Tag: tax cuts
Mark Warner cannot even diagnose what went wrong and why we have a large deficit. A large portion of the deficit is the result of the recession (not the cause of it). The deficit is also the result of the very tax cuts Warner seems too willing to hand over. And, it is the result of off-the-books wars (which Obama put back on the books to keep us honest). But this much is certain (and it seems to elude Warner every time): You cannot grow an economy while slashing jobs. And that is precisely what Mark Warner's desire for massive and too-rapid deficit reduction will accomplish. When the private sector isn't hiring (and there are some pretty Machiavellian reasons for that), the government must be the employer of last resort. Tax cuts reduce revenue, which means government has fewer resources for job-growing.
When offshoring is too enticing, you must remove the incentives. AND, when Wall Street becomes the Wild West, you must reasonably regulate or re-regulate. You surely need to fix those underlying causes of the latest debacle. Tax cuts won't help deficit reduction AT ALL. They make it worse. Reagonomics has FAILED. The more-than-thirty-year experiment in trickle-down economics has shown clearly that you cannot tax-cut your way into job growth. And savaging the poor, children, the old and the unemployed won't solve this, though it does serve as balm to Republicans. (It is also unethical, but in DC these days, few seem to care about that.) If nothing else, the latest economic debacle shows that Ayn Rand/Peter Peterson/Chicago School of Economics/Club for Growth ideas are bankrupt hypotheses for any economy. Who would base their economic strategies on a 10th rate novelist anyway? But the Peter Peterson drones mumble on with their mouthfuls of economic mush...
(More on what Warner gets wrong below)
A full transcript of President Obama's press conference on the debt ceiling is here, and an excerpt is below. The bottom line, though, is that Republicans are completely incapable of reaching an even semi-serious compromise, one in which both sides give something, because they are terrified of/controlled by the extremists in their party. That's why John Boehner, who had wanted to cut a big deal with President Obama, was forced to back down. It's also why the ambitious, cutthroat, unprincipled Eric Cantor is happy right now, as he sees a path to move up in rank. Meanwhile, the country's solvency, economy, prosperity, future all hang in the balance, while Republicans like Eric Cantor stick to their rigid, taxes-are-evil, my-way-or-the-highway approach. Wonderful, eh?
I will not sign a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day extension. That is just not an acceptable approach. And if we think it's going to be hard -- if we think it's hard now, imagine how these guys are going to be thinking six months from now in the middle of election season where they're all up. It's not going to get easier. It's going to get harder. So we might as well do it now -- pull off the Band-Aid; eat our peas. (Laughter.) Now is the time to do it. If not now, when?I believe that's known as "calling their bluff." So, now what happens?
We keep on talking about this stuff and we have these high-minded pronouncements about how we've got to get control of the deficit and how we owe it to our children and our grandchildren. Well, let's step up. Let's do it. I'm prepared to do it. I'm prepared to take on significant heat from my party to get something done. And I expect the other side should be willing to do the same thing -- if they mean what they say that this is important.
It is that last sound that disturbs me.
I have heat - and food - and roof over my head - and transportation - and the ability to pay our bills.
Those whose unemployment compensation has run out? They may have difficulty paying their bills. Soon they may not be able to afford to put gas in a car, or pay mortgage or rent. Food will become scarcer. And heat - at some point, will their house remain silent because there is no money to pay for it? My furnace is gas, but the fan is electric. If I were in arrears on either bill, might we need to bundle up and pray the pipes don't freeze? Might we be forced to live in car yet not be able to run the engine to stay warm?
We are near the nation's capital. What if we were further north?
A majority of Americans favor letting the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration expire for the wealthy. While 37% support keeping the tax cuts for all Americans, 44% want them extended only for those making less than $250,000 and 15% think they should expire for all taxpayers.That's right, not only were the Bush tax cuts a horrible idea in the first place (which, in fairness, Connolly seems to acknowledge), and not only were they designed to expire at the end of 2010 (it was the Republicans, by the way, who designed the legislation that way), but only 37% of Americans want to "keep the tax cuts in place for all taxpayers." Is this a no-brainer or what?