tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post6787808734237719131..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Another Round on the DeficitJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-65179905165780478292010-12-08T09:14:16.933-06:002010-12-08T09:14:16.933-06:00Nice Info,Good workNice Info,Good workFree Download Movie Onlinehttp://www.freedownloadmovieonline.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-2160188331470561462010-12-03T10:24:12.420-06:002010-12-03T10:24:12.420-06:00David,
OK, that's a fair point -- except that...David,<br /><br />OK, that's a fair point -- except that if Tea Partiers really cared about the deficit, they might actually pay attention to neutral budget projections. Or at least have a coherent explanation for why the neutral projections are wrong. Or support a real budget balancing plan. <br /><br />(I know some Tea Partiers do, in fact, support significant budget cuts, including defense. But I hear a lot more complaints about taxes, not to mention complaints about ACA Medicare cuts. And of course Tea Partiers just voted in heavy numbers for the party that supports big deficits).Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-89476818655383371252010-12-03T00:16:33.504-06:002010-12-03T00:16:33.504-06:00Tea Partiers, who wanted to . . . repeal the defic...<i>Tea Partiers, who wanted to . . . repeal the deficit-slashing ACA . . .</i><br /><br />Do you have any evidence that Tea Partiers <i>believe</i> that ACA will cut the deficit?<br /><br />I haven't seen polling on this point. As a Tea Partier myself, I suspect finding a Tea Partier who believes this would be about as easy as finding one who believes in AGW.David Tomlinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-87742315648432264182010-12-02T16:10:40.028-06:002010-12-02T16:10:40.028-06:00The point about the Dems continually having to cle...The point about the Dems continually having to clean up the mess and not getting credit for it far understates the problem for them. Instead, the GOP insures that they will take the blame for any tax increase, no matter how well intentioned. <br /><br />Then, when the Dems' policy does relieve the GOP-policy-induced budget problems, they simply buy back the electorate's favor with more tax cuts, claiming that now the government brings in too much money.<br /><br />Try to get a reasonable answer to this question from any Republican: When is the right time to raise taxes? They will always answer: NEVER!!<br /><br />That always sells and the Dems are just outflanked by that position. They couldn't get a tax increase for war. They couldn't get a tax increase during a boom. The GOP cuts credit for tax cut after tax cut. If the Dems to it, as Obama did, the GOP charges him with raising taxes!!<br /><br />The Dems have to take away the tax argument from the GOP and the only way to do that is by exploding the deficit. Even faced with massive interest payments, a sagging dollar and copious debt, the GOP's answer to the question above will continue to be: NEVER!!<br /><br />Yet, there is no choice. If the Dems do raise taxes, and it actually helps the economy, the GOP will ride the fact of a tax increase and false claims of harm to electoral victory and just start the cycle over again. <br /><br />Debt is the new tax we all pay -- as it has been from the beginning of modern finance. Until the public realizes that the debt we accumulate now costs us NOW, and also costs us later, the GOP can ram tax cut after tax cut through to curry favor of the voters and lay the blame for the cost of the debt on the Dems.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-88354368115303908292010-12-02T15:54:04.390-06:002010-12-02T15:54:04.390-06:00I think you are wrong about what the Tea Party is ...I think you are wrong about what the Tea Party is about. In my view, the impetus for the Tea Party was the bailouts. I'm a liberal myself, and when the $900 billion no-strings-attached bailout of the banking sector was announced, I was livid (and am still simmering to this day). Many in the Tea Party believe that when government gets involved in something, someone benefits disproportionately and unfairly, and it is never them. I agree with that. There are too many people feeding at the trough and that is not what government should be about. The Tea Parties culturally identify with the Republicans not the Democrats, so they hold their tongues when the Republicans are in power, but fundamentally the movement was sparked not by who was in power but who is benefiting from that power. That seems to remain the same no matter which party is in power--both seem equally good at feeding the corporate beasts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-28307904983741326742010-12-02T15:42:41.816-06:002010-12-02T15:42:41.816-06:00I think the policy is bad on the merits. The recov...I think the policy is bad on the merits. The recovery is still vulnerable, so an anti-stimulative measure in the short term doesn't make sense.<br /><br />But I also agree that this demonstrates not that Obama is concerned with the deficit. Rather, it demostrates that he is concerned about the concern about the deficit. This is beneath Obama.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-74894509102620828612010-12-02T15:30:01.071-06:002010-12-02T15:30:01.071-06:00I never hear anyone pointing out that "cuttin...I never hear anyone pointing out that "cutting spending" is another way of saying "putting more people out of work" (either directly by laying off government workers, or indirectly by reducing government's purchases of private sector goods and services).<br /><br />So my question to anyone who wants to cut spending: who exactly is it you want to put out of work in this time of already high unemployment?John Qnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-54713578986213353642010-12-02T15:28:47.985-06:002010-12-02T15:28:47.985-06:00Jonathan, I don't know about "sincere wan...Jonathan, I don't know about "sincere wants." I was thinking more of an inchoate sense, sucked up from Foxville, that Democrats have been indiscriminately spending the country into bankruptcy. <br /> It will be interesting to see what people think of Chris Christie a year or two out. At least he's really doing what Republicans say they want to do and rarely do: swinging the meat ax. And I wish Obama knew how to use a veto threat like he does.Andrew Sprunghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601269968798865106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-7913310679649660542010-12-02T13:26:39.260-06:002010-12-02T13:26:39.260-06:00ASP,
Sure. But cutting spending, even if it'...ASP,<br /><br />Sure. But cutting spending, even if it's sincerely supported (and we both know that once you go by category that commitment to cutting spending gets awful dicey), isn't the same as reducing the deficit. The people who are buying GOP talking points are also complaining (inaccurately) that Obama raised their taxes. Oh, government/hands/Medicare. <br /><br />Anyway, I do agree that there are people who sincerely want lower levels of government spending.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-26975121132624666532010-12-02T12:57:38.087-06:002010-12-02T12:57:38.087-06:00liberal budget hawks want substantive action, not ...<i>liberal budget hawks want substantive action, not symbolism</i>. <br /><br />This is an outstanding point, IMHO, and perhaps captures some of the frustration with what, coming from Obama, seems like a gesture of staggeringly calculated cynicism that by reputation, anyway, seems beneath him.<br /><br />According to <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/11/the_tax_cuts_vs_the_pay_freeze.html" rel="nofollow">Ezra Klein</a>, the pay freeze is worth about $60 B over 10 years. So, essentially: $6 B a year, with deficits floating along in the neighborhood of $1 T per year. In other words, the pay freeze is so insignificant toward cutting the deficit that it will - surely - be easily dwarfed by random noise from economic growth, etc, in balancing the budget. It is meaningless.<br /><br />And yet, as Jonathan points out, it means a lot to those Federal workers, who probably feel like a giant lump of coal has been dumped in their collective Christmas stocking. But what can they do? Their alternative is to vote for Republican tea party poseurs, who will probably give government workers an even bigger (though nevertheless symbolic) shiv than Obama did.<br /><br />It appears, then, that Obama has put the gears to one of his safest constituencies in order to play the game of appearing to be anti-deficit, even as Bowles/Simpson fades into the sunset and no one does anything of substance to mollify deficit hawks.<br /><br />The problem with declaring pols like Cheney outsized assholes is that they wear the title like a crown, while a fellow like Obama is lovable by virtue of smiling here, there and everywhere. We all know that difference doesn't amount to squat, but seeing what's in front of one's nose, and a constant struggle, and all that.CSHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-60839441583288497182010-12-02T12:34:57.111-06:002010-12-02T12:34:57.111-06:00Jonathan, one thing I heard more than once while p...Jonathan, one thing I heard more than once while phoning voters this season was that government spending was "out of control." Most voters may not even know what a deficit is, but the Republican lie that Democrats have been spending like drunken sailors resonates, and lots of people blame continued economic woes on that perception.Andrew Sprunghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601269968798865106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-74120679929642078612010-12-02T10:47:36.632-06:002010-12-02T10:47:36.632-06:00This is one of the issues where Sullivan's res...This is one of the issues where Sullivan's residual Thatcherite Toryism is still holding him back. (He's not going to like British Great Recession 2.0 or the 2015 Labour landslide, but he's currently cheering on the people determined to cause them.) Also, he blogs about a million different subjects -- that's a great thing about "The Daily Dish" but also a weakness, because it means he brushes past some subjects without fully understanding them.<br /><br />And yeah, this Pump guy is mistaking Tea Party rhetoric for actual Tea Party motives, which include the two you mention plus (3) moral panic over the gradual de-whitening of the United States.Jeffnoreply@blogger.com