Paul Krugman is again a must-read. Obamaphiles still might not be happy with what the Professor is reciting, but he's right, and it needs to be said. And passed on...
• Obama blew it on the stimulus plan by empowering the Republicans, who just want to screw the country over in hopes of a comeback.
• This should be the perfect time to push universal health care.
• Obama's bank plan is (probably) also for shit.
UPDATE: You want a lecture? I'm giving one in the comments...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
• Obama blew it on the stimulus plan by empowering the Republicans, who just want to screw the country over in hopes of a comeback.
As much as you don't like the Republican ideas on this plan, you don't seriously believe they hope the country goes down the shitter and they can stage a comeback? That is just as crazy as the Republicans that thought Democrats wanted us to "lose the war on terror."
Krugman also talked about how people saving and not spending is a bad thing. While there needs to be some spending, overspending and people borrowing beyond their means was a major contributor to this mess. No thanks, perfesser.
I agree that he should be doing something with health care. I don't know about universal health care, but some program to insure the uninsured. It does seem odd that we haven't heard anything.
As for the banks, he does raise a good point. Why should taxpayers reward bad behavior on the part of the banks without some kind of accountability. While there may need to be some strings, Geithner and Summers are right, governments make shitty bank managers. You want an example, just look at Argentina or any other place where this has been done. Oh, but I am sure we can do it right.
Steves,
1. I think GOP ideology and their delusions nestle in nicely with what they're doing here, but I absolutely believe they are consciously scuttling Obama's plans for their own selfish strategic and political goals. They think they are giving Obama enough rope to hang himself, and—yes, the impact on the country be damned.
Do I think this is akin to hoping soldiers die or wars are lost? No. Not at all. Here's the difference why: Because working class people getting the shaft at the expense of big business and their fantasy version of capitalism and trickle-down economics is the GOP religion. To them the awful effects of a failed stimulus is a feature not a bug.
Republican policy is always against the interests of the general public—even the bulk of their own supporters—and this is no different. They would pursue this same stupid "tax cut" course regardless of the country's situation, it's just that now, they think they can use it against Obama in two years.
Fortunately they are wrong. I just need Obama and the Dems to realize it before they play right into it.
2. The only people who should be expected to spend beyond their means in a good stimulus package should be the government. That is a big part of why this package sucks. The breaks aren't targeted to the right people (cutting food stamps in favor of a stupid house-purchasing rebate? WTF?). If the gov't had a good public works plan for this spending, I'd have absolutely no hesitation about deficit-spending.
Just think, the stimulus package helps right the economy and after it's all said and done, we have broadband in every neighborhood, a new electrical grid and eco-retrofitted schools and city halls all over the country...
This plan will have shit to show for it at the end.
3. Universal health care couldn't come at a better time—we currently stare double-digit unemployment straight in the eye. That's MILLIONS more uninsured people in the next few months. To relieve employees and unemployed, not to mention business and employers of one of the biggest single financial drains seems like a no-brainer. Sure, it'll cost money, but so will doing nothing—probably more. Spending THAT money will not only cover everyone with healthcare it'll free up billions to be spent from the bottom and invested from the top.
4. Nationalize the fucking banks yesterday. This is fucking craziness. They did it in Sweden and sold them back to the private sector at a profit. Like the fuckingbanks have done a bang-up job running themsleves? Please.
THAT is the "bold action" and change I was believing in. I've yet to see it.
To some extent, tax cuts do stimulate spending, as people have more money to spend. Don't get me wrong, I am not always in support of tax cuts, but I would rather the gov't look at cutting spending, if possible, than to raising taxes.
As for them actively defeating Obama's plans for their own selfish gains, as opposed to an ideological opposition, I need some evidence. Otherwise, it just sounds like BS.
Just think, the stimulus package helps right the economy and after it's all said and done, we have broadband in every neighborhood, a new electrical grid and eco-retrofitted schools and city halls all over the country...
Sounds good, of the most part, but schools should be funded at the local or state level, where the residents of that community have input. Why should I have a say as to what goes into a school in Texas or Oregon?
Universal health care couldn't come at a better time
You may be right. I would certainly be willing to consider it.
Nationalize the fucking banks yesterday. This is fucking craziness. They did it in Sweden and sold them back to the private sector at a profit. Like the fuckingbanks have done a bang-up job running themsleves? Please.
The Swedish scheme was successful, but many others were not. I guess I would be more confident if the plan was coming from Obama and not Congress.
schools should be funded at the local or state level, where the residents of that community have input. Why should I have a say as to what goes into a school in Texas or Oregon?
I'm not talking about some bullshit one-zize-fits-all No School Left Behind mandate, but if there are municipal projects (new school construction, lead or asbestos removal, whatever...) that have been awaiting some $$$, consider them funded, and get LOCAL people working, upgrading their own schools...
I think a better way to fund schools and decrease the federal tax burden whilst raising the local or state tax. Having money works it way up tot he feds and back down to the states is not the most efficient way to fund smaller projects, IMO.
Sure, in a perfect world...but most towns and states are strapped and cutting school funding to the bone and beyond. Infrastructure work has gone undone for years. Most towns and states (all?) are not allowed to operate in a deficit like the Federal Gov't is.
This is a chance to fill the gap. Get people working, but on real stuff that needs to be done, and is a long-term benefit and investment.
Otherwise, the school (city hall, firehouse, etc) goes on being neglected, and the local contractor goes belly-up with no houses to build.
"...you don't seriously believe they hope the country goes down the shitter and they can stage a comeback?"
I wouldn't have believed it at one point in my life, but yeas, I really think they they want failure.
And this is why:
"Because working class people getting the shaft at the expense of big business and their fantasy version of capitalism and trickle-down economics is the GOP religion."
---
"That is just as crazy as the Republicans that thought Democrats wanted us to "lose the war on terror."
I do think some Dems wanted to "lose" the war in Iraq, if only to keep the neocons from invading the rest of the world.
Post a Comment