-
The Taxman Cometh (for Tea Partiers)
May 13, 2013 | 150 comments
-
Farrell’s Fallacies
May 9, 2013 | 25 comments
-
Turning on Obama
May 7, 2013 | 227 comments
-
The Pigs of Pigford
April 30, 2013 | 71 comments
-
Overstating Boston
April 26, 2013 | 143 comments
Special Report
Democratic Ceiling Wax
Applying Orwellian logic to S&P’s warning.
Monday’s outlook change by ratings agency Standard & Poors (S&P) for U.S. federal government debt — going from stable to negative while affirming the current AAA rating — brought Democratic responses that would have made George Orwell proud.
S&P’s rationale is that despite a “high-income, highly diversified, and flexible economy, backed by a strong track record of prudent and credible monetary policy” (the latter being a characterization certainly up for debate), “the U.S.’s fiscal profile has deteriorated steadily during the past decade.” This deterioration has led the U.S. to have higher deficit/GDP and debt/GDP ratios than most other AAA-rated nations and S&P is skeptical of the ability of Congress and the Administration to reach agreement as well as the potential of any agreement to have substantial impact within a few years. Thus the change in outlook which means at least a one-in-three chance of the debt rating itself being lowered within two years.
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), aiming for a gold medal in logical gymnastics, interpreted S&P’s warning about potentially unmanageable debt as meaning that “Republicans cannot hold the debt limit hostage over partisan, divisive issues” (such as reducing government spending, apparently).
White House Press Secretary Jay “Anyone but Gibbs” Carney chimed in similarly: “The issue here is the debt ceiling has to be raised.”
And far-left Representative Peter Welch (D-VT) reiterated a call he made on Friday in a letter that 114 House Democrats signed calling for “a Democratic position in favor of a clean extension of the debt ceiling” by which Welch means allowing the U.S. to borrow more money without requiring any progress on spending cuts (or even the Democrats’ favored tax increases) to reduce ongoing deficits.
One might have been tempted to debate the Democrats using (wait for it!) logic to explain that taking on more debt hardly seems like the first best step toward dealing with concerns that the nation has too much debt. But we don’t even have to resort to such below-the-belt tactics as reasoning to dispense with Democrats’ arguments. Instead, we can listen to S&P themselves. In a “FAQ” about their outlook change entitled “A Closer Look At The Revision Of The Outlook On The U.S. Government Rating,” S&P offers this Q&A, which not only lays waste to every Democrat claim above but also to their ongoing boy-crying-wolf pleas about the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. government being at risk in this debate:
Do the debates about passing Congressional continuing resolutions or raising the debt ceiling influence your decision to revise the outlook?
The congressional debates did not, by themselves, prompt us to revise the outlook. But we believe that these debates do highlight the political challenges in reducing the U.S.’s government’s fiscal deficit. That said, we do not expect the U.S. government to default because of a Congressional refusal to authorize the government to borrow additional funds.
Others on the left, including the Democrats’ useful idiots in the media, gunning perhaps for the silver medal after Steny Hoyer’s performance, are desperately seeking other ways to use S&P’s revision to attack Republicans and particularly House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget plan which passed the House on Friday.
The Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein looks to blame Ryan for — well, for everything from disagreement to deficits to dead senior citizens — by trotting out the Democratic talking-point-du-jour that Ryan’s plan “cuts taxes and makes sweepingly ideological changes to Medicare and Medicaid.” Ryan’s plan cuts tax rates. But by eliminating loopholes and deductions it is intended to be revenue neutral; it specifically does not cut taxes. As for changes to Medicare and Medicaid, if it is “sweepingly ideological” to propose the first serious plan in decades that might allow market forces to nudge down health care inflation and keep these entitlement programs from bankrupting the nation, then I (and I presume Paul Ryan) plead guilty.
But then Klein is known for saying that Senator Joe Lieberman’s early opposition to Obamacare meant that Lieberman was “willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people,” so why anybody other than DailyKos readers and MSNBC viewers would find him credible is beyond me.
Slate’s David Weigel offers his own version of moral equivalence by omission: “Left unsaid here (by S&P) are the inconsolable issues: Republicans won’t give on tax increases, and Democrats won’t give on entitlements.” Weigel thus implies that the Republican and Democrat intransigence on their particular issues are economically and morally equivalent. This despite it being rather obvious (both from data and from common sense) that no amount of tax increase will prevent entitlements from bankrupting the country. And further that tax increases take the earnings of citizens while refusing to reform entitlements redistributes those earnings to others based on the fundamentally Marxist premise that the others “need” it more. (That’s the same premise a mugger might use to redistribute your income.)
But then Weigel is the guy who had to resign from the Washington Post after insulting Republicans, calling Matt Drudge an “amoral shut-in,” and suggesting that the media is wrong to air “‘real American’ views, no matter how f***ing moronic.” (Weigel’s favorite expression to denigrate Republicans is not fit for publication on these pages, but if you’re interested you can find it here.) So, why anybody other than Keith “nothing better to do these days” Olbermann would find Weigel credible is beyond me.
Democrats, who are so fond of arguing that the U.S. should be more like Europe, might look at S&P’s analyses of certain foreign economic policies. In particular, both the UK and France have implemented budgets that border on being “austerity plans”; indeed S&P called France’s an “austerity program.” In both cases, S&P believes the plans will reduce those country’s deficits primarily through the discipline of reduced government spending, though both countries did implement tax hikes as well. You know the tide has turned against government’s being all things to all people when even the French favor spending cuts over tax increases by 80% to 8%, according to a recent poll by the Economist. And Canada, which unlike the U.S. substantially decreased the size of its government relative to GDP in the 1990s, is expected to “return to (a deficit) of less than 0.5% of GDP by 2013.”
In other words, while not taking a position on the relative merits of tax hikes and spending cuts, and even with a passing shot at the Bush tax cuts, S&P’s examples of successful tackling of deficits are nations that have cut or are cutting the cost of government far more than they’re digging deeper into their citizens’ pockets.
Moody’s, another key ratings agency, reacted to S&P with a very different take on the current political debate over the federal budget: “This potential change in the direction of fiscal policy is credit positive for the U.S. federal government (Aaa stable), although it remains uncertain what sort of budget will actually be adopted.” Anyone want to bet on when you’ll hear a liberal giving Paul Ryan credit for that?
About the Author
Ross Kaminsky is a self-employed trader and investor and is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute. He is the host of The Ross Kaminsky Show on Denver’s NewsRadio 850 KOA at 11 AM on most Sundays. You can reach Ross by e-mail at rossputin(at)rossputin(dot)com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (56) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ross Kaminsky
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/04/19/democratic-ceiling-wax
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Michael Tomlinson| 4.19.11 @ 7:15AM
Had the conservative crackup of 2005 not occurred the Pelosi/Reid Congress and later the Obama oligarchy (who created this mess in 4 yrs) would have been a mere liberal dream/nightmare not a reality.
Sadly, despite the "conservative" hysteria about the profligate Republican spending the last Bush/GOP Congressional budget was predicted to be balanced by 2015. Again despite the current rhetoric blaming Bush his deficits were substantialy lower than Reagn's and Clinton's until the GOP Congress fixed his mess
(Federal Deficit as % of GDP http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/index.php).
leftnmyrightmind| 4.19.11 @ 7:20AM
Both parties positions have serious flaws. On the Democrat side flaws are obvious. We have a spending problem not a revenue problem as Dem's may claim. The Republicans and the Right get it when they say we have a spending problem not a revenue problem. However, their plan goes off track by not including military policy in the cuts. Unless the spending cuts include major reductions in overseas military spending, getting out of other Countries civil wars (to focus on our borders) then the Republican plan will fail. Change is hard, both sides need to put ego and pride aside and give our country some "tough love".
George S| 4.19.11 @ 8:10AM
Instead of 'major reductions' why not cease funding for Iran and Afghanistan altogether? That would save enough money to fund Obama's budget for three weeks. How does that hamper the Ryan proposal?
Michael Tomlinson| 4.19.11 @ 11:38AM
It is Iraq. Iran is funding the take over of Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood, Syrians domination of Lebanon, the Palestinian scum on Gaza, the rebels in Libya and probably the Muslim thugs in Nigeria. All groups Obama is sympathetic too.
Melvin| 4.19.11 @ 7:47AM
I came into the United States Marine Corps in 1979, shortly after the end of the Vietnam War. There was no moral, more equipment was deadlined that up and ready for war, and the rifle that I was issued was designated XM16, the X denoting experimental. When we did train which was very often because there was no money, and when we did, we went bang bang, because the Marine Corps had no money for blank or live ammunition. When we did shoot live M16 ammunition it was once a year at the rifle range.
Former President Jimmy Carter embarked upon a rescue plan for the hostages that ended in the catastrophic failure known as Desert One. The failure was attributed to mostly equipment malfunctions and human error because of the inability of the services to work together, because a lack of funds to do so. All this resulted in needless deaths of American service members.
After the Vietnam War, the same anti-war loons and the cut back on the military funding crowd touting the same thing they are touting today. "Put the money that we spend on military and invest it in social programs.
I'm not saying that there isn't a certain amount of waste in the military that can be cut. But more often what really happens Congress goes buck-wild and cuts too much.
Instead of having a feast or famine mentality with the DOD, fund it at a sustainable level. Tanks, aircraft, and Trucks wear out, and if we don't maintain maintenance or replace this equipment, it will cost three to four times as much down the road.
Because I've been there, nothing sucks as much as getting ass-deep in a fire-fight and have a weapon or piece of equipment malfunction or fall apart at that time I would need it to save myself or my fellow Marines lives.
Marines need to be in a constant training cycle to prepare them for combat. New Marines join an outfit and they need to be trained and train with live ammunition. Going bang, bang doesn't cut it anymore folks.
One thing is for sure, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Al-Quds, or the PLA "Peoples Liberation Army don't go bang, bang, they use live ammunition in training because they don't care about social programs, they only care about tyranny.
You lefties and progressives need to only understand one thing. There had been bad men in the past, there are bad men now, and there will be bad men in the future, and if we don't have the means to defeat them, they will come over here and kill you and your family period. So, please tell me how that, bang, bang is going for ya, when the enemy is charging at you with a AK-47.
JimH| 4.19.11 @ 8:15AM
The military was largely bled both of men and equipment in Viet Nam, and then stripped further in order to fund all kinds of entitlement goodies. America is best served by having a military that is smaller than what we have now, but one that is well paid, highly trained and given the best equipment and weaponry available. One with more nose and less tail. We have to clearly define the mission. And that mission ought not to include having a major presence in various parts of the world such as Europe and central Asia. And when we do decide that it is our interest to go in somewhere we need to do it in a fully committed manner which lets our troops win and without endangering them with ridiculous ROEs.
mames| 4.19.11 @ 4:04PM
The number one role of government is protection and the constitution makes that clear. Along with a tiny list of "negative rights" as O would call them there is nothing else the government is to be involved in. Every thing else they do is unconstitutional and anyone voting for spending on anything outside those enumerations is engaging in a traitorous act. Simple. And what do we do with traitors?
Occam's Tool| 4.20.11 @ 6:45PM
Thank you for your service, Melvin. You are, of course, correct.
Mimi| 4.19.11 @ 7:50AM
Finally....The WARNING...The first! Next comes MOODY!
The American people have been BEGGING for two years to "STOP THE SPENDING"
The Democratic Senate, and the President must NOW change coarse... You didn't heed the Tea Party signs....You didn't heed the Nov.'10 shellacking....Last week you did not HEED the Republican plan to cut spending...with only pennies thown on the table....It's getting too late for you...Time to Go into "TREATMENT "! You know when people feel that their going to DIE they start thinking A.A., they admit they lost control and start to get well...But it takes HONESTY.
Mimi| 4.19.11 @ 7:59AM
PS....Heh, do you have any IDEA how darn hard our KIDS and GREAT GRAND KIDS are going to have to WORK to pay the TRILLIONS of ...INTEREST you are placing on their backs....They will pay and pay taxes for NOTHING just INTEREST.....This placed on them by the congress of 2007 til now..headed by Nancy Pelosi. This President??? how much deficit???
mames| 4.19.11 @ 4:06PM
Yes but THE tool of the Alinskite is to lie, for the greater good, of course.
Dixie Pixie| 4.19.11 @ 8:29AM
TBA.....Standards and Poors (S&P) downgraded America stock to "Penny" stock status today.
The Democratic Leadership lauded the move saying "....Now more Americans can buy into the American Dream ....Where else does a penny buy 100 dollars of value...."
The Democratic leaders immediately floated a another multi-trillion loan issue to maintain the current spending levels.
When asked to comment, The Republican Leadership stated "....This just shows the need for strong leadership in deficit reduction...."
On related news, lead negotiator Halley Barbour has successfully completed negations to move the former Confederate States to Receivership status under the EU.
He stated "....Thank God the 170 year Nightmare of Northern Economic Pillage is over...."
The Chinese occupation of California continues with the Brown caretaker government handing over all powers to the Won Chin government.
The Big E| 4.19.11 @ 8:35AM
Ssssssssshhhh! What happened?
Shut up Barack! Stop talking. Listen.
Can you hear it, Steny? Yeah, that. That silence. Wasn't there something singing just a few minutes ago? Why is it so quiet all of a sudden?
Oh, yeah, BECAUSE THE CANARY IN THE COAL MINE JUST CROAKED.
Barack's response? "So what?"
Steny's response? "We need to pump more deadly gas in here."
Louis Jenkins| 4.19.11 @ 8:38AM
Mimi, you hit the nail on the head. Come on congress, get some nads and go after it. We are tired of hearing the leftists whine about Ryan this or Ryan that, Grandma is going to starve or be thrown to the wolves. We haven't much time left people. Our government is broke. It's like a turtle with it's head cut off- it doesn't know it's dead yet.
Melvin| 4.19.11 @ 8:47AM
But that ugly story that is circulating around that Boehner and the rest of the boys, promised Barrack that they would raise the debt ceiling, isn't going to help matters much.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm sick and damn tired of dying by a thousand tax increases. If I'm going to die, I want at least to take some of those Political elites with me.
They shouldn't be allowed to just walk away from this wreckage and go, "Ooops, I guess our policies didn't work." They need to suffer some pain to.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 4.19.11 @ 8:47AM
I remember the day I stopped drinking, back in January 2000, I didn't want to stop drinking, but my job was hanging by a thread, and I had to stop drinking. When I entered rehab, I thought I'd just tell them what they wanted to hear, and then when I got out, I'd just be more careful when I drank, and everything would be fine again. But during my second week there, I actually listened to what they were saying (for a change), and took a good look at myself, and realized that I was the problem that I was suffering from, so I started participating in the discussions from there on out. Then the day arrived when it was time for me to go home, and I'd be on my own once again, and I wasn't feeling very confident about that at all. But I didn't go back to the bottle, and slowly, and very painfully the weeks turned to months, and then turned to years. Now I'm still an alcoholic, and I still can't drink like everybody else can, but that's alright, I don't think about it as much as I used to anymore. I didn't know that day back in January 2000 was going to be the last day I got drunk, but ever since then, I celebrate that day like it's a National Holiday, my own Personal Liberation Day!! Our Government has got to go cold turkey on spending, it's the only way it can be done!! Life will suck for awhile, but then it'll get better again, I can assure you of this, but the first step is you've got to stop. Do not raise the Debt-Ceiling, not even one single cent, just stop, and step away from the cash, and "just say No to spending". It'll be alright, the sun will come out tomorrow (well maybe not for the Democrats, but eventually, it'll even come out for them too)!!
Nunya| 4.19.11 @ 3:58PM
Excellent analogy LLL, congratulations on your sobriety!
Unfortunately, I don't think the morons we have in office actually believe what they're doing is a problem as you did, or they're doing it on purpose.. Boehner's actions in selling out the conservative base with the "$38 billion" BS cut. If the Republican leadership REALLY believed our spending was going to result in the demise of this country, I have to think they would do something. Therefore, they are either stupid or completely complicit in our financial destruction. Frankly, I think it's the latter.
mames| 4.19.11 @ 4:12PM
I do not see black helicopters but it is apparent they are trying to destroy us via the Alinski "spend them to death so they turn to us for help" method. IF not they are truly the most willfully stupid men in all of human history and the GOP is their enablers. bottoms up (it hurts less that way)
Walking Horse| 4.19.11 @ 8:52AM
In all candor, neither political party has a clue. Even representative Ryan's proposal, for which he has been labeled the devil incarnate, is just a gentle tap on the brakes, and will still result in our fiscal train launching into the fiscal abyss.
Both political parties are invested in Big Government, which is to say, they both gladly embrace insolvency rather than give up power.
Strong measures have been taken in the past, with salutary results. The way out of the depression of 1920 was intense and brief, and there is a better than even chance you've never read that the U.S. had a depression in that time.
Michael L. Hauschild| 4.19.11 @ 9:02AM
The tax code is too complicated and only conceived to allow “interpretation” by favor seeking legislators, manipulating lobbyists, and moneyed influences. Rand Paul (idiot on national defense) is right on this, however, we have to have tax reform and the best, most effective, and easiest implemented would be the FLAT TAX.
Michael Tomlinson| 4.19.11 @ 11:40AM
Amen! Jack Kemp was right.
Occam's Tool| 4.20.11 @ 6:48PM
Michael, as usual I concur with you. I like the elimination of most deductions in exchange for a lower overall tax rate, though. A Flat tax would be even better. In NZ, I spent no time preparing my taxes for the NZ government. It would be nice to do that here. Tax attorneys, etc., are a drain on National resources, not a boon.
Dee See| 4.19.11 @ 9:24AM
---Must admit, not a single clear compelling
voice anywhere on our false spectrum political
landscape.
NO, not even one.
Peppermint Tea| 4.19.11 @ 9:24AM
Lullabys, I liked your story. Perhaps we Tea Party sympathizers can adopt the slogan,
"Fix the debt ceiling--stop big government cold turkey!"
They would need to furlough 90 percent of employees while deciding what to cut, then sell assets like land, buildings, PC's and office furniture. Maybe they could bottle up some arrogance and sell it as well. They won't be needing it anymore.
A. C. Santore| 4.19.11 @ 9:30AM
I am so tired of the Progressives' twisting the truth and the conservatives not setting them straight.
I have had difficulty understanding the Progs' new talking point that not raising the debt limit will necessarily mean defaulting on our debts. The only way that works is if we borrow more to pay our debts. Financial suicide, plain and simple.
For me, the quote most telling in this article is the one from S&P: "That said, we do not expect the U.S. government to default because of a Congressional refusal to authorize the government to borrow additional funds."
Who ya gonna believe, then?
Stop this madness now. Do not raise the debt ceiling one penny, then learn to live within our means.
Pecos Pete| 4.19.11 @ 9:52AM
There ain't gonna be any (ummm, enough?) fiscal restraint by this Congress. Congress is going to finese it again. The bank is empty and the only way out is via the printing press. Hyper inflation is just around the corner, and maybe already here if gasoline pricing (and the price for coffee, etc.) is any indicator.
Al Adab| 4.19.11 @ 12:00PM
Morning Pete:
Have you visited the grocery store lately? Prices up 16% in the last couple months and fewer trucks bringing in products. Gasoline everyone knows and this is the plan of The Left. For whatever reason they intend to break us down to common world (third world?) status. Some sort of guilt over free market success I suspect. Keep posting, it's good to have you here.
A. C. Santore| 4.19.11 @ 1:58PM
I agree with the Progs' intent to break us down.
Everything this Proto-Dictator does takes us inexorably downward, and at increasing speed.
Shermans riding again!| 4.19.11 @ 9:59AM
Alas, I fear that the damage done can't be over come. Obummer still has 49% of the US still under his spell and like others have posted, no real leadership anywhere. There are people that could take us in a new path, but we're too poor to run and defend ourselves from the character assasinations.
Gordon W.| 4.19.11 @ 10:39AM
Uh, question 11 asked WHY NOW? The response says because of tax cuts. You can use the link labeled FAQ above the quoted paragraph about raising the debt ceiling.
Then you say democrats wont give up on entitlements. I assume you are referring to loopholes. Which is what Obama suggested to get rid of in his budget plan. Other wise entitlements should be a little clearer.
You say then S&P says nothing about the merits of cutting taxes, except it does. It says if we kept taxes the same before the bush tax cuts were re-memorialized, they would not have lower our rating.
You mention Europe and their thought on spending cuts vs. taxes. Except that is a dumb argument, because they tax much more heavily already. The only place they can go is to the spending.
Al Adab| 4.19.11 @ 11:43AM
How refreshing to hear from a true believer. You stand your ground so well. Nothing must interfer with the agenda, not even the facts. I think it was Boxer yesterday who suggested what the country and economy needs is a new mega-stimulus. How wonderful it must be to live in a world where all good comes from government and people who work and produce are greedy and must be punished. Why, tell me, is one person's money trerated differently from another's? Who is entitled to make that decision?
It is the spending friend. Why do all those private special interest lobbies like La Raza, ACORN, SEIU, Planned Parenthood and the like get taxpayer dollars to promote their political vision? If the ideas are sound they can raise enough money on their own. If unsound, we are better off without them.
Ross Kaminsky | 4.19.11 @ 1:07PM
Gordon,
The response does not say "because of tax cuts." It says because of a lack of agreement on a plan.
Since when does "entitlements" mean loopholes? Indeed, I don't think I've ever heard the term used that way. How can you attempt to offer a comment on this debate without knowing what "entitlements" means?
S&P does NOT say that repealing the Bush tax cuts would have kept them from their revision. And to be clear, they did NOT lower their rating. They just said the current path increases the chance they may lower their rating in the future.
Finally, please go tell a liberal anywhere in Europe, no matter what their local tax rates, that "the only place they can go is the spending" and see what response you get.
Sat| 4.19.11 @ 3:05PM
I was on the CTA (Chicago) bus today following the announcement by McDonalds that they would be hiring 50,000 new workers. There was a group of African American women going throughout the city looking to get hired. Here's a direct quote I overheard '...you know WIC ain't giving out no more money like they used to, they shut 'em down, I'm done having kids..." How ironic, once the gov't teet is scaled back and the freebies stop, people become self-reliant and seek to take care of themselves!! These people are not helpless victims that need to be taken care of by the redistributionist left, they are savvy and will do what is necessary to help their families. If only their elitist caretakers rode the bus every once in a while!! ... Stop the entitlements and sit back and watch the rejuvenation of communities begin...
Gordon W.| 4.19.11 @ 4:28PM
Your rebuttal is short and concise, but in refuting the question 11 comment you completely overlooked the second sentence. Here it is: When pull all this together, especially following last year's tax cut decision, the US fiscal profile is increasingly diverging from the profile of its AAA peers.
That is the reason that spurred got us here, the uncertainty of what congress is going to do is what spurred them to lash out and tell them that need to get a grip.
I merely asked what it is meant by entitlement. By the article does not spout which entitlements he is talking about. If he is talking about medicare and medicaid, why does it not say so. Instead the article just paints with a wide brush. Entitlements. Some are bad, some are good.
Thanks for rebutting my premise with a technicality, but not getting to the point.
Finally, I if there is a fiscal problem in Europe and you have two choices as posited here, either taxes or spending. They will go with reducing spending, rather than increasing taxes. Unfortunately for you the trickle down theory hasn't taken hold in most of Europe.
skip| 4.19.11 @ 5:49PM
1) Entitlements, all one of them, are unconstitutional. Whether they are bad, or good, is completely irrelevant, a non sequitur.
2) Raising taxes, ostensibly to match spending, has virtually nothing to do with tax revenue increases. Over time in America, whether the tax rate is 90% or 20%, Americans adjust their finances such that they will not pay more than 19% of GDP in taxes. Your assumption the choice is either taxes or spending is another non sequitur.
3) You continually present your assumptions in a rambling, often incoherent manner, the only consistency in your manner being a constant stream of non sequiturs.
4) Your use of the english language is grammatically atrocious, you mangle sentences as badly as your attempts at logic which inevitably result in another non sequitur.
Occam's Tool| 4.20.11 @ 6:52PM
Sorry, Skip. You answered that better than I could, and with better logic and grammar.
Occam's Tool| 4.20.11 @ 6:49PM
No, "entitlements" refers to Medicare/caid and Social Security, not loopholes.
Pat| 4.19.11 @ 12:44PM
The S&P folks are being brutally honest about the health of our nation’s finances, Moody’s is less pessimistic than S&P but still they’re moody about America’s financial soundness and Credit Score dot Com is working up a new television commercial where a young Mr. America is turned down for a loan by Mr. Akhiro-san, international loan officer at Japan’s Deep Kimchee Bank – and primarily because America has a dismal credit score of 475. Congress agrees we must first fix the blame before we can fix the problem so the Democrats are blaming it all on George Bush who is somewhere in Texas, no one is quite sure where, fixing his cattle fences and dictating his memoirs. House Republicans are also very concerned but too polite to disagree with the Democrats at this time. California’s governor Jerry Brown advised Washington to “don’t worry, be happy” and offered Obama a hit on his bong.
Former California governor, Ahhnold “the Barbarian” has offered his assistance in this crisis if only we would allow a foreign born citizen to be President. And Vito, “The Icepick”, Bustyurballsa has offered Obama a short term loan at 70% interest, payable weekly to his designated Wise Guys, with the interest paid back before the principle. The European Union of Concerned Nations has formed a support group and are considering an “intervention” where they will confront America and try to make us understand our financial irresponsibility is unacceptable – they plan to point out we have a duty to fight their wars and keep their oil supply safe and therefore our unrestrained borrowing has to stop. So what are we going to do about this – our government is dysfunctional, out of control and filled with self-serving elected employees who lack the personal integrity to pay their overdue parking tickets let alone deal with a major financial crisis.
Will average Americans in our millions rally at the gates of the White House and demand “reform or else”? S&P predicts: “no way”, Moody’s says: “highly unlikely” that would happen and Credit Score dot Com just reduced Mr. America’s credit rating to 450. We used to be a prosperous, wealthy nation but that was then and, unfortunately, this is now. Hey Jerry, would you please pass that bong over here?
Ed| 4.19.11 @ 1:04PM
Obama and the S&P rating reminds me of an old Beach Boys song:
"And we'll have fun, fun, fun, till our daddy takes our Visa away..."
Pat| 4.19.11 @ 7:35PM
Ed, good one. Always enjoyed that old Beach Boys tune, those long ago days were good times, happy memories.
On a serious note, however, this author missed the impact of the S&P action. And what he missed is that among the American government’s various creditors, Americans themselves usually rank 2nd or 3rd place among those creditors holding our government’s debt instruments at any specific time (the ranking fluctuates). If S&P downgrades our country’s credit rating, it would and could impact how much government debt Americans themselves can buy – certain pension funds or money market funds won’t purchase debt instruments below a certain S&P or Moody’s rating – their own fund rules prohibit them from doing so. So, in a way, it’s amusing that S&P’s action may impact whether Americans can buy our own government’s debt instruments - because our ability to pay ourselves back is questionable.
Oldefarte| 4.19.11 @ 1:29PM
To be completely redundant, I'll spin Wild Bill's phrase: IT'S THE GD DEMOCRATS, STUPIDS! R's are bad enough, but IT'S ALL ABOUT THE D'S, since the former are at least now talking spending cuts/governmental reduction [thanks to the blessed folks of the Tea Party movement] while the latter are typically continuing their historical/traditional BS playbook of ROB THE RICH [ANYONE WITH INCOME] TO GIVE TO THE POOR [ANYONE WITHOUT INCOME]. That's all these domestic terrorists D's know, and it's a constant screaming of STICK EM UP, PARDNER! When will the moronic, stupid, imbicilic idiot-voters of this country get it through their thick, empty craniums that the D's are destroying this country? They STUPIDLY [hey, how bout that wording huh?] voted/elected this Chicago community organizer-in-chief in 2008 when there were highway billboards lighting up the interstate highways proclaiming his history, associates, background etc; and the stupid idiotic voters lemmingly followed the Democrat's talking points off of the political cliff into oblivion [the financial ruin that we're now experiencing]. Where were some of you people that are constantly griping, negatively commenting etc prior to 11/2008? Have you just now awakened to the fact of who/what this president and these Democrats are? There is one and only one solution to the fastly approaching disaster, and that is to support/vote for any all R's and/or independent conservatives on your future voting ballots. Since the R's now only control 1/3 of the government and are essentially still powerless, whatever they do or don't do is only a protest until they get more reinforcements starting in 11/2012. Ryan and the R's can't be successful in passing their legislation until such time. What R's need to do now is simply adapt Ryan's budget as it now exists, amended only by incorporating/adding military etc spending cuts not now included in same and eliminating any aspects of same dealing with tax revenue issues [same can be dealt with at a later time; since as stated, this budget crisis is an EXPENSE problem, not a REVENUE problem]. They need to attach their confirmation of their intention to vote together/in mass for Ryan's entire budget plan to the upcoming legislation to their vote FOR RAISING THE DEBT CEILING [but again only with the understanding that the Ryan plan will be entirely voted for in September]. What will happen subsequently will be the D's in the Senate will have to vote against same in order to negate the R's intent to vote in block statement. If the Senate D's vote to pass the debt ceiling YES from the House and to thereby raise the debt ceiling, this will acknowledge their acceptance of the upcoming R's block voting for the Ryan plan in September. This will effectively DRAY THE LINE IN THE SAND for the American voters to hopefully see/understand the true major difference between the two parties concering this defecit/debt problem, and they can then have a clear understanding of how to vote to save this country in November of 2012 by VOTING FOR REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES OR CONSERVATIVE INDEPENDENTS!!!!!!
Bill Bruce | 4.19.11 @ 1:31PM
True leadership is what is needed and the sooner the better. Is Donald Trump a possibility or is he just show boating?
Al Adab| 4.19.11 @ 3:44PM
In re: Trump,
As a culture we seem to confuse celebrity with expertise. Why else would we even ask what Lady Gaga or the Dixie Chicks think about political issues? Donald may be blessed with business acumen (luck and pluck?) and Oprah might think him wonderful but does that qualify for the Presidency. We most often select from Governors and/or successful military leaders. Those have served us well over the centuries. This was the first time since 1960 we selected from the Senate and what have we to show for it? We need to look at the wider world.
Ore Gone| 4.19.11 @ 3:55PM
I watched the Grapes of Wrath last night for the first time since I was kid in the sixties. I remembered it was a great movie and Henry Fonda played a downtrodden reluctant hero. My fathers entire family came from OK very near the spot where the movie starts so it always had some special attraction. Now I could hardly watch it especially the portrayal of the Dept. of Agriculture camp director who had a god like glow about him. It is a piece of big government tripe that says everything would be much better if only we had more government intrusion into our lives. It is small wonder so many people are so confused when we have been spoon fed such crap during our formative years. The Awakening has taken a long time and much credit to the internet with its free flowing information to overcome the massive Hollywood bias and MSM.
Al Adab| 4.19.11 @ 4:12PM
For an alternative vision I would suggest Sinclair Lewis's "It Can't Happen Here". That presents an insight into the dark potential of the "helping" government.
Bill| 4.19.11 @ 4:55PM
In the movie Grapes of Wrath, the Agriculture guy at the federal camp does indeed seem like an angel, and the camp itself like a kind of Heaven, with campers' soviets and all and all...
That was because it was early in the era when the government was intruding into the lives of average citizens, and the things they were doing were simple.
Now it's the government intruding deeper and deeper into our lives after 75 years of intrusion, and it's no longer so simple, good, or valuable. It's just oppressive.
Oldefarte| 4.20.11 @ 11:31AM
Ironically, I purchased recently old/used paperback editions of Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, Sinclair Lewis' Main Street, Fitzgerald's Tender is the Night & The Great Gatsby, and Dickens' Tale of Two Cities from our local library's book sale [which are all old classics and worth my re-reading and co-incidentally that you both mentioned same above]!!!!
With God all things r possible| 4.19.11 @ 8:30PM
Angel of death.
Chris Martel| 4.20.11 @ 4:05AM
The way these idiots in Washington are going I would say we need another revolution. But we all know that is'nt going to happen, the sheeple keep Believing what the MSM tells them, they do not care, as long as they have their American idol and i phones they could give a fig less.
Not to throw a wet blanket on things but there are a couple of things we need to remember:
1. Once people realize they can vote themselves all kinds of entitlements, they become junkies.
2. A full 50% of Americans are now on the public dole, there are not enough of us "regular" Americans left to stem this tide.
3. We have the most porous border in the world, by design I might add, so the democrats get their votes and the republicans get their labor.
4. I believe we are now at a situation where we must place our heads firmly between our legs and kiss our *sses goodbye.
5. Joe McCarthy was right!!!
Appleby| 4.20.11 @ 11:10AM
So was Ayn Rand, now and then. What she was especially right about was that you can't be looted if you have nothing to loot; therefore, stop producing. Get a Joe Job that will keep you and your family and leave nothing over, and contribute your pennies to the private charity (or church) of your choice, secretly and quietly as Jesus told you to, and it won't be long until there's nothing to "redistribute".
Oh, right, you'd have to give up your Binkies. Never mind.
electric winch | 4.20.11 @ 4:15AM
Thanks a lot for sharing the article on cash. That's a awesome article. I enjoyed the article a lot while reading. Thanks for sharing such a wonderful article. I want to say very thank you for this great informations, now I understand about it,thank you!
Occam's Tool| 4.20.11 @ 6:53PM
Incidentally, the cost of living in Europe is MUCH higher than here, which is something Obummer wants to change.
Dee See| 4.21.11 @ 3:12AM
"Folks the entire system has been poisoned.
Anyone who's put before you has already
sworn alegiance to the CFR. Remember, theirs
is the agenda which has destroyed your entire
eonomy and is now taking away sovereignty,
even the appearance of sovereignty. In case
you're not noticing, you are now living in a
soviet surveillance police state. You really are."
-ALAN WATT
(essential online coverage)
REALLY
TRULY
Sam| 4.21.11 @ 10:06PM
Thanks for the link to David Weigel in his own words. I had heard about this but never read it. Disturbing.
Creative Recreation | 8.10.11 @ 10:04PM
is good