Update — 18-Dec-2011
How many more times?
So now, after persuading the White House and the Democrats to accept a TERRIBLE 60-day extension (and getting themselves off the government shut-down hook), the GOP again reneges on their agreement.
How many more times will our clueless and incompetent “leaders” be shamed this way?
SUCK IT UP, DEMOCRATS, or go home.
Original Post
I am so tired of this.
No tax on millionaire incomes. No veto of pipeline attachment. No habeas corpus. Nothing but retreat, cave, and retreat again.
Barack Obama and the Democrats are weak and incompetent. They offer token resistance — stomping their feet like a toddler throwing a temper-tantrum — and then cave.
I really don’t know what is to become of America and the world. I really don’t.
What do I tell my disillusioned almost-18 year old son?
Just check out the calendar of events: http://www.occupyboston.org/ They are all really happening, and the collaboration on anti-eviction this week was extraordinarily moving and successful. Frankly, the most energy and most positive political activity I see right now is in the very young, rough around the edges, but still quickly evolving Occupy movement. The choice of Occupy is really to draw attention to the fact that We The People are actually still here, and government ultimately requires our consent. We Americans have gotten the worst government we were willing to tolerate, and we have tolerated some awful government. Time to change that, and the “same old” is just not enough, even though it is worth it to me to put in time to elect “the real deal” like Will Brownsberger and to push for 100% voter participation. Opting out only guarentees more of the same – but so does doing the same thing (buying into the least worst PR construct as our chosen candidate) and expecting a different result.
Obviously the Dems didn’t have numbers to oppose the pipeline. Primary Byron Dorgan (and lose).
… and there is still no case why taxing millionaires is going to make my life better. It won’t make that much money, and whatever it yields the middle class will never see it.
For all the yapping, income inequality has failed to become much of an issue.
especially since the 99% is much larger than the 1%.
And considering that anyone who actually cares about keeping America great — and particularly as “the land of opportunity” — would be concerned about rising income inequality, I’d think that it’s become quite an issue. Unless you are suggesting that most Americans don’t care about maintaining the greatness of America. I’d disagree with you there.
.
make relatively low incomes.
It’s not as hard or unusual to teach public school as it is to create something great, or make a great country.
You guys seem to think that the village makes great things. It doesn’t. It’s usually one or a few extremely driven, extremely talented people. The rest of us slot in where we can.
But this statement comes as close to “anti-American” as any I’ve read at BMG. Your obvious elitism tells me that perhaps you’d be happiest in 16th century England.
@
Even extremely talented people rarely accomplish great things all by themselves. Modern medical and IT products, including the internet, are the result of effort by thousands of unnamed people working in government and private organizations. Recall what T.A. Edison said about 99% of genius.
If that were true Edison would have shared the returns from his various enterprises your way and not mine. He didn’t.
had to pay the workers in his various enterprises. He presumably paid his share of taxes, which supported the infrastructure that helped his enterprises to succeed.
Back to the books for you, Miss Junior
Comparing himself to Tom Edison and only hoping the elite of the elite rule is the same kind of Randian fantasy Newt Gingrich places himself in on a day to day basis, who are you seascraper and why aren’t you out in Iowa or on your yacht with your third wife instead of bothering us here?
Or the former head of Boston Fed: http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2011/12/17/sec-sues-federal-loan-executives-for-fraud/gCoBdGSpeEtfwqNVb1VmoL/story.html Nope. Occupy has it right. Great people are the ones who leave the world better than they found it, have integrity, fortitude, and honor. Great people do a great job no matter what they are paid (Don’t tell ME it took $395k to find a good had for the Mass Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to animals (MSPCA) – I am sure a great leader would have been quite satisfied with a “living wage” of a mere $80k or so and avoided closing shelters and euthanizing animals). Hint – “You cannot serve both God and Mammon.” still holds true toeday.
…
Right alongside “giving more to the already wealthy is the best way to create jobs” and “the rich are rich and the poor are poor because that’s God’s will”.
By what measure?
About half of all Americans who vote vote Republican in any given election. Non-voters are probably more liberal than voters, but even taking that into account, Republicans are still a very large segment of the population. The 1% most directly benefits from income inequality, but there’s quite a lot of people who seem okay with it, or at least aren’t comfortable with using progressive tools to fight inequality. Just because you are fighting on behalf of the interests of the 99% doesn’t mean that the 99% is willing to listen to you.
Too many Americans believe another Republican lie: that they, too, will join the 1% if they work hard and vote Republican. Too many Americans believe an associated Republican narrative: The GOP is the party of God. Too many Americans vote Republican because they rely on information sources owned by the GOP.
Too many Americans attempted to vote Democratic and were thwarted by corrupt voter roll manipulations (Florida) and election result tabulation (Ohio).
Too many Democrats have failed to realize that the right wing is playing for keeps, that truth and justice long since fell by the wayside, and that the effectiveness of those who stay within the law is greatly amplified by those who do not — a principle the right wing learned from the abortion clinic bombers and relearned from Waco.
oh come on
because it’s not secret–unconscious perhaps–but not secret. We’re getting rolled by a system.
Is whatever illusory demon that motivates the voter ID rubbish a “conspiracy”? Is Acorn a “conspiracy”?
The activities of Republican operatives in Florida like Katherine Harris — co-chair of George W. Bush’s 2000 Florida election campaign — are well documented, as were the similar activities of Republican operatives in Ohio like Ken Blackwell — Secretary of State and Chief Elections Officer for Ohio. Mr. Blackwell was a key player in the many problems with electronic vote tabulation in Ohio in 2004.
I’m referring to ugly and embarrassing facts about the relentless GOP manipulation of elections and voters. No “conspiracy”, just facts.
Unfortunately many of the 99% are still fixated on the specter of ‘welfare queens’, even though we have very little left as a safety net. They have been misled to believe that reforming our extreme inequality will mean lowering their already modest, endangered standard of living. The conservative drumbeat on this point – that there are lazy poor people trying to take YOUR hard-earned money – has been steady since 1980. Much of this rhetoric plays on racial prejudice, as is intended.
The notion of “the 99%” is a potential way to counter the strategy of the 1%, who exploit differences of race, religion, and occupation (blue collar vs white collar) to their advantage. It took time for the 1% to convince their voters that up was down, and it will take time and effort to set the record straight.
I would note that getting an extension of the payroll tax and unemployment benefits is a good thing. There are many Americans who will benefit greatly from this, even if (for now) it is only a two-month extension.
That makes the dropping of the “millionaires tax” more understandable (since that tax was a difference from the status quo, and therefore an invented chit in this debate). Why any Democrats would go along with the XL Pipeline I don’t get (particularly since it is a transparent Republican political power-grab…in an attempt to split Democratic environmentalists and union supporters) , but there’s time yet to get a veto on this point.
David Brooks on the Newshour last night:
.
On advice for your son, I second Amber’s motion.
Whichg party wants that again?
Democrats feel bad about that, Republicans don’t.
Again, you are flat wrong. The payroll tax cut does nothing to harm Social Security. As long as this payroll tax cut it in place, any reductions in contributions to the trust fund will be made up be payments from the general fund. Social Security is specifically held harmless in this legislation, just as it was when this tax cut was first enacted.
How amusing that Republicans are now big defenders of Social Security and big critics of tax cuts. About the only thing that they’ve been consistent about is maintaining criticism based upon blatantly false factual information of the type seascraper peddles here.
It’s been years since I took economics but here goes.
Doesn’t putting (or continuing to put) money in the hands of people who will spend it on goods and services, e.g. working and unemployed folks, ultimately increase jobs via increased commerce and then doesn’t more social security go back to the fund?
Thanks.
After all, the whole point of targeting tax cuts to middle and working class Americans is that they are the ones most likely to spend it (important in an economy largely based upon consumer spending). The payroll tax cut is even more effective in this regard (compared to, say, receiving an extra $400 refund check in one chunk), because people are less likely to save money that they get in small doses and more likely to spend it.
So you make a good point that increased jobs means more tax revenue. In case the increased job growth due to higher consumer spending does not make up for lost revenue for the Trust Fund, however, the legislation explicitly requires such “lost” funds to be paid from the general fund.
Mark Zandi of Moody’s gives multiplier effects for several fiscal stimuli.
Spending has more effect than tax cuts, but it doesn’t have the added benefit of transferring more wealth to the 1%. “Extending food stamps,” according to Zandi, “is the most effective way to prime the economy’s pump. A $1 increase in food stamp payments boosts GDP by $1.73.” (The problem is that it goes to poor people who we all know don’t deserve the money).
Here are the rest of the multipliers:
Tax Cuts
Nonrefundable Lump-Sum Tax Rebate 1.02
Refundable Lump-Sum Tax Rebate 1.26
Temporary Tax Cuts
Payroll Tax Holiday 1.29
Across the Board Tax Cut 1.03
Accelerated Depreciation 0.27
Permanent Tax Cuts
Extend Alternative Minimum Tax Patch 0.48
Make Bush Income Tax Cuts Permanent 0.29
Make Dividend and Capital Gains Tax Cuts Permanent 0.37
Cut Corporate Tax Rate 0.30
Spending Increases
Extend Unemployment Insurance Benefits 1.64
Temporarily Increase Food Stamps 1.73
Issue General Aid to State Governments 1.36
Increase Infrastructure Spending 1.59
….
being such an idiot! You add nothing to the conversation with your two word utterances.
What happens to you guys at Christmas? You watch A Christmas Carol and get mad when Scrooge is redeemed?
It’s not voodoo economics, it’s textbook economics. Mark Zandi is in business, not politics.
three words
You’ve moved up Binet’s scale from idiot to moron.
…. a) it’s not necessarily true in all contexts
b) there will be a revenue lag while it takes time for the effect to manifest (hence the ‘velocity of money’)
c) You can’t expect to recoup the same amount of revenue, so it’s a hard sell if your worried about deficits (this is how you can tell the GOP doesn’t really care about deficits – we have plenty of money to spend on what they want).
is to confront the easy sell of short-term thinking.
that we have tapped the general fund for social security? That completely changes the nature of social security, it turns it into a regular European socialist-style dole, instead of a kind of insurance/savings system.
This does not change the nature of the system, even if the payroll tax was permanent (rather than a temporary plan to improve consumer spending). Social Security was never a “savings” system. It was always a broad-based social insurance system.
Both parties serve the same owners.
At least he can marry a man. That’s all that matters, right?
from a conservative d-bag at Blue Mass Group.
Seriously, sometimes you people are a black hole of reasoned discussion. God was good to you when he granted you the ability to form a complete sentence, you should have stayed in line when He was handing out the ability to form a complete thought.
At least Seascraper tries. You forget that it’s RMG where being an ass—- is confused with being clever.
You guys set the priorities and the thing you put at the top of the list was same-sex marriage, along with things like EDNA, transgender rights, and a general insistence that the majority of people in this country are homophobes and bigots and d-bags and should be spat on or laughed at. That’s the position from which you are now trying to bargain. It’s no wonder that makes it a little harder to accomplish anything else.
Just “who” are you trolling at? My agenda was integrity, fortitude, building a strong team to reclaim the American Economy while protecting civil liberties for everyone (get that “everyone” – I don’t classify some folks as non people, and I consider the claim that “All Americans are Equal but some are More Equal” or “civil rights for some” violations of civil liberties).
I don’t spit on or laugh at anyone but you sure do! The old meaning for “cute” was “bow legged or deformed” by the way, and your straw man argument (i.e., creating an imaginary and weak or idiotic card board cut out and knocking it over) is in my view morally deformed.
The recent comments of this participant on multiple threads (including this one) have, for me, crossed the line into plain trolling.
I encourage you … don’t feed the troll.
Make a different bed if you don’t like the one you’re sleeping in.
I have to lie in the same bed with you, and I’d much prefer we had a fairer and smarter tax system that didn’t burden the poor and working people and instead got more from the wealthy and corporations, and I’d prefer if still had habeas corpus, that we emphasized conservation over consumption and expensive pipelines, that we promoted health and sustainability and cared about getting back below 350 parts per million, etc. I’m upset by the priorities of the party that ought to be accomplishing those things, but is instead giving them only lip service and actually against those things to be able to feel morally superior and politically correct. It doesn’t help anyone, what you are doing.
dropping a number of obnoxious one-liners.
I don’t know what you’re trying to say in the latter half of your comment, but I’m pretty sure there’s some substance there.
in Massachusetts on the left is not that we focus on marriage equality. It’s the fact that our party is united only when it comes to social issues. This is more or less true at the federal level as well.
The price we pay for a Democratic super-majority in Massachusetts is a lot of fiscal moderates, including people who might even be moderate Republicans. Social issues are easy to fight and win because they don’t have any effect on revenue or spending. There’s no serious money opposing social issues, and our populace is socially liberal (relative to other states). If same sex marriage had cost the Commonwealth $10 million a year, we might not have it right now.
All it cost us was our souls. j/k
(My browser won’t let me reply directly).
Teachers are tasked with making the greatest things our society needs, that is, future responsible citizens. Anyone who claims this is not a challenge has obviously not spent much time in front of a classroom. I believe that teachers should make high salaries precisely because they ARE on the front lines of making this a great country. Fortunately, mmany communities in this state actually do pay pretty decently, but in my book teachers are on par with doctors and lawyers in terms of the necessity of the profession and the respect they deserve. Many of the 1% got their through good investments not sweat or intellectual prowess, and don’t even get me started on the obnoxious salaries professional athletes command.
Professional athletes gross 5x their salary for the teams they work for. That’s what being a valuable employee is.
I never said anything bad about teachers. It’s a lot harder to be a doctor than a teacher. You want to make as much as a doctor? Work as hard as a doctor and produce as much for your practice as doctors do. Bring in a million dollars, you’ll make $200K easy.
Your alternative quickly leads to attacking and destroying people with ability and I can’t agree with that.
I think it is a little overblown to call the Keystone a loss yet. It may very well be, but the White House has been claiming that 60 days will lead to a permit reject. Frankly, would you be happier if the president did not have his hand forced to decide on Keystone, wait until after the election, win and then approve it? Kind of the same thing. At least this gives him even more cover should he deny the permit.
I want my president to say “This pipeline is a terrible idea at a terrible time. It benefits only the very few already-wealthy at a horrific environmental and economic. I and my party will do everything in our power to stop it.”
President Obama already has all the “cover” he needs. What he seems to lack is backbone.
And to be clear I was once on the other side of the anti-Obama criticisms from the left wing, but it is obvious the man does not have the stomach for a real political fight. Bill Clinton campaigned as an open centrist and governed as one, but even he knew when to fight like during the government shutdown. I think at this point Boehner could say ‘shutdown’ and get Obama to privatize social security, medicare, and ban gay marriage in the Constitution and call it a victory for progressives with a straight face.
I manage a small payroll. Calculations and payments are made QUARTERLY. This goofball Democrat vote exposes the face that none of them have ever met a payroll. By making it 8 weeks, it exponentially increases the likelihood of errors and under/overreporting and withholding.
I realize the lobbyists the Democrats are listening to are large enough to do monthly reproting, but that isn’t true of most businesses.
A Year makes sense. A Quarter mekes sense. 8 weeks makes no sense.
The right thing to do was a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday, extended unemployment benefits, and current medicare payments to providers — funded with a tax on high-income wage-earners.
After the GOP trashed that, the 8-week (actually, closer to 9) period was chosen to give time to thrash out a longer-term extension. All but the most extreme right-wingers agree that raising payroll taxes on working men and women right now is terrible economics, regardless of its political optics. You’re right that 60 days makes no sense. Forcing it to that point made no sense.
The only thing that DOES makes sense is a one year extension, funded by increased taxes on the already-wealthy.