Topical thread June 8,2010 Angry electorate?
Democrats/Republicans face angry electorate is the early lead at MSNBC for this day of ‘important’ primaries. Yet what issues matter most to these groups of angry people? Just the tea party? Dismay with Pres. O’bama? Vote for John Boehner clones? Righteous perfected Christians? Unemployed versus employed? Can a deficit crow even be heard over the roar of special interest deficit hawks? Torture, surveillance and pre-emptive assassination as tools of choice? The apparent capture of many aspects of government function?
Everybody is thinking “Kick the Bums out.” Nobody has any confidence in Obama or the Democratic leadership, so nobody is expecting anything to get better while these poeple are still in power.
The most important issue in everybody’s mind is the economy and what kind of economic future they and their kids will have, and figuring out where they stand on the economic freedom scale.
Some might say the current agenda is focused on the Redistribution of Wealth and the destruction of Free Enterprise, so I don’t see anything being talked about that fits that agenda while improving the economics that is on everybody’s mind.
Democratics have a real problem headed their way this fall, and I don’t see how in the world Obama will hang on in 2012, but that’s too far away to make any assumption.
Dan, I think the answer to your questions is, yes! All the above and more.
Jimi’s hit on the key points, but disappointment in the change is the cornerstone. After years of hearing how bad Bush and the Repubs had been for the country, world, poor, and good for the rich, we wake up 1.5 Yrs after “O” took over, and things are gaining speed going down hill.
Clueless economic policy, is exacerbated by a poor economy. Lying about pivoting to JOBS, Jobs, jobs, and then moving on to everything, but JOBS is making most of us, Dems and Repubs, anxious. Pursuing an agenda not shared by the majority of voters is creating expanding voter remorse.
But, if you’re a Lib YMMV.
There are a number of bums being replaced. It appears to me it is pretty bi-partisan. Retirements were and are. And cleansing doesn’t seem to be a key element. The Dems happen to be in power and will catch flak, but….
Hardly. Only two choices. I fail to see YMMV anymore for Libs than any other group.
I think there is a lot of activity that goes beyond Dems and Repubs. with American public. And I don’t mean the tea party, which I believe has roots in a multitude of different traditions.
Some might say the current agenda is focused on the Redistribution of Wealth and the destruction of Free Enterprise,
I would sure love to see some data to support this point of view.
What would one call this kind of statement? Appeal to a hypothetical ignorant minority?
Wow!
JzB
Jazz,
“BY taking the conditions of supply and demand as given and declaring government intervention the ultimate evil, laissez-faire ideology has effectively banished income or wealth redistribution. I can agree that all attempts at redistribution interfere with the efficiency of the market, but it does not follow that no attempt should be made. The laissez-faire argument relies on the same tacit appeal to perfection as does communism. It claims that if redistribution causes inefficiencies and distortions, the problems can be solved by eliminating redistribution — just as the Communists claimed that the duplication involved in competition is wasteful, and therefore we should have a centrally planned economy. But perfection is unattainable. Wealth does accumulate in the hands of its owners, and if there is no mechanism for redistribution, the inequities can become intolerable. “Money is like muck, not good except it be spread.” Francis Bacon was a profound economist.”
“The laissez-faire argument against income redistribution invokes the doctrine of the survival of the fittest. The argument is undercut by the fact that wealth is passed on by inheritance, and the second generation is rarely as fit as the first.” George Soros 1997
These are only a few comments from George Soros in support of redistribution of wealth. He is by far one of the most important players in Democratic Politics and financial support. There is no question that Obama and the Democratic Leadership is aligned with Soros both in Ideology and financially, and many have publically stated that they would like to go much further. Hell two years ago, Maxine Waters let it slip that Democratics were interested in “Socializing” all the oil companies.
A Single Payer System which the Obama and the Democratics clearly want and will get, unless the Republicans can turn it around is not a Free Enterprise principle. Cap & Trade is a tax and spend shell game that is not a Free Enterprise principle. Government control of Banks and Car Companies are not a Free Enterprise principle, all of which Democratics clearly support.
Are you seriously gonna argue that the modern Democratic party is an ally of Free Market Capitalism? If you are…..be prepared to get laughed out of the arena.
Sorry, Jimi. neither a quote from G. Soros, no matter how long, nor a naked assertion that he and Obama are economic brothers in spirit qualifies for what I requested, which is data. In fact, neither B. Hoover Obama nor I feel compelled to agree with Soros on that, or any other issue.
Single payer? Obama isn’t even making a quarter-hearted push for a public option, which I believe would be, from your viewpoint, a tad less intrusive.
I agree with you on cap and trade, though probably not for the same reasons.
There is no Government control of either car companies nor banks, so what are you talking about? (I take it by control you mean taken over and/or run by the Govt, not merely regulated.)
Free market capitalism is a myth.
(I will assert that corporatism and free enterprise are quite different animals.)
So, before you start laughing too hard, come back with some of that data – you know, laws enacted, executive orders, policy decisions, that sort of thing.
I’ll also request that when you disagree with me, you do it by disagreeing with the things that I actually said, not things you make up and by implication attribute to me. You know – straw men.
Cheers!
JzB
To a very large extent Obama has continued Bush policies, both economic and in foreign policy – I believe this is your point.
So, yeah, I’d be disappointed if I had serious expectations that he was going to be anything along the lines of a real progressive.
Which raises a question? Why do self-styled conservatives hate him so much?
Cheers!
JzB
Dan said: “I fail to see YMMV anymore for Libs than any other group.“
Then immediately thereafter we have JzB with: “To a very large extent Obama has continued Bush policies, both economic and in foreign policy – I believe this is your point.
So, yeah, I’d be disappointed if I had serious expectations that he was going to be anything along the lines of a real progressive.”
JzB, with the exception of TARP, “O” has followed economic policy similar to Bush’s? In what way?
As far as foreign policy, I do not think our allies and others (with the exception of Iran) would be acting as they are under a Bush policy. As far as the war(s) go, I think you are seeing just how wrong were the Dem. complaints. T’aint easy successfully pursuing some of these real world solutions (Gitmo, trials for captive Jihadist, etc) versus rhetoric.
Jimi
you may be right about the dems problem. But that is because so many people listen to the same preacher you do. I’m sorry, but you, and they, are just delusional. Or gullible.
I am not at all happy with the democrats myself, including the big O. But “economic freedom” at risk? give me a break.
jazz
i called it delusional.
And it remains to be seen whether the delusional constitute a pluraility. I mean outside GOP primary voters.
in the 60s the tea partiers were all john birchers. And laughed at by most republicans.
JzB, with the exception of TARP, “O” has followed economic policy similar to Bush’s? In what way?
Well, he kept Bush’s whole economic team pretty much intact, and they set the policy. Nothing has been done to curtail the the welfare to Big Finance execs and hedge fund managers. Privatizing the gains while socializing the losses continues. Taxes are less in 2010 than they were in 2007.
I’ll grant you we would have had less of a stimulus, if any, with a Rep in the White House. Other than that, I’m hard put to find big differences. Maybe you can help.
One difference, probably due to the now expiring stimulus effort, is that unemployment, either U3 or U6, has stopping rising, for the nonce. We have to see how that plays out going forward. I see no reason for optimism.
To a very large extent, Democrat is the new Republican.
As far as the war(s) go, I think you are seeing just how wrong were the Dem. complaints.
That’s your viewpoint. O continuing the policies of the past in no way vindicates them. American foreign policy, at least since Ike and Churchill overthrew the democratically elected Govt in Iran and installed the Shah, (which is the real reason why they hate us) has been a great continuous arc of short-sighted screw-ups, regardless of who was in the white house. We propped up right wing dictators all over the globe and wound up having to take them down in Panama, the Philippines, and Iraq. Did I miss any? Do you suppose living under our good friend Batista might have made communism look pretty good to the Cubans?
Cheers!
JzB
Regardless of the various specific traditions, the unifying factor for teabaggers is the culture of ignorance promoted by the right wing noise machine.
Cheers!
JzB
JzB said: “Well, he kept Bush’s whole economic team pretty much intact, and they set the policy.” Other than the aopparent contradiction in the statement, replacing the Sect of Treas., director his Council of Economic Advisors, and the head of Obama’s National Economic Council, Geithner, Romer and Sommers. Is not keeping intact, Bush’s economic team when the heads are replaced. Bernanke is by law independent.
Then JzB says: “I’ll grant you we would have had less of a stimulus, if any, with a Rep in the White House.” Maybe less is more when it is effective. Hard to call this stimulus plan effective, especially when measured by creation of jobs and initiating private sector growth.
As to foreign policy, JzB said: “O continuing the policies of the past in no way vindicates them.” And I reply with that is your personal opinion.
We’re on the verge of vindicating Bush’s policies due to “O’s” continuance. If there were better, I feel secure that the “O-team” would have implemented them. Failure to do so just reinforces my origianl comment: “I think you are seeing just how wrong were the Dem. complaints. “
In the future if you are going to make unsubstantiated points: “Well, he kept Bush’s whole economic team pretty much intact, and they set the policy. ” at least try to make them rational.
JzB, color me totally unimpressed.
JzB, try this WSJ article: http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/08/wsj-liberals-fail-economics-test-conservative-and-libertarians-score-best/
It is titled:
WSJ: Liberals fail economics test, conservative and libertarians score best
So, JzB, keep on perpetuating the myths believing in Lib/Dem superiority.
Coberly,
Hey….current economic results and the direction of the policy doesn’t back you up…….Better think real hard about who is gullible in this equation.
Ha!…….Your the frog in luke warm water being prepared to be boiled.
“Free market capitalism is a myth.”—-Hehe!
Being a Zogby poll makes it suspect no matter the result.
Also, the author states “I like beating up on progressive economics as much as any conservative blogger, but this looks a lot like a test designed to produce a result, not an objective analysis. Besides, we’re getting a real-world demonstration of progressive economics over the last sixteen months. We don’t need a Zogby survey to tell us that it fails; all we need to see are the job-creation numbers coming this year, and the precipitous drop in mortgage applications.”
Perhaps the author forgot to mention how the declines started??? Talk about self-congrats!
Besides, the waters are so muddies now by political rhetoric passing for economic thought I do not understand how a regularly interested person can follow the debate…so much is simply made up, literally, not even interpretation.
I do have brown spotted toads in my yard.
What we have are crony capitalism, near-monopolies by multinational corporations and too-big-to-fail financial organizations, and a lack of anti-monopoly legislation. Governments provide the infrastructure and societal stability for capitalism (or other business models) to survive. (Contrast Somalia)
So, boil away.
Cheers!
JzB
Rdan,
“are so muddied now by political rhetoric passing for economic thought.”
Why is that so? Couldn’t that be turned around to say….Economic Rhetoric is so muddied by Political thought?”
When we have a political agenda not supported by the majority of the population, but sold with deception, your bound to expect resistance. The minority world view in America was represented in the modern Democratic Party agenda, and in 2008 the mask began to get ripped off, and now the population is seeing the direction all the rhetoric was taking us, and it is being roundly rejected…..Simple…Clear….and to be expected.
Ah well Jimi…you are fervent, but I see a lot of mixed signals from a confused public bombarded by a lot of simple, clear, and expected messages from lobbyists and sponsors. The rhetoric did not create the mess we got in overtime. I fear you are substituting ferver for thought.
Jazz,
Why do self-styled conservatives hate him so much?
Oh…that’s just because he is not fully white. If he were fully white we would be totally behind him. Since we are being told that there is no difference between him and Bush, and Conservatives are just easily manipulated Dolts, we really want to walk lock step with Obama and his quest…..but since he is not fully white….we can’t….because we’re racists….Remember?
I was thinking of-
Geithner – Pres of NY Fed Res since 2003
Summers, who I thought was a Bush guy, but wasn’t, though his Gov’t involvement goes back to Reagan, and
Bernanke, Fed and economic advisor positions from 2002 on.
So, yeah, including the grammer faux pas, I guess I’m pretty much pwned.
But, getting back to substance, other than the anemic stimulus package, explain to me how Obama’s economic policies are significantly different from GWB’s.
Maybe less is more when it is effective.
And maybe you need more for it to be effective. Every progressive has been calling it too little from the very beginning. Anyway, unemployment has stopped increasing. Faint praise, I know. But it’s better than still increasing.
If there were better, I feel secure that the “O-team” would have implemented them. Failure to do so just reinforces my origianl comment:
Really? Why do think they would do better? What inspires that confidence? Obama’s failures will never vindicate Bush’s failures. Where does an idea like that come from? Is this just another steaw man?
JzB, color me totally unimpressed.
Gladly.
Cheers!
JzB
Jimi –
That’s about as good an explanation as any.
Thanks for clearing it up.
Actually, though, if you substitute the word “Republican” for the word “white” and “partisan” for “racist” I think you’ll have it nailed. Though I can’t really believe the “we really want to walk lock step with Obama and his quest” part.
Cheers!
JzB
As I recall, this was a call in survey with 8 questions about 4000 + respondents. This is drawing huge conclusions from very little data.
I’m unable to find the survey questions, sampking protocol, or, indeed anything that looks like an unbiased evaluation of the results.
This might be a conversation starter, but it sure isn’t the answer to anything.
BTW – what myths have you seen me perpetuating?
Cheers!
JzB
JzB said: “BTW – what myths have you seen me perpetuating? “
Let me point out the offending comment: “ …the unifying factor for teabaggers is the culture of ignorance promoted by the right wing noise machine. ”
So I confronted with a published study/survey not just more personal opinion.
Tea Partiers understand the fundamentals. We are on the verge of going over a national financial cliff, and the solution is simple, clear and possible. We are not on a path to this solution set.
Dan, you started this discussion with a question: ” Yet what issues matter most to these groups of angry people?” Jimi has answered it several times. Do you not want or believe the answer? You are blaming the wrong cadre: lobbyists and sponsors.
It is the policies of the previous administrations, but particularly this administration, that has caused much of the reaction. “O” is all about rhetoric over actions, and actions supporting an agenda with which the voters do not agree.
Dan said: “…rhetoric passing for economic thought I do not understand how a regularly interested person can follow the debate…so much is simply made up,…” I have to admit I agree.
People, let’s include the politicians in this class, just do not understand what is happening. We can not continue to spend when 1 of every 3 dollars is borrowed. We’re doomed if interest rates rise just a little. We may not yet be in a deficit crisis, but we are teetering.
There are only two solutions: 1) cut spending; AND 2) raise revenues. See anyone proposing these solutions?? Oh yeah, the Tea Partiers. Imagine that.
Let’s keep the discussion simple, clear and on target. Ignore the rhetoric. It’s just meant to obscure and divert attention from the policy causes.
JzB asked: “explain to me how Obama’s economic policies are significantly different from GWB’s. ” While starting the question with the following statement.
“other than the anemic stimulus package, ”
The answer is in the statment. The stimulus package was not anemic. It was, however, misguided and too political. Backloading a stimulus package is obviously the wrong approach. All it does is extend the pain for those affected by the recession.
Furthermore, we have had ths same discusssion since the Bush recession. We can not expect large rapid economic gains by investing in long term projects, infrastructure builds. Its intuitively obvious. Stimulation in a recession must be front loaded and made to immediately impact the economy. Or else we end up with this lingering and painful recovery.
Cap & Trade? Don’t even ask. Energy policies that don’t add energy.
I’m getting the feeling the new FDR is taking us donw the same path as the last one. And, Mike’s amazing numbers not withstanding, the turn around was too long and too little to change the populations’ psychology re: the economy. And, psychological impacts do matter.
Jazz,
Oh…..I am not the one who is going to boil you…Your Boiling Yourself!
Nobody is claiming that we don’t need a Government watchdog. The issue is whether or not State Capitalism or Free Market Capitalism is the most efficient and moral economic method to maintain this civilization.
Free Enterprise has a long record of producing economic prosperity, a standard of living which is the envy of the world, and is overwhelmingly supported by the majority of the population.
All of a sudden it is the system that has failed, and it is government that will save the day, even though we can look across the ocean and see that Ideology failing time and time again over history.
If the intentions are fairness for all, the results will be fairness for no one.
The issue is whether or not State Capitalism or Free Market Capitalism is the most efficient and moral economic method to maintain this civilization.
Really? In this thread? When did that happen?
Way back – gee, it seems like only yesterday – I read and reponded thusly:
Read:
Some might say the current agenda is focused on the Redistribution of Wealth and the destruction of Free Enterprise,
Reponded:
I would sure love to see some data to support this point of view.
My love might be unrequited, but it continues none the less.
Cheers!
JzB
The answer is in the statment.
Oh. Well, if that’s it, then end of discussion.
Re: stimilus (from wikipedia) my guess as to front/back loading
Provisions of the Act
* 2.1 Tax cuts
o 2.1.1 Tax cuts for individuals Front End
o 2.1.2 Tax cuts for companies Front End
* 2.2 Healthcare Beats me
* 2.3 Education Back End, unless it kept teachers employed, then front
* 2.4 Aid to low income workers, unemployed and retirees Front (including job training) (Back)
* 2.5 Infrastructure Investment
o 2.5.1 Core investments (roads, bridges, railways, sewers, other transportation) Front
o 2.5.2 Investment into government facilities and vehicle fleets Front
o 2.5.3 Supplemental investments Who knows?
* 2.6 Energy Back
* 2.7 Housing Front
* 2.8 Scientific research Back
* 2.9 Other Who knows?
Mixed bag, but there’s plenty of front-end stuff here.
Cheers!
JzB
OK. I’m ofensive.
Now, where are those myths?
Cheers!
JzB
JzB, these “o 2.5.1 Core investments (roads, bridges, railways, sewers, other transportation) Front
o 2.5.2 Investment into government facilities and vehicle fleets Front “
are classic back loaded. Takes months to years to get funding stream going.
Moreover, you have forgotten how the spending is levied over fiscal years.
JzB, sigh!!!!
Yes, I did ask.
Jazz,
Hehe!….Hear no Evil..See No Evil..eh?
And I offered some, but you rejected it, like you will do with every other piece I provide for you, which is totally unnecessary, because if you don’t understand what the agenda has been, then you surely are not going to be able to understand much of anything else politically.
How about Obama’s “Global Poverty Act of 2007”, or the known socialists and communists within his administration, the overall deep ties with the Democratic Socialist movement or Weiner and Sanders. Nope….not gonna mean anything to you, because you don’t want to understand what’s being attempted, or your simplying lieing that you don’t understand.
How about the “Pay for Performance Act of 2009”, The Health Care Bill, Obama’s refusal to secure the border, his bad mouthing of the United States economy over seas, Cap & Trade legislation, support for the Global Warming Scam, attempts to control the internet, governemnt mandated decisions in the buisness of GM and Chrysler, or all the proposed Bailout legislation for banks and newspapers,
All of which adds up to an attack on Free Enterprise.
That’s why your the frog in Warm Water, or maybe, economic death by a thousand cuts suits you better?
You’re absolutely right. If global warming is a scam (perpetrated for Moloch only knows what nefarious reason) , and this never-enacted proposal is aimed at the destruction of free enterprise, I am very unlikely to understand many of the things that make perfect sense in your universe.
H.R. 1302 [110th]
To require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.
Unless, of course, the following onerous intrusion sounds the death knell for free enterprise, in which case, I’ll have to agree with you.
H.R.1664 – Grayson-Himes Pay For Performance Act of 2009
To amend the executive compensation provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards.
And here is how Governemnt interference is destroying free enterprise in the auto industry.
http://www.ibtimes.com/contents/20100604/gm-and-chrysler-real-chance-growth-obama-adviser.htm
Cheers!
JzB, evidently searching for evil in all the wrong places
That’s not the correct Global Poverty Bill, and not the full explaination of GM and Chrylser, but believe what you want.
How Cloward and Piven backed up with the massive Deficit Spending outlays moving int the future?
I know…I know…You could care less?
You have evidently never driven on the roads and hihgways of Michigan, where these projects have been active for many months. In Oittsburg they’re getting going now.
Buying fleet vehicles takes years? Who knew?
Infrastructure projects are long term, but that doesn’t make them back-end loaded. It just means they have a long duratoin, during which time people are working. (see image)
But if it pleases you to believe that this is all back end loaded, feel free.
Cheers!
JzB
Poittsburg, not Oittsburg.
Cheers!
JzB the bad typist
JzB, get to MI quite often. MI has the worst roads between the E Coast to there.
I’m not sure what yourm chart is trying to show. In the future please give the source so that it may be read and interpreted.
Anyway, I guess you think waiting many months and even years to get the stimulus cash flowing is really good for those unemployed? Delaying the healing and extending the pain is what you think is a good stimulus strategy?
BTW, the immediate impacts on GDP from this stimulus and the last was from the tax cuts and tax incentives. They ended early on, and on this I will agree with most, they were too small.
Poittsburg??? Pittsburg? If the latter it makes my point of taking a year to get started (backloaded!). A year of added pain and extended suffering for those already unemployed.
Sheesh!!!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704804204575069772167897834.html
Point well made by the chart, Jimi! Thanks.