The media gleefully tells us that when we go off the fiscal cliff, the "Republicans will be blamed."
Well, guess what: no matter what happens, no matter what the outcome, the GOP WILL be blamed.
Obama is a moron. He's a well-packaged moron, but he IS a moron. He clearly doesn't know any more about the economy... or foreign policy.... or job creation... or reducing the debt or any of the other lies he used to stay in office.... than he does brain surgery. The man is a menace and we will be injured by this clown for generations... which certainly does not matter to, say, the millions of recipients of "Obama phones."
But a willing, arrogant media is going to blame the GOP NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.
In battle, when you know you are going to die... the question is do you play like an armadillo and roll up into a little ball awaiting death?
Or do you take as many of the bastards with you as possible?
The issues of debt in front of this MUST BE ADDRESSED NOW. There is no advantage in kicking the can down the road as we emulate Obama's heroic example of an economy, namely, Greece.... and we rapidly approach the ultimate bankruptcy that will cripple us for decades.
Some suggest that an allegedly brief bout of hyper-inflation would solve all of our debt problems. I disagree.
Such a plan would require both a level of competence and finesse our government has shown itself wholly incapable of achieving as they have screwed up every initiative they have tried.
Every single one of them, foreign.... OR domestic.
So, to Boehner and his crew, I suggest that since the GOP stands to get it's asses kicked now, they might as well get something in return for the blood about o be spilled. And NOTHING on the table now will have ANY meaningful impact on reducing spending OR debt.
Shut the government down.
Determine a list of essential services and shut the rest down.
Cut spending to revenues. One person, much wiser that I once said that you cannot blame Obama for deficits: if Congress didn't want deficits, there wouldn't be any.
Reduce our expenditures to, say, the 2008 level. Cut the federal pay roll and pay/benefits package that moron has been buying union support with. In fact, outlaw public sector unions and collective bargaining with those unions altogether.
If that means reducing social security payments or any of the massive entitlement programs, then so be it.
Institute mandatory work for welfare programs. Anyone getting federal money who CAN work, WILL work.
Institute random urinalysis/hair testing: if you do drugs, drink, smoke (anything) then you do not require federal.. that is, taxpayer, assistance.
Institute stricter means testing for welfare/EBT: EBT should ONLY be allowed for unprocessed, unprepared food. None of this "EBT for uncooked pizza" crap. Knock off the garbage like free cell phones. If you have a cell phone, you don't need federal assistance. If you have cable, or the internet, you don't need federal money. The "feelings" or the "self respect" of those leeching off us does NOT supersede the "feelings" or "self respect" of those of us that dillwad is stealing from to keep his plantation full.
Knock off federal student loans. The more money out there for loans, the deeper in debt our students will be.... and the more those sharks in these schools will charge.
Folks, these kinds of steps WILL have to be taken, sooner or latter: is it not better to take them when we WANT to.... then when we HAVE to?
The Speaker is showing himself to be far too easy to manipulate. As a rule, he should be no more concerned about "getting the blame" than idiot stick was for the curse of Obamacare.
When he fails us, he will need to be fired. And he, along with the cabal he's surrounded himself with will need to be replaced
But they need to be guided by the principle that if Obama wins on this, then we will all lose. And that means if they have to sacrifice themselves politically to do the right thing NOW instead of a less-right thing LATER, then, so be it.
8 comments:
I hope all this brinksmanship is simply ass-covering because I think both sides know we NEED TO GO OFF THE CLIFF!
Why? Because tax revenues MUST GO BACK UP! Cutting spending is indeed an economy-breaker but it's worth it, and might even turn out okay?
Has anyone heard of the Laffer Curve? The President has. He has an individual on his advisory board who completed a solid, peer reviewed and published study that shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that raising taxes above the 33% mark reduces revenues to the governement. So, if the President insists on raising taxes above that, one can only conclude that it is for political reasons rather than economic ones. Also, if the rebuttle is that Clinton's tax rates were higher and they were successful, read the Forbes article about the Myth of the Clinton Tax strategy.
I would like to see more leaders in government who are concerned about the welfare of this country and its citizens than about making points with their respective partys. These decisions could easily be made if these individuals would do some research, look at what is proven to work...without the political slants and just implement the best research. That is how most normal people solve problems. It isn't like the information isn't available to them.
Kriss, the Laffer Curve is bogus. As is Supply-Side, monetarism, and all the other debunked economic theories floated as self-serving cover for people not to pay taxes.
America, as with most nations in the world, uses Keynesian economics. It's hard for me to believe that not one single Republican knows how that works? You could be the first!
I understand Keynesian economics however when the money curve is based on credit, problems begin to arise. When Keynes was alive, people didn't have credit cards...those came into use in 1950, well after Keynes was dead. Before that, people did buy things with actual money which kept a flow of sorts going around. However, as we have seen with the past two stimulus packages...could it be the reason they weren't as successful is because people were paying off their debt with the money and not putting it back into the system? That is what a smart person would have done.
Martin, what specifically do you base your comment on regarding the Laffer Curve? This study was done within the last 4 years and came out of UC Berkley.
I understand Keynesian economics however when the money curve is based on credit, problems begin to arise. When Keynes was alive, people didn't have credit cards...those came into use in 1950, well after Keynes was dead. Before that, people did buy things with actual money which kept a flow of sorts going around. However, as we have seen with the past two stimulus packages...could it be the reason they weren't as successful is because people were paying off their debt with the money and not putting it back into the system? That is what a smart person would have done.
Martin, what specifically do you base your comment on regarding the Laffer Curve? This study was done within the last 4 years and came out of UC Berkley.
Laffer: see the “problems” section in the Wikipedia explanation, along with its connection to the totally discredited Supply Side economic theory.
Keynesianism: all government spending is a stimulus, and considered a loan to the nation. Every penny of that loan eventually ends up in somebody’s bank account. People with big bank accounts have most of the loan money, and they need to pay it back. Even though lots of self-serving folks come up with clever excuses why they don’t really have any loan money – MATH CANNOT BE FOOLED! Eventually, the loan money will be paid back via hyperinflation, which is extremely messy but does balance the accounts.
I don't agree with that perspective Martin. I can't loan money to myself seeing as I am the one, among other citizens, that is giving the money to the government in the first place. If you would like to give the government more money, I will not stand in your way. :)
Kriss, it doesn't look like you'll be the first Republican ever to understand Keynesian economics.
Post a Comment