OMG Teh Taxes!!! (No, Not Really)
Tweet
Via Matt Yglesias comes this handy dandy chart showing the vast millions of regular Americans the tiny amount of the uber rich who whould pay a smidge more on their taxes in order to help fund health care reform that would bring America up to par with the modern world.
Yes, the Republican caterwauling you hear is about 1.3% of people. The funny thing is here in Maryland and DC that percentage is about twice what the national average is going to be… and both of those areas support the plan. This latest horse puckey reminds me of the estate tax nonsense where the right successfully snookered the rubes into getting OUTRAGED over a tax 99.9999% of them did not qualify for.
The Republican Party: Getting Regular People To Lose Their Minds To Defend Rich People.
82 Responses to “OMG Teh Taxes!!! (No, Not Really)”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
“I might win the lottery”-con blog commenters
You and Matt are fooling yourselves if you think it’s just 1.3% of the population who will be footing the bill. You guys never seem to grasp that point, even though a lot of Democrats do;Democrats who are against this soak the rich mentality as a solution to the whims of socialistic liberals.
“The Republican Party: Getting Regular People To Lose Their Minds To Defend Rich People.”
let’s be fair: when your weekly number finally hits the jackpot, you’re gonna kick yourself for not getting behind all those tax cuts.
You guys never seem to grasp that point
This is because we’re dealing in actual numbers and not the Barack Obama Plan To Distribute Wealth In A Socialist Manner rules written on invisible ink that conservatives seem to have the ability to see everywhere.
Far too many things we said about Bam and his promises are coming true to mock us about phantom charges, Oliver. We weren’t all being Dick Morris’s, either.
The Republican Party: Getting Regular People To Lose Their Minds To Defend Rich People.
I’m quoting that.
Dennis the Bigot: “Far too many things we said about Bam and his promises are coming true to mock us about phantom charges, Oliver. We weren’t all being Dick Morris’s, either.”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
You are blaming Obama for an economic collapse that began before he was elected. That’s not a prediction, that’s passing the buck.
You guys are crackpots that have zero credibility when it comes to these subjects.
No, I’m blaming him for the actions he’s taken and is currenly proposing that are making things worse.
I said here before the election that his was likely to be the second Jimmy Carter term. I hope and pray that I have to eat those words, as I will do so gladly, Strowbridge, and I expect you to hold me accountable for that prediction.
So far, he’s right on course.
———–
———–
What’s Next, Mr. President — Cardigans?
–By Matt Welch and Nick Gillespie
The Washington Post
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Barely six months into his presidency, Barack Obama seems to be driving south into that political speed trap known as Carter Country: a sad-sack landscape in which every major initiative meets not just with failure but with scorn from political allies and foes alike. According to a July 13 CBS News poll, the once-unassailable president’s approval rating now stands at 57 percent, down 11 points from April. Half of Americans think the recession will last an additional two years or more, 52 percent think Obama is trying to “accomplish too much,” and 57 percent think the country is on the “wrong track.”……
Dennis the Bigot: “No, I’m blaming him for the actions he’s taken and is currenly proposing that are making things worse.”
How the fuck would you know if they are making things worse?
You are a fucking retard, remember?
To prove that point…
“and 57 percent think the country is on the ‘wrong track.’…… ”
And in October of 2008, that number was in the mid-80s.
Obama’s net approval rating is better than Bush’s approval rating was when he left office.
Obama’s approval rating is better than the Republicans, including the leadership in the House of Representative and the Senate.
Americans support his position over those of the Republicans, including Independents, by large margins in most cases.
And by the way, if Americans think the recession will last more than two years longer, that’s good news for Obama. Having a realistic view of things will help him politically. Building false hope would only hurt in the long run.
No, I’m blaming him for the actions he’s taken and is currenly proposing that are making things worse.
I agree with that. He should have doubled the amount of stimulus and used the Patriot Act to jail all Republicans Members of Congress for life.
I think Obama ought to ask for a 2nd stimulus, call it some scary directly jobs-related New Deal name like the Jobs Recovery Act and start off by proposing it be $4 trillion in size just to watch the right wing and ‘centrists’ poop their pants.
For starters, teh unemployment rate that you had no clue that Obama and his advisers stated unequivocally would not go above 8% that I had to embarrass you into admitting was correct, which was incidentally the last time you called me a fucking retard, remember?
We’ve gone higher in unemployment than what they predicted it would go if we had done nothing, Strowbridge.
I no longer enjoy doing this to you, Strowbridge. The enjoyment has worn off. It’s now at pity. If I thought educating you was a worthy cause, I wouldn’t mind, but you do nothing for America except bash it’s citizens, so I’m completely wasting my time corresponding with you.
What, Matt Welch and the libertarian fetishists at Reason Magazine don’t like a Democratic president? And the pro-war Washington Post, gives them editorial space to bitch about it a week after giving Sarah Palin the same courtesy?
YOU DON’T SAY?!!!!!
Here’s a plot of the right track/wrong track numbers since election. Even with a slight recent uptick, the wrong track number is still almost 30% lower than it was with Bush. Everybody Panic.
The Republican Party: Getting Regular People To Lose Their Minds To Defend Rich People.
If only Louis XVII had had that kind of foresight.
No, I’m blaming him for the actions he’s taken and is currenly proposing that are making things worse.
How much worse shape do you honestly -HONESTLY – think we would be if John McCain and Sarah Plain and Tall had won?
I’d wage a HELL of a lot worse.
How much worse shape do you honestly -HONESTLY – think we would be if John McCain and Sarah Plain and Tall had won?
I don’t know, Duros, impossible to say. Obama is taking an enormous gamble that I think it’s safe to say those two would not be with regards to the deficit and paying for social programs through higher taxes on the wealthy. But do you and Oliver really want to reduce your defense so soon to, ‘well, what would McCain and Palin have done better?’ and ‘People like Obama more in his first six months than they liked Bush in his last six months, so for now, “Barack Obama, you are ………………………………………………………….SAFE!”?
We’ve gone higher in unemployment than what they predicted it would go if we had done nothing, Strowbridge.
That forecast, Dennis, was based on their assessment of the general economic conditions, not on the full effect of the stimulus. Indeed only a child or a fool would expect the stimulus to have much of an immediate effect on a systemic metric like unemployment. There are dozens of people where I work who still have their jobs, or got hired to new positions, because of the stimulus, but those few are hardly enough to counteract the job-shedding momentum that was already steaming down the hill in sectors like the auto industry at the end of the Bush presidency.
Now the Obama administration, using pretty broadly accepted analyses at the time, did underestimate the depths of the shithole that eight years of right-wing economics had left us in, but what seems to escape you is that it is that underestimate, and not any over-estimate of the effect of the stimulus, that explains the bulk of the difference between their projections and the actual numbers.
What this means is, the same dynamics driving unemployment higher would have driven unemployment higher if the stimulus hadn’t passed. While the projected post-stimulus unemployment number for this date that Obama’s team came up with was too low, those same people’s estimate for no-stimulus unemployment was probably even more short of the mark.
Now there are some things I don’t like about the stimulus as passed either – in terms of the size, the expenditures, and the implementation. But to declare it complete failure at this point is completely without basis, unless you’re of the opinion that increased government spending never has a positive effect on recession conditions. That opinion, if anyone were to hold it, would be historically inaccurate.
The more you keep crowing about the supposed failure of the stimulus the more you make it clear that you’re just expressing your own wish-fulfillment fantatsy, and that you are, despite your protestations, a member of the “hope-he-fails” school. Since economic behavior is dependent to a significant extent on people’s perception of economic conditions, the more right-wingers trumpet each setback and piece of bad news as conclusive proof that Obama is fucking up, the more they abet the conditions that will retard our economic recovery. During the Iraq war they told us that every criticism of Bush was giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They might think of directing the same attitude toward those who aid and abet economic pessimism, which is a far more imminent threat to our way of life than Saddam or Al Qaeda ever was.
“Now the Obama administration, using pretty broadly accepted analyses at the time, did underestimate the depths of the shithole that eight years of right-wing economics had left us in”
gee, replace ‘ecomomics’ with ‘pre-war intelligence’ and you’ve just described the last 8 years. Trouble is, Obama’s President so he gets the blame even if he was working with innacurate experts.
Wilbur, without going into detail, you are just flat out wrong about what I’m hoping for. I have too much at stake and too many people depending on me to hope he fails, or to hope America fails, just so I can come on here and ‘crow’ and ‘trumpet his setbacks’.
If you didn’t like criticism of your negative views of what Bush was doing in the Iraq War, and I wasn’t one of them, then why are you using that against me with regards to the economy and what Obama is doing?
You’re doing exactly what you’re upset about that people did to you for being critical of Bush. That doesn’t make one bit of sense, Wilbur. That’s fine by me, I can take it, but you are being logically inconsistent.
Glaringly so.
Either practice what you preach or stop whining. But don’t practice what people did to you and then whine that they were wrong to do it.
Maybe that’s just the liberal way, but you should be bigger than that.
Good point, SF. There’s a whole days worth of logical inconsistencies in that diatribe, isn’t there?
I have too much at stake and too many people depending on me to hope he fails, or to hope America fails, just so I can come on here and ‘crow’ and ‘trumpet his setbacks’.
Then stop doing it.
You’re doing exactly what you’re upset about that people did to you for being critical of Bush. That doesn’t make one bit of sense, Wilbur. That’s fine by me, I can take it, but you are being logically inconsistent.
Difference being, Dennis (and this goes for your to, SF), is that while I was always skeptical of the Iraq war, I didn’t start screaming on blogs about miserable failure Bush until there was some hard evidence that he was actually a miserable failure. You guys have been screaming miserable failure Obama since day one (or at any rate long before there’s a rational basis for doing so).
Yes, SF, Obama bears responsibility for the economic forecasts of his team. Never said otherwise. What I am saying is that the fact that those forecasts underestimated the problems we were facing does not mean that the stimulus isn’t working.
There is now. If you want to criticize me now for what I did quite a while ago, be my guest. If you want to bring me a holier-than-thou rebuke because you withheld your criticism until you were certain there was something amiss, then that’s fine too, but in the case of the Iraq War, the majority of Democrats were on board with Bush for the most part. In the case of Obama’s fiscal moves, Republicans were not on board, for a host of reasons, and those reasons are playing out right now. Even Dems are bailing, or at least starting to seriously question him. Telling me to stop with the criticism is perplexing to me. Criticism will do nothing to make things worse economically; surely you can’t be making that case, Wilbur.
Dissent. Patriotism. Highest form.
Remember all that?
Tell you what, Wilbur, I’ll stop googling “Economic Depression”, how’s that?
My contribution to Obama’s economic policies and America’s bright future.
You guys have been rooting for things to go bad since election day. Itll be fun when things pick back up to go back over these portents of doom.
Wilbur, without going into detail…
No shit, Sherlock.
You and Matt are fooling yourselves if you think it’s just 1.3% of the population who will be footing the bill.
Because it’s just not! It’s not! Because shut up! Socialism!
Look! Over there!
The violent right wing coward “Dennis” rewrite of history neglects that the Republican 2007 Great Recession was a direct result of right wing policies some of which go back 30 years and more and many of which where put on steroids under Republican President Bush.
Republican Bush’s recession was the worst economic turn since the Great Depression (which was also arguably triggered by right wing deregulation that triggered massive speculation and the subsequent collapse).
Right wing extremists like “Dennis” don’t actually believe in anything except for defending abusive power.
“Dennis” defends the privileged elite.
That’s all.
He’s hinted that he’s part of that privileged elite (I doubt it, unless he inherited money, it seems clear he deludes himself that he can someday join the elites [Republican Bush's "Base"], perhaps because he’s crawled so far up their asses).
“Dennis” is the remora suckerfish to the real sharks.
http://www.google.com/search?q=remora+fish
There is now.
If there is any rational reason to pronounce Obama or the stimulus a failure at this point, and begin comparisons to Jimmy Carter (under whom, by the way, the economy grew at a greater net rate than under GWB), then you haven’t provided any. The unemployment rate is all you’ve presented so far, but as I explained above that is attributable to the economy being crappier than we thought, not to the stimulus being weaker than we thought.
If you want to criticize me now for what I did quite a while ago, be my guest.
Quite a while ago? Obama’s only been in office 6 months.
Criticism will do nothing to make things worse economically; surely you can’t be making that case, Wilbur.
Your criticism alone will have little effect, but the totality of the right-wing squawking from all sources may have some effect. As I said, economic behavior depends on perception, which is often a step or two ahead or behind reality. One thing for sure is that you certainly aren’t helping anyone gain confidence in the economy. This doesn’t mean that I don’t think you and others should express your opinion, I just wish that you would take the trouble to get yourself better informed before you deem your opinion worth expressing. And that leads us to your next witty riposte…
Dissent. Patriotism. Highest form.
It certainly is. Hope you remember that next time a president more to your liking is in office. Again, you are welcome your dissent, I just wish it were better informed dissent and less hysterically expressed. As I said, I’ve got my own dissents with Obama. And just so we’re comparing apples to apples: I’m not calling you a traitor, or an economical surrender monkey, or anti-American, or any of the other names that I and millions of others were called when we spoke up against a war that had been a manifest cock-up for much longer than six months.
Tell you what, Wilbur, I’ll stop googling “Economic Depression”, how’s that?
I’d bet you 10 to 1 that when Summers said that he said it as a crowd-warming joke, and that the politico reporter was as irony-impaired as you are (or just couldn’t resist the lurid headline). What Summers really cited as the ongoing progress of stimulus was the following (from the bottom of that politico article):
“More than $43 billion in immediate tax relief has reached households
and businesses. Another $64 billion has been channeled into the economy through aid to state and local governments, expansions in social programs, and spending on education, housing, and transportation projects. In addition to the amount that has already been paid out, another $120 billion in spending has been obligated by the federal government and is on track to begin working its way into the economy.”
Pleasure chatting with you, Dennis.
You know what we learned about in our first Economics 101 Class? The Law of Diminishing Returns. Let’s say you have fertile soil in your backyard You plant 100 tubers in the back yard and get 500 potatoes. Next year, you plant 200 tubers and get 1000 potatoes, Then, you plant 500 tubers and get 2,500 potatoes. Then, it occurs to you to plant 10,000 tubers and get 50,000 potatoes.
So you do that, and guess what?
Nothing comes up.
Let’s throw a quadrillion, quadrillion, bajillion, gamillion dollars at the economy.
Let’s drop bales of money out of planes. Let’s put $100 bills in cereal boxes. Let’s send everyone whose last name begins with a “D” (to pick an initial at random) a million dollars.
What could it hurt?
It’s not a matter of defending “the rich”. “The rich” can be a small business owner, and taxes effect what he/she does in terms of employment of individuals.
Really, I don’t worry about what class someone belongs to. I’m always going to be in favor of lower taxes, because I believe that’s the surest way towards prosperity. Obviously with the whole we’re in now, that’s probably not going to happen especially with the tax and spenders we’ve got in there now.
They’re not going to lower the deficit and pay for all these statist programs by taxing just the rich. That’s why you’re seeing fee increases, and taxes on just about everything going on at the state level. Taxes that will effect every economic group.
I believe in rewarding success and wealth, not punishing it.
Then, it occurs to you to plant 10,000 tubers and get 50,000 potatoes.
So you do that, and guess what?
Well, I hope your econ professor went on to warn you against drawing any foolishly simplistic conclusions from that, such as that if you only increase to 600 potatoes you won’t get the 3000 you expect.
A quadrillion, I agree, would be way too much, but nobody’s talking about anywhere near a quadrillion, are they?
Aristotle was right, Frank. Moderation: it’s what’s for breakfast.
Right winger “Gabriel McKee” asserts a falsified theory: “I’m always going to be in favor of lower taxes, because I believe that’s the surest way towards prosperity. “
Unemployment went UP after Republican Reagan’s tax cuts.
The economy went to crap after Republican Bush’s tax cuts.
America was at it’s strongest during the 1950′s when taxes were at their highest rates.
The RICHEST 10% (and increasingly the top 1%, 0.1%, 0.01%) certainly benefit from lower taxes, but the bottom 90% (99%) get screwed when the rich aren’t significantly taxed.
That’s economic reality that hundreds of years of basic math has repeatedly illustrated.
The right wing’s economic theory is somewhere between believing the sun rotates around the earth and a predatory con-artist telling you that if you give them more money that money they can make money rain down from the skies.
That’s what Hollywood entertainer and con artist Republican Reagan’s ‘tickle down economics’ was all about: Serve the rich and magic ponies will fly out his ass.
It was bullshit.
You obviously don’t know what caused the Carter/Reagan recessions….Do a little reading/learning then come back with the correct answer.
Compare inflation, interest rates, and unemployment rate in 1981…and 1983…to the end of Reagan’s 2nd term…..all are lower….Even an economic novice can look at the numbers are see that.
People shouldn’t have to work for the federal government anymore than is absolutely necessary….I’m sure you’d love to work over half the year for Uncle Sam, right?
Unemployment rate:
http://miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp?StartYear=1981-01&EndYear=1989-01&submit1=Create+Report
Yes, it raised as Reagan and Volker squeezed stagflation out of the economy….But it reached a low point as Reagan’s 2nd term ended.
http://miseryindex.us/iRbyyear.asp?StartYear=1981&EndYear=1989
Inflation during the Reagan years…
http://miseryindex.us/iRbyyear.asp?StartYear=1977&EndYear=1980
Inflation during the Carter years.
Never defended Bush’s economic policies. But the facts are that Reagan’s worked. Bush’s didn’t.
And one more thing, this recession probably wouldn’t have been avoided regardless of who was president.
Gabriel McKee: “And one more thing, this recession probably wouldn’t have been avoided regardless of who was president.”
Hell no. By the time the election happened, it was far to late to prevent it.
But if your ‘solution’ was ‘give more tax cuts’ it would have been made worse. At least spending money on bridges and roads will help the economy grow in the long run.
“I’m always going to be in favor of lower taxes, because I believe that’s the surest way towards prosperity.”
This is a misuse of the Laffer Curve.
Just to add, I work at a non-profit arts org that, like hundreds of other non-profit arts orgs around the country, applied fir stimulus funds to offset downturns in other funding. The money had to be targeted to maintaining speciic positions or the rehiring of laid off staff. We found out about the results last week. While the number of jobs in this sector of the economy are relatively few, this is an example of how some stimulus funds may only just now be entering the economy.
It took Reagan and Clinton a couple of years for their policies to show results, and Bush41 and Bush43 never saw decent net results.
Fafaroo: “Just to add, I work at a non-profit arts org that…”
Now Dennis the Bigot and others will use your job against you, and if you ask them what they do for a living, they will run away.
These days lower taxes for the middle class would only mean more money in the bank – as in personal savings. The only way to prime the economic pump is to tax the crap out of rich folks. They put most of that cash into investments and savings anyways, during good times even. At worst, the jobs saved and created will inspire middle class spending that the wealthy would have put instead, into raising our real estate costs and oil prices.
Reagan and Clinton handled the economy well.
Bush I was better than people give him credit for (but not great), but Bush II wasn’t very good. Carter, Ford and Nixon all stunk.
I’ve stated several times here what I do, I just enjoy not answering you when you beg me to tell you, Moby Strowbridge.
As to anyone’s job, I’ve only remarked on yours, a Canadian know-it-all who bashes Americans, and Jaim’s, and underachieving malcontent who admits he couldn’t find a job in America when the unemloyment rate was 4.5% and he had graduate degrees and an elite and very expensive private school education, then moved to Korea, and now, like you, bashes Americans from a foreign country.
Both of you brag about your jobs. Both of you are losers.
Big difference between you two and EVERYONE else here.
Dennis the Bigot: “I’ve stated several times here what I do…”
You spout racist, sexist, homophobic bullshit, then run away when people ask you questions you can’t answer.
Like what are the tenants of the Laffer Curve?
Nope. That’s not quite fair. Recently you’ve also been uttering veiled threats of physical violence.
You refuse to tell us what you do for a living, because you are embarrassed. You are likely unemployed.
You are a loser who has never done anything of value, and you attack Jaim and I due to fits of jealousy.
Gabriel McKee: “Reagan and Clinton handled the economy well.
Bush I was better than people give him credit for (but not great), but Bush II wasn’t very good. Carter, Ford and Nixon all stunk.”
I don’t think you will find very many economic numbers from Bush I that show him to be better than those you claim stink.
Also, you would have a hard time finding very many economic numbers from Bush II that show him to not be one of the worst in the history of the United States.
Reagan and Clinton handled the economy well.
Bush I was better than people give him credit for (but not great), but Bush II wasn’t very good. Carter, Ford and Nixon all stunk.a
Thanks again for more highly detailed and wonkish economic analysis. Quite illuminating, it is. I predict that the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences will be giving you a call in the near future. It’s a done deal if there’s any justice.
I don’t bash America, Dennis. I just bash wing-nut racist fuckwits like you.
You’ve never listed a legitimate example to any of those charges, Strowbridge. That’s why I don’t answer. Answering your baseless charges only makes you do more of it. You only come here to do that to everyone. You thrive on being a prick. Again, I can list concrete examples for your racism and bigotry. You never do. You can’t.
I have before. We’ve actually discussed it. I went back to the thread where I mentioned it and you actually commented on it; you’re just to much of an idiot to remember, and you’d rather make a charge you know nothing about than check beforehand to make sure you were correct. Ask freD if I’ve never told anyone what I do. Email Oliver and ask him how many IP addresses come in from me, and if one is a business IP. There’s no good reason to talk about it. You offer up what you do here often, and there’s nothing brave about telling people what you do,; you just want to know what I do so you have a different piece of ammunition. No mystery there.
So if you want to know, it’s on these threads. Work for it if you’re that curious.
You say that as if you know something, and you don’t. Anyone can taunt, Strowbridge. Kids in kindergarten can taunt.
My career doesn’t define me, my family does. Hopefully, one day you’ll have a family of your own and appreciate them enough to say the same thing.
Oh, but you do, Jaim. You see, you consider anyone who doesn’t vote for Democrats, wing-nut racist fuckwits. You bash half the population, give or take a few percentage points depending on which election, of America.
That’s a whole lotta America-bashing, young Jaim. A whole lotta America-bashing for someone who posts comments on a blog about Americans he hates all the way from Korea. You bash first thing in the morning, and you bash late at night. In fact, you do little other than bash Americans on this blog, but you do surprisingly little of it on your blog.
Curious that.
Dennis the Bigot: “You’ve never listed a legitimate example to any of those charges, Strowbridge.”
Yes I have.
Or did you ever come up with a non-insulting interpretation of ‘get a room’?
“you’re just to much of an idiot to remember,”
Or maybe I don’t give a fuck about you.
Maybe you are such a minor piece of shit, that I couldn’t be bother to remember.
Maybe your only value to me is as a verbal punching bag.
Ever thought of that?
“My career doesn’t define me, my family does.”
And I bet your family hates you as well.
They have to. They know you better than anyone else.
Unless they are also racist, homophobic, sexist assholes like you.
(And I can say that, cause you were bragging about your family, and that makes them fair game. Right, Dennis. That is the rules you play by, right?)
Dennis the Bigot: “Oh, but you do, Jaim. You see, you consider anyone who doesn’t vote for Democrats, wing-nut racist fuckwits.”
No. We consider people who are racist, wing-nut, fuckwits to be racist, wing-nut, fuckwits.
That includes you, because you have proven yourself to be a racist, wing-nut, fuckwit.
“You bash half the population”
No, only about 30 percent of it. And that number is growing smaller every day, thank God.
Actually, according to Gallup 40% of the country identifies themselves as conservative, 35% and a meager 20% liberal.
Just sayin.
This is clearly good news for John McCain.
I’m sure the number of people who identify as “conservative,” a vague political affiliation at best, is much larger than people who want it known they belong to the party of Limbaugh, Sanford, and Ensign.
Conservatives Health Care School of Thought (percent of conservative adherents)
Let Dems pass their health care plan and watch it fail. (1%)
It’s a power grab! Da gubmints gonna force insurance companies outta business. And then we’re all stuck with USSR style waiting lines… and stuff. (19%)
Black Satan’s Voodoo Socialism will prevent the rapture from happening. (80%)
Actually, according to Gallup 40% of the country identifies themselves as conservative, 35% and a meager 20% liberal.
Thanks for the unlinked assertion. That explains how a Neo-Marxist-Socialist Liberal Extremist like B. Hussein al-Bama was (legitimately!) elected by such a large margin.
Yes, if the tax rates are the same rates they were in 1997, the economy will collapse!
No, only about 30 percent of it. And that number is growing smaller every day, thank God.
You bash everyone who didn’t support, Obama, Kerry or Gore. That’s a lot more than 30%. Even if you claim you only bash 30% of Americans, which is not true but assuming it was, that’s still a lot of America-bashing for a guy who admits he couldn’t cut it in America and bashes them from his hideout in a Far East country.
But whatever justification you want to apply, your Dixie Chicks act is still despicable.
“Thanks for the unlinked assertion. That explains how a Neo-Marxist-Socialist Liberal Extremist like B. Hussein al-Bama was (legitimately!) elected by such a large margin.”
Well, we do have a two party system in this country. It swings back and forth depending upon the conditions in the country. The goal is to win more than you lose, cause you’re never going to win them all.
The country may turn slightly to the left for 4 to 8 years, then it goes to right for 4 or 8….Which is why I think it’s silly when people act like if the other side wins a presidential election it’s the end of America!! It’s just ridiculous.
The founding fathers were smart people. It’s good to have balance. It’s rare when things are titled to one side as much as they have been in recent years (Republicans in 2005-2007, and Democrats currently).
It will all balance out. Still conservatives make up the biggest portion of the electorate, and I think that’s supported by recent electoral history. 1968-present. Democrats got smart and started running conservative democrats..especially in the south/midwest.
Good point, Gabriel. Funny how that bit of information never sees the light of day on this blog. The only time it does is when the bravado reaches epic proportions here and liberals decide the conservative Dems are no longer needed. We’ll have to see about that come 11/2010.
“that’s still a lot of America-bashing for a guy who admits he couldn’t cut it in America and bashes them from his hideout in a Far East country.”
Like I said Dennis, I’m trying to play nice. But if you continue to obsessively bring up what I do for a living I’m going to:
a) Continue to ask you if you even have a job and b) Remind people that like the whiny little punk bitch that you are, you offered to buy me a plane ticket back to the States but promptly chickened out.
I had a job in the States, I have a better one (financially, but just as importantly in terms of career prospects and personal fulfillment) here. Why is that so fucking hard to get through your bigoted, dumbass skull?
“your Dixie Chicks act is still despicable.”
Jesus, what the fuck are you talking about? I’ve been abroad less than one year and this makes me a traitor? And by the way, The Dixie Chicks sell a hell of a lot of albums. What are you, stuck in 2003?
Fuck you Dennis. Fuck you and your petty, bigoted world-view. Fuck you for being a little bitchy coward who a few days ago tried to play Tuff Guy and buy me a ticket home, thinking in a million years I’d never accept it, and then promptly wetting yourself when I told you I’d be happy to meet you on your terms (Dulles Airport). (But it was funny how you tried to change the location, little punk that you are.)
In all sincerity, I feel for your wife and daughters. They can’t be happy having to deal with a twisted, sad little turd-stain like yourself.
“Still conservatives make up the biggest portion of the electorate, and I think that’s supported by recent electoral history.”
Um, this is stupid.
No doubt Americans are more culturally conservative than many other people living in first-world countries, and certainly more religious. But the whole “center right nation” is dead, dontcha get it? McCain got trounced. Polling indicates that a majority of Americans want health care reform. And out of Iraq as well. And think that in times of economic crisis like the Bush Recession, that the Fed can help people and solves some of the problems.
I mean, go ahead and keep telling yourself whatever makes you feel better. But there are demographic trends (the GOP is largely a party of aging white males) that do make this time historically different from, say, the 90′s or the 60′s. Nobody knows how long the Dems’ ride is going to last, but I think you need to take a closer look at your “pendulum.” Younger folks are abandoning the GOP in droves. Women, blacks, and hispanics already gave up on it. George W. Bush, a Texan and Spanish speaker, actually made some positive moves early on to bring more hispanics into the fold but guess what? The GOP drove them all out, probably permanently, with all of their bigoted hysteria over immigration reform.
So sure, a comeback could happen, but your party will need a) credible candidates (hint: half-term governors from Alaska don’t count) and b) major outreach (hint: Michael Steele ain’t bringing blacks into the GOP).
How about this? Of ALL the taxpayers , an average of more than one in 100 will pay a graduated surcharge – an unspecified amount – for the healthcare plan.
We don’t know how much they will pay ,or who else will pay some other amount.
But, for now, just relax.
Isn’t that what the frog is thinking as the water gets hotter ?
OMG Teh Obamacare Approval Rating Is Teh Popular!!! (No, Not Really)
- – – – – – – – – – – – – -
“Heading into a critical period in the debate over health-care reform, public approval of President Obama’s stewardship on the issue has dropped below the 50 percent threshold for the first time, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Obama’s approval ratings on other front-burner issues, such as the economy and the federal budget deficit, have also slipped over the summer, as rising concern about spending and continuing worries about the economy combine to challenge his administration. Barely more than half approve of the way he is handling unemployment, which now tops 10 percent in 15 states and the District….”
OMG Teh Stimulus is Working!!! (No, NotReally)
“WASHINGTON (AP) – The White House is being forced to acknowledge the wide gap between its once-upbeat predictions about the economy and today’s bleak landscape.
The administration’s annual midsummer budget update is sure to show higher deficits and unemployment and slower growth than projected in President Barack Obama’s budget in February and update in May, and that could complicate his efforts to get his signature health care and global-warming proposals through Congress.
The release of the update – usually scheduled for mid-July – has been put off until the middle of next month, giving rise to speculation the White House is delaying the bad news at least until Congress leaves town on its August 7 summer recess.
The administration is pressing for votes before then on its $1 trillion health care initiative, which lawmakers are arguing over how to finance….
- – – – – – – -
Hope. Change. We Are The Ones We’ve Been Waiting For.
Whiskey Foxtrot Tango???
You know, conservatives said the stimulus was nothing but expensive pork projects. We just didn’t know how right we really were.
I think I may owe Jimmy Carter an apology for saying we’re getting his second term, Save Farris.
In comparison to this, malaise doesn’t look so bad now.
If it’s a center right country, then why is the media “liberal”? If the media is corporate sponsored big business which competes intensely for market share, why is it “liberal” again?
We just didn’t know how right we really were.
Save, you wanna rephrase this at all in light of, you know, the facts?
freD: The Press is mostly liberal, because they go to left-wing journalism schools, where they learn that Woodward and Bernstein were mythological supermen that toppled the mighty. As Sam Donaldson famously put it, “Our job [as journalists] is to comfort the afflicted, and to afflict the comfortable.” I always thought it was the reporting of news.
The Press is mostly liberal, because they go to left-wing journalism schools…
You may have missed my point. Reporters do not run their corporations or have full control over the content of their media. Are you saying their editors, managers, owners and shareholders are also liberal?
The “Press” is mostly owned by right wingers and Republicans.
However, since Journalism as an ideal is fact based and evidence based which means that it clearly has a liberal bias to right wingers that can’t cope with facts and evidence.
“Frank DiSalle’s” entire life is spent believing in falsehoods and trying to push his falsehoods on other people.
“Frank’s” ignorance and hostility represents a very large portion of what the right wing has degenerated into and represents the core Republican base.
NR,
I knew a liberal who had to do an onsite job in Ireland a few years ago. He said Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News was fair and balanced compared to his Fox News here. Apparently Murdoch only cares about ideology when it makes him bank.
FDS,
And come to think of it, how come I can’t get anybody who respects the Austrian School of economics to answer my simple questions? (example: http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/07/16/gop-has-sudden-interest-in-the-economy/#comments at July 17, 2009 at 10:05 am). And I mean nobody will answer them – nobody from the libertarian world.
Center-right nations don’t elect supposedly Muslim Islamofacist Kenyan citizens with ties to the Weather Underground.
But like I said, keep telling yourself what makes you happy wingers. The longer you deny reality, the longer you don’t reform your dying party, and the longer you stay in the wilderness.
The GOP will come back some day no doubt, but it won’t be — it can’t be — in its current form. And it has to shed a lot of baggage which so far it doesn’t seem willing to do.
Master of the ad hominem, insubstantial, unintelligent attack “News Reference”, as usual, contributes nothing to the debate.
“News” “Reference” belongs to the absurdist school of liberalism, about which James Taranto wrote in today’s Best of the Web Today:
freD : I am not fishing through 152 comments to find your questions. Try emailing me at fd10801@gmail.com
FDS,
For your convenience I’ve posted some here:
1. Simply put, Say’s Law suggests that demand grows as supply grows, and recessions are caused by supply shrinking, not demand shrinking. How does one get corporations to communally increase supply during a recession, without government assistance/coordination?
2. If bankruptcy protections were eliminated, who administers the debtor prisons/workfarms if it’s not the government?
3. Was our current economic situation stemming from the credit – real estate fiasco a “rational expectation”?
I’m just trying to separate the Austrian School from the holistic-preventative-medicine type school of economic thought (You know, sorta like where their experts tell you to eat right and exercise and then you get cancer anyways and you say to the holistic doc: “So now what do I do?” and after calling you a liar about not eating right and exercising holistic Doctor finally says, “Uh… okay… eat really really right and exercise really good now!” you know what I mean?) A good economic school of thought has pragmatic answers to everything.
I must confess that my economic education is not precise as to recall schools of economic thought. I am more familiar with specific theories, and people like Hayek and Bastiat.
The political definition of a recession is “a widespread decline in the GDP and employment and trade lasting from six months to a year” or an increase in prices and unemployment for two quarters.
Why would bankruptcy protections be eliminated? Why plan for something that will never happen?
If you continue to lend money to poor repayment risks, and then build an investment securities scheme on those transactions, it is a reasonable expectation that more people than usual will default, and the securities will lose value.
Back to the beginning.
I will continue to maintain that the government removes too much money from the economy – an unhealthy amount.
Taxes always have that downside – it’s tough to make that cash be money well spent, let alone inspire cash flow that inspires more cash flow without ‘house of card building’ risks. Small government in complex times means government has no choice but to be smart as well. The GOP cannot succeed by putting up rock star incompetents as leaders and candidates and then smearing all the competition to compensate. That’s exactly how the sociopaths we all encounter in our daily working lives operate, and regular Joes are becoming wise to this.
Back on topic, I guess my point is that the Austrian School doesn’t appear to inspire much thought about quickly resolving market failure.
Right wing innumerate “Frank DiSalle” falsely claims: “I will continue to maintain that the government removes too much money from the economy….”
The government doesn’t ‘remove’ any money from the economy, the government redirects money.
“Frank’s” misconception is common on the right wing.
Government’s don’t ‘remove’ money, Government’s redirect (reallocate) money.
Claims can be made that government misdirects money or wastes money but it’s false to say that government ‘removes’ money (in fact, “governments” add “money” to economies, though that’s a different discussion).
Furthermore, in a macroeconomic system where demand slows or stops, the only way to shorten or reverse the inevitable recession or depression is government spending (either through taxation or debt).
Taxing rich people who are NOT spending in order to resuscitate a failing economy is rational.
Those taxes can then be spent or even better invested in order to revive demand. Well invested taxes include things like public infrastructure that can provide an economic good that can earn a consistent stream of revenue over time (public utilities can include things like water, electricity, and Internet; infrastructure includes things like roads, bridges, rail lines like subway and light rail for commuters).
Republican Communist Eisenhower understood this. He used high tax rates to invest in the National Highway System which has provided 50 years of continuous economic returns.
Watching an economy wither and die in vain hope to validate false right wing (Milton Friedman/University of Chicago/Austrian School) economic fictions is irrational.
Why are all these “patriots” willing to send our youth to kill for our country, but not willing to pay their salaries, help them through college, ensure that the water they drink when they get home (or over there, for that matter) isn’t toxic, or help them provide their family with health care? The next anti-tax person you meet, ask them if they are willing to take their own garbage to the dump, pipe in their own water and install their own electrical grid, as well as police their own neighborhood. They want all the benefits, but too selfish to help others through taxation. That’s the real treason.