Time to end Norquist’s death grip on tax policy
Mitt Romney lost big on election night and has continued to take a beating from his fellow Republicans ever since. The lack of affection toward Romney is no surprise, but the post-election response has also revealed an absence of basic respect for the man among conservatives. It is hard to recall a candidate so thoroughly and quickly repudiated by those who just a few days earlier were touting him for the most important job on the planet.
Karl Rove, who wasn’t even on the ballot, has also lost big in the days since the election, suffering a hit to his reputation from which he may never fully recover. However, the biggest off-ballot loser of the season may turn out to be Grover Norquist, the one-man keeper of the GOP’s no-tax-hike-ever-ever-ever-under-any-circumstances-whatsoever pledge.
I must say, it couldn’t happen to a nicer, more deserving guy.
As Dana Milbanks reports, Norquist continues to put on a game front. Just this week, Norquist told a gathering at a Washington think tank that “he sees no chance of Republicans going squishy” and allowing tax hikes to pass as part of a budget compromise.
“The Rs are holding,” he announced at a luncheon Monday of the Center for the National Interest.
“The fantasy is that the Republicans would cave on marginal tax rates — they’re non-negotiable,” he added.
In fact, Norquist maintained, if you think there’s any erosion of support for his Pledge, which forbids any net increase in taxes, Norquist would like you to know something. “You’re mistaken,” he said. “The entire Republican leadership has been elected on that commitment in the House and the Senate.”
I think Norquist is wrong, and that he knows he’s wrong. Most of the signals coming out of Washington suggest that in the end, the final budget deal will include a higher marginal tax rate on the wealthiest of Americans. If that happens, if the Norquist pledge is broken en masse, as seems likely, his bizarre source of political power disappears as well.
That said, a lot of Americans have yet to be convinced of the GOP’s willingness and ability to compromise. According to a new Gallup poll, 65 percent of Americans believe that President Obama will make a sincere effort to reach bipartisan compromise. Only 48 percent say the same about congressional Republicans. Among independents, only 43 percent believe Republicans are sincerely willing to compromise.
As the chart above demonstrates, those numbers are down significantly from four years ago, when 62 percent of Americans had faith that Republicans were interested in compromise. Somebody out there has been paying attention, which gives Obama and the Democrats considerably more leeway in the negotiations ahead.
– 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
620 comments Add your comment
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
November 20th, 2012
9:42 am
Mick
November 20th, 2012
9:35 am
Krugman isn’t even in the top 25 of respected economists…if he didn’t work for the foremost liberal rag in the history of liberal rags, he may have more credibility…he has never written a column that does not support DEM thinking hook line or sinker..
There are many more economists who take a more balanced view of things…many certainly lean left on many issues but neither side is correct 100% of the time….
josef
November 20th, 2012
9:42 am
BEN
“Not all conservatives care about gay marriage”
Then why don’t those stand up and say something instead of allowing it to become an (alienating) plank in the platform?
Get Real
November 20th, 2012
9:42 am
I did Mary Elizabeth, I am just not a Socialist, perhaps that is the problem..
jewcowboy
November 20th, 2012
9:43 am
“Krugman is DELUSIONAL.”
Who happened to have accurately predicted the housing bubble and collapse back in 2005.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
November 20th, 2012
9:43 am
http://static1.firedoglake.com/29/files/2012/08/PaulKrugman_Tired.jpg
and
http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/2012/11/19/1120-luckovich-cartoon-honey-boo-boo/
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:43 am
“I take it you don’t buy into that whole Ronald Reagan myth. Reagan the “socialist” called the Earned Income Credit “the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress” during the signing ceremony greatly expanded the EITC.”
No, in fact I consider EITC to be a colossal joke, nothing but another welfare program, and $10,000 to you if you can find where I ever said otherwise.
Welcome to the Occupation
November 20th, 2012
9:43 am
godless heathen: “according to Paul Krugman / And I quit reading right there”
I love this idea among some of our provincial friends that Paul Krugman, columnist for the most mainstream press establishment organ we have, is somehow is paragon of the far left.
Is Krugman strident and relentlessly scathing in his denunciations of the American right? Sure. But he is a solid believer in the market and of capitalism in general, a reliable representative of a consensus that was perfectly mainstream 30-40 years ago. Nothing wild-eyed lefty about him. Just another sign of how wildly to the right our whole political spectrum has swung over the last couple of decades.
Regnad Kcin
November 20th, 2012
9:43 am
“I’m to believe that fully 47% of workign Americans fall into those buckets?”
Ben – I believe that 47% was YOUR number…
mm
November 20th, 2012
9:43 am
“I found it interesting to hear Paul Ryan say that we should not allow an unelected board of people to oversee medical decisions.”
So he’s against insurance companies?
Redcoat
November 20th, 2012
9:44 am
Was it true that if you take all the money all Americans earn, by working or from investments, you still couldn’t pay all the cost of government spending?
Thomas
November 20th, 2012
9:44 am
Norquist and Krugman are both one trick poneys that should be kicked to the curb.
One somehow won a prize- the other should get second prize- a set of steak knives and a trip home.
DC should be stop doing Texas death matches on issues as this simply harms one group- us.
jewcowboy
November 20th, 2012
9:45 am
josef,
“Then why don’t those stand up and say something instead of allowing it to become an (alienating) plank in the platform?”
Because as Ben stated, they don’t “care about gay marriage.” Civil rights don’t rate a blip on the radar for them.
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:45 am
“Then why don’t those stand up and say something instead of allowing it to become an (alienating) plank in the platform?”
Probably because, like me, they really don’t care one way or the other.
I don’t oppose gay marriage, but neither do I celebrate it. Same with abortion. Sorry if that is not sufficient to bolster your self esteem.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
November 20th, 2012
9:45 am
Well, anybody with a brain and enough sense to read can see what’s going to happen. The Republicans are going to go for getting rid of all kind of deductions for the Job Producers. Taxes of the Job Producers will go up about 33%. Then they’ll refuse to raise the tax rate and come out and tell people they “held the line” on tax increases. The Job Producers will be taking it in the shorts and paying out the wazoo. But even old Grover will pretend there was no tax increase. The people that will know better will be the people paying higher taxes.
Have a good Tuesday everybody.
USMC
November 20th, 2012
9:45 am
“Why gomer you’ve always had the ability to leave, just click your military issues three times and repeat; there’s no place like home… welcome back to the new socialist utopia…”–Mic..key..Mouse!
Leave what, Mickey??? At least you are now honest and admitting to your love and yearning for Socialism. I can deal with honesty. We just disagree on the issues.
I believe in Capitalism and you believe in Socialism. Fair enough.
Welcome to the Occupation
November 20th, 2012
9:46 am
Ben Shockley: “No, in fact I consider EITC to be a colossal joke, nothing but another welfare program”
The EITC was a CONSERVATIVE idea, Einstein! (See my 9:43 on how our whole debate has swung to the right — nowadays ideas that were once conservative initiatives are routinely assumed out of hand to be ‘left’ or ’socialist’.)
alex
November 20th, 2012
9:46 am
@Mary Elizabeth, oh here we go :bush tax cuts, Krugman, and the devious republicans,States may be refusing to set up exchanges because frankly the state can’t afford it. Fine, mandate something, but paying for it may be a bit more complicated. Where did you teach..Atlanta public Schools,? Begun under Bush, for a teacher you are an embarassment , you need to read and read a lot, go back to 1992 or earlier..Sheesh, Read any number of books before you spew your extremely superficial thoughts….
In the immortal words of KAM;” Bush tax cuts:
there’s the sign…
Tax increases for the rich will be necessary to assuage the masses….”to the barricades”
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
November 20th, 2012
9:46 am
Was it true that if you take all the money all Americans earn…
Was it true that unicorns used to poop Skittles?
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:46 am
“Ben – I believe that 47% was YOUR number…”
Reading is fundamental, dude…..
I’m implying that I don’t believe for one minute that 47% of income-earning Americans are retired, poor, or military.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
November 20th, 2012
9:47 am
Brosephus™
November 20th, 2012
9:37 am
Taking my comments out of context and painting me in some box is weak..I said nothing about increasing taxes on any of those folks…many of whom have paid already for the benefits they recieve…it is definitely politically incorrect on this site to harp on the (absurd) 47% number…they may not pay federal tax but there are plenty of other taxes they incur..
I will say that if the tracjectory of those unable or not otherwised required to pay their fair share, or if their fair share continues to be defined for political gain, we are going to be in trouble…the “rich” have finite resources to address this number if it gets up to 60% or more…
Have a coke and a smile….
alex
November 20th, 2012
9:47 am
Skittles..
there’s your sign…
middle of the road
November 20th, 2012
9:47 am
“Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.”
Good thing we aren’t a strict democracy.
Erwin's cat
November 20th, 2012
9:48 am
Late to the party again…I* don’t expect either side to offer a sincere compromise…I hope I’m wrong
Mick
November 20th, 2012
9:48 am
get real
Apparently you haven’t read krugman; he advocates gov’t deficit spending when there is an economic depression or severe recession to stabilize the economy. When the recovery is solid, then raise taxes to pay for the deficit spending.
I’m sure you would have made a great advisor to herbert hoover…
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:48 am
“The EITC was a CONSERVATIVE idea, Einstein!”
But unlike liberals, i don’t mindlessly embrace every idea my party advances.
St Simons - he-ne-ha
November 20th, 2012
9:49 am
Stevie, and that is mrsstsimons’ chosen clinical career to which she has devoted her whole prof life, until she became an administrator. Recovery is success for all of us
USMC
November 20th, 2012
9:49 am
“Who happened to have accurately predicted the housing bubble and collapse back in 2005.”–Jewcowboy
Yeah, Krugman, GEORGE W. BUSH, and many others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM
NEXT!
JP
November 20th, 2012
9:49 am
“Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.” – P.J. O’Rourke
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
November 20th, 2012
9:49 am
Where did you teach..Atlanta public Schools,?
There’s your sign.
Simple Truths
November 20th, 2012
9:49 am
Another Jay hit piece.
jewcowboy
November 20th, 2012
9:49 am
“You cannot spend what you do not have, it is really not that difficult a concept”
Of course you can. You may or may not eventually have to pay it back, but you most certainly can spend what you don’t have. Ever heard of a car loan or a mortgage?
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:50 am
“Apparently you haven’t read krugman; he advocates gov’t deficit spending when there is an economic depression or severe recession to stabilize the economy. ”
Krugman (like all liberals) is a real hoot. Bush’s deficit spending CAUSED the recession, but Obama’s deficit spending is necessary to end the recession.
LMAO
DannyX
November 20th, 2012
9:50 am
“No, in fact I consider EITC to be a colossal joke, nothing but another welfare program, and $10,000 to you if you can find where I ever said otherwise.”
Got to love the anti-Democrat “they’re socialist” theme around here.
Republicans gave us the EITC, Medicare expansion, and Medicare Part D. They also started 2 unfunded wars that cost over a trillion dollars.
To top it off, if you bring up George W Bush, they scream and throw tantrums.
getalife
November 20th, 2012
9:50 am
Don’t change a thing gop.
Stay the course.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
November 20th, 2012
9:50 am
WELCOME
I’m happy to retract any negative comments about Krugmans incentives and suspicious ommission of any economic favor toward GOP economists, if you can provide me some fodder..
There exists not shortage of balanced and thoughtful economists out there that are well above a hint of impropriety….NYT’s says it all IMO.
Regnad Kcin
November 20th, 2012
9:50 am
The republican mantra of “if we can just make the rich people rich enough…all of our problems will be solved!” seems to be losing traction on the right…
Rabbit
November 20th, 2012
9:51 am
‘when the bottom 47% or so contribute nothing in the way of federal taxes, is selfish, greedy, and cowardly.’
A tired mantra. For originalists, only the weatlhy were to participate in government, period. Only men who owned land could vote. Even after the civil war, discrimination denied blacks a seat at democracy’s table. The 19th amendment around 1920 (less than 100 years ago) allowed women to vote.
So there has always been an elitist bent to American democracy. But the shift seems to be, that the elites, want the power, they just don’t want the obligations that was understood to come with it.
I am fine with wealthy statesmen and stateswomen developing policy and guiding the country for the good of all. I am not fine with what’s been happening the last 30 years when the wealth of the elite has jetted so far out from the rest of society that the vacuum has caused the economic equivalent of a sonic boom. (not like an economic boom)
Jay has identified those 47%. Many are seniors who have contributed for a lifetime. Many are the less fortunate through no fault of their own that we always should care for. Many are stuck in the stagnate wage world created by an irresponsible elite.
I am all for the wealthy getting richer. It’s the way things are supposed to be. I am not for the wealthy getting richer while the rest are becoming worse off.
DannyX
November 20th, 2012
9:51 am
Worth repeating…
“The EITC was a CONSERVATIVE idea, Einstein!”
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
November 20th, 2012
9:51 am
STSIMMONS
Thanks…most difficult thing I ever did..much more difficult even that my actuarial exam process..be good..gotta jump.
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:51 am
“Giving liberals the right to vote is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.” – Ben Shockley
USMC
November 20th, 2012
9:51 am
Don’t change a thing BAMA.
Stay the Course… Go Dawgs!
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
November 20th, 2012
9:52 am
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:42 am
“Hey Redcoat and Ben, your side should try winning an election!”
Hey DannyX, your side should try making it through life without mooching off of others.
.
.
.
A perfect example of Ben doing himself more harm than good.
Mooching….like a 13% effective tax rate? Like off shore accounts?
like deductions for a dancing horse?
Moocher…thy name is GOP.
Mick
November 20th, 2012
9:52 am
usmc
Actually, I prefer more of a hybrid of capitalism and socialism – the best of both worlds so to speak..
Jay
November 20th, 2012
9:53 am
“Bush’s deficit spending CAUSED the recession … “
That right there is a stunning display of economic illiteracy. There is no mechanism, no rational process by which that can be said to be true.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
November 20th, 2012
9:53 am
“The Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work and then they get elected and prove it.”
–Thomas “P.J. O’Rourke” Jefferson
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:53 am
“Republicans gave us the EITC, Medicare expansion, and Medicare Part D. They also started 2 unfunded wars that cost over a trillion dollars.”
Worth repeating….conservatives don’t mndlessly support every idea advanced by their party, as liberals do.
See TEA PARTY
josef
November 20th, 2012
9:53 am
jewcowboy
I was thinking much the same thing…
I do find it interesting, however, that the conservatives have not jumped on this one big time since marriage and all that brings with it is one of THE most conservative of institutions in our society. They should be championing this as their cause and, in so doing, woo no small few gay folks to their big tent given, and I know this is falling for the stereotype, we are a pretty well-heeled community and a significant component of their “53 percent who DO pay taxes.”
middle of the road
November 20th, 2012
9:54 am
“Taxes of the Job Producers will go up about 33%.”
What Job Producers? The ones in main danger of seeing their taxes go up are the Romneys – those with income mainly from investments (capital gains taxes). Want to tell me why $500,000 from investments should be taxed at 15% and $500,000 from working gets taxed at 25%, when they both spend the same? So you say that without the tax cut, no one will invest in anything. Right, all those rich people will pull their money out of the stock market and put it under their mattresses in cash? Give me a break.
For your information, the Job Producers are the consumers – they are the ones driving 60% of the economy. The big part of the rest is business purchasing.
Brosephus™
November 20th, 2012
9:54 am
Sorry, Obama got 96% of voting african americans…
This is not a GOP talking point…its true..what’s your problem?
My problem is that you’re still blowing smoke, and you’re not pointing out truths. In 2008, Obama received 95% of the vote. If he received less in 2012, he could not have received 97% OR 96%. That whole idea of Blacks voting as one block for Obama goes towards that myth of people voting for him based on race. If you, or anybody else, chooses to push that meme, I will call you on it each and every time.
Funny that people are so damned concerned about how Blacks voted for Obama, but not a damn peep about how Blacks voted for Clinton, Kerry, Gore, or any other Democratic candidate. THAT’S my problem!!!
Get Real
November 20th, 2012
9:54 am
Little Mickey…
You are correct, I have not “read” Krugman because I have seen him and listened to him enough to the point my ears were forcibly raped by his crazy a$$ed beliefs….geez
getalife
November 20th, 2012
9:54 am
cons still don’t get it so I will nor help.
Keep thinking you cut after a collapse.
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:55 am
“That right there is a stunning display of economic illiteracy. There is no mechanism, no rational process by which that can be said to be true.”
I didn’t say it was true. It said liberals believe it to be true.
Are you seriously going to deny, Jay, that you ripped Bush in print on a regular basis for his deficits? deficits that pale in comparison to Obama’s, by the way?
Doggone/GA
November 20th, 2012
9:55 am
“Was it true that if you take all the money all Americans earn, by working or from investments, you still couldn’t pay all the cost of government spending?”
Why not? If you took all of MY income you still couldn’t pay off what I owe on my house…but over the course of the next 15 years or so, the loan will get paid off.
Marc
November 20th, 2012
9:55 am
jewcowboy I did. It wasn’t hard to see how over built Atlanta was becoming and at some point the building had to stop. It shouldn’t have been a shock to ANYONE that did have their head up their …
Get Real
November 20th, 2012
9:55 am
Brosephus™
I basically agree with you, blacks vote in blocks for Democrats regardless of the candidate…
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:56 am
Granny, why don’t you tell us how a 13% effective federal tax rate is “mooching”?
Thanks in advance.
Regnad Kcin
November 20th, 2012
9:56 am
GR – ” I have seen him and listened to him enough to the point my ears were forcibly raped by his crazy a$$ed beliefs”
I bet that wasn’t actually a “legitimate” rape…
DannyX
November 20th, 2012
9:57 am
“See TEA PARTY”
Lol, Palin/Bachmann 2016!
Mary Elizabeth
November 20th, 2012
9:57 am
Related to tax cuts and entitlement cuts, via Social Security and Medicare. Here are some of Krugman’s thoughts. I hope readers will objectively read his thoughts and learn from them.
———————————————————————
“Now, life expectancy at age 65 has risen, too. But the rise has been very uneven since the 1970s, with only the relatively affluent and well-educated seeing large gains. Bear in mind, too, that the full retirement age has already gone up to 66 and is scheduled to rise to 67 under current law.
This means that any further rise in the retirement age would be a harsh blow to Americans in the bottom half of the income distribution, who aren’t living much longer, and who, in many cases, have jobs requiring physical effort that’s difficult even for healthy seniors. And these are precisely the people who depend most on Social Security.
So any rise in the Social Security retirement age would, as I said, be cruel, hurting the most vulnerable Americans. And this cruelty would be gratuitous: While the United States does have a long-run budget problem, Social Security is not a major factor in that problem.
Medicare, on the other hand, is a big budget problem. But raising the eligibility age, which means forcing seniors to seek private insurance, is no way to deal with that problem.
It’s true that thanks to Obamacare, seniors should actually be able to get insurance even without Medicare. (Although, what happens if a number of states block the expansion of Medicaid that’s a crucial piece of the program?) But let’s be clear: Government insurance via Medicare is better and more cost-effective than private insurance.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/opinion/life-death-and-deficits.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0
Redcoat
November 20th, 2012
9:58 am
Democracy = socialism……? and what is a representative republic?…..sure is getting confusing on this blog….ask questions and all you get are insults…..
JohnnyReb
November 20th, 2012
9:58 am
What? Repubs not rolling over to Barry’s win. I dare they!
Jay’s crystall ball is cloudy on this one. There may be some Righties who agree to higher tax rates, but a wholesale change, forgetaboutit.
Why is it Moonbats don’t understand that lowering taxes increases commerce which increases revenue? Conversely, if taxes go up, commerce goes down and the smaller revenue increase is from the tax rates.
Come to think of it. I dare state that most Moonbats don’t understand the difference between taxes and revenue.
willie lynch
November 20th, 2012
9:58 am
JP
November 20th, 2012
9:49 am
I don’t understand. Isn’t the state…government? Isn’t this country’s 200+ years due to the ability of it’s government to establish it as the “greatest country in the history of mankind?” I must be missing something.
Regnad Kcin
November 20th, 2012
9:58 am
““That right there is a stunning display of economic illiteracy. There is no mechanism, no rational process by which that can be said to be true.”
I didn’t say it was true. It said liberals believe it to be true.
Are you seriously going to deny, Jay, that you ripped Bush in print on a regular basis for his deficits? deficits that pale in comparison to Obama’s, by the way?”
Ben – If I didn’t already know that you never back up anything you say, I’d ask you to provide a link to where Jay stsed that Bush’s deficits caused the recession, as you stated above.
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
9:59 am
“Come to think of it. I dare state that most Moonbats don’t understand the difference between taxes and revenue.”
Most of them don’t undersatnd the difference between marginal tax rates and effective tax rates either.
jewcowboy
November 20th, 2012
10:00 am
josef,
“I do find it interesting, however, that the conservatives have not jumped on this one big time since marriage and all that brings with it is one of THE most conservative of institutions in our society.’
Other conservatives have…those not kowtowed to bigoted religious dogma.
“But for me, leadership on families also means speaking out on marriage. Marriage is not just a piece of paper. It pulls couples together through the ebb and flow of life. It gives children stability. And it says powerful things about what we should value. So yes, we will recognize marriage in the tax system.
But we’re also doing something else. I once stood before a Conservative conference and said it shouldn’t matter whether commitment was between a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, or a man and another man. You applauded me for that. Five years on, we’re consulting on legalizing gay marriage.
And to anyone who has reservations, I say: Yes, it’s about equality, but it’s also about something else: commitment. Conservatives believe in the ties that bind us; that society is stronger when we make vows to each other and support each other. So I don’t support gay marriage despite being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I’m a Conservative.” ~ David Cameron
ad
November 20th, 2012
10:00 am
EITC was a Reagan idea and it is terrible. It gives the working poor a fairly large, once-a-year check. Many of these folks are not the best money mangers, so, rather than being spent for food and housing over the course of the year, the money is spent on nonessential items soon after the check is received. It was a well intentioned plan, but there has got to be a better way to help the working poor.
USMC
November 20th, 2012
10:00 am
“Actually, I prefer more of a hybrid of capitalism and socialism – the best of both worlds so to speak..”–Mick
That sounds nice and compassionate, Mick.
The only problem is “Eventually, Socialists run out of other peoples’ money [to spend].”
We just agree to disagree and I by no means pretend to have all of the answers.
I grew up in an America that was built on Capitalism and where Socialism had NO hand in creating the most prosperous country in the history of the world.
So It will take me some time to adjust and get used to the Socialist take-over of the United States. But I will overcome, adapt, and succeed… Believe me.
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
10:00 am
“Ben – If I didn’t already know that you never back up anything you say, I’d ask you to provide a link to where Jay stsed that Bush’s deficits caused the recession, as you stated above.”
Why don’t you just let Jay speak for himself?
I’m betting he won’t weigh in. He knows better.
Banderson
November 20th, 2012
10:00 am
USMC – You grew up in the 1840s?
Doggone/GA
November 20th, 2012
10:02 am
“Why is it Moonbats don’t understand that ”
Why is it that wingers don’t understand that taxes are not the only thing that affects the economy.
Michael
November 20th, 2012
10:02 am
Ben, Bobby Ryndal asked you to quit “saying stupid things.”
Mick
November 20th, 2012
10:02 am
get real
Reading is fundamental, knowledge is power, disagreement is ok but it’s not if you don’t know what your disagreeing with. Stiglitz, another respected economist, and krugman are on the same page economically there must be something to it; economists with superb CREDENTIALS! Yours is just a shrill voice in the desert…
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
10:03 am
“So It will take me some time to adjust and get used to the Socialist take-over of the United States. But I will overcome, adapt, and succeed… Believe me’
Great point USMC. That’s the key point the libbies will never get. Because we (conservatives) don’t pin all our hopes and dreams on government, it’s really not that big a deal that Romney lost the election.
We’ll keep doing what we do….working hard and trying to make good decisions…and let the libs fight over government crumbs.
Regnad Kcin
November 20th, 2012
10:04 am
“So It will take me some time to adjust and get used to the Socialist take-over of the United States.”
Boo! (socialism is sooooooo scary!)
Paul
November 20th, 2012
10:04 am
Norquist illustrates what happens when an ideologue runs into changing reality. They can’t adapt and they get left behind.
Maybe why some cons resist the idea of evolution. They’re on the losing branch.
What I’m waiting for is to see which Republican member of Congress goes publicly on record and tells Grover to flake off.
Morning, Stevie Ray
“47% is silly intial thrust..”
It’s not about facts, it’s not about ideas, it’s not about gaining understanding. Just look at all Ben’s initial “I’ll throw stuff out until someone responds” posts. It’s about attention. Good attention, bad attention, it doesn’t matter. He craves attention. Any attention is good attention.
I know it’s sad, but that’s a condition even the best-intentioned libs can’t do anything about. Unless it’s to give him what he wants.
Hey, ain’t that a kick? Ben has needs that can be fulfilled only on the liberal site he seeks out!
What’s the phrase? Oh yeah…
LMAO!!!
Redcoat
November 20th, 2012
10:04 am
Budget?……hahaha……just gets in the way……..debt ceiling?….hahaha…..taxpayers have no control and we can milk it and leave before the bills come due…….what a racket!
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
November 20th, 2012
10:04 am
Ben
Why not tell us how it is not?
Explain why you think off shore accounts and deductions for dancing horses apparently are?
Oh please tell us and make some more liberals while you do.
Regnad Kcin
November 20th, 2012
10:05 am
“Why don’t you just let Jay speak for himself?”
Your surrender is accepted…
USMC
November 20th, 2012
10:05 am
“Bush’s deficit spending CAUSED the recession … “
“That right there is a stunning display of economic illiteracy. There is no mechanism, no rational process by which that can be said to be true.”–JAY BOOKMAN
Just when I think Jay and I are at complete PHILOSOPHICAL odds…
Bookman ‘hits it out of the park’!……. Boy, that’s frustrating!
Thomas Heyward Jr
November 20th, 2012
10:05 am
This is the Romney’s Result When You Try to Ignore the Ron Paul Movement
.
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/11/this-is-result-when-you-try-to-ignore.html
jewcowboy
November 20th, 2012
10:06 am
Morning Paul,
“Norquist illustrates what happens when an ideologue runs into changing reality. They can’t adapt and they get left behind.”
Bingo!
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
10:06 am
“Ben – If I didn’t already know that you never back up anything you say, I’d ask you to provide a link to where Jay stsed that Bush’s deficits caused the recession, as you stated above.”
It is liberal mantra that the Bush tax cuts “on the rich” (actually he cut rates for all taxpayers) squandered the Clinton “surpluses” (fictional by the way) and that the associated deficits caused the recession.
If that’s not the lib position, perhaps one of you will enlighten me.
Mick
November 20th, 2012
10:07 am
usmc **Socialism had NO hand in creating the most prosperous country in the history of the world.**
Policeman, firefighters, teachers, politicians, gov’t workers of every stripe, MILITARY???
C’mon, you can do better than that..
Rabbit
November 20th, 2012
10:07 am
‘I grew up in an America that was built on Capitalism and where Socialism had NO hand in creating the most prosperous country in the history of the world.’
You must be a pretty old fella. WPA was a government jobs program in the early part of the 20th century. Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid were “social” programs developed in the mid 20th century.
Public education has been around, depending on where you lived, for a long time.
Eisenhower’s interstate highway program was a national program designed to help everybody become more mobile.
The mortgage interest deduction is arguably a leveling tool – helping many to own homes.
NO hand? I hope you can adapt and become more appreciative of the compassionate country you grew up in.
barking frog
November 20th, 2012
10:07 am
Tax Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Can it be cured ? Not until after the 2014 election,
if even then.
Redcoat
November 20th, 2012
10:08 am
Paul …….you’re response to Ben was nothing of substance, just a gloried insult……and you laugh….sad
USMC
November 20th, 2012
10:08 am
“Keep thinking you cut after a collapse.”–Getalife
Obama “‘You Don’t Raise Taxes’ in a Bad Economy”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uoE_NicaMY
It looks like my friend Getalife and Obama disagree…. Who knew???
Jay
November 20th, 2012
10:09 am
“It is liberal mantra that the Bush tax cuts “on the rich” (actually he cut rates for all taxpayers) squandered the Clinton “surpluses” (fictional by the way) and that the associated deficits caused the recession.
That is utter fabrication. First Ben makes up some nonsense, and then when called on it, he attempts to blame someone else for that nonsense.
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
10:09 am
Granny,
Not only did Romney pay all taxes he legally owed, there is no record of him ever receiving government handouts, and he has given tens of million to charity. His tax reords prove it.
And you call him a moocher.
How much have you given to charity?
Seriously….if you have nothing intelligent to say, please go away.
Brosephus™
November 20th, 2012
10:09 am
I’m to believe that fully 47% of workign Americans fall into those buckets?
Liberals are so funny.
And conservatives are so dumb. In 2011, 46.4% did not pay federal income taxes. However, 2/3 of taxpayers paid some form of federal tax, whether it was income or payroll taxes. There was 18.1% who paid neither one of those taxes.
In 2011, of the 18.1 percent of American households who paid no federal tax (meaning, no federal income or payroll tax), more than half were elderly, and most of the other half were non-elderly people making below $20,000 a year. The other sliver, roughly one in 20 non-payers, were people who made more than $20,000 in household income.
The reason being poor helps is because, with a combination of tax credits (like the earned income credit and the child credit) and deductions, many people earning under $20,000 a year can zero out their overall rate. The primary reason being elderly helps is that Social Security benefits aren’t taxed as income, so if all (or most) of your income comes from your monthly Social Security check, your taxable income is marginal or non-existent.
http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romneys-47-who-are-dependent-on-the-government-2012-9
If you want to dig deeper and see who’s responsible for the policies that cut so many people from federal tax rolls, look no further than Saint Ronnie himself…
There are two reasons the percentage of Americans who don’t write checks to the IRS has spiked in recent years: the bad economy, which Romney pledges to ameliorate, and Republican tax cuts, which Romney plans to continue.
When Ronald Reagan signed into law the Tax Reform Act of 1986, he boasted, “Millions of the working poor will be dropped from the tax rolls altogether, and families will get a long-overdue break with lower rates and an almost doubled personal exemption.”
Both the initial Reagan tax cuts of 1981 and indexing income taxes to inflation in 1985 had a similar effect.
In the 1990s, the Republican-controlled Gingrich Congress passed a $500 per child tax credit that also wiped out the income tax liability of many low- to moderate-income households.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/17/the-real-problem-with-romneys-47-percent-gaffe/
We will now return to our conservative rantings already in progress…
godless heathen - Support Small Business Saturday
November 20th, 2012
10:09 am
Krugman is an excellent economist who happens to be liberal.
and sounds like a conspiracy theorist.
jewcowboy
November 20th, 2012
10:10 am
“Eisenhower’s interstate highway program was a national program designed to help everybody become more mobile.”
Or more accurately, to ensure the military’s mobility.
Ben Shockley
November 20th, 2012
10:10 am
“That is utter fabrication. First Ben makes up some nonsense, and then when called on it, he attempts to blame someone else for that nonsense.”
Why don’t you tell us YOUR theory of the recession Jay?
And it is duly noted that you chose not to deny that you bashed Bush repeatedly for runnign deficits that pale in comparison to Obama’s.
Regnad Kcin
November 20th, 2012
10:10 am
“Seriously….if you have nothing intelligent to say, please go away.”
……………………..BEN said this^^^^!!!!!!!!………………………
Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette
November 20th, 2012
10:11 am
Speaking of Paul Krugman….
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/19/a-public-service-reminder-paul-ryan-is-a-con-man/
He’s spot on here.
Doggone/GA
November 20th, 2012
10:12 am
“Or more accurately, to ensure the military’s mobility.”
That was it’s original genesis, but the “mission” changed as the interstate system grew.
Mary Elizabeth
November 20th, 2012
10:12 am
” ‘Bush’s deficit spending CAUSED the recession … ‘
That right there is a stunning display of economic illiteracy. There is no mechanism, no rational process by which that can be said to be true.”
========================================
Paul Krugman does not contend that the Bush tax cuts CAUSED the recession, but Krugman does write that the Bush tax cuts were implemented in part in order to raise the deficit so that entitlements would have to be cut. There is a difference in causing the recession and planning deliberately to raise the deficit to force entitlement cutting. Judge for yourself. Below is what Krugman actually wrote on Feb. 22, 2010 in The New York Times:
——————————————————————-
“Rather than proposing unpopular spending cuts, Republicans would push through popular tax cuts, with the deliberate intention of worsening the government’s fiscal position. Spending cuts could then be sold as a necessity rather than a choice, the only way to eliminate an unsustainable budget deficit.
And the deficit came. True, more than half of this year’s budget deficit is the result of the Great Recession, which has both depressed revenues and required a temporary surge in spending to contain the damage. But even when the crisis is over, the budget will remain deeply in the red, largely as a result of Bush-era tax cuts (and Bush-era unfunded wars). And the combination of an aging population and rising medical costs will, unless something is done, lead to explosive debt growth after 2020.
So the beast is starving, as planned. . . .
You read it here first.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/opinion/22krugman.html?scp=1&sq=Paul%20Krugman,%20The%20Bankruptcy%20Boys,%202/22/10&st=Search
————————————————————————————————-
That column took courage for Krugman to write, but what he wrote needed very much to be stated outright. And, he was correct to assert that readers did read it there first.
Have a good day all. Gone for the day.
DannyX
November 20th, 2012
10:13 am
“It is liberal mantra that the Bush tax cuts “on the rich” (actually he cut rates for all taxpayers) squandered the Clinton “surpluses” (fictional by the way) and that the associated deficits caused the recession”
Right because we all know Bush led us to economic utopia! His socialist unfunded Medicare Part D! His creation of the unfunded big government Dept of Homeland Security. The wonderful unfunded Iraq war! The out of control earmark spending. The big government No Child Left Behind. All topped off with huge tax cuts. Those tax cuts will one day lead us to prosperity.
Republicans are economic geniuses! A bridge to nowhere.
Brosephus™
November 20th, 2012
10:14 am
Stevie Ray: Taking my comments out of context and painting me in some box is weak
How did I take your comments out of context? You claimed that it’s politically incorrect to bring up the 47% on this blog, right? I merely pointed out that it’s not politically incorrect as much as it is factually incorrect in the manner that most people bring it up. The manner in which you framed it was not factually correct.
If you notice, most responses to the 47% talking point are merely to point out the inaccuracy of the statement itself.
Jay
November 20th, 2012
10:14 am
“And it is duly noted that you chose not to deny that you bashed Bush repeatedly for runnign deficits that pale in comparison to Obama’s.
It is also duly noted that you have no leg to stand upon. Of course I bashed Bush’s deficits. I also bashed his handling of Hurricane Katrina.
But I did not claim that his mishandling of Katrina caused the recession, and I likewise did not claim that the Bush deficits caused the recession. That would be a really foolish claim to make.
Which is why YOU made it.