Why else would they incessantly push for more tax cuts? That seems to be their solution to every and any problem the country faces. Also it seems to be the only solution they seem to offer.
If they just give rich people more money, then the great unwashed masses will be all taken care of!
That has worked so well thus far. I just wish someone would freaking take Sen. Mitch McConnell to task for it.
I also like how now is the age of bipartisanship. Remember these are (for the most part) the same republicans who wanted to do away with filibustering, and freezing out the minority party.
Basically congressional republicans are trying to find any and all reasons to object to the stimulus bill. They don't have any real ideas for a solution just that they will vote "no".
I firmly believe that President Obama and congressional Democrats should just rewrite the bills and pass it on a straight party line vote. If republicans vote against it go on every news show, website, and newspaper you can find and paint their conduct as obstructionist partisan hackery. When their constituents start calling about why they seek to torpedo the economy even more, maybe then they will get the message. Because obviously getting slaughtered in the election was not enough of an indicator.
-Cheers
6 comments:
I clearly do not have the vocabulary necessary to read this blog. So unfortunately, I am afraid that by posting this response I am proving the Republicans' point.
It is remotely possible that *some* of the remnants of the Empire feel that spending a ferocious crap-ton of money we don't have is a *bad* thing... It is my contention that borrowing against future earnings is a significant part of what got us into the recession.
If you are a follower of supply-side economics, tax cuts *are* the way to go. More money in the pocket makes for a faster rebuilding of savings and a faster return to spending.
I'll admit that we have a problem with making it more equitable. *Nobody* wants to spend more than they absolutely have to, which often puts a bunch of siphons in the trickle-down pipe.
Though, even if the method of distributing wealth (or transmission, if you will) is not functioning correctly, might not repairing the engine be a more critical concern? If "Big Business" collapses, where will the money that we are spending in advance come from ? Ford (the only major car company *not* looking for a bailout) paid 1.7 billion in income tax in the 4th quarter of 2007. Their quarterly return for 3q of 2008 was a hair over 400m. That is a 1.3 billion dollar cut in the US Government's paycheck...
This is the dichotomy of the traditional leftist dogma that has always confused me: The "system" is inequitable, so we should redistribute the wealth to the many, not the few. However, the government's #1 job is to protect the people from themselves economically via increased regulation.
I am curious to see how Obama's views and emphasis on personal responsibility will interact with this phenomena.
It must however be noted that I *am*, for many intents and purposes, "The Man".
Well I would point out that the "tax cuts" as economic balm has been tried repeatedly over the 25 years (first Reagen then Bush the lesser). With generally bad results. I tend to be more of a Keynesian in times of trouble. The government as lender of last resort.
There are many fathers for the current problems we face. Lack of foresight, the inability to set aside funds during prosperous times, and the nonsensical belief in unlimited growth. Balance that on the haphazard financial schemes that have been exposed and you have mess for the ages. Most of which, I might add, were built on strict supply-side voodoo.
The problem with the "financial schemes" is that we weren't ready for them. (In addition to the ones that NEVER should have happened. One example, sub-prime mortgages.) The country was in no way prepared legally for what some of these corporations have done. The lack of proper safeguards and regulations is astounding.
As a country, we have to start being more proactive on the legislative side and pass laws that actually protect something. For example, Family Medical Leave. In the state of Illinois, a company can fire you during filing of FMLA paperwork, without cause, and there is NOTHING one can do about it. Unless the company is stupid enough to say, "We are letting you go because you are filing for FMLA," the employee has no recourse. The act is, in effect, useless.
I could go on and on with the laws and their shortcomings but that isn't even half the story and ya'll know that. My point is the government has allowed big corporations to do the most illogical things and to buy, sell, and trade non-existent commodities. The government is at the same time not updating regulations on unions and letting them get out of control. The government is also handing out aid to people who have never paid into the system and have no intention of doing so AND is forcing states to do the same (in some cases).
OK, I'll stop with the list of peeves, as I am likely to be making sense only to myself. However, there is no sense in any of it. It's like the government said, Hey, let's make everyone happy! They forgot they were supposed to be working ahead of the demand curve, anticipating where we wanted to go, and working toward that end. Then again, given the divide I'm seeing in people, maybe we are exactly where we are supposed to be right now... screwed.
My stance is a bit different with what I feel the root cause of a lot of our problems are, political, social, and ethical (and the intersection of them all), is personal responsibility. When did it become the norm for CEO's and the like to be so selfish? There is no one, it seems, that is watching and saying, "Hey, that is not right."
To expound upon Amy's example of the subprime mortgage issue, it is has now come to light (at least for me) at how irresponsible individuals were in this situation. Of course there were those who did know they couldn't not afford the home loan they received; however, when the 'professional' in the equation is telling you 'it is ok, and you can afford it' a significant majority will follow their advice. (As a tangent, getting a 'second opinion' is something American’s seemed to have forgotten about.) However, this does not even begin to cover those who were 'doped' into a mortgage they could not afford and those professionals, who may have had some sense of responsibility, that were pressured by higher-ups to push these loans. So on both ends of the spectrum in this example, one's personal responsibility is at fault. Us as the individual thinking it is normal and even dare I say American, to live beyond our means, and those 'professionals' that should be guiding us and providing us with all the necessary information to make an informed decision, without pressure and bias.
With all that said, I can not completely say I am not a part of the problem. It is a fundamental issue of peer pressure, and when everyone is “doing it”, then the herd seems to win. That I feel is where the control/oversight of the government needs to positions itself. Putting laws etc. in place to provide for checks and balances in order to make it safe to say “Hey, that is not right.”
Actually the "sub-prime" fiasco was made possible by I believe the Sarbanes-Oaxley bill (circa 2000-2001). It removed some of the few safe guards that had been put in place to regulate the lending of money. Banks have certain rules they must follow in order to loan money. The joy of AIG, Fannie, and Freddie, etc. Is they got to ignore these rules.
They were able to loan money and load and take on all sorts of risky endeavors. That is what led to the mess we see. Also lets not forget that some of those mortgages were set up to "sunset". Meaning the rate would increase, making the payments unpayable by the loanee. Now some might say they should have been aware of this. True, but also that is why you pay someone to handle this stuff if you don't understand it.
Back to Andy's point from earlier about tax cuts. In good times, tax cuts can be good. The problem when facing a recession is that people don't spend that extra money. They horde it. Further crippling the economy. So what the economy needs is not more cash in the hands of its citizens, but more cash being spent. Ideally creating jobs and paying people to make stuff. This is were those grandiose infrastructure projects come in.
Post a Comment