Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
TP economic priorities
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
As far as I could tell from the debt ceiling fight - I mean, slaughter - here are the TP economic priorities, in order:
1) no "new" taxes, including the expiration of temporary tax breaks; 2) balanced budget; 3) no default. In other words, pretty much none of them would support a plan with any tax increase under any circumstances, even if the plan included significant cuts or even a balanced budget. Obviously, none would support anything without significant cuts. I'll generously say that if the deal included a balanced budget the TPers would have consented, though I suspect that in fact most of them wanted the default. Do I have that wrong, TPers? I'm only asking because it would be easier for everyone if you would make your rhetoric fit your priorities better, for example by complaining about taxes. It's confusing when TP politicians say that all they care about is the deficit, but then never mention taxes. BTW, an advantage is that if TPers were allowed to raise taxes, you might get some Democratic TPers. |
Anonymous
| TP economic philosophy...Whatever f'd up Europes' balance sheet .....do the opposite. |
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
Germany has one of the world's strongest economies. They have universal healthcare, strong unions and high taxes (relative to the US). There balance sheet is is good condition. Edit: France has a Triple A rating. That must really burn. |
Anonymous
|
How about "It's the spending stupid" to pharaphrase...
|
Anonymous
since they were nazi's, they have no defense dept and can't defend themselves. I don't understand why all liberals don't move there. The whole EU is going down and everybody knows it. |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
I think that would probably be a fair phrase for you. So why do your leaders keep saying that your issue is deficits, when it's really spending? |
Anonymous
France also has universal healthcare, and universal preschool, and functionally free universities (though the university system is not nearly as flexible as the US system) and higher taxes (but what we don't pay here in taxes we end up paying out-of pocket anyway). Social mobility is also higher everywhere in the developed world than it is here at this point. Oops. |
Anonymous
So we have done the opposite, which is to spend as much as the entire rest of the world (no exaggeration). Because defending 300 million of us costs the same as defending the entire rest of the planet. |
Anonymous
| We are still building weapons to fight the USSR. You know they may be just faking it over there... |
Anonymous
Right, and very very strong automatic social spending that acts as a massive Keynesian stimulus on autopilot during times of recession. What f'ed up Europe's balance sheet was the unification of currency. And generally speaking, "europe" is not in trouble. Countries like Greece and Ireland--which have massive debt in non-sovereign currencies--are. If you want a very accurate litmus-test of whether someone knows nothing, listen for the inevitable predication that--barring heavy-handed austerity measures--the US will "end up like Greece." Just utterly clueless. |
Anonymous
You got "stupid" right. Everything else wrong. It's the growth. Spending is a drop in the bucket. The problem is lack of growth. Return to growth and the deficits go away. "Cutting spending" will do nothing. Well, short of eliminating Medicare--which won't happen. It's literally the equivalent of disbanding the military. It may be something out of the wet dreams of the most fringe-y of the fringe nutjobs, but it ain't going to happen. |
Anonymous
My guess is that if this were more than an article of faith, you'd have an argument. Or at least some sort of mechanism to describe the process. But instead, my guess is you find them to be immoral socialists who won't eat Freedom Fries, therefore they will be "going down". |
Anonymous
Don't forget the crippling health care costs--driven by our inefficient, decentralized system--which is borne largely by private industry. At the cost of our competitiveness. What's the solution? Eliminate the ability to sue for malpractice (which would save nothing) and further decentralize the system to put further pressure upwards on costs. Woo-hoo! If I spoke fluent French and could get a work visa, I'd move to France in a heartbeat. Unfortunately it's not an option. |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
Yeah - they're too smart to let us primitives in. If one could choose in what country to be born, though, you'd be a fool not to pick one of a handful of European countries. I'm not saying that the U.S. would be near the bottom - it's probably top 10 - but it would be a terrible first choice. I wish we could all go, so the lower class Reps - those manipulated by their rich thought leaders - could see how screwed they are without us. That map of the blue states joining Canada that circulated in 2004 gave me such nice fantasies, but also highlighted how most of the red states, relatively speaking, are poor, backwater shitholes. |
TheManWithAUsername
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
Not surprising that no TPer has come on to give clear economic priorities. They're moving targets because they're identity is primarily in opposition to other things.
Also, they're simply the most conservative Republicans, rebranded. If they were a libertarian party or a balanced budget party, I'd respect them more, and there would be opportunities for common ground. It's like this: TPer: No deficits. Reasonable person: OK - let's cut spending AND raise taxes. TPer: No new taxes! RP: OK - how about just eliminating some stupid tax breaks. TPer: No! The rich are job creators! RP: OK - let's start with ending the wars and making some major military cuts... TPer: No! The military kicks ass! I don't see how they're anything but Bush 2.0. Everything's the same except for slashing spending, which was the obvious next step. |