If you oppose stimulus, don't take the money

[Daniel]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/16/begala.carolina/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina took umbrage at my writing that his approach to the economic crisis is to do nothing. I'll deal with his "ideas" in a moment, but first let me make a modest proposal:

If Republican politicians are so deeply opposed to President Obama's economic recovery plan, they should refuse to take the money. After all, if you think all that federal spending is damaging, there are easy ways to reduce it: Don't take federal money.

Gov. Sanford can lead the way. South Carolina should decline to accept any federal funds for transportation, education, health care, clean energy or any of the other ideas President Obama is advocating to fix the economy. And the rest of the GOP can follow suit.

Justice Louis Brandeis famously called states "laboratories of democracy." So let's experiment. Gov. Sanford can be the guinea pig. His Palmetto State already gets $1.35 back from Washington for every dollar it pays in federal taxes, according to 2005 numbers, the latest calculated by the Tax Foundation, a nonprofit tax research group.

South Carolina is a ward of the federal government. It's been on welfare for years. If Gov. Sanford is so all-fired opposed to federal spending, let's start by cutting federal spending in South Carolina. Otherwise, he's got about as much credibility on fiscal conservatism as A-Rod has on steroids.

Under the Bush-Sanford economic theories, South Carolina's unemployment rate has reached 9.5 percent -- among the highest in the nation. But if Gov. Sanford wants to continue those policies, good luck to him.

Make no mistake about it, Republicans like Gov. Sanford want to go back to the bad old days of George W. Bush. In his CNN.com column, Gov. Sanford expends 605 words attacking President Obama's plan to turn the country around after eight years of Bush-Republican-Sanford economics.

That is his right, but attacking President Obama's plan is not itself an alternative plan. Nor is dredging up hoary old gripes about the New Deal. Nor, indeed, is deriding neighborhood electric vehicles -- which create jobs, save money and reduce pollution -- as "streamlined golf carts." But that is what Gov. Sanford offers us. iReport.com: Share your thoughts on the stimulus plan

Then Gov. Sanford turns to his ideas (keep in mind he was responding to my charge that he favors doing nothing). He devotes precisely one half of one sentence to his plan to save the world economy; 24 words that will create millions of jobs, restore liquidity to capital markets, protect investors and consumers, regenerate stagnant demand and restore the capitalist system. Here they are:

"... cutting the payroll tax, opening foreign markets through an expansion of our trade agreements, and reducing our corporate tax, which is among the highest worldwide."

Wow. As we say in the South, I've got the vapors. So cutting taxes and cutting trade deals will get us out of this mess? That's all we need to do?

We don't need to extend unemployment insurance, or update health information technology, or move to renewable energy or repair roads or rebuild bridges or modernize the power grid or prevent states and cities from laying off teachers and cops or any of the other myriad proposals in President Obama's plan?

To be sure, President Obama's plan includes tax cuts -- mostly for middle-class families. But cutting taxes on corporate profits is of little utility when there are no corporate profits to tax. And precisely with whom would Gov. Sanford cut these miraculous trade deals? In case he hasn't been watching CNN, the entire world economy is in the tank.

If cutting taxes for the rich and for big corporations and promoting foreign trade alone could energize the economy, we wouldn't be in this mess. But maybe Gov. Sanford is right. Let's keep our federal money -- give it to states where the governors will actually put it to good use. We'll let Gov. Sanford try his plan, we'll try President Obama's plan.

Something tells me Gov. Sanford won't take that gamble. Because for all his rhetoric about hating federal spending, he can't wait to get his hands on our money.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul Begala.

---

Tell em how you feel son!!11!!

[Xaerve]

Waste of 2 minutes to read that nonsense :(

[Methais]

Waste of 2 minutes to read that nonsense :(

Thanks for saving me 2 minutes.

[tyrant-201]

Waste of 2 minutes to read that nonsense :(

Waste of the second it took to read your post. If you don't agree with Begala, why not underline why? ;)

[Tolwynn]

South Carolina should decline to accept any federal funds for transportation, education, health care, clean energy or any of the other ideas President Obama is advocating to fix the economy.

Unsurprising something like this should get churned out - any pork lumped in with the actual stimulus like infrastructure repair has been anointed as just as valid and good. After all, it's the same mindset that got the dubious stimulus package ramrodded through in the first place.

[Back]

Make sense to me. If you were against it do not collect.

That could even be applied to Americans who are going to get tax cuts. Protest by sending your tax cut back to the government.

Don’t agree with the package and want to buy a house? Send the government $8k.

[Tolwynn]

Want an even better solution? Kill all the pork and use those earmarked funds towards education, health care, or infrastructure repair. Don't hold your breath waiting for something like that to happen under this administration, though.

[ClydeR]

Gov. Jindal says that he may decline to accept Louisiana's share of the stimulus money. Louisiana is looking at a $2 billion deficit this year.


Gov. Bobby Jindal said he isn’t sure the state will take all the money it’s eligible to receive, depending on the strings attached.

“We’re going to be looking very carefully at the restrictions and conditions attached to these dollars and programs before we recommend that we include those dollars in our budget. And I would certainly expect the Legislature to do the same thing as they review our budget before any of these dollars can be spent,” Jindal said this week.

More... (http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/20090213/NEWS01/90213032)

[tyrant-201]

Unsurprising something like this should get churned out - any pork lumped in with the actual stimulus like infrastructure repair has been anointed as just as valid and good. After all, it's the same mindset that got the dubious stimulus package ramrodded through in the first place.

I think of after 50-60 years of neglecting our infrastructure, its time for some repairs. Evidently you feel differently. I would think that would be the least to argue about in the package - considering everyone benefits from better infrastructure. Not to mention the amount of jobs it will create.

Judging by the content of your last post I may have misinterpreted your intention though, as far as infrastructure goes. I don't agree with the amount of "pork" in the bill. I don't agree with pork, period. But unfortunately that's the way congress currently works.

[tyrant-201]

Gov. Jindal says that he may decline to accept Louisiana's share of the stimulus money. Louisiana is looking at a $2 billion deficit this year.

And if things get worse for Jindal? Well at least he'll only have himself to blame.

[Tolwynn]

Eh, no. Bad wording on my part, the way I put that. Infrastructure repair is good and valid economic stimulus, and pretty much necessary at this point as you said. A lot of the pork they ramrodded through isn't, and now you have people like the joker in the original post trying to say they're all equally good, since they're part of this 'stimulus' package.

When all's said and done, it's just a new pig rolling in the same old shit.

[Mtenda]

Unsurprising something like this should get churned out - any pork lumped in with the actual stimulus like infrastructure repair has been anointed as just as valid and good. After all, it's the same mindset that got the dubious stimulus package ramrodded through in the first place.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a200/wet_from_birth/car_ramrod.gif

[Back]

Eh, no. Bad wording on my part, the way I put that. Infrastructure repair is good and valid economic stimulus, and pretty much necessary at this point as you said. A lot of the pork they ramrodded through isn't, and now you have people like the joker in the original post trying to say they're all equally good, since they're part of this 'stimulus' package.

When all's said and done, it's just a new pig rolling in the same old shit.

rofl @ pork.

Like the last 8 years weren’t bacon weaves.

Try this shit on someone else.

[Tolwynn]

Ah, the traditional response of "The other party did this too, and we think they suck and were horrible and desperately needed to be replaced, but now that we're in power, we'll do pretty much the same thing?

Congrats on that, I guess.

[Back]

Ah, the traditional response of "The other party did this too, and we think they suck and were horrible and desperately needed to be replaced, but now that we're in power, we'll do pretty much the same thing?

Congrats on that, I guess.

Not really.

[tyrant-201]

Ah, the traditional response of "The other party did this too, and we think they suck and were horrible and desperately needed to be replaced, but now that we're in power, we'll do pretty much the same thing?

Congrats on that, I guess.

In the regard of pork spending, yeah. Not much else is similar though.

I don't agree with pork at all. I think Democracy would be better suited if we got rid of pork and lobbyists. I'm disappointed that this so-called agent for "Change" has been doing anything but in regards to pork spending and lobbyists.

[Tea & Strumpets]

Make sense to me. If you were against it do not collect.

That could even be applied to Americans who are going to get tax cuts. Protest by sending your tax cut back to the government.

Don’t agree with the package and want to buy a house? Send the government $8k.

Also, if you don't agree with any new taxes, just don't pay them! It would be hypocritical if you disagreed with a tax and then still paid it.

[Methais]

Also, if you don't agree with any new taxes, just don't pay them! It would be hypocritical if you disagreed with a tax and then still paid it.

^

[Back]

<- in total agreement.

But this bill does not raise your taxes. It lowers them.

[radamanthys]

Well, Obama showed himself to be just another politician.

Chairman Obamao's message: "Lets all be friends and work together. But only so long as you agree and acquiesce to my demands on you. Otherwise, fuck off."

The simple fact of the matter here is that with the TARP and this package, the United States is no longer a Capitalist country. That's it. Tomorrow is the day that US Capitalism died. (This is a bad thing.)

On topic: Will the amount of spending decrease as people don't accept stimulus? No. Just like a whore wife, someone's getting it- it might as well be you.

[Warriorbird]

A fair portion of the pork got trimmed. You've got approximately 500 billion going to stuff that will have direct effect.

There's a fair amount of debatable things in the other section, but there are a number of provisions that are going to things that I can support (like preventing the wholesale savaging of LA programs that Jindal's going to do because he isn't excepting governmental stimulus).

Who helped vote for the other stuff, radamanthys? Ain't just Obama. Republicans'll never hold their party accountable for spending though.

[Back]

Well, Obama showed himself to be just another politician.

Chairman Obamao's message: "Lets all be friends and work together. But only so long as you agree and acquiesce to my demands on you. Otherwise, fuck off."

I disagree, Rady. He went for bipartisan and thats what bit him in the ass. Oh, if we extend a hand someone will take it? Not republicans. Nope.


The simple fact of the matter here is that with the TARP and this package, the United States is no longer a Capitalist country. That's it. Tomorrow is the day that US Capitalism died. (This is a bad thing.)

No, that happened before the inauguration. Remember the free bank bail-outs?


On topic: Will the amount of spending decrease as people don't accept stimulus? No. Just like a whore wife, someone's getting it- it might as well be you.

Oh yeah, I forgot how many prostitutes politicians buy and how influential they are then commit suicide.

[radamanthys]

A fair portion of the pork got trimmed. You've got approximately 500 billion going to stuff that will have direct effect.

There's a fair amount of debatable things in the other section, but there are a number of provisions that are going to things that I can support (like preventing the wholesale savaging of LA programs that Jindal's going to do because he isn't excepting governmental stimulus).

Who helped vote for the other stuff, radamanthys? Ain't just Obama. Republicans'll never hold their party accountable for spending though.

I've been just as critical of the Bush administration (and the rest of the idiots). I just don't consider them republicans. The whole idea is less government- of which this is the antithesis. I included TARP- that wasn't an Obama thing. My main criticism in that post was his violation of one of his 'inviolate' promises throughout his campain.

[radamanthys]

I disagree, Rady. He went for bipartisan and thats what bit him in the ass. Oh, if we extend a hand someone will take it? Not republicans. Nope.

Bit him toward furthering his own agenda- his promise was to work to make sure everyone agreed.



No, that happened before the inauguration. Remember the free bank bail-outs?

I'm aware. I was accusing Washington in whole, not any particular group.



Oh yeah, I forgot how many prostitutes politicians buy and how influential they are then commit suicide.

Huh? I made a metaphor about the stimulus package. Whore wife (government) gives it (money) to whoever's there. It might as well be me.

Doesn't mean I won't complain about my whore wife.

[tyrant-201]

In Obama's defense, he reached out to Republicans quite a bit more than he -had- to. We never saw any cooperation whatsoever with the Bush administration, not on the scale that Obama attempted to do. I think this bill is quite a bit more mediocre than it could have been, had Pellosi and Reid had their way.

[Back]

Bit him toward furthering his own agenda- his promise was to work to make sure everyone agreed.

Exactly. And what did that get him?

Yet you still get massive tax cuts.

The duplicity is simply stunning.

[radamanthys]

At least the GOP was honest about it. More ethical that way, believe it or not.

Money doesn't work like that- if it's spent, it'll have to be paid back at some point.

Say what you want- spending nearly a trillion bucks doesn't equal tax cuts.

[Back]

At least the GOP was honest about it. More ethical that way, believe it or not.

How was this bill not clear about tax cuts?


Money doesn't work like that- if it's spent, it'll have to be paid back at some point.

Thats the American way propagated by Reagan.


Say what you want- spending nearly a trillion bucks doesn't equal tax cuts.

But it does include massive tax cuts. Which all the Republicans voted against.

[Ignot]

Well, Obama showed himself to be just another politician.



Were you expecting something else? You sound naive. Or stupid. Or both.

2632

[Daniel]

Unsurprising something like this should get churned out - any pork lumped in with the actual stimulus like infrastructure repair has been anointed as just as valid and good. After all, it's the same mindset that got the dubious stimulus package ramrodded through in the first place.

Of these, which do you think is pork?

Education?

Healthcare?

Transportation?

Investment in Clean energy?

[Back]

Tax cuts?

[Parkbandit]

Waste of the second it took to read your post. If you don't agree with Begala, why not underline why? ;)

Paul Begala (born May 12, 1961) is a political consultant, a commentator, a prominent liberal, and a former advisor to President Bill Clinton. He gained national prominence as half of the political consulting team Carville and Begala. Until June 2005, Begala was a co-host of CNN's political debate program, Crossfire. He is Research Professor of Public Policy at Georgetown University Public Policy Institute. Currently he is teaching at the University of Georgia School of Law as a Sanders Political Leadership Scholar.

[Warriorbird]

So... you immediately disregard Begala for his Clinton associations... but don't understand it when people question your use of Murdoch owned media news stories?

[Parkbandit]

Make sense to me. If you were against it do not collect.

That could even be applied to Americans who are going to get tax cuts. Protest by sending your tax cut back to the government.

Don’t agree with the package and want to buy a house? Send the government $8k.

It makes perfect sense. So I suppose it also "make sense to" you that if you believe socialism is the best government system, you should pack up and leave the country?

Or isn't that convenient for you?

FYI - I'll be making a small fortune off this stimulus package... and I still disagree with it.

[Parkbandit]

So... you immediately disregard Begala for his Clinton associations... but don't understand it when people question your use of Murdoch owned media news stories?


It's a pretty safe bet that I won't agree politically with a flaming liberal... much like you disregard opinion pieces from Rush Limbaugh or Murdoch.

Sorry if that somehow hurts your feelings.

[Warriorbird]

Way to not talk about what I was.

:)

[Parkbandit]

In Obama's defense, he reached out to Republicans quite a bit more than he -had- to. We never saw any cooperation whatsoever with the Bush administration, not on the scale that Obama attempted to do. I think this bill is quite a bit more mediocre than it could have been, had Pellosi and Reid had their way.

Are you fucking kidding me.. or just completely ignorant on the facts?

Immigration
Kennedy Education - No Child Left Behind.

Just off the top of my head.

But hey.. Obama is the Saint and Bush is the DEVIL, so please continue.

[Parkbandit]

Way to not talk about what I was.

:)


You being a complete asshole isn't really on topic.

:)

[Warriorbird]

Ah. Well... at least you've learned something valuable. People aren't swayed by highly partisan sources.

:)

Pleasant evening.

[tyrant-201]

Are you fucking kidding me.. or just completely ignorant on the facts?

Immigration
Kennedy Education - No Child Left Behind.

Just off the top of my head.

But hey.. Obama is the Saint and Bush is the DEVIL, so please continue.

That all you can think of after 8 years? The stimulus eclipses any significance of those bills. The two instances you cited were also instances where Bush's base wasn't strong on either bill in any regard. He NEEDED those Democratic votes to get both bills passed. I'm quite certain any legislation Bush could've gotten passed on the "fast track" was done just exactly so.

I'm not at all ignorant on the facts. I've never said Obama was a saint. I disagree with Obama on many accounts. I don't think Bush is the Devil. He's just pretty plainly stupid.

In my own opinion the best thing for this country, politically would be the death of the Republican party, or reinvention of it. Right now the Republican party is a JOKE. Get rid of your warhawk politicians that spend massive amounts on foreign wars and national defense. Get rid of your whacko evangelical christian base. Start the fuck over.

[Ignot]

I wouldn't say Bush was the devil but he was not a good president. We will see what history has to say about that, though. And in regards to Obama, can we wait and see what he does in 4 years instead of 2 months before we start ripping him to shreds? You political thread folk need to take a day off.

[Rocktar]

That all you can think of after 8 years? The stimulus eclipses any significance of those bills. The two instances you cited were also instances where Bush's base wasn't strong on either bill in any regard. He NEEDED those Democratic votes to get both bills passed. I'm quite certain any legislation Bush could've gotten passed on the "fast track" was done just exactly so.

I'm not at all ignorant on the facts. I've never said Obama was a saint. I disagree with Obama on many accounts. I don't think Bush is the Devil. He's just pretty plainly stupid.

In my own opinion the best thing for this country, politically would be the death of the Republican party, or reinvention of it. Right now the Republican party is a JOKE. Get rid of your warhawk politicians that spend massive amounts on foreign wars and national defense. Get rid of your whacko evangelical christian base. Start the fuck over.

Ok, so a President working with the opposition party to get a bill passed that most everyone wants doesn't count? Okay.....

Also, people failed to point out the drug added to Medicaid. The largest welfare expansion in the history of the country, under a REPUBLICAN President. Hummmmm, yeah, bipartisan support and so on.

While you may not be ignorrant of the facts, you surely seem to ignore a large number of them and post with a fervor that bespeaks of rose colored glasses.

Lastly, the same could be said about the Democrat party, trash the radical Socialists/Marxists, get rid of the environmental whackos, and lynch Nacy Pelosi. The whole "everything is ok, lets legalize about anything and we should fund every social program in the world AND support the rest of the world too" BS has to stop. I mean come on, we have had 40 years of the "Great Society" and it hasn't worked. Every European country that can is trying to get away from Socialism, it failed in Russia and it is failing in China, how much more evidence do you need to see that it doesn't work and nothing is going to change that. Just ebcause we are America, doesn't mean we know how to do Socialism better than everyone else, it won't work here either so why try it?

[Rocktar]

I wouldn't say Bush was the devil but he was not a good president. We will see what history has to say about that, though. And in regards to Obama, can we wait and see what he does in 4 years instead of 2 months before we start ripping him to shreds? You political thread folk need to take a day off.

No, we can't, I don't need 4 years of failed Socialism/Marxism to know it is wrong, won't work and will harm this country. No one in politics gets a free ride for any length of time. For far too long, we have let these idiots screw things up, it is time to stand up, tell them they work for us and they need to know we are watching.

[tyrant-201]

No, we can't, I don't need 4 years of failed Socialism/Marxism to know it is wrong, won't work and will harm this country. No one in politics gets a free ride for any length of time. For far too long, we have let these idiots screw things up, it is time to stand up, tell them they work for us and they need to know we are watching.

That goes for both the republican and democratic party. They're both ridiculously incompetent and corrupt.

[TheRunt]

No, we can't, I don't need 4 years of failed Socialism/Marxism to know it is wrong, won't work and will harm this country. No one in politics gets a free ride for any length of time. For far too long, we have let these idiots screw things up, it is time to stand up, tell them they work for us and they need to know we are watching.

QFMFT

[Sean of the Thread]

Can I take it or can you send it to me if you dont' want it?

[TheRunt]

To expand on that write/call/email/show up at their motherfucking door your congressman/ senator/governor/etc let them know what you want and don't. Let them know if they don't do what you want you'll vote against them the next election and do it. If you keep voting assholes out of office that don't do the will of the pubic eventually you will get ones in office who do. Most politicians don't want one or two terms they want to be in it for life.

[Daniel]

Every European country that can is trying to get away from Socialism, it failed in Russia and it is failing in China, how much more evidence do you need to see that it doesn't work and nothing is going to change that. Just ebcause we are America, doesn't mean we know how to do Socialism better than everyone else, it won't work here either so why try it?

Your stupidity is astounding. What "European" countries are trying to get away from socialism? This isn't 1989 buddy.

Quick Quiz: What is the most recent European country to fail?

Which country was also the poster child for free market capitalism?

If you guessed it was the same country you'd be right.

Let's try something else:

Which countries are growing the fastest in the world? Free market capitalisms or state led capitalists?

Give you one guess.

[TheRunt]

Let's try something else:

Which countries are growing the fastest in the world? Free market capitalisms or state led capitalists?

Give you one guess.

Nazi Germany grew pretty damn quick also and only failed because they bite off more than they could chew. And how did Italy do under Il Duce?

I'm assuming your talking about China though and yes their growing pretty damn quick but would you want to live there?

[Daniel]

Nazi Germany grew pretty damn quick also and only failed because they bite off more than they could chew. And how did Italy do under Il Duce?

I'm assuming your talking about China though and yes their growing pretty damn quick but would you want to live there?

Really, Nazi Germany and FASCIST Italy are the best examples you can come up with?

No, seriously. You should go pick up the economist.

[Xaerve]

Ok, so a President working with the opposition party to get a bill passed that most everyone wants doesn't count? Okay.....

Also, people failed to point out the drug added to Medicaid. The largest welfare expansion in the history of the country, under a REPUBLICAN President. Hummmmm, yeah, bipartisan support and so on.

While you may not be ignorrant of the facts, you surely seem to ignore a large number of them and post with a fervor that bespeaks of rose colored glasses.

Lastly, the same could be said about the Democrat party, trash the radical Socialists/Marxists, get rid of the environmental whackos, and lynch Nacy Pelosi. The whole "everything is ok, lets legalize about anything and we should fund every social program in the world AND support the rest of the world too" BS has to stop. I mean come on, we have had 40 years of the "Great Society" and it hasn't worked. Every European country that can is trying to get away from Socialism, it failed in Russia and it is failing in China, how much more evidence do you need to see that it doesn't work and nothing is going to change that. Just ebcause we are America, doesn't mean we know how to do Socialism better than everyone else, it won't work here either so why try it?

I don't argue politics on the PC because half the democrats on these boards just make shit up as they go along. This guy cracks me up more than the usual though, because he really believes he has all the answers.

When socialism fails we'll see what he has to say then. :)

[Xaerve]

Your stupidity is astounding. What "European" countries are trying to get away from socialism? This isn't 1989 buddy.

Quick Quiz: What is the most recent European country to fail?

Which country was also the poster child for free market capitalism?

If you guessed it was the same country you'd be right.

Let's try something else:

Which countries are growing the fastest in the world? Free market capitalisms or state led capitalists?

Give you one guess.

While I'll agree that socialism is largely dead in elected politicians Europe, (France's recent presidential election helped seal that deal), socialism is still very much alive in the populace and in the political system. Many major socialist parties exist in the European Union, and many of their laws/mandates are still in effect in the 10,000+ laws that the EU governing bodies pass.

To answer your last question, without spending all morning, the current situation has little to do with Free Market vs State led capitalism. The root of the issue really falls to Greenspan and the failed policies and lack of regulation that Bush let the Fed run wild with. The issue here is bad decision making in a free market, and we are not in a correction as a result--a good correction. I think that a new era of global transparency and inner-connectivity will arise out of this situation; focused on things like sustainability, improved reporting structures and informational flow, and drastically overhauled accounting and regulatory bodies. While I'll agree that Bush fucked up on his "state-led" regulatory approaches, through various agencies (The Fed for example); the primary reason for our current situation was bad information or the outright lack of information. When that situation is corrected, and it will be, we will ween-off the current state-led capitalist model and free-market capitalism will see its time again.

I just think its absolutely silly to pretend that Obama is capable of turning this country into a true state-led capitalism regime, for all time. The model that we've pumped around the world, lived in for years, and all of our friends and allies subscribe to is not going away anytime soon. This is, like most market corrections, a huge correction that will come and go. It will be a time that a large portion of this country should be re-educated, and the education system can and should be revamped (two things that the current socialism "stimulus" package does not help address).

Save education, the other primary way Obama could have actually made this "stimulus" package more effective at "jump starting the economy" would be to lower the minimum income requirement to receive the stimulus, because currently some 33% of individuals (I think I heard that on NPR, number could be off) are most likely going to save the money.

[TheRunt]

Really, Nazi Germany and FASCIST Italy are the best examples you can come up with?

No, seriously. You should go pick up the economist.

Perhaps not the best but quite apt off the top of my head at least regarding germany and Mussolini did have some socialist tendencies including being a socialist agitator and journalist and being editor of a socialist newspaper but quite a few historians just consider him an opportunist who jumped on whatever bandwagon was popular at the time. Or perhaps you would I refer to the current Venezuela Govt.?

And seriously, You should pick up a history book.

[radamanthys]

These people love Chavez- that's a moot point.

Only with the threat of failure can excellence occur. Unfortunately, in mitigating failure, you're also mitigating excellence.

I can't tell you how many kids ended up down a bad road because "it doesn't matter" in middle school. The reason 'rich kids' do so well later is that they're pushed early on so that they can get into a better elementary, middle and high school, then college. The public school system, in mitigating failure, has shown an impressive track record of also mitigating excellence. The same thing can and will happen to the rest of the country.

Anyone get the commercials where you live about "Lets let the millionaires pay their fair share"? It's something like that. If you look at the 'paid for' byline, you may be shocked. That blatantly socialist commercial is paid for by the fucking teacher's union. Here's an article about it. (http://www.observer.com/2009/teachers-union-ad-campaign-wealthy-must-pay-fair-share)

The TARP bill, now the stimulus. This is just the beginning. We're in real trouble, long term.

[Daniel]

To answer your last question, without spending all morning, the current situation has little to do with Free Market vs State led capitalism.

That's not the point I was making. You have people on these boards who seem convined that anything that falls into their narrow minded definition of socialism is automatic fail, whereas anything "capitalism" is automatic win. That's not even remotely true, and frankly is part of the problem we're in today.



The root of the issue really falls to Greenspan and the failed policies and lack of regulation that Bush let the Fed run wild with. The issue here is bad decision making in a free market, and we are not in a correction as a result--a good correction. I think that a new era of global transparency and inner-connectivity will arise out of this situation; focused on things like sustainability, improved reporting structures and informational flow, and drastically overhauled accounting and regulatory bodies. While I'll agree that Bush fucked up on his "state-led" regulatory approaches, through various agencies (The Fed for example);

Ironically enough I agree with you. However, people need to understand that just letting the market run wild is not always the best solution and that capitalists will not always put their best foot forward for the nation and its' well being.






the primary reason for our current situation was bad information or the outright lack of information. When that situation is corrected, and it will be, we will ween-off the current state-led capitalist model and free-market capitalism will see its time again.

I kinda disagree with you here. You'll never have perfect information and you'll never be able to account for everything going on in a market.



I just think its absolutely silly to pretend that Obama is capable of turning this country into a true state-led capitalism regime, for all time. The model that we've pumped around the world, lived in for years, and all of our friends and allies subscribe to is not going away anytime soon. This is, like most market corrections, a huge correction that will come and go. It will be a time that a large portion of this country should be re-educated, and the education system can and should be revamped (two things that the current socialism "stimulus" package does not help address).

Save education, the other primary way Obama could have actually made this "stimulus" package more effective at "jump starting the economy" would be to lower the minimum income requirement to receive the stimulus, because currently some 33% of individuals (I think I heard that on NPR, number could be off) are most likely going to save the money.

Yea. Well, too bad both of these things (More investment in education and lowing income requirements) are two of the biggest things that would have republicans howling about "socialism" and wealth redistribution.

[Daniel]

These people love Chavez- that's a moot point.

Only with the threat of failure can excellence occur. .

You obviously don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

The threat of failure? You really think poor kids in this country have no threat of failure, whereas rich kids due?

rofl x 1000.

[Daniel]

Perhaps not the best but quite apt off the top of my head at least regarding germany and Mussolini did have some socialist tendencies including being a socialist agitator and journalist and being editor of a socialist newspaper but quite a few historians just consider him an opportunist who jumped on whatever bandwagon was popular at the time. Or perhaps you would I refer to the current Venezuela Govt.?

And seriously, You should pick up a history book.

If the only example of "socialism" you can come up with for current events happened in your grandparents generation then there's not a lot I can tell you.

[TheRunt]

These people love Chavez- that's a moot point.

Only with the threat of failure can excellence occur. Unfortunately, in mitigating failure, you're also mitigating excellence..

Which is just one of the problems I have with the no child left behind laws.
Hell before it was enacted we had people graduation h.s and being admitted into college that couldn't read past a 3rd grade level, some of them were functionally illiterate. Hell in IN where I live they give out 2 different diplomas now. One for kids who meet the state standards and one for kids who for various reasons don't. Which is better than just giving out the same one to everyone but still. If you can't meet the requirements to graduate you don't graduate. Any job I have ever had you either did the the job or you got fired. You didn't get x amount of pay if you did and y amount of pay if you didn't. Well they do that in sales but that doesn't count.



Anyone get the commercials where you live about "Lets let the millionaires pay their fair share"? It's something like that. If you look at the 'paid for' byline, you may be shocked. That blatantly socialist commercial is paid for by the fucking teacher's union. Here's an article about it. (http://www.observer.com/2009/teachers-union-ad-campaign-wealthy-must-pay-fair-share)

The TARP bill, now the stimulus. This is just the beginning. We're in real trouble, long term.

Hell they paid 1.5 mill for the commercial why didn't they put that into funding schools?

[Warriorbird]

I love it how Republicans (barring Gan and a couple others) here love to forget the Scandinavian countries as examples of socialism.

Ultimately corporations do worse but the average citizen tends to do better as a whole. Their tax burdens (when you count state+federal) aren't typically all that different from ours.

[radamanthys]

You obviously don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

The threat of failure? You really think poor kids in this country have no threat of failure, whereas rich kids due?

rofl x 1000.

Obviously I don't. Because it's so obvious that you do, right?

Rofl x 10²³

[radamanthys]

I love it how Republicans (barring Gan and a couple others) here love to forget the Scandinavian countries as examples of socialism.

Ultimately corporations do worse but the average citizen tends to do better as a whole. Their tax burdens (when you count state+federal) aren't typically all that different from ours.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/510

http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5616.aspx

Read this guy's post in regard to taxes:
http://mises.org/Community/forums/p/5616/76390.aspx#76390

[Warriorbird]

Heh heh. All I have to read is the domain name to understand I'm reading agitprop. There are folks in America who'd pay nearly 50% if they weren't dodging much of it.

[radamanthys]

Which is inherently the problem, isn't it? That our economic model can't sustain a socialist system because of our inefficiencies? Because Americans, as a rule, know how to (and will) jerk around a system to the greatest extent it allows?

[Xaerve]

I love it how Republicans (barring Gan and a couple others) here love to forget the Scandinavian countries as examples of socialism.

Ultimately corporations do worse but the average citizen tends to do better as a whole. Their tax burdens (when you count state+federal) aren't typically all that different from ours.

You need to read up on Scandinavian countries and post again :)

They are not socialist, not even close; in fact they have taken some of the most extreme strides to liberalize their economies recently (even during this huge recession). After the huge recession they experienced in the 1990s they have done extensive amounts of work towards open-free markets; hell their membership in the EU mandates and regulates this. I think the term you might want to use, and one that we used often in school is "Welfare Capitalism;" a blend of capitalism with a welfare state. Taking care of your populace through the government organization/redistribution != socialism; they do not have extreme state-ownership of industries, like we are increasingly facing now in the US.

Furthermore, the assertion that their tax burdens are similar to ours is just made up. Wikipedia, because I'm lazy:
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/3835/blahuf0.jpg

[Xaerve]

Heh heh. All I have to read is the domain name to understand I'm reading agitprop. There are folks in America who'd pay nearly 50% if they weren't dodging much of it.

Your definition of "dodging" is often "legal" and "working as intended."

[radamanthys]

True. Our tax system is insanely fucked up.

[Methais]

However, people need to understand that just letting the market run wild is not always the best solution and that capitalists will not always put their best foot forward for the nation and its' well being.


The threat of failure? You really think poor kids in this country have no threat of failure, whereas rich kids due?

rofl x 1000.

Where did you learn spelling and how to use apostrophes?

rofl x 1000.

[radamanthys]

Where did you learn spelling and how to use apostrophes?

rofl x 1000.



Perfect post in combination with your avatar.

[Parkbandit]

Where did you learn spelling and how to use apostrophes?

rofl x 1000.


To sum up:

"The better educated our people are, the people we do in the world."

[Methais]

To sum up:

"The better educated our people are, the people we do in the world."

Dont' due that, thats' not nice.

[Warriorbird]

Taking care of your populace through the government organization/redistribution != socialism; they do not have extreme state-ownership of industries, like we are increasingly facing now in the US.
-Xaerve

Way to invalidate yourself with a sentence that staggers belief. I'd say that for the last 8 years nearly the opposite has been true... extreme industry owned government.

I'm just going with the definition of socialism that most Republicans use... IE, the government doing anything other than cutting taxes on the highest income bracket or spending money on defense.

Your graph seems to be from somebody's Photobucket. It also ignores state tax rates and sales tax.

[radamanthys]

The more you argue that we have similar tax rates as the 'socialist' countries, the more conservatives (not necessarily GOP) realize that we're getting boned by tax-and-spenders.

And yea, there are different kinds of socialism. Some refer to the push for total equality (i.e. government provision of all necessities), others refer to the nationalization of all industry, others still refer to revokation of liberties in order to achieve equality (Maoism is somewhat akin).

National Socialism was one form.
Soviet Communism was another.
Chinese Communism is yet another.
The list goes on.

The idea is that equality leads to excellence in every case. The idea of promoting excellence for excellence's sake is out the window.

Oh, and Conservatism doesn't mean cutting taxes on the rich and defense spending.

[Warriorbird]

Could've fooled me... though I guess religious fundamentalism plays a role in one part of the party.

[radamanthys]

Religious motivations, as well as ideas on spending and government size.

Being libertarian, I'm conservative in regard to this conversation. I may not be in others (Vehemently anti-prohibition [i.e. drugs, abortion, guns, seatbelts], anti-censorship, etc.).

Basically, not all republicans are conservatives anymore.

[Warriorbird]

Can you tell the rest of them that?

[Xaerve]

Way to invalidate yourself with a sentence that staggers belief. I'd say that for the last 8 years nearly the opposite has been true... extreme industry owned government.

I'm just going with the definition of socialism that most Republicans use... IE, the government doing anything other than cutting taxes on the highest income bracket or spending money on defense.

Your graph seems to be from somebody's Photobucket. It also ignores state tax rates and sales tax.

I'm talking about currently, the government is buying large portions of companies... are you refuting that?

And the graph came straight from wikipedia, I said that. I'm not taking time to scan some image out of a journal or something for an internet debate :P

[Daniel]

Where did you learn spelling and how to use apostrophes?

rofl x 1000.

Oh noe.

I made a typo.

I still have a college education. Yourself?