Thursday, December 22, 2011

We'll take it...

Well, it's not like the Dems and Obama did anything great or bold or clever. In fact, the Republicans in the House overreached, the way arrogant and not very smart people often do. They were mislead into doing so because they are fundamentally wrong about things: they buy into a philosophy of a powerful elite over the majority and of the wealthy over the poor. Most are self-righteous in their narrow and intolerant religious views and ignorant of not only science but of economics and social philosophy.

The victory itself was minor: the PTR (Party for the Rich, formerly the GOP) in the House, in thrall to the Tea Screamers, having to back down and eat the Senate's two-month extensions of (1) a dubious "temporary" lowering of the FICA tax and (2) a temporary extension of unemployment benefits. Many battles over these issues remain -- and we'll see how tough the Dems are when push really comes to shove.

However, let's hope that this is the first cry of "The emperor has no clothes on." Maybe folks will wake up from the seemingly endless nightmare of buffoonery we've had to put up with from the Republican presidential B-Team (there is no A-Team) candidates.

Could this be a turning point? I will go to bed hoping so.


  1. The only purpose of this tax holiday was political. The payroll tax holiday hasn't done much to lift the economy this year. Temporary tax changes don't lead to permanent changes in consumer, taxpayer or business behavior. We need long term solutions, not stupid 2-month fixes. But it sounds like you're too partisan to focus on that, you'd rather just make ridiculous overreaching comments about a philosophy of elite/wealthy over majority/poor. Give me a break.

  2. Your comment has nothing to do with what I said -- I was even "dubious" about the FICA discount, and certainly the 2 month extension of unemployment benefits was not what I preferred. It is, as you know, impossible to have meaningful negotiations with Republicans these days, since they are under the thumbs of the Tea Screamers, and basically are hoping to make it impossible for Obama to succeed in any way, even if it means opposing policies that they have supported in the past. Care to comment on THAT?

    Calling me partisan is not meaningful. Most of what the Republicans -- especially their leaders -- say is just nonsense, and you know that as well as I do; however, I have no illusions about Democrats, as I've made clear many times. But, the Dems are more likely to take reasonable, pro-people positions. They genuinely care about equality of opportunity, economic democracy, personal freedom. They generally support gay and minority rights, the right to unionize, safety regulations, responsible environmentalism, etc. etc. These are things I believe in, but modern Republicans oppose.

    In any case, if you don't like what I say, or disagree with what I believe in, and it aggravates you, why read the blog?

  3. Big generalities that you like to throw around. I hope Obama fails too, because he supports bad policies which aren't going to help the economy or people. You only consider them reasonable policies because you agree with them. It's not non-sense at all. What IS non-sense is idiots in Washington who say that I don't pay my "fair share". Just because I work on Wall Street and make about $750k a year, somehow it's not enough that I paid about 28% to the Treasury for federal taxes last year on my taxable income. People who made $50-75k in taxable income paid about 11%. I paid 28% and they paid 11%. But apparently I'm not paying my "fair share". Idiotic.

  4. Am I not paying my fair share?

  5. To Anonymous re: Fair Share.

    Here is why 28% on 750k versus 11% on 75k is not unfair. A nice filet mignon costs about $20 per pound for someone making $75k. It doesn't cost ten times as much for someone earning 10 times as costs the same! So when you consider basic costs of food, shelter, clothes and healthcare there is not much disposable income left on a $75k income, but plenty on a 750k income. So, the 11% in dollars when considered on disposable income may be much closer to 28%, if not more on the income left after basic living expenses are met

  6. MSB - I didn't ask whether I am being treated UN-fairly. Rather whether or not I am currently paying my "fair share" since the author loves to claim that the rich (and I assume that he would include me in that statement) don't pay their "fair share".

    Your comment about the price of filet mignon is silly - if you can't afford it then you shouldn't be buying it. I get that their tax bill is a much higher percentage of their disposable income than 11%. Would you be in favor if we changed to tax code to shield the first $50k or so of income from ANY tax on the basis that you need that for basic food, shelter, clothes, etc. and then every dollar of income above that level gets taxed at the same marginal rate for everybody? Would that be a fair tax code?