Georgia Republicans believe themselves invulnerable
In politics as in sports, it’s dangerous to get cocky.
And Georgia Republicans have gotten cocky. They have come to feel invulnerable and complacent, convinced that their constituents’ intense dislike of Democratic policies at the national level has given them a free hand to do as they wish here in Georgia, without consequence or backlash.
Ethical missteps, bad judgment, failure to govern — they believe that none of it matters as long as those magic words “Barack Obama” retain the power to distract and anger Georgia voters.
Want proof? Let’s review events just from the first eight months of 2011.
The year kicked off with the revelation that House Speaker David Ralston had taken his family and staff on a $17,000, all-expense paid holiday trip to Europe, courtesy of lobbyists for a high-speed rail company. In our much-reviled Congress, such behavior would result in severe censure or even removal from office, but here in Georgia it barely raised an eyebrow. In fact, Ralston continues to argue that limits on lobbyist gifts to politicians are not necessary given the fine, upstanding character of those we elect to public office.
There were also no repercussions when the chairman of the Senate Banking and Financial Institutions Committee, Jack Murphy of Cumming, was sued by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for being grossly negligent in his role as a director of a failed bank in Alpharetta. Murphy is now barred from involvement in any FDIC-insured institution, but inexplicably, he has been allowed by his fellow Republicans to retain his role overseeing the state’s banking industry.
Murphy’s counterpart in the state House, Banks and Banking Committee chair Greg Morris, was also fined $5,000 this year by the FDIC for violating regulations as a director of an Ailey bank. He too has been allowed to stay in his leadership role overseeing Georgia’s deeply troubled banking industry.
Not surprisingly, neither Morris nor Murphy has shown interest in investigating why Georgia continues to lead the nation in bank failures or whether the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance, charged with regulating state-chartered banks, failed in its duties. Given that 17 of the nation’s 68 bank failures in 2011 have occurred here in Georgia, costing the FDIC a total of $1.549 billion so far this year, their studied avoidance of the problem is appalling.
But again, they feel no public pressure to do better, so why should they?
Then there was the scandal in June, when the executive secretary of the state ethics commission was given her walking papers and her sole investigator stripped of her job. Those events occurred immediately after the two sought to subpoena records from the 2010 campaign of Gov. Nathan Deal. Again, there were no repercussions. Overall, GOP leaders have slashed the commission’s budget by 42 percent since 2008, even as they have burdened the agency with new record-keeping duties. They have also stripped the agency of rule-making powers available to almost every other agency in state government, all the while claiming to be horrified at alleged abuses of power in Washington.
I haven’t even mentioned the coup against Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle by his fellow Republicans in the state Senate, which basically left that body rudderless, or the embarrassing financial shenanigans of Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers and his business partner, U.S. Rep. Tom Graves, or the continuing efforts of GOP legislators to empower themselves at the expense of local government officials. And who knows what the rest of the year will bring?
Once politicians feel themselves unaccountable, there’s no telling what they might do.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,210 comments Add your comment
md
August 23rd, 2011
4:52 pm
“I never said there wasn’t a cost associated with it. What does that have to do with anything?”
Plenty………..it changes the equation. Instead of 100 to 100, it’s more like 200 to 100. If it costs to distribute, then use that money more efficiently and create more wealth………..instead of having 100 to create, you now have 200………………..
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
4:53 pm
“But if he did that he couldn’t get his name in the paper and on television three times a year..”
Of all the imbecilic BS regarding the Oracle of Omaha I’ve ever read, and trust me I’ve read a LOT of it, that has got to be near the very top.
The world’s financial markets follow his every move and he is one of the most respected men in all of capitalism. His record as an investor, family man, philanthropist , of community service and as ab American is impeccable.
Yet you buffoonish armchair psychologists know his deepest darkest motivations? He needs the publicity???!!!
Jesus on a stick…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
4:53 pm
Well finally I can agree… Clearly, Doom does not know what shows leadership.
md
August 23rd, 2011
4:56 pm
“I guess taxing those that don’t have it works well in some minds”
I guess this is the week where the masses no longer believe in the Clinton rates…….
And you might want to check out the booty the census burea says the “poor” hold.
In a progressive tax structure, there is a difference in rates……………everybody should have to pay something to be a member of society………how much is a pack of cigs these days??
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
4:56 pm
FWIW, I never even made it past those first two childish sentences. I’m sure the rest of it was equally scintillating…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
4:58 pm
Gee, md, how much is a pack of cigs….and how much of that price is tax?
md
August 23rd, 2011
4:58 pm
“Is their not a cost for the private sector gnerating that 100 dollars.????”
Yes….and it comes out of the private sector………….
All the costs come out of the private sector………..
Mary Elizabeth
August 23rd, 2011
4:58 pm
Dusty @ 4:19:
md @ 4:20:
You both have selected reading of what I have written all day and you both project onto me simply your own stereotypical perceptions of me. That only shows that you have a very limited understanding of who I am or what I am about, in any depth.
—————————————————
The issue of the day is today’s article and it is not about me nor about Wall Street. It was about corruption of politicians of power in Georgia. I centered, specifically. on the banking aspect in the article above. That is what your focus should have been on if you were thinking correctly. That you make it about me or about Wall Street to point out that I “take sides” shows your own personal biases regarding me.
You obviously did not read my words to Mighty Righty earlier today in which I said at 1:52 p.m. the following. You can see that I do not consider corruption in either political party to be ok:
—————————————————————————-
Mighty Righty @ 1:01
“Your mentioned 7 individuals, some of whom did nothing illegal. Be that as it may, no one is saying that there is not individual corruption in society-at-large, including within all political parties.
However, the below statement, from the article above, does not simply address individual corruption; it also poses a very relevant question that causes citizens to wonder about possible corruption of the banking industry, itself, in Georgia. That sweeping possibility is even more disturbing to consider, although no corruption in the public’s interest should be overlooked:
——————————————————————————————–
Dusty, you continue to talk about my “saying it nicely.” I simply write as I am. I would really appreciate it if you would get away from the personal, where I am concerned.
I make no denial that I am a Democrat. So is Hillary Clinton, and Barbra Streisand, and so was Adlai Stevenson, and FDR and Eleanor. But I am so much more than a Democrat. I do not think that all should be called equivalent if the truth is not equivalent, as I see truth.
You should have also read my post at 11:28 a.m. today to understand that my thinking is more than that of a simply “Democrat” label per se. See below:
———————————————————————
“11:28 am
- I am for a party that supports public education in Georgia because it knows that education will enlighten all of Georgia’s young. It, also, knows that placing a priority on education will elevate the citizens overall because the public’s values will change toward common good interests, and not simply self-interest.
- I am for a party that looks at the great need by so many Georgians for dental care in Woodstock, and asks how can this be in Georgia. That party would want medical attention for all of Georgia’s citizens through government to ensure that all have needed care, and not simply be given care haphazardly through churches, here and there. That party would believe in the value of government to serve the common good medically.
- I am for a party that can foresee a positive coalition of business interests and public government interests to serve both interests fairly and equitably, and it would not be a party that supports condemnation of all government.
- I am for a party that seeks a social safety net for its elderly, and formerly productive citizens, simply because it is the right thing to do, and not simply because its members know that they, too, will be elderly one day.
- In other words, I want a party that knows the value of service more than it values power. Call that party by any name you choose. “A rose by any other name is still a rose.”
- A party that supports those values will have less corruption within its membership than a party that has grown to value power and self-interests, above all. And, that is because the values of that party will emphasize looking outward to the common good, and not simply inward toward self-interests.
And maybe, just maybe, that party would also help our overall economy grow because it would not be programmed to cut, cut, cut, thus, programmed to pull inward economically more and more, instead of growing outward in ideas that foster growth and development.”
————————————————————————————————–
Dusty and md,
I would greatly appreciate if, in the future, you want to address me, that you would stay with the issues at hand, instead of making your remarks about me personally. Otherwise, please do not post to me. Thank you.
Some people are stupid
August 23rd, 2011
5:00 pm
MD-
Plenty………..it changes the equation. Instead of 100 to 100, it’s more like 200 to 100. If it costs to distribute, then use that money more efficiently and create more wealth………..instead of having 100 to create, you now have 200………………..
WHAT….I literally laughed out loud. Ok, lets take the $100 example. Just to make sure i understand, your premise is before the federal government can give it out, someone has to make it in the private sector…ok
1. To generate money in the private sector has a cost, just like to distribute it in the public sector has a cost. So what part are you arguing.
2. Circle economy- Money generated is derived from money spent. Each time you get less and less money. That’s usally how it works. When you get a paycheck, you are getting a protion of what was generated. You spend a portion, your portion gets smaller, and smaller.
3. Say I own a company, and I’m gonna invest $ 100 in buying equipment. I give it to XYZ equipment. They receive 100 in revenue. HOw is that any different than I gonna buy 100 in grocery using food stamps. , they get 100 in revenue.
Maybe we are just looking at it from 2 different ends. Im focus on the end result, are you at the beginning???
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:00 pm
Granny, the fisherman you mention would not, I believe, be advocating forcing your neighbors at the end of a figurative and literal gun to sell their things to divide them according to needs. Forced charity is false charity.
josef
August 23rd, 2011
5:01 pm
Georgia GOP? Jus’ plumb uppity…
The immigration fracas? Can’t wait for the ruling on the Alabama Bishops’ challenge that it prohibits the free exercise of the Christian religion…
Southern Comfort
August 23rd, 2011
5:01 pm
Doom
Gotcha!!
AmVet
Didn’t see that post, but I’ve been watching the whole process play out. I’m not impressed by either party throughout this whole process either. I see the human element at play though. The GOP has control over the process. To them, it’s simply, “to the victor goes the spoils”. I don’t doubt for one minute that the Democratic Party would do the same if they were in control. I haven’t seen enough with my own eyes to say that they’re trying to purge White Democrats from GA. However, if past actions are any indications, I’ve witnessed many rural White Democratic Party members switch party affiliation both in GA and AL. The seemingly disconnected patterns gives pause for concern, but I can’t decare it’s an outright party attempt to do so yet. I’m interested to see how things play out though.
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:02 pm
Dusty
“As we have all noticed NOW, what you mentioned did not work out very well. ”
Until someone can persuade me otherwise, I’ll stay with the position this economic situation was not like any other we’ve had in cause, in scope (excepting the Great Depression) and in how it fundamentally affected so many aspect of our economy.
Going in, there are just a few classical theories. Both administrations took actions – bailout and stimulus – and while the bailout and stimulus stabilized things, neither brought the kind of recovery we expected (well, in most cases. Corporate profits, as we’ve discussed, are higher than they’ve been in decades). And while the job losses and unemployment rates went on for some time, they did stabilize, but recovery is elusive.
So I have to ask: what would the loyal opposition have done? From what I read here and see in the media the answer is “Nothing!!! Even the votes we gave for the bailout, if we had it to do over, we wouldn’t have voted for it!!!”
So Republicans offer nothing. And that’s not a formula for recovery and success.
md
August 23rd, 2011
5:02 pm
“Gee, md, how much is a pack of cigs….and how much of that price is tax?”
Missing the point………if one can afford to pay 5-10 bucks for cigs, one can afford to pay something for the privilege of living in this society………………
The argument about taxes is bogus when it come to sales taxes………we ALL pay those.
1811/0311
August 23rd, 2011
5:03 pm
Johnny Cashless From the Grave:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n8K5b3gFvI
Dusty
August 23rd, 2011
5:04 pm
Keep,
Do keep up. Your reference was the time when Democrats were deciding whom was to be on the presidential ticket. You voted against Hillary and that was the mistake I mentioned. Obama, ouch!!
You, of course, wanted to say something unpleasant about McCain. Figures. But, then again, you DID forget to say that Bush did it. Better watch it or you will be kicked out of the morning coffee klatch for dereliction of duty. .-
josef
August 23rd, 2011
5:05 pm
Mary Elizabeth
Why a party? Democrat or Republican, do you really, honestly believe that their politicians have anything beyond their own self-interest at heart and mind?
marko
August 23rd, 2011
5:06 pm
I often wonder why you never see I’m stupid and I vote bumper stickers.
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:07 pm
“At some point, printing money can and will lead to hyperinflation…..see Zimbabwe for example”
I have in my possession several “dollar bills” from Zimbabwe, in the denomination of 100 Billion Dollars (Z). Due to hyperinflation, these were only valid currency in Zimbabwe for 6 months. I bought from a coin dealer for the novelty of them for $8 (US) each.
There’s the stories about Germans pushing wheelbarrowfuls (wheelbarrowsful?) of Deutchmarks post WWI to buy a loaf of bread…
Matti's Annoyance
August 23rd, 2011
5:07 pm
To truly appreciate Mary Elizabeth’s direct, yet ladylike response to the rudeness of others, picture Dixie Carter playing the part of Mary Elizabeth, ala Julia Sugarbaker.
Delightful!
Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
5:07 pm
md…. did not miss the point. Sales tax is a tax….. there are many taxes paid by the poor that are regressive. Let’s see…take all the wealth from the bottom 50%, 1.4 trillion. That’s what? 2x the amount of the tax loophole for the private jet industry…. You want their refrigerators and microwaves too?
Our problems stem from a very simple problem….what we used to tax to the higher income/wealth individuals has been reduced to a level too low to sustain the spending left over from the Bush era much less what is need to invest in infrastructure and to allow this country ability to deal with economic disasters like that left by Bush.
md
August 23rd, 2011
5:08 pm
“The issue of the day is today’s article and it is not about me nor about Wall Street. It was about corruption of politicians of power in Georgia. I centered, specifically. on the banking aspect in the article above. That is what your focus should have been on if you were thinking correctly. That you make it about me or about Wall Street to point out that I “take sides” shows your own personal biases regarding me.”
Mary…….just because Jay posts on one aspect of corruption does not equate to everybody falling in line on the subject……………….I have no problem saying it is wrong, but also that it is wrong on the National level………How about you??
And if you are going to get your britches in a wad when one responds to your posts, I suggest you learn to ignore them or not post on a public forum……………….this isn’t private e-mail here.
Good luck………..
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:08 pm
MPercy
“Granny, the fisherman you mention would not, I believe, be advocating forcing your neighbors at the end of a figurative and literal gun to sell their things to divide them according to needs. Forced charity is false charity.”
As I was in the original discussion with Scout, I’ll interject.
That was not the point, at all. Scout wanted to know who said “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their need.’
The answer I gave was Luke’s record of the early Christian church in the Book of Acts. It wasn’t about gov’t vs charity, it wasn’t about volunteerism vs gov’t programs. The concept is straight out of the New Testament.
Any other ‘buts’ are just an effort to distract from the earliest Christian practice of their religion and how they viewed materialism and their faith.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
5:09 pm
Dusty…I guess your post made sense to you… bless your heart.
md
August 23rd, 2011
5:11 pm
“1. To generate money in the private sector has a cost, just like to distribute it in the public sector has a cost. So what part are you arguing.”
Once again, all costs come out of the private sector……..the costs will be greater when an entire bureaucracy must first be paid for………………..so you have extra costs associated with gov’t.
Think cost on top of cost……………..or 2x the cost.
Mighty Righty
August 23rd, 2011
5:16 pm
In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the
University of Edinborough, had this to say about the fall of the
Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:
“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.”
“The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the
beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:
From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.”
The Obituary follows:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Born 1776, Died 2012
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:16 pm
Adam @4:22 pm Oh, is that what Warren Buffet did? I must have missed that part. “Raise all the millionaire’s taxes, except mine.”
Actually, pretty much.
First of all, Mr Buffet doesn’t have a large income. His company pays him a salary of $100,000 each year, and he “earns” a few million dollars every year in interest and dividends. He does hold assets that represent unrealized capital gains in the several tens of billions (crica $40B or so, primarily shares of Berkshire-Hathaway). If BH were to go belly up tomorrow, his holdings become worthless. His wealth, however is immaterial; the income is what he pays taxes on, much of which is taxed at the lower capital gains rate rather than income tax rate. Quoting his tax rate, based on CG rates compared to his secretary’s, based on income tax rates (and not at his or her *effective* income tax rate, at that) is apples and oranges.
Mr Buffet takes full advantage of the tax system to minimize his taxes. He has accountants and tax lawyers. He has clearly structured his affairs to minimize his taxes, as, for example, when he established trusts for his children.
It is further worth noting that when Mr. Buffet and his friends Bill & Melinda Gates set out to figure out how to improve the world, they created the tax-exempt foundation and donated billions of dollars to the foundation, rather than simply letting the government have that money. We have to ask why? Didn’t they trust to government to do the “right thing” with that money?
Finally, note that both Gates and Buffet, when they donated to the Foundation, did so by giving away appreciated shares of their respective companies, thus garnering for themselves the largest tax break possible–not only did they not have to pay GC taxes on the gains (substantial they were, too), but they get to claim the *appreciated* value as a deductible charitable contribution. So, if WB had been granted one share of BH when it sold for $1000, he would owe income taxes on on the $1000. But if he held that share until BH sold for $200,000 per share, he would owe income taxes on the $1000, and CG taxes on the $199,000 difference. But by donating the share to the foundation, he still owes income taxes on the $1000, pays no CG taxes, and gets to claim $200,000 charitable donation (which can go a long way to offsetting any other income he has).
Mr Buffet has moved virtually all of his wealth into these sheltered trusts, and structured his affairs to produce a relative pittance in taxable income. So, yeah, I’d say that he’s said “Raise all the millionaire’s taxes, except mine–because I’ve already sheltered all mine.”
Soothsayer
August 23rd, 2011
5:18 pm
Ever wonder why pilots make the big bucks? Watch this video. I’m telling you, my rear end would have chewed a hole in the seat! Screw up and it’s your ass!
md
August 23rd, 2011
5:18 pm
“Our problems stem from a very simple problem…”
No, our problems stem from quite a collection of problems………up and down the spectrum.
Dropouts cost this society $300 billion annually…………….I’d say that would equate to “part” of the problem.
marc
August 23rd, 2011
5:19 pm
of course they feel invulnerable….heck rednecks always feel good at home on the front porch…
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:19 pm
Mighty Righty
You may not want to forward that email….
The Fall of the Athenian Republic: Mostly False.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp
Martin Williams
August 23rd, 2011
5:20 pm
Jay, are you really surprise at politics in the State of Georgia? I am not, and you know why? this is one of the few States that elected a governor while he was under investigation. The GOP is truly right to take big time advantage on all principles of political issues as Georgians/Southern folks in general are very sutpid when it comes to politics. You see Tom Price left his practice in the medical field to become a politician….go figure…….easy money and the best best benefits in the world especially after retirement.
Thomas
August 23rd, 2011
5:21 pm
MPercy
Well done. No matter where you stand think before defending the indefensible. Buffet could have easily said sale my stock, I will pay tax. I will then take the after tax monies and lend versus contribute. The assets then would not have created a charitable contribution and they would have stayed in his taxable estate.
BS walks.
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:21 pm
MPercy
“First of all, Mr Buffet doesn’t have a large income. His company pays him a salary of $100,000 each year, and he “earns” a few million dollars every year in interest and dividends.”
In what universe is an income of $3,100,000 a year not ‘large’?
A dad
August 23rd, 2011
5:21 pm
I don’t know what strikes me as sadder: the ridiculous, factually inaccurate rants vented herein, or those who acually seem to be arguing that their party is better than the other one. If y’all haven;t figured out that regardless of whether Dem or GOP, essentially all politicians are self-centered, elitist, two-faced SOB’s then you’re beyond hope. Funny how you can allege one thing against the other party, and someone will always come back and point out that folks in your party have done it too. Nuff said folks? Maybe it’s time for a real “tea party”….
Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
5:22 pm
md…having the money to fix the education system and to provide teachers, and to provide usuable education to “dropouts” including addressing the reasons that cause “dropouts” is part of the the infrastructure of this country. But we can agree…taxes are needed to address these problematic areas that private enterprise cannot wihout government support
Dusty
August 23rd, 2011
5:22 pm
Paul,
You can preach on indicating that this economic situation could/would have happened to any president. You might be right. The GOP has brought up many suggestions but none can get through Congress. What seems to get action now is issued by the president in one way or another.
The trouble is, Paul, the president is not seen or felt to be a competent leader. For instance, FDR encountered terrible economic conditions yet the people felt he was leading them in the right direction and would pull them through. He managed! He inspired!
Obama seems to do almost everything wrong. To decrease debt, he spends vast amounts of money. To help unemployment, he pays people not to work (That is what it amounts to.) To change the healthcare system, he ignores doctors and the failure of a trial in Massachusetts. After promising to bring home troops as soon as possible, he does not and sends the airforce to Libya without even looking to the representatives of Americans. He takes lavish vacations while talking about conservation. He seems to try but lack of experience and poor results are evident. He inspires no confidence.
The only approval I see now for our president is by loyal politicians and mindset voters to whom results don’t seem to matter. They ignore the obvious.
1811/0311
August 23rd, 2011
5:23 pm
“The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.”
Author unknown.
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:25 pm
“For starters, the comparison is not equal……………there is a cost associated with getting that 100 dollars in food stamps to the individuals”
Not to mention the fact in order to put $100 into the pocket of a SNAP participant, that $100 (assuming perfect transfer efficiency) had to be removed from the pocket of someone else. It is reasonable to assume that the original holder of the $100 may also have spent it, albeit most likely on “luxury items” like going out to eat and not on groceries.
But the transfer is not 100% efficient, e.g., we have to pay people who administer the program, and cover fraud in the program, and print the EBT cards the program uses, and mail the cards, and pay the stores so that they install the machines that accept the cards, etc. That means that we must first remove $100 + all the overhead from the first person’s pocket so that the second (more deserving!) person can spend it.
Unless the stimulative effect of the 2nd person spending the money on groceries is larger than the stimulative effect of the 1st person spending the money on say, a steak dinner at a restaurant, *and* that effect is larger by a factor that is greater than the overhead involved in the transfer payment channel, then those dollars have been spent less effectively (for the overall economy) by the 2nd person.
Mighty Righty
August 23rd, 2011
5:26 pm
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:07 pm
Zimbabwe is a great example of what happens to a rich capitalistic economy when it is taken over by a socialism government. They went from one of Afica’s richest countries to one of its poorest in a very short time. The government took the businesses from the evil rich and the land from the farmers and redistributed it equally. Now everyone is equally starving.
saywhat?
August 23rd, 2011
5:26 pm
md- the $100 generated by the private sector could not safely and reliably be generated without the presence of government. Unless that person built their own roads, hired their own security force, wrote and enforced their own laws etc, don’t spout b.s. about the private sector doing it all on their own. Government and the private sector are symbiotic. To see how well the private sector does without a goverment, move to Somalia and write back telling us how great it is. To see how well government does without a private sector, time travel back to the Soviet Union.
The economy doesn’t care where spent money comes from. If tax breaks don’t result in the saved money being spent, either at the retail level or in an actual business creating investment, the tax breaks are worthless to the economy. It doesn’t make sense to invest in a business however, unless there are consumers ready to support that business. Until money reaches the hands of people willing to spend almost all of of it instead of sit on it, the economy will continue to stagnate. Use tax policy to create a consumer class again, and the new businesses and jobs will follow soon after. Its like tilling and fertilizing the soil before you plant.
josef
August 23rd, 2011
5:26 pm
martin
Georgians and Southerners are stupid when it comes to politics? What planet do you live on…they play politics better than anybody else in the country and have since the Virginia House of Burgesses…we may not like the politics they play, but the bottom line is that even Tammany Hall and Daly came South to study how…
Matti's Annoyance
August 23rd, 2011
5:29 pm
A dad,
Can’t disagree with your 5:21. However, adding more parties to the mix doesn’t really solve the problem: Campaigns require money, and he who raises the most $$$ (usually) wins. With the Supremes now effectively nullifying our sad little $50 contributions by enabling foreign conglomerates carte blanche to spend whatever they want on advertising on a candidate’s behalf (under hidden identities, even), there is virtually NO chance that our elections will return to the issues or that those issues will address the needs of average American people. Until we put some sensible limits on campaigning, our “representatives” will continue to be owned by their biggest donors and corporate sponsors, and will continue to serve THOSE entities, not us.
Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening, and I have to (in this rare case) agree with Mighty Righty. What we grew up believing was the greatest nation in the history of the planet will ultimately be a blip in in a history text somewhere that describes the foolish, arrogant failure of a greed-fueled, ignorant populace. Wish I didn’t, but I do.
pogo
August 23rd, 2011
5:32 pm
What about the Morris Brown story. Millions in the form of taxpayer funding are gone into Cross’s and her cronies pockets and now MB is only going to have to pay 500K to get back in good standing? And nobody is going to jail for this? Yep, there is something bad wrong with this country. I have a black friend who was an allumni of that college and he sent them lots and lots of money after he graduated. He also sent his son there who was in the process of getting a degree when this whole corruption thing happened. My friends money was gone and his son’s education up to that point suddenly didn’t amount to anything. He was then faced with the reality that he would have to pay again for his son to go somewhere else and retake the same classes he had already paid for. Yes, he was real happy with them. He wanted Delores Cross’s scalp but of course nothing was done to her. She wasn’t even prosecuted. Why wasn’t she prosecuted and why is our government so willing to let them default on millions of dollars of debt?
Pertaining to the topic, ALL politicians feed at the trough of public money because to them it is endless. They get good and “fat” from it. My God, most of you are from Atlanta and what with its illustrious history of policital corruption (mostly from corrupt Democratic officials), you have to know this. If you think that the party you support doesn’t do this you are an utter and complete fool. Of course that last bit describes a good number of the blinded fools here. I am really surprised that Jay would even bring repbulican corruption up considering the corrupt Democratic leadership the City of Atlanta has had over the years.
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:35 pm
Dusty
“The GOP has brought up many suggestions but none can get through Congress. What seems to get action now is issued by the president in one way or another.”
I’m going back two and a half years. The one thing Republican went along with – the actions to stabilize the financial markets – they’ve now repudiated that action.
I am not aware of any other idea Republicans have put forth and said “this is it. This is what we need to spur economic recovery and get people working again.’
I hear what you’re saying, but I think we’ve forgotten the reactions FDR got thru the Depression. He was inspiring, but the results weren’t there for years and years. In that case, FDR and Obama are actually pretty much alike. All that differed was the reaction of the populace.
I don’t think Obama has ever said he was spending vast sums to decrease the deficit. What he has said i that spending levels are too high to sustain, but this is an economic emergency. And according to the classical theories I mentioned earlier, they should have worked. But they haven’t. I think both Democrats and Republicans were surprised by the outcomes.
Healthcare – I still cannot comprehend why people think not getting dropped from insurance when you’re ill, having insurance companies arbitrarily deny procedures, and other situations listed before, are good things. Boggles my mind.
Iraq’s on schedule. Military commanders and some Iraquis are lobbying for a delay. Afghanistan – he never, ever said he’d begin a withdrawal as soon as he was elected. Quite the opposite, actually.
I do see your point about results. My original point was, Democrats AND Republicans put forth classic proposals from the beginning. When they didn’t work a expected, Republicans said “if I had it to do over I’d have voted to not do anything’ and then became the complainers with no solutions (other than sound bites) they said “Here! This is what definitely will work.’
Soothsayer
August 23rd, 2011
5:36 pm
I think we’ve just about beaten the shyte out of that $100. What do you think?
josef
August 23rd, 2011
5:36 pm
MATTI
Not so sure about that “blip in history” bit…this empire will be right up there with the Mesoptamian, Egyptian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Russian, Hapsburg, French, British, Spanish, Moorish, Ottoman…etc, etc. in the history texts of the future…too great and impact over too long a time to fade into a blip…
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
5:37 pm
The only problem with percy’s ‘analysis” is that it has nothing to do with Buffett’s specific recommendations, because he neither knows nor provides them.
In point of fact they completely disregard and utterly misrepresent the very thrust of Buffett’s proposal – to “eliminate the extraordinary tax breaks”.
These bloggers have convinced themselves that he is senile and they are brilliant when it comes to matters of fiscal policy, tax ramifications and economic principles.
I suspect 99.99999999999999% of Americans would laugh at that…
Soothsayer
August 23rd, 2011
5:38 pm
Republicans = white = producers = good
Democrats = color = parasites (also known as moochers) = bad
Who knew it was this simple?
md
August 23rd, 2011
5:39 pm
“money to fix the education system”
And that is also part of the problem……it isn’t just the system…………folks do choose to leave said system……….and they are also part of the problem.
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:40 pm
“The answer I gave was Luke’s record of the early Christian church in the Book of Acts. It wasn’t about gov’t vs charity, it wasn’t about volunteerism vs gov’t programs. The concept is straight out of the New Testament.”
I was responding more to Granny’s “That’s why I play for the fisherman’s team.” comment, which I combined with Granny’s long history of advocating redistributive government practices, to arrive at the supposition, which could be erroneous, that Granny might be implying that she feels that redistributive government actions would be advocated by Him as charity. I disagree with that prospect, based on my own faith.
Nevermind that though. Am I to understand that you’re saying that Marx appropriated “from each…” from Acts (and thereby from Jesus?)
It seems to me that there’s a large difference between Jesus’ supplication to be charitable (even if it was to the point of giving everything to the cause) and Marx’s plan for enforcing “from each…” at the point of a gun (and which our Government has been doing in its forced charity activities).
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
August 23rd, 2011
5:43 pm
this empire will be right up there with the Mesoptamian, Egyptian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Russian, Hapsburg, French, British, Spanish, Moorish, Ottoman…etc, etc. in the history texts of the future…too great and impact over too long a time to fade into a blip…
And they’ll be writing about the greatest invention in the American Age, the American Redneck. They’ll write that he never had too much book learning but he determined the course of history. They’ll write about how the redneck elected George W. Bush rather than the wimpy Al Gore. They’ll write about how the redneck was the backbone of the Tea Party. About how we stood up and said no to just about everything. I could go on and on. Too bad none of you will be alive when all the history books praise us.
carlosgvv
August 23rd, 2011
5:44 pm
Dusty
The rich learn early on that if they will occasionaly do something good, the plain folk will gladly look the other way while they do many bad things. As for taxes, the rich have high-powered lawyers and accountants to exploit every loophole legislated for them by their lacky politicians. So. most of them wind up paying little or nothing. The rich are really leading you around by the nose, sport!!
Matti's Annoyance
August 23rd, 2011
5:44 pm
josef,
If we make it to our 300th birthday in the condition we can reasonably expect given our current rate of decline, then, yeah… maybe a big blip, but certainly not so very impressive as the Egyptian, Greek, Roman, or even British empires. Well, unless we ditch education and public health entirely, and funnel ALL our money into military might, and kill a *bleep*load more people. Killing people seems to make history-book content, but generally, I’m agin’ it.
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:46 pm
“In what universe is an income of $3,100,000 a year not ‘large’?”
In a universe where athletes make $25M or more per year, where Oprah makes about $100M per year for talking about nothing on TV, when actors are paid $20M per movie (work a few weeks), where rap musicians (is that an oxymoron, maybe not) make millions. Or where hedge fund managers make $1B or more? (P.S. It’s that last one that ticks the left off, the former are all good people just getting by).
For Mr Buffet to generate billions of dollars of wealth for his shareholders, $3M or so is not outrageous, esp. as his *salary* is $100K. But you’re right, I meant “not large relative to his wealth.”
md
August 23rd, 2011
5:47 pm
“In point of fact they completely disregard and utterly misrepresent the very thrust of Buffett’s proposal – to “eliminate the extraordinary tax breaks”.
And what good is the talk in a 2 party system split by a huge ideological divide??
If it’s argued for the next ten years, did they help or hurt? That’s ten years of contributions they could have made…………..but didn’t.
Must not truly believe in their convictions enough to pull out the ole wallet……………
Southern Comfort
August 23rd, 2011
5:48 pm
Sooth @ 5:18
I saw planes do things during the hurricane summer of 2004 that makes that 747 look like a routine landing. I’ve long thought that pilots should be well compensated for the skills they have.
Soothsayer
August 23rd, 2011
5:48 pm
Redneck, thanks for lettin’ us record this over at your trailer the other night! Thanks again for holding the camera for us. Too bad the “Missus” was over at the bake sale and missed the whole thing! By the way that’s me . . . well, I’ll just let you decide which one’s me!
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
5:48 pm
So Mpercy and Righty, time to put up.
What exactly do you fault with Buffett’s specific recommendations?
If you have no clue what they are, I can help you out with some…
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:49 pm
Soothsayer
“I think we’ve just about beaten the shyte out of that $100. What do you think?”
I think I’d give them a hundred bucks to stop….
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:51 pm
Mighty Righty @5:26 pm
Indeed. Partly why I bought the bills in the first place. Mugabe is just another in a long line of miserable dictators espousing popular socialism and failing.
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
5:51 pm
Sooth and Paul, naw! I’m gonna egg them on to get to the egg on the face syndrome…
md
August 23rd, 2011
5:52 pm
Great Paul…….have jay send that $100 to my address…….and Ill go home now
getalife
August 23rd, 2011
5:53 pm
Reading con comments makes you crazy.
Scroll down.
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:54 pm
MPercy
“I was responding more to Granny’s ”
Sorry for misattributing your post –
As to the other, no, I’m not saying Marx appropriated from the early Christian church. It’s a concept, been around in many societies for a lonnnnnng time. There are, as you noted big differences between the two. But in answer to the question ‘who said, from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs’ citing Luke in his description of the Christian church is a fair answer.
Maybe not the answer some were looking for or expecting, but a fair answer nonetheless.
And again, I was not quoting, and Luke was not citing, any quote of Jesus. Luke was merely reciting how the church, led by the Apostles, interpreted Jesus’s teachings and put them into practice.
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:56 pm
MPercy
““In what universe is an income of $3,100,000 a year not ‘large’?”
In a universe where athletes make $25M or more per year, where Oprah makes about $100M per year …’
care to guess what percentage of US households those income levels represent?
(Hint: no one could construe it as ‘large’).
Mary Elizabeth
August 23rd, 2011
5:57 pm
josef @ 5:05
It’s not an either/or proposition. Most have elements of self-interests and interests of the public. It is a matter of degree in each area for each politician. Some start out serving the public as a goal and then grow toward sel -interest, and some even grow in stature toward statemanship with time. JFK’s “Profiles in Courage” comes to mind.
Then, I saw a public servant first hand in my father, who was Director of Vocational Schools in several counties in south Georgia in the late 1940s. He helped veterans secure vocational skills and work after WWII, and then he became a City Manager of a town where he was committed to serving the public’s interest. He told me that had he been corrupt he could have been wealthy. He was not a wealthy man, but he was an outstanding public servant. He got Georgia’s legislature in his day, to grant retirement for all city employees throughout Georgia. It was not retroactive to include himself. He spoke before a Congressional Committee in the U.S. Congress to have the schools built by the veterans in the Vocational School to be used for black schools in the 1940s instead of simply being built for instruction, and then torn down. His request was granted by that Congressional Committee..
He was named a Man of the Year in two south Georgia towns for his public service in the 1950s. So, yes, I believe that some politicians have the public’s interest at heart. I saw it firsthand in operation. BTW, he admired both John and Robert Kennedy and met Robert.
Bosch
August 23rd, 2011
5:57 pm
Oh no you dont md, I stopped first so Paul owes me the money (although to be fair I left to help my kids and the topic was boring me to death)
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
5:57 pm
MPercy
I just read the last line of your post. I think we can move on to other topics.
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
5:57 pm
AmVet “In point of fact they completely disregard and utterly misrepresent the very thrust of Buffett’s proposal – to “eliminate the extraordinary tax breaks”.”
I’ll disagree. I was addressing specifically the comment earlier that Mr Buffet was safe in raising this issue, since it won’t affect him any. This does appear to me to be the case. He *has* sheltered the vast majority of his fortune in the Foundation and other trusts. He *has* structured his income to minimize taxes.
I respect Mr. Buffet for his shrewd business sense and his largess to the charities he supports, but this oft-repeated meme from him smacks of hypocrisy. Mr Buffet is essentially saying “Stop me before I kill again” but only *after* he has garnered immunity.
1811/0311
August 23rd, 2011
5:58 pm
mooch
[mooch]
verb (used with object)
1.
to borrow (a small item or amount) without intending to return or repay it.
2.
to get or take without paying or at another’s expense; sponge: He always mooches cigarettes.
3.
to beg.
4.
to steal.
getalife
August 23rd, 2011
6:03 pm
Who did it?
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
6:06 pm
AmVet
Go for it!
I got a kick out of the retired American Express CEO Harvey Golub who said in the Wall Street Journal, well sure, I made a boatload in salary and earnings, but hey! I paid 80 to 90 percent of it to the government in taxes!!!”
All that dough and he got the worst accounting firm in America to do his taxes. What a bozo.
Paul
August 23rd, 2011
6:07 pm
md
No problem…. I’ve got that Monopoly board around here somewhere…. y’all were saying how a hundred bucks wasn’t worth anything anyhow…..
Thomas
August 23rd, 2011
6:07 pm
In point of fact they completely disregard and utterly misrepresent the very thrust of Buffett’s proposal – to “eliminate the extraordinary tax breaks”.
Completely wrong. 100% of Americans should be tired of the costless exercise of getting in front of a panting media to simply say things and not do things. Buffet benefitted greatly from his Goldman Sachs preferred stock which was given to him on a silver platter by the Feds. He has hired high priced lawyers to concoct a scheme to save him billions in current income and estate tax.
Walk the walk or don’t talk the talk
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
6:07 pm
I was addressing specifically the comment earlier that Mr Buffet was safe in raising this issue, since it won’t affect him any. This does appear to me to be the case.
Not sure what off-base comment you are referring to, but it doesn’t matter.
Because you are dead wrong.
Why? You apparently don’t know any of the specific recommendations he has made. I have read several of them and those specific recommendations do in fact, very much affect him. And another 0.3% of Americans.
Would he truly make up some highly public cock and bull story that did NOT affect him and think other brilliant people couldn’t easily figure it out?
This groundless posturing based on ignorance of the facts in an effort by the Republicans to portray him as some nefarious, devious, transparent liar is patently absurd.
And I am fully prepared to show you where you are in error…
Soothsayer
August 23rd, 2011
6:08 pm
R I P Nick Ashford!
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
6:10 pm
So Thomas, you want to play as well?
Great.
Which of Buffett’s recommendations are you opposed to?
Normal
August 23rd, 2011
6:11 pm
East Coast theme song…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20Feq_Nt3nM
MPercy
August 23rd, 2011
6:11 pm
AmVet: “What exactly do you fault with Buffett’s specific recommendations?”
Mr. Buffet has been saying this sort of thing for 5 years or more. Most recently, I believe was his NY Times op-ed piece. I am unaware of an specific proposal he made therein other than raising rates on those with incomes more than $1M and raising rates on those with incomes more than $10 even more. He didn’t provide his target rates for those new brackets. he complained about several other things that rich people get away with, but didn’t propose any other changes.
Neither of those two proposals does much in terms of impacting Mr Buffet personally, which is the main gist of my comments. He would see some of his income subjected to the $1M rate (my understanding is that Mr Buffet’s normal income is less than $10M per year). He has already sheltered most of his $40B in assets from any further taxation (e.g. estate taxes). He’s pretty safe saying raise the rate on over $10M to 100%. It wouldn’t impact him at all! This sort of tax increase is easy to call for.
As to the “proposal” to increase the number of brackets to include a new bracket with a rate higher than the 35.6% for $1M-$10M and another for income over $10M. I see nothing wrong with that, really, at rates of say 38 and 40%, perhaps, although I think 35% of a man’s income ought to be more than enough of a “fair share”.
Anything else?
Normal
August 23rd, 2011
6:14 pm
Republican Theme song…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOErZuzZpS8
josef
August 23rd, 2011
6:14 pm
duk-sha-nee u-ni-lu-tsv-hi
One of the reasons I dislike your persona to the degree I do is that you take your sneers at the absolute backbone of who we are as a society thinking you’re ever so d*mned superior…well, you’re not…you’re a useless, arrogant little pissant without a scintilla of respect for the working shmo…you don’t a bit more know what a Redneck really is…you’re a one-diminsional, one-trick pony…you may have your fan club who think you’re just ever so clever and every so witty and I’m not here to judge them, but you’re a supercillious, bigoted little twit, imho…
getalife
August 23rd, 2011
6:14 pm
Yeah, cons know more about our economy than Buffett.
Not buying it.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
August 23rd, 2011
6:16 pm
you may have your fan club who think you’re just ever so clever and every so witty and I’m not here to judge them, but you’re a supercillious, bigoted little twit, imho…
Oh, put a sock in it, josef. You ain’t the be all and end all of this blog.
josef
August 23rd, 2011
6:16 pm
MARY ELIZABETH
Thank you for your answer.
F. Sinkwich
August 23rd, 2011
6:16 pm
Oh, nooooooo!
“Only 38 percent of Americans say they approve of the way Barack Obama is handing his job as president, according to Gallup’s daily tracking poll released today (which averages the president’s approval over Gallup’s previous three days of polling). That is the lowest that Obama’s approval has been in the daily tracking poll since he was inaugurated in January 2009. 54 percent of Americans in Gallup’s daily tracking poll said they disapprove of the way Obama is handling his job as president.”
Who the hell comprises that 38%?
Oh yeah, AmVet, granny, usinuk, etc.
Normal
August 23rd, 2011
6:17 pm
The Obituary follows:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Born 1776, Died 2012
Only if the Tea Party wins…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
6:17 pm
dang it, josef, why do you have to make it personal to the pissants? Attack the posts, not the pissants!
Bosch
August 23rd, 2011
6:17 pm
Who the he’ll is Josef talking to?
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
6:18 pm
I am unaware of an specific proposal he made therein other than raising rates on those with incomes more than $1M and raising rates on those with incomes more than $10 even more.
And there sir is the fatal flaw in your position.
He has made other very specific proposals in addition to those. Which do affect him exactly as he has said.
Here are three of several items to read about vis a vis his plans – capital gains, carried interest and Erskine/Bowles.
If you have difficulty in finding/researching them let me know…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
6:18 pm
Dang, left off the
… that’s what I get for letting the pissants rant 
Bosch
August 23rd, 2011
6:18 pm
Make that hell
josef
August 23rd, 2011
6:20 pm
Duk-sha-nee U-ni-lu-tsv-hi
“Oh, put a sock in it, josef. You ain’t the be all and end all of this blog.”
Never said I was and the only time I ever lower myself to respond to you is when you quote, address or allude to me….
And. gee, Mary Agnes…dropped the shtick for that one, didn’t you…? Now THAT was funny…
getalife
August 23rd, 2011
6:20 pm
Bosch,
Redneck Convert (R–and proud of it)
josef
August 23rd, 2011
6:21 pm
BOSCH
It wasn’t you…
So, SHUT UP…
AmVet
August 23rd, 2011
6:22 pm
josef, don’t hold back! Tell RC what you really think of his persona!
You did something that always cracks me up, my friend. At the end of your screed, you wrote “imho”.
Humble???
NOT!
(Just razzin’ ya…)
josef
August 23rd, 2011
6:23 pm
BOSCH
Hell vs he’ll…are you ipading?
Bosch
August 23rd, 2011
6:23 pm
Getalife
Oh okay – did somebody just jack Paul again?
josef
August 23rd, 2011
6:24 pm
ZamVet
Not ME who’s humble…just my l’il ole wuthless opinion…
getalife
August 23rd, 2011
6:24 pm
Bosch,
I think so.
Who do you think it is?