Bankrupt Rhetoric
Peter Dorman at Econospeak comments:
Bankrupt Rhetoric
I woke up this morning to Paul Ryan, describing his budget proposal, as quoted in the New York Times: “This is about putting an end to empty promises from a bankrupt government.”
Bankrupt government? Let’s consider this more closely. The normal meaning of bankrupt is negative net worth, as when your liabilities exceed your assets. By this standard, the US government is hardly bankrupt, since it has enormous hard assets and an even larger soft one, the legal right to tax the income, transactions and property of all individuals and organizations subject to US law. We should all be so bankrupt!
So I guess Ryan is not using the normal business meaning of the word. Perhaps for him bankrupt means having negative earnings over some period of time. Here is the federal government’s fiscal record since 1929:
So during what periods has the federal government been “bankrupt”? During every year when outlays exceeded revenues? That would include nearly all of modern history since the 1960s. Or when the fiscal deficit exceeded, say, 5% of GDP? That’s a smaller time frame—basically the past few years since the financial crisis hit and WWII. But if the government is bankrupt now, how bankrupt was it in the days of FDR and the struggle against Germany and Japan? And what does it mean to be bankrupt if the US could be really, really bankrupt in the 1940s and then bounce back to fiscal health almost immediately as soon as the troops came home?
And if the US government is bankrupt today, how come it can raise money at approximately a zero real interest rate?
And on a philosophical level, how does Ryan measure the financial health of government when its purpose is not to make itself rich but to support the prosperity of everyone else?
My translation of the way Ryan uses the word “bankrupt” would be “I want to scare everyone about the current fiscal deficit, and the best way to do it is to use a business-sounding term that has no meaning at all in this situation and hope that the public, and especially the journalists, are too dumb to notice.”
There is something creepy about Ryan when he stares, unblinking, into the camera striding confidently toward the viewer, spouting gloom and doom. (http://thehill.com/video/house/216391-paul-ryan-previews-budget-release-with-ominous-video-trailer) Look at his face. Would you buy a candy bar from that guy let alone a federal spending plan? Suit yourself but I’ll pass. NancyO
Whenever a Republican utters almost anything these days, I ask myself, are they really that stupid, or are they just cynical tools who think that we are?
JzB
“….and hope that the public, and especially the journalists, are too dumb to notice.”
That’s the key phrase, is it not? We know well enough from past performance that John Q. American can be sold the highest pile of bullshit by deodorizing it with emotionally charged rhetoric. We know just as well, again from past performance, that not only will journalists of many different stripes buy the crap that Ryan and his ilk peddle, but they will promote those same lies with the amplification of repetition. Faux News will not be alone in this effort. MSM outlets are just as likely to pose the issue as one of a legitimate argument, not of opposing facts, but of opposing ideologies. The facts are not at issue, but too many journalists of late aren’t concerned with the presentation of documentation, but, instead, with the promotion of corporate and right wing ideologies.
Those like Ryan who offer a radical right wing ideology parading as conservative responsibility and/or American individualism and patriotism are unconcerned with arguments based on demsonstrable facts. They lie because they know that they can do so with impunity as a result of the conspiracy of corporate control of information distribution. here at AB there is a dedicated audience, but one of infinitesimal size relative to the voting population. It is now two hundred and twent five years since this quote was uttered in the Estates-Generale, “When will the people be educated? When they have enough bread to eat, when the rich and the government stop bribing treacherous pens and tongues to deceive them. When will this be? Never.” It remains just as true today as then.
JZ, Republicans know that what they say doesn’t matter. They are presumed to represent certain “conservative” points of view shared by most of their constituents. Sometimes they decry the way the government wastes money on poor people. Other times they get all tangled up in reproductive health issues. Macht’s nichts. They favor military spending and support large corporations and that’s about all you need to know.
The main political purpose the R’s serve is to provide access to government agencies and the revenue that flows to contractors and others through the budget and other legislation. The Democrats serve the same purpose but offer access to contributors with different priorites through mainly domestic program spending. One way or the other, it’s the money that matters, not some supposed political philosophy. NancyO
Bankrupt you say!
If the Very Serious Paul Ryan says it, it must be true.
I guess we could always sell off the national highway system. I’d like to buy the rights to the roads leading up to the Koch brothers properties and charge them full market value for access to their properties.
eightnine
actually, i think they are going to privatize tax collection. like in the good old days.
what amazes me is they keep telling the same lies they told that got us here… out of work and in debt. and no one seems to notice.
The only thing that is bankrupt is Paul Ryan’s,and most of the Republican party’s, morality
The good old days of Roman tax collectors in Jerusalem, circa 33 AD?
You remember them, they were lumped with Samaritans and prostitutes in approximate social standing.
noni
i think our good friends across the aisle liked those good old days. see, a person who went bankrupt…couldn’t pay his creditors, could always sell himself into slavery. it was called the free market.
and you don’t want to know about the original Cato.
Well, you don’t need to worry about infrastructure projects. China is considering taking the initiative on that one:
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2d795a90-190e-11e1-92d8-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1qE22I3Rh
“China eyes western infrastructure
…
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2d795a90-190e-11e1-92d8-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1qE372fcs
“Now infrastructure in Europe and the US badly needs more investment,” Mr Lou wrote. “Traditionally, Chinese involvement in overseas infrastructure projects has just been as contractors. Now Chinese investors also see a need to invest in, develop and operate projects.”
…”
Well, you don’t need to worry about infrastructure projects. China is considering taking the initiative on that one:
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2d795a90-190e-11e1-92d8-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1qE22I3Rh
“China eyes western infrastructure
…
“Now infrastructure in Europe and the US badly needs more investment,” Mr Lou wrote. “Traditionally, Chinese involvement in overseas infrastructure projects has just been as contractors. Now Chinese investors also see a need to invest in, develop and operate projects.”
…”
89etc,
American greed may very well lead to American semi-servitude some day. Free lunches abound until they cut off the freedom of “ownership” of the free-lunch crowd.