He is president of America at a time of grave economic conditions and danger. The opposition party is one of the most reactionary we have ever had. Why is he catering to them to support a bill, instead of passing the best bill he can to help Americans? How is catering to a corrupt, diseased ideology which Americans are still roundly rejecting, being president of all of America? I just don't see it this way.
Despite the Ass-kissing, Stimulus Plan Passes Without a Single Republican Vote
- Thread starter blackascoal
- Start date
He is president of America at a time of grave economic conditions and danger. The opposition party is one of the most reactionary we have ever had. Why is he catering to them to support a bill, instead of passing the best bill he can to help Americans? How is catering to a corrupt, diseased ideology which Americans are still roundly rejecting, being president of all of America? I just don't see it this way.
But what's the final bill going to look like?
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Very true .. and, how much more will he give up for "appearance?"
How has he catered to them? Particularly with regard to the actual legislation....where has he caved in any way?
They put the tax cuts in to attract Republican support. Or, that is what they put out there anyway. A lot of the more liberal economists, Krugman and Delong for instance, have been writing that the tax cuts that are in the bill are very ineffective, and think the money should go for other investments.
I don't think they put them in to please the GOP at all. There are plenty of economists outside of the 2 you mentioned who think that not only is this not a time to raise taxes, but tax cuts - especially some of the ones for small business & lower income that are in there - are essential as part of any stimulus package right now.
Personally, I would have been horrified if they came out with a stimulus package that didn't get more money in people's pockets, and give small business more tax incentive to keep jobs here & hire more.
You're buying into the BAC propoganda. He made a public show of bipartisanship & inviting Republican input, as any President should, but the package remains essentially what it was before that. He compromised no principles.
I don't think I'm buying into propaganda. I believe that tax cuts are next to useless, and much of them, from what I have read, are corporate tax cuts. I know you believe that businesses that get tax cuts are going to use their savings to hire people. Many believed that banks were going to use their bailout money to lend.
See, I just don't believe any of that.
The rich really are greedy. And we really were in a new gilded age. And they really want more and they really don't care who starves, and they really think everyone else can go eat cake. And they really want to make sure we never get health care, and the captains of industry really do have phone calls where they plot and plan to ensure that there are no unions, and they really were caught on tape doing that, and they really do think that we need a peasant class.
And that is how I really see it.
So we just have a difference of opinion on this. I do hope that this bill staves off the worst of it, but I think it could have been that much better.
And that is how I really see it.
So we just have a difference of opinion on this. I do hope that this bill staves off the worst of it, but I think it could have been that much better.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Obama Caves to Republicans on Stimulus Plan
GUEST: Doug Henwood, author of the book, “After the New Economy,” and editor of “Left Business Observer,” host of a Pacifica weekly program called Behind the News
Rough Transcript:
-- excerpts
Kolhatkar: So, how much do you know of the plan, and just looking at it—broadly speaking, before we get into the details—do you think that it has the makings or the potential for something that will actually address this recession we’re in?
Henwood: It started out better than it’s becoming in the last few days; it started out looking like a very large spending program—mostly concentrated on infrastructure, with also some assistance to state and local governments and extended unemployment benefits… and for the longer term some spending on subsidies and research and development for clean energy. These were all very good things, but we’ve heard in the last couple of days—in order to appease Republicans—that a very large portion, perhaps as much as forty percent of the proposed plan, will go to tax cuts, which are a much less effective way of stimulating the economy.
NOTE:: Explaining the difference between republican demanded tax cuts directed towards business..
Kolhatkar: Explain the difference between the two.
Henwood: Well, the business one is the one that’s especially ineffective. They’re actually talking about even giving credits to companies that have made losses in recent years. Now, that doesn’t make any sense to me, that kind of rewarding failure…
Kolhatkar: I mean, that would just basically help them perhaps not go bankrupt, but it wouldn’t necessarily create new jobs.
Henwood: No, it certainly wouldn’t; and it just could be a dying operation anyway, so it’s throwing good money after bad. But what really stimulates the economy most effectively is infrastructure spending, and that kind of thing. And the more we learn about the plan, the less of it there seems to be.
And what the politics behind this are very mysterious to me. It’s obviously designed to appease Republican opposition—but the Democrats have fifty-nine votes in the Senate, a large House majority, Obama won with a fairly large popular vote margin—they have some political capital to spend. George Bush barely squeaked into office a couple of times and acted like he owned the world. And with much more of a mandate and a great deal of enthusiasm behind him, Obama is eagerly compromising with the Republicans—it doesn’t make any political sense to me. Okay, if you can’t get it through Congress and you have the Republicans start to filibuster, then maybe you start thinking about compromise; but if you start out compromised, what kind of political thinking is that?
Kolhatkar: And, so, basically, the Republicans—even as an unpopular minority—are still carrying so much clout. But, then, what about the argument that Wall Street supported Obama hugely, wholeheartedly, when he was running for President, is this perhaps also not a nod to Corporate America?
Henwood: Well, to some degree, but Wall Street is very happy with the idea of big stimulus spending…
Kolhatkar: Right, because that means contracts for them…
Henwood: Well, not just that—I think they’re really very concerned about the state of the economy. I read, for example, the Goldman Sachs daily economic commentaries and they’re very enthusiastic about a very large stimulus program. You have the IMF talking about very large public spending programs—this is orthodox economic thinking right now.
Republicans, I think, really represent a kind of provincial, small-business mentality that really doesn’t deserve the time of day. We’ve got big business—certainly big capital, big Wall Street capital—would go along with whatever Obama and Congress came up with, so I just don’t see the point in appeasing Republicans.
I think this is part… let me see… I think there are two things involved. One, the Republicans have a coherent theory—it’s nonsense, but they have a coherent theory about tax cuts—it’s your money, you should keep it, the government shouldn’t take it, the government doesn’t know what to do with your money. The Democrats really have nothing to compete with that. They don’t have an ideology, they don’t have a real philosophy—they’re just pure pragmatists. And, on top of that, we have Obama’s dedication to this post-partisanship—he’s going to end conflict in Washington. But politics is about conflict; there are different interests, different philosophies involved. You can’t have politics without conflict. So this seems to me bankrupt at every level, both the purely political level and also the philosophical/ideological level—and, also, the economic level at this period…much less economically effective turn this program has taken the last couple of days.
-- more at link
http://uprisingradio.org/home/?p=5383
These are voices from America's REAL left .. not the Democratic Party.
Last edited:
Yeah, we definitely disagree, but I can respect that. As much as corporations & the rich abuse their wealth, America is still in the shadow of other countries when it comes to being business-friendly.
Get rid of loopholes & incent companies to keep jobs in America, but try to improve the business climate while you do it.
There are $275 billion in tax cuts in the plan. $145 billion are for low & middle income workers. There are renewable energy tax credits worth $20 billion. Much of the rest as far as business goes is for SMALL business, in terms of incentives to hire & keep jobs domestic.
I have no problem w/ any of that; I think it's smart. I don't see it as "conservative," or as "catering." It's good policy.
Get rid of loopholes & incent companies to keep jobs in America, but try to improve the business climate while you do it.
There are $275 billion in tax cuts in the plan. $145 billion are for low & middle income workers. There are renewable energy tax credits worth $20 billion. Much of the rest as far as business goes is for SMALL business, in terms of incentives to hire & keep jobs domestic.
I have no problem w/ any of that; I think it's smart. I don't see it as "conservative," or as "catering." It's good policy.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
It's not what's best for the country now .. that's the point. The emphasis on spending, discovery, safety nets, and education was and still is the best course to take to recovery. We've been down the tax cut road .. IT DIDN"T WORK.
Obama is the President .. LEAD THE FUCKING COUNTRY.
I'll be surprised if there isn't quite a few R Senators that will vote for it.
The Senate is quite a bit different than Congress.
What's going to the low and middle income workers they are going to see in an increase of 12-15 dollars a week in their paychecks. I don't know.
I don't know how we're in the shadow of which countries for being business-friendly either.
Well, I am rooting for it to work. But I am also mindful that I have been open to this idea of letting Obama be Obama. I get that I hate Republicans. Someone once said that the republican never lived who who wasn't dirty, and the only way to deal with them was to beat them to death with a baseball bat. That was Rahm Emanual. Or the old Rahm Emanual. I still think that way. But I can certainly consider that my feelings are petty and destructive and if Obama can do good, progressive things, while making Republicans feel good and not forcing them to crawl around on their knees and admit that they did their best to destroy this country for 8 years and should be put in prison, then that was good. All that matters is the outcome.
At the same time I'm mindful that I might be the one Obama is playing, appeasing, trying to get it over on, while he institutes the economic policies of Larry Sumner, one of the architects of this disaster, which let's at least be honest, began under Bill Clinton.
So I think I'm pretty open and not unreasonable, but watchful.
If there is one thing I have never agreed with "my side" on, it's taxes. I don't understand a mindset that somehow thinks that we are not taxed enough, or that a new program shouldn't have a cost justification that shows how it can pay for itself over time. There is a recklessness on the part of some on the left, that thinks it's okay to just raise taxes if we can't pay for something.
In principle, I don't think anyone should pay more than a third of their income on taxes. There are many ways to reduce gov't & make it more efficient, and still pursue the goals & programs that are important to you.
In principle, I don't think anyone should pay more than a third of their income on taxes. There are many ways to reduce gov't & make it more efficient, and still pursue the goals & programs that are important to you.
Well wait just a minute Mister. Those Senators who are going to vote for it, are demanding things for their votes, and all signs say, they are going to get that.
So again, to my question, what is this bill going to look like, that Republicans are going to be just lining up to vote for it?
They ain't doing it for free. Just because you don't read the fine print, don't think I don't. I do.
And if more Democrats thought that way, they might get my vote more often.
If there is one thing that this crisis is producing, it's a large group of know-it-alls who think they can guarantee what works.
Gots news for you - no one knows what is going to work. There have been times in history that tax cuts have worked; there have been others when massive infrastructure spending did not. This is a time with no precedent.
You think you know what's going to do the trick, but you don't. I'm glad the bill embraces a variety of approaches.
Well, I'm of the mind that we've already had enough tax cuts. A lot of people on the right have found it useful to claim that if only the Democrats would go back to JFK, who after all, cut taxes.
Not one of them have ever asked; what was the tax rate that JFK cut? And, what is it now?
And when is it enough?
We know that on one side we have a radical element who want no taxes. The question is always, where do we stop before we get to that? And who gets hurt? What is the social contract? Do we have one? These are the questions, and they are what we fight for. I don't want to fight on the side of social darwinism. (I know that you do not either).
That's definitely true. But one thing that I think we do know is that the same people who destroyed everything, are now claiming that they know what to do, and they have a very large seat at the table Onceler. And I just wonder, how fucking wrong do you have to be, once you reach a certain level, to be kicked the hell out?
And I mean that for all of this stuff, the biggest example is William Kristol. Why are the same dopes who get us into this shit, still talking? More importantly, why is anyone still listening?
That is what bothers me.
But yeah, no one knows for sure, and certaintly be different aspects to the bill.