Morning Must Reads: Taxes and Stimulus

Adam, do you think the Republicans would have allowed millions nationwide to fall of the unemployment insurance rolls and into dire poverty and destitution? Honest question. Because I’ve seen it argued that congress has never ultimately failed to extend unemployment benefits, no matter which party is in charge, so that wasn’t a major win in the bargain. I am, by the way, not opposed to this particular compromise.

It seems America likes this deal, except the fringes of course.

Two major elements included in the tax agreement reached Monday between President Barack Obama and Republican leaders in Congress meet with broad public support. Two-thirds of Americans (66%) favor extending the 2001/2003 tax cuts for all Americans for two years, and an identical number support extending unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed.

…

Opposition Limited to the Extremes

Looking more specifically at the different ideological wings of each party, only liberal Democrats oppose extending the tax breaks for everyone: 39% are in favor, while 55% are opposed. Among the other groups, support ranges from 64% of conservative/moderate Democrats to 87% of conservative Republicans.

Similarly, conservative Republicans are the only political/ideological group opposing the extension of unemployment benefits. The majority of moderate/liberal Republicans are in favor, as are most Democrats, regardless of ideology.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145109/Americans-Support-Major-Elements-Tax-Compromise.aspx

and latter is not typically a big issue for the left (or anybody in reality).

And therein lies the real problem. Actually the deficit IS a problem whether people think so or not. It needs to be addressed and history shows that it CAN be addressed. But with the Republicans wallowing in dishonesty over what motivates them and the Democrats just trying to nibble away at unemployment without actually suggesting anything effective, we have just achieved the worst of both worlds.

YouCut, its like YouTube, but for lawmakers who can’t make decisions on their own.

Wired reports that Republicans have turned to the American public to help pick out what science funding is fluff and can be cut.

One must question whether this is a good idea after scientifically illiterate members of the global community waged a year long war against climate scientists and branded it climate gate, only to be later told they were absolutely wrong and there had been no wrong doing by the climate scientists.

So BO is focusing on that group that “hammered” his party in the midterms — the dreaded “independents.” Dems don’t count, neocons don’t count.
.
Compromise is why I don’t get into politics ’cause I couldn’t bear to compromise my principles and beliefs for something no one believes or supports.
.
I just want our country to pay its bills. We did it before in recent memory without a whole lot of sacrifice, why can’t we do it again?

The Left is the only group arguing for fiscal responsibility now, which must be what makes them “extremists” and puts them on the “fringe.”

Why can’t the Left see this is really all about helping the poor and “stimulating” the economy, even though it relies exclusively on one aspect of economic stimulus, leaving out those things that provide the greatest contribution to job growth.

YouBoobs – It’s like YouTube, but it’s actually a Republican euphamism for “The American People.”

One thing I still don’t get: The Obama tax deal that has liberals so incensed includes stimulative measures like a 13-month UI extension and a payroll tax cut.

Allow me to explain. After one year, the payroll tax cut and the UI extension disappear while the the tax cuts for the wealthiest, including a ridiculous estate tax plan, continue on. There are two problems here: The deficit, as Paul Dirks notes at 3 and the continuation of “voodoo economics.” Empirical evidence demonstrates the folly of trickle-down economics and, despite the hue and cry on the right regarding the burgeoning debt, it continues to add to the debt at an alarming pace. While you are correct that there are worse things than adding to the debt in a time of seriously depressed demand, shouldn’t one get something of value for it? Additional tax breaks for the wealthiest among us aren’t the answer. It’s apparent that the Republicans want their tax cuts while paying lip-service to debt concerns. Typical hypocrisy.

New Gallup poll on the approval ratings of former presidents:
.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/145064/kennedy-highest-rated-modern-president-nixon-lowest.aspx
.
Worth noting to a few esteemed individuals on here, Carter, that dirty liberal, is rated higher than GW Bush.

The left has largely argued for the last year that boosting growth in the short term should be a priority and that structural deficits are not something to be tackled in a recession. Isn’t this deal a step in that direction and certainly better than anything they could hope to get once Republicans take over the House?

The point is mainly that it won’t be as good for America as is being flaunted by the spin machines right now. And that, as far as stimulus options go, it is the worst possible option in the bag. And if thats the best we can do, that’s very sad.

To elaborate, when these taxes expire, what is the likelihood that wages will have increased? Without the pressure on companies to pay their employees more, raises are unlikely in a “flat” economy, but we’re staring down the barrel of an ever rising drop in realized income. (roughly 3 thousand dollars if this passes)

Republicans are flaunting these tax cuts as a way to let businesses hire employees more cost efficiently. What that boils down to is that lower wages are worth more in the short span ahead of us. But once those taxes drop out, will those wages really be worth more? Of course not, this plan provides cheap jobs to business at the expense of the workers.

What’s more, this is entirely un-targeted stimulus. I believe a lot of liberals would be on board for the new energy grid stimulus plans, alternative energy, new rail ways, etc. Those projects have demonstrable value to the economy now and in the future. This is not an investment though. This is money that ghosts into the economy and then just evaporates.

The next point against this bill is that it is mainly being proposed by republicans for political theater purposes. Tax cuts are like drugs. There’s an addiction that develops around them as the economy adjusts to higher wages. Threatening to revoke the drug or to willingly not resupply the drug is a political death sentence. The Republicans know this and they are setting it up as a time bomb for the next election so that they can try to make the cuts permanent, to the benefit of the rich and their political prospects.

That is why I am mostly upset about it, aside from the fact that things were given up to a group of people who have never shown an ounce of desire to compromise.

Obama has said, fine we’ll do it your way. Which basically says to me that voting for these Democrats has just been voting for Republican lite.

The left is finding itself in an interesting place these days. First with unemployment again rising to 9.8% Mr. Obama decides to suspend any drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. While the Gulf states economies sag, oil has risen to $90/bbl again and could be headed to $100. The cost of heating oil, electricity and transportation will rise and hit hardest at low and middle income Americans.
.
So why do Democrats continue to clobber the ones they so defiantly claim to protect?
.

The second is there fascination with Keynesian economics and how the government can control the economy. Well since, Bernacke announced QEII (buying bonds in the open market) interest rates on the US Treasury 10 yr note has risen from 2.56% to 3.24% with the largest increase coming yesterday after the tax deal announcement.
.
So now the left has 3 options: The realization that the economy can’t be controlled by Keynesian methods, 2) tax cuts will fuel growth and jobs or 3) everything they believe is wrong!

Or 4) your **** is worth less than $5/barrel.

Even if we drilled in the Gulf now, none of that oil would come on line until 5 years from now at the earliest. It wouldn’t have the slightest impact on oil prices.
Find another canard. It’s your purpose in life.

I’d go with 4, since Keynesian methods were never actually applied as a full swing method to fixing the economy and we opted for trickle down wasting of money, instead of investment.

In light of the Fed’s disclosure of all the companies they bailed out, to the tune of trillions of dollars, it is sadly humorous to see the right arguing that the stimulus had no effect.

However, I would be very interested in seeing the empirical evidence, which supports the theory that the deal Obama and the right just made, is likely to lead to a rapid acceleration of job growth. Two or three examples would be a good place to start.

Of course not, this plan provides cheap jobs to business at the expense of the workers.

This doesn’t get said nearly often enough. The Chamber of Commerce knows that when people are hungry enough they can be hired for cheap. Thats why the R’s felt no compunction over holding unemployment benefits hostage in exchange for low Capital gains taxes.

Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics, predicted that the package would accelerate economic growth, adding more than 1.6 million jobs next year and driving unemployment down to 8.5 percent by the end of 2011.”

.
Demwits are toast if this does indeed happen, which it will. Enjoy!!
.
One might think that the reason Democrats do not want this increase in our tax rates to occur is that it just may stimulate the economy, and actually prove once and for all they have no clue what-so-ever as to how to govern or control our economy.

Should say keep our tax rates the same.

“America likes this deal, except the fringes of course”
.
LOL
.
It seems you might have spared us the choice between “America” and “the fringes,” if you were being more honest in your interpretation.
.
You’re leaving out the most important part of the poll!

This [new result based on the choice between the Obama-GOP plan or nothing] differs slightly from a November Gallup poll giving Americans three options for extending the Bush tax cuts.
.
That poll found 40% in favor of extending the tax cuts for all Americans, 44% in favor of extending them with limits on tax breaks for the wealthy, and 13% in favor of letting the tax breaks expire altogether. Nevertheless, the results of the new question suggest that, while the compromise position on taxes may not be their ideal, most Americans would support congressional passage of it.

So, basically the new poll presented Americans a choice between having nothing or having a tax cut for themselves, a scenario which assumes Obama does exactly what he did.
.
Gallop finds that, after Obama-GOP removes an option, they’re stuck with a new choice to make, and a majority will take the tax cut.
.
So yes, Gallup finds that, once the popular option is taken away from people, most folks will tend to take the lesser of two evils presented to them.
.
That’s obviously completely different than saying that Obama and the GOP’s position was the popular one, and that only extremes support what was given away in the deal!
.
But what if there was a choice?
.
What if that option –what a majority actually wanted– hadn’t been taken away from them?
.
What if there was still a third option?
.
That’s a question more and more Americans are probably going to be pondering during the days leading up to the 2012 presidential elections…
.
To proclaim based on this data that “America likes this deal, except the fringes of course” is preposterous.
.
That’s like saying “America likes to have what they actually desire for dinner to be removed from the menu” or “America likes having its choices reduced” or “America likes taking the lesser of two evils.”
.
Obviously there’s something more than a little flawed in interpreting these results to mean that the position most Americans favored less than a month ago is now somehow the “extreme” or “fringe” position.
.
That’s just not what this data says.
.
Put the choice back in front of the American people, and I suspect the Obama-GOP tax deal becomes just as unpopular again.

Yes, raising taxes (ala Clinton early 90s) necessarily causes a Recession. And lowering taxes or not changing them (ala bush 2000′s) creates jobs.

If only there were data to prove these claims.

The proof
.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates

Argh! This has never really been about deficits. The GOP doesn’t care about deficits.

The entire question has always been whether tax cuts for the wealthy are an efficient stimulus. The empirical evidence shows they aren’t.

Extending the tax cuts is not a “stealth” stimulus package. It was the entire rationale for them from the GOP. What they are is a lousy stimulus package.

Of course, they are “temporary” and would never be extended. Riiiiiiight.

Actually new if you read the article they are referring to the stimulus funding, not the tax cuts. Here is the full section with quote

“A bigger boost

The mood was cheery at the White House as administration officials celebrated a package that, if approved by Congress, would provide a far bigger jolt to the economy than anyone had expected. While lamenting the need to compromise on the Bush tax cuts and particularly on a revived estate tax, administration officials said the package would inject an extra $300 billion into the economy next year alone.

Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics, predicted that the package would accelerate economic growth, adding more than 1.6 million jobs next year and driving unemployment down to 8.5 percent by the end of 2011.”

So they are referring to things like the extension of unemployment benefits or tax cuts for low income families which have been shown time and time again to give more of a return on your investment than tax cuts for the rich (which actually give a negative return due to the rich simply saving the extra money).

I understand you want to make this about your ideology scoring points, but it is not. This is a compromise measure that allows R to get the tax cuts they want (which every major economist will tell you and history has shown will only cause a minor effect on the economy) while allowing other more stimulative measure to pass that would not otherwise.

Honest question: Who was maligning the demand to freeze settlements, other than Israel itself and, I presume, Eric Cantor?

This is how you treat a liberal!
.
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2010/12/christies_bully_act_getting_ol.html
.
Debating on facts if for liberals, frenchmen, and losers. Or all three. Real Americans bully the weak into submission by using state troopers and excessive weight gain (its glandular!).
.
Just like the Founding Fathers did!

hmm “none of that oil would come online until 5 years from now at the earliest.”
.
Damn, how many years now have we been hearing that same old line?

“Actually new if you read the article …”
.
Real Americans don’t ‘read’, they go with their gut! Or Glenn Beck’s gut. Whichever gut comes first.
.
You see, facts and charts only serve to confuse the issue by ‘proving’ that us conservatives have a poor historical track record. Of course we do. That’s not the point. The point is that we’re right THIS time. And that’s what really matters, isn’t it?
.
It’s just common sense!

For a while, One-Thirds, for a while, so I dumbed it down for you:

Drilling is not a quick fix.

First the heritage foundation is a conservative think thank (google them its what comes up beside their name) second that data was from an article in 2003 so the Bush tax cuts are not included. If they were you would see that the data would show little effect of them on the overall health of the economy. Tax cuts for the rich are not helpful while tax cuts for the poor are.

Here is a quote from the economist (that noted left wing rag) on this
he CBO’s Doug Elmendorf explains: “(T)he economic impact per dollar of revenue reduction from the full extension would be smaller than that from partial extension because a greater proportion of the tax savings from the full extension would go to relatively high income households, which tend to spend less of an increase in income than lower-income households do.”

“Clearly, $100 billion for somewhere between zero and 100,000 jobs is pretty poor performance. Giving more government money to rich people just isn’t a good way to get people working.”

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/12/tax_cut_deal

Oh god. These are the people who attack basic research on fruit fly genetics (Sarah Palin), addiction mechanisms (McCain, my own Dave Reichert), honey bees (Tom Coburn), and naturally climate change. They have zero understanding of how science works, and they aren’t interested in knowing and don’t care.
.
At least China and India are investing in science. Hopefully they will carry the torch after we fumble it.

Well it took a Palin endorsed republican candidate to do it but Minnesota has a Democratic governor.
.
Emmer just officially conceded.

The Republicans claim not to give a whit about the dire poverty and destitution of the unemployed, and I, for one, take them at their word. Which is, to some extent, the core of the problem: in a showdown over hostages (in this case the unemployed desperately reliant on the next check getting mailed), the side that cares about their well being is at a distinct disadvantage against the side that could not care less. Obama is taking quite a bit of heat in this forum and elsewhere for caring about these helpless people, but as someone who, many years ago, desperately waited for such a check to arrive, I cannot fault him overmuch.

.

The extent to which a major political party in this country is hostile to the government doing anything on behalf of its least fortunate citizens is something we have not seen since the time of, oh, Roosevelt, I guess. In this regard, the Us. S. is indeed exceptional among developed nations.

Oh of course it aint foggy. Creating thousands of jobs practically overnight, jobs that actually produce a valuable product, and automatically forcing the Saudis to lower their prices in the meantime… couldn’t possibly be a fix of any kind. Perhaps you should dumb it down a little more.

Ah we seem to have struck a nerve with the philosophically bankrupt left!
.
“In light of the Fed’s disclosure of all the companies they bailed out, to the tune of trillions of dollars, it is sadly humorous to see the right arguing that the stimulus had no effect.”
.
As humorous as the left ranting and raving about the bailouts only helping the rich? Or GE as they were then getting government contracts to support the global warming farce? So was it the right thing to bail out the companies or not? Seems you are arguing both sides- supporting greedy corporations profits or was it stimulative?
.
“Damn, how many years now have we been hearing that same old line?”
.
Since the 70s. So let’s see nothing for 5 years since let’s say 1975 (which is when I began work on alternate energy projects) so that at least 7 different spots (Alaska, Gulf, and several western states) we could have gotten more oil, lessened our energy dependence and increased domestic security. Amazing how energy form oil takes 5 years but let’s switch to alternative sources since they apparently are immediate (and yet we have little).
.
“likely to lead to a rapid acceleration of job growth. Two or three examples would be a good place to start.”
.
See Mark Zandi in #10, wo has been an Obama economic cheerleader.
.
“since Keynesian methods were never actually applied as a full swing method to fixing the economy and we opted for trickle down wasting”
.
$800 billion stimulus, trillion dollar TARP & bailouts, 3 years of unemployment benefits,doubling of our debt and the nearly trillion in money the Fed has injected into the system is trickle down?
.

You got to love how liberals stick to their delusions

“Clearly, $100 billion for somewhere between zero and 100,000 jobs is pretty poor performance. Giving more government money to rich people just isn’t a good way to get people working.”

.
And the first Trillion dollar stimulus that demwits provided for us created how many jobs again? I haven’t heard much on job creation lately from Obama or his side-kick Biden on all those jobs created or saved. Have they given that up now?
.
The historical reality does show no matter the source that cutting taxes not only increases revenue, but also stimulates economies. Period. The ONLY instance where taxes were increased and the economy still grew was during the Clinton years. But, spending was also equally if not more, cut. Cut because of the Republican controlled House and Senate at that time.
.
Hopefully a Republican controlled House will again visit and drastically cut spending. Then the real growth can occur and jobs will be created.

and you’re positive it was BECAUSE of Palin?

freeinpa could we see the empirical evidence supporting the theory that the deal Obama and the right just made, is likely to lead to a rapid acceleration of job growth? Surely, you can rattle two or three examples from the past, off the top of your head, can’t you?

Well, Republicans have been using the deficit argument as a way to prevent having to help the unemployed when they can’t help it. So yes, I agree that Republicans would probably be able to find the political will to extend unemployment benefits, but they’d probably make Obama give up something…..again. The tax cuts was something Obama had kinda walked into having to give up after the midterms so this is a pretty decent deal for that.

$800 billion stimulus

Lets take out the $250,000,000,000 in tax cuts out of that number. Since it wasn’t additional spending.

Then, of the remaining $550,000,000,000 only about $180 bill seems directed at investing in something that will improve this nation, and of that much of it went to “shovel ready” projects that were already slated to be done.

So, that stimulus, which ultimately did a lot to prevent catastrophe, did next to nothing to provide us with a future. It mostly continued what was already in place, or gave us fleeting benefits that would expire with the stimulus.

trillion dollar TARP & bailouts

It is a subject for argument over whether this would qualify as a stimulus since the target of these programs was to stop catastrophe, not stimulate.

3 years of unemployment benefits

Perhaps with targeted stimulus, those unemployment benefits might not have been so necessary.

doubling of our debt

side effect of above & the wars. Not really an additional point, and all the more reason to have argued for a better package for the cost.

the nearly trillion in money the Fed has injected into the system is trickle down?

The fed isn’t injecting money, it is loaning money that it requires to come back, which doesn’t do much to spur investment. And rates are about as low as they can go. They are doing something which simply doesn’t help much given the state of the economy, but its all that was left to do, so they tried. That $9 trillion it loaned before tarp was even conceived, was a series loans that had to be paid back.

The left has largely argued for the last year that boosting growth in the short term should be a priority…

Somewhat incorrect. We’ve been arguing that boosting employment should take precedence. Economic growth itself has not been reflected in our employment numbers (and corresponding increases in wages have not been happening).

So, while the wealthy have benefited in the mild recovery we’ve been having, the rest of us haven’t been doing as well.

…and that structural deficits are not something to be tackled in a recession.

So, what are We The People really getting for that (by some estimates) $900B? Where does all that money eventually end up?

Isn’t this deal a step in that direction and certainly better than anything they could hope to get once Republicans take over the House?

It’s not just the stunning display of hypocrisy, of which there’s enough to choke a herd of horses. Consider this question:

How does this compromise solve any of our problems?

Getting people back to work doesn’t mean extending unemployment benefits. Getting companies to start hiring Americans – at decent, middle-class wages – doesn’t mean reimbursing them for buying new equipment. The payroll tax cut actually increases taxes on families making $40K or under. As a ‘stimulus package’, once again it is too small and doles out a large portion of its money in the least stimulative way possible to people who can’t supply enough demand to justify the handout. College tax credits don’t make tuition any cheaper.

It’s a scam, plain and simple; sausage-making using rotted meat…only with the added bonus of getting to do this all over again in two years, only with the unemployment rate being at 8.5% instead of 9.8%.

One quote:

“A weak economy is not an excuse to spend money we don’t have on things we don’t need.”

And another:

“What should Democrats do?

The answer is that they should just say no. If G.O.P. intransigence means that taxes rise at the end of this month, so be it.”

Two respected economists, different sides of the political spectrum.

Objection to this flaming hunk o’crap isn’t even ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’; it’s an outcry against how broken our government is…that it can’t enact commonsense, workable solutions. That it can no longer act rationally to solve huge problems that affect millions of lives.

That necessary policy items can be held hostage by extortionists…who we then give in to, only to let them go off scot-free, free to extort again and again. And they will, because they know they can get away with it, again and again.

As for Obama, I can’t excuse him for this. We needed him to be more Keyser Soze – even if it hurts him or the ones he loves – and what we-as-a-country are getting instead is Neville Chamberlain.

As repugnant as Marty Seifert is he would have garnered at least 9000 more votes than Emmer.
.
Thankfully the state republicans went with the furthest right candidate they could. Palin’s endorsement days before the republican convention sealed it for Emmer.

You can check with the folks who get paid to analyze these things (link below), since you are less interested in the result than in having a pinata to swing.

I can give you one example though. Drug companies will scale up the production of cymbalta and prozac for all the manic depressive liberals increasing jobs for drug manufacturers, pharmacists and makers of rubber rooms

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/business/economy/08leonhardt.html

It’s interesting to note that while it’s mentioned the job creating effect of gulf drilling, no one is talking about the job DESTROYING effect. You know, like the one we had over the summer? Are we so quick to forget, its not just the huggy, lovey feeling of not destroying whole ecologies, which i wouldn’t ever expect some of you(i quote) “philisophically bankrupt people” to care about. It is also about all the people whose livelihoods depends on such ecologies being destroyed also, like tourism and fishermen. People in the gulf are hurting, and it’s not because we are NOT drilling enough oil there.

Add after this line: That it can no longer act rationally to solve huge problems that affect millions of lives.
.
That its primary function is to serve the interests of the wealthy and powerful.

Its also worth noting that government doesn’t have to work like this, but is working like this because people who claimed it couldn’t work are making sure it doesn’t.
·
Its such a glossed over fact that the Republicans are basically sabotaging the government and getting away with it for personal gain.

HAHAHA i get it now! Yesterday I was going to climb all over you for being a dimwit and for having your lips firmly planted on the anus or teat or whatever of the conservative party line. I now realize the true satire of this persona. KUDOS!

Tangential: Obama’s “they want the keys back” metaphor would have better been replaced by “they told us used cars hold up well, sold us a car they new would break, and now they’re offering us yet another car that’s going to break now that the first has broken.”

Free, when Derek said: “In light of the Fed’s disclosure of all the companies they bailed out, to the tune of trillions of dollars, it is sadly humorous to see the right arguing that the stimulus had no effect.”, I think he was referring to the $9 trillion bailout Bush gave to the banks before TARP. So it the argument does seem odd.
.
(were bailouts) supporting greedy corporations profits or was it stimulative
.
My opinion: both. Certainly the bailouts were elite-centric, and they were stimulative- but not an optimal use of funds. IOW, there were more stimulative options available.
.
that same old line
.
It was Reagan that closed the domestic oil rigs in favor of cheap oil from OPEC. More to the point: opening gulf-state rigs won’t have an immediate effect on oil prices- which was the point of nflfoghorn’s statement. Plus, those rigs were closed for safety concerns, not ideological.
.
the nearly trillion in money the Fed has injected into the system is trickle down?
.
Much of it is. And to be sure, without a major investment in job-creation (perhaps via the electrical grid, repairing bridges, or digging ditches), it ain’t “Keynesian methods”.

You can check with the folks who get paid to analyze these things (link below)
.
Sure, why not?

Initial estimates by economists suggested that the overall legislation would reduce the unemployment rate by one-half a percentage point to a full point over the next year, compared with allowing all the tax cuts to expire and passing no new stimulus. By the end of 2012, the decline could be up to 1.5 percentage points, economists said.
.
On the other hand, the unemployment rate will still probably be near 8 percent by the end of 2012, when the current package expires, and the two parties will get to have this fight all over again.

That’s not ‘very rapid growth’, is it?

Summation of all the different maths:

No one really knows exactly how it pans out but in general, it really should help stablize the economy, especially due to the unemployment insurance benefits. As I heard someone from the Tax Center on NPR say after enumerating the pieces that aren’t that stimulaic, “but it is a reasonable course to take” at this time as long as it doesn’t extend past the set deal.

P.S. Anyone else see the little fire bolts shooting out of Obama’s eyes as he answered the last question?

‘trade ya for an unindicted criminal from FL….

“You can check with the folks who get paid to analyze these things (link below), since you are less interested in the result than in having a pinata to swing.”
.
So you have no idea, correct? You are unable to support your arguments with proof, even though you act as if they are unequivocal.
.
Thanks for the clarification.

Self-editing:
.
Much of it is.
.
I’m wrong here. By my statement, “it” refers to everything, not the stimulus itself as free intended. What I was trying to say is that when compaired to the nearly $10 trillion that went to the banks and the overwhelming trend in US politics over the past 30+ years, the stimulus hardly indicates a change to our trickle-down-ness. It was a collection, mostly, of tax cuts and emergency funds- not a new direction, not Keynesian.

“I think he was referring to the $9 trillion bailout Bush gave to the banks before TARP.”
.
I was referring to his suggestion that the gov’t plays no role in the economy and should have used a better word than stimulus, although I’m not sure what the action of the Fed can be properly named. Crisis loans is one option. From what I’ve read the action was unprecedented.

Here is a very interesting find from Dave Weigel that’s really worth watching at this particular moment:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel/archive/2010/12/08/we-are-all-tom-buffenbarger-now.aspx

We Are All Tom Buffenbarger Now
Posted Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:12 AM | By David Weigel

Remember Tom Buffenbarger? In 2008, his International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers endorsed Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. The night of the Wisconsin primary, which Obama won, Buffenbarger helped kick off Hillary’s campaign in Ohio with a volcanic 12-minute speech all about the weakness he’d seen in Obama in Illinois, on pivotal labor fights. I found the video again after watching a few minutes of MSNBC last night.

(Not that Hillary would have…etc, etc, that’s not the point)

To be fair Newfree, the “Trillion dollar stimulus that demwits provided for us” relied mostly on tax cuts and emergency funds. So I think the lesson is different than what you imply.
.
——–
.
Hopefully a Republican controlled House will again visit and drastically cut spending.
.
Yes, and I’m counting on you to rally the TPers to demand that we end the wars overseas in order to cut that spending.

Objection to this flaming hunk o’crap isn’t even ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’; it’s an outcry against how broken our government is…that it can’t enact commonsense, workable solutions. That it can no longer act rationally to solve huge problems that affect millions of lives.
.
Thank you grape. There is no struggle between liberal and conservative going on in Congress. Both are so inconsequential to current US politics as to be not worthy of discussion. There is corporatism vs corporatism plus a little something for the regular folks*. It is not ideological, it is a function of how representatives are elected and how legislation is influenced. The corporations always win. While corpotrate profits are good, they will always act in their best interests and seek to solidify their dominance. Too often we suffer.
.
The media is interested in framing it as “lib v con” because they want to pit us against one another so that we don’t focus the near-oligarchy that they are a big part of.
.
.
.
* see HCR: private insurance mandate; no medicare negotiation of prices plus no rescission.

Hey, look at this polling released from Bloomberg today!
.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-08/obama-s-compromise-on-extending-highest-income-tax-cuts-unpopular-in-poll.html
.
Wow, there’s even more to that America-opposed fringe element than we previously suspected:

Obama’s Compromise on Extending Highest-Income Tax Cuts Unpopular in Poll
.
By John McCormick and Julianna Goldman – Dec 8, 2010 11:29 AM ET
.
Americans don’t approve of keeping the breaks for upper-income taxpayers that are part of the deal President Barack Obama brokered with congressional Republicans, a Bloomberg National Poll shows.
.
The survey, conducted before, during and after the tax negotiations, shows that only a third of Americans support keeping the lower rates for the highest earners. Even among backers of the cuts for the wealthy, fewer than half say they should be made permanent.
.
Another third say they want only the tax cuts for the middle class to be extended, while more than a fourth say all the tax cuts should be allowed to expire Dec. 31, as scheduled.
.
A plurality of Democrats favor extending the cuts only for middle-class taxpayers, though a third would let all tax cuts expire and use the revenue to help cut the federal budget deficit. Put in the context of deficit reduction, 6 in 10 poll participants favor raising rates on the wealthiest.

How about that?
.
What a bunch of extremists!

The Bernie Sanders threatened filibuster may have picked up another supporter.
.
I heard Al Franken interviewed on Minnesota Public Radio this morning and he sounded grave.
.
Paraphrasing but near to verbatim-
.
“The President did a terrible job” “The administration tipped their hand weeks ago when Axelrod said their was room to compromise on the tax cuts for the millionaires”
.
Will you join Senator Sanders filibuster? “I have to see the final bill but I campaigned on ending the tax cuts for the rich”

“Much of it is. And to be sure, without a major investment in job-creation (perhaps via the electrical grid, repairing bridges, or digging ditches), it ain’t “Keynesian methods”.”
.
Weren’t we told that there were shovel ready jobs for the stimulus? Seems the only shovel ready job was shoveling liberal crap about the stimulus.
.
“So you have no idea, correct? You are unable to support your arguments with proof,”
.
So let’s see, the left calls everyone liars, doesn’t like “proof” if their paranoia thinks its from right wing sources and want empirical scientific evidence but when you are pointed in that direction you decide no tell us what you think. As I said you don’t want proof or the truth but something else to whine about. In your own post you ask for” empirical evidence then 3 examples off the top of my head”.
.
“That’s not ‘very rapid growth’, is it?”
.
Compared to the increase in unemployment since the stimulus was enacted- yes! Remember unemployment wouldn’t go up beyond 8% with the stimulus?- It’s 9.8% now and was 7.7% in Jan 2009)

This guy won’t last a round against the Republican attack machine.
.
–Buffenbarger

I don’t know, Stuart. By my count, Obama has gone at least four rounds with the Republican attack machine – the ’08 campaign, the stimulus fight, the healthcare bill and the mid-terms – and come out bloodied but unbowed and ahead on points three rounds to one. Liberals need to remember, a ring fighter is only fighting for one guy. So far, we’re the only real losers, based upon our bets on how the fight would go.

Newfree:

Seems nothing drives liberals to the brink like tax cuts- it steals their lifeblood of spending which is the backbone of their very existence.

The Bernie Sanders threatened filibuster may have picked up another supporter.
.
“Oh dear! How bad will the Democrats look if they kill this compromise! It’s such a good deal, one that they aren’t likely to see again!”
.
(Chris Matthews clutches pearls, collapses on fringed couch, fainted)
.
Meh. It’s not that good of a deal for most Americans.

So who stands to benefit the most from the deal in 2011? It’s not the middle class.[...]
.
its the rich, though not by a landslide. But that’s just 2011. For 2012, the deal that Obama struck gets even better for the rich. They still get their upper income tax cuts, but the social security payroll tax and the unemployment benefits expire. As the saying goes, the rich get, well, better tax treatment.

http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2010/12/07/who-benefits-most-in-tax-deal/
.
And if a couple of ‘far left Dems’ get blamed for ‘wrecking’ this craptastic compromise…well, what else is new?

Since the left is bouncing off walls and frothing today I thought I would pass on an interesting story in the Financial Times this past weekend.

Sushi is marketed as the sophisticated food item. It is closely linked to liberal educated global professionals. Yet…..

They pay no attention to the environmental health woes of heavy metal poisoning or the fact that the prized blue fin tuna population has been dwindled by 75% or that impact on “global warming” as the fish is air freighted sometimes twice per day.

It’s good to be a liberal- smug, self-righteous and a Hypocrite!!

OK, I saw the press conference. I wanted to Obama to explain to me, at the very least, why he was not a total douche.
I can see where he is coming from. The press conference brought down my anger.

However, this is what bothers me.

It is not the public option all over again. The public option threatened to but an end to a skeleton bill much like Medicare and the civil rights bill. A skeleton bill can be built upon and created into more of a social justice bill.

The only skeleton in this compromise is that republicans could twist it and build upon it to extend all tax cuts to the top 2%.

I have almost no faith in Obama winning the spin war. Obama has proven to not fight. He always claims to be ready for a fight.. but he never really fights. He pulls the “Grown up high road speech”.. but never fights. The people who get hurt the most in the spin wars are the democrats in congress and the senate. They pay the price of Obama not fighting for his image and theirs. I pay the price for him not fighting. He lets the right call me all kinds of awful names.. communist, Hitler, baby killer, grandma killer. Hillary and Bill fought like hell for democrats image.

Obama needs to start being willing to hit back at republicans. Laugh in their face. Mock them.
Painting them as terrorist holding the American public hostage so the rich could get more tax cuts was a good start.

However, it was just a tiny spark in a war zone full of mirrors and black smoke. Obama has to learn how to win spin wars. He has to understand they matter. He has to fight.. or the republicans will use this compromise as a Trojan horse and demolish all hope for deficit spending sanity that does not harm the masses with deep cuts to them in all social security and social justice programs. Obama could help give them the key that could undue countless years of progress democrats have made. It all rest on his ability to fight. And truth be told.. Obama blows a$$ at spin wars because he does not fight.

That is what worries me.
He can go stick his finger wagging chiding of the righteous lift up his back side.

He needs to prove he can go for the jugular when it is time for a show down. Somethings are worth fighting to the mat for. He has to prove he is willing to get dirty to protect democratic values at some point.

“said their was room”
.
Actually I’m pretty sure Franken used “there”. Sheesh.
.
“And if a couple of ‘far left Dems’ get blamed”
.
Maybe Demint will give them cover. Politics, bedfellows, etc.

I’ve never seen “liberals only” on sushi, nor does there seem to be a difference between my liberal and conservative friend with regards to liking sushi.
·
Beyond the fact that some of my liberal friends who eat sushi no longer eat related tuna sushi for the very reasons mentioned above. And as far as sustainable sushi, there are movements to making that more of a possibility, but its not like sustainable farming has caught on 100% across the board yet.

He has to prove he is willing to get dirty to protect democratic values at some point.

.
Did you steal that from one of George Soros “Open Society” websites?
.
Democrat values: Stealing from rich people to fund poor people’s entitlement programs in order to get re-elected to office

Here’s the link to the Financial Times article Freeper thinks is important:
.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e43c22ca-fcdc-11df-ae2d-00144feab49a.html#axzz17YCQu6WO
.
As expected, Freeper has edited his snippet of it to suit his own prejudices.

“I’ve never seen “liberals only” on sushi, nor does there seem to be a difference between my liberal and conservative friend with regards to liking sushi”
.
Don’t shoot the messenger but thanks for proving
“Since the left is bouncing off walls”

Weren’t we told that there were shovel ready jobs for the stimulus?
.
“Shovel-ready” = “already planned” = no new jobs programs = not Keynesian.
.
Money went to the states so that they could pay for completed contracting work and for planned projects that would have been done under normal (solvent) circumstances. It kept contractors (and ancillary businesses) from losing jobs, which is important, but it did not create new jobs in the way Keynes advocated.

freeinpa still doesn’t know how to end a blockquote tag… it makes responding to him more challenging…

“”So you have no idea, correct? You are unable to support your arguments with proof,”"
.
“So let’s see, the left calls everyone liars, doesn’t like “proof” if their paranoia thinks its from right wing sources and want empirical scientific evidence but when you are pointed in that direction you decide no tell us what you think. As I said you don’t want proof or the truth but something else to whine about. In your own post you ask for” empirical evidence then 3 examples off the top of my head”.
.
“That’s not ‘very rapid growth’, is it?”"

The facts speak for themselves.
.
How about just one example? For example, “The last time we had a recession of this magnitude “Ronald Reagan” or “Margarete Thatcher”, implemented a lower tax only, fiscal policy, that returned full employment in 5, 6 or some number of quarters. What is your best example?

“Thank you grape. There is no struggle between liberal and conservative going on in Congress. Both are so inconsequential to current US politics as to be not worthy of discussion. There is corporatism vs corporatism plus a little something for the regular folks*. It is not ideological, it is a function of how representatives are elected and how legislation is influenced. The corporations always win.”
.
Clearly, this place (somehow) hosts some of the smartest political commentary on the intertubes.

“It’s good to be a liberal- smug, self-righteous and a Hypocrite!!”
.
You’re the one to tell us.

Maybe Demint will give them cover. Politics, bedfellows, etc.
.
Wouldn’t matter. We’ve already heard ‘analysis’ that the opposition to this is on the ‘far’ left and right.
.
It’s the centrists versus everyone else on this one.

“but it did not create new jobs in the way Keynes advocated.”
.
My wild guess is Keynes would emphasis tax cuts related to employee hiring, front and center in his tax policy, at this time in the business cycle. To help the private sector pay the extra amount on new hires, beyond the credit, he would advocate the nation invest in several (i.e. 3 or 4) major, trans-formative, infrastructure programs, readjusting the nation’s business model, one could say, and opening up new markets for the people offering the new jobs.

As for other taxes, my guess is he would not really care how they are done, as long as the money is likely to end up back in circulation. That would leave out the billions for billionaire program.

The problem with polling the public is that Obama doesn’t have to get legislation passed by the public. He has to get it passed by Congress. These same folks who don’t like all the tax cuts being extended have voted in people who have promised to dig their heels in on the issue.

Obama has to work with a mix of Senators and especially Representatives who are hard-line conservative purists and weak Democrats who jump every time Rush Limbaugh says “boo.”

I don’t agree with everything Obama has done and I would’ve like to have seen a much stronger stance on things like Health Care. The bed he has to sleep in is partially of his own making. On the other hand, he has to deal with a Congress who got elected on knee jerk emotional reactions in 2006 and 2010. Why would they defer to your polls when they’ve had so much success moving counter to them? And can he take a stronger stand against them if it equals things not getting done at all?

This was a response to Stuart at 2.3

Clearly, this place (somehow) hosts some of the smartest political commentary on the intertubes.
.
It really does, doesn’t it?

This tells you everything a liberal needs to know about why Obama doesn’t fight hard for truly progressive policies or make the strong rhetorical case for liberalism or against “conservatism”:

Within the administration, the split over whether to mount a tax-cut offensive broke down largely along wonk-operative lines. The wonks spent the last year mystified that the White House was ducking the fight when the substantive merits were so one-sided. The operatives brooded that the politics could abruptly turn against them, despite polling showing little public appetite for the upper-income cuts. “They view it through the class warfare stuff—Kerry in 2004, Gore in 2000,” says one administration official. “They worry that they’ll get painted as lefties, tax-raisers.”
.
–Noam Scheiber

It also tells you everything you need to know about how this White House loses every progressive fight long before the question of 60 votes ever arises. Whether or not they’re somewhat more liberal than their policies, they’re scared sh!tless of the label.
.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/the-sorrow-and-the-self-pity-2/

And it pales in comparison to you.

But did you ever answer the question about the name hippo?

Does it refer to species or body type?

“

Sushi is marketed as the sophisticated food item. It is closely linked to liberal educated global professionals. Yet…..
.
They pay no attention to the environmental health woes of heavy metal poisoning or the fact that the prized blue fin tuna population has been dwindled by 75% or that impact on “global warming” as the fish is air freighted sometimes twice per day.

.
You have to wonder who this moron (and the one who posted it) thinks is fighting against overfishing and for protecting species. It sure as sh!t isn’t “conservatives”.
.
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2010/bluefin-tuna-05-24-2010.html

“Democrat values: Stealing from rich people to fund poor people’s entitlement programs in order to get re-elected to office.”
.
Taxing to promote the general welfare isn’t “stealing,” it’s government’s job, you can look it up. You’ll just have to get over the fact or move to some other country that doesn’t have such a mandate for government. I hear that Somalia can use a few more rugged individualists. Apparently, for some reason, they keep dying there.

“Hopefully they will carry the torch after we fumble it.”

So, they’ll carry the torch with hope in their hearts? And how do you fumble a torch? Ouch!

The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

P.S. I apologize for being so snarky. But that does win the prize for Bad Sentence of the Day.

I imagine fumbling a torch looks something like this: linky.
·
And yeah, that’d be a pretty accurate metaphor for what we are doing right now.

“And it pales in comparison to you.
.
But did you ever answer the question about the name hippo?
.
Does it refer to species or body type?”
.
You’re the cutest cyber bully evar. Is this the best that you got? You show no integrity, you’re a hypocrite trough and through and you preach to others about it. But this is your troll punch line? You’ve tried it a couple of times already and no one dropped their keys. Don’t you think you should move on?
.
So cute.

And this extremist American is even more ticked off that we made the rich richer, but no love for the 99ers. So, unemployment benefits were extended but no solution for the long-term unemployed (estimated to effect 2 million folks already):

http://www.businessinsider.com/does-the-unemployment-insurance-extension-help-the-99ers-2010-12

Swapping the ARRA’s Making Work Pay credit for a payroll tax cut will actually raise the taxes of individuals making less than $20k a year and families making less than $40k.
.
This always happens. More and more of the tax burden is placed on the backs of those who can least afford it. I didn’t see any change in my pay check with Obama’s first round of tax cuts–you know the ones that were supposed to add about $8 a week to a person’s check? There was no change in my take home pay at that time. In fact, with all the tax cuts since 2001, I’ve not seen any change in my take home pay until earlier this year when I actually got a raise–of about $60 a month!!

“Democrat values: Stealing from rich people to fund poor people’s entitlement programs in order to get re-elected to office.”

That was Jesus.

Why it is hard not to think some Republicans are truely nuts, Freeper.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/11/30/tea-party-voting-property/
.
Tea Party Nation President thinks voting should be limited to property owners only.
.
http://www.texasobserver.org/hotonthetrail/srec-member-i-got-into-politics-to-put-christian-conservatives-into-office
.
From the Texas Legislature (R).
SREC Member: “I got into politics to put Christian conservatives into office.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/06/rep-steve-king-mccarthyism-panel-_n_792623.html
.
Rep Steve King thinks we should reinstate McCarthy type hearings.
.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/odonnell-unemployment-benefits-deal-tragedy-like-pearl-harbor-and-elizabeth-edwards.php?ref=fpblg
.
Christine O’Donnell equates Unemployment Insurance deal with Pearl Harbor and the death of Elizabeth Edwards. All are tragedies.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/beyond-hackery-ctd.html
.
Taking on Time’s Halperin for his hackery.

http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2010/12/elephants-in-room-what-andrew-sullivan.html
.
Regarding Republican thuggery:
.

What we’ve observed these past two years is a political party that knows nothing but scorched earth tactics, cannot begin to see any merits in the other party’s arguments, refuses to compromise one inch on anything, and has sought from the very beginning to do nothing but destroy the Obama presidency. I see no other coherent message or strategy since 2008…. There is not a scintilla of responsibility for their past; not a sliver of good will for a duly elected president….
.
These people are not conservatives in this core civilized sense; they are partisan vandals.
.

In my last post, I talked about how a dominant media narrative about Democrats (namely, that it’s a horrible mistake for them ever to be progressive) gets into the heads of Democrats and into the public’s consciousness, and helps make a weak party even weaker. Conversely, there’s an MSM take on Republicans that strengthens the GOP: namely, that no matter what the party does, it’s a legitimate party interested in governance. It’s one of our major political institutions — it can’t ever be talked about as if it’s gone off the rails, as if it’s thuggish and deliberately acting in opposition to the national interest. Major political parties just don’t do that with malice aforethought.

,”doubling of our debt ”

What? When Obama took office, Bush had left him with an escalating National Debt of nearly $12 trillion. Our current Debt is over $13 trillion. That’s “doubling” our debt??

Most of that additional debt is the continuation of the tax cuts, the unpaid for wars, the unpaid for Medicare drug program, and the Great Republican Recession. The only major action Obama took that added significantly to the Debt was the less than $800 billion Stimulus.

“Why it is hard not to think some Republicans are truely nuts, Freeper.”

lol

I keep trying to explain to them that the price of getting into heaven according to the final Judgment law is to look upon the poor as if the are Jesus himself. We must feed them, nurse them back to health if ill ect.

The price to live in America is to pay taxes and if you make millions then you can afford to pay more to this lovely land that allowed you to make your wealth. The land of the free has a price. Bleed America dry with tax cuts for the rich and we will become a third world like Mexico. We can see how well low flat tax and near zero social services has worked out for them. lol

Just like if you make millions you can afford to give more to the country that made your riches possible.

It’s divine politics that Christian conservatives can’t seem to fathom. lol

That can’t be right. I have a pension of $20,000 a year with no cost of living increase. I’ve had it for 9 years. The Obama tax cuts in the Stimulus add about $40 per month to my check.

The Bush tax cuts added about $5 a month.

Time to reup your meds la-la-land. You’re rambling incoherently.

Actually no. Jesus fed the multitudes through miracles. He didn’t steal anything that was not his already to give.
.
Perhaps you should try that method sometime. Are you any good at making miracles happen?

Republicans seem pathological in their belief that lowering taxes does not tail spin us into huge deficit spending. Even though Nixen had the top pay rate of taxes at 74% and before that it was once at 90% under republicans. Republicans were conservatives. They did not borrow and spend.. then Reagan came along. Reagan the ex-democrat.. he had an idea… instead of tax and spend.. let borrow money from China and spend! And he handed out money left and right.. called it “tax cuts” all borrowed.. and sunk us in the biggest deficit whole we as a nation had ever been in, at that time.
HW Bush tried to get back to sanity and raised taxes but was punished because his party was no longer responsible stewards of the economy.
Clinton raised taxes and we had zero deficit spending.
Bush lowered them and start two wars. He more than doubled the deficit of all presidents combined before him.
So Obama follow his example. Obama is a compassionate conservative, meaning spending like crazy on borrowed money, more than have of which we give to the rich you do not create jobs. They horde it. Tax breaks to the middle proves far more stimulative by all serious economist, both lift and right.

Obama can’t get is ideal choice, super big tax cuts to the middle for ultimate stimulation of the economy.. so he agrees to the far lesser stimulating of giving borrowed money from china to the rich, as well.

I got it.

The Clinton people say way we have to do it.

I got it.

Clinton is meeting with Obama today, I need to hear Clinton tell me that Obama understands that we must raise taxes at some point like he did for deficit reduction.

It is nothing less than identity politics for me.

It is my Holy Grail.

Obama belittles me for having principles my core identity has entwined with.. but those principles are what inspired me to walk blocks for the man. They are what inspired me to send him $1000. Maybe that sound like nothing to him, but it was a lot for me and the first time I ever gave.

He is kicking my holy Grail down the road. He is chastising me for caring and being hurt and confused. He is hurting himself by hurting the people who were the backbone of his election. I’m not some super left liberal. I did not freak about the public option. I thought it a good Idea to get the guy who really was behind 9/11.

But we all have some issue that defines a part of our identity. Many fiscally responsible democrats defined themselves in 1993, with the Clinton Deficit Reduction Act.

Obama has no idea how blessed he is that Clinton is still alive. Obama needs Clinton to be a mouth piece and reassure people like me that our principles still mean something to Obama. That Obama will honor them one day. Otherwise, it might be true some day that I did not leave the democrats but they left me.

And I don’t think Clinton is perfect either. Clinton really screwed the pooch when he signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act also known as Financial Services Modernization Act, bill from 1999.
I never cared about the blow job.. that that bill was toxic to our economy and almost brought our nation to its knees, two years ago.

“Time to reup your meds la-la-land. You’re rambling incoherently.”

Oh, shut up. I have to type with my left hand only and I’m right handed. If someone is even half way clever they can read past the typos.

And if they lack the ability to understand my humor.. then they prove themselves lacking in intuitive grasp of black mirth.

but that was pretty funny regardless. I have been feel rather manic the last few days. lol