Preparing for a conversation about pain and fairness
Outgoing French President Nicolas Sarkozy, right, and President-elect Francois Hollande observe a minute of silence at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier during last week’s commemorations at the Arc de Triomphe in Paris. AP/Francois Mori
Last week provided two important political tutorials, spaced more than 4,000 miles apart. Neither of them has anything to do with gay marriage.
Lesson No. 1: The defeat of U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana on Tuesday is proof that the tea party still exists and remains a potent force in determining who will carry the Republican message and what that message will be. U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., already expects that a GOP primary challenge will be part of his 2014 bid for re-election.
Lesson No. 2: Last weekend’s defeat of President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, punished for his work on the conservative side of the European fiscal crisis, is evidence that Republicans and their tea party allies in the U.S. will have to do a much better job of selling the pain that would come with their plans to vastly shrink the size of the federal government.
The link between the two lessons is linguistic. For three years, by its very name, the tea party movement has worn a protective cloak of red, white and blue. With the word “austerity,” Europe has shown that a new identity can be imposed on tea partyers as a group that pushes too recklessly for cuts that are too deep, threatening fragile economic growth in the process.
You can assume that Democrats are taking notes.
Republicans, of course, publicly scoff at any suggestion that the Continent offers anything other than snails and a bad example. But they also acknowledge that, when it comes to shrinking government, the devil isn’t just in the details, but the conversations that surround the details.
In France, conservatives lost control of a conversation about pain and fairness.
“Most voters get the fact that you can’t continue to spend money you don’t have indefinitely without getting into trouble,” Republican pollster Whit Ayres said. “So they understand the big picture. What most voters want is not to be singled out in the effort to become more fiscally responsible.”
“It takes some serious national leadership from a president to persuade people of the necessity of trying to get your fiscal house in order in a fair way,” Ayres said. “That said, nobody likes doing with less. It’s not a popular thing to do.”
President Barack Obama, the pollster says, hasn’t just neglected the conversation, but has actively avoided any discussion of pain — except as it applies to those who should pay more taxes. Mitt Romney, the GOP’s presumptive nominee, has made a good start but will have to do more, Ayres said.
It will be a tough conversation. “It’s difficult to make good economic policy by majority vote,” he said. “I doubt that we would ever get a majority in this country that would vote to raise the debt limit rather than default on our bonds.”
And there are places Romney won’t be allowed to go. He can’t tell voters that federal programs — domestic programs, in particular — must be cut to save money. The argument that works is that those programs must be cut in order to preserve their core purposes, Ayres said.
“You will never, ever stand the slightest chance of winning an argument that the federal government was wrong to create Social Security or Medicare. That’s the ultimate nonstarter,” said Ayres, who is now Washington-based but got his start in Roswell.
When it comes to a conversation about federal spending, Romney’s greatest threat may come from House Republicans, whose safe districts put them under no obligation to appeal to the political center — as a GOP presidential nominee must.
“That is a real debate in the Republican conference,” said U.S. Rep. Rob Woodall, R-Lawrenceville, one of the more thoughtful members of the freshman class of 2010. “Do you let America vote against a president who has clearly failed as a CEO? Or do you let America vote in favor of a Republican vision?”
Woodall would push the issue. “We have to roll out our best Medicare reform alternatives,” he said. “We have to roll out our best transportation reform alternatives.”
What unites Romney and House Republicans is the belief that cuts to federal spending are directly linked to economic growth. So how do you sell the pain? You don’t, Woodall said. You sell the day after the pain.
“What we can sell is the optimism about tomorrow. That’s what we know,” Woodall said. “I believe crisis is something we respond to well. Long-term pessimism is not something we respond to well.”
And where will this discussion about pain, and the day after pain, occur?
Chambliss, the Georgia senator, says one of the three presidential debates on the fall calendar between Obama and Romney should be dedicated to a discussion focused on the massive tax increases and spending cuts scheduled to go into effect automatically on Dec. 31 as a result of the failure of last year’s debt commission to reach an agreement.
Ayres, the pollster, doesn’t think that’s a bad idea, if we can get past the routine tap dancing. “Anything you do to craft something more than a sound bite here or there would be good for the country,” he said.
- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.
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
89 comments Add your comment
honested
May 12th, 2012
11:16 am
Several paragraphs quoting people who have only one thing in common, they haven’t a clue and will follow their misguided ideology over the cliff.
Whit ayres gets paid to ask questions to arrive at the answers he was paid to receive.
The politicians who were elected on a plan of blind refusal to accept long proven economic policies will never accept the total failure of their policies as followed from 2001-2008.
The French and Greeks need look no farther than England, where a full implementation of plans as parroted by the teaklanners have provided the first British double-dip recession in 40 years.
The fact are simple (to the tune of ‘Don’t Worry, Be Happy)
Stop Whining!
Raise Taxes!
Simon Jester
May 12th, 2012
11:21 am
And as the Euros continue to push away cuts and hold their hands out for more freebies, they speed their spiral into collapse. You can’t keep taking from some to buy the votes of other indefinitely. It will fail.
Shine
May 12th, 2012
11:43 am
President Barack Obama, the pollster says, hasn’t just neglected the conversation, but has actively avoided any discussion of pain — except as it applies to those who should pay more taxes. Mitt Romney, the GOP’s presumptive nominee, has made a good start but will have to do more, Ayres said.
Another lie by another kook. Obama proposed cuts of somewhere between 10-1 and 4-1 as long as revenue increases were included. THE GOP KOOKS SAID NO!
Boot some kooks! Vote democrat!
Centrist
May 12th, 2012
11:47 am
Voters react to recent circumstances rather than taking steps to ensure future prosperity. The similarity between the U.S. and France is that both have undergone recessions and voters are not happy. While Obama, unlike Sarkozy, may survive his re-election by buying votes via increased spending, debt, deficits, and size of government – he will lose much of his mandate in a closer election as an incumbent along with the Senate. The repercussions from the spending spree will be felt for a generation.
honested
May 12th, 2012
11:53 am
centrist,
The spending spree on the Iraqi War of Choice and the Afghan Fiasco (both entirely unfunded) or the ’spending spree’ to help generate sufficient economic activity to recover from those to pointless disasters and the concurrent financial sector irresponsibility that wrecked the domestic economy.
Enlighten me.
DannyX
May 12th, 2012
12:11 pm
“The repercussions from the spending spree will be felt for a generation.”
Victimist at 11:47 is right. We are still only 3 years removed from the Bush disaster, we are making progress but still have a ways to go.
Bush and his Republican buddies started 2 wars that they never funded. They started the socialist Medicare Part D, never funded. They created the Dept of Homeland Security, unfunded. They feasted lavishly on unfunded earmarks.
The cherry on this $&!# sandwich? Massive tax cuts.
David Granger
May 12th, 2012
12:21 pm
It’s certainly true that France had two possible courses, Mr. Galloway. But both courses do not have similar long-term outcomes. France could continue its austerity program, cut spending to the absolutely HAVE to haves, and eliminate the NICE to have things. And eventually get back on a solid financial footing, and not be running deficits forever. Or it could end the austerity measures…as it has chosen to do by electing Hollande…and continue spending money that it does NOT have. Continue to provide all the NICE to have things (six week paid vacations, full pay for all union members whether they work or not, lots of government hiring without need for additional personnel, etc.)
And eventually the day will arrive when the bills for all of that come due, and the European Union is tired of propping up a failed economic system…and France can’t get anymore credit. Those days are in the future, so they’re not readily visible to most French citizens. But we’ll see…
Centrist
May 12th, 2012
12:33 pm
David Granger posted “And eventually the day will arrive when the bills for all of that come due…and France can’t get anymore credit. Those days are in the future, so they’re not readily visible to most French citizens.”
We and a lot of Europe haven’t, yet, learned the lesson from Greece. Spain, Portugal, and Italy (all known as the P.I.G.S. with very shaky economies) may be next joined by France.
And we are not too far behind. As Europe pulls the world down, MAYBE it will not be too late to take note and action to blunt our following them toward the drain.
honested
May 12th, 2012
12:43 pm
And we are not too far behind…..
Crap!
We can return to sensible taxation next week and move back to the REAL prosperity we enjoyed in the late ’90s.
Or we can continue the lie that we are “taxed enough already” but continue to blindly fund the largest military industrial complex in the history of the universe.
In November, Americans have their best chance ever to vote in their own best interest or vote for a faux ‘conserrrrrrrvative’ failed ideology.
Farsider
May 12th, 2012
1:15 pm
The Birther Party is committed to ideology. Not solving any problems. Fairness? They don’t understand the premise.
td
May 12th, 2012
1:16 pm
DannyX
May 12th, 2012
12:11 pm
And everything you said equaled $1 trillion to the national debt. They should have been on the books. Now Obama has spent an additional $5 trillion in 3 1/2 years. What has it got us?
td
May 12th, 2012
1:18 pm
honested
May 12th, 2012
12:43 pm
And we are not too far behind…..
Crap!
We can return to sensible taxation next week
Yes we can take every penny the top 1% made last year and still not have a balanced budget and still not even address the first penny of debt.
Jackie
May 12th, 2012
1:30 pm
When governments are driven by some fuzzy notions of equality, the society rips itself apart with envy, greed and anger. Liberty and freedom are much better, more American ideals
Buckhead Boy
May 12th, 2012
2:19 pm
Centrist, there is no lesson for the US to learn from Greece or the other Euro zone countries that you proffer. The principal reason is that they don’t control their currency, although there are many other lesser dissimilarities. The best European comparisons are offered by the economies of Great Britain and Poland. Austerity policies in Great Britain have driven its economy back into recession; while Poland never really experienced the Great Recession, principally because of government regulation of the banking system. Can the Euro zone economies impact ours? Certainly. But, I submit that the “risky business” of the big banks is a far greater threat. The former we can do little about. The latter, we should.
Drew
May 12th, 2012
2:42 pm
Obama has been irresponsible because he’s talked about tax increases and spending cuts that target the rich, whereas Romney has been responsible because he’s talked about tax increases and spending cuts that target … Everyone but the rich? Yeah, right.
Republicans haven’t shown an interest in responsible budgeting for decades and Romney is no different. It’s a party dedicated to taking out loans and using the money to cut taxes for themselves and their rich friends.
DannyX
May 12th, 2012
2:47 pm
Speaking of the the Great Bush Recession…
Congrats JP Morgan on your recent 2 billion dollar loss.
Remember folks, Countrywide is on your side.
td
May 12th, 2012
2:52 pm
DannyX
May 12th, 2012
2:47 pm
The best homer line of the day. Blaming the Bush Presidency on what JP Morgan did 3 1/2 years into the Obama administration after the Dems totally got what they wanted in reform because the Republicans had no say so. LMFAO
honested
May 12th, 2012
2:59 pm
totally demented
Yes we can take every penny from the 1%.
More crap!
That stupid talking point is assuming 1 YEAR of revenue and is not relevant to the discussion.
However, a top marginal rate of AT LEAST 41% (remember the ray-gun years?) kept in place for the next decade would make a tremendous difference in paying off the irresponsible lack of taxation for the PREVIOUS decade.
Massive, irresponsible tax cuts CAUSED the problem. If we can learn from our terrible mistakes, it is time to correct them.
honested
May 12th, 2012
3:00 pm
DannyX,
The bush recession was 2002-2003, the rest was/is the ‘bush depression’.
Going Right
May 12th, 2012
3:01 pm
Europe will be looking to Germany to assist it in getting back to square one of the nanny state status. French airheads, meanwhile, are salivating about getting their freebies back and, what the hell..if they can’t pay for them, then it’s a trip to Bonn to play lap dog for the Germans. Barack Hussein bin Obama is following this story closely – just in case there’s something there that he needs to write down for his re-election.
bin Obama is still blaming George Bush for everything but diseased gums. Truth be known (and one need only check with the World Almanac for quick proof), the Dimbulbocrats actually controlled ALL of congress from 2007 through 2011 in both houses. Only in 2012 did the Republicans take control on 1/2 of Congress.
The Dimbulbocrats apparently sat on their A$$ES and began writing the bin Obama Excuses Manual during that time. 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011…4-1/2 years of a Do-Nothing Congress. And it’s the Republicans’ fault, of course.
Galloway and his mindless minions can’t wait to get to the ballot box to give the “Anointed One” another term. After all, bin Obama isn’t through wrecking our economy. As soon as the Afghan war is finished (assuming he is still in office) just think what a bag full of entitlement goodies he can hand out! Wow! I ask you, Dimbulbocrats: Don’t it make you just wet your pants…sorta like the hosts of the national media shows (especially Chris Matthews! Isn’t he just a darling)?.
honested
May 12th, 2012
3:02 pm
going wrong,
I am glad to see that reality makes no difference to your tight grasp of opinion and ideology.
td
May 12th, 2012
3:05 pm
honested
May 12th, 2012
2:59 pm
So you are saying a 6% increase from the top 1% )that makes only 18% of all money every year) over the next 10 years will balance our budget? Prove it. As my math teacher use to say you are going to have to show your work before I believe your answer.
Going Right
May 12th, 2012
3:07 pm
Ah, yes, the “reality”…only in the mind (if one has one, dishonest) of the beholder. And you know what is said about opinions. Everyone n this blog has an opinion and is of an ideology…even you.
By the way, at last contact you were looking for a date for your GS prom. did you find one?
DannyX
May 12th, 2012
3:12 pm
“Blaming the Bush Presidency on what JP Morgan did 3 1/2 years into the Obama administration after the Dems totally got what they wanted in reform because the Republicans had no say so. LMFAO”
Actually I didn’t blame Bush for the JP Morgan fiasco. We haven’t learned a thing. Here we go again. That sickening self-regulation regurgitation championed by JP Morgan and the Republicans could very well lead to another Bush-like disaster. Reminded me of the good ol’ days of the Bush presidency.
And as Drew mentioned at 2:42, Romney is pushing for more Bush like tax cuts, another ingredient in the Republican recipe for disaster.
As for Bush, I certainly will not be silenced by Republicans embarrassed by him and want to pretend his actions are too far in the past to ignore. You can try to erase him with a Romney Etch-a-Sketch, Romney just keeps etching in the same old story.
Shake it up.
DannyX
May 12th, 2012
3:15 pm
“The bush recession was 2002-2003, the rest was/is the ‘bush depression’.”
I stand corrected honested.
You see td, I can admit when I make a mistake.
Going Right
May 12th, 2012
3:23 pm
Commander, Seal Team 6: “Hello, Sir, glad you could make it!”
bin Obama: Uh, yes, well, I understand I am to address the Seals while I’m here.”
CST6: “Yes, Sir, we’re all here, locked and loaded…ready to go!”
bin Obama walks to the water’s edge, stands there for several minutes looking out over the water and along the shoreline. Finally, after quite some time, the Commander comes over and says, “Pardon me, Sir, are you going to address the Seal Team?”
bin Obama: “Uh, well, yes, I suppose so. Where are they? I thought several at least would be up on the beach by now, but I suppose they being aquatic animals, are still swimming around out there somewhere.”
The Commander, trying not to embarrass bin Obama, says, “Sir, with all due respect, I assume you DO KNOW that the Seals we have assembled over there (pointing to 28-30 teams members) are humans and not animals.”
honested
May 12th, 2012
3:29 pm
terminal distortion
Let me clarify, return to ALL of the taxation as produced prosperity in the Clinton years, with an increase in the top marginal rate to at least 42% (more if necessary). ENFORCE collection with adequate funding to the IRS.
Of course that includes little details like reinstating Inheritance Taxes, increasing tariffs, redacting deductions of expenses included since 1994, you know moving back to a civilized tax system.
honested
May 12th, 2012
3:30 pm
going wrong,
Prom?
How old are you little feller?
Those gladiator movies and video games have damaged your brain.
Centrist
May 12th, 2012
3:56 pm
@ td – Not only bad math by partisan leftists concerning spending far outstripping potential revenue, they CONTINUE to do static tax analysis as if they get a dollar back for every dollar they raise taxes. Every person who understands economics whatsoever knows that people react to tax increases by earning less, taking more time off, exchanging taxable compensation for better benefits/ stock paid at a lower capital gains rate, and cutting back on expenses which negatively affects the economy and tax receipts. Furthermore, most jobs come from small businesses which layoff people when their taxes increase – loss of more tax revenue and increases unemployment/ welfare expenses.
It’s possible raising taxes will net more revenue than expense, but nothing close to dollar for dollar as so many Democrats try to claim. It is also possible it will have a negative net as many Republicans claim as the outcome from the many variables can’t be accurately predicted.
Auntie Christ
May 12th, 2012
4:04 pm
Oh look, going reich is exercising his little mind for what passes for creative writing among the reich wing. Here you go Herr reich, some fodder for your little fairy tale that mommy can read to you when you get into your jammies tonight:
“He can run, but he can’t hide.” “we’ll get him, dead or alive.” Remember that little brave cowboy who made those statements, pretending he was in a john wayne movie. Sorry to say, tho the little cowboy never got the bad guy and the fairy tale has him riding off into the sunset on his widdle rocking horse. The fairy tale has a happy ending tho, a man with real determination sent the seal team in and they killed the bad guy, much to the chagrin of those who woved the widdle cowboy and his rocking horse.
Michael #1
May 12th, 2012
4:07 pm
Farsider 1:15, agree with you 100%
Auntie Christ
May 12th, 2012
4:14 pm
Our economic geniuses posting here have it all figured out that if we go back to the tax rates in effect during Clinton’s days, we’ll go into a depression like we did with bush’s tax rates. Go figure.
They outline all the dire, extreme behaviors that the middle class will exercise when the top 5% taxes are raised. Somehow we will all be heartsick and cut back on spending, our hours worked, and our love of America. Again, go figure.
What will continue for sure if we keep the tax rates the same for the uber rich, or cut them, is more money will go into Cayman Island banks, more krugerands will be bought, and no jobs will be created as a result.
honested
May 12th, 2012
4:24 pm
centrist (is that the same as the squishy middle?)
Well, so far at least, the bogus assumptions about ‘behavior changing with taxation’ has failed, as has the ‘massive flow of unleashed capital’ predicted by the trickle down tax cuts.
For the record, I have NEVER laid off an employee much less made a hiring or purchasing decision based on ‘tax consequences’. I hire the people I NEED to get the job done and buy stuff in the same fashion. Taxes are an inconsequential part of the calculation. It hasn’t hurt the bottom line or impaired productivity.
So I guess your synopsis fails in my case, but I doubt facts will modify your interpretation.
Going Right
May 12th, 2012
4:45 pm
(Dis)honested: How old am I? Clue: I still have a TRS-80 as my computer but have added 34 K more memory. Takes a while to “boot up” but age have endowed me with grace and patience.
ANTI-Christ: Having had the opportunity tow work in Wurtzburg for about three years I never heard the term “Reich” (capitalized, by the way) used in the manner you have attempted to use it, but, considering your mental condition, I will pass on a rejoinder. Oh, and I thought the Grade Schoolers still referred to the dances as proms, but I will stand corrected on that one.
As for GWB being a “cowboy” I’ll agree in so far as he doesn’t have to have a teleprompter to distinguish a cow’s head from it’s A$$.
And, finally, ANTI, are you serious about joining the Society of Bed-Wetting Socialist Democrats” this year? Best hurry…the line’s are miles long!
Centrist
May 12th, 2012
4:45 pm
I usually don’t read much less respond to partisan posts but accidentally read one above. Here are some missing facts:
President Clinton had the benefit from less defense spending after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and our economy was not stressed by the Twin Tower terrorist attack. The recession actually hit many years after the Bush tax cuts.
The top 5% of taxpayers earn over $160K, and can’t hardly be classified as the “uber rich”. They currently pay taxes on the most progressive income tax scale in the industrialized world, and exemptions and deductions phase out making their effective taxes even higher – they pay 59% of overall income taxes. They include dual income families, specialized schooled professionals, and successful small business owners. Many will certainly react to a tax increase by a dropping the second income, working less, taking more time off, exchanging taxable compensation for better benefits/ stock paid at a lower capital gains rate, and/or cutting back on expenses which negatively affects the economy and tax receipts. The small businesses will do some of the above and layoff workers. Those who ignore/ don’t care how it will affect the economy because of their warped “fairness” or jealousy point of view are myopic.
DannyX
May 12th, 2012
4:56 pm
“I usually don’t read much less respond to partisan posts but accidentally read one above”
Accidentally read one, good on Victimist!
Auntie Christ
May 12th, 2012
5:14 pm
going reich: I still have a TRS-80 as my computer but have added 34 K more memory.
How does it feel to have less thinking ability than a 30 year old computer. There are probably a lot of disadvantages, to your ignorance, but from what I have observed of the reich wing, so many of you find it to be an advantage. Life must be very easy when you are free of abstract thought and critical thinking. Just get your opinions and ‘facts’ from pox news and glenn beck, and go blissfully through your day.
Auntie Christ
May 12th, 2012
5:26 pm
I wish I could dispute what you say centrist, but I know nothing of the parallel universe you inhabit. I’m sure in your world where women love invasive medical procedures, tax cuts increase revenue, and saddam had wmd’s, everything is bliss. Here in my universe, most of what you’ve said is unadulterated bull sh!t.
20/20
May 12th, 2012
5:30 pm
Speaking of the World Almanac (published by the New York Slimes, the Federal Budget was balanced for the FYE 1998 – its first since 1969. Who was President? None other than that bastion of integrity and morals: William Jefferson Clinton!. How, pray tell was that accomplished? It seems almost impossible given that both houses of Congress were controlled by REPUBLICANS!
That damn, lyin’ NYS…you can’t believe a word they say. What they wanted to say, of course, is that this was done under a triumvirate of a Democratic President, a Democratically-controlled Senate and, of course, a Democratically-controlled House of Representatives. That, apparently, is what most of you on this blog want. With that – if it happens in November – look for a huge jump in taxation. Problem is, it (more taxes) will hurt the ones who can least afford it. The nasty, Republican wealth-mongers (no Democrats in this crowd, of course!) will be able to weather the storm and keep the remaining money they have worked for in a vault and not invest it. Tsk, Tsk.
Weetamoe
May 12th, 2012
5:35 pm
Lugar’s overwhelming loss could not possibly be attributed to TEA party votes alone. But in a closed democrat primary in West Virginia a jailed felon running against Obama got almost 50% of the votes. All those cute little reich comments (guess they do not refer to Robert the Small who resembles a failed Dr Mengele experiment) ignore the fact that you can’t spell brownshirts without OWS.
Going Right
May 12th, 2012
5:42 pm
“Life must be very easy when you are free of abstract thought and critical thinking. Just get your opinions and ‘facts’ from pox news and glenn beck, and go blissfully through your day.”
My, my all this wisdom coming from the world’s first (and still breathing) genetically-altered protoplasm! I now understand why you are the anti-Christ.
I really get a charge out of you idiots that constantly berate “pox” news! You don’t have enough brain power or native intelligence to find it on the TV let alone watch it. I can see why you don’t like it. They actually try to be honest about politics and their hosts (even O’Reilly) don’t “get off” when mentioning bin Obama’s name.
Glenn Beck? Man you are really digging now. Didn’t watch his show when he was on FOX and don’t know where he is now and care less.
By the way, I’m glad you’re thrilled about my “creative writing.” I had a thirty-minute course on it while I was using my 1929 Royal trying to get out a term paper. The mention of the TRS-80 was apparently read by a friend of mine and he has offered to get me an upgrade to a PC with Windows 95. I so thrilled! I may even wet MY pants!
td
May 12th, 2012
6:03 pm
honested
May 12th, 2012
3:29 pm
You mean like raising the 10% tax rate back to 15% for people making under $40,000 per year, raising tax rates back to 25% for people making between $50,000 and $80,000 per year. Doing away with the child care tax credit for the working poor. Are these the taxes you want to raise? Now do you also want to bring back spending levels to the Clinton years? Cut Food stamps by 50%, reduce childcare subsidies by about 40% and cut Medicaid spending in half?
Cut all of the spending first then I will consider raising taxes again to reduce the debt. Republicans have been fooled two times on promises from the left to cut spending in the out years if they would raise taxes first and both times the Dems refused to follow thru on the deal. Not again my friend.
honested
May 12th, 2012
6:04 pm
centrist (of a dark and scary place where you represent the ‘center’)
What a nice, selective culling of taxation and remuneration.
Raise ALL taxes back to the levels they were when we last experienced prosperity (remember that).
Yes, the shrub depression didn’t kick in until a couple of years after the tax cuts (when the surplus had been depleted).
Yes, President Clinton did have the flaming good sense not to start two wars (one with absolutely no justification) and make no plans to finance them while having no decency to ask for sacrifices from the American people. Which President did that?
And which President inherited the inevitable end result of the entire steaming mess?
Now, if we are able to learn from FACTUAL INFORMATION (rather than keep waiting for crackpot ideology to pan out) we will GO BACK TO WHAT WORKED as the French will do.
As for those ‘job creators’ who elect to work less because (horrors) they may actually have to pay a little to finance the system that allows them go build wealth, no problem.
There are more of us who will gladly work harder and support a system that will allow us to succeed rather than just keep funding an ever hungry military beast while starving our elderly, children and un-able.
honested
May 12th, 2012
6:06 pm
twice deluded
I support raising ALL taxes to the levels present from 1993-2001.
I support cutting ALL military spending to levels of 1996.
I think we can absorb the necessary social spending that has occurred since then as a societal evolutionary process.
Nice try, but as always, fail.
td
May 12th, 2012
6:11 pm
honested
May 12th, 2012
4:24 pm
“For the record, I have NEVER laid off an employee much less made a hiring or purchasing decision based on ‘tax consequences’. I hire the people I NEED to get the job done and buy stuff in the same fashion. Taxes are an inconsequential part of the calculation. It hasn’t hurt the bottom line or impaired productivity.”
Then you are either not a good business man or you factor these costs other ways. One must factor the cost of labor (Wages, benefits and tax consequences) into the price of the good or service performed to see if they are going to be making or losing money.
td
May 12th, 2012
6:17 pm
honested
May 12th, 2012
6:04 pm
You conveniently forgot to mention that a large part of the prosperity (during the Clinton years) was due to the dot com bubble that burst right before the time Bush took office (what you call the Bush recession). You also forgot to mention the double dip that happened right after 9/11 (caused in a large part due to the massive cuts in human intelligence capability during the Clinton Administration). Yea, those two factors did not matter in the calculation.
td
May 12th, 2012
6:18 pm
honested
May 12th, 2012
6:06 pm
Like I said you libs want to raise taxes and not cut spending. My Tea Party friends say “h3ll no not ever again”.
Centrist
May 12th, 2012
6:20 pm
This discussion is mostly moot. A November/December lame duck Congress is not going to allow the Bush tax to be rescinded or sequestration to happen next January. The next Congress seated in January is going to be more conservative than the present one, and is not going to pass anything close to what Obama proposes – and Senate Democrats can filibuster a Republican plan if Romney is elected. Either a compromise will be struck along the lines of last year’s failed “Grand Bargain” which liberal Senate Democrats made Obama renege, or we will have continuing resolutions and kick the can down the road until the next crisis.
Centrist
May 12th, 2012
6:37 pm
The good news about next year’s government is that we will NOT have a one party filibuster proof disaster like we had when the partisan Obamacare mess was passed. I’d fear a 60 seat Republican Senate as much as a Democrat one.
Savannah Moderate
May 12th, 2012
7:16 pm
Td, as Citizens for Tax Justice has estimated, the Bush tax cuts have already cost the country over $1 trillion and counting, and the non-partisan Tax Policy Center has validated that estimate: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/calculating-the-cost-of-the-bush-tax-cuts/2011/10/14/gIQADB7dkL_blog.html. I agree with you that we absolutely must cut spending on social programs like Medicare and Social Security if we want to even make a dent in the national debt, but if we got rid of the Bush tax cuts, then, contrary to what you said earlier, we will definitely at least “address the first penny of debt”. This mixed plan of spending cuts and tax increases on millionaires and billionaires is exactly what Obama is proposing. He has already pledged to cut at least $1 trillion in programs like Medicare and Social Security.
You also said, “Republicans have been fooled two times on promises from the left to cut spending in the out years if they would raise taxes first and both times the Dems refused to follow thru on the deal.” That is not true. Contrary to popular belief, a lot of Republicans in Congress are just as scared as Democrats are to cut funding to social programs like Medicare and Social Security. In his new book Republican Senator Tom Coburn willingly admits that Republicans have also been complicit in foiling plans to cut spending to social programs when taxes were also raised. See, for example, his interview with Jon Stewart on The Daily Show: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-may-2-2012/exclusive—tom-coburn-extended-interview-pt–1.
Both of our parties in government have their own tragic flaws. The Democrats’ is their commitment to entitlement programs and the Republicans’ is their commitment to the maintenance of tax cuts. But at least the Democrats have made some overtures to curb their flaw, while the Republicans refuse to come to any kind of compromise. It’s time for the Republicans to stop acting like stubborn children and to offer the Democrats the same kinds of concessions that the Democrats have offered them.