Just to pperhaps illuminate some of the misconceptions of the right, I had a discussion on another blog with someone who insisted that Hitler was a left wing person. I shot back that that would have been news to Stalin, but he just said that they were both left wingers. From my history I believe that Hitler and the NAZI were right wingers. Now perhaps the issue is that the right today wants to define right wing as individualist and left wing as communitarian. (Meaning the community is more important than the individual). If thats there definition then it explains somethings, but is sort of from an Alice in Wonderland sort of world “words mean exactly what I want them to mean” It appears there is a movement to declare the Nazi party a left wing party because the right wing does not want to be associated with them. We clearly need to start saying indivual oriented versus community oriented as that then resolves the issue.
What do I think of the Value Added Tax?……….. Give it to me in Paper Form and watch what I do with it.
Obamacare’s Next Trick: The VAT By Charles Krauthammer
American liberals have long complained that ours is the only advanced industrial country without universal health care. Well, now we shall have it. And as we approach European levels of entitlements, we will need European levels of taxation.
Obama set out to be a consequential president, on the order of Ronald Reagan. With the VAT, Obama’s triumph will be complete. He will have succeeded in reversing Reaganism. Liberals have long complained that Reagan’s strategy was to starve the (governmental) beast in order to shrink it: First, cut taxes — then ultimately you have to reduce government spending.
Obama’s strategy is exactly the opposite: Expand the beast and then feed it. Spend first — which then forces taxation. Now that, with the institution of universal health care, we are becoming the full entitlement state, the beast will have to be fed. And the VAT is the only trough in creation large enough.
As a substitute for the income tax, the VAT would be a splendid idea. Taxing consumption makes infinitely more sense than taxing work. But to feed the liberal social-democratic project, the VAT must be added on top of the income tax.
Nationalized Health Care = Nazi = Agenda of the Left Eugenics = Nazi = Agenda of the Left Socialist Ecomonic System = Nazi = Agenda of the Left Non Faith Based Culture = Nazi = Agenda of the Left Unionization of all Corporations = Nazi = Agenda of the Left Iconography = Nazi = Propoganda of the Left Loss of Property Rights = Nazi = Agenda of the Left Loss of Gun Right = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
And On And On And On!
And which Political Party openly advocates these principles?
Hitler promoted a version of socialism athough it was not the same as Marxism. Hitler’s economic policy was of the left. He actually did better then Roosevelt in beating unemployment. I suppose Roosevelt got frustrated and jealous inducing him to pack the courts so he could catch up with Hitler in terms of economic output and improving unemployment. However, this anti democratic play has permently tarnished his legacy and back in the day it made the New York Times endorse the republican Wendell Wilkie the republican because they thought FDR was becoming to close to his peers in Europe at the time.
Hitler promoted a version of socialism athough it was not the same as Marxism. Hitler’s economic policy was of the left. He actually did better then Roosevelt in beating unemployment. I suppose Roosevelt got frustrated and jealous inducing him to pack the courts so he could catch up with Hitler in terms of economic output and improving unemployment. However, this anti democratic play has permently tarnished his legacy and back in the day it made the New York Times endorse the republican Wendell Wilkie the they thought FDR was becoming too close to his peers in Europe at the time.
There is a growing number of posts being deleted here. I know this more than others. I know the rules but I won’t kiss their ring. Never have and never will.
Jimi, you’re displaying your gross stupidity once again. Have you no sense of personal embarassment at being so ignorant and going out of your way to exposse it on a widely read blog? Eugenics is part of the Left’s agenda? Non faith based culture? Or do you mean to imply non faith based government policies? Faith is a part of culture. A culture cannot be non faith based unless there are no people of faith within that culture. Unionization = Nazi? Were the forced labor camps an example of such a union? Maybe that was the Union of the Damned.
Well one could say that Stalin practiced a form of eugenics killing the rich off. (But thats not what the term generally means). It appears that some are in the Looking Glass world (thats actually where the quote came from). Actually Naziism was a faith based culture, faith in Hitler, he was to be the savior of the german nation. A socialist system supposedly relies on public ownership of the means of production, so how did Krupp do so well? National health care was as the president noted the agenda of that raving socialist Bismark. It does appear that the definition of left is those who put the community over the individual, and the right the converse.
by this time you can get an idea of what they mean.
but basically it is that hitler and stalin are famous bad guys and the “right” wants to associate them with the “left.” So that you can see any Democrat who is in favor of providing health care for the needy is really a hitler or stalin. probably they really believe this.
and it is not completely beyond any hope of reason. those of us who understand that we need a government for more than police and military functions do need to keep in mind that we can overreach.
i think we are a long way from overreaching.
but meanwhile the “right” is very much in favor of the same military and police funtions that hitler and stalin made so famous in the world.
The “philosophy” of the right is that if the government taxes a rich man, that is tyranny, that is theft, in fact since time is money and life is time, it’s really murder. But if the government jails a poor man without due process, well, that’s just law and order.
“ Hitler’s economic policy was of the left. He actually did better then Roosevelt in beating unemployment.”
Yeah its amazing how many people it takes to round up and exterminate over 6 million people.
Sarah Palin would solve unemployment by paying people to hunt down democrats who voted for the health bill, all their friends family and later anyone who utters their name without saying” god damned” before it.
Hitler a left winger………thats rich. Hitler was about national purity….you know REAL GERMANS. Thats was at his core. Sounds a lot like Ms baked Alaskas REAL AMERICANS. You never heard Hitler going around apologizing for Germany the way Obama does for America.
You cant have it both ways morons. You cant criticize Obama for wanting to open the floodgates to foreigners and seek some sort of multicultural paradise where he gives everyone money not to work just so theyll vote democrat and then turn around and equate him with the worlds prime enforcer of cultural purity who saw evry non aryan as vermin.
You’re not being logical. The left differs most from the right with its willingness to have the government own or at least direct economic activity. Hitler used the Third Reich to organize the German economy. Hitler was also a huge Keynesian. Building the autobahn was a gigantic keynesian infrastructure stimulus program.
Hitler was able to get his programs passed. Roosevelt was looking accross the sea and getting angry that the U.S. Supreme Court stopping many of his programs. That’s why he tried to pack the courts. It was an act of trying to keep up with Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin.
And by the way, I’m pro immigration so long as most of the new immigrants are well educated. I don’t care what color they are and would grant automatic citizenship to anyone with a Ph.D. (given a common sense security check).
You’re not being logical. The left differs most from the right with its willingness to have the government own or at least direct economic activity. Hitler used the Third Reich to organize the German economy. Hitler was also a huge Keynesian. Building the autobahn was a gigantic keynesian infrastructure stimulus program.
Hitler was able to get his programs passed. Roosevelt was looking accross the sea and getting angry that the U.S. Supreme Court was stopping many of his programs. That’s why he tried to pack the courts. It was an act of trying to keep up with Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin.
And by the way, I’m pro immigration so long as most of the new immigrants are well educated. I don’t care what color they are and would grant automatic citizenship to anyone with a Ph.D. (given a common sense security check).
Interestingly the guy who is generally cited by people like Amity Shlaes to prove that the New Deal did nothing to improve unemployment, because jobs created by the WPA and CCC were not included, used forced and slave labor in Germany and the Soviet Union in his employment numbers.
Forced to work at bayonet point in Krupp’s factory? Gainfully employed! Volunteer to build National Parks in exchange for room (in tents or cabins you built yourself) and food and a small cash stipend. Why that is no job at all!
The Jimi screed is drawn entirely from Beck’s new book and movie which in all seriousness make the argument that the Nazi Death Camps took their inspiration from the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger. The are now insisting that Abortion=Holocaust is not at all a metaphor and that in fact Abortion=Eugenics>Holocaust.
The Eugenics movement of the 1920s was in fact misguided but the notion that the whole concept of Aryanism and the German Master Race came about because some soon to be Nazi’s were browsing through the writing of Margaret Sanger is so absurd as to be–, well there really isn’t the word. Except to the unhinged residents of Glenbeckistan.
This didn’t come out of Jimi’s head, he is just reciting the current set of wingnut talking points.
Remember how Trotsky got air-brushed out of photographs of the Revolution (and so inspired that aspect of 1984)? We didn’t go so far as Stalin and send a guy with an ice-axe to visit Cambridge, but we hope the effect will be just about as final. No point arguing with a ghost.
Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.
by Bruce
There is, or used to be, a requirement that all licensed Psychiatrists, which is what Krauthammer is by training, themselves had to go through a full course of psychoanalysis. Obviously in Chuck’s case the treatment didn’t stick, M.J. Rosenberg at TPM Cafe insists that Krauthammer is the first Jew he has ever seen openly shouting at the Rabbi from a front seat at the Synagogue (they both attend the same one).
Although it would explain a lot to know that Jimi was under current treatment by Dr. Krauthammer, lots of pieces would come together.
You may be right on both accounts. I watch all three shows and CBS has been inconsistent with releasing the episodes. I assumed that Tuesday night was not going to be a problem. Not true…
I understood why old episodes weren’t aired during the Olympics.
Cantie, your commentary is no more biased than Jack’s, 2slugs, Dale’s, Robert’s and except for one subject Bruce’s.
Sammy, it’s a sad day when a “slightly left of center blog”, takes on the full trappings of a far left blog. Banning, sarcastic personal attacks, anger at being confronted, arrogance that only one view exists, and that one view is the bestest ever seen. And, I am only talking about Bruce (and a couple of other Bears and commenters.) Sad! Sad! Sad!
I have left AB in the past, and will not hesitate to do so again. Many of us have cautioned Dan re: becoming an echo chamber of leftist only dialog. If this banning and angry, arrogant, sarcastic response continues without an open discussion then AB can go on without this conservative.
2slugs, earlier this week we had a discussion over the HCR polling and whether the poll you cited would be shown to be an outlier. I then asked, wait a week a month then let’s see what the polls say.
Well, a week later and we can see that the poll is an outlier. Feelings re: the HCR are nearly unchanged, except for the far left, which is slightly more energized.
You may be right on both accounts. I watch all three shows and CBS has been inconsistent with releasing the episodes. I assumed that Tuesday night was not going to be a problem. Not true…
I understood why new episodes weren’t aired during the Olympics.
Leftist? What a joke. There is barely any left wing attitude on this blog or within academic circles in this country. What gets painted as left wing is populist oriented ideology that takes each individual’s needs into account and professes to see each individual as equal to the others. Every sector of our society and our economy gets preferential treatment of one form or another from the government. The wealthiest secotr gets by far the most preferential treatment of all. There are barely any controls still existing from three or four decades ago. The FCC is a sad joke and makes little effort to enforcement licensing rules other than a focus on profanity. The food industry is hardly held to account by FDA and there are all manner of price protections for industrial farmers whose executives would barely recognize a plow. As we have recently seen, and has been repeated several times over the past twenty-five years, the bannking and financial industires have run amuk causing serious disrepair to our economy only to be bailed out of their own losses by the government.
Left wing is a sad paraphrase of what parades as social justice in the US. Who in any high office even pretends to be a Social Democrat? The health care “reform” act is barely different from what Romney introduced into Massachusettes. Instead of a public option our so-called socialist President and the left wing Congress are about to force private corporate insurance plans on the entire population. Pharma and health insurance stocks have suffered no loss and are stronger than ever. Nothing like being delivered a nation of obligated customers to your door step. Left of what? Ghengis Khan!
CoRev, You, Jimi and Cantab are the face of reactionary ideology. You see yourselves as some kind of patriots who immediately take up the cause of any plan to buttress the strangle hold that the party of One Percent hold on our government. The prevaililng political ideology in this country ranges from right of center to far right of reality. And Cantab makes about as much sense as does Palin, Bachman, McConnell or Boehner. Do they want to save the economy. No problem. End the wars of adventure in the middle east. Do they want responsible government? Get some control over the strangle hold of corporate lobbiests on our elected officials. You think that health reform is some communist plot? The f—n’ legislation was virtually written by insurance company lobbiests.
If the public option were added to the reform package you’d see over 60% support. People dont like a mandate when they dont have an affordable option available. We’ll see Medicare buy-ins being proposed very soon and I think you’ll see a lot more support for the health reform. As is its a VERY conservative plan. The cries of socialist are quite laughable, or would be if the people doing the crying werent pointing guns in your face as they cried.
Of course its the intimidation factor that IS the MO of the modern American Reich …..um Right I mean. When you cant win at the ballot box just bully your way to control. Thugs
Not sure what poll you’re looking at, but the Quinnipiac poll shows a bump, albeit not quite as large as what Gallup showed. The thing about the Quinnipiac poll is that not only was the sample size larger than any of the other polls done entirely after the healthcare vote, but it reinterviewed the same people to check to see if passage of the bill had changed their minds. No doubt that much of the bump was coming from those who supported healthcare reform but weren’t thrilled with this bill because it was too conservative. Those folks have reconciled themselves with the bill. And the Rasmussen poll shows that the enthusiasm gap is closing, as more folks who moderately approved of Obama’s performance now strongly support Obama’s performance. Passage of the bill has definitely stopped the electoral bleeding and I think the teabaggers have pretty much hit a highwater mark. It will be interesting to see what happens in the GOP primaries. If the teabagger candidates win, then this will help the Dems. If the teabagger candidates lose, then this might depress teabagger enthusiasm. In any event, healthcare is now the law of the land and there’s nothing that the GOP can do about it. They aren’t going to repeal it and even Ronald Reagan’s solicitor general to the US Supreme Court agrees that the constitutiona challenges to the bill are loony tunes.
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from that conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well. As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government.
CHARLIE ROSE: Do you believe — Paul Volcker was here at this table within the last week, Roger Altman was here several months ago. They both have, Roger especially, that we may have to in terms of the performance of this economy and because of the obligations we will have to meet, add a value-added tax.
Does a value-added tax have any appeal to you?
NANCY PELOSI: I would say put everything on the table and subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves.
The situation that we are in is as follows. Take the auto industry. You make a car, and it has about $2,000 worth of health care benefits in it.
You send it overseas, and the whole value of that car is taxed as it goes into another country, including the health care benefits.
They get a tax off of that and they use that money to pay the health care for their own workers. So their cars coming into our country don`t have a health care component cost.
CHARLIE ROSE: So they have a competitive advantage.
NANCY PELOSI: They have a competitive advantage.
Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this. Of course, we want to take down the health care cost, that`s one part of it. But in the scheme of things, I think it`s fair look at a value-added tax as well.
CHARLIE ROSE: Sooner rather than later?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, we — I think what we will see is as we are finishing the health care bill in our budget and start with the recovery, the budget, all the initiatives that we have, they have a oneness to them. They`re all connected and they are part of the president`s plan to take the country in a new direction.
As we`re doing that, we are looking at the tax — tax fairness, should we lower corporate rates? What do we — and in that context we would look at these other things. Some of them sooner rather than later. Whether we`re talking net operating loss, bonus depreciation, some issues that could be job creators very quickly, but also how we look at our tax code in terms of fairness and simplification.
CHARLIE ROSE: So it needs an overhaul?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, it may. We need to subject it to scrutiny.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because the president is on the record said there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: That`s absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Whatever the financial obligation is there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me turn to climate change for a second.
CHARLIE ROSE: Do you believe — Paul Volcker was here at this table within the last week, Roger Altman was here several months ago. They both have, Roger especially, that we may have to in terms of the performance of this economy and because of the obligations we will have to meet, add a value-added tax.
Does a value-added tax have any appeal to you?
NANCY PELOSI: I would say put everything on the table and subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves.
The situation that we are in is as follows. Take the auto industry. You make a car, and it has about $2,000 worth of health care benefits in it.
You send it overseas, and the whole value of that car is taxed as it goes into another country, including the health care benefits.
They get a tax off of that and they use that money to pay the health care for their own workers. So their cars coming into our country don`t have a health care component cost.
CHARLIE ROSE: So they have a competitive advantage.
NANCY PELOSI: They have a competitive advantage.
Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this. Of course, we want to take down the health care cost, that`s one part of it. But in the scheme of things, I think it`s fair look at a value-added tax as well.
CHARLIE ROSE: Sooner rather than later?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, we — I think what we will see is as we are finishing the health care bill in our budget and start with the recovery, the budget, all the initiatives that we have, they have a oneness to them. They`re all connected and they are part of the president`s plan to take the country in a new direction.
As we`re doing that, we are looking at the tax — tax fairness, should we lower corporate rates? What do we — and in that context we would look at these other things.
Some of them sooner rather than later. Whether we`re talking net operating loss, bonus depreciation, some issues that could be job creators very quickly, but also how we look at our tax code in terms of fairness and simplification.
CHARLIE ROSE: So it needs an overhaul?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, it may. We need to subject it to scrutiny.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because the president is on the record said there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: That`s absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Whatever the financial obligation is there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me turn to climate change for a second.
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from that conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well.
As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government. Might play in the President’s plan to double U.S. exports in five years. Guess we will find out.
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from a key conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well.
As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government. Might play in the President’s plan to double U.S. exports in five years.
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from a key conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well.
As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government. Might play in the President’s plan to double U.S. exports in five years. Guess we will see how this plays out.
CHARLIE ROSE: Do you believe — Paul Volcker was here at this table within the last week, Roger Altman was here several months ago. They both have, Roger especially, that we may have to in terms of the performance of this economy and because of the obligations we will have to meet, add a value-added tax.
Does a value-added tax have any appeal to you?
NANCY PELOSI: I would say put everything on the table and subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves.
The situation that we are in is as follows. Take the auto industry. You make a car, and it has about $2,000 worth of health care benefits in it.
You send it overseas, and the whole value of that car is taxed as it goes into another country, including the health care benefits.
They get a tax off of that and they use that money to pay the health care for their own workers. So their cars coming into our country don`t have a health care component cost.
CHARLIE ROSE: So they have a competitive advantage.
NANCY PELOSI: They have a competitive advantage.
Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this. Of course, we want to take down the health care cost, that`s one part of it. But in the scheme of things, I think it`s fair look at a value-added tax as well.
CHARLIE ROSE: Sooner rather than later?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, we — I think what we will see is as we are finishing the health care bill in our budget and start with the recovery, the budget, all the initiatives that we have, they have a oneness to them. They`re all connected and they are part of the president`s plan to take the country in a new direction.
As we`re doing that, we are looking at the tax — tax fairness, should we lower corporate rates? What do we — and in that context we would look at these other things.
Some of them sooner rather than later. Whether we`re talking net operating loss, bonus depreciation, some issues that could be job creators very quickly, but also how we look at our tax code in terms of fairness and simplification.
CHARLIE ROSE: So it needs an overhaul?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, it may. We need to subject it to scrutiny.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because the president is on the record said there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: That`s absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Whatever the financial obligation is there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me turn to climate change for a second.
I thought dissent was the highest form of patriotism!!! So critisizing the greatest expenasion inthe Federal Government in decades should be ultra-patriotic! And I was backed (the HCR was oppossed by) by over 50% of the electorate, and just under 50% of our elected officials!
But since dissent was considered the highest form of patriotism by the anti-war group even though their views had little support by our elected officials for over 9 years. I am really confused by the left?
So when again is the anti-war protests going to risk sun-burn on the mall again???
And now I’m hearing their is no enforcement measures in the HCR? Well Pelosi did tell the truth when she admitted to not knowing what was in the bill!!!!
You were not able to relate the term “Faith Based Culture” to organized religion? Of Course, every culture will have Faith to find meaning, but to purposely shift Faith from an organized religion to a Political Ideology is perverted, and demonstrates that just like the Lefist in America the Nazi’s were interested in absolute control of behavior not simply a workers movement. Obviously you haven’t figured that out yet!
And your asking if Unionization equates to National Socialism? Wow…It’s only the entire premise of National Socialism???? The original name for the Nazi Party was “The National Socialists German Workers Party” , and it wasn’t until Hitler came to Power, that all the unions were enveloped under the control of a more centralized Nazi Party.
Your nice little rant just rpoves your are way off in looney left land. No longer in the mainstream of Democratic orrepublican thought. Enjoy the wasteland…
Wow……Your beliefs are deeply ingrained and nothing with that, but you really have no understanding or any open mind-ness to view points that differ from yours. It typically would not be a problem, except your only getting your information from one side of the spectrum, and it really exposes your hand!
What I have noticed most especially with you is, you rarely work in the realm of hard facts, and use the typical Leftist Strategy of Personal Attack. Good Luck with that!
Keep in mind that the AB’s and some of the commentors have totally exposed thier hand. All the hateful behavior and the inability to see that they have become the exteremist fringe of political discussion shows that in the past they were merely always pushing an agenda instead of the quest for truth.
I believe that most here don’t acutually want to confront the truth, but to merely figure out a way to manipulate “Non-Believers” into submission.
All the Hate is telling….Probably means all the effort is going to waist…And that is a good thing. 🙂
If the American people had a media that actually vetted Obama, the Democratics, and had known how bad this Congress and Administration was going to be, how badly they lie, and how radical their agenda is….It would have been roundly rejected.
So your premise that Republicans are bully their back to control = FAIL!
I agree, they won’t repeal the thing. Just amend it until it no longer looks anywhere near what was passed. Some of the changes will actually make the monstrocity actually work better. Others will just increase government control or make things more confusing. Not even Pelosi new what was in the bill and most of our congress-critters never read the thing. So now we get to sort things out. The fact that a lot of large companies are already anoucing first quarter charges due to healthcare and insurance companies are already sending out notices that rates will increase (which was obviously going to happen) does not bode well for the Dems in Nov.
I also agree with you, if I read you right, that if the Tea Party actually runs a candidate they will split the R vote and it will be good for the Dems. (See ’92 election for a perfect example of this). If you get a Tea Party candidate running against an incombent Dem, I would expect the Dem to lose. At this point with Obama falling in the polls and a big throw-all-incumbants out mood of the populance I expect the R’s to win back the house (or be really close) and pick up a few in the Senate (effectively wiping out any chance of a Dem filibuster proof majority). A bonus if Reid got voted out.
I would like more divided government. Our government does not seem to work well when onoe side or the other has either de-facto or de-jure control.
“Well, a week later and we can see that the poll is an outlier. Feelings re: the HCR are nearly unchanged, except for the far left, which is slightly more energized.” CoRev
Again I put to you the question. Left of what? A political position that is far left would espouse socialism, the government ownership of the means of production and control of capital. What part of mmodern US policies can you point to that fits that description? Using the term far left is little more than an ad homenim attack on actions that you don’t agree with. A legal frame work within which private enterprise operates for its own good is the hight of capitalism. Free market theory is only one of many concepts within a capitalist system, and in the case of modern US economics that theory has been little more than a viral infection. That does not make its critiques socialists. It makes them patriotic populists.
Greenspan now sounds as if he and the Fed played no real role in the bubble. Of course, for those of us who remember the Waxman-Greenspan exchange, where he did at least a partial mea culpa, he cannot rewrite history.
Just to pperhaps illuminate some of the misconceptions of the right, I had a discussion on another blog with someone who insisted that Hitler was a left wing person. I shot back that that would have been news to Stalin, but he just said that they were both left wingers. From my history I believe that Hitler and the NAZI were right wingers. Now perhaps the issue is that the right today wants to define right wing as individualist and left wing as communitarian. (Meaning the community is more important than the individual). If thats there definition then it explains somethings, but is sort of from an Alice in Wonderland sort of world “words mean exactly what I want them to mean” It appears there is a movement to declare the Nazi party a left wing party because the right wing does not want to be associated with them.
We clearly need to start saying indivual oriented versus community oriented as that then resolves the issue.
What do I think of the Value Added Tax?………..
Give it to me in Paper Form and watch what I do with it.
Obamacare’s Next Trick: The VAT
By Charles Krauthammer
American liberals have long complained that ours is the only advanced industrial country without universal health care. Well, now we shall have it. And as we approach European levels of entitlements, we will need European levels of taxation.
Obama set out to be a consequential president, on the order of Ronald Reagan. With the VAT, Obama’s triumph will be complete. He will have succeeded in reversing Reaganism. Liberals have long complained that Reagan’s strategy was to starve the (governmental) beast in order to shrink it: First, cut taxes — then ultimately you have to reduce government spending.
Obama’s strategy is exactly the opposite: Expand the beast and then feed it. Spend first — which then forces taxation. Now that, with the institution of universal health care, we are becoming the full entitlement state, the beast will have to be fed.
And the VAT is the only trough in creation large enough.
As a substitute for the income tax, the VAT would be a splendid idea. Taxing consumption makes infinitely more sense than taxing work. But to feed the liberal social-democratic project, the VAT must be added on top of the income tax.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032502406_2.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Lyle,
Nationalized Health Care = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
Eugenics = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
Socialist Ecomonic System = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
Non Faith Based Culture = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
Unionization of all Corporations = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
Iconography = Nazi = Propoganda of the Left
Loss of Property Rights = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
Loss of Gun Right = Nazi = Agenda of the Left
And On And On And On!
And which Political Party openly advocates these principles?
I would like to know why CBS did not have new episodes of NCIS, NCIS LA, and The Good Wife this week. Anyone know why?
Lyle,
Hitler promoted a version of socialism athough it was not the same as Marxism. Hitler’s economic policy was of the left. He actually did better then Roosevelt in beating unemployment. I suppose Roosevelt got frustrated and jealous inducing him to pack the courts so he could catch up with Hitler in terms of economic output and improving unemployment. However, this anti democratic play has permently tarnished his legacy and back in the day it made the New York Times endorse the republican Wendell Wilkie the republican because they thought FDR was becoming to close to his peers in Europe at the time.
Lyle,
Hitler promoted a version of socialism athough it was not the same as Marxism. Hitler’s economic policy was of the left. He actually did better then Roosevelt in beating unemployment. I suppose Roosevelt got frustrated and jealous inducing him to pack the courts so he could catch up with Hitler in terms of economic output and improving unemployment. However, this anti democratic play has permently tarnished his legacy and back in the day it made the New York Times endorse the republican Wendell Wilkie the they thought FDR was becoming too close to his peers in Europe at the time.
Barry Ritholtz says it outloud: “Is it just me, or does everything he says now sound like nonsense…”
Yeah, I have the same problem. I’m struggling with this video at the moment. (click) I can’t take anymore right now. Maybe later. LOL. And maybe not…
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/03/alan-greenspan-discusses-u-s-jobless-rate-treasuries/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheBigPicture+%28The+Big+Picture%29
There is a growing number of posts being deleted here. I know this more than others. I know the rules but I won’t kiss their ring. Never have and never will.
Jimi,
you’re displaying your gross stupidity once again. Have you no sense of personal embarassment at being so ignorant and going out of your way to exposse it on a widely read blog? Eugenics is part of the Left’s agenda? Non faith based culture? Or do you mean to imply non faith based government policies? Faith is a part of culture. A culture cannot be non faith based unless there are no people of faith within that culture. Unionization = Nazi? Were the forced labor camps an example of such a union? Maybe that was the Union of the Damned.
Cantab,
Do you remember the old TV program Truth of Consequences? Take that to heart if you expect to gain any one’s respect for what you have to say.
Well one could say that Stalin practiced a form of eugenics killing the rich off. (But thats not what the term generally means). It appears that some are in the Looking Glass world (thats actually where the quote came from). Actually Naziism was a faith based culture, faith in Hitler, he was to be the savior of the german nation. A socialist system supposedly relies on public ownership of the means of production, so how did Krupp do so well? National health care was as the president noted the agenda of that raving socialist Bismark. It does appear that the definition of left is those who put the community over the individual, and the right the converse.
Jack,
You’re column was a joke as are most of your posts. Because of this you can’t muster consequece
Lyle
by this time you can get an idea of what they mean.
but basically it is that hitler and stalin are famous bad guys and the “right” wants to associate them with the “left.” So that you can see any Democrat who is in favor of providing health care for the needy is really a hitler or stalin. probably they really believe this.
and it is not completely beyond any hope of reason. those of us who understand that we need a government for more than police and military functions do need to keep in mind that we can overreach.
i think we are a long way from overreaching.
but meanwhile the “right” is very much in favor of the same military and police funtions that hitler and stalin made so famous in the world.
The “philosophy” of the right is that if the government taxes a rich man, that is tyranny, that is theft, in fact since time is money and life is time, it’s really murder. But if the government jails a poor man without due process, well, that’s just law and order.
“ Hitler’s economic policy was of the left. He actually did better then Roosevelt in beating unemployment.”
Yeah its amazing how many people it takes to round up and exterminate over 6 million people.
Sarah Palin would solve unemployment by paying people to hunt down democrats who voted for the health bill, all their friends family and later anyone who utters their name without saying” god damned” before it.
Hitler a left winger………thats rich. Hitler was about national purity….you know REAL GERMANS. Thats was at his core. Sounds a lot like Ms baked Alaskas REAL AMERICANS. You never heard Hitler going around apologizing for Germany the way Obama does for America.
You cant have it both ways morons. You cant criticize Obama for wanting to open the floodgates to foreigners and seek some sort of multicultural paradise where he gives everyone money not to work just so theyll vote democrat and then turn around and equate him with the worlds prime enforcer of cultural purity who saw evry non aryan as vermin.
Greg,
You’re not being logical. The left differs most from the right with its willingness to have the government own or at least direct economic activity. Hitler used the Third Reich to organize the German economy. Hitler was also a huge Keynesian. Building the autobahn was a gigantic keynesian infrastructure stimulus program.
Hitler was able to get his programs passed. Roosevelt was looking accross the sea and getting angry that the U.S. Supreme Court stopping many of his programs. That’s why he tried to pack the courts. It was an act of trying to keep up with Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin.
And by the way, I’m pro immigration so long as most of the new immigrants are well educated. I don’t care what color they are and would grant automatic citizenship to anyone with a Ph.D. (given a common sense security check).
Greg,
You’re not being logical. The left differs most from the right with its willingness to have the government own or at least direct economic activity. Hitler used the Third Reich to organize the German economy. Hitler was also a huge Keynesian. Building the autobahn was a gigantic keynesian infrastructure stimulus program.
Hitler was able to get his programs passed. Roosevelt was looking accross the sea and getting angry that the U.S. Supreme Court was stopping many of his programs. That’s why he tried to pack the courts. It was an act of trying to keep up with Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin.
And by the way, I’m pro immigration so long as most of the new immigrants are well educated. I don’t care what color they are and would grant automatic citizenship to anyone with a Ph.D. (given a common sense security check).
MG — maybe it was because they though they could not compete with March Madness?
But they generally squeeze a couple of reruns in during every seasn. Thye have not made a full season of original programs for years.
Everyone is focused on NCAA basketball this week.
What is your gut telling you Jethro?
All of the shows I mentioned air on Tuesday night.
by Bruce Webb
Interestingly the guy who is generally cited by people like Amity Shlaes to prove that the New Deal did nothing to improve unemployment, because jobs created by the WPA and CCC were not included, used forced and slave labor in Germany and the Soviet Union in his employment numbers.
Forced to work at bayonet point in Krupp’s factory? Gainfully employed! Volunteer to build National Parks in exchange for room (in tents or cabins you built yourself) and food and a small cash stipend. Why that is no job at all!
The Jimi screed is drawn entirely from Beck’s new book and movie which in all seriousness make the argument that the Nazi Death Camps took their inspiration from the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger. The are now insisting that Abortion=Holocaust is not at all a metaphor and that in fact Abortion=Eugenics>Holocaust.
The Eugenics movement of the 1920s was in fact misguided but the notion that the whole concept of Aryanism and the German Master Race came about because some soon to be Nazi’s were browsing through the writing of Margaret Sanger is so absurd as to be–, well there really isn’t the word. Except to the unhinged residents of Glenbeckistan.
This didn’t come out of Jimi’s head, he is just reciting the current set of wingnut talking points.
Who’s Cantab?
Remember how Trotsky got air-brushed out of photographs of the Revolution (and so inspired that aspect of 1984)? We didn’t go so far as Stalin and send a guy with an ice-axe to visit Cambridge, but we hope the effect will be just about as final. No point arguing with a ghost.
Signed, Your Friendly Moderator.
Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.
by Bruce
There is, or used to be, a requirement that all licensed Psychiatrists, which is what Krauthammer is by training, themselves had to go through a full course of psychoanalysis. Obviously in Chuck’s case the treatment didn’t stick, M.J. Rosenberg at TPM Cafe insists that Krauthammer is the first Jew he has ever seen openly shouting at the Rabbi from a front seat at the Synagogue (they both attend the same one).
Although it would explain a lot to know that Jimi was under current treatment by Dr. Krauthammer, lots of pieces would come together.
The quality of the discussion has markedly improved if only by the absence of the absurd.
Discussion?
Bruce,
Did you really ban Cantab? It didn’t seem like he was regularly out of line. Perhaps sometimes, but a lot of us are sometimes.
Spencer,
You may be right on both accounts. I watch all three shows and CBS has been inconsistent with releasing the episodes. I assumed that Tuesday night was not going to be a problem. Not true…
I understood why old episodes weren’t aired during the Olympics.
Cantie, your commentary is no more biased than Jack’s, 2slugs, Dale’s, Robert’s and except for one subject Bruce’s.
Sammy, it’s a sad day when a “slightly left of center blog”, takes on the full trappings of a far left blog. Banning, sarcastic personal attacks, anger at being confronted, arrogance that only one view exists, and that one view is the bestest ever seen. And, I am only talking about Bruce (and a couple of other Bears and commenters.) Sad! Sad! Sad!
I have left AB in the past, and will not hesitate to do so again. Many of us have cautioned Dan re: becoming an echo chamber of leftist only dialog. If this banning and angry, arrogant, sarcastic response continues without an open discussion then AB can go on without this conservative.
2slugs, earlier this week we had a discussion over the HCR polling and whether the poll you cited would be shown to be an outlier. I then asked, wait a week a month then let’s see what the polls say.
Well, a week later and we can see that the poll is an outlier. Feelings re: the HCR are nearly unchanged, except for the far left, which is slightly more energized.
Spencer,
You may be right on both accounts. I watch all three shows and CBS has been inconsistent with releasing the episodes. I assumed that Tuesday night was not going to be a problem. Not true…
I understood why new episodes weren’t aired during the Olympics.
Leftist? What a joke. There is barely any left wing attitude on this blog or within academic circles in this country. What gets painted as left wing is populist oriented ideology that takes each individual’s needs into account and professes to see each individual as equal to the others. Every sector of our society and our economy gets preferential treatment of one form or another from the government. The wealthiest secotr gets by far the most preferential treatment of all. There are barely any controls still existing from three or four decades ago. The FCC is a sad joke and makes little effort to enforcement licensing rules other than a focus on profanity. The food industry is hardly held to account by FDA and there are all manner of price protections for industrial farmers whose executives would barely recognize a plow. As we have recently seen, and has been repeated several times over the past twenty-five years, the bannking and financial industires have run amuk causing serious disrepair to our economy only to be bailed out of their own losses by the government.
Left wing is a sad paraphrase of what parades as social justice in the US. Who in any high office even pretends to be a Social Democrat? The health care “reform” act is barely different from what Romney introduced into Massachusettes. Instead of a public option our so-called socialist President and the left wing Congress are about to force private corporate insurance plans on the entire population. Pharma and health insurance stocks have suffered no loss and are stronger than ever. Nothing like being delivered a nation of obligated customers to your door step. Left of what? Ghengis Khan!
CoRev, You, Jimi and Cantab are the face of reactionary ideology. You see yourselves as some kind of patriots who immediately take up the cause of any plan to buttress the strangle hold that the party of One Percent hold on our government. The prevaililng political ideology in this country ranges from right of center to far right of reality. And Cantab makes about as much sense as does Palin, Bachman, McConnell or Boehner. Do they want to save the economy. No problem. End the wars of adventure in the middle east. Do they want responsible government? Get some control over the strangle hold of corporate lobbiests on our elected officials. You think that health reform is some communist plot? The f—n’ legislation was virtually written by insurance company lobbiests.
Oh, and one last point CoRev. Arrivederci.
If the public option were added to the reform package you’d see over 60% support. People dont like a mandate when they dont have an affordable option available. We’ll see Medicare buy-ins being proposed very soon and I think you’ll see a lot more support for the health reform. As is its a VERY conservative plan. The cries of socialist are quite laughable, or would be if the people doing the crying werent pointing guns in your face as they cried.
Of course its the intimidation factor that IS the MO of the modern American Reich …..um Right I mean. When you cant win at the ballot box just bully your way to control. Thugs
rdan,
It didn’t seem like cantab was violating the comment policy. http://www.angrybearblog.com/2008/02/new-posting-rules-comment-removal.html
CoRev,
Not sure what poll you’re looking at, but the Quinnipiac poll shows a bump, albeit not quite as large as what Gallup showed. The thing about the Quinnipiac poll is that not only was the sample size larger than any of the other polls done entirely after the healthcare vote, but it reinterviewed the same people to check to see if passage of the bill had changed their minds. No doubt that much of the bump was coming from those who supported healthcare reform but weren’t thrilled with this bill because it was too conservative. Those folks have reconciled themselves with the bill. And the Rasmussen poll shows that the enthusiasm gap is closing, as more folks who moderately approved of Obama’s performance now strongly support Obama’s performance. Passage of the bill has definitely stopped the electoral bleeding and I think the teabaggers have pretty much hit a highwater mark. It will be interesting to see what happens in the GOP primaries. If the teabagger candidates win, then this will help the Dems. If the teabagger candidates lose, then this might depress teabagger enthusiasm. In any event, healthcare is now the law of the land and there’s nothing that the GOP can do about it. They aren’t going to repeal it and even Ronald Reagan’s solicitor general to the US Supreme Court agrees that the constitutiona challenges to the bill are loony tunes.
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from that conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well. As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government.
Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
May 27, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052602909.html
Roger Altman, former United States Deputy Treasury Secretary,
Clinton Administration
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Video
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458
Transcript
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458#frame_top
—-
Paul Volcker, former Chairman, Federal Reserve
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
September 30, 2009
Video, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10631
Video, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
Transcript, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10631
Transcript, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
—-
Nancy Pelosi Discusses House Speaker Role
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
October 5, 2009 Monday
Video:
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10646
*Tape segment on VAT begins at 27:34 minutes in the interview
Transcript:
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10646
or
http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/Pelosi_Charlie_Rose_10-05-09.pdf
.
SPEAKER PELOSI INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT
October 5, 2009
The Charlie Rose Show
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10646
EXCERPT:
CHARLIE ROSE: Do you believe — Paul Volcker was here at this table within the last week, Roger Altman was here several months ago. They both have, Roger especially, that we may have to in terms of the performance of this economy and because of the obligations we will have to meet, add a value-added tax.
Does a value-added tax have any appeal to you?
NANCY PELOSI: I would say put everything on the table and subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves.
The situation that we are in is as follows. Take the auto industry. You make a car, and it has about $2,000 worth of health care benefits in it.
You send it overseas, and the whole value of that car is taxed as it goes into another country, including the health care benefits.
They get a tax off of that and they use that money to pay the health care for their own workers. So their cars coming into our country don`t have a health care component cost.
CHARLIE ROSE: So they have a competitive advantage.
NANCY PELOSI: They have a competitive advantage.
Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this. Of course, we want to take down the health care cost, that`s one part of it. But in the scheme of things, I think it`s fair look at a value-added tax as well.
CHARLIE ROSE: Sooner rather than later?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, we — I think what we will see is as we are finishing the health care bill in our budget and start with the recovery, the budget, all the initiatives that we have, they have a oneness to them. They`re all connected and they are part of the president`s plan to take the country in a new direction.
As we`re doing that, we are looking at the tax — tax fairness, should we lower corporate rates? What do we — and in that context we would look at these other things.
Some of them sooner rather than later. Whether we`re talking net operating loss, bonus depreciation, some issues that could be job creators very quickly, but also how we look at our tax code in terms of fairness and simplification.
CHARLIE ROSE: So it needs an overhaul?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, it may. We need to subject it to scrutiny.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because the president is on the record said there will be no increase in
middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: That`s absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Whatever the financial obligation is there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me turn to climate change for a second.
SPEAKER PELOSI INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT
October 5, 2009
The Charlie Rose Show
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10646
EXCERPT:
CHARLIE ROSE: Do you believe — Paul Volcker was here at this table within the last week, Roger Altman was here several months ago. They both have, Roger especially, that we may have to in terms of the performance of this economy and because of the obligations we will have to meet, add a value-added tax.
Does a value-added tax have any appeal to you?
NANCY PELOSI: I would say put everything on the table and subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves.
The situation that we are in is as follows. Take the auto industry. You make a car, and it has about $2,000 worth of health care benefits in it.
You send it overseas, and the whole value of that car is taxed as it goes into another country, including the health care benefits.
They get a tax off of that and they use that money to pay the health care for their own workers. So their cars coming into our country don`t have a health care component cost.
CHARLIE ROSE: So they have a competitive advantage.
NANCY PELOSI: They have a competitive advantage.
Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this. Of course, we want to take down the health care cost, that`s one part of it. But in the scheme of things, I think it`s fair look at a value-added tax as well.
CHARLIE ROSE: Sooner rather than later?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, we — I think what we will see is as we are finishing the health care bill in our budget and start with the recovery, the budget, all the initiatives that we have, they have a oneness to them. They`re all connected and they are part of the president`s plan to take the country in a new direction.
As we`re doing that, we are looking at the tax — tax fairness, should we lower corporate rates? What do we — and in that context we would look at these other things.
Some of them sooner rather than later. Whether we`re talking net operating loss, bonus depreciation, some issues that could be job creators very quickly, but also how we look at our tax code in terms of fairness and simplification.
CHARLIE ROSE: So it needs an overhaul?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, it may. We need to subject it to scrutiny.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because the president is on the record said there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: That`s absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Whatever the financial obligation is there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me turn to climate change for a second.
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from that conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well.
As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government. Might play in the President’s plan to double U.S. exports in five years. Guess we will find out.
Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
May 27, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052602909.html
—-
Roger Altman, former United States Deputy Treasury Secretary,
Clinton Administration
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Video
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458
Transcript
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458#frame_top
—-
Paul Volcker, former Chairman, Federal Reserve
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
September 30, 2009
Video, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10631
Video, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
Transcript, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10631
Transcript, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
—-
Nancy Pelosi Discusses House Speaker Role
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
October 5, 2009 Monday
Video:
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10646
*Tape segment on VAT begins at 27:34 minutes in the interview
Transcript:
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10646
or
http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/Pelosi_Charlie_Rose_10-05-09.pdf
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from a key conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well.
As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government. Might play in the President’s plan to double U.S. exports in five years.
Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
May 27, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052602909.html
—-
Roger Altman, former United States Deputy Treasury Secretary,
Clinton Administration
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Video
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458
Transcript
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458#frame_top
—-
Paul Volcker, former Chairman, Federal Reserve
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
September 30, 2009
Video, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10631
Video, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
Transcript, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10631
Transcript, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
—-
Nancy Pelosi Discusses House Speaker Role
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
October 5, 2009 Monday
Video:
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10646
*Tape segment on VAT begins at 27:34 minutes in the interview
Transcript:
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10646
or
http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/Pelosi_Charlie_Rose_10-05-09.pdf
.
Bruce – “Krauthammer, as usual is just pulling crap out of his ass, there is no evidence I know of that the Obama team is pushing any such policy, in fact most of the people who are pushing VAT are doing so from the Right, for example the Ryan Roadmap relies on a quasi-VAT to replace all corporate taxes.”
It appears that you’re overlooking the events of last year, including discussions at the White House about the possibility of using a VAT. Aside from a key conference, Pelosi, Volcker, and Roger Altman were subsequently interviewed by Charlie Rose. None closed the door on consideration of VAT. Quite the opposite, particularly with Pelosi. There were other key Democrats who discussed the possibility of a VAT as well.
As far as I know, the VAT is still on the table at the White House and Congress. It is a consideration that has been discussed to resolve VAT problems with WTO as well as providing for a general source of revenue for the Government. Might play in the President’s plan to double U.S. exports in five years. Guess we will see how this plays out.
Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look
May 27, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052602909.html
—-
Roger Altman, former United States Deputy Treasury Secretary,
Clinton Administration
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Video
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458
Transcript
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10458#frame_top
—-
Paul Volcker, former Chairman, Federal Reserve
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
September 30, 2009
Video, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10631
Video, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
Transcript, Part I
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10631
Transcript, Part II
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10635
—-
Nancy Pelosi Discusses House Speaker Role
THE CHARLIE ROSE SHOW 11:00 PM EST
October 5, 2009 Monday
Video:
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10646
*Tape segment on VAT begins at 27:34 minutes in the interview
Transcript:
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10646
or
http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/Pelosi_Charlie_Rose_10-05-09.pdf
.
SPEAKER PELOSI INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT
October 5, 2009
The Charlie Rose Show
http://www.charlierose.com/download/transcript/10646
EXCERPT:
CHARLIE ROSE: Do you believe — Paul Volcker was here at this table within the last week, Roger Altman was here several months ago. They both have, Roger especially, that we may have to in terms of the performance of this economy and because of the obligations we will have to meet, add a value-added tax.
Does a value-added tax have any appeal to you?
NANCY PELOSI: I would say put everything on the table and subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves.
The situation that we are in is as follows. Take the auto industry. You make a car, and it has about $2,000 worth of health care benefits in it.
You send it overseas, and the whole value of that car is taxed as it goes into another country, including the health care benefits.
They get a tax off of that and they use that money to pay the health care for their own workers. So their cars coming into our country don`t have a health care component cost.
CHARLIE ROSE: So they have a competitive advantage.
NANCY PELOSI: They have a competitive advantage.
Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this. Of course, we want to take down the health care cost, that`s one part of it. But in the scheme of things, I think it`s fair look at a value-added tax as well.
CHARLIE ROSE: Sooner rather than later?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, we — I think what we will see is as we are finishing the health care bill in our budget and start with the recovery, the budget, all the initiatives that we have, they have a oneness to them. They`re all connected and they are part of the president`s plan to take the country in a new direction.
As we`re doing that, we are looking at the tax — tax fairness, should we lower corporate rates? What do we — and in that context we would look at these other things.
Some of them sooner rather than later. Whether we`re talking net operating loss, bonus depreciation, some issues that could be job creators very quickly, but also how we look at our tax code in terms of fairness and simplification.
CHARLIE ROSE: So it needs an overhaul?
NANCY PELOSI: Well, it may. We need to subject it to scrutiny.
CHARLIE ROSE: Because the president is on the record said there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: That`s absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Whatever the financial obligation is there will be no increase in middle-class taxes.
NANCY PELOSI: Absolutely. That is absolutely correct.
CHARLIE ROSE: Let me turn to climate change for a second.
Bruce,
You keep trying to defend something you can’t if it makes you feel better! It just exposes your bias and ignorance!
I thought dissent was the highest form of patriotism!!! So critisizing the greatest expenasion inthe Federal Government in decades should be ultra-patriotic! And I was backed (the HCR was oppossed by) by over 50% of the electorate, and just under 50% of our elected officials!
But since dissent was considered the highest form of patriotism by the anti-war group even though their views had little support by our elected officials for over 9 years. I am really confused by the left?
So when again is the anti-war protests going to risk sun-burn on the mall again???
And now I’m hearing their is no enforcement measures in the HCR? Well Pelosi did tell the truth when she admitted to not knowing what was in the bill!!!!
Islam will change
Jack,
You were not able to relate the term “Faith Based Culture” to organized religion? Of Course, every culture will have Faith to find meaning, but to purposely shift Faith from an organized religion to a Political Ideology is perverted, and demonstrates that just like the Lefist in America the Nazi’s were interested in absolute control of behavior not simply a workers movement. Obviously you haven’t figured that out yet!
And your asking if Unionization equates to National Socialism? Wow…It’s only the entire premise of National Socialism???? The original name for the Nazi Party was “The National Socialists German Workers Party” , and it wasn’t until Hitler came to Power, that all the unions were enveloped under the control of a more centralized Nazi Party.
Jack,
Your nice little rant just rpoves your are way off in looney left land. No longer in the mainstream of Democratic orrepublican thought. Enjoy the wasteland…
Islam will change
Jack,
Wow……Your beliefs are deeply ingrained and nothing with that, but you really have no understanding or any open mind-ness to view points that differ from yours. It typically would not be a problem, except your only getting your information from one side of the spectrum, and it really exposes your hand!
What I have noticed most especially with you is, you rarely work in the realm of hard facts, and use the typical Leftist Strategy of Personal Attack. Good Luck with that!
Wow…what a hell of a open minded forum you have here?
Corev,
Keep in mind that the AB’s and some of the commentors have totally exposed thier hand. All the hateful behavior and the inability to see that they have become the exteremist fringe of political discussion shows that in the past they were merely always pushing an agenda instead of the quest for truth.
I believe that most here don’t acutually want to confront the truth, but to merely figure out a way to manipulate “Non-Believers” into submission.
All the Hate is telling….Probably means all the effort is going to waist…And that is a good thing. 🙂
Greg,
If the American people had a media that actually vetted Obama, the Democratics, and had known how bad this Congress and Administration was going to be, how badly they lie, and how radical their agenda is….It would have been roundly rejected.
So your premise that Republicans are bully their back to control = FAIL!
2slugs,
I agree, they won’t repeal the thing. Just amend it until it no longer looks anywhere near what was passed. Some of the changes will actually make the monstrocity actually work better. Others will just increase government control or make things more confusing. Not even Pelosi new what was in the bill and most of our congress-critters never read the thing. So now we get to sort things out. The fact that a lot of large companies are already anoucing first quarter charges due to healthcare and insurance companies are already sending out notices that rates will increase (which was obviously going to happen) does not bode well for the Dems in Nov.
I also agree with you, if I read you right, that if the Tea Party actually runs a candidate they will split the R vote and it will be good for the Dems. (See ’92 election for a perfect example of this). If you get a Tea Party candidate running against an incombent Dem, I would expect the Dem to lose. At this point with Obama falling in the polls and a big throw-all-incumbants out mood of the populance I expect the R’s to win back the house (or be really close) and pick up a few in the Senate (effectively wiping out any chance of a Dem filibuster proof majority). A bonus if Reid got voted out.
I would like more divided government. Our government does not seem to work well when onoe side or the other has either de-facto or de-jure control.
Islam will change
“Well, a week later and we can see that the poll is an outlier. Feelings re: the HCR are nearly unchanged, except for the far left, which is slightly more energized.” CoRev
Again I put to you the question. Left of what? A political position that is far left would espouse socialism, the government ownership of the means of production and control of capital. What part of mmodern US policies can you point to that fits that description? Using the term far left is little more than an ad homenim attack on actions that you don’t agree with. A legal frame work within which private enterprise operates for its own good is the hight of capitalism. Free market theory is only one of many concepts within a capitalist system, and in the case of modern US economics that theory has been little more than a viral infection. That does not make its critiques socialists. It makes them patriotic populists.
Greenspan now sounds as if he and the Fed played no real role in the bubble. Of course, for those of us who remember the Waxman-Greenspan exchange, where he did at least a partial mea culpa, he cannot rewrite history.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/greenspans-mea-culpa/
Unregulated free markets?