Tuesday, April 12, 2005
'Pick your cynical hypocrites,' or, 'Don't complain with your bank account full' (or something like that)
An Anonymous left this as part of an ongoing debate in the comments of this post. The points it raises are well worth their own post. So, here:
--ER
Re: Nick Toper's argument. I agree completely that both sides have politicians that exploit "issues" to pad their own power. If the Dems use Social Security, civil rights, helping the poor, etc., to gain votes, but also destroy people by helping them, consider what the Republican philosophy does:
A CBO chart (link below) outlines how federal revenues have climbed since 1962, but notice the dramatic change in 1980-82. These are the years when Reagan and the Republican House were able to implement their fiscal policy designed to give them power over voters while “helping” them. In a nutshell, the policy is to cut taxes and spend like drunken sailors. They skyrocketed the debt, per Republican policy, until George H.W. Bush and Clinton responsibly decided to increase taxes to offset Capitol Hill’s inability to stop spending like mad. (Surplus revenue reached in 1999.)
Enter the Republican takeover again in 2000, and the deficit spending cycle begins anew and with great vengeance. With Republicans in control of the House, Senate and presidency, they’ve gone back to their formula of cutting revenue (taxes) and launching huge deficit spending. It’s a shrewd formula that keeps the party leaders in power: To wit, the party buys votes by giving taxpayers part of their money back (tax cuts) and the leaders get re-elected by spending billions on pork for their districts (keeping voters happy). The third leg of this stool is to keep telling voters – despite all evidence to the contrary – that Republicans are deficit hawks and out to stop reckless federal spending. The formula works for the leaders who control the party, and for short-sighted, gullible voters who get miniscule tax cuts if they’re only middle class (but if you're one of the wealthy in charge of party policy, buy yourself a yacht and call her "Tax Cut").
So is this good for America’s long-term future? The federal government has been running with deficit budgets for a long time, with big and small results in any given year. But only the Republican Party has embraced the idea of massive deficit spending as policy (albeit one to be denied steadfastly in public).
Do you really think America's economy is going to take off when the Repubs get the yearly deficits past $1 billion, or $2 billion, a year? When we become a second-rate economy overtaken by Europe and Asia, we’ll look fondly on these days of half-billion dollar deficits. Remember, don't put your measly tax cuts in the American stock market, though. That'll be a sucker's bet, too, after the Republican deficit (fantasy turns into a reality that screws) us all. [Edited for taste by ER; see the original comment if you're interested in the writer's exact phrasing.]
See Table 1:
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1821&sequence=0#table1
--ER
Re: Nick Toper's argument. I agree completely that both sides have politicians that exploit "issues" to pad their own power. If the Dems use Social Security, civil rights, helping the poor, etc., to gain votes, but also destroy people by helping them, consider what the Republican philosophy does:
A CBO chart (link below) outlines how federal revenues have climbed since 1962, but notice the dramatic change in 1980-82. These are the years when Reagan and the Republican House were able to implement their fiscal policy designed to give them power over voters while “helping” them. In a nutshell, the policy is to cut taxes and spend like drunken sailors. They skyrocketed the debt, per Republican policy, until George H.W. Bush and Clinton responsibly decided to increase taxes to offset Capitol Hill’s inability to stop spending like mad. (Surplus revenue reached in 1999.)
Enter the Republican takeover again in 2000, and the deficit spending cycle begins anew and with great vengeance. With Republicans in control of the House, Senate and presidency, they’ve gone back to their formula of cutting revenue (taxes) and launching huge deficit spending. It’s a shrewd formula that keeps the party leaders in power: To wit, the party buys votes by giving taxpayers part of their money back (tax cuts) and the leaders get re-elected by spending billions on pork for their districts (keeping voters happy). The third leg of this stool is to keep telling voters – despite all evidence to the contrary – that Republicans are deficit hawks and out to stop reckless federal spending. The formula works for the leaders who control the party, and for short-sighted, gullible voters who get miniscule tax cuts if they’re only middle class (but if you're one of the wealthy in charge of party policy, buy yourself a yacht and call her "Tax Cut").
So is this good for America’s long-term future? The federal government has been running with deficit budgets for a long time, with big and small results in any given year. But only the Republican Party has embraced the idea of massive deficit spending as policy (albeit one to be denied steadfastly in public).
Do you really think America's economy is going to take off when the Repubs get the yearly deficits past $1 billion, or $2 billion, a year? When we become a second-rate economy overtaken by Europe and Asia, we’ll look fondly on these days of half-billion dollar deficits. Remember, don't put your measly tax cuts in the American stock market, though. That'll be a sucker's bet, too, after the Republican deficit (fantasy turns into a reality that screws) us all. [Edited for taste by ER; see the original comment if you're interested in the writer's exact phrasing.]
See Table 1:
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1821&sequence=0#table1
