-
The Democrats’ Walmart Obsession
June 4, 2013 | 112 comments
-
Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets
May 24, 2013 | 94 comments
-
McCain-Feingold Gave Us the IRS Scandal
May 21, 2013 | 122 comments
-
It’s.The.Law
May 20, 2013 | 20 comments
-
The Taxman Cometh (for Tea Partiers)
May 13, 2013 | 150 comments
Special Report
Thelma and Louise Economics
Patty “Thelma” Murray and Barack “Louise” Obama prepare to drive their country and party over a cliff.
Things didn’t end all that well for Thelma and Louise, in the eponymous 1991 Ridley Scott film, as they drove off a cliff in a desperate effort to evade legal and moral responsibility for having transformed themselves from non-descript mediocrities into common criminals. An alarmingly similar political saga, starring Democrats in Washington, D.C., is playing out today — although, unlike Thelma and Louise’s crimes, plundering citizens is, unfortunately, only illegal if you were not elected to do so.
Given President Obama’s deep love for Hollywood (or at least the money of its residents), one would think that he would be aware of the impact, if you will pardon the obvious pun, of driving off a cliff.
Yet Barack “Louise” Obama along with Senator Patty “Thelma” Murray (D-WA) seem hell-bent on taking the economic version of that same road trip, as if they’ve never seen the end of the movie and aren’t smart enough to figure it out.
In a speech at the Brookings Institution on Monday, Murray, the second-ranking Democrat on the do-nothing Senate Budget Committee and Chairwoman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, put her foot on the accelerator of the Democrats’ doomed joy-ride, saying that her intent is to prevent any tax rate policy deal in Congress that does not include raising taxes on the “wealthy.” By wealthy, Thelma and Louise mean individuals making over $200,000 per year or families earning over $250,000, a standard that Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and a handful of electorally vulnerable Senate Democrats dislike, but one they will go along with when the time comes to cast a vote.
Raising taxes on the two percent of Americans who already pay about half of all federal income taxes is what strikes Democrats as “balanced”: “[I]f we can’t get a good deal — a balanced deal that calls on the wealthy to pay their fair share — then I will absolutely continue this debate into 2013, rather than lock in a long-term deal this year that throws middle-class families under the bus,” said Thelma.
It takes a particular sort of mind to argue that not raising taxes on Mrs. Smith represents throwing Mr. Jones under the bus. It takes a particular sort of mind to claim that the “wealthy” do not pay their “fair share” when the top one percent of earners pay more in federal income taxes than do the bottom 90 percent. Read that again; it is not a typo.
And it takes a charlatan to imply to voters that this tax hike will have a significant impact on the federal debt and deficit: Even the White House’s own notoriously optimistic assumptions anticipate that the additional revenue due to raising the top two marginal income rates will represent less than seven percent of the coming decade’s cumulative deficits.
It is unlikely to do even that.
As the Cato Institute’s Dan Mitchell puts it, “Behind closed doors, Obama’s people must realize that their class-warfare proposal won’t generate as much revenue as projected. Surely they are familiar with the evidence from the 1980s, and they must know that upper-income people have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income.” Perhaps Dan, despite being as cynical about politicians of both parties as anybody I know, nevertheless gives Democrats too much credit: Part of the left’s “fatal conceit” is their deep belief that history is irrelevant against the force of their wills, their wisdom, and their claims of good intentions.
While noting Thelma Murray’s weasel words, “long-term,” which would give her a face-saving way to jam on the brakes and accept a several-month deal to allow the debate to be had during the next Congress rather than in the lame duck session, it’s safe to say Democrats are playing a dangerous game. Are the brakes on the economic automobile, which is speeding toward the fiscal cliff, strong enough to stop it from going over the edge if Democrats keep their foot on the gas until the last possible moment?
When repeating his tax-hiking goal recently, Louise Obama said, “I’m not proposing anything radical here,” but then the definition of “radical” probably has a different meaning to a disciple of Jeremiah Wright and Saul Alinsky than it does to most Americans.
Or does it?
Our elected Thelma and Louise, and other Democratic leaders — a term I use very loosely — believe that Republicans will feel so much political pressure from being perceived as defending the “rich,” will be so bloodied by the slings and arrows of class warfare, that they will cave.
House and Senate Republicans, to their credit, show no sign of weakening. Nevertheless, guided as Democrats are by polls their view is understandable. In what can best be thought of as a damning indictment of Americans’ economic literacy, recent surveys by Rasmussen and Pew suggest that a plurality of our countrymen support the soak-the-rich, beggar-thy-neighbor views of Thelma Murray and Louise Obama, believing that raising taxes on the “rich” would benefit both the economy and “tax fairness.” Thelma and Louise economics, however, will do to your job (unless you work in foreclosures) what the movie characters did to their car.
Republicans make a sound argument about the economic impact of raising taxes, particularly on job creation. But they haven’t made the argument frequently or well enough, nor are they addressing the “fairness” claim, one that fewer Americans would buy into if they had even the most basic understanding of the true structure of our tax code.
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 (122) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ross Kaminsky
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/18/thelma-and-louise-economics
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Drink Earlier, Drink Less
- Celebrating Our Lady of Paris
- How Not To Buy a Fighter
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
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
spike59| 7.18.12 @ 6:51AM
this Administration and its fellow travellers in Congress give ammunition to those who accuse the Dems of deliberately trying to destroy the economy and the nation; what, pray tell, would the Dems do differently if they were TRYING to send us all over a cliff???
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 9:43AM
Funny thing about Ammunition. It don't do any good, sitting in the Box, on a Shelf. It's only good if you use it.
Now, does anyone think that Johnnie Boner, and his Blinking Bonettes, over there in The House, have Learned ANYTHING yet, about making Deals with the Devil? What about All Talk McConnell?
Anybody think he's Grown a Pair, since he last drew an Imaginary Line, in the Sand?
Maybe if we just MADE OUR POINT, for once?
Maybe, if we EXPLAINED to the American People that ANY Raise in Taxes, at this time, is just Gasoline on a Fire?
Maybe if we used The Muslim's OWN WORDS, when defending his decision to extend the Bush Tax Rates?
If Pissy Patty wants to bring about Fiscal Armegeddon?
Call her bluff.
Then ask the American people just what have these Democrats proposed, in the last 3 years, has Worked? What have they DEMANDED, that has resulted in the Creation of Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs, and brought the Unemployment Rate Crashing to the Ground?
What have they done that has resulted in ANYTHING, besides a Check from the Government, and a Minimal Existence ala The Soviet Union?
Stop Blinking, every time you get in a Staredown with these Lying MFers.
You've got the Ammunition.
USE IT!
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 10:25AM
Republicans are absolutely hopeless. If you're not careful, you could get cynical.
Brookschwarzenegro | 7.18.12 @ 3:18PM
This is TLP:
"Don't these GOPsheep know that the Demonrats
are out to screw them ROYALLY?
Isn't it time for an all out THERMONUCLEAR WAR??
In the meantime, best thing to do is to drive around in an 18 Wheeler CONVERTED INTO A FLAMEFLOWER!!!
So when you see a devil wearing a blue dress,
you cook the sumbitch like a potroast on Sunday morning.
And then you piss on the ashes."
MK48| 7.18.12 @ 8:26PM
I like it................
MelvinNC| 7.18.12 @ 7:03AM
For Patty Murray a past faced nondescript bureaucrat drone who is basking in the adulation of her master Barrack Obama, I have but one German description of this hack, "Dumme Schlampe." I hope this Dumme Schlampe enjoys her fifteen minutes of fame, because the Country is going to suffer through 15 years of economic hell because of her.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 7:52AM
Assume that the Democrats increase taxes on the "rich" ... what then? The nation's debt will not be reduced and the economy will not improve. What then is their next step? Even higher taxes? Which won't solve the basic problem of too much spending. Eventually there can be no more income to tax. That leaves only the wealth tax and nationalization of property along with repudiation of the nation's debt. Hyper-inflation then eliminates all remaining wealth.
We are approaching lock and load time.
Louis Jenkins| 7.18.12 @ 1:36PM
In a personal opinion, it is way past that time.
JohnLeo| 7.18.12 @ 2:34PM
To find out what happens next, just study the history of Argentina form 1912 to the present.
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 3:46PM
Just Study the End Results of ANY Marxist Worker's Paradise.
If Leftist Utopianism Failure had a Batting Average?
It would always be 1,000.
Riff Raff| 7.18.12 @ 8:04AM
Can someone explain how Patty Murray has a job?! This infamous lunatic is best known for claiming in the immediate aftermath of 9-11 that Osama Bin Laden is a hero in the Middle East because he builds schools and day-care centers. How can such a person get RE-elected? Are they all nuts in Washington? And this goofball is peaching economics?! What?!
Dr. Emilio Lizardo| 7.18.12 @ 10:05AM
Western Washington from Olympia to north of Seattle swarms with liberals following its Californication. The same morons who repeatedly return the likes of Patty Murray to the US Senate are waiting in the wings to return BHO to the White House, aided by their fellow travelers from coast to coast, a lapdog media and entertainment industry to help foot the bill. If this country is so blind as to the ineptitude of its Democrat leaders and returns Obama to the White House, hell, we might not be worth saving.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 10:33AM
The silent majority is still silent. Can't break through the media blackout, except on election day. The level of frustration and anger is rising. The Tea Party really helps, but they can't do it alone. I get that most conservatives are really losing patience with congressional Republicans, who could stop most of this if they tried.
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 3:50PM
Emiliooooooooooooo.
Hat Tip - Stan Smith - American Dad.
Funniest Show on Television.
Every night at 10:00 and 10:30 on Cartoon Network.
You're Welcome.
Houdini| 7.18.12 @ 5:05PM
The nuts are located in western Washington, not in the eastern counties.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 7:44PM
Like California. The Central Valley is loaded with conservatives.
Anthony| 7.18.12 @ 8:20AM
Well, Obozo and Holder, the real Thelma & Louise, will also drive off the cliff as a result of Fast & Furious.
When these two lawless bastards get arrested for being accessories to the murder of two American agents, and hundreds of innocent Mexicans, America will have finally regained its senses, and not a moment sooner.
It's all spinning out of control, and America needs a real leader to put a stop to this lawlessness. The alternative is too ugly to contemplate.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 10:34AM
Noticed how Issa's investigation has all but disappeared? It's following the usual Republican do-nothing pattern. Are you angry yet?
Louis Jenkins| 7.18.12 @ 1:39PM
Angry, I'm livid. The Republicans have once more swept the entire investigation under the rug, and, let's face it, it will not be nor never be a major contention for the election debate. If, however, it had been a conservative issue the MSM would never shut up.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 7:46PM
If he wasn't careful, a guy could get cynical.
R Martin| 7.18.12 @ 8:34AM
The Obama “fairness” call is in the same genre as “hope and change”—broad, vague and impossible to define. Most people think “fair” is a good thing, but few stop to consider what constitutes fairness and (more important) who decides what is fair. Strong arguments could be made that the highest income earners are unfairly overtaxed while too many earners are unfairly under taxed. So the logical extension of the argument must be that to be objectively “fair” we must all earn the same amount and be taxed equally. Such a policy would turn the American dream on its head and ignore the long history of failed economies and societies which have tried it.
Mimi | 7.18.12 @ 8:42AM
Thanks Ross good article!
Poor "THELMA".....she is going to dred the day, she agreed to become the mouthpiece for the latest Democratic extortion /blackmail threat. They are "HELL" bent on getting the GOP to raise taxes so they can castigate their character of not honoring their NO-TAX pledge..it is on their must-do list for getting re-elected!
Ben Bernacke just shot the idea DOWN...warning a sure recession if Taxes are increased.
This BLACKMAIL attempt , and the way it was worded is sure amaturism. Every Mom knows when you answer a WHINE of a 3 yr old ....all you get is another WHINE !
Surly the STATE of Washington , can get themselves a better Senator than this...can she be recalled or impeached? A state so big can find a more honorable man /women to represent them!
Thelma & Louise are now caught in a NET! Life in our Nation is serious business....no time for " GAMES!"
jaytrain| 7.18.12 @ 8:57AM
Democracy is the principle that the people know what they want and deserve to get it , good and hard . H.L. Mencken
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 3:53PM
"Democracy is the worst form of Government, except for all the others."
Winston Churchill.
"Once the people realize that they can VOTE THEMSELVES MONEY, it's all over."
Thomas Jefferson.
(I'm paraphrasing.)
Kwan| 7.18.12 @ 9:04AM
Obama and the left are trying to inculcate the message that those that earn a certain income due to hard work, education, family wealth, or business success are somehow the enemy of the American people, and need to have their excess income confiscated. This is classic communist rhetoric that tries to rally the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. This is suppose to be America not some Orwellian People's Republic. Obama is a master of deception and a serial liar, if the American voters are dumb enough to fall for this Marxist propaganda, then they have only themselves to blame for the disastrous results that will follow.
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 3:57PM
"If I went to work for a Corporation? It would be like going over to the ENEMY."
Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro/Abu Hussein. (Evil always goes by Multiple Names.)
Again, I'm paraphrasing.
Look it up!
Kwan| 7.19.12 @ 12:08AM
Communist Chinese Scientist Dr. Yen Lo: Attractive plant you have here.
Soviet Agent Zilkov: Thank you, doctor. It's actually a rest home for wealthy alcoholics. We were able to purchase it three years ago. Except for this floor and the floor above it, which is sealed off for security purposes, the rest functions quite normally. In fact it's one of the few Soviet operations in America that actually showed a profit at the end of the last fiscal year.
Dr. Yen Lo: Profit? Fiscal year? Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! Beware, my dear Zilkov. The "virus" of capitalism is highly infectious. Soon you'll be lending money out at interest! .....The Manchurian Candidate
SCPOret| 7.18.12 @ 9:10AM
Since the Dumbocrats "soak the rich" plan will only fund the government for 8 days, how are the going to get the money to fund the other 357 days. Can you say go after the middle class, and then everyone above the poverty level. When they're through we'll all be below the poverty level.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 10:38AM
It's not about funding the government. It's about separating the middle class from their assets and turning them into have-nots. It's just one aspect of class warfare.
vtwin| 7.18.12 @ 9:10AM
Bain Capital is selling another American company, Sensata, which Bain acquired from Texas instruments 2006, to the Communist Chinese. The Communist Chinese will profit selling the products made by Sensata back to Americans as will Mitt Romney the largest share holder of Bain Capital while several hundred American workers will lose their jobs and the American economy will further decline vis a vi China. All encouraged by the United State tax code.
http://www.journalstandard.com.....st-layoffs
Crassus| 7.18.12 @ 10:18AM
Good for Bain. At least somebody is making money these days besides Obama's cronies.
vtwin| 7.18.12 @ 12:08PM
Bain Capital, creating the next generation of food stamps recipient, one off-shored job at a time.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 1:01PM
Idiot. I know the rules say to be nice. But, what else is possible with an idiotic comment by vtwin who wouldn't know an offshore job from a Fisker electric car.
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 3:58PM
Nice.
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 2:51PM
It is the government that is creating the "next generation of food stamp recipients."
Anthony| 7.18.12 @ 3:29PM
vtwin, Looks like Compton Calf is the next CA city to declare bankruptcy. Jeez, who knew the domino theory worked for bankrupt CA cities as well as Communism?
Hey vtwin, pretty soon, we'll off shore CA to Mexico.
Oh, Obozo did that already with Fast & Furious?
Hope your Spanish is better than your politics, Senor vtwin.
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 4:02PM
You mean like The Messiah's American Jobs Czar - Jeffery NO TAXES Immelt's - GE?
The UAW's GM?
Or, do you mean Fisker?
Please specify.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 7:50PM
What do you expect Bain to do, sell to the second or third highest bidder? "Bain" isn't some abstract evil concept. It's owned by stockholders, as are all the big, evil corporations. And your own pension fund probably owns those shares. Shooting oneself in the foot is typical of most liberal rants.
JP| 7.18.12 @ 12:17PM
Texas Instruments makes commodities - ie low end IC and memory chips that run the kind of inexpensive crap you buy at Dollar General. Hell, Taco Bell has more value than Texas Instruments. Only a fool would invest in Texas Instruments.
Not sure what your point is, other than Bain made a small fortune for its investors. Let the Chicoms chase these low end companies - no one else does.
Marie| 7.18.12 @ 9:18AM
I wonder if Patty Murray has "accidently" sent a campaign donation begging letter to the Koch brothers lately. LOL. Apparently, campaign donations are so secretive these days (according to Rachel Maddow and Senator Tester) that maybe we will never know. Again, LOL.
paintbrush| 7.18.12 @ 9:33AM
Since the stimulus was nothing more than extending the base line for spending, we are pretty near the point in which Thelma and Louise drive off the cliff…perhaps they can take a bus this time along with all those rapacious unions, federal micro-managers, crony capitalists, dependency social engineers, the main stream media and those wonderful greens. Nothing like watching the political Gong Show as we all head to the abyss….
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 4:12PM
Actually, the Stimulus/Slush Fund was for giving Hundreds of Billion$ to Blue States, to keep their Public Employees on the job, and Paying Dues to their Union Leaders, who, in turn, would send them to Obama's Coffers.
It was for funneling Stimulus Money to Obama's Biggest Contributor's and Biggest Bundler's "Front Companies" such as SOLYNDRA, and FISKER, that they could siphon off that Taxpayer Money, back to The Muslim.
In the words of Walter Cronkite: That's the way it is.
SoSueMe001| 7.18.12 @ 9:41AM
Yeah, Patty, draw a line in the sand...and then trip over it! (is the cliff just beyond?)
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 10:12AM
Kaminsky is a con man - this isn't about raising taxes on the rich. It's about letting a temporary tax cut created by Bush expire – the cuts were not legally set down as permanent changes to the tax code.
And they've already been extended by two years. To extend the top earner's low rate would drive the deficit up by more than $2 trillion over 10 years – I thought you wanted to get the deficit down.
And congratulations to Ross for learning a new word - 'eponymous' - guess this will figure a lot from now on.
Ross Kaminsky| 7.18.12 @ 10:26AM
Jack,
The tax cuts are the law today. If rates are allowed to rise, that's a tax hike compared to what we're paying today.
By the way, even the liberals who want the tax hike only claim it will raise $1 trillion, not $2 trillion, but $1 trillion is too high an estimate.
By the way, the real con in this discussion is when the left says that keeping the current rates, or tax cuts in general, "cost" money.
No, the money belongs to those who earn it. If a tax rate is prevented from rising, that simply means that government is plundering us less.
And, I repeat, your "soak the rich" plans are estimated even by Obama's crew at raising less than 7% of the money needed to eliminate the deficit.
So, even if you got your wish, and even if their estimates were right, what would you do, "Jack", to get our fiscal mess under control?
mike 3/505| 7.18.12 @ 10:41AM
"No, the money belongs to those who earn it. If a tax rate is prevented from rising, that simply means that government is plundering us less."
This needs to be shouted from the rooftops, loud and long...especially when some Liberal speaks of tax breaks "costing" the government. I absolutely despise, hate....I cannot think of a harsher word to describe my feelings towards folks who think government owns all the money and we are "blessed" by whatever allowance we are allowed to keep.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 11:10AM
At least you're honest - your position is pure ideology, namely 'the money belongs to those who earn it' and that the price of inequality and societal dysfunction is well worth paying.
As you know, there is no correlation between low tax rates for the well off and job creation and economic progress - quite the reverse, in fact.
At least restoring reasonable tax rates helps to address the deficit - you have no plan at all, just Randian ideology.
Bu the way - what do you think Romney is hiding in his tax returns? Why even Sarah Palin was a better bet that him for McCain...
Drunken Sailor| 7.18.12 @ 11:21AM
"your position is pure ideology, namely 'the money belongs to those who earn it' and that the price of inequality and societal dysfunction is well worth paying."
So, you admit Jack, that you believe the money people make belongs to the goverment first. Tell me, do you send the money you do not use back to Uncle Sam or do you save it? Afterall wouldn't sending your unused money back be the patriotic thing to do to support job creation, infrastructure, etc?
Idiot.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 12:05PM
No, I believe we would have a more productive, stable, healthier and engaged nation with less inequality, as we've seen both here in post-war years and in countries such as Germany, Netherlands , Sweden etc. That doesn't mean giving all your money to the government.
JP| 7.18.12 @ 12:28PM
You've got to be kidding? Germany, Netherlands, Sweden? Take your head out of your butt and try visiting those nations. I have. I can tell you those nations are far from "equal". Go to Berlin Wedding, or Leipzig, or Frankfurt, Chemlo.
Do you ever wonder why the Germans have essentially exported their auto-manufacturing to the US? All of their North American operations were (the only market that shows growth potential) relocated to the US. DItto for most of the Dutch firms? And Sweden, with its tiny, mainly urban population has lower corporate and capital gains tax rates than the US. Sweden also allows many small private health insurance companies that use market techniques to underwrite and sell health insurance (Canada has the same thing, which even pays for Canadians who visit US doctors). Both Holland and Germany have super rich baby boomers, as well as large urban poor who remain comfortably destitute. Is that what you want here? Obama does.
Norway, since 1992 has cut its central government spending, and its wealth is derived from the drilling and selling of fossil fuels. Norway remains the 5th largest oil producers in the world.
Jack,
You need to update your talking points. The Clinton era rhetoric is getting stale.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 12:59PM
I go to Europe a lot - but in any case what you say is just not true. Inequality is much less in these countries, and they benefit greatly from universal healthcare, high quality education and training (Germany especially), excellent infrastructure, good quality and affordable housing, and good industrial policy (again, Germany).
And for your reference - German auto makers make more cars at home than they do abroad.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 1:08PM
Jack, wrong again.
Germany produced autos domestically: 5,871,918.
Germany produced autos offshore: 7,108,600.
Source: http://www.vda.de/en/zahlen/ja.....roduktion/
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 1:19PM
Unlike, you, I'm happy to say if I've got something wrong - I was looking at figures from about 5 years ago. But the figures you cite are impressive - showing growth both at home and abroad. Looks like great success to me.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 1:30PM
Jack, and wrong again. Universal healthcare? Germany deducts approx 14% of an individual's pay for health insurance which is then matched by the employer. Approx 10% of Germans are not covered. Private health insurance is used by those Germans who can afford the premium. Otherwise, they do without health insurance.
"But the greatest problem facing the German system today is its exploding costs. Technological advances and new drugs have made health care costs skyrocket. Moreover, Germany's rapidly aging society is straining the system to its breaking point. Ultimately, in the German model, today's workforce (and its employers) pay for the health costs of those now retired, who are using the system the most. With an ever older population and sagging birth rates across Europe, it leaves fewer people paying for the health care costs of ever more people. Closing this gap is the dilemma that Germany's political class faces, and to which it has so far found no answer at all."
Death rate in Germany: 10.9 per 1,000.
Death rate in USA: 7.9 per 1,000.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 4:35PM
Most developed nations are facing ageing populations - nothing unique there. But I can't let your insurance stat go - only about 0.2% of Germans are not insured. How many Americans?
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 5:36PM
Jack: I'll agree partly with you on this one. My 10% was an overstatement ... I should have written 8%. Some 92 percent of Germany's residents receive health care through statutory health insurance, that is, the GKV, for which they pay. It ain't free. The German government estimates that most of those not on GKV obtain private insurance and that only .2% (as you state) are naked. I could not easily find anything about medical care for illegals residing in Germany.
In Germany compulsory insurance according to the law doesn't apply to every citizen.
In general, those who are self-employed are exempt from compulsory insurance. Whatever their income level, they have a choice of buying a state-run insurance plan, buying a private plan -- or saving the money and going without insurance altogether.
Even German company employees can opt out of the state run insurance schemes if they earn enough money to do so. The current upper limit for compulsory insurance is a salary of €3,862 ($4,750) per month. Anyone who earns more than that can opt out.
Cont.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 5:37PM
Jack: cont.
As for the uninsured in the USA, there are those who, as in Germany, elect not to purchase insurance for personal reasons. Everyone else in the USA (including illegals), who do not have a private insurance policy, can obtain health care at any emergency room as required by federal law and is thus a form of insurance. In addition, there is Medicaid for the poor. I am unaware of anyone who can not obtain health care in the USA and believe that the USA compares favorably with Germany in this respect.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 6:27PM
No - you must have been living on a different planet during all the healthcare debate. The ER is not the same as the universal healthcare the Europeans have, but you know that. You also know that in states like Texas the Medicaid qualification is so low that most are not eligible and millions are uninsured, while Perry turns federal dollars away to insure them.He really is a monster.
JP| 7.18.12 @ 1:36PM
Jack, pleeeze. Outside of China, the US has spent more on infrastructure than any nation on earth these last 10 years (over $2 trillion). We invest more in education, bridges, harbors, highways, railways, sewers, streets, and utility lines. But, you wouldn't know that driving through any of our large cities. And almost all of our large cities are run by Dems. Does that tell you anything?
Other than having less corruption, Germany doesn't have much going for it. And If I were you, I would research German auto exports. Thanks to Americanc consumers, German autos remain viable. In Europe, the loss of living standards amongst the working class leaves them little to spend on new cars. If you're an unemployed die maker in Germany you have 3 options - a Trabant, a Yugo, or your feet (most Germans cannot afford to public transportation).
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 4:41PM
Germany is the world's third largest exporter and its economy is in much better shape than most. I've been to Munich and Hamburg recently and have friends in the country – they tell me that apart from right wing Aryan types, many of whom we have here too, the country is in relatively good shape compared with the US , in factors such as employment, educational attainment and in particular middle class living standards.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 1:46PM
Jack, affordable housing in Germany? Owning a house in Frankfurt am Main (Germany) is 67% more expensive than in Santa Fe (New Mexico) (United States), and Santa Fe is not cheap.
Rent is less expensive due to rent controls. Approx 60% of Germans rent as opposed to own their home.
So, if you want to rent, housing is more affordable. But, if you want to own then housing is more expensive.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 4:36PM
That's right - they have had no sub-prime crisis. A good thing, no?
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 5:46PM
Jack: Germany has strict controls over mortgage borrowing and thus avoided the disaster caused by the CRA. They did, and do, have their head screwed on when it comes to mortgages.
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1977, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law, signed by President Carter, designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to help meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining. The 95th Congress, both chambers with a Democratic majority was the last time either party held a filibuster-proof (60 member) majority in the Senate, until the 111th United States Congress in 2009 (in which both chambers once again held a Democratic majority.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 6:05PM
No, the CRA was set up to address discrimination and never required a lender to make unwise lending. It's lack of impact can be seen in the huge fine that Wells Fargo got a few days ago for - and wait for it - discriminatory lending to minorities.
R Martin| 7.18.12 @ 1:46PM
It is only you leftists who (claim to) care about inequality. The rest of us understand that America's strength is the freedom of its citizens to use their skills and ingenuity to stand out, prosper and be exceptional. It's going to take a lot more than Obama and his minions to kill that drive.
mike 3/505| 7.18.12 @ 4:20PM
Jack...I make no bones about wanting to keep more of what I earn. I also make no bones about being absolutely willing to contribute State and Local taxes for local roads, firemen, policemen & teachers. I also have no problem in paying Federal taxes for Defense and the othe constitutional functions of the Federal government.
I also...absolutely believe in giving to charity...and I do so....much more effectively than the Federal government can 1) No overhead...I give directly to the needy and 2) I am inherently much more qualified than anybody in any government, to decide who is worthy of my charity.
Now about Governor Romney's tax returns....The only thing you will see is more of the same...nothing to hide...He's rich...he makes a lot of money and most of it is from capital gains...so what? If I were he, I would tell everyone to pack sand...if he gives in on 10 years worth...the Chicago thugs will demand 20....It's a losing game. He needs to ignore the demands...and ignore any mem,ber of the press who asks...Remember "access" is a "reward" for compliant press weenies.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 5:07PM
Well good Mike, except for two things - we do need some direction in where we invest in supporting our community otherwise there will be significant losers and a lack of services where they are most needed.
And as for Romney - well it could be he paid no taxes at all in 2009. I don't think he's the right person to be POTUS in a time of such stark inequality. I'd have some time for him if he'd campaigned as a genuine Republican proud of Romneycare and not a tool of the tea bags.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 5:55PM
Who is this WE you refer to, Kimosabe? If local government, leaving out the idiots in the federal government, spent out taxes only on needed services (sanitation, water, police, fire fighters) then I doubt that any direction is needed. But, we damn sure need direction when it comes to bike paths and all the other junk you progressives are so proud of because it makes you feel good.
As for Obama, maybe he really is not a citizen, could be in your terminology, and Romney might have paid a load of taxes, again, could be.
I can tell that you are losing interest in our discussion as you are down to tea bagging and thus you may now depart to finer quarters where the conversation will be more stimulating (ummm, agreeable?).
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 6:20PM
I'm thinking or services such as primary healthcare, care homes, hospices, young people's services, housing, employment services, training etc - we need the right balance of these things. It's no good giving all the cash to the animal shelters.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 6:22PM
Oh, and Romney I think is going to have to put up his returns and tough it out - it's a hard life when you have Swiss bank accounts to be sure and I think he'll sweep the sympathy vote.
mike 3/505| 7.18.12 @ 7:02PM
It is absolutely good giving all the cash to the animal shelters...Try and absorb this concept...the best place for any gift...is exactly where the gift giver and the gift receiver are in agreement. If everyone wants to give to the animal shelters, then the animal shelters are inherently more deserving. You don't get to decide where my charity is best used. I, on the other hand, don't get to decide where yours goes.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 8:01PM
"As you know, there is no correlation between low tax rates for the well off and job creation and economic progress - quite the reverse, in fact."
Are you kidding? There is a direct correlation between lower taxes and increased economic activity. Every time taxes are lowered, economic expansion soon follows. And, since the wealthy pay the largest share of taxes by far, any tax reduction will logically benefit them proportionally.
As to hiding documents, why is Obama hiding his college records? His entire background is fiction. Why does he have a Connecticut SS card? He never lived there. We have no idea who he really is.
Ross Kaminsky| 7.18.12 @ 11:02AM
Oh, "Jack", I used "eponymous" on these pages a little over three months ago...
http://spectator.org/archives/.....opinions/1
Is that too frequent a use of the word for you? I'll be very sure to tread carefully around your editing guidance.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 11:45AM
Ross, please leave poor Jack alone. His brain is scrambled enough.
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 11:56AM
Mr. London, like Obama and most Bozo-Socialists, "thinks" (if you could call it that) that wealth and prosperity are made possible by government roads and the internet. But the truth is, government roads and the internet are made possible by wealth and prosperity. Without wealth and prosperity to TAX, government has no source of revenue to build the roads and internet. "Jack" and his hero have it exactly backwards.
Furthermore, it is "Jack" and his type who employ pure ideology, and certainly not economics. His idea is that money belongs first and foremost to government, not to those who earn it. His notion that this produces "inequality" and that such inequality is a "price" that "society pays" is a ridiculous notion. Even rats in a laboratory are not treated equally, yet "Jack" thinks such complete equality is not only possible but the purpose of government to bring about. Such ideas are self-evidently ludicrous and "Jack" is in a very practical sense, nuts.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 12:21PM
Albertus - the key question is whether building the Internet, roads, researching new technologies etc leads to more economic growth and advances that more than pay back our investment. I would say most certainly.
I know I shouldn't be surprised, but I was startled yesterday to see people here arguing for the shutting down of all federal labs such as Brookhaven, Sandia, National Cancer Institute etc. How they think early stage research will be funded I really don't know – I guess they think Europe will do it for us, as with the Higgs particle.
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 12:42PM
Researching new technologies DOES lead to more prosperity (usually, but not always) but this is the function of private individuals and businesses, NOT the federal government. Federal government programs ostensibly intended for such things are rife with corruption and failure (e.g. Solyndra, et.al.). The US Government has absolutely ZERO legal authority to "invest" taxpayer money in such things. That's what the market does, and it does it much better and with far less corruption than government.
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 12:44PM
Once again, let me stress that it is government supervised infrastructure that is the RESULT of wealth, economic growth, and prosperity. It is not the cause. The cart does not pull the horse.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 1:15PM
Sorry Albertus – but businesses do not invest in basic research and much of the applied science we see in action today because there is no short-term commercial value. If you shut down our universities and laboratories we might as well switch off the lights.
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 1:28PM
"...businesses do not invest in basic research..."
This is flatly untrue. The PC you are typing this drivel on is proof of that. And even if it were true, it is irrelevant. The Federal Government has no legal power to "invest" and any such "investment" is always rife with corruption and waste. Note: The best techincal universities are private, not government. Technology is not going to disappear if the federal government obeys the law. So far none of the premises for your arguments are valid.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 3:34PM
You don't understand what basic research is. Building a PC is not basic research or even applied research. It was the quantum mechanics that have us the transistor, and all manner of materials science that gave us technologies such as lithium batteries that underlie a commodity like a PC.
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 4:30PM
I understand perfectly what it is. You still do not address the issue. Government is not the source of wealth and prosperity. It never has been. It never can be. Government is built FROM wealth and prosperity. Nothing you cite contradicts this.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 4:43PM
If government research discovered how to turn lead into gold, would you still say that?
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 5:08PM
If a private corporation discovered how to turn lead into gold, would you still say government made it happen?
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 5:09PM
And, yes I WOULD still say that, because government would have NO revenue to put into this supposed "research" absent the wealth and prosperity of the People whose taxes pay for it. You are still putting the cart before the horse.
mike 3/505| 7.18.12 @ 7:09PM
Yes...because the minute it did so, gold would n o longer be a precious metal, thus destroying that particular industry...But...I am glad you bought up that example....Although government does not create wealth...it does do a pretty good job at destroying it.
Albertus Magnus| 7.18.12 @ 5:15PM
Incindentally, the transistor was developed by private individuals over several decades whose research and development culminated in Bell Labs' production and marketing of it. This was NOT a government operation.
Furthermore, in the 1960's the Japanese government's technology subsidy program (MITI) refused to fund development of the transistor, thinking it had no future. SONY opted out of MITI at that time and proceeded with transistorized products to great success. Again, NOT a government operation.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 5:31PM
I think we are basically in agreement. Of course all government comes from us because it is us. It's an organizational construct like a giant company. But unlike a company we can prioritize things like insurance in old age that no company ever would because there is no profit.
And I totally agree that are great examples of private companies doing great research - but Bell Labs, sadly, is no research powerhouse these days.
The truth is that on balance, the public sector tends to back the high risk long term curiousity driven research - which is essential - while the private sector tends to go for shorter term applied gains.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 8:15PM
Albertus, It's like talking to a brick wall. All Jack has to do is review some annual reports to see how much money corporations plow back into research. Drug companies spend billions. Most high tech companies spend a ton. After all they're "high tech." Medical device companies spend a ton. Why do they do this? To compete in the marketplace and to earn a return for their stockholders.
That concept is repugnant to liberals, but all of this evil commercial activity is the source of other people's money they love to spend.
As I said above, allow a liberal to ramble on for a while and they'll shoot themselves in the foot. Killing the golden goose is another term for it.
What absolutely amazes me is how a country like ours can be populated by so many suicidal idiots.
Jack London| 7.19.12 @ 7:59AM
You still don't comprehend that most basic research takes place in government sponsored labs - destroy those and you destroy the commercial research base for our companies, which as you rightly point out also do R&D to take things to market, but most of which relies on academic work.
JP| 7.18.12 @ 12:42PM
Jack,
The internet as we know it was not built by the federal government. DARPA, in its 35 years, was only able to build a crappy text based communications system, that was limited to 56k serial based infrastructure that was used by less than 3000 people. For all of their taxpayer funding, DARPA couldn't even build a simple routing protocol other than RIP. It was up to firms like Sun Micro, Novel, Cisco, Compuserve, and later Netscape, and AOL who poured billions of private venture capital into the infrastructure that made up the internet. And speaking of private firms, it was Bell Labs that did the original research of TCP/IP way back in 1969.
Even if DARPA didn't exist, private firms would have done it.
PolishKnight| 7.18.12 @ 1:41PM
This was largely done by systems such as compuserve and AOL. They brought internet to the masses and even helped generate catch phrases "you've got mail" or a "Me-too"er! The elite business and academic people with internet access looked down upon the peasants (I was one of them!)
However, from the old academic days came open source and the international nature of the internet that private businesses are trying to kill off such as Microsoft's internet exploder and .net protocol. Thank heavens so many people refuse to use it.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 2:01PM
Look, leaving politics aside here for a minute, I'm sure we can agree that the history of the Internet is actually a good example of public-private transition. You cannot discount ARPAnet or CERN in the story, and in fact it was Vincent Cerf at Stanford who came up with TCP/IP for the DoD.
JP| 7.18.12 @ 3:38PM
I agree. But, most in the DOD were happy with it. Private firms saw quite a few problems and limitations. From 1969 to 1990 private firms (with an eye ultimately towards profits) made significant changes to it. In one of the great ironies of technology, it was Novel (who developed its own protocol (IPX,SPX) did more to improve TCP/IP than even SCO. It was this version of TCP/IP that made its way forward, and eventually put other protocols to bed (remember AppleTalk and Dec?).
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 4:18PM
Everybody responding to this IDIOT, is just beating his head against a wall.
Think: Tom Cruise, and Scientology.
You can't fix Dumbass.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 8:18PM
You really can't. About all you can do is out vote them. There is something about other people's freedom that drives them nuts. They absolutely can't stand that.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 4:54PM
Good - we agree on something at least. The point is well made - that the federal funding often makes fundamental breakthroughs, while venture capital and commercialization refines and takes it to market, which is exactly the model we've been pursuing for many years.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 5:59PM
Federal funding sometimes, NOT often, makes fundamental breakthroughs. Mostly federal funding results in bankruptcy for those they fund. If you can say "often" then I can say "mostly."
And yes, Tim, you can't fix Dumbass. I didn't have much useful to do today after paying my taxes so I been beating my head against a brick wall.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 6:12PM
No, most scientific breakthroughs in modern science are in the public domain, often because of their sheer scale. Here's a good example, which I've just been reading in the NYT:
"The colon cancer study, published on Wednesday in Nature, is the first part of a sweeping effort that is expected to produce a flood of discoveries for a wide range of cancers. The colon cancer findings will soon be followed by studies of lung and breast cancers and, later this year, of acute myeloid leukemia. The $100-million-a-year Cancer Genome Atlas project is being financed by two government agencies, the National Cancer Institute and the National Human Genome Research Institute."
And you want to defund these agencies? Really? I just don't understand why we'd want to do that.
Pecos Pete| 7.18.12 @ 10:29PM
The USA is $16 Trillion in debt with the president proposing ongoing deficits of at least a trillion a year and you want to spend more? Sure, cancer research is a worthwhile effort if done by private money, not tax money. You bet, I'd cancel the $100 million a year Cancer Genome Atlas project grant in a flat minute. Jack, we be out of money. You remind me of my son when he was 3 years old and wanted a new toy every time we visited a store.
Jack London| 7.19.12 @ 7:55AM
So you'd destroy our leadership position in biomedical research - I hate to be rude but really you are an utter fool.
Jack London| 7.18.12 @ 12:15PM
Sorry Ross - my bad. I'll try and spot a genuine new 'mot du jour' in future.
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 4:22PM
Hey Ross!
Hey Great White Tourist!
How about taking Jack on your next trip to Shrunken Head World, and make a Trade with the local Tribal Chief.
And, don't worry.
He'll never know that Jack hasn't got a Brain in his head.
In fact, it might even be a Plus, in the whole Shrunken Head process.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 8:21PM
Ross, your Thelma and Louise comparison is priceless. A direct hit, as I like to say.
JP| 7.18.12 @ 12:12PM
Jack,
Is 11 years temporary? Good grief you people are jack asses. The federal government spends close to $4 trillion (of which over $1.1 trillion is borrowed). This nation doesn't have a tax problems as much as it has a spending problem.
And the last time taxes were raised to lower the deficit, the deficit went up (see Bush and Darman's tax increases circa 1991).
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 8:20PM
And, see Jack Kennedy's tax decreases.
cicero| 7.18.12 @ 1:42PM
I can't believe that the Democrats are really serious in their claims that a rise in the rate of taxation will do anything to reduce the deficit, or solve any of the problems of the country. Their only goal is to remain in power for another cycle. To think otherwise is to completely disregard recent (not to say, ancient) history.
The idea is to fix the terms of battle on the issue of tax "fairness". This allows them to choose the ground, and the weapons. The real issue is spending. The real battle ground is the United States Senate, which has refused to pass a budget for this entire term. Spending cannot be controlled if there is no budget, and no accounting for the peoples' money. Taxation is merely a red herring.
PolishKnight| 7.18.12 @ 1:47PM
Regarding the Thelma and Louise analogy. I'm reminded of a Polish joke (truly Polish, not Americanized).
A Pole goes to the bank during communist times and asks the manager if his money is safe. He says not to worry since the money is guaranteed by the communist Polish treasury.
The Pole asks what that's guaranteed by and the manager says that's guaranteed by the Soviet treasury.
Then the Poles asks what that's guaranteed by and the manager replies:
"Well, if the Soviet Union collapses then you lose your money. But it's worth it, isn't it?"
We're in the middle of a culture war and the S.C. decision reminds us that this isn't going to won cheaply (pun intended.) It's going to get messy. If we had gone to battle on this perhaps at the end of the cold war, this probably would have been a lot easier but conservatives couldn't address the underlying issues: feminism, women's equality, immigration, and the 300 lb gorilla in the room: worker relations. The left has successfully created a distrust with the Republicans with labor, including private labor, which has outsourced work often at the cost both to labor and consumers (Hello, this is Peggy...)
TLP| 7.18.12 @ 4:34PM
I disagree.
I believe that, after Pharaoh pissed away the Shovel Ready Infrastructure Jobs money, and his Illegal Drilling Moratorium, and his Denial of the XL Pipeline, even though HIS OWN State Department APPROVED it?
Rank and File Union Guys GET IT.
They wanna WORK.
I believe that they realize that he is No Friend of theirs, and needs to GO.
Trust Me.
PolishKnight| 7.18.12 @ 4:45PM
I agree that rank and file labor doesn't trust Obama anymore but the problem, similar to 4 years ago, is getting Republican voters to the polls.
Simply being the anti-Obama and hoping enough discontents show up is a safe strategy and may even work if Romney doesn't blow it and praise La Raza like McCain did, but he really ought to come up with some good original platforms rather than warmed up Reaganomics and tax cuts.
fmm| 7.18.12 @ 2:18PM
Super last paragraph!
Kingofthenet| 7.18.12 @ 8:15PM
When are you Conservatives going to ask Willard WHY he had a Swiss Bank Account? The SOLE Purpose of a Swiss Bank Account is Tax Evasion, there is no other reason to have it otherwise.
'Blind Trust'- What you need in your head to vote for Willard.
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 8:31PM
Who has broken more laws? Romney or our Dear Leader? Which one as the MSM going through his trash? How many congress critters have legal Swiss bank accounts? How 'bout we take a trip through Pelosi's trash? How 'bout we compare the validity of their SS numbers? Which one shirks his duty and plays golf all the time? Which one accepts illegal foreign campaign money? Which one has been soaking in communist propaganda his entire life? Which one hates the idea of America? How about we actually vet Obama this time?
Gary B| 7.18.12 @ 8:34PM
Hating America - What you need in your head to vote for The Muslim.
Riff Raff| 7.19.12 @ 12:46AM
When are you Communists going to ask Hussein WHY he produced, not one, but TWO Forged Birth Certificates? The SOLE purpose of a FORGED Birth Certificate is to CONCEAL one's true identity, there is no other reason to have it otherwise.
'Abject stupidity' - What you need in your head to vote for Hussein.
Oldefarte| 7.18.12 @ 9:08PM
Why should not Americans believe this T&L dynamic duo, SINCE THOSE SAME PEOPLE ARE STUPID? Anyone who would vote for this domestic terrorist, community organizing, labor unionist from the mean streets of Chicago, friend of Ayers/Axelrod/Jarrett/Marshall/Wright/
Pfeglher/Oprah etc has got to be an IDIOT WITH A CAPITAL '''''I''''''. I mean Hope & Change....really? Give me a GD break! How stupid can you be? Obviously pretty damned stupid! Since 11/4/08, I haven't heard or been aware of anyone other than liberals, thieves, and complete dumbarses ADMIT TO THE FACT THAT THEY VOTED FOR HIM IN 2008. Pay a little bit more by the rich? Sure, why not? As is said by a man with a bandana covering his face inside a bank holding a gun in his hand to the teller...........STICK 'EM UP! G-d, how stupid! The damn economy is in the toilet swirling around the bowl and headed for the hole at the bottom and these theives aka DEMOCRATS have the nerve to propose a tax increase on anyone. They should be thrown in jail for proposing the thought, but how can they? They [as Judge Leroy of the Church of the Here-and-Now aka Flip Wilson] are saying CAN YOU GIVE ME AN AMEN?????? Oh and the rich folks that these animals talk about? Rich to them is ..........ANYONE WITH INCOME OR A JOB [since their constituents have neither and would not attempt to obtain either if available]. Oh, and in the T&L movie, remember what Brad the charleton did to Louise the Stupid in the motel room!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 7.18.12 @ 9:18PM
PS: Maybe, instead of T&L, one could fabricate a porno movie comprised of Patty, Nancy and Debbie is seductive poses while adorned in skimpy nighties to arouse the voter-taxpayers into being tax-increased DILDOED by them??????
Vapor| 7.19.12 @ 1:18AM
Murray got re-elected by a little creative video editing.. asked a question and then played audio of Rossi answering a completely different question. Since it came late in a close race it made the difference IMO. So she decieved her way back into office.
BTW King county controls the vote in WA. Most of the rest of the state votes conservative (Eastern and Central Wa). It's frustrating because regardless of how the rest of the state votes we have to watch the King county returns to see who wins.
Murray is just a mouthpiece. So has no spine of her own and can hardly get through a conversation without a script. I knew as soon as I saw her name on the debt panel it was a farce designed to do nothing.
Combine her and U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash and Christine Gregiore and we have quite the liberal mess. If the Republicans could focus on and take King county though they would probably take the state.
Mimi | 7.20.12 @ 3:57PM
Thanks for the info...does anyone in King County know what harm Obama has wrought on this country?....They must watch the news...how about the business owners and creators being told 'YOU DIDN'TBUILD THAT !' All the country has to WAKE-UP...everybody...the country is at stake!
Marvin E. Fox | 7.19.12 @ 9:53PM
It is ridiculous to believe Senator Obama understood the fiscal effects of raising taxes on the rich (middle class) but President Obama does not. Give that argument up! He knows! He wants those effects! Hope and Change was not about the intelligent, efficient administration of our Constitutional Republic. It was about Obama becoming the great emaciator of capitalism.
Marvin E. Fox
sly311| 7.20.12 @ 2:11PM
Now that everyone is talking in terms of trillions, $200k is not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination. As a matter of fact, $200 is simply upper middle caste. Bottom line is tax increases for everyone are looming ahead. Is anyone else's head exploding?