR. And, when a govt removes this wealth, it removes a nation’s capacity-to-invest. Do you know what investment means? It means putting profit money into building new factories, hiring more people, innovating new designs. Or do you think that wealth is simply stored in someone’s old socks?
3) Are you aware that Obama’s ‘stimulus’ didn’t create any new jobs – but simply propped up his electoral base, the PUBLIC service, by giving the money to the public bureaucracies? Remember, govts don’t create wealth; they consume it.
4) You don’t seem to understand basic economics – how wealth is created, how a nation mustn’t consume all its productive capacity but must STORE, i.e., invest it, into infrastructures that generate more wealth. This is basic economis. And basic biology…imagine if all the seeds were eaten by birds and none could produce more plants. Or if a farmer ate all his crop and left nothing to plant next year’s crop. Think, Praetorian. Don’t just mouth platitudes of the left.
You stated social security is destroying the economy. You may be right but, can you kindly direct me to your resources indicating that social security has ever added a penny of debt on the nation? Seems my resources indicate that the social security trust fund has funded this nations government and private sector handouts, wars, etc., for a few decades….in addition to its recipients. I’m always open to learning something new from your resources!
Until then, I will continue to believe it is the mechanical parts of the private and global sector economic engine that is broken, continuing to produce grave long term consequences. Like European governments, America’s government decided also, to prop it’s certain to be doomed domestic private sector economy up at any cost. That government cost has proven to be unsustainable!
The government only steps in when the people and, in this case, their economic engine doesn’t step up…or can no longer step up to the populations requirements of existence.
TTTHomas – you can google social security debate yourself to see the statistics. The facts are that the long term viability of social security can’t be sustained because the output (benefits) will outstrip the input (taxes) as the population ages and as lifespans increase. The surplus that was developed has been used!!! by the govt, instead of remaining ‘in the pot’ (Trust Fund)..and the Trust Fund will be exhausted in 20 years.
Could you explain what the ‘mechanical parts’ of the private and global sector are? I’m not familiar with such terminology.
No, you are quite naive that government only steps in when the private sector isn’t working! Taxing away the Investment money of small businesses, which is what this Obama government is doing – and wants to increase – is preventing business from working! The expanding bureaucratic regulations are strangling private enterprise; the many and varied taxes on businesses and individuals are strangling private enterprise. The Obama insistence that your wealth must be taken and ‘redistributed’ for consumption rather than investment – is strangling private enterprise.
So- I’ve no idea what you are talking about with your ‘mechanics’.
“social security trust fund”
Can you point me to your research that indicates this even exists outside AlGore’s and your mind.
WTF are we going to do about it as Americans? Well baby, watch and learn. The liberal left has never learned it’s not wise to get mainstream America fighting mad about an issue. Carter learned that lesson in the 1980 election over Iran – a landslide for Reagan. Last fall in the mid-terms it happened again. There is a lot of truth in the old phrase “the silent majority”. They stay silent until it’s time to speak up and change things – then “hope and change” becomes real change.
BTW, the financial crisis came right from the Democrats’ wanting everyone to get a mortgage no matter their credit worthiness and others wanting to make big bucks from it. Re the debt – take a look at the increase over the past 3 years – it dwarfs anything by any other President all the way back to perhaps WWII or further. Our “Spending addict” Mr. Obama” has raised the debt by 25% in 3 years with no visible benefit other than to his political cronies, and he wants to stay on that road. Don’t think so.
This article is the type of partisan filth that makes it impossible to get anything done in this country. When Richard Pollock and others write baseless crap like this, all it does is further convince the right wing that its fellow citizens on the other side of the isle do not simply think differently, but are mortal enemies who hate them and must be destroyed. We all want to live in a strong, prosperous America, we just have different ideas of how to get there. We used to be able to sit together at the table and hash these things out. But how are we supposed to unite as a nation and fix our real problems if the Richard Pollocks of the world are committed to turning us all against each other for cheap short term partisan political gain? If Richard Pollock were writing this article 70 years ago, his title would surely be “The Reichstag is Burning – Are Jews Cheering?”
“Romney leads the polls for the GOP nomination among Republican primary voters. However, it is far too early for the polls to give a sense of who is likely to emerge as the Republican nominee. In 2008, John McCain never took the lead in a national primary poll until December 31, 2007.”
If the goal is to rid the Marxist of the White House, isn’t it about time to quit the game playing and get on with the business of electing a President that can and will get it done.
An endless list of stoppers hasn’t worked so far, including Time Pawlenty. Maybe we should try John McCain again? He could probably stop the cultist.
Or maybe Jeb Bush, Hannity spotlighted him for an hour today on the fair and balanced Fox News Channel.
The source of the quote is Rasmussen, 7-22-11.
There are two ways you can win the Presidency. Either by NOT being the other guy or by being charismatic. Being centrist has never been the reason anybody won the Presidency. Extremists, left or right, always win.
Carter: Way out left wing
Reagan: Very right wing
Bush Senior: Very right wing in his campaign.
Clinton: Doesn’t matter, he won because Ross Perot split the Republican votes
GW Bush: Very far out right wing on military and social issues.
Obama: Extreme left wing bordering on Marxism.
Centrists loose because they are uncharismatic and vague. The people pleasing concept of reaching across the isle, instead of having strong principles, is a sure way to not becoming President.
How was Reagan “very right wing”? He raised taxes multiple times and the deficit increased by 89% under his administration?
“How was Reagan “very right wing”? He raised taxes multiple times and the deficit increased by 89% under his administration?”
Don’t you get it? Increasing the national debt is what right wingers (Reagan, Bush) do.
Remember, in the 2000 campaign, Bush promised to govern following Reagan’s example. I read that as running up the national debt, and irresponsible adventures abroad (remember Iran/Contra?).
You gotta admit: Bush kept his campaign promises!
“Don’t you get it? Increasing the national debt is what right wingers (Reagan, Bush) do.”
I’m unclear here, Anonymous. Are you saying it’s GOOD to increase the National Debt, and that’s why you admire Reagan and Bush? Or is it BAD to increase the National Debt, so you don’t like Reagan and Bush?
If raising the National Debt is BAD, is Obama wrong to do it? Will you be supporting a “centrist” like Romney or Pawlenty, then?
Failing a sweep in 2012, then what?
That is probably true. In the past I have had heartburn about the GOP holding the House, Senate, and White House, but no more. I think that when the goal is to prevent more burdensome legislation, a split set is good. But we are talking about REPEAL of bad legislation and actual NEW laws that would prevent profligate spending. For that you need all three arms of the gov’t.
This “marxist” crap is getting tired. Please point to a single actual policy that this administration has put into place that is remotely marxist. Obama has governed basically like Reagan. The problem is that the GOP has moved so far to the right in the last three decades that anything short of libertarian anarchy is viewed as socialism. Reagan wouldn’t even recognize his party today.
obamacare
obama motors
crony capitalism (ge, goldman sachs, citigroup,etc…)
exponential growth of the state
promoting class warfare (millionaires/billionaires in their jets)
promoting “equality” via confiscation of wealth
siphoning from the private sector to reward political allies
ideological aversion to free market capitalism and individualism
and on
and on
and on…
Marxism is ‘crap of bull’ but for a completely different set of reasons.
How Marxofascism is Being Systematically Implemented in American Neighborhoods
http://trevorloudon.com/2011/07/how-marxofascism-is-being-systematically-implemented-in-american-neighborhoods/
By: Arlen Williams Gulag Bound
Also called…
■Smart Growth
■Sustainable Communities
■Sustainable Growth
■Sustainable Climates
■Local Governments for Sustainability
■Sustainable [whatever else]
■Liveable Cities
■Resilient Cities
■Greenhouse Gas Prevention
■Green [whatever]
■Biodiversity
■[Something, Something] Climate Change
■Triple Bottom Line Finance
■Communitarianism [more convenient than Marx & Engles' C-word]
■ICLEI
■Responsible Planning
■Responsible Redevelopment
■Effective Environmental Protection
■Rio Accords
■New World Order [yes, they use that term]
■Global Governance [yes, that one too]
■the list can be longer, but you get the picture
Source; http://gulagbound.com/17457/how-marxofascism-is-being-systematically-implemented-in-american-neighborhoods/
Compare the above with the original 10 planks of Communism by Karl Marx
http://www.jeremiahproject.com/culture/10-planks-of-communism.html
The Marxist/Communists are quite content with being in the shadow because the Democrats are doing all the work for them.
“House Speaker John Boehner (D-OH)” — did someone switch parties when I wasn’t looking?
I especially like the D-OH part. Homer says it all the time.
“Boehner did not announce the collapse in talks until the stock market closed. If there is no more movement over the weekend, expect a massive sell off on Wall Street.”
Depends on the time horizon, and the specific companies involved.
As Deninger notes at http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=190550 — there would be an almost immediate contraction of the GDP by about 15% (technically a depression)….however, this could be followed in the 18-month range by a laissez faire rebound as malinvestments are reformulated in productive ways — much like the “forgotten depression of 1920″ ( http://mises.org/daily/3788 ).
Any crony capitalism companies currently supported by the taxpayer dime (GM, GE, Chrysler, banks, etc.) might not see a clear path to that future, and would likely get hammered in the market. Other companies might get a boost from the prospect of excessive regulation and government meddling being peeled away (oil companies, WalMart, Boeing, drug companies, healthcare…).
Of course, the one sure thing to happen on Monday is — as JP Morgan famously responded when a reporter pestered him for a forecast on the market — “it will fluctuate.”
We can only hope that the vast majority of the American Voter Public understands what Game is being played out in this Debt Limit debate.
Obama has really proved himself to be empty suit, and has little to no Leadership Quality or understaning of what being POTUS means or requires.
Just the same, The Republicans under George W Bush were big time spenders themselves.
Neither Party should be trusted to do the right thing, when really required.
The Elite Political Class have become a major burden to the Taxpayer and Small Business. Too Bad.
What Bush and the Republicans spent was lunch money compared to what Obama spent! Quit with the “Blame Bush” mantra, already!
Bush increased the deficit by 4 trillion and neglected to cut spending at all over 6 years of total control of the government. Blaming him is perfectly reasonable – for the debt. The economy, of course, is a different matter.
BS. Please cite the reference for this false claim.
It is Obama who has increased the deficit by 4 trillion over just the last two and a half years. Get your facts straight.
Citation, please.
You’re totally WRONG! The only reason the deficit is so much larger now than what we had under Bush is that under Bush the wars were not included on the books. Obama put the wars on the books and suddenly it appears the deficit has exploded. The only REAL difference is that Obama did honest accounting, while Bush did not. Also, any decrease in GDP is thanks to Bush crashing the economy, before Obama was even inaugurated. Lastly, the debt ceiling is not the appropriate venue for deficit discussions. The debt ceiling refers to money ALREADY SPENT, money that we already OWE. We are liable for the debt, and to pretend otherwise is to live in the fantasy land of “if wishes were horses…”
WRONG!
The National Debt/Deficit figures released by the Treasury each November include ALL spending done in the name of the Federal Government; whether it was a budgeted item, or special appropriation (which is the way GWB and the Congress funded the war against IslamoFascism in Iraq and Afghanistan).
Nothing was done out of a shoebox kept under the bed in the Lincoln Bedroom.
You’re delusional. But I understand. You people read most things like you read the Constitution. If it supports what you already want to believe you give it a big bear hug. If it doesn’t it may as well be sitting beside your toilet. Anyway, how does it feel getting thrown under the bus by the orange speaker????
CHildren under the age of 5 are not able to identify fact from fairy tales.
No, Praetorian, the debt ceiling is about new borrowing. If we decide not to borrow any more money, all appropriations not covered by tax receipts are cancelled. We don’t owe that money yet, and we won’t if we don’t agree to borrow it.
Sorry myth but the debt ceiling concerns money that has already been appropriated. Even the Ryan budget requires an increase in the debt ceiling. Get a clue.
The Senate never voted on the Ryan plan. No budget has been passed in nearly three years. You would have a leg to stand on if the budget had actually been passed and signed this year, but it hasn’t. No money has been appropriated.
Congress can change its mind about spending appropriated monies whenever it wants. This includes imposing the restriction to spend only if revenue plus asset sales plus authorized borrowing is sufficient to cover the appropriations. Not only can one Congress not bind a future Congress, a Congress can’t even bind itself.
So are you saying that even though the money has already been appropriated and spent that the congress can simply wave its wand and say, oops, we decided that we don’t want to pay that now? You’re dead wrong. That is what ensuring the full faith and credit of the U.S. is all about.
Again, The debt ceiling refers to money ALREADY SPENT, money that we already OWE. We are liable for the debt. What part of that do you not understand? We may be on different sides of the political spectrum but I think we both know that when you charge something on your credit card you have to pay it when the bill comes in. Do you ever call your creditor and say, “I know I charged that gun rack for the back of my trailer, but I just decided today that I don’t want to pay you?” I’m assuming you even have a credit card.
And Voyager, while it is true that the senate did not vote on the Ryan plan the house did, and they passed it. The Ryan plan would have required an increase in the debt ceiling. That it didn’t pass the senate seems hardly relevant. The bigger point is that the GOPs own plan would have required an increase. In other words the GOP are just hypocrites.
P stop showing your ignorance. Debt ceiling is not the amount we owe. It is the amount we can owe if we wanted to. Sort of like your credit card limit. I understand stupidity might be congenital with you, ignorance is curable.
“The only reason the deficit is so much larger now than what we had under Bush is that under Bush the wars were not included on the books. Obama put the wars on the books…”
Oh, the books, huh? Was Bush hiding them under the bed? Did Obama put them back in the Social Security Lockbox, where they belong? (Do you guys realize that this Praetorian schlub may be getting taxpayer dollars to hurl this dreck at us?)
Supposedly the Iraq War cost a trillion, so Obama’s “stimulus” was to cost the same.
The trillion in Iraq ended a dictatorship, saved women and children from Saddam’s rape rooms, and attracted and killed tens of thousands of violent jihadis. Don’t know if it was worth it, but it accomplished things for the common good.
The trillion to “stimulate” was a slush fund – it mostly went to plump the pensions of government union types to keep the Dem base eager. Lots is still being held back to help Dems in 2012. No common good, just political larceny.
Obama’s added three times as much to the debt as was added during Bush. Even if the reverse were true, as this lefty liar contends, why condemn Bush while praising Obama? If spending’s bad, it’s bad, right?
Meanwhile, Obama’s minions are pressuring banks to create more toxic “assets” by loaning money to insolvent minorities to buy houses again. The Dems think they’ll profit from collapse and chaos. That’s worked for the Left in Europe and Asia, but will it work in America? I think not – we’re armed and feisty. But I hope we don’t have to find out.
So under Bush budget deficit about 450B under Obama about 1700B. So the wars cost about 1250B per year. That seems like an order of magnitude larger than reality. But since you are busy name calling, perhaps it is hard to devote a few gray cells to reality. These cells must be a scarce resource for you.
My estimate of the situation is that we’ll end up with;
1. Obama getting the debt ceiling rise he wants. After which
2. The House and Senate will give him the tax increases he demands; the former with a coalition of Democrats and “traditional” Republicans working in the name of “compromise”, the latter on a party-line vote like the one which just killed Cap, Cut, & Balance. Then
3. Obama will promise spending cuts “later”- which will never materialize. Because
4. The same elements that brought home the bacon on the debt ceiling and taxes will then vote for another round of “stimulus”, and even more spending on “projects everybody wants”- meaning projects they like. With the inevitable result being
5. They will blow through the new tax money and borrowed money before the new taxes are even collected or the new loan from (whoever) becomes final. At which point
6. Along about February, the entire dance will begin again, except this time Obama will threaten to cut off Federal aid to state heating-assistance programs for seniors, etc., then tell everyone that the mean, evil GOP wants Gramma to freeze to death.
At what point do we all acknowledge two things? Namely
A. Progressives are so addicted to spending our money, that they are now obsessed with spending money which does not even exist; and
B. Obama is incapable of telling the truth on any subject. Even when it would be to his advantage to do so, he will lie just to see if he can get away with it, believing that it proves he really is “the smartest guy in the room”.
Albert Einstein once defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result each time”. By this standard, anyone who takes Obama, or the Democratic Party, at their word is functionally insane. Rather like Charlie Brown expecting Lucy not to pull the football away.
As for whether or not Obama and his acolytes like Reid are also mentally unbalanced, I’ll let you judge that for yourselves.
clear ether
eon
“Albert Einstein once defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result each time”.
Then why do you keep advocating more tax cuts? We had eight years of them under Bush. Not only did they make things worse but they certainly didn’t produce any jobs. Yet you people want to do the same thing over, and over, and over, and over, and over again. You are insane. I agree!
So, what was the unemployment rate when Bush was President? We did not have any serious economic problems, outside of the CRA caused housing bubble. I guess you think you are better off then you were during the Bush years? If so please explain how?
The idea that this or any other government can spend it’s way to prosperity has been dis-proven a few times over quite recently – see Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Italy etc etc for reference.
Drop the Keynesian crap – it does not work.
As for Bush’s spending habits – did you even happen to notice the sudden spending increase from 2006 and on? In order for Bush (same as for Reagan) to get what he needed in budgetary items it was necessary for him to look the other way while Democrats happily began a new spending spree – one that continues to this day and seems to have no end. Obama’s solution? Seemingly the same as yours – taxes. Call them what you will – taxes kill recoveries – always have and always will. If the Dems get what they want (more taxes) look for more unemployment – food stamps – and less revenue money actually being taken in to the Treasury – not more. A fact that even Obama had to admit to during the lame duck congress last year when the Bush tax cuts were extended – something you lefties call Obama’s tax cuts.
Thats a laugh. And he’s a joke.
By cutting government spending (and government spending has shrunk in the last year) during a recession, you stall the economy. Thus, less govt spending in the last year, the economy (the real economy, not Wall St. gambling) has slowed. Thus, Keynesian economics have been proven to be true once again. We’re seeing the beginning of the next Republican Depression. The difference between you and the Repubs in DC is that they know what they’re doing. They’re protecting rich people’s money. You don’t know what they’re doing. You believe in mythologies. Enjoy the carnage, it’s on your tab. And it’s coming to you and your family.
Not according to the CBO, we’re not: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12165/2011_06_MBR.pdf
We have seen a $104 billion increase in spending from October-June vs. the same period last year. Even factoring out the effect of the bailouts (repayments are counted as negative spending in the year they are received), we still increased spending by $46 billion.
Correction: The post-bailout figure is $71 billion more in spending this year over last year.
Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child and there is much foolishness in yours. Taking a dollar from me and transferring it to the government to spend you can still only spend a dollar. No change to the economy. Borrowing a dollar to spend may increase today’s economy but when you have to pay it back with interest it will decrease the real economy in the future. Then again maybe you hope to inflate it away which steals from everyone or you really intend to not pay it which which steals from those who loaned you the money. Immoral anyway you look at it. in my opinion you are flat out evil since you wish to make slaves of my children, grand children, etc. to pay for your concept of good today.
Children under the age of 5 are not able to distinguish fact from fairy tales. You are 2 at best. So foam at the mouth all over your keyboard as much as you wish, you will gain no traction here. Go back to kos kindergarten and review your Alinsky lessons.
@Praetorian
“By cutting government spending (and government spending has shrunk in the last year) during a recession, you stall the economy.”
Please explain your theory, that taking funds from productive entities and instead placing them into unproductive entities increases production.
Also please explain why you consider economic growth and a decrease in unemployment “making things worse”.
Even if lowering taxes increases the debt, it doesn’t change the fact that an expansion of the money supply in the private market during a recession has a positive effect on private job creation. Remember production happens in the private sector. Therefore by definition a production increase ie. economic growth can only happen by stimulating the private sector.
Do you have any kind of proof or even a some kind of invalidated theory for your wild and illogical claims?
You deride Bush for increasing the debt. Yet you violently defends huge government spending and deficits. Where is the consistency? If you had any kind of consistency, you would applaud Bush for his increased government spending. As you say government spending is good for the economy, right.
“Then why do you keep advocating more tax cuts? We had eight years of them under Bush. Not only did they make things worse but they certainly didn’t produce any jobs.”
Tax cuts increase revenues. Tax increases lower revenues. (People think Art Laffer came up with this, but it was proved during Coolidge.) This was pointed out to candidate Obama during a debate, but he still wanted to increase taxes for reasons of “fairness”.
Bush’s tax cuts created millions of jobs – enough to compensate and more for those wiped out on 911. They very definitely made things better, and more cuts would now, too.
I’m glad these talks collapsed, too. We Americans deserve better than to have our leaders meeting in secret.
Read what I wrote, not what you want to pretend I wrote.
The key is reducing spending. Period. Dot. Failing that, the government must STOP RAISING SPENDING FASTER THAN ITS REVENUES INCREASE.
Any normal person knows that they cannot spend more money than they have. Governments must learn to live within their means, as well.
As for your idea that “more government spending = more wealth for all”, it overlooks the small detail that government does not create actual wealth, or value; it can only take it from other sources, i.e. the people. Saying that the more taxpayers’ money government spends, the more money there is, is rather like two kids trading the same Twizzler back and forth and deciding that they are tycoons, because they now have a million Twizzlers apiece.
This isn’t my “insanity”, by the way- it’s a grade-school level explanation of Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations”. Or do you consider him “insane”, too?
clear ether
eon
I wonder if the Tea Party freshmen in congress have thought about just collapsing the federal government? The 14th amendment demands the debt be serviced. Public outcry will insist the military get paid along with social security recipients and medicare patients. That will leave 50 billion or so a month to run the rest of gubmint.
Oh happy day! All those stinking agencies fighting tooth and nail for my money. What a show.
Over at Megan McArdle’s blog the leftists are talking about a “compromise” at spending 25% of the GDP. That’s what this is about.
What you’re telling us Mike, is that they’re willing to compromise on the Status Quo, by freezing spending at the obscene level that they’ve driven it to?
And, since they’re borrowing $1.5T every year, the Debt Ceiling would have to raised that much every year, or the Congress would have to raise taxes by that amount – an amount that probably does not exist in the economy without driving it into the doldrums and a permanent condition of Stagflation.
Welcome to the Socialist Paradise, where everyone is equal(ly poor, and miserable).
What everyone misses is that the last Bush era deficit was set to be $400bn or so. He asked Obumbler if he wanted the stimulus and said he would sign it. Obumbler said yes and Bush signed what he was prepared to veto. The promise from ALL of the 536 Thieves of DC (Congress + POTUS) to the American people was that this insane level of spending would not become institutionalized. Well, guess what? It has become the norm in spite of all of the 536 Thieves of DC saying it would not.
‘We The People’ have been gamed. By all of them. This is all Kabuki.
The answer is simple – clean sweep for the Tea Party in 2012 or TWANLOC need to meet the solution proscribed by Misha.
And do not feed that troll Pretentious Idiot or whatever it is. He is one of TWANLOC.
The deal has not collapsed yet, unfortunately. This is theater…Cryin’ John has already capitulated, but this is simply a ploy to fool the base.
Obama and the progressives will get everything they want, and more.
If they do get ‘everything they want’ it’ll be the rope that hangs them. All they seem capable of doing is to spend more money. Lets just hope the MSM isn’t up to the monumental task of removing the rope from their collective neck.
Sorry KT, but the Republicans will own the increased taxes and higher spending if this plan passes the House.
““The Democratic base did not work night and day to elect Democrats so that they could cave to Tea Party extremists.”
The socialist wing of the Democrats just became “the party of No.”
Didn’t their media lackeys winge and cry over that when Republicans did it?
— “This outcome reflects the point of view espoused by _Mother Jones_’ Washington bureau chief David Corn …”
Well that’s good to know!
But aside from that, Mr. Obama? You, sir, are going down. The writing is on the wall: You want big taxes, big spending, and big regulations on American business, big & small. It is difficult to wind one’s way through all the deal-making going down in the Halls of Government, but THAT MUCH is perfectly clear. You want it all. You are out to destroy this nation as a precursor to heralding in the Fundamental Change that you sold my STUPID fellow Americans on in 2008. Shame on you, Leftist scum, and may your name go down in ignominy.
When pigs are stuck before slaughter they make the same kind of noise you do.
Their other emissions are much like yours.
Now Praetty-boy’s a pig farmer. Are you really supposed to stick the pig before you slaughter it, Praetty? Seems kind of mean.
I’ve been a participant in the slaughter of many a hog so tell me how many pigs you have slaughtered little lisping Praetorian. 1? 2? 50? 0?
— “Deficit Negotiations Collapse — Are Progressives Cheering?”
These are not “Progressives” (as in Teddy Roosevelt times). These are the New Left — also known as “Leftists” — that our freedoms as Americans are up against. These people HATE the West. They HATE America. They are the fifth column. Make no mistake. There is nothing “progressive” about this camp (except insofar as they wish America’s direst enemies to prevail). Words matter. Terms matter. Get it straight.
Yes, Doctor, words matter.
What’s to be done, though? By objecting to the application of the term “progressive” to the “new left”, you seem to be romanticizing the old Wisconsin Progressives. They were dirt, too, Doc – go read LIBERAL FASCISM, you’ll really like it!
The Left isn’t “new”, and it’s never been “progressive” or “liberal”, but by these names we now know them, and the names have long since lost their cachet. (As have “reform” and “reformer”.)
I do draw a line at calling them the “Democratic Party”, though. The Democrat Party dislikes democracy – they like legislating from the bench and buying and stealing votes.
Cheers.
Yes, the Left has been around a long time. But the New Left combines Marxism with Multiculturalism (which grew out of the “anti-colonialism” narrative). This makes the New Left doubly obsessed with wanting to take America, and The West, down. They are Leftists — not well-meaning social reformers focussed on domestic issues.
“The Democratic base did not work night and day to elect Democrats so that they could cave to Tea Party extremists.”
Perhaps if they had worked a little harder, and hadn’t pissed-off so many people with the legislation passed in the 110th, and particularly the 111th, Congresses, they wouldn’t have had their heads handed to them by the electorate in the elections of Nov-10 at the Federal, State, and Local levels, and would have retained their majorities.
What a bunch of whiny little girls!
Democratic legislators sure didn’t work hard. They could have raised the debt limit and taxes all they wanted last year but chose not to – they didn’t even pass a budget. It’s more fun to indulge in limitless borrowing and spending – and leave it to the Republicans to pay for.
I hope you’re all wrong. I think the newest reps are having a big effect of delivering conservative demands to Washington. I hope they listen nightly to Krauthammer. This is a David vs. Goliath moment.
I fear that, if Congress can’t slow down the OweBama Express to Hell, there will be no elections. This is all getting very scary. We are in the middle of a coup.
Then prepare for a shooting war. Cancelling the elections must be considered an act of war, and nothing short of a nuclear attack against America by a foreign power should cause us to even CONSIDER tolerating postponing the elections by a single day! Anyone in the government who makes any gesture toward postponing elections should be considered an enemy agent and guilty of capital treason. Indeed, such a man (or woman) should be considered an outlaw and shot on sight!
If Comrade Obama believes there’s even a chance of losing in 2012, he will use SEIU in certain conservative states, gun violence in Republican border states, etc. to manufacture violence in key states, declare martial law, and suspend elections. I believe the Soros demon with his Indonesian Muslim socialist America-hating puppet President is capable of ANYTHING any evil man has ever done.
Soros’s litmus test to judge when to make his move was seeing if he could get Obama elected despite the incredible baggage of his extremist connections with Ayers, Wright etc. I still can’t believe that one. Yes, Soros, America is now dumb enough for you to defeat.
If he wants martial law, he’ll get a civil war.
If you haven’t already, read up on the Council of Governors and the FEMA detention camps. I think this is really coming.
Maybe the Donks will not listen to our representatives but I will bet they pay attention to our militia.
SEIU union President May Kay Henry has called reports of a deal with Republicans “morally wrong.” She told The Nation that with most of the the deals publicly floated “Medicaid will be eviscerated, access to healthcare for millions of Americans will be gutted.”
I wonder if precious May Kay has thought about what will happen when the debt reaches 150% of GDP if the feds keeping throwing money into the abyss? Nahhhh.
Not making a deal is a huge opportunity for the Republicans. When the accounting tricks run out the budget is automatically balanced. No more debt means the deficit must be zero. The only risk is that the Executive is going to decide what gets money and what doesn’t. If the Republicans are smart (I know, I know…) they’ll have lawyers ready to force the Treasury to pay our interest, as well as having ads ready to point out what Obama chooses to fund and what he chooses to ignore. Point out the Republicans passed a plan to avoid all this and were rejected by Democrats who refused to negotiate. Target them to markets that are fiscally conservative but have Democratic senators and we might get CCB passed.
BINGO!!!
We have a winner.
Try this on for size and lets see how disingenuous all the CAP rhetoric is.
Unless deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, congressional enacted legislation has the full effect of the constitution.
In 1917 CAP on debt was passed. Hows that worked thus far?
Additionally, theres been the Congressional Budget Act of 1974…..the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, and the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. All of those legislations carrying the full effect of the constitution.
How are they doing today?
How fickle can Americans be? Cut…Cap….Balance…. are all synonymous to each other…one in the same. For those of us who haven’t been asleep for decades, this is more of the same ‘political’ repeat playing to an election cycle void of anything ‘serious’ to do with the nation spending and debt problems.
NO human beings of the government can predict the future, the consequences of legislation nor the myriad of other uncontrollable variable of the nation and world. A century of continuous and massive wars, a more complex global economy, natural disasters, a broken and dysfunctional society and corrupted capitalism and government……continues on into this new century.
Government spending and debt are ONLY a minute ‘symptom’ of the real problems of the nation! The political rhetoric of Cut, Cap and Balance are nothing more than political rhetoric and political gamesmanship having little to nothing to do with the realities of governing. Its all about playing to a fickle American audience.
Both legislation and the Constitution carry the force of law. The difference is that legislation can be be changed by later legislation, e.g. including a line “the provisions of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 are hereby waived” You cannot do that to a Constitutional amendment.
Cut Cap Balance sounds identical because it’s shorthand. It deliberately deletes information that is assumed to be known. The first step is to cut the federal budget to its historical average of 20% of GDP. The second step is a legislative cap to keep it there while the third step, the balanced budget amendment, is ratified. Yes, the cap is the weakest part of the bill, but it’s only a temporary expedient. The balanced budget amendment is the most important part. Unfortunately it’s also the part most likely to be sacrificed in negotiations.
Jeff…I’m well aware of statutory legislation and constitutional differences. I addressed exactly what I intended to address. The government cannot be bound to any such constitutional amendment any more than can staturory legislation on budget matters. Rational people in government know and understand precisely why.
The world is never precisely predictable! Thus, no matters of budgets can be precisely predicted and maintained. Such a constitutional amendment would make for the most unstable and vulnerable government on the planet.
Theres a ultimate constitutional amemend that could be made that would solve so many economic problems but folks can’t grasp it nor do they have any intrerest in it….so they reap what they have sown.
Cut, Cap and Balance came within 4 Senate votes of passing. If we had an adult in the White House we would be well on the way to solving this since he could round up those votes.
The left really doesn’t understand that we are about to buckle under all of this debt. The productive class has already thrown in the towel and are just waiting to see if we can get someone sane back in the White House. All of the small business guys I know have had enough. They didn’t sign on for this and no one wants to be a part of it if this is what America is going to become. We want out.
The money has gone to ground. All that is left are the operators who game the system for themselves. In other words leftists and government lackeys.
When you reply to Praytoruin you are playing his game. And this is a just a game to this milquetoast, emasculated, emotionally-stunted and obviously lobotomized white boy. His anonimity is his blanky and his computer is his ducky. His retort will no doubt be something witty regarding my screen name.
I’d love to bring him with me to walk through Walter Reed and explain why he spells America, “Amurikka.” POS
“I’d love to bring him with me to walk through Walter Reed and explain why he spells America, “Amurikka. POS.”
I’d love to bring you on a tour through a nursing home and explain to the residents why you want to cut the retirement and medical security the, so called, greatest generation worked all their lives for and paid into away. POS.
You just might check out that 1960 SCOTUS decision that said none of us have a property right to Social Security. Absence a change of heart by the Supreme Court it would logically apply to Medicare also. Blame all those Congress Critters (GOP & DEM) since then for spending all the money, which they rightfully could, and then lying to the people about program solvency. The programs don’t have any money, treasury bonds not withstanding since they have to be sold on the market and then paid for, so where do you suggest we get the money to maintain the fiction. You could confiscate all the money from every million and billionaire yet wouldn’t have enough to cover this year’s deficit.
So where is all that cash Americans paid into the Social Security “trust fund”?
Somebody raided the piggy bank?
Unfortunately, it’s far worse than that. The Democratic party has become the Communist Party. We have George Soros and his money to thank for that.
You are right. We have 80 openly socialist/communist representatives in the House of Representatives who call themselves the Progressive Congressional Caucus. The CPC was organized to promote “the principles of social and economic justice,” code words for socialism and communism.
We also have the Congressional Black Caucus, which has the same goals as the CPC. And, talk about playing the race card: No white person can join this caucus. Liberals scream about having a color-blind society, but yet they sanction an all-black group that excludes whites based on skin color. This is true for the Hispanic Congressional caucuses as well.
We thus have over 100 openly anti-American and anti-capitalist members of Congress who, by the way, took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and the United States of America. Obviously, they were lying when they took the oath.
America had better wake up. We must get rid of these traitors, starting with Obama.
Can you imagine what would happen if Whites established White caucuses of Congressional reps, mayors, police, etc? How about Miss White America, White Entertainment TV, and so on? The fact that this could never ever happen in our wildest dreams should wake us up to the nightmare we are in. As I keep stating, we are in the middle of a coup.
Most likely what will happen is any tax increases will be enacted in full and any budget cuts will come only from the military, just like under Clinton. The real budget busters, entitlements, won’t be touched. Then again, they might be handled so hamfistedly it will create a backlash against Republicans.
“Apparently he believes that it is more important to secure his own base rather than continue to see the continued slide in popularity among his supporters.” Huh?
First, “more…rather than” is not idiomatic. One would say “it is more important to do x than to do y,” not “more important to do x rather than to do y.”
Second, the sentence is saying that the president “believes it’s more important to secure his base than to not secure his base.” I think what the sentence is trying to say is that the president beleives it is more important to secure his base than to secure wider support among voters who prefer even a vague simulation of a pretense of a beginning of fiscal sanity. The sentence as it stands does not state whatever the trade-off might be in the author’s view which could give the sentence content. After all, people always prefer what they prefer to what they don’t prefer.
If you want a balanced budget, don’t raise the debt ceiling.
Obama is going to give the Tea Party Exactly what it wants and the Dems are going to actually be happy about it and try and blame the Republicans.
Devils advocate: Taxes are bad, but at least in the fieldss I have worked in businesses cite uncertainty, lawsuits, and regulations as the primary drivers for fleeing the US. They can pay salaries in many cases but they cant wait a year to find out they wont be able to build a factory. Or find out after closing a factory they have to spend hundreds of millions digging up the dirt. Christs sake we all benefit from industry if we are all about shared sacrifice maybe we can sacrifice some trees also.
I think you will have an issue getting Obama to follow any laws passed by the House, even if passed by the Senate. No that doesn’t relate to my above ramblings. Just a thought. We need to survive til 2012.
Liberals see this as there last shot to cripple America prior to the 2012 elections.
Obama and the libs in Congress own this disaster totally and unequivaclly. He is the one who racheted up the spending levels by about $1.5 trillion annually and produced a succcession of $1.5 trillion dollar annual deficits. Prior to his occupation of our presidency I believe Bush’s largest deficit was about $300 billion or so. This guy is the king of liars and bullshitters. His congress is despicable. At this stage to hell with moodys and s&p. We the citizens need to tear up their credit card. This means NO DEAL. Period! That may be the only thing these creeps understand.
Note to media enablers who will try to spin this story. Do you think we are that stupid. So lets stop buying their papers, stop listening to their news, stop responding to their polls, stop supporting their bullshit agendas. We have limited means to punish the media but ignoring them may be our most potent weopen. What else can we do to these mendacious punks.
As talks broke down late today, House Speaker John Boehner (D-OH)
Some on the right think so one supposes but you really ought to fix it.
“The Democratic Wingnut Activist Marxist base did not work night and day to elect Democrats willing to destroy America in the name of fairness so that they could cave to the Tea Party patriots.”
There, fixed it.
The pubs are a castrati cabal. Default is a red herring and talking about it is the best indicator these girly-men don’t/won’t drive a hard bargain. They shouldn’t be dealing at all. The house passed CC&B whereupon they should say take it or leave it. Period. Not that CC&B really solves the problem. How does 100bil cut the first year amount to anything when the expected deficit for the same year is 1.4tril? Why aren’t they talking about abolishing whole agencies? These people couldn’t even cut CPB (Corp. for Public Broadcasting) funding. They are all total losers – the leadership. Mayhaps they can get someone like Rubio, Paul, Demint, Bachmann, etc., to show them how to find their balls. And as for cuts in the out years, last time I checked Ronald Reagan was still waiting for the cuts the dems promised him when he agreed to a tax increase.
Just one request: can we not call these people “progressives”? That’s what they call themselves, in the same way that Judeo-Christianity-haters call themselves “reality-based.” I think we should stick to “liberals.” Although it’s another misnomer, it now pretty much means “socialists,” which is why, I think, liberals are running from “the L word.”
Issue is to some, me anyhow, ‘liberal’ has the connotation of a support for justice, civil rights, generosity of spirit. Whereas conservatism has the connotation of not eating ones seed corn , and respect for the founding laws and community. These are both necessary points of view.
I say go with ‘progressive’, which means leftist hack incremental progressing toward a communism that has collapsed everywhere but in the college he or she graduated from.
I agree with progressives that they are not liberal and they do not mean the people well.
It’s tough to take all of the Kabuki theater literally, especially when…
Every single Senate democrat voted “nay” on raising the debt ceiling in 2006, including but not limited to…
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America ’s
debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that
the US Government can not pay its own bills. It is a sign that
we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign
countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.
Increasing America ’s debt weakens us domestically and
internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’
Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today
onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a
debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve
better.”
~Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006
This president sees an opening in debt ceiling so called “negotiations” to pump for two things near and dear to his tiny little heart, raising taxes on those Americans whose taxes already provide something like 70% of total government revenues and launching an attack on the overwhelming majority of Americans who expressed themselves in the November 2010 election, what said president rightly described as a “shellacking”.
Individuals the idiot Senator Tom Harkin from Iowa has referred to as “terrorists”.
It’s truly stunning that a president will allow the fiscal soundness of the United States (what’s left of it) to become so totally enmeshed in his hopes for another 4 years of his brand of carnage.
I think a very large problem that neither party is addressing is a core issue – every employed person needs to be paying taxes. Everyone needs to have some skin in this game in order to care about the ultimate outcome. There should be no class warfare at all – we all need to win this one. Taxes should be cut; spending should be cut. There are whole federal departments that could and should be eliminated. I don’t think we have the leadership on either side that wants to do the right thing, and that is very heartbreaking for our country. Our children and grandchildren are the real losers.
“There are whole federal departments that could and should be eliminated.’
The federal bureaucracy has grown 20% in 2 1/2 years.
Salaries & benefits surpass those in the private sector.
A raft of white house lackeys (excuse me, personal assistants) are in the 6 figure salary range.
The gubbmint (likely at our expense) has produced a video on youtube exalting federal employees.
It’s the wave of the future, employment ! job growth ! and the ever growing cadre of bureaucrats is thrilled at the free lunches.
Read F.A. Hayek’s book, “The Road to Serfdom.” Getting as many people to work for the government as is possible is one of the basic platforms of socialism/communism. It’s in the book. Everyone should read this book. It’s a blueprint of what Obama is doing, right down to Eric Holder’s Justice department trying to erode the Rule of Law.
By the way, the Obama administration has added 3,000 new government workers since he took office. Through executive orders and regulatory agencies, he has enacted almost 3,000 new laws and regulations. There are about 250 yet coming if Obamacare is implemented. There are over 400 new regulations in the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Bill. No wonder that Steve Wynn spoke out on behalf of American businessmen this week. Obama is strangling innovation and prosperity.
I can’t find the government produced video I referenced (it was shown on tee vee last night) but this one is pretty funny, in case you need a laugh.
May be a little too close to the truth, though.
Government employees on an escalator
I agree that for Obama, the ‘best POLITICAL outcome is no deal’ (emphasis added). Why is this?
Because Obama has no interest in the well-being of America or Americans. His focus is always and only on Himself. His focus now is on his re-election and he’s campaigning…which is all he ever does…with his endless pontificating, fictional self-focused empty speeches of grandeur and falsehoods.
But Obama needs the money to get re-elected. Not simply the debt ceiling raised but more revenue. Why? Because I suggest that Obama plans to buy his re-election.
The 2008 election – he won that, not based on any record of governmental or administrative achievement. He has none, and the little work he has done (community organizer, adjunct lecturer, member of senate) have all been noticable for their non-productiveness…but they all set him up in His Role as sanctimonious pontificator.
The 2008 election was based on pure virtuality. What this means – is that it was based only on words. Words. Obama has, by the way, no ability to connect to the real world of hard facts, statistics, data, other people with other agendas, other nations with other agendas. None. Obama lives in a bubble, an isolate ‘other world’ made up only of His Own Words. So, we can call him a pathological liar but for Obama, each speech is given, not to refer to some external reality (which he ignores) but to manipulate you, the audience, into being His, his adulator. Praetorian is such an example.
The 2008 election was based on Bash Bush and Hope and Change..the oceans ceasing to rise etc.. Nothing concrete.
The 2012 election? Well, Obama can’t run on his record; it’s disastrous, economically, socially, foreign policy – it’s all a disaster. So, Obama will run, in the only way he’s capable of..within Words. Within a madeup fictional reality. He’s now bashing the GOP – telling us they’ve offered nothing. What? How about the Ryan budget, how about Cut, Cap and Balance? What has Obama offered? Hmmm?
Obama needs to raise the debt ceiling AND he needs extra revenue. Taxes. That’s because, I suggest that Obama is buying this next election. He’s going to scare the dependents-on-the-govt (medicare, social security, and all govt employees) by suggesting the GOP want to throw them off the cliff (he’s suggested this many times already)…AND…he wants to, in 2012, offer NEW SUBSIDIES or ‘special benefits’ to his base..his base, who are all the dependents on the govt, and not the private producers of the economy.
That’s why Obama is so adamant about raising taxes (he’s changed the word ‘tax’ to ‘revenue’…it sounds less like a grabbing of your money). Obama needs that slush money to bribe his electoral base. He’ll be venting vicious rhetoric against the GOP (oh, remember his Tuscon speech where he said we shouldn’t engage in such practices? heh..he broke that in a week, didn’t he)…and bribing his base. Obama wants to increase dependency on the govt in the US..and reduce the freedoms and independence of the American people. That makes him feel powerful.
And personal power..is what Obama is all about. Whether it’s ‘summoning members of Congress to him’ (who does he think he is, some Banana Dictator?) or telling Congress to pass his bills without reading them, or his constant, endless references to ‘I’m the President’. It’s all about Obama. Nothing and no-one else. And his focus is only on Power. Not the well-being of America.
Exactly, in particular the part about Obama’s own words.
What is stunning is all the Praetorians still out there whose brains won’t or can’t see through the ruse.
That “ruse” puts food on people like Praetorian’s table. Can’t expect them to see through it or to admit to seeing through it, if they do. The problem is they finally have pushed too far and the people funding the whole thing have said “enough”. The Praetorians of the world just can’t figure out why the rest of us don’t have an envy-driven hard-on to tax the living crap out of the rich. Rich man never did anything to me and the Praetorians of the world never did anything for me. That’s the problem right there. It’s not like we’re having this debate in 1847 before anyone had any live experience with the welfare state. We’ve seen it and it doesn’t work over the long run. The results are in and Praetorian doesn’t like it because he’s bet on the opposite outcome. Well, tough. As long as I have a choice in the matter, taxes aren’t going up and I’ll elect anyone who espouses that position. If you try to make it such that I don’t have a choice, well, let’s get it on. I’ve been of the mind that I’d rather fight it out in the streets with these a-holes than debate ‘em for years now. Dead Praetorians can’t spend my money.
The other issue is this amorphous and virtual image of ‘the rich’. That’s a key defining characteristic of the socialist left; they live only within words. Not reality.
The socialist left seems to think of ‘the rich’ as some kind of golden cauldron, that keeps filling, magically, on its own, bubbling up with ‘money, money, money’, all the time.
Consider Obama, who has, in his virtual world-of-words, redefined the term of millionaire to refer to ‘anyone who makes over 200,000′. Did he fail grade four math? Since when is one/fifth of a million now defined as a million?
And while we’re speaking of the socialists operating only within the virtual realm of words – we must consider their view of the economy. It is weird beyond belief; it’s based around a view of Government-as-a Parent Who is a God.
They seem to think that the GodParent will use this Magic Cauldron, suck all the wealth that bubbles up each day (and it never runs dry)..and then distribute this money to everyone, everyone. [Oh, Obama, will you buy me a house, will you buy me a car, will you...]. Unbelievable.
Reality? There is no magic cauldron. A million has 7 not 6 digits. And an economy is based, not on consumption but on production. And governments do not produce wealth. Nothing. Nothing. Governments only consume wealth. So, where does wealth come from? No, no, no. Not from that Magic Cauldron. Sheesh.
It comes from the PRIVATE SECTOR. From small/medium businesses who manufacture and provide private goods and services which they sell in a free market. The profit/wealth from these businesses..provides the main wealth of a nation. Now – what should be done with this profit/wealth? Oh, I know!!!
Such it all up by the govt..and hand it out to more and more and more govt-dependents! To unionized public service whose numbers are exponentially increasing…and who get salaries, benefits and pensions all double and triple that of the private sector WHO PAY FOR ALL OF IT.
Or, heck, why not create more and more and more Dependents! More food stamps, more welfare programs (Oh, Mr Obama, buy me a car!)..more and more I don’t have to work! programs for illegals, for hapless and living off the taxpayer! more and more!
Oh, and why not create more and more valid users of taxpayer funds, but increase the bureaucracy, increase the fraud and waste..so that funding the valid uses triples in cost! heck – why not do that!
Meanwhile, the production sector of the economy, drained dry by the govt greed, collapses. Remember, an economy that only CONSUMES its wealth, and does not PRODUCE any wealth…well, guess what happens.
And remember, only the private sector produces wealth. No govt produces wealth. It only CONSUMES, in wasteful massive amounts..that wealth…and thus, sucks dry the capacity of the businesses to invest, to hire more people, to set up new factories…because the govt has taken all their INVESTMENT money.
Economics 101.
In more modern times the ‘wealth’ systems inflates the value of goods and services….generally arbitrarily. Not all economic classes can stay up with such inflation. Thus, theres are five kinds of wealth income systems. 1) Earned. 2) Inherited. 3) Extortion. 4) Credit. 5) Welfare. Numbers 3, 4 and 5 represent the overwhelming majority, employed or not.
Today, automobiles of the economy and mid classes average 3 to 6 times the first very nice home we purchased.
There was a time in much of America when ones wealth was literally the wealth of and for the community to whatever extent possible. In my home town, the wealth of one individual contiues to fund the countys only hospital…..in life and now, 63 years after being deceased. This is a different America!
The nation is broken from the bottom up….not the top down!
In reply to TTTHomas – I’m afraid I don’t get your point. I’m not talking about INCOME, i.e., how you get your wealth/money. That’s a red herring.
I’m talking about how, basically, any and all wealth/money is PRODUCED. It’s the production-of-wealth that is vital to consider. Your categories ignore and hide this basic fact.
So what if your income is EARNED (your category 1); the key to consider is, did your WORK produce any wealth? Or was it merely bureaucratic. The unionized bureaucrat, funded by the taxpayer, ..well, his work produces no wealth. He’s simply a consumer of wealth. And – your other categories of ‘how I got my money’ are equally irrelevant. The point is: how does a population produces value, i.e., wealth?
And, there is only one way. By private businesses making goods and services that are sold on the market. Period.
The profit above the costs: is wealth. Now, if the govt takes all this profit, then the private businessman has NO MONEY to INVEST: to hire more people, upgrade his equipment, build a new plant. And so, the economy grinds to a halt. All because the top level, the govt, took all the wealth.
And what did the govt do? It distributed it all for CONSUMPTION purposes. Not for investment purposes.
And your additional red herring of inflation values..is also irrelevant.
Again, the issue is: how does an economy PRODUCE wealth? By enabling private businesses to make profits..and these profits are then INVESTED by the private business back into that business. That’s the only way. Got it?
“Do you ever call your creditor and say, “I know I charged that gun rack for the back of my trailer, but I just decided today that I don’t want to pay you?” I’m assuming you even have a credit card.” Pratorian somewhere up above.
Priceless.
Praetorian, you just couldn’t resist could you? That $hit only works at Huffpo.
What a tool.
Cut, Cap, and Balance only game in town. Anything else is just having Congress revisit this matter in next Congress…which, by the way, has no responsibility to honor last Congress’s agreements.
Precisely the point, Congress has us in this vice grip. Every new Congress, weather one Party or the Other has found ways around last Congress’s rules, regulations, agreements and Laws. Musical chairs…all the while Our USofA is held hostage to…GREED.
Either one of two things will save our Country:1) go back to the Gold Standard, or 2) a Balanced Budget Amendment. Nothing else will suffice. Our children and children’s children deserve better. Later, toss out the IRS, Federal Reserve and institute a nationwide Flat Tax.
Vote this 2012 Election. Massive fraud is on its way. Have every State Legislature Enact a Voter ID Law. Otherwise fraudulent voter registrations will choke every polling booth, Polling Booth’s absentee balloting and Election compilations. All these organization mentioned in this article, along with heavy funding from George Sosros et al, is already underway.
God Bless America
I see that Obama and his bunch of mad hatters aren’t the only loons not in asylums. The left is happy? As we teeter on a downgrade that is expected for reasons beyond the debt ceiling increase, and which the agencies so inform us, they only care for what is now a bloated federal monster, one where we don’t even know where the money is going. The mere gigantic size of this thing is what enthralls their fanatic minds,
Naturally when the axe falls these freakish beings will blame the Republicans & Tea party, a major part of their sickness is the inability to accept blame
Dangerous time are ahead, very!
ETAB….All income is relevant to some form of economic ‘production’ from some point in time and some source. No disagreement there!
What so many aren’t looking at is how much of the ‘productive’ economy is propped up as a matter of exisitence or competitive profitability by taxpayer dollars (government) that in turn support jobs at best, at only a ‘reasonable’ and acceptable level when the times are good. Another means of propping up the economy is an expanded government that becomes a major consumer of private sector goods and services….again at taxpayer expense. Its called public/private partnership.
Your economic theory is old school. A theory that at one time in our histroy, was not only relevant but was sustainable for a time. That theory has now become irrelevant! One can argue all the variables but, the fact is, it no longer is a pure theory works for the population and the global circumstances of today. I suspose, if we were to become more isolated, controlling immigration and population birth rates, the old school theory may work once more….but never again at the level of once global kingfish.
These are things China has recongnized and learned from in decades of astute observations. Though they’ve not conquered all the variables, they’ve made strides of progress in those directions and are moving steadily at a rapid pace to becoming the new economic kingfish of the world….if an when the rest of the ‘advanced’ (ha) westernized world gets out of the tank its in.
Europe, the North America’s and others closely tied, have put themselves into a ‘circular’ catch-22….and its not like it has never been predicted and massaged for decades, while the people partied and otherwise slept through the systemic perils and finally, the wreck.
There is nothing more I would like, than to say ‘ETAB’ has identified all the relative problems and has all the answers but, I’m afraid that is far from realities of today. Still, I love reading most of your posts as they, in many ways, represent what once was.
Best wishes!
heh – the problem is, anonymous, that you haven’t provided a shred of evidence or analysis why the basic theory that an economy rests on the production of wealth by private business – is either ‘old’ or ‘unworkable’. Not a single shred of evidence. And there’s no need to be smugly patronizing and suggest that my ideas ‘represent what was’. Nice try at a putdown but I require facts not rhetoric.
Your idea that the ‘new economy’ is a partnership of private and public, i.e., private and government – is unworkable. The basic strength of an economy is derived from individual entrepreneurial freedom – to start up businesses, take risks in the open market, and fail or succeed.
This risktaking testing is a VITAL economic action – and government subsidization prevents risks and testing. That is, the goods/services are not longer accountable to the consumer. The result of such false propping up of a goods/services production is inevitable: the denigration of the goods/services because the provider is not given feedback on the open market. Then, more and more govt subsidization becomes required as consumer desire and confidence in the product wanes.
Nope – a robust economy, both local and global, rests within the element of private innovation, risk taking, an open competitive market that provides constant feedback and accountability. The only role of government is to enable this freedom, reduce regulations to a minimum and enhance global trade networks.
As for China – you are quite wrong in your glowing image of it; there are a lot of problems in China – as you well know. Nothing to do with astuteness but acknowledging the reality that they had to change from a peasant rural local economy population to a national urban economy. That’s very difficult. The superstitions and isolationism of the Chinese are big hills to climb1
And, as you know, a key problem is the accountability and integrity of their goods and services. At the moment, they are ‘in’ the global economy because of the cheapness of their goods. But is that all they are? A supplier of low cost low quality copies of western technology? They’ve got to move into quality control, which will drive the price up – and then, we’ll see how they function both internally and on the world stage.
Again – you haven’t provided any details on your ‘modern theories’. They would be useful for a discussion.
ETAB…I find it incredible, in fact bizzare, that ‘you’ of all people would attempt to deny the public/private partnership after all that has been so public throughout government and commerce…. and [evidenced legislatively] for decades. You leave me speechless!
I’m not advancing any ‘modern theories’ whatsoever, beyond the realities of what is.
You stated ["government subsidization prevents risks..."]. Try telling that to so many recipients of SBA loans at one point in their quest for the American dream. Try telling that to those scientific investigators who have and continue to receive research grants….especially in health and NASA’s space program….oooops! Surely no public-private partnership there! Try telling that to those who R&D so much of America’s national security platforms and services. Ooops! Surely not more of that public-private partnership!
Then you say in part ["open competitive market that provides constant feedback and accountability."] Did you mean ‘open and ‘competitive’ markets? Open is one thing and competitive is quite another thing. Where in the U.S. do we not have open markets? The markets of competitors, domestically and globally, determine their competiveness….regardless of their nations form(s) of government.
The U.S. constitution grants to the government to regulate foreign trade. So long as folks grant to the government ‘expanded’ constitutional authorities to regulate domestic commerce they shall reap what they’ve sown.
If you’ve ever been to China you would know they are technologicaly and labor capable and do produce very high quality products across many sectors. The fact that China can produce billions of tons of cheap goods to be guzzled up by Western consumers is more a testament to the consumer than any Chinese capability…or dare I say strategy. If they’re so bad as you proclaim why is it for many decades that what the Chinese couldn’t steal they were given to blossom as a major global economy. See how many are still investing in China and will continue to do so on into the future. They will soon be the space leaders of the world and necessarily all for the good, just as our program or Russia’s hasn’t been.
“accountability and integrity of their goods and services…” Do you ever follow for instance, the auto manufacturers quality/reliability data?
Next, we list the 5 most reliable automobile manufacturers. The 2010 Top Five auto manufacturers are:
Toyota Motor Corporation, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 3.49,
Honda Motor Company, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 3.35,
Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. (Subaru), with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 2.61,
Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 2.60,
Nissan Motor Company, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 2.51.
Next, we list the 5 least reliable automobile manufacturers. The 2010 Bottom Five auto manufacturers are:
Land Rover, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 0.13,
Isuzu Motors Ltd., with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 0.83,
Chrysler LLC, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 1.08,
General Motors Corporation, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 1.35,
Jaguar, with an overall 2010 Auto Reliability GPA of 1.42.
So much for this discourse today.
China is a poor, third-world nation; the communist government is repressive. The gleaming highways and so-forth that people associate with a modern and emerging China are mostly a show for politicians from other countries. The vast majority of the population lives in poverty, and never sees the shiny new buildings that only exist in a few cities.
The idea that China is going to be an economic “kingfish” is absurd.
How many years have you spent in China? Investors world wide including Americans continue to invest in China. They’ve been on an organized course of economic and industrial change for the best part of a century now and they don’t do anything in an arbitrary and radical way. America has been a principal inspiration and model for more than a century and has been a princpal partner in their modern industrialization and infrastructure planning and funding. They’ve succeeded step by step, far more than you obviously know.
Of course, as the global economies go, so goes China. Their global supermarkets are victims of global instability and recession. You think China isn’t a global powerhouse? Let them decide they no longer want to favor the USD, then see how much you know about China. The matter of the USD as a global currency continues to be on the table for a number of countries. Some already dropped the USD in favor of the Euro…where have you been?
ETAB…was typing and the PJM popup came on and in a flash my response went away. So allow me to start over.
re: Mechanical componets of an economy.
I know you’re jousting when you claim ignorance of what the mechanical components of an economy are but since I have a durn good and reliable old steed, I’ll joust a bit with you.
The mechanical componets of an economy are those that provide for the motion of an economy and their condition reflects directly on what that ['motion'] is to be….or not be.
Lets see if I can start with a couple mechanical components and you can add to them.
A sustainable market with sustainable disposable income.
A good or service that can competitively serve a market.
A labor force.
A sustainable and competitive logistics system.
Those are the starter and spark plug, the piston, the crankshaft and driveshaft of an economy. When one component becomes inefficient or breaks down it adversely affects the remaining components and the motion of…..
Most of the variables you often speak to are within the functions of a transmission….in the hands of both the private and public sectors bureaucrats….and yes, I do know the definition of bureaucrats. Theres little distinction today between private sector commerce and government bureaucrats as they’re in partnership….a huge amount of the 1,700+ federal government subsidies and additional states subsidies.
Small business. A majority of small business as most like to think of, beyond Aunt Hazels wedding cakes on a dime are redundant and serve their markets ‘solely’ on the basis of consumer convenience. They dilute the market and themselves thus, they operate on very thin and risky profit margins, then fail at the first economic hiccup. Consumer retail especially, is a glut of redunancy based soley on consumer convenience with little difference except for maybe a tag or a lable.
America has run its economy on the basis of risky redunant ‘excess’ for decades which ultimately bears the fruit of consequences. Additionally, it no longer is the principal manufacturer of its goods and provider of many service sectors. So we end up with a glut of ‘cut-throat’ commerce and don’t make much nor service much of anything anymore. The mechanical parts of the economy are now inneficient at best and broken at worst!
Blame it on taxes and regulations but those are NOT the core problems. Our businesses, like many, have grown decade after decades and increased profitability decade over decade in spite of government taxes and or regulatory policies….. and agricultural is one of the most regulated and ‘producers’ at the bottom rung of the profit margin ladder, in most cases.
The ‘core’ national economic problems of commerce are NOT taxes and regulatory policies! The tax code for individual AND commerce allows a large range of tax ‘rate’ offsets. Likewise, in many cases, there are government offsets for regulatory policies.
Bottomline! The federal and states government have all to long done more to prop up America’s economy than destroy it. However, those motivated and blinded by political/social ideologies will not see it and would be in denial if they did….they’re not about the honest realities of their willing and demanded contributions to the failures.
The people failed the nation…..not the government!
TTHomas – no, I wasn’t ‘jousting’/jesting when I said I had no idea what you were talking about re your ‘mechanics’ of the economy. That’s because I totally and completely reject the notion that an economy is a mechanical system. It isn’t; it’s a CAS, a complex adaptive system – and that, most certainly, is non-mechanical, non-linear, is flexible, adaptive, networked and interactive.
So, your list of attributes, which you use to define your ‘the economy is a mechanical system’ is, to me, quite invalid.
By the way, a ‘sustainable market with sustainable disposable’ income is a result not a cause of a robust economy.
I also totally disagree with your ‘small businesses are redundant’ and your focus on public/private partnerships. I explained in a previous post my rejection of the long term viability of public/private partnerships, and also, my support for the robust strength – and necessity – of small businesses.
As for the US losing its manufacturing base, blame the unions, which drove up the costs of supplies and production beyong the carrying capacity of the market. And think about how Obama is trying to block Bombardier setting up a plant, a private business, in a right-to-work state..in favor of setting up in a unionized state. Heh – Obama’s buddies are the unions.
I also disagree with your rejection of taxes and regulations as core economic problems. You haven’t told me, if I understand you correctly, what you see as the core problems.
And I’ve no idea what you mean by ‘the people failed the nation’. If you mean the burgeoning class of dependents on government handouts and ‘free’ services – and the 50% who pay no taxes – yes, that’s a failure and it’s due to the government. And if you mean the exponential increase in bureaucracies, of a mass of people living off the taxpayer and consuming private enterprise wealth but producing no wealth – well, again, that’s the fault of the government for setting up these unionized massive bureaucracies.
So – no, an economy is most certainly not a mechanical system; it is a CAS, a complex adaptive system (google it)..and has long been studied as such. That means that it can’t be reduced to a list of parts (as you attempted to do) but must be studied as an ongoing dynamic network of interactions with many causal nodes, adaptive reactions, and even, the development of normative patterns that may last..and then, undergo transformative change.
Here’s one article – and it’s an international field of research.
Agent-based computational
economics: modeling economies as
complex adaptive systems
Leigh Tesfatsion
Agent-based computational economics (ACE) is the computational study of economies modeled as evolving systems of autonomous interacting agents. Thus, ACE is a specialization to economics of the basic complex adaptive systems paradigm. This paper outlines the main objectives and defining characteristics of the ACE methodology, and discusses several active research areas.
If intellectuals and their slick terms were the answer to the nation and worlds economic problems, or any other problems….well, this would be the ultimate utopia…wouldn’t it? Theres NO shortage of intellectual experts in any discipline..is there? But, theres a problem in the world of genius! They don’t seem to agree on much of anything. So much for intellectual validity especially, of the philosopher ilk!
I could say that in daylight, the sky appears most often to be the color blue….no doubt some intellectals of the world would have some long counter.
Now, I’m a real simple kind of guy, probably in the most literal sense in spite of them there sheepskins on the wall. However, I do have certain capcities to observe and correlate. I have the capacity to read and understand regularoty data sent me from the government and evaluate its affects on our business. I’m also of the capicity to read and understand taxes as data is sent to me and correlate it to our businesses. Furthermore, I have the capacity to read and understand the multitude of government subsidies as they came across my desk and correlate them not to our business but rather, to our priciples. I barely have any sense I supose, but I’m smart enough to know that when money offers come my way from a government entity or any other source, the source of such money becomes my partners in business….should I accept. Though, I’m not very smart to somes standards, I’ve alway been able to analyze a liability and engineer some means of offset. Never, has any of our family or our active and retired employees taken a penny of government funds in any form….not even social security or medicare! We have a loyalty and responsibility to each other…something most Americans today have no moral fortitude for.
Why so many fail and some expand and prosper regardles of any taxes or regulatory policies. Why, so many employed or not, are long time happy, even demanding, recipients of government and employer based welfare entitlements. The same applies to all sectors and providers of commerce. Why the majority [deny] their contributions to socialism principles and that they are in many ways, recipients of of such welfare…to include millions of private sector jobs from government handouts. None of these issues are issues for us, our enterprises nor our employees
So, I’ll leave you to identify and fix all the problem encountered by others.
Oh, and the reason I don’t bother to supply references was because you, on another post told me to do my own research so, I assumed that was your rule. Just rying to follow your rules.
Yoo hoo, TTThomas, you still haven’t provided any evidence or analysis that a Keynsian economic mode (that partnership of private and public) produces a robust economy.
Oh, and wasn’t GM (one of your ‘bad ones’) such a partnership?
And you don’t supply references – I wasn’t asking for references but for actual hard data and analysis..which are missing in your posts. And, why don’t you do things ‘your way’…Why copy me?
And all those research projects funded by the govt? Heh – that reliance on govt funds isolates the researcher and the research from risk-accountability. So, we get such rubbish as AGW…funded by the govt. And other go-nowhere results.
Try again.
This all started with your misconception of my comments regarding public-private partnership. While I have no desire whatsoever, to expose my mail or email and its content, I have long been on the mailing list of most political parties and politicians long before and since the advent of the internet. Long before I was politically active and certainly since, public-private partnership has been common place dialog as has its implementation. Its been around in theory and in implementation during the best of times and the worst of times. I’m not certain one can justify in each and every instance, credit to any particular economic philosopher. Sometimes the whole works and sometimes bits and pieces work, reliant upon many independent variables.
If you were to study all the agencies and corporations of the federal government you might become enlightened a bit more on public-private partnerships….not that partnerships are limited to only those angencies and corporations. An honest person would find some partnerships have served well and some not so well and some failed.
I neither defend in part or support in part, any position(s)…just acknowledge the realities.
Furthermore, I have no intentions of ‘arguing’ any points of opinion with any intellectuals, as I’m hardly of that class, who has all the probilitlity and absolute anwers to everything from eggs benedict recipes to the molecular structure of OGLE-TR-56b from a drawing.
That said, I do enjoy reading all your writings of opinion, be they yours or borrowed….and you’d be suprised at how many of your opinions I share and fully agree with.
I paid $32.67 for a XBOX 360 and my mom got a 17 inch Toshiba laptop for $94.83 being delivered to our house tomorrow by FedEX. I will never again pay expensive retail prices at stores. I even sold a 46 inch HDTV to my boss for $650 and it only cost me $52.78 to get. Here is the website we using to get all this stuff, CentShack.com