Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Constitutional issue

By: tkc in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Sat, 16 Jul 11 10:25 PM | 37 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix 		Msg. 05460 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 05459 by Cactus Flower)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Hi CF, a year ago or so we discussed the debt problem, the soft economy, you advocated additional stimulus - which I concurred w/ only if it was targeted to create jobs such as rehabing infrastructure or reduce oil dependency - while I leaned toward spending reductions, particularly in public employee benefits.
I never envisioned this fiasco on not raising the national debt. It's nuts. The old GOP has been mutinied. We understood the old GOP mantra of less government, less regulation and lower taxes. But this extremism if successful could cause irreparable harm for years, if not decades.
However some of what I'd advocated has occurred, albeit via the back door. Much, much of the stimulus money that had been used to retain jobs in State, Local and school districts while it worked only postponed the inevitable. When it ran out all those jobs and more were lost anyway. Public employee unions throughout the Nation were forced to accept lowered benefits and minimal if any raises, while significant job reductions were made. One or more GOP controlled States eliminated bargaining rights for public employee unions (extreme and hopefully unlawful). NYS recently passed a property tax cap placing local gov'ts and school districts into further austerity. In the short term there will be much more pain. The long term impact only history will judge. As I favored this, I hope it ends well.
As a centrist I hope for compromise, cut spending where it can be (i.e. military, negotiated pricing on federally purchased drug, the inevitable waste, fraud & abuse, and outdated bureaucracies that have outlived their net benefit) and increase revenues through elimination of tax looppoles, unnecessary corporate tax benefits and increasing income taxes on those earning more than 400% above the mean established in their residential area in the out years. I think Simpson-Bowes had it about right.
In summary, I agree it's scary that the extreme can mutiny their party and control one branch of Gov't which in effect holds the remaining 80% of citizens hostage to their whim. Hari is right, an educated voting populace would swing the pendulum. Unfortunately, especially given the recent Supreme Court ruling, we won't have that. Good luck to us.


 - - - - -
View Replies (2) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Constitutional issue
By: Cactus Flower in ALEA
Sat, 16 Jul 11 8:45 PM 		Msg. 05459 of 54959

Hi Hari,

Quick point of clarification: I am using a small c at the beginning of the word constitution to include arrangements that extend beyond the Constitutional document. For example, the filibuster arrangement in the Senate is constitutional in this regard, but it isn't Constitutional.

I don't think the Tea Party people will split. It suits them to control the Republican Party with around a half of its voters. The moderate Republicans cannot afford to toss them out. The result is the unholy alliance that is the conservative status quo, with the moderates increasingly exasperated by the Limbaugh puritans (witness the NYT's Brooks).

Certainly the leaders of the Republican Party in the Senate and the House are not mad enough to wish for a default. But, absent a Presidential over-rule (which has questionable legal validity) I believe the House Republicans must vote in favour of raising the threshold in order for it to be raised. The problem is that the Tea Party folks are not susceptible to argument and seem happy enough to destroy the government, as the anti-government dogmas are entrenched.

I don't think anyone contemplated this particular strain of politics when the Constitution was written. The hazards of anarchy have always been known, even if some people have chosen flagrantly to disregard them. Wealth is a product of order (even a kind of dynamic order) rather than chaos.

The mere fact of contemplating default has probably already damaged the US.

I am hoping that one of the Tea Party folks wins the Republican nomination. It is only a good hiding which will send those folks back to the boonies.

By the way, although I mostly disagree with the austerity folks, and agree with the neo-Keynesian folks who think the issue is mostly about growth and demand, there are some portions of government expenditure which might take a haircut - the US military being one area.

Perhaps someone might introduce a kind of national service on the domestic front which will allow young adults to build infrastructure, provide useful services and get some practical training for a year or two after school or college.

On the other hand, as you will remember, I believe it is blindingly obvious that tax rates on upper threshold income earners must increase.


« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next