• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Clarifying Week

cpwill

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,605
Reaction score
39,893
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well Said

A Clarifying Week:

The past week has done an enormous amount to illuminate the contours of the struggle for fiscal sanity in America. It is increasingly clear that one party is committed to denying the reality of the challenges we face and wants instead to bury its head in the ground and pretend all is well, and that another party is slowly coming to terms with the fact that it will have to lead the way if we are to avert a disastrous debt crisis.

President Obama’s budget, released Monday, was the epitome of cynical denial. It proposed to take none of the steps required to address the fiscal collapse of our welfare state—no real tax reform, no real entitlement-spending reform, no real discretionary-spending reform. No change of direction at all...

House Republicans did not answer this denial of reality with a politically convenient denial of their own. Instead, their response to Obama’s budget was that if he wouldn’t lead then they would. In a statement Tuesday afternoon, House Republican leaders said that their forthcoming 2012 budget would:

include real entitlement reforms so that we can have a conversation with the American people about the challenges we face and the need to chart a new path to prosperity. Our reforms will focus both on saving these programs for current and future generations of Americans and on getting our debt under control and our economy growing. By taking critical steps forward now, we can fulfill the mission of health and retirement security for all Americans without making changes for those in or near retirement. We hope the President and Democratic leaders in Congress will demonstrate leadership and join us in working toward responsible solutions to confront the fiscal and economic challenges before us.​

But that hope was clearly misplaced. By Wednesday, Democrats were explicitly acknowledging a cynical political strategy behind their denials of the entitlement problem — they hope to goad Republicans into proposing entitlement reforms and then bash them for it instead of offering alternatives of their own. “They are suckers,” one “senior Democratic congressional aide” told Politico, “they have painted themselves into a corner.” A true profile in courage for Washington Democrats...

Wisconsin, where a new Republican governor has proposed to have many of the state’s public employees start contributing modestly toward their own pension and health benefits (though still not as much as essentially all private-sector workers do), and proposed limiting their collective bargaining rights to negotiations over pay rather than benefits. Change along these lines is obviously unavoidable as Wisconsin and many other states confront enormous budget gaps and daunting unfunded retirement liabilities. But in Madison, no less than in Washington, Democrats are intent on avoiding the unavoidable and denying the undeniable...

In Washington and all over the country, then, the Democratic party is mobilizing to defend our failing system of entitlements and runaway spending by cynically denying reality, while Republicans are mobilizing to take on difficult governing choices and confront at last the reality of what the liberal welfare state has wrought.

Too often, there is not much of a difference between the parties, and people inclined to care about policy are driven to call a pox on both their houses. But as this remarkable week has shown, this is not one of those times. The Democrats are shaming themselves on the premise that American voters can’t handle the truth and that there is political advantage in appealing to the country’s worst instincts. Republicans, whether by choice or by default, are taking up the challenge of telling voters the truth about our problems and persuading them that effective, responsible, and gradual solutions are possible — without taking benefits from current seniors and without abandoning our obligation to fellow citizens in need. There have not been many opportunities for conservatives to be proud of being Republicans in recent years, but this week has certainly been one...
Click to expand...

So come 2012 I suppose we're going to see if the American people are adults or not. Now THIS, is going to be a real election :D.
 
from CPWill

So come 2012 I suppose we're going to see if the American people are adults or not. Now THIS, is going to be a real election
Click to expand...

It takes two people to have a competitive election. So far, we have but one. The problem of the GOP is not ideas. They have more ideas than a pharmacy has drugs. Unfortunately, nearly all are bad ideas. Their real problem is the lack of a viable candidate.
 
I would not have a problem at all with all Americans tightening the belt if it were truly all Americans that were ask to do so.

If tax breaks and loopholes were also taken away I would go for it but that is not what is happening here.

Big business have had tax breaks for years yet they are laying off not hiring. Big business is lobbying hard on the government to keep the setup that rewards them for going overseas. They don't want just tax breaks they want no taxes in the US.


When the fair share is distributed to both sides and not just big business then I'll say no problem go for it. One only has to look at charts from years past to see where the biggest distribution has been going but it isn't enough they want more and the only way to get it is to shut down the very things that build up the US.

I don't have a problem with lowering the corporate tax rates if your going to shut down the loopholes that lets them get out of paying those taxes.

Over regulation can be a problem but it is also a problem when business looks for ways to bribe regulators so they can skirt even common sense regulation and it does the country harm for regulators to take the bribes.

Derivatives are not a problem of the little people they are a problem of big business and even those in big business don't always understand them but they have caused big harm to the whole of America.

Americas problems are across the board to lay them simply at the feet of workers and the mantra of big government is a farce.
 
haymarket said:
It takes two people to have a competitive election. So far, we have but one. The problem of the GOP is not ideas. They have more ideas than a pharmacy has drugs. Unfortunately, nearly all are bad ideas. Their real problem is the lack of a viable candidate.
Click to expand...

Nearly all are bad ideas?? You got some?? Haymarket, your denial of reality is rapidly becoming legendary.

The more light that shines on sweetheart public pensions the happier I am -- the happier we should all be. Taxpayers are being sodomized.

And that's just ONE of their good ideas.
 
haymarket said:
from CPWill



It takes two people to have a competitive election. So far, we have but one. The problem of the GOP is not ideas. They have more ideas than a pharmacy has drugs. Unfortunately, nearly all are bad ideas. Their real problem is the lack of a viable candidate.
Click to expand...

No what you have is a disgraceful incumbent that you are stuck with. Sucks to be you.
 
It is increasingly clear that one party is committed to denying the reality of the challenges we face and wants instead to bury its head in the ground and pretend all is well, and that another party is slowly coming to terms with the fact that it will have to lead the way if we are to avert a disastrous debt crisis.
Click to expand...

Nah. Actually what you have is one party that is committed to denying the fact that the trendline for entitlement spending is the real problem, and they're pretending to address the issue by chipping away at discretionary spending, which is at historically normal levels and isn't projected to get any higher in the future. This will reduce economic growth and is in no way desirable.

You have another party that is also committed to denying the fact that entitlement spending is the real problem, but at least isn't pursuing economically destructive policies like cutting discretionary spending.

...and let's not forget that this whole debate is taking place just weeks after both parties voted to extend tax cuts for the rich for two more years, with a $3.9 trillion impact on the national debt over the course of the next ten years.
 
haymarket said:
from CPWill



It takes two people to have a competitive election. So far, we have but one. The problem of the GOP is not ideas. They have more ideas than a pharmacy has drugs. Unfortunately, nearly all are bad ideas. Their real problem is the lack of a viable candidate.
Click to expand...



Chris Christie,
Scott Brown,


The latter would be a real sell to moderate liberals.


Not my favorite... but both could and IMO would beat Obama hands down.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Chris Christie,
Scott Brown,


The latter would be a real sell to moderate liberals.


Not my favorite... but both could and IMO would beat Obama hands down.
Click to expand...

You may be right about the viability of Brown being able to win a November election.He certainly would have more appeal to moderates and Independents. However, he has NO chance of winning the nomination given the make-up of the GOP primary constituency. .

You and I are 180 degrees apart on Christie - both in our opinion of him as well as his viability in an election. I think he would get his clock cleaned.
 
American said:
No what you have is a disgraceful incumbent that you are stuck with. Sucks to be you.
Click to expand...

Hardly. When folks like Palin and other extremist screechers are your best bets, I think we are in the drivers seat with the power of incumbency.
 
haymarket said:
You may be right about the viability of Brown being able to win a November election.He certainly would have more appeal to moderates and Independents. However, he has NO chance of winning the nomination given the make-up of the GOP primary constituency. .

You and I are 180 degrees apart on Christie - both in our opinion of him as well as his viability in an election. I think he would get his clock cleaned.
Click to expand...



Corzine thought the same thing. :ssst:
 
I really like Christie. I wish he would run, I think he would make a great president. I admire the fact that he's blunt and doesn't put up with the lies and crap that the media flings at him. We need a president like that.
 
The past week has done an enormous amount to illuminate the contours of the struggle for fiscal sanity in America. It is increasingly clear that one party is committed to denying the reality of the challenges we face and wants instead to bury its head in the ground and pretend all is well, and that another party is slowly coming to terms with the fact that it will have to lead the way if we are to avert a disastrous debt crisis.
Click to expand...

Where was the outrage as the other party doubled the national debt? The debt crisis didn't begin in Jan, 2009. Claiming that one party is more fiscally responsible than the other is completely ridiculous and one would have to be naive to believe the GOP will save us.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
corzine thought he would clean christies clock... like you he underestimated Christie.
Click to expand...

yes, I got that the first time.... just thought I would point out that it is a very different proposition in running for governor and running for president.
 
haymarket said:
yes, I got that the first time.... just thought I would point out that it is a very different proposition in running for governor and running for president.
Click to expand...



It sure is..... Not sure of your point, but the lack of explaination and depth, give me a clue as to what it might be.


I suggest you look at how well Christie works with Democrats all while promoting his agenda. He and corey booker are a fine example of a state and its largest city, getting the peoples business done.

You don't like him because of your union affiliation.... As we see in the rest of the country, this union power is losing its steam.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Nah. Actually what you have is one party that is committed to denying the fact that the trendline for entitlement spending is the real problem, and they're pretending to address the issue by chipping away at discretionary spending, which is at historically normal levels and isn't projected to get any higher in the future. This will reduce economic growth and is in no way desirable.

You have another party that is also committed to denying the fact that entitlement spending is the real problem, but at least isn't pursuing economically destructive policies like cutting discretionary spending.

...and let's not forget that this whole debate is taking place just weeks after both parties voted to extend tax cuts for the rich for two more years, with a $3.9 trillion impact on the national debt over the course of the next ten years.
Click to expand...

arguments about the flaws in claiming that public spending is good for the economy... Republicans are planning to take up entitlements in their current budget. you gonna change your tune when they do?
 
The past week has done an enormous amount to illuminate the contours of the struggle for fiscal sanity in America. It is increasingly clear that one party is committed to denying the reality of the challenges we face and wants instead to bury its head in the ground and pretend all is well, and that another party is slowly coming to terms with the fact that it will have to lead the way if we are to avert a disastrous debt crisis.
Click to expand...

After this it went to poop. I imagine a frenchwoman in a battlefield surrounded by mangled warriors illuminated from the heavens screaming... REPUUUUBLICAAAAAAAAANS!
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
arguments about the flaws in claiming that public spending is good for the economy.
Click to expand...

I don't think any serious economist of ANY political ideology disputes this point. Are you disputing it?

cpwill said:
Republicans are planning to take up entitlements in their current budget. you gonna change your tune when they do?
Click to expand...

Depends what exactly they propose. I'm not inherently opposed to it, no.
 
Kandahar said:
I don't think any serious economist of ANY political ideology disputes this point. Are you disputing it?
Click to expand...

of course I am. and i am certainly aware of multiple economic schools that point out the economic harm done by government spending.

Depends what exactly they propose. I'm not inherently opposed to it, no.
Click to expand...

well, what are you looking for?
 
You do realize, cpwill, that as a conservative your comments are completely hypocritical. What do you mean this election will show if people are adults or not? Keep in mind, friend, that you are still talking in opinions.

In fact, no offense sir, but I would say you have no right to that opinion.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
of course I am. and i am certainly aware of multiple economic schools that point out the economic harm done by government spending.
?
Click to expand...

Why did the GOP support it so much when Reagan did it?
 
cpwill said:
of course I am. and i am certainly aware of multiple economic schools that point out the economic harm done by government spending.
Click to expand...

It's not the government spending that's the problem; government spending is usually good for the economy (with a few exceptions). It's the taxes and/or deficit that causes economic harm. Taxes cause deadweight loss and deficits cause inflation in the long-term. So the question isn't if government spending is good for the economy - it is. The question is whether it's good ENOUGH for the economy to justify those deadweight losses and/or inflation.

This, of course, would involve looking at the specific type of government spending, and the specific method of funding it. Some taxes are more harmful than others, and some forms of government spending are better than others. In my view, the government does a pretty good job on the spending side...the types of spending we do are mostly things that bring a substantial benefit for the economy - human services like education/health, and infrastructure like transportation/communication. I do think we spend too much on defense, public unions, and retirement though...these are much less economically beneficial.

On the financing side, the picture is a bit mixed. In general, we shouldn't run a sustained deficit (although with unemployment as high as it is, it's OK in the short term). As for the forms of taxation, some are better than others. The taxes that harm the economy the least are the ones that minimize deadweight loss. Estate taxes, luxury taxes, land/property taxes, and income taxes on the wealthy are the best ways to do this. The worst forms of taxation are sales taxes, corporate taxes, and payroll taxes, because they carry substantial deadweight losses.

cpwill said:
well, what are you looking for?
Click to expand...

In terms of reining in entitlement spending, I would be receptive to any Republican proposals to raise the retirement age, means-test social security, nudge the public toward high-deductible health insurance plans, tax health benefits as regular income (which could, if necessary, be made revenue-neutral by cutting the marginal tax rates), or reform our malpractice laws.
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
You do realize, cpwill, that as a conservative your comments are completely hypocritical
Click to expand...

i completely fail to see how my being a conservative does anything to alter the fiscal reality.

What do you mean this election will show if people are adults or not?
Click to expand...

it will demonstrate whether or not we as a people have the maturity to face and deal with the fiscal disaster that we face; or whether we will choose (immaturely) to refuse to face up to our problems, and continue in the insistance that we can continue down an unsustainable path, to the detriment of our children, who are currently in the unenviable position of being destined to pick up the family credit card bill when the music stops playing.

grownups take care of their children. grown children do not. we will see over the next year or two which category the American voter falls under.
 
USA_1 said:
Why did the GOP support it so much when Reagan did it?
Click to expand...

firstly, the republican party in the 80's was not the republican party of today; todays' republicans are alot more economically conservative. secondly, the GOP generally supported the Presidents' increasing defense spending because we wanted to actually win the Cold War. Thirdly, the Democrats controlled Congress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom