QVV - you have made some very good points. Let me try to explain my point of view a bit more in response to your points.
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
I never offered Boehner or the GOP absolution for their spending sins pre-Obama. But NOW, when we are in the crucible, who is doing what to get us out?
I'd argue personally that both sides have as a very high priority looking good for their supporters and not appearing to "cave" to the other side. I think that the reasons for this are at least as much because of politics and perception as they are because of principle. But I also think that, in my view, the committment that no revenue of any sort can be obtained through modification of the tax code, even if tax rates are not raised and even if individuals are not directly affected, seems unreasonable given the current situation. We spend so much more than we take in that we have to do something that is going to be radical and will require some changes on both sides of the equation. Also, because of the numbers of people on each side of the political spectrum in Washington, it's just not possible to have a solution that is Republican-only or Democrat-only. It just can't be done. In my mind, we either do something or we do nothing. And if we do something, in order to actually get it done, we need to have some give and take in order to have something that is nonperfect but better than nothing.
Quote:
It is clear to me that the greatest obstacle(s) to getting us out of this mess AT THIS POINT IN TIME are the Democrats & Obama. And I would like to know what you fault the current class of Republicans for AT THIS POINT IN TIME because the Dems are the one who spent us up to this precipice & are now pointing their fingers at the Reps while still refusing to actually do anything (ok, I have to acknowledge that Reid is finally going thru the motions), while the Reps are the ones working to figure out where to cut spending.
Because our national debt is cumulative and did not just pile up over the past two years (although President Obama has raised the debt at a far faster rate than his predeecessor did), I can't just assign the blame to who has done what at this point in time. I think that the blame has to be shared as there were a lot of people in both parties and on both sides of the current debate who are responsible for borrowing that $14.2 trillion.
And if we were to just talk about current times, I still would say that the blame should be shared. President Obama deserves blame for not putting forth a specific plan, for making partisan political speeches that have diminished an already faint desire for any type of cooperation, and for continuing to talk about tax hikes. The GOP deserves blame for repeatedly walking away from negotiations, for taking a hard-line approach that essentially says that they will never support any solution that increases tax revenue in any way under any circumstances and, in the case of several politicians, including at least one GOP Presidential Candidate, arguing publicly that it wouldn't be the end of the world to default on our obligations. The latter point has had the additional negative result of convincing a number of voters that it's not important to resolve this and may have helped prevent a deal from getting done. From a poll I saw yesterday, about 68% of the American people blamed the GOP for a big part of this mess because of perceived intransigence. However, I think that both parties are to blame in the current timeline as well as historically.
The Democrats have an unrealistic view of spending money. They tend to think that the government has the obligation to take care of every problem, wipe away every tear, take care of every person who can't or won't take care of themselves in perpetuity. They have not been good stewarts of the economy by any measure. But the Republicans, while speaking to the issue of financial stewartship, have spent almost as much as the Democrats and have not seemed to take the nation's mounting debt very seriously until it got to this breaking point that we are in now. I blame them both.
Quote:
I am stumped as to how a Huckabee supporter can suggest that the GE's of this world should do their share as he has pointed out so many times that businesses don't pay taxes; they roll all costs of business into their prices and we will pay for the tax increases imposed on the GE's of this world with higher prices. It also works against job creation.
I hear you and I am generally against trying to make corporations and wealthy people the whipping boys for all of society. I think that our corporate tax rates are in general higher than they should be and that we have a lot of rules and fees that stiffle economic development and which should be scrapped. However, just last week, I heard of an earnings report for a major corporation that paid less than a three percent rate in U.S. corporate taxes - far less than any of us have to pay. Far less, in fact, than small businesses, which also are responsible for creating jobs. I know corporations pass their expenses on to consumers. However, if a company had to pay a ten percent rate or even an eight percent rate instead of a three perecent rate or a zero percent rate, would that really have that much of an impact on consumers? I would guess probably not, especially as those companies still have to compete in the open market against other corporations and against smaller businesses.
I still advocate the idea of the Fair Tax and hope that the day comes where there are no Income OR Corporate Taxes. However, since we're not there yet, I don't see the harm in closing some of the loopholes that enable corporations to pay a smaller tax rate than small businesses or individuals. Maybe I'm missing something, but, I don't see it. I also don't think that causing a major company to pay eight or ten percent instead of zero or three percent amounts to "raising taxes" on the American people.
Quote:
And my admiration for Boehner AT THIS POINT IN TIME stems from the fact that he is managing this situation as well as he is while getting it from all sides. I would have done far more than push away from the negotiating table when Obama effectively trashed everything that had been accomplished by trying to add his tax increases back in at the last minute.
I would be more impressed if I saw him really take charge of his own side. There are a lot of people on the GOP side who don't think the debt ceiling should be raised at all. There are some who would raise it but not if they have to compromise at all with the Democrats. To borrow a term from Trent Lott's book, I think that Boehner needs to do a better job of "herding cats" and getting everyone on his side to work together and to see the criticality of doing so. I also would have been a lot more impressed if there had been no walkouts in negotiations. Like somebody or not, you have to work with people when the American people are depending on you to do so.
Quote:
It also boggles my mind that anyone can see what the Dems have done to this country as a followup to the Reps and say that they will work to get rid of the Rep party. That's like saying you're going to get rid of your dog that protects your children but chews up your shoes while a wolf is shredding your house's interior & will have your children for dinner with the shoes for a chaser as soon as the dog's gone.
I didn't say that I would work to get rid of the Republicans. I said that I feel like working to vote out EVERYBODY who is currently in Washington. It's just a mess and is non-functional. They can't get anything done. It's just broken. A terrible mess of hot-headed ideologues on both the left and the right, a large number of career politicians who are eager to cast themselves in the image of whatever the polls are telling them people want ("I'm for protecting this country"," I'm for green energy," "I'm for fixing immigration," "My first priority, friends, has always been to watch our spending"). And then you have a few criminals and pervs thrown into the mix for good measure. We really can do better than this as a country. Are you proud of the collective group of people who represent us? This mess is just embarrassing.
Quote:
Huckabee was right - the party can be salvaged, but who on earth believed that it was going to happen in just 4 years? Seeds have been planted & roots are clearly spreading out - this is not the time to abandon the crop just when it is starting to show signs of green growth sprouting up.
I hope at the very least that we are all praying for a real resolution to the problem and one that will NOT benefit the culture of death in the next elections.
I absolutely do not want to benefit the culture of death, and that is a very good point that you make as well. I don't know what the answer is, but I want to stop the Democrats in the areas in which they promote abortion, changes in the definition of marriage, and just societal disentigration. This is why I was attracted to the GOP and to Huckabee. But I also am turned off by hypocrisy, hyper-partisanship that allows the country to burn while each side is fiddling in front of their supporters, and a lot of other things. This is why I am an Independent.
But my comment about wishing that politicians could not be affiliated with a political party is because I think it causes voters to be lazy. The root problem in Washington is that, essentially, once you get elected, most politicians only have to worry about pleasing their party and avoiding same-party challenges. Because most are in "safe" districts and know that they'll never lose to someone of the other party, no matter how much they might act like people from the other party. In general, too many voters just vote (R) and (D) and listen to however politicians wish to cast themselves without always doing our homework. I think we the people have enabled this mess and I'd like to see a more inquisitive, less easily placated electorate come out of this somehow so that we can elect a better quality of leadership.