An attempt to stimulate debate and thoughtful contemplation re: the state of the U.S. economy, utilizing the power and promise of the Internet for said purpose. And if someone has better sources than me, then use them for Pete's sake.
Point: Don't worry, everything is fine. Really. Would the government lie? Go and buy something.
Jobs and prosperity! Yay!
A strong, strong economy.
Did we mention that this is a strong economy?
Wow, things are looking great! I guess things are looking up and there's no need to fret about the future as long as W's crew are writing the economic "analysis."
In an attempt to support our noble president, I tried to pluck similar, upbeat opinions from the vast universe of business/financial/economic commentary that is available on the Internet, I really, really tried, please believe me.... you think I want to quote the government in my blog?
Hmmm... not much positive stuff out there. Instead, I found a lot of arguments along these lines... and there are tens of thousands more.
Counterpoint: what has the President been smoking?
Make your minimum payments, and we might extend your line of credit! Wouldn't you like that? Aren't we generous?
Be happy, be productive.
Work for a living but can't seem to get ahead? Screw you, it's your own fault.
Pay it forward.
The American dream, or hamster wheel?
The Consumer Price Index: a lie?
Yes.
Well, that's just how free markets work, slacker! Oh, wait a minute...
What do I think?
James McMurtry is no newcomer -- he's been recording and touring for nearly 20 years. The following song is from his excellent album from last year, Childish Things.
I believe this video is unofficial, but it pretty much summed up how I feel about the state of this land when I came across it a couple of months ago. It's a powerful, moving song, simply stated in terms anyone can understand.
But why listen to James McMurtry, or to me for that matter, when W is so clearly on top of the game, and Bernanke and the Fed are just waiting to bail out the billionaires from their bad bets? Isn't that good for us all?
If you're not angry or worried, I'd like to move to your planet. The weather must be nice there.
I would love to be able to tell my son that the USA will be a free, prosperous and shining beacon of democracy when he is older. I'm not optimistic. Now, discuss...
23 comments:
So James McMurty "can't make it here anymore," huh? Is that because we have crime, unemployment, poverty, unchecked consumerism, and occasionally corrupt businessmen and politicians in the US? Where does he think he can make it then? Is he comparing the present state of the country to the "good ol' days" that never really existed when he could make it? Why not try out China or Russia or any of the countries of Africa or the Middle East? I'm sure he would like it a whole lot better there!
Basically, I'm taking a page out Despair.com's book "The Art of Demotivation". Complaints and dissent can be discouraged by emphasizing that "no matter how bad it is, it really could be worse! :-) It's an effective tactic.
I have no problems with criticizing our governments or dissenting against politicians or complaining about how life in the USA totally sucks. In a lot of ways for a lot of people it does. I know that for the most part my family and I are very insulated from many of the problems we have in our country. But, the gloomy cynicism that leads people to the conclusion that the U.S.A. is completely headed for the dumps is just overly pessimistic if you ask me. Sure, the country is kind of screwed up with a whole host of problems that Mr. McMurty is complaining about.
He seems to imply that unemployment is rampant in the US, I'm no expert, but I believe that unemployment in general is below 5%, which historically isn't too bad as I understand it. I guess his real point is the difficulty for hard working people to get out of poverty working for minimum wage and the growing gap between the rich and the poor. These are problems, I agree, but it seems to me that there are no simple solutions, especially that the government can offer.
It bugs me when people rail against the military and recruiters and the like. Military service is an honorable thing. I wish more citizens participated in the military for a time(including me, I feel guilty that I have never served). The US military for the most part is a great force for good in the world. I have gotten to know a lot of Navy and ex-Navy personnel in my job and in the area where we live and they are overwhelmingly very pleased with the VA services they receive, especially the health care when compared with the civilian world. Are there people that get screwed or are unsatisfied, no doubt, but we need to work to correct that without condemning the whole system.
In short, there are a lot of problems, but a whole lot of positives that Mr. Mcmurty and others like him take for granted.
My mission experience gave me a great appreciation for my American citizenship. In Ukraine, every politician is corrupt, the police are incompentent and utterly bribeable, the economy is in the tank and going backwards. You want to talk about getting ahead? The mafia controls most profitable businesses, your civil liberties are limited. Racism and intolerance abound...
We got our problems, but I don't think it is as bad as a lot of pessimists want us to think. That is just my humble, uninformed opinion.
Thanks for having the guts to post your thoughts here. Really. It's been nearly two weeks since I posted this. All I really wanted was to stir a little debate, not to shout everyone who disagrees down... clearly though, either everyone agrees with me or is scared to say what they think -- except for you, Tyler ;-)
In retrospect, it may not have been a good idea for me to include the video in this post. I think it's a very powerful protest song and accurately reflects the times, but it might be a little too emotional next to the dry economic and business links I put up -- I'm guessing that you didn't look at those, two of which were written by Republicans, btw, not counting the government links.
At any rate, allow me a rebuttal here -- you can respond in kind if you feel inclined.
I take that you disagree more with the tone of the video than anything else I posted, though I'm not sure why. There is nothing in the video that hasn't been widely discussed by tens of thousands of people.
You spent a lot of time comparing the US to other countries. That was your doing, not mine, but I'll bite. I never said (neither did McMurtry) anything about China or Ukraine being better/worse than the US. But I'll bet the Ukraine is much nicer than, say, Zimbabwe or Sudan or Bangladesh. It's all relative.
Just as the US is better in some ways than other parts of the world, it is also worse in other ways -- and I don't see many reasons to be optimistic about the future. If you look at the links I included, you will see why I believe this to be so. Our currency is on the brink of being devalued, foreigners are less and less willing to subsidize our debt, the government is spending itself into the deep blue sea -- these are just a few of the topics I linked to.
I also never "railed" against the military, and neither did McMurtry for that matter (I think he was actually speaking out in favor of the interests of military people). That the VA budget has been stretched thin is a verifiable and objective fact, not "railing", and this was done by an administration that claims to "support the troops", which is a glaring hypocrisy. The line in the song about the panhandling, crippled Vietnam vet is not an invention either -- you can see several of them on any given day here in downtown Denver. Why this is so is open for discussion, but it shouldn't be a topic off-limits because someone thinks it's unpatriotic.
RE: the military "is a great force for good in the world." Funny how the rest of the world very strongly disagrees. Is the rest of the world so evil? The military is only a force for good as long as the politicians who control it send it on worthwhile missions. From a cost/benefit analysis, the war in Iraq has been a waste. From a management perspective, it was done incompetantly from the very beginning. From a geopolitical standpoint, it has made us more enemies than friends, broadened the appeal of terrorism worldwide, killed tens of thousands at the very least, and destablized the entire Middle East, not to mention that Bin Laden, the ostensible person responsible for the whole mess is still alive.
You can claim that the military is a force for good in the world. I counter: not in this case. Why would you say such a thing? I have no doubt that most people in the military are good people. The problem is the mission on which they were sent, and the outcome.
You're right about unemployment being low, but that number is like the CPI -- unless taken in context and analyzed, it's meaningless. For instance, much of the employment growth that happens nowadays is in the service sector, replacing jobs lost from the once-robust manufacturing sector, which used to be the bedrock of the middle class. Part time, lower wage jobs with few benefits, and the cost of living is going up in ways that the CPI (see the links in my post) does not measure. At the same time, compensation for the tiny minority of the ultra-rich is skyrocketing. Again these are objective facts, the only debate is about the implications. I think these trends are very negative for the vast majority of Americans. I don't know what you think, because you seem offended that I even brought up the topic.
Apparently you didn't read some of the links I posted, which you should do if you do decide to respond to this if you want to know where I'm coming from.
The government and its policies are direct causes of many of the problems I mentioned. To blithely say "...there are no simple solutions, especially that the government can offer," ignores this central point. I assure you that moneyed interests find government solutions to their self-caused financial problems all the time. Read the link about free markets to see what I mean.
It all depends on to whom the government listens, and who benefits from the decisions made. I personally believe that we are all better off with government policies that work to create the broadest possible middle class, and narrow the income gap. I don't think this should be a contriversial idea.
Again, I don't know what you think, because the idea that the government intervenes all the time on behalf of the upper class minority to solve their problems didn't seem to occur to you as being worthy consideration, even though I posted a very good article written by a conservative for you to digest.
If you don't think it's as bad as a lot of we "pessimists" want you to think, I'm very happy that you have managed to remain unshaken by the perilous economy, the endless war in Iraq (please, define "victory" for me... I've never heard a single person who "supports the troops" give a straight answer), and the USA's shrinking stature in the world. You must have better information than I posted. I wonder why you didn't share it?
To quote James McMurtry: "You can read it in the newspaper / read it on the wall / hear it in the air, if you're listening at all."
First off, it didn't take "guts" to respond, just a little bit of time, which I never seem to have. Before you burn me alive, however, I have to admit, that my comment was mostly an emotional response to the song/picture montage, than to your post.
To my embarassment, I didn't even realize that the links in your post were actually links. :-( I guess the mouse never went over them and I was kind of reading fast anyway. I guess I thought they were kind of a weird string of sarcastic commentaries that your were making about the subject. I feel ashamed of my stupidity. :-( That's what you get for being in a hurry.
I just now scanned them and I think if I had read them, I would have understood some of your points better. I'm glad you put in some articles by republicans and conservatives, because I don't accept any other viewpoints into my narrow-minded world!
To the song/video: I wouldn't say I disagree with the "facts" the video presents, I just don't feel like the overall picture in the USA is so doomsdayish. I didn't say I "remain unshaken" or that I am even that optimistic. In some ways I am very worried about the future (energy, environment, globalism, Africanized killer bees, etc.). I agree that the song is moving and provocative, just a little too pessimistic to reflect my understanding of and feelings for my country. I respect the message of the song.
I brought up other countries in response to McMurty's refrain that he "can't make it here anymore." I was trying to point out that the effects of globalization and modernization are tough on everyone in the world and mostly seem to offer a mixed bag of benefits and drawbacks, including in the US. If he feels so strongly that the US is such a bad place to live, go live in about any part of 95% of the rest of the world and I think he would clamor to get back here. Are there better places? Sure, but not many. Like you said, it is all relative...
When did I declare ANY topic "off-limits" or anyone with contrary views about VA funding "unpatriotic." I never accused anyone of being unpatriotic. I simply stood up for military service that I felt was treated cynically in the slideshow. I probably miscontrued James McMurty's true message for my own political purposes, thereby making my ideas more persuasive by attacking a "strawman" depiction of his views. I'm sure you've never done something so vile!
At what point did I argue that a lot of our problems aren't a direct result of government policies?
In fact, I tried to acknowledge that the country is screwed up in a lot of significant ways.
I'm not sure when I communicated that I am in favor of a shrinking middle class. I think we need a strong middle class and I want the government to promote that. However, I don't believe that all rich people are dishonest cheaters who the government is obligated to bring down to redistribute their wealth (how's that for a hyperbolic description of your opinion? :-) ).
I was trying to say that economic solutions, especially governmental ones are always complex and honestly, I feel pretty unqualified to propose solutions as I have a hard time even understanding what is really going on. I bet there are a lot of really opiniated people out there who ride the same economic ignorance train I do, but that doesn't stop them from having a solution to just about any complex problem.
Your link about free markets is so harsh! Of course we don't live in a pure capitalistic free market. I believe in a free market with balanced and limited regulation. Where that line/tipping point is in this case is way beyond me. I don't want to bail out the overly zealous risk takers, but I'm not opposed to considering taking some steps to prevent economic collapse due to the housing bubble burst. How is collapse good for anyone? Don't you realize that the majority of the people that would be helped out by providing some relief on bad mortgages are the hard working middle class folks we all love so much who were just trying to buy an overpriced house for their family to live in but instead they got caught holding the bag in a huge elaborate Ponzy (sp?) scheme?
I wonder if your feelings would be so harsh if you were a home owner. I'm not saying there was not a housing bubble that didn't need to be burst. I think the lending practices that were rampant were dispicable and in some cases criminal. (Trust me, I bought a house at the height of the excitement.) But to just let honest people flounder because that is the "creative destruction" that the free market demands seems immoral to me. Isn't that why we allow some regulation of the markets?
The overall flavor of my last comment was that I feel like the USA is still a remarkable land of opportunity and diversity in the world. We are lucky to live here. I know there are serious problems, and let's work to point them out and correct them. I feel like the country will weather these hard times.
I hope we can mend some of the sour feelings that exist towards us out there in the world. I really hope we elect someone who sees that as a priority, and frankly, the lot of republican candidates worries me in that regard.
I believe the rest of the world can disagree with the USA's actions, but I definitely think the title "evil" is reserved for a select few in the world. I think our intentions are horribly misunderstood by our world neighbors (enemies and allies), and I am frustrated that we can't do a better job of communicating our intentions. I still naively believe that we went to Iraq for the reasons we said we did: to disarm Saddam and to build a democracy. Those aims have proven to be very difficult and possibly very misguided and wreckless. Our military people are trying their best to stamp out forces that oppose democracy in Iraq. The terrorists and sectarians are killing innocent people and trying to stir up anarchy. I am not ready to pass a final judgement on the whole mess and part of me really hopes that there could still be some long-term good in all of this. I know, I'm naive and uninformed, but at least let me have my opinions, no matter how wrong they may be...this is America after all!
Matt, I think that you and I actually agree on more than you might realize. There are probably a few points of honest disagreement as well. That's life I guess. Just gimme some love brotha and at least acknowledge that my soul has some worth...
PS. this was going to be a short comment, an hour later...oh well. :-) You are no role model of brevity either!
I agree with Tyler. The most pressing issue our society faces is that of Africanized killer bees . . .
I'll admit that I didn't read every link in your post, though I skimmed through them. Not that I'm not interested, but things are busy, and, you know, you left a lot of content to sift through. I hadn't responded to your post yet because I hadn't read them all, but now I figure that I better just respond one way or the other.
I listened to about half of Mr. McMurtry's song and that was about enough for me . . . by then, I had gotten the point, and something about his voice annoys me.
I will not do your post the disservice of responding point by point in my ignorance. I'll agree that, with your usual precision, you've identified serious hypocrisies, inconsistencies, and problems with our government, society, and civilization, all of which need to be exposed and addressed.
So . . . what are the solutions?
I believe you tend strongly towards libertarianism is most of your views. Is the answer to rampant capitalism less government? Or is it more government regulation?
How would you deal with Islamic terrorists that believe God wants them to crash airplanes into skyscrapers? Such extremists want to kill you and your wife and child, too, you know, if they ever get the chance . . . I bring this up just as an example of a problem that has no simple solution, but yet something has to be done to confront it. Mistakes, huge ones, have and will be made by people of good and ill intent. But to do nothing would be the worst mistake of all, not to mention passively suicidal.
At any given point in our nation's history you could register an equally lengthy litany of social ills and conclude that all government is corrupt, all social problems are unsolvable, and we're all going to hell in a hand-basket.
But we're still alive and kicking . . . slowly improving . . . learning from mistakes . . . we've started a republic from scratch, survived a Civil War, two World Wars, faced down fascism, Naziism, and communism, survived constitutional crises, impeachment, recessions, depressions, terrorism. We've also evolved into the most affluent and free society in the history of the world, extending personal freedoms to women and all races, created the world's most expansive middle class, most dynamic economy, and most powerful military. On the balance, I'd say the American experiment is a unqualified success. The French and Bolshevik Revolutions didn't turn out so well . . .
I think that any democracy needs internal criticism from agitators and discontents in order to progress. But criticism untempered with patience or optimism is wearying and ineffectual. In the end, people will tune you out unless you give them something to hope for. You have a very strong voice and command of the facts, and I think you have something important to say, but if it's all doom and gloom, what's the point of changing things anyways?
Really, are things that bad? Sure, there's a lot of miserable people out there. Trust me, I deal with them everyday. But from my viewpoint, most people are miserable from the consequences of their own poor choices, not because the system has failed them. Freedom to choose your own destiny . . . I still believe that this is true for most Americans. But that also means freedom to choose poorly (such as mortgages or meth), and then to suffer the consequences. Government can't rescue everybody.
Finally, take it easy on Ty. By my read, he was just trying to engage in your discussion, and you scorched the man to a crisp, leaving him quivering like jello. Not to patronize, but I know that you want people to respond to this sort of post, and I think you will dissuade would-be responders by castigating dissenting opinions so severely.
Now, figure something out about those African bees . . .
I haven’t read all of the links, but I read enough and watched the video to know that we are all in a heap of trouble and we might as well give up now. I actually don’t claim to understand enough to be able to purpose a solution, which I wish more people would do, but I wanted to say one thing.
Mark touched on it in his comment. It is the mentality of your average human to blame problems, whatever they may be, on anyone or anything other than themselves. I think that if we really want to correct the problems that this world has, we have to correct the problems in ourselves. What happened to personal responsibility? Everyone wants freedom to choose, but to be responsible for the choices is asking too much. I am not taking about Americans alone, but the world in general. I am talking about functioning families where kids can learn to love, and not fear others or hate those who are different. I am talking about responsible moms and dads who teach by example that drugs destroy the lives it touches. I am talking about teachers who want students to learn to think for themselves and not incompetent instructors who only wait for the next paycheck. There are so many problems that need to be corrected, but changing the government is only a very small piece of the pie. We, the human race, need to become better people. Less judgmental and more forgiving. Fewer reckless and rash people, and more responsible and dependable people. I know this suggestion is probably never going to happen, but
I do know there are many good people out there who are using their own freedom to choose in ways that can help. I have known many poor people in this world, in some of the poorest places on earth, and I have seen them make good personal choices that have brought happiness to them and their families.
I feel that the worst disease that we face today is not poor politics, or improper governmental policies, but bad personal choices. There is no quick fix, and certainly no permanent fix any government can provide, until the majority of the people in this world choose to be personally better. In the mean time, lets not give up hope, but do our little part by being examples to those who learn from us and trying to instill morals and principles into those around us.
How nice of you guys to finally respond to this. All I wanted was to stir a little debate, an exchange of opinions. It doesn’t mean you have to agree with me.
Mark: Was I really so mean to Ty? I love Tyley Mike and respect his opinion, even if it’s completely wrong (joke, people!). While I’m flattered that you think my rapier wit and devastating logic “scorched the man to a crisp, leaving him quivering like jello” (nice mix of metaphors there), I don’t think I did so, nor was that my intent. Moreover, I complimented him on his "guts" simply because this post was up for more than 3 weeks before anyone responded to it, not because I was trying to be snarky and condescending.
I tried to respond point by point to his comment and urged him to read some of the links I posted. Doesn’t mean he has to agree with me, and he let me know it too, later on. That’s great, that is what a free exchange of ideas and opinions means. If I was really so mean, I don’t think he would have spent an hour (by his own count) responding to me the second time. I also agree with him when he says “I think that you and I actually agree on more than you might realize,” although, actually I realize that I agree with him on quite a bit of stuff. But if anything I said scorched him, I hereby turn the flamethrower of logic and debate upon you. Fry beneath my unassailable conclusions, Dr. Dude!
You also said: “I believe you tend strongly towards libertarianism is most of your views. Is the answer to rampant capitalism less government? Or is it more government regulation?”
This deserves a longer response than I care to spend time on right now, but let me illuminate a few things. First, I am emphatically not a libertarian politically. It would be fair to characterize my political views as leftist (I prefer “progressive”, but read: leftist if you want), though a single word can’t possibly describe my positions, which I really don’t think are very radical at all. Furthermore, I would like to state for the record that no party or school of thought holds my allegiance – nobody tells me how to think. I try not to have opinions about things I’m not sure of, or don’t know enough about… or so I like to think. Feel free to disagree.
Secondly, the “less government/more government” dichotomy is an obsolete paradigm, which was really a central theme of my post. The government intervenes and regulates on behalf of moneyed interests all the time. I repeat, because I am tired of hearing archaic “small gummint is better” arguments from the right: The government intervenes and regulates on behalf of moneyed interests all the time. The government intervenes and regulates on behalf of moneyed interests all the time! This has never happened moreso than under Republican presidents, particularly the current one.
I will reframe your question(s): on whose behalf should government intervene, the moneyed interests or the vast majority of us who aren’t wealthy? Whether or not “government regulation” should happen at all is pretty much beside the point. Personally I think (as stated in my response to Ty) that government regulations and laws should have the creation of the broadest possible middle class.
As far as terrorists go, let me be blunt: let’s kill them all. But wait… Osama Bin Laden is still alive. The radicals in al Qaeda’s base in remote Pakistan are stronger than ever. The so-called “war on terror” has been inconsistent, incompetent, has made the problem worse, and broadened the appeal of terrorism to a radical few worldwide. Many, many people, including myself, predicted the current mess nearly 5 years ago when talk of an Iraq war became an overwhelming din. W’s administration is a failure in this respect alone, and for so very many other reasons.
To Drew and Mark: our personal choices have nothing to do with the government lying about inflation, the national deficit that our children will be taxed to pay for, the declining US middle class, the rapidly weakening us dollar, corruption in the real estate market etc. I think it’s interesting that you really didn’t disagree with any assertions I made, you made the observation that you believe me too negative. Touche!
…riposte!! I think you guys are too positive – you acknowledge the problems I laid out, but then hold out faith that things will somehow solve themselves without really saying how. I’m trying to live a decent life too – I work hard, I am going to school, try to live as a moral person, take care of my family. Much of what I’m talking about is much bigger than “personal choices”, which have little to do with the erosion of the dollar against world currencies, and everything to do with government/societal choices. This was the central theme of my blog post: you can do everything these days that the "American dream" is supposed to mean, and you can fall behind at the same time. If you believe differently, say so, but it's very tiring to hear how people think I'm too negative. What positive signs do you see in the US economy and government, Mark? I am seriously asking this.
I’m not trying to be mean, just saying what I think. You are free to do so too, because we live in the USA which guarantees it in the Constitution. Isn’t it great?
Matt, I see that what I said about personal choices doesn’t leave much room for debate because each of us that are reading this basically agree that people need to be more moral, more honest, etc. But let me quote what you said in response.
“To Drew and Mark: our personal choices have nothing to do with the government lying about inflation, the national deficit that our children will be taxed to pay for, the declining US middle class, the rapidly weakening us dollar, corruption in the real estate market etc”
And again,
“Much of what I’m talking about is much bigger than “personal choices”, which have little to do with the erosion of the dollar against world currencies, and everything to do with government/societal choices”
How can these issues not be related to the personal choices that Americans are making everyday? How can any issue be bigger than our personal choices? If the government is lying about inflation, isn’t that more of a moral issue than anything else? The fact that so many people are “choosing” to have children out of marriage (I hope you understand what I mean by choosing) so that kids are raised by only a mom working 3 jobs, doesn’t that have an effect on the middle class. It seems that only one source of income and 4 mouths to feed would make it hard to be qualified as “middle class.” What about fathers who have children and run away because he just wasn’t ready to grow up. What about those who spend money up the wazu (check spelling) and then can’t make the payments and have to file bankruptcy. Now I am no economist, but I believe if we are spending more then we earn it will make it hard to keep the US dollar very powerful. And what about the “corruption in the real estate market”, sounds like bad personal choices to me. Now I know that there are many who fall victim to hard times and things just don’t go there way, but there are many irresponsible people out there who put themselves in these kind of positions and then turn around and blame the “idiots” in Washington for all of their problems.
My whole point is that it is no coincidence that as the “problems” have increased in America, whatever they may be (economic, foreign policy and relations, currency, societal), so has the moral decay of us as a people. We have fewer standards that we are living by and that can not be blamed solely on Washington, but on the general public as well. To turn things around, it will take more than a new piece of legislature, but a reawaking of what made America, America. I love this country and I know that there are a lot of problems, many of which I am ignorant of, but to blame all those problems on the bad choices of our government is not the answer. What is the answer, stirring debate like you have done, recognizing the problems each of us have, and then correcting them. Just imagine if every American chose to stop lying, stealing, lusting, and the like. It seems the problems we now face would in fact, “fix themselves” as you stated couldn’t happen in your last response. So yes, I think there is a lot to hope for. I still see so many good people who are trying to do what is right, and as long as they are I konw the problems that we find today can be fixed. I also know that we must stay aware of what is going on in Washington and make sure that our voice is heard and I know that is what you have done with this post. It gives me much to research and think about. So thanks Matt, but you still haven’t addressed the problem of Africanized Killer Bees, now that is the governments fa
Well, Matt and all,
I had not wanted to get into the fray on this as one of the biggest issues I have with the left of which Matt is an admitted member...."progressives" if you will, is that they don't look at facts as much as they do their feelings.
I grew up in the 60's where this sort of look at America started big time....people on the left have always existed, but the 60's and Vietnam seemed to bring out big time, this distrust of government and its leaders and everything our country traditionally stood for like individual choice, moral strength, family structure and individual responsibllity.
It is a frustration to me to say the least, that rational people can look at the same data and come to diametrically opposite conclusions.
Global warming is a a great example of that. But I don't want to go there.
I just want to kind of echo what a couple of you have said. This great country we live in...this great experiment if you will, is the single greatest government to be created in the history of the earth. There is simply nothing that compares to it.
From the very beginning of man's existence we have had kings and arisotcractis and dicatators and tyrants and many other names. They were somehow born into their positions or took them by force. Rarely was freedom and liberty ever extended to the "common man" as we live it. This great country was established to not let that happen again. There would be no king no aristoracy supression of thought or religous beliefs. Nothing, and I mean nothing like our US of A has ever been tried like this in the past. The Constitution of the United States is the single most important man made document ever created. It established a multicultural, freedom loving, capitalistic economy that is the envy of the world. Yes Matt....the envy of the world. We Americans are different and look at the world differently and that my friend is a good thing. Arrogance...yeh I think so.....perhaps to a fault at times but American exceptionalism is real and important. We are different than the world and that is not a bad thing.
I love this country and in my prayers every day I thank my Heavenly Father that I was born at this time, in this place. We are so lucky to be Americans.
Now having said all that, I have no illusions that we don't have large, complex issues that have no easy solution. That doesn't make our country any less great. It just means we as a people have not collectively had the will, nor do I think we will reestablish the will to solve the issues we face. Name me one great civilization in the earth's history that once it begins to deteriorate every comes back. I can't think of one...whether it be the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, Chinese, the British empire etc. etc. It simply doesn't happen.
Our country is being destroyed from the inside as all great civilizatons have been. No outside force will defeat the USA...its demise will come from within our own country.
The split we have in this countrybetween the left and the right has never been as acrimonious, has never been more devisive and I have to say I don't see if turning around. I mean...what will turn it around? The only possible thing is some outside force that threatens us....we as Americans seem to come together when threatened from the outside...but I don't see any leader who can bring this together. Perhaps Ronald Reagan was the last leader we will have that seemed to unite us more than he divided us....even if you disagreed with him you couldn't not like the guy. He was optimistic and had a a vision of American exceptionalism that was infectious.
Yes America is different than the world and think goodness for that. It is so stupid to judge what is right by how the world thinks of the US. I love to be liked but I love more to be right. The USA is right about so many issues that the world deems wrong and they "hate" us for it. I would submit they "hate" America because deep down they can't and won't do what needs to be done to have a peaceful world. So the UN selects Libya I think to head of the human rights group of the UN...that is what we get from the World community. The list of how wrong world opinion is so long as to be impossible to put on paper.
The world simply wants evil to go away rather than face it. Thank God The US has been willing and have had leaders who have faced down evil in the world. Without the US we would now have a world ruled by the Nazis, Communists, Japanese or radical Isalmists or whatever group at the moment is trying to take over the world.
No Matt, this is a great country with great problems...but we will not solve those problems if we can't objectively look at facts and make decisions that are based on other than what seems good or feels good.
Some other points to address your issues:
Iraqi - I normally know you to be a well read and thoughtful about things. Your position on Iraqi is just muddled to say the least. Big, Big mistakes have been made. Certainly, under estimating the Shia/Sunni divide is a big part of that. Not having enough troops was another big mistake. (Ironically, for you on the left of this issue, The reason we didn't go in with overwhelming force was Rumsfeld wanted to get out of Iraq as fast as possible...in and out with minimum number of troops.....now because of the very policy this thing has spun out of control and has lasted much longer than it needed to) I'll tell you what victory is Matt...it is when the Iraqi's can stand up to the Al Queda terrorists themselves and no longer need us there. They will have to solve their internal problems on their own. But when we get the outsiders out of the picture (Al Queda, Iran, Syrians..maybe even the Saudis) we can get the heck out and that will be victroy.
But to say it was a stategic mistake to go into Iraqi is simply muddled thinking and again confuses strategy with tactics. Tactics are up for considerable criticism for sure. As for strategy, Bush will go down as a US President that may have saved or at least delayed the destruction of the free democracies of the world by those who would fly airplanes into buildings and kill innocent people because of an ideology. The US has warts but we don't do that.
Goose makes a great point about choice. The Left, ever since the Great Depression, has got such a grip on the psyche of many that government is here to help save you from the adversities of life. It is so pervasive that we are now blaming Bush for the California fires and just about every other malady that comes along. Whether it be hurricanes, earthquakes, stock market crash, unemployment etc, etc. It is always Bush's fault. (read that government)
I am more a Libertarian than you might think to tell you the truth. They just take it too far but more government is not and will not ever be the answers.
The mindset that the US government is the cause of all the woes of our country and the world is so very prevalant that it becomes "fact" and just assumed to be true by so many of us. We can't even think anymore about such things because now it is just a given that the government is corrupt and isn't doing enought and what it is doing is all screwed up. (true a lot of the time actually)
Let me ask you some questions:
Since when is a business trying to make a return on its investment...yes make a profit that evil word, obligated to provide benefits to its employees that drive it out of business. It is so pervasive that it is now becoming a "right" that every employee has. No one even thinks about it. A company is simply not living up to is obligation if it doesn't provide extremely expensive health and other benefits. If you are really honest, you have to say that is total nonsense and not the role of any business....but yet it is a right and obligaton now. Did you know that before the Great Depression companies didn't do that as a rule? Every American car that is build today has $1,500 in it of health care and other benefits...incredible. I don't know the answers, but I know that isn't the job of businesses and yet now it is assumed to be an obligaton they have.
I just read some material about the living standards around the world. Goose will know this but in Ghana, the annual average wage is $500. In the US, if you make $44,000 you are living in poverty by our definition. The poorest of the poor in the US are so much better off than the much of the world. Clean water, electricity on demand, phone service, good roads, TVs in most homes, less than 5% unemployment, freedom of travel, speech, religion etc. etc. are just a few of the blessings we enjoy. Are you kdding me saying the rest of the world doesn't envy us. They could have it too if they got rid of corruption, had real freedom of choice, improved their education, go to a capitalistic economy, promote entrepreship.....but they don't. Instead they tell us we are greedy, evil and uncaring.
Who comes to the worlds aid whenever a disaster occurs....yes you are right my friend that great evil empire.....the US. (Tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes, Aids epidemics etc, etc....you name it) No country in the world is as generous, as quick to respond to hardship than the US. I love this country for that and if truth be told so does most of the world....but the left would have you beleive otherwise. That the US is imperialistic, opportuntistic, bullies and just downright lousy, evil people. I admit that the US many times does things perceived by many as in our own best interest and not for some alturistic reasons. That is true just like it is for every other country. We have made mistakes for sure....but all in all this world is a better place because the United States exists and that my friend is the great dividing line between the left and the right. I think the world is a better place because of the US and you think the world is a worse place because of us. We couldn't disagree more on that point.
Tax policy, health care, homelessness, moral decay, breakup of the family....all these issues are with us but it isn't because of George Bush or Bill Clinton for that matter. Government regulations and interventionss are necessary many times but more than not, the government is the problem not the solution to the problem.
Our Founding Fathers wanted a system where the minority rights would not be stepped on by the majority. We have that for sure and it is what causes our problems and at the same time being one of the most brilliant aspects to this government they created. The very fact we have such animoisty on both sides toward the other is the very thing that keeps this great country perculating. I wish we could be more together but I cherish that we are able to be divided so deeply and all love our country as we should.
Much too long and sorry about that.
I don't think you were too rough on Ty....he is a sensitive man. You can unload on me as I'm used to it.
I do appreciate being able to talk about this. Let's just not shout at each other and just listen to each other's opinions. After all none of us have a corner on truth or maybe even the facts.
Dad
Thanks for sharing! I don't know why it took you guys so long.
Drew,
I understand what you're saying about personal choices. If I had to pick a bone it would be this: you are calling for a universal change in how people make personal choices. Isn't there a contradiction there? By what mechanism would this universal change in personal choice come about?
This is more of a philosophic issue than a business issue, but it's an interesting subject.
Dad,
Did you actually read any of the links in the post? Two were written by conservatives. All were about business and the economy. There was not an anti-business post among them. They covered specific issues that concern the real-world economy and business, and government policies relating to them.
I've said something several times in the comments that doesn't seem to have registered at all with you, so let me repeat again: the government intervenes constantly on behalf of moneyed interests. Is that clear?
"They just take it too far but more government is not and will not ever be the answers." This is catagorically false. "More government" is, for one thing a hazy and suspect term. Business concerns have no problem with more government when it suits their bottom line.
The argument is really not about how much government there should be, but in whose interests it should act. And many regulations are designed to protect investors and market transparency, two things essential for capitalism.
No, the government can and does provide solutions all the time, as a cursory glance at American business practices will illuminate. Your assertion is just not true, and the facts back that up -- not your Reaganite simplicity.
The "left" vs. "right divide that you spent about 9000 words decrying is so outdated.
I can't figure out why the right wing hates America so much -- they spend so much time proclaiming the USA the best country on earth and then denounce the majority of their fellow citizens.
Maybe you should look at your idols on the right for people who make decisions with their feelings and not with facts. In what fantasy world do you exist where the world is a better place because of the Iraq war? It just isn't, no matter how much you pump yourself up with patriotic feelings.
Terrorism is worse, hundreds of thousands of people have died, the entire middle east is destabalized, we have more enemies than ever -- your denial that it's happening nonwithstanding.
"I'll tell you what victory is Matt...it is when the Iraqi's can stand up to the Al Queda terrorists themselves and no longer need us there." So what kind of timeline are we talking about here? You do know that we are going to start withdrawing troops next year, regardless of who is in power, because the US cannot sustain the current troop levels? How do you propose to keep paying for the war? You are talking about your feelings, not facts.
But you know? My post had nothing to do with the Iraq war. Reasonable people can disagree about issues. They can even respond directly without dragging in stuff that has nothing to do with the original subject.
What do you think about a government bailout of big investment banks who wrapped up too much capital in CDOs? How about the budget deficit because we are'nt willing to pay more taxes, but apparently are willing to tax our children for this wasteful war? What about interest rates? The trade deficit? The housing bubble and the complicity of the Federal Reserve system in creating it? Why would you imply that I'm anti-business when I am clearly so interested in it?
These are all issues raised in my post, and it's telling that I still don't know what you think about them, after all your hot air that basically boils down to this: "USA #1! USA #1!" Do you ever think of anything else?
Talk about feelings over facts -- you aren't dealing with reality in your comment, but a fantasy world. Much like the Bush administration. No wonder you voted for the guy twice.
Let me tell you about my truck.
The paint is rusting and peeling off my tailgate. The radio was ripped out by a burglar. The ignition catches several times before it starts. The upholstery is stained and ripped. The fender is bent and twisted. The brake light stays on constantly. It is rear-wheel drive and handles dangerously in the snow. It's 12 yrs old and looks 15.
Wanna buy it?
Tough. It's not for sale. You know why? The engine works. It gets me where I want to go.
You are missing the bigger picture. You can lament all day America's numerous shortcomings and its hopeless future, but the fact is you live in a country that works. Not perfectly, not without major inefficiencies and injustices, but it works, brother.
Don't you see that? Most roads get repaired. Most babies get immunized. Most criminals get caught. Most elections are fair. Most citizens have jobs and cars and phones and computers and TVs and food on the table.
We are the most affluent nation with the biggest economy and the largest geopolitical influence in the history of the world. You can't argue against that. What additional superlatives would you require to lessen your dissatisfaction with America? We've also given more dinero to humanitarian causes that any other nation, how 'bout that?
Hegemony breeds contempt, and thus the world's -- and your-- backlash against it. What would you have us do? Be less successful? You may hate Wal-Mart, but can you blame them being ultra-successful at delivering quality products at a cheap price to average middle-class consumers? (Sorry, I shouldn't have mentioned Wal-Mart . . .)
The pendulum will swing back and check some of these American successes, no doubt. Maybe that's what's happening in Iraq. But spots on the sun doesn't mean it isn't shining.
Why shouldn't the government intervene on behalf of moneyed interests? To the extent that Sam Walton and Bill Gates are Americans, the government is beholden to their interests as well, and they (and big business) are the engines that make the country go. To italicize (which I can't figure out how to do in comments, so imagine it): it is generally in the interest of the middle class for the government to intervene on behalf of businesses. This is because without big businesses acting to maximize their profits, there would be no incentive for progress, no innovation, no trickle down effect. If Trans Montaigne (or other companies) didn't exist, where would you get bread for your table, health benefits for your family, tuition for your education?
You'd have to start your own business. And you'd probably then vote for politicians that would legislate in your interests.
If the economy is a train and the middle and lower classes are the box cars, then big businesses are the engines. Sometimes the government may need to stoke the fires, but in the end it's the whole train that gets pulled along.
Of course the id of big business must checked by the superego of government regulation from time to time, or by unionization of workers, or by cyclical recessions and down markets. But inasmuch as we are a capitalist society, part of the government's job is to intervene on behalf of the drivers of the economy. It's other important function is to check those same big businesses from exploiting the lower classes. It's a constant tug-of-war.
Tell me, what is so bad with our country now that wasn't equally bad or worse at sometime within the last 100 years? Are we on a tragic downward trajectory after falling off from some edenic utopian society in the past?
Au contraire. We are on a constant uphill climb, but by many measures, we are infinitely better off than we were in the not too distant past. I don't remember much of the 70s, but there was a recession, energy crisis, runaway inflation, a lost war and a general sense of despondency about America's place in the world. Sounds somewhat familiar. Also, there were leisure suits and disco, so see? It really was bad. :)
This has already been mentioned in this thread, and I don't mean it condescendingly, but you've never lived in another country. Go check out what democracy and society and culture and freedom are like in Ukraine or Russia or Ghana or Brazil. (Japan probably ain't too bad.) What's it like in Zimbabwe? What's it like in Syria? Burma? Sudan? Venezuela? China?
Sure, there are plenty of countries that enjoy a similar degree of America's prosperity and freedom, but guess what? These are primarily capitalist democracies patterned after the USA. So if America's brand of capitalism and democracy are not the ideal, then show me another working model. Communism? Fuedalism? Islamofascism?
You want to see unbridled corruption and government catering to moneyed interests? Take a look at the UN or the World Bank or any other supposedly impartial international organization.
An obvious question is, does America's affluence makes its people any happier? I don't believe so, and I would argue that our material successes have made us more fractionated, more self-interested, more vain . . . and less happy. But you aren't arguing that. You and Mr. McMurtry seem to be arguing that governmental conspiracy and ineptitude have deprived you of your share of material wealth and thus of your happiness. This argument to me smells like victimhood and entitlement.
Maybe that's the ultimate irony I see in your arguments. You denounce the government for acting in the interest of business . . . instead of in your own. In reality, the two largely overlap.
Maybe we antagonists in this thread fall back on patriotic platitudes and appeals to personal responsibility because that's the way we view our relationship to the government. It is an extension of us, not an overlord. I don't expect Uncle Sam to give me jack squat. I don't expect him to protect me from my poor choices. I understand that I, through my voice in elections, help choose government representatives that set the rules of the game, and I expect myself and others to play fairly within those confines, and I expect government to intervene when there are gross injustices. But my success or failure is not the government's responsibility.
Yeah, I am genuinely very pleased with being an American citizen at this very point in time. The government largely does for me what I expect it to do, which often means it does nothing at all. Are there rough days ahead? No doubt. Just like there are rough roads behind. Maybe it's my native (or naive?) optimism that lets me look at things so rosily. But then again, optimism is an indelible American trait.
Now about my truck. I was just kidding. I'll sell it to you for $4000. It's not really that bad. But feel free to make an offer that's in your own self-interest . . .
Everybody,
I am going to say it the way it is and no one can argue. I am just joking. The main reason I haven't written a comment is because I have been really busy with school, work, and marriage, but also I wasn't sure I had anything to add, but I think I do now.
I want to make two points and I am going to have to keep them short. The one thing I have learned more than anything in college is that "experts" are experts in their own minds and often polluted with their own bias and limited knowledge, experience, and resources. No one knows everything about anything. In that light, there are hundreds of people wanting to bash and rip the current administration to bits. Very intelligent people I might add. However, I am confident that one could find a more positive outlook on the current economic situation than those sited. (I have to admit that I didn't try and that makes my argument very weak but I am pretty sure that I could if I had time to look) If I am correct on that both sides have intelligent "experts" arguing totally different outcomes on the same subject looking at the same data then the natural question is "who do I trust?" I don't have an answer for that. I don't think either side has an answer to be honest. (By answer I mean a way to get rid of all of the problems)
Matt- I think you treated Drew's point to lightly. I am a firm believer that no system no matter how good it is constructed will solve any problem unless it somehow promotes morals and values. Having said that I think you are trying to say who's morals and values are we defending? The rich's or the poor's? Again I think obviously the rich have a much louder voice than the poor do and so they are being treated differently and not only economically.
To further that previous thought and to agree somewhat with what Mark said. There are far less consequences to punishing a poor theif than a rich theif. If the poor theif gets put away and not allowed to be a part of society it is him and his family that is affected. If a rich theif goes to jail or is put out of business usually it is him, his family, his employees, his investors and (depending on how rich) all of us. Is this fair? No, but what do we do?
I honestly feel that there is no solution to this without an increase awareness and draw to morals and values (I think a lot of this can be tied up into the idea of traditional Christian values) Without that no system can work.
I agree that the system is bias to some degree and I wish that could be changed, but perhaps the system isn't meant to make everyone equal, but instead give everyone a equal chance. That is an ideal and certainly not a reality to some people and I am for what will help us realize that.
I just read through my post. There are alot of typos and incomplete sentences. I apologize.
Mark,
I’d have to be pretty desperate to buy your truck. It sounds like a piece of junk. But OK, I’m pretty desperate for transportation and you are asking a cheap price, so I guess we close the deal.
Cool, I’ve got wheels! Sure that rich guy down the road is driving a Cadillac, but I’m sure he earned it. Besides, someday I hope to own my own through my own hard work and frugality.
But what’s this? I just got a bill from the government – seems like they’re raising taxes to buy the guy down the road a Ferrari for taking such good care of his Cadillac. My truck is pretty much worthless, and it’s not really worth anything to society anymore, but rich guy’s Caddy has actually gone up in value because it’s a limited edition luxury model to which he’s added a powerful sound system, spinning rims and black lights around the gunwales. So they’re borrowing money from the Chinese and taxing more heavily to pay for it. Because when rich guy prospers, everyone does.
Oh well, at least my truck still works – that is, until it finally breaks down and I can’t afford a better one. I guess I’ll just have to resign myself to buying an even crappier truck next time, one that I can afford. I do resent the guy down the road a little bit, for effectively being rewarded at my expense while the trucks I drive get more rusted year after year.
I guess I’m just not working hard enough – maybe I’ll get a second job. Anyway, I shouldn’t be complaining – after all, my great grandparents didn’t have a truck at all.
Your truck metaphor, thoroughly exhausted – thank you! Here are the symbolisms – the truck you sold me is my income. The rich guy’s Caddy is his net worth. The Ferrari is current economic “policy”. Agree or disagree, whichever you fancy – but that’s how I see it.
Optimism is no more an American trait than pessimism is. In fact, I would say it’s the other way around right now – please peruse this link if you are in doubt, or Google it yourself.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/economy/
“Hegemony breeds contempt, and thus the world's -- and your-- backlash against it. What would you have us do? Be less successful?” Oh this is the sort of rhetorical flourish that I relish picking apart!
Where do I start? You hit on something there but kind of dismissed it with your rhetoric. Yes, hegemony breeds contempt…. with good reason. The contempt America faces in the world IMHO is not due to the rest of the world’s hatred of freedom and jealousy of America. No, it is due to America reserving freedom and prosperity for itself while exporting destructive economic and military consequences. Perhaps you disagree. But you know what? That is completely another topic for another post.
More to the point, I wouldn’t have “you” do anything, much less be less successful. First of all I would have the government encourage small-scale entrepreneurship and American jobs with tax and economic policies that favor people who work for wages, not those who have accumulated enough capital to plutocratize economic growth. This would include: tax breaks for the wage earners, raising taxes on the wealthy, universal healthcare to make American business more competitive with the rest of the world, and a substantial ramp-up of public investment in education and job training. See, you didn’t have to lift a finger!
“Why shouldn't the government intervene on behalf of moneyed interests?” You don’t have to worry about that – they do it all the time, and will continue. But of course you know that the Constitution nowhere says that the government represents “we the moneyed interests,” it states that the government is for “we the people.” It’s not a small point. I am certainly not a socialist, but I’m not a pure free marketer either. How reassuring that you agree.
Four times now in this thread, I have been told that I should be happy that I don’t live in Ukraine or some other god-forsaken place. You know what? I am. I never claimed otherwise, therefore I won’t even respond to this line of thought anymore. That three of you now have used the same “argument” against me says more about how you feel than how I feel.
I don’t WANT the US to become like Ukraine – in fact, the way things are heading China might own a significant chunk of the US in the foreseeable future – it already buys most of our debt and has vast dollar currency reserves to underwrite its own currency.
“Sure, there are plenty of countries that enjoy a similar degree of America's prosperity and freedom, but guess what? These are primarily capitalist democracies patterned after the USA.” You’re very proud of these countries, and America’s influence on them. That’s very big of you – most people on the right speak of Europeans contemptuously when they can bear to speak of them at all. But I wonder why we don’t seem to have much influence anymore, or why people are fleeing the dollar and buying euros in droves (another record low of the dollar vs euro this week by the way, just like last week and the week before that).
Problems like this, or the housing bubble, are neither inevitable nor unforeseeable – they are the direct result of the government policy, complicity with private interests, greed and lies. Again, don’t take my word for it – this stuff is all over the place. Plenty of conservatives are hopping mad about it too. I don’t think you disagreed substantially with any situations I described – why are you optimistic again? Oh yes, you’re characteristically American. Wait a second – I’m just as American as you are, how about that?
You may be surprised that I didn’t intend for this blog post to become yet another left vs. right issue, hence me including stuff from a couple conservative economic writers. None of the ideas I discussed are out of the mainstream. You would think I stood up at a W rally and sung “The International” for pete’s sake!
It seems like you want to make this debate that is fundamentally about big vs. small government again. I don’t buy it. Yes, tough times are ahead. The only question is what needs to be done. Do you think anything needs to be done? Many, many pessimistic Americans do. I’m surprised that you’re so unconcerned and can only conclude that maybe you’re not paying attention to the economic news lately.
But then again, great-granddad walked six miles uphill to school in freezing snow and never complained. Why should I?
Matt,
I agree with several of your proposals on how we can help improve America. I agree whole heartedly that we should somehow find a way to put more money into education. I am not an expert on how to make our education system better but it seems to be that with a better educational system we could stop many of our problems before they even get started.
The healthcare system is another issue that is hard for me to have a strong opinion on. I think we certainly need to make healthcare more available. One's ability to have healthcare depends mainly on who one works for. I do not agree with socialized medicine, I think that it might fix one problem but ultimately create many more. (Everyone talks about how great Canada's system is but from the research I have done it has it's setbacks also) I am not sure how but someone we need to bring the prices down and the free market doesn't seem to be doing a very good job of this. I don't have an answer and I haven't heard anything from anyone that does.
(I have run out of time. I need to study for a test tomorrow) The rest of your improvement planned focused on giving tax breaks to the poor and taxing the rich. Idealistically this sounds like a good idea,(especially to the poor) but hasn't history shown that this is not good for the economy? I am not asking that question in a offensive way. I have heard from several sources that this is the case.
See you in a week or so.
To all,
We can all agree that America has problems....many of them created by the personal choices many have made as Drew has pointed out. Many times it is government itself who is partially at fault with the problems. (Heavy taxation driving businesses away, overly regulating etc.)
But all that being said, this country and its constitution is the single greatest society every conceived by man. That greatness comes from the rule of law and the liberty and freedoms we enjoy as no nation ever has. I'm so proud of living here and with all our warts and we have many, it is still the greatest country on earth and the envy of the world. You hear about how everyone in the world hates Americans...and that is undoubtedly true, but it is because of our willingness to stand up for what we believe and our willingness to back it up that much of the world dislikes about us. Thank God that the US is there anytime there is a disaster...who else does what we do. I wish we had the resources to stop the genocides and other atrocities in the world. Where is the rest of the world to be at our side. No, if we even have the gumption as a nation, we have to go it alone....and that is why we are hated....because we are the only nation (with some exceptions....but certainly the only one with resources) that could and will try and do what is right. Yes, sometimes...maybe in our own best interest.....but not imperialistic in anyway......mostly altrustic.
Tax policy. It is such a crock to always be saying, "Tax the Rich", give a break to the poor. First problem is what is the definition of poor. The poorest person in America is way ahead of most of the world. That is not to say there aren't needy people...there are and there are legitimate things that government should be involved in with regard to that but government is not the long term solution to poverty and certainly "taxing the rich" is not the answer to our revenue issues if we have any.
The deficit this year is forecasted to go down from $260 billion to $215 billion. This with an increase in spending of $123 billion. Now let me see....we had tax cuts, increased spending by $123 billion and reduce the deficit by $45 billion. That is a net swing of $168 billion....with a tax cut none the less. A simple fact the left will never get a grip on is that if you cut taxes....yes that means on the wealthiest people, you will actually increase revenues. Maybe counter intuitive but not really if you have Econ 101 and understand capitalism. It happened under Kennady, it happended under Reagan and it happened under Bush. It works every time and the left is so obsessed with "getting" the rich and making sure that we redistribute the wealth of this country that they lose sight of the ball. The ball is to collect enough revenue to run this country at a minimal level of expenditures. As long as the focus is to tax the wealthy instead of collect enough revenues they will be off track.
67% of the taxes paid in this country come from less than 10% of the wealthiest among us. The left would have that be 100% but I think 67% is more than fair. Somthing like 40% of the poorest in our country pay no taxes and in fact some who don't pay taxes actually get a tax credit. There is a huge disparity in who pays the taxes in this country.
Until we come to grips with whose money this really is we're talking about and how much do we really need to run the country we will have this huge divide in what is considered fair and reasonable.
Also until we as a country on a biparitisan basis attack the problem of Medicare and Social Security we will not get this under control. That will not happen with politicians as everyone is afraid of the revolt that would result. But that is a big part of the solution to our deficit problem and other issues.
60% of the federal budget goes to entitlements.....60%. And all we hear from the left is how the rich are getting richer on the backs of the poor. One word...poppycock!!
You want to help this country's fiscal status....cut taxes more or at least leave the tax cuts in place. Worse thing we could do is to raise taxes again. Disaster.
My two cents,
Dad
Dad,
Wow, I am flattered that you actually responded to things I said, rather than things I didn’t say. It’s so unlike you! It’s still hard to take seriously the opinions of someone who uses the word “poppycock”, but I’ll try my best since you made such a sincere effort.
First, in my opinion the deficit is only “going down” because of some nifty accounting tricks used by the Feds. For instance, money for the Iraq war has always been left out of the figures used to calculate the deficit because it always is contained in so-called “emergency spending bills”. And even if that weren’t so, your figures are based on a forecast, which is just that – a prediction, nothing more. Can you see why the Bush administraton would have a vested interest in misleading us?
There is a lot of debate about whether the deficit is actually declining, so I won’t say that your arguments have no basis in fact, only that a lot of flim-flam has been perpetrated on us. Don’t take my word for it – you can find evidence and opinions supporting this view instantly on the ‘Net – plenty of “conservatives” agree.
Second, I won’t argue with you about whether tax revenues have increased. But I will say that increased revenues come from tax cuts only in a healthy, fast growing economy. And inflation has a part to play, also. For instance, if revenues increase by 2% after a tax cut while there is 3% inflation because of slack monetary policy, then revenue measured as a percentage of GDP actually declines. And this administration’s monetary policy has been far beyond “slack”; it has been utterly atrocious. I’m not just talking about deficit spending here (which is bad enough). I am talking about an economy that is profoundly sick and corrupt, literally living on borrowed time.
“The poorest person in America is way ahead of most of the world.” This is a specious argument straight out of the Limbaugh playbook. What exactly does this mean? Who is this “poorest person in America?” Is this person wealthier than a Bangladeshi peasant, or a war refugee in Sudan? You must think so (I guess you know the person), but if you are going to make that argument then you also should acknowledge that in many countries the middle class, by almost every measure, is better off than the American equivalent.
But I don’t buy your rhetoric. America has plenty of poverty, more than you seem to care acknowledging. There are quite a few run-down areas within a few miles of your house where people are struggling just to pay the rent. If you don’t care, that’s your right – but you shouldn’t simply deny it.
Also, the Denver metropolitan area is quite affluent compared to some other places. Have you ever been to the bad areas of Baltimore, or Washington DC, Los Angeles or Detroit? What about the dying coal towns of Appalachia? Howsabout the makeshift illegal barrios that proliferate along the border with Mexico? I’m not saying that such places are the norm in the good old USA, only that they exist and are more widespread than your statement might suggest. With the shrinking American middle class, more and more of us (myself included), can expect to live in run-down areas in the future, the only places we can afford to live.
How nice that you think everything is so fantastic for the poor. I hope you explain this to the homeless guys who ask me for change every day downtown so that they will leave me alone. I’m sure they will be happy to know they have it better than if they lived in Bangladesh, and thank you for your helpful advice.
“…until we as a country on a bipartisan basis attack the problem of Medicare and Social Security we will not get this under control.” I couldn’t agree more, which is why I am baffled at your enthusiasm for this arrogant, incompetent, ignorant fool of a president and his gang of schemers that you have now voted for twice.
It’s funny how now you’re calling for bipartisanship now that you can’t produce a credible defense of this administration, the most partisan administration in my memory. Your party ran two of the three branches of our government with little opposition for six years (and Congress for nearly a decade previously); the last six years which were an utter disaster for our democracy, to say nothing of our foreign policy and economy. I can only assume you are satisfied with how things have gone, given your rigid ideological defense of your boy Bush. But this only makes me once again question your grip on reality.
I am asking this seriously – if Bush were running a company instead of this country, would you invest in it? Well I wouldn’t, and if I had at some time in the past, I’d be selling. The rest of the world apparently agrees – have you been paying attention to the dollar’s behavior in the currency markets recently? Down, down, down and the bottom is not in sight.
“And all we hear from the left is how the rich are getting richer on the backs of the poor…” If the economy is so strong and the middle class is so healthy, then why is the income gap between rich and poor shouldn’t bewidening so drastically. Literally, the rich are getting richer, and everyone else is getting poorer, even if they’re not already poor. I’m not making it up, nor is it some crazy pinko-leftist extremist opinion. Please don’t take my word for it.
“Until we come to grips with whose money this really is we're talking about and how much do we really need to run the country we will have this huge divide in what is considered fair and reasonable.” Please read this article – yes, it’s just an opinion, but the facts it relates are not in dispute and unlike most of what we’ve discussed so far in these threads, it actually relates to my original post – and then come to grips with how our money is essentially being used to bail out the bad investments of a large corporation. There’s a reason why collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) are nicknamed “toxic waste” in the finance industry.
Four words from the article really sum it up: “socialism for the rich”. Apparently, the rich are in greater need than we are and I should be glad to help them out, since I will eventually benefit (why would they lie to me?). No wonder the government comes running to their rescue whenever they cry for help.
Your argument about the proportion of taxes that should be paid by the wealthy is certainly a valid topic for debate, and it’s indisputable that raising taxes too high is a drag on economic growth. The debate really crystallizes around whether taxes should be regressive (the poor are taxed more heavily), or progressive (wealth is taxed more heavily). Space prohibits me from getting too deeply into why I think current tax laws are so regressive.
I will just say that the US tax code is in dire need of a top-to-bottom overhaul, and that as a guiding principle, tax laws should be shaped to encourage the broadest possible middle class. Hey, the Democrats are proposing just that – but I find it hard to believe the Dems’ leadership on that, either.
Nobody likes paying taxes, myself included. It all depends on whom we want to tax for the running of the government and certain needs of our society. You can cut taxes all you like and sit back and smile; after all you won’t have to pay for the national debt, your children will.
Finally, yes, I have had Economics 101 and then some. That education, and a fascination with the paradoxes of modern capitalism, is why I read about business, finance and capitalism so voraciously, and why I have the opinions that I do. You are free to tell me if you disagree, but don’t expect me to adhere to this bizarrely narrowminded, demogogic left/right worldview you seem to hold to. It’s much more complex than that. The current course of what is disingenuously called “capitalism” in America endangers the health of our economy, and capitalism itself.
So glad you agree!
Sorry to be so longwinded above.
One correction: I included a link that didn't make the translation from MS Word to illustrate "socialism for the rich". Please read it:
http://www.rgemonitor.com/blog/roubini/227330?ref=patrick.net
Matt, no one will ever accuse you of a lack of passion for what you believe. I wish passion had some common sense attached to it at time, but usually it is just screaming and calling people names and ignoring what is right before you eyes due hatred of Bush and all things Republican.
So be it. Passion is good. Facts are better. Common sense with facts is the best of all.
You are infected with "Hate Bush Syndrome at all costs" An incurable disease. Maybe Mark could give you something for that.
You said:
"You are free to tell me if you disagree, but don’t expect me to adhere to this bizarrely narrowminded, demogogic left/right worldview you seem to hold to."
I would never expect you to adhere to anything as bizarre as what I see to be the facts and what I believe. I hope you will allow me the same privledge for your strongly held beliefs as well. My fear is before too long, there will be more Americans that believe like you than those of us who choose to say, while this country and our people and leader have many flaws which need to be addressed, it is still the greatest government and system ever divised by man in the history of the world.
While we are "hated" as you think by much of the world......we still are, and will remain the envy of the world. A very interesting paradox. Until we who love what we have in this country and we who see the USA as the greatest force for good on the planet, are outnumbered by our those of our own people that think this is a terrible country with terrible leaders and values, that envy and hatred of what we stand for will grow until we lose what we have.
We are being torn apart from the inside and that in the end is what will bring us down.....no one from outside our country ever will.
My generation will be gone and then you will have your way, Matt. Good luck with that. I hope you enjoy living like the French or the Germans or the Russians. Something to really look forward to. You won't be have to worry about expressing your opinions then....you won't be allowed to and if you do you will end up in jail.
Dad
Dad,
Such petulance. And to think I actually thought we were making progress -- in your last post I thought you actually had kind of a point, and I said so too.
Now you're back to "responding" to things I never said. To wit:
"I wish passion had some common sense attached to it at time, but usually it is just screaming and calling people names and ignoring what is right before you eyes due hatred of Bush and all things Republican."
1) Not once have I called anybody a name, nor have I screamed in this entire thread. I'll thank you in advance apologizing for this blatant lie.
2) If I hated Republicans so much, I wouldn't have included two links, written by conservatives, with which I happen to agree. But then, I wouldn't expect you to know that, seeing as you didn't read any of them.
3) I'll thank you kindly not to lecture me about "common sense". It's a good thing you don't actually live the way you write. Don't insult me.
"I would never expect you to adhere to anything as bizarre as what I see to be the facts and what I believe."
Q: What exactly is a fact to you? A: What you "see" to be a fact. Thank you for stating your factual relaltivism so clearly, if unwittingly. I laid out plenty of facts, backed up by links and commentary from the entire political spectrum and you ignored them all. Your "facts" are statements like these:
"...it is still the greatest government and system ever divised by man in the history of the world."
I'm a fan too! But that is an opinion, not a fact.
"we still are, and will remain the envy of the world."
This is an opinion too, but it's also a great example of your lazy thinking and imprecise language. Really, the entire world envies us? Every single person? Oh I know that's not what you meant, but you throw it out there as if you're stating some grand revelation... that you've previously said. ten. million. times.
"Until we who love what we have in this country and we who see the USA as the greatest force for good on the planet, are outnumbered by our those of our own people that think this is a terrible country with terrible leaders and values..."
That is also an opinion, not a fact (although I'm sure it meets your definition of one), and a very reactionary, narrow-minded and rather vague denunciation of... *gasp* your fellow Americans! Why do you hate America, Dad?
"My fear is before too long, there will be more Americans that believe like you than those of us who choose to say"
Mr. America, you don't read the links, then you bombard me with posts of right-wing chest beating about my supposed pinko-leftist anti-Americanism. The beliefs you think I hold are generally beliefs I don't hold, or at best, crude distortions of them. Do you have any clue what I actually do believe? Are you even reading my blog?
My blog was about business... I happen to follow business news very closely, and in fact most of what you have said has zero bearing on what I wanted to discuss in the first place.
So why do I respond to you now, for the umteenth time, you ask?
I don't expect you to even acknowledge that I've said the following but I'm going to say these things nonetheless so that you have no excuse for your wild hypotheses, next time (as if you ever did):
1) I do not hate America.
2) I do not hate business.
3) I believe in democracy and freedom.
4) I am not a communist. Believe me, they wouldn't want me anyway.
"My generation will be gone and then you will have your way, Matt. Good luck with that. I hope you enjoy living like the French or the Germans or the Russians....You won't be have to worry about expressing your opinions then, you won't be allowed to and if you do you will end up in jail" I am scratching my head at this one. Are you saying that the French and Germans have no freedom of speech? Why do you think this?
Moreover, what exactly is this "way" that I would have? I do seem to recall mentioning that I want more transparency and accountability in the financial markets for their healthy functioning. I guess that's too abstract and radical a concept for you to handle?
I would venture a guess as to what you meant -- but then you really don't seem to have clue about what I believe, or even about what you yourself meant. And you manage to be condescending all the while.
You are making yourself look ridiculous, and I'm not going to respond to any more of this bullshit until you demonstrate that you have basic reading comprehension skills and at least a feeble grasp on reality -- rather than just poking at my ass with a sharp stick and whining like a petulant middle-schooler when I give you the rational beating you deserve.
Hint: start by losing the condescension, and try reading a book on grammar and sentence construction before and if you decide to respond.
Oh, that felt good. I guess you are right -- I did call you a name -- ex post facto. I'm sorry, I'll try harder next time to restrain myself... but then, you didn't want to listen to anything I said anyway, so this will probably just roll off your back like everything else.
I'll thank you in advance for not reading my blog any more. Clearly, the things that I don't say, and the things that I don't believe in, are just too upsetting to you.
Matt
I just want to say thank you for the post and the comments. I haven't read all the links, but I read a majority and I learned a lot from them. I feel like I know much more about our country and our economy. I also feel like I understand where you are coming from much better, and although we don't agree on a some things, we do agree on many things. Most importantly of which is our common hope of a more peaceful future for our posterity. So lets get a new post with some new information to digest and argue about.
Also, I'll see you in a few days. Merry Christmas. I don't know why I just said that but I did.
Post a Comment