27 Comments

1. smitty:

On #2:
Forget The Dumb Stuff (FTDS). Kill the 16th Amendment. Get some kind of effigy, sell tickets, and let the people swing a sledge at the beast.
Instant revenue generator.

Jul 8, 2009 - 12:08 pm 2. calvon:

Your idea is altogether too simple. All it would do is become active and effective as soon as the ink dried and give relief to those who can best use it.

What it wouldn’t do is give the obammacrats the opportunity to funnel the money to their friends (ACORN?).

Jul 8, 2009 - 12:34 pm 3. Janus Daniels:

“… the money would go to those who pay proportionately the most in payroll taxes — the working poor and middle class. Oh, and people get to spend the money how they like. Which is why it’ll never happen.”
Agreed.
I can scarcely believe that you’d admit that, and even more surprised that you didn’t cobble together some junko logic to blame Democrats or absolve Republicans.

Jul 8, 2009 - 12:39 pm 4. Stephen Green:

JD –

Thanks. But please note that I spent 2002-2007 bashing “the spendthrift Republican Congress,” and harped on Bush for using his veto pen less often than we get new Popes.

So far, it seems the Democrats are determined to make the Republicans look good, however — something I wasn’t sure was even possible.

Jul 8, 2009 - 12:44 pm 5. Stephen Green:

Correction: There is no way to make the Republicans look good, so let me rephrase. “So far, it seems the Democrats are determined to out-stupid the Republicans — something I wasn’t sure was even possible.”

Jul 8, 2009 - 12:46 pm 6. McGehee:

It’s pretty obvious Janus is a newcomer to this site or he’d know better than to assume it’s a hotbed of RNC talking points.

Or, he’s just stupid.

Jul 8, 2009 - 1:37 pm 7. tree hugging sister:

(How awful to stumble blindly into a strange new world…)

I watched the CEO of American Express express his view that no green shoots were visible. And won’t be, until, like, people have jobs. The quickly diminishing number of people who have jobs would be happy to endorse the VodkaPundit’s Cotton Eyed Joe. Oh, if only they could hear about it!

Jul 8, 2009 - 1:46 pm 8. NukemHill:

It’s pretty obvious Janus is a newcomer to this site or he’d know better than to assume it’s a hotbed of RNC talking points.

OrAnd, he’s just stupid.

FTFY.

Jul 8, 2009 - 2:49 pm 9. Janus Daniels:

5. Stephen Green:
Fair.
I pray that we’re wrong, and that Democrats posses insights unknown to us, that may yet save us all.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/20/_the_stock_market_the_governme/
Curiously, Republicans (and conservatives) always presume that wars end depressions, and cannot deny that governments take over the economy and drive massive deficits to make war… yet, when you suggest that any government might end a depression by doing all this except slaughtering foreigners, Republicans (and some conservatives) balk, and cannot say why.
Democrats could showcase and appoint Buffet, Krugman, Roubini, Soros, Stiglitz, Taleb, and others who predicted this disaster for the last several years.
Better yet, they could begin by bitchslapping and shit canning everyone who caused this disaster for the last several years, instead of hiring and pimping the scum; Goldman Sachs has come out on top:
Source: The Great American Bubble Machine : Rolling Stone
Address :
“The first thing you need to know about Goldman Sachs is that it’s everywhere. The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.
“Any attempt to construct a narrative around all the former Goldmanites in influential positions quickly becomes an absurd and pointless exercise, like trying to make a list of everything. What you need to know is the big picture: If America is
circling the drain, Goldman Sachs has found a way to be that drain…”

Jul 8, 2009 - 3:01 pm 10. Janus Daniels:

Second try…
Source: The Great American Bubble Machine : Rolling Stone
Address : http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/the_great_american_bubble_machine/print
“The first thing you need to know about Goldman Sachs is that it’s everywhere. The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.
“Any attempt to construct a narrative around all the former Goldmanites in influential positions quickly becomes an absurd and pointless exercise, like trying to make a list of everything. What you need to know is the big picture: If America is
circling the drain, Goldman Sachs has found a way to be that drain…”

Jul 8, 2009 - 3:03 pm 11. Mauther:

The main problem with blaming Goldman Sachs and other financial houses instead of the government is because where do you think all of those people are working now. Count the number of Goldman, Freddie and Fannie execs now working in the government. Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach. Those who try and fail spectacurally get jobs in the government.

Steven your tax plan is horribly flawed. First of all there’s no room for graft or corruption, much less infleunce peddling so its going to face bipartisan opposition. Besides, we need the government directing spending, otherwise people have to spend their own money and we’ve seen how wasteful they are with that. You end up with non-profitable businesses going under and profitable business adapting and thriving and that’s just crazy…

Jul 8, 2009 - 3:29 pm 12. Janus Daniels:

Re: 11. Mauther
Correction:
“The main problem with blaming Goldman Sachs and other financial houses instead of the government is because THERE IS NO ‘INSTEAD’ SINCE where do you think all of those people are working now?”
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/the_great_american_bubble_machine/print
“… they hoover up vast sums from the middle and lower floors of society with the aid of a crippled and corrupt state that allows it to rewrite the rules in exchange for the relative pennies the bank throws at political patronage…”
The financial industry has long enjoyed an even better revolving door to government than such relative newcomers as Halliburton (Cheney) or Carlyle (Bush).

Jul 8, 2009 - 3:54 pm 13. Mark Zart:

If we *have* to spend money, why not beef up the military. Helicopters, trucks, Airplanes, whatever. It’s the definition of pail ready and it offers a wide range of job opportunities.

Jul 8, 2009 - 4:21 pm 14. Frank Martin:

You’ve got it all wrong. You keep thinking that the purpose of “The Stimulus” was to breathe life into the private sector by getting all that money out there and moving around and by doing so, it rescue the economy from its collapse.

In point of fact, “The “Stimulus” was designed to take money out of the private sector capital markets and to put it under the control political action on behalf of Congress and its parasitical lobbyists.

The fact that money was poured into “the Stimulus” and nothing happened is not a bug, its a feature, that is precisely what was supposed to happen.

With the Private Sector now choked off from its life giving capital, the only source of possible funding is the say so of those “cool, cool considerate men” on Capitol Hill. You want access, you have to pay. Fail to pay, and you will fail to compete for available cash in the market.

If you wanted to make the private sector economy improve, you wouldnt take private money out of the market, you would lower tax burdens and give big incentives to make sure that all the private capital that is out there lining mattresses would get out into the marketplace to make more money. But this is not what we are doing. What we are doing with “The Stimulus” is to make sure that the private sector is as small and distinctly non private as possible for Congress to keep its power over the lives of the citizenry.

Remember, its not the mission of politicians to make the marketplace safe for you to invest your in, its their mission in life to make sure you pay them to get to your money first.Its so bad that they don’t even think that its your money, they think its theirs.

The private sector, being a free market entity is the enemy of politicians everywhere and what is “Stimulating” about “The Stimulus” is how it feeds the dreams of bureaucrats everywhere to its new found ability micromanage the lives of free people.

Jul 8, 2009 - 4:31 pm 15. bgates:

cannot deny that governments take over the economy and drive massive deficits to make war

Sure they can. Watch me:

To the (large!) extent that the government interfered with the economy 2001-2008, the purpose was not to make war. Defense spending was historically low. (Hell, military casualties were historically low – 2/3 as many members of the armed forces died under Clinton as under Bush, and the rate under Bush was comparable to the rate under Reagan.) The deficit wasn’t necessary for the war, it was necessary to have the Medicare drug benefit, leave Social Security unfixed, and have the war.

Jul 8, 2009 - 5:08 pm 16. NukemHill:

JD’s yummalicious trollish flavorings are simply delectable. Let’s take a look at this simple one:

Republicans (and conservatives) always presume that wars end depressions, and cannot deny that governments take over the economy and drive massive deficits to make war

Let’s see here. Between Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and now the Medicare drug benefits enacted during Bush’s tenure, we’re staring at an unfunded liability somewhere on the order of $75 to $100 trillion.

That’s $100,000,000,000,000. Got that JD?

Please identify one piece of any of those liabilities that are geared to making war. Well, besides the war on our economy and fundamental liberties. And yes, my underlying assumption is that the Republicans are just as much to blame for these liabilities as the Democrats. But your presumption that massive deficits (a logical and inescapable consequence of said liabilities noted above) are purely the blame of Republicans and Conservatives is reprehensible. I’m not a Republican, but I still find the mendacity of your claims to be appalling.

I’ll see your “massive deficits” and raise you a big-ol’ “Bite Me”, you God-forsaken tool.

Jul 8, 2009 - 6:19 pm 17. John Drake:

RE: Janus Daniels.

I was under the impression that the lobotomized were still institutionalized. No?

Jul 8, 2009 - 7:09 pm 18. Janus Daniels:

Re: 17. John Drake
The answer is “No,” since people still watch Fox “News”:
Glenn Beck Agrees US Needs Another Terrorist Attack
Sources: CastTV
Address : http://www.casttv.com/video/kul80j1/glenn-beck-agrees-us-needs-another-terrorist-attack-video
Click to watch Glenn Beck agree with guest Michael Scheuer that the only way to “save” the US is to have Osama bin Laden bomb us.
Glenn Beck, Fox “News” June 30th, 2009
I deride, you decide.

Jul 8, 2009 - 9:19 pm 19. jaymaster:

One thing to consider is that anything done now will be completely forgotten (statistically speaking) by the time the elections roll around in 2010.

It’s in Obama’s best interest (politically speaking) to do the least amount possible, but sound good doing it, until about April 2010.

Jul 8, 2009 - 10:47 pm 20. Janus Daniels:

16. NukemHill:
Thank you for conceding that, “Republicans (and conservatives) always presume that wars end depressions, and cannot deny that governments take over the economy and drive massive deficits to make war…”
I do not suffer, nor do I see any way that I implied, any “presumption that massive deficits… are purely the blame of Republicans and Conservatives…”
However, since you bring it up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
And, for a partisan and more colorful view:
http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html
As you see, every Republican president since the Depression did deficit spending, not Democrats.
Nevertheless, let’s absolve Republicans of pure blame for deficits incurred outside the Reagan era, and outside the recent several years that they controlled all three branches of government.
For an alternative view:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
For “unfunded liability… $100 trillion” please cite, so that I can respond; seriously, only Stephen Green and I post URLs for anything?

Jul 8, 2009 - 10:52 pm 21. NukemHill:

You really need to learn how to read, fuckwit. I conceded nothing. I quoted your statement to refute it. Reading comprehension 101.

Who was in control of the Legislature during 90+% of the time post-Depression? Oh, wait. Democrats. Who has budget creation power? Oh, wait. Congress. Duh. Civics 101.

I’m detecting a pattern here.

I’ll dig up the “$75 to $100 trillion” (nice Dowdism there, on your part; you sure you’re not a member of the Press?) number. I’ve read various numbers over the last few years, and they’ve done nothing but go up. A couple of weeks ago, I read $99 trillion. I’m sure you’ll accuse me of lying because of the glaring discrepancy between 99 and 100. But there you go.

Jul 9, 2009 - 8:34 am 22. NukemHill:

Man, that was hard.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124303024230548323.html:

In a speech at the Kennedy School of Government in February, he wrung his hands about “the very deep hole [our political leaders] have dug in incurring unfunded liabilities of retirement and health-care obligations” that “we at the Dallas Fed believe total over $99 trillion.” In March, he is believed to have vociferously objected in closed-door FOMC meetings to the proposal to buy U.S. Treasury bonds. So with long-term Treasury yields moving up sharply despite Fed intentions to bring down mortgage rates, I’ve flown to Dallas to see what he’s thinking now.

The guy being quoted? Head of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank. Is that someone sufficiently knowledgeable of the situation for you, or do you need a higher authority? Like, maybe, an editor at Rolling Stone.

Jul 9, 2009 - 8:40 am 23. baserunr:

#20 JD–

Your chart would likely look different if, instead of basing it on which party held the Presidency, it was based on which party had full control of congress. Stephen is right, I didn’t think it was possible that anyone could look more stupid than the R’s. How sad that we’re wrong….

Jul 9, 2009 - 2:06 pm 24. Janus Daniels:

22. NukemHill:
1. Your use of, “stupid… trollish… Dowdism… learn how to read, fuckwit,” detracts from your credibility. Yet, you alone offered a URL; that deserves a reply. Please note that I have not insulted anyone here.
2. You refute nothing I wrote; nor has anyone else. Hence I presume that you agree with me. The linked articles and charts clearly show that our national debt consistently increases under Republican presidents, most dramatically in the Reagan\Bush disasters, and even more painfully when (remember the last decade?) Republicans also control congress; to cut debt, vote for Democrats.
3. Please explain, “Dowdism”? I guess you mean the NYT pseudo-liberal who seems to have learned something post Palin. What’s your point?
4. I have not accused anyone of lying, nor have I implied that I might. I have corrected misinformation, and given URLs for correct information, so that anyone may read further, and better inform themselves.
5. You quote from a WSJ article that begins, “From his perch high atop the palatial Dallas Federal Reserve Bank, overlooking what he calls “the most modern, efficient city in America,” Richard Fisher says…” An unsupported opinion from a puff piece has no credibility. WSJ opinion clips are as silly as WSJ research is useful.
6. Richard Fisher has credibility if he did anything but rake in money while his industry looted our country. When did he blow whistles in the last decade?
7. Who besides Fisher is the “we at Dallas Fed” that “believe total over $99 trillion,” and who else believes it, and how do they arrive at the sum? A source makes itself credible, not by having a big name, but by exposing their sources, by explaining how they derive their assertions, and by passing peer review. That makes obscure and unpopular sources become cite worthy:
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
Scroll down to understand.
http://tinyurl.com/4nvt77
Also.
8. Aside from Fisher, I have not found a source for the hundred trillion dollar meme. Apparently he just made it up. Yes, they do that. They are salesmen. They don’t sell houses or cars; they sell economic snake oil. Again, they know that their best investment is “the relative pennies the bank throws at political patronage…” and misinforming voters.
9. Yes, “that was hard.” Everyone here needs to understand this. None of us can make intelligent political decisions by depending on bits of uncritical interviews, random fragments of RushReilly, insulting opponents, or anything other than work on correcting ourselves. You have to work.
9. I keep coming back here because Stephen Green (almost alone among conservatives and the far right) allows open comments and (almost alone among conservatives and the far right) consistently condemned torture.
He has a moral compass.
He deserves well mannered, well reasoned, and well cited dialog.

Jul 9, 2009 - 2:46 pm 25. jsallison:

Guys, the ‘working poor’ don’t pay taxes. Whatever they have withheld they get back, with bonus bucks if they have kid(s). The ‘working poor’ are tax consumers, NOT payers. Hell a rather largeish chunk of the middle class are net tax consumers, as well. Which would go a long way to explain why they’re reliable voters for jackasses.

Jul 10, 2009 - 6:41 pm 26. Stephen Green:

You’re 100% wrong. The working poor pay big chunks of their income as payroll taxes. What they don’t pay is income taxes, which is why I didn’t include those. Since payroll taxes are capped above certain income levels, payroll taxes are fairly regressive. I’m a flat tax (or even a “fair tax”[Google it]) kind of guy myself, and understand that payroll taxes hit hardest on those with the smallest paychecks.

Not that they’re kind to anyone else, mind you.

Jul 10, 2009 - 6:49 pm 27. 3DOGMAN:

I agree with #26 proposal for flat taxes for everyone.While poor may not pay income taxes they still pay taxes at the same rate as all of the rest of America when they purchase gasoline,cigarettes,food(not everyone is on food stamps-I am too ashamed to use them),clothes,cell phones,vehicle repairs,alcohol and many other products.

As a disabled Persian Gulf Vet I can assure you that I am indeed paying taxes. True,not at the rate most of you might be owning new cars and living in nicer homes,but I am still paying taxes.

I live on just $1700.00 a month and I have to rent a place to live,drive a 1992 pick-up truck,my computer is my only source of entertainment(cant afford cable or even want it),dont get to take vacations and I could go on and on.

I am sick of people stating that “poor people” dont pay any taxes.

A flat tax will hopefully end the use of this “stupid agruement” by people that have too much that is taxable and find it easy to go onto the Internet and bitch about us poor people and how we are part of the problem.

The problem is in your state capital and Washington.If they didnt have to spend so much your taxes would be greatly lower. Please put the blame where it truly belongs and stop picking on those of us that are struggling to survive on what little we do have.

With our current government in DC I think all of you will be living just like very soon. I want to see who you bitch at then.

Jul 12, 2009 - 11:14 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.