I’ll bet SOMEHOW, the HofR paychecks, credit union (don’t they hate ALL “unions”?), and health care system stays funded.

If the Republicans succeed in shutting down the government, does that mean they
would be out of a job and receive no paycheck?  Yaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy!

Watching the protests in Madison and Yemen and Egypt
side by side on tv, it struck me that we seem to be
witnessing two sides of the same coin. It’s not
simply a struggle for democracy or saving collective
bargaining rights for unions, but something deeper.
And if this was simply about allocation of finite
resources, you’d see protests in energy-poor
countries like Denmark and Sweden. Rather what is
happening in the Arab Spring is a full-on embrace of
modernity. What is happening with the Tea Party and
their ilk, is an attempt to throw off modernity and
return to an idealized version of the 1830s and the
Taney Supreme Court world view. Modernity demands
fluency in certain skill sets, particularly numeracy
and literacy, but also the ability to analyze a
problem and come up with novel solutions. Americans
had completely embraced modernity in the 1920s, but
those who have not been rewarded now feel threatened.
It doesn’t really matter if you live in Phoenix or
Cairo, rather it is whether you see modernity as your
friend or your enemy.

Oddsox,

Glad you appreciated my math.  But the bottom line is that the revenue shortfall the NST will create in lieu of the Payroll Tax will kill Social Security.

By taxing potato chips and not potatoes, Big Macs, but not uncooked ground round, you are now into the value judgment and re-engineering of society….and that’s just as much a problem for your NST as it is for the income tax—incentives to encourage what THIS crop of Congress wants.  This week it’s less potato chips (Oh, will Frito-Lay lobby against THAT, and John Boehner will come out weeping for why little kids can’t have their chips with their lunches—if F-L bribes him enough).  Next week there could be an exemption on religious chatchkas, but not on political ones, etc.

Vicious circle starts again!

If you add 5% to the cost of 2nd homes, or 2nd homes and homes over $1,000,000, you will BY DEFINITION reduce the number of those homes sold as well.  How much? That’s a market question but that the reduction will occur is Economics 101.

Inherit the Wind:  As your math shows, no way the average worker will be paying more in NST than he was in payroll taxes, unless he’s buying a couple new cars and a 2nd home.  That’s because payroll taxes are regressive.  And the NST, as I’ve proposed it, is not.  You proved my first point.

Speaking of 2nd homes, that’s a key to the funding of FICA with the NST.  Those purchases (combined with with investment properties) make up 27% of the housing market.  Add in $100B for commercial real estate (2010 sales)—these aren’t considered consumption items when calculating GDP, but they would be taxed.
Also understand: we spend over a trillion in food per year, but nearly half (48.5%, USDA figure) is spent “outside the home.”  All those Big Macs and Filet Mignons would also be taxed. 

My proposed exclusion was for “groceries,” not food.  So potatoes, rice & milk?  Exempt.  Potato chips, Rice Krispy Treats, Milk Duds?  Taxed.

And the clothing and tuition exemptions were items that were bound to come up.  But, as I pointed out in the earlier post, the more exemptions, the higher the tax %,  Myself, I wouldn’t exclude them, you have to draw the line somewhere.

It all adds up, though, and it all works for replacing FICA taxes.  That Medicare Tax is the sticky part—such a huge expense.  Of course, that’s not regressive.  It’s a straight 1.45% for everybody with no cap.  Even the billionaire bonuses are taxed for Medicare, if I’m not mistaken.

Also, a key weakness with any tax proposal—mine included—is the possible false assumption of a static response.  I’ve tried to anticipate that with the 5% cap, but, yes I could be wrong there. 

Be assured, ITW, the goal here is not to starve Social Security. 
But, unfortunately, replacing payroll taxes with a NST isn’t designed to save it either. 
Social Security and Medicare both need reform or we’ll be heading off another financial cliff within 20 - 30 years.  Maybe sooner. 
And that will have to be addressed separately.
Again, the goal here is “only” to increase employment.

RayLan—the subprime debacle was the canary in the mine.  It was part of the financial juggling and jiving which was driven by the expansion of credit, that is, funny money.  If lots of funny money is produced, no amount of regulation is going to keep enterprising financiers from doing funny things with it.  In fact, regulation might make things worse by putting off the day of reckoning and deluding people into believing that what was going on was all right.

Money, to be worth anything, has to correspond to labor and the goods and services that labor produces.  There is no way labor can support the funny money now holding up the stock market, the collectibles market, what’s left of real estate, and the mountains of cash the corporations are sitting on.  It’s a very unstable situation.

Anarcissie
“The present Republican agitation around the deficit has nothing to do with consistent ideology or policy”
Consistent ideology? I would never accuse them of consistency. The housing bubble was enabled by many factors but primarily by two
1. Governement deregulation
2. Wall Street crime.
And yes. The subprime debacle was the virus that brought down the world economy. Read the ‘Big Short’ by Michael Lewis or ‘Griftopia’ by Matt Taibbi. Or see Inside Job.
It’s fast becoming common knowledge.

The one-trick pony about government spending has been one of the pillars of the Rep platform for quite a while. This is not to say they are consistent in practice, since Ronald Reagan increased government by leaps and bounds without keeping the financial regulatory systems in place.

If they can divert attention with this red herring and blame it for the economic downturn, they have carte blanche to dismantle the New Deal.  Of course that will shrink GDP and then the Dems will be reelected on the heels of that failure. Dizzying incompetence.

‘In the case of employees, the employer and employee split the cost of these payroll taxes, each paying 7.65% of eligible wages. An independent contractor, by contrast, is both the employer and the employee, so a self-employed person pays both halves, or 15.3% total. The tax is composed of a Social Security tax of 12.4% on the first $106,800 of net self-employment income (for 2009 through 2011), and a Medicare tax of 2.9% on all net self-employment income.’ (from some government document or other).

But of course the employer doesn’t pay the employer’s half of the payroll tax.  As far as the employer is concerned, it’s just part of the wage expense of exploiting labor.  The person who actually does the labor and creates the value that pays the tax is the employee, and the tax is 15.3% (according to the above) of the first $106,800.

Oddsox:

So, if you exclude food, rent, utilities and meds, clothing and tuition (college? or fancy private prep schools as well?) that pretty much leaves (as far as I can tell) durable goods: TVs, iPads, gardening tools, you get the picture.

This dumps the load instead on…the middle class who ALREADY pay the bulk of both the payroll and income tax.  How much is taken out of your income in SSI per year?  How much do you spend on durable goods?

Let’s do a little arithmetic here:  Current maximum payroll tax is 6.2% of $106,800. or $6621.60.  You suggest that the consumption tax should be 5%...

Therefore to make up for that $6621.60 in payroll taxes, the average consumer would have spend $132,432 at the 5% tax rate every year. Ouch!  That’s more than the taxable income from the payroll tax.

Now say you reduce the payroll tax to 4.2%.  Each consumer will STILL have spend $42,720 each year (at 5% tax rate) just to make up the shortfall.

It should be blatantly obvious that your consumption tax even at the maximum rate of 5% can’t even BEGIN to make up for the loss of the payroll tax, even if it’s just a reduction.  How many people do you know that spend $42720. every year on items that aren’t food, clothing, rent, utilities and all the other exemptions.

Now I didn’t look up any number other than the current payroll tax rate of 6.2% and the taxable number of $106,800. The rest is simply plugging it into a calculator.

How much is 6.2% of $106,800?
What amount is the above result 5% of? (even by inspection it should be clear that one must spend quite a bit more than $106,800 to match the 6.2%).

What’s the actual difference between 6.2% and 4.2% and what is THAT 5% of? ($42,720).

Thus, simple arithmetic reveals the total un-viability of your plan, unless, of course, your GOAL is to starve Social Security and actually ruin it.  In which case it works perfectly.

Raylan—the housing bubble was only one symptom of the rapid expansion of credit during the early Naughties.  Many people observed this and some profited mightily by, in effect, selling short.  As far as I know the credit expansion game began in earnest in 1987, when the Reagan administration averted a major stock market crash by offering the specialists unlimited credit as long as they kept prices from going into free fall.  In effect a money faucet was turned on, but it applied only to rich people, because cheap credit is not usually available to the poor.  As in the lead-up to the real estate crash, this credit was accompanied by major deficit spending, but I don’t think it was significant compared to the expansion of credit money.

The present Republican agitation around the deficit has nothing to do with consistent ideology or policy.  Any stick will do to beat a dog.  (Or, any stigma will do to beat a dogma.)  Recent Republican administrations have run historically enormous deficits. 

I do think many people, including those of right-wing or conservative sensibilities, realize that something is seriously wrong with the economy and the financial system, so talking about deficits is a way of deflecting this unease, which might otherwise result in people thinking, onto convenient scapegoats.  The Democrats play along with this by accepting the false theory and arguing about superficial details.

Inherit the Wind, thanks for the chance to respond to your post & to flesh out my proposal.

“As for OddSox right-wing “consumption tax”: It’s totally regressive and punishes the people at the bottom of the ladder most.”
—ITW

1) Regressive?  No, not this one. Please read my earlier post again: the National Sales Tax (NST) will exempt groceries, rent, utilities & meds —- where the poor spend most of their money.
We could add more exemptions (for clothing?  tuition?) and make the NST more progressive but it would drive up the %.  There’s a consequence to that, see below.

I’d also exclude purchase of a principal residence from the NST.  That to minimize it’s impact on the housing market.  Purchases of commercial or investment properties and 2nd homes would be taxed.  Yes, everyone will pay, but the rich will pay more.

2)“Right-wing?”  No, a “right wing” bill won’t fly—might pass the House, but wouldn’t make it past the Senate or Obama’s veto.  The idea here is to be revenue-neutral to gain bi-partisan support.  NST revenues will replace revenues lost from eliminating payroll taxes.  Those revenues will fund FICA/Medicare.  No more, no less.  The goal is increased employment.  Who benefits most from that?  The jobless, of course.

——-

“now you’d add another 5-10% (tax upon) their already-meager incomes.” 
ITW

Not 5%-10%.  3%-5%, depending on exemptions (see above).  That’s important because any higher than 5% and you stoke inflation and create black markets where they don’t already exist.  That’s one of the reasons I don’t care for the Value Added Tax (VAT) idea.
———

“...rich conservatives LOVE the idea of “consumption tax” instead (of the income tax)
—ITW

Very important: I’m not proposing the consumption tax (NST) to replace the income tax, but rather payroll taxes.  Big difference.  Again, please re-read my earlier post. 
Income taxes are progressive.  Agree with you, ITW, high-earners would love them to disappear, but that’s not my idea.
Payroll taxes are regressive.  They tax the first dollar earned to both employee and employer.  But not the 106,801st dollar; from then on the tax is 0.  Eliminate payroll taxes and watch employment rise.

—-

“What about corporations?” 
—ITW

What about them?  If they employ people, they’ll benefit from the elimination of payroll taxes.  If not, they won’t. 
Same thing when they purchase materials.  They’ll pay the NST on non-exempt items just like everyone else.  Yes, they’ll pass those costs on to consumers, but the savings from payroll taxes will offset, enabling them to keep costs in check.  If they get greedy and try to increase prices anyway, competition will step in and take market share.
Which corporations benefit most?  Those employing the most workers earning under the FICA threshold.

——
“And as income goes up, people save more.”
ITW

Not a bad thing.  Savings provide capital.  Or a nest egg for retirement or a rainy day.  And as income goes up, so does consumption.  Creating jobs is the goal here—those who go from 0 income to employed benefit most when we stop taxing labor.  Tax consumption instead & we come out ahead.

“The Deficit” is definitely a contributor, and helped cause the housing bubble.

But “The Deficit” is the result of spending a trillion dollars to change a regime in Iraq that wasn’t a threat to us, on top of a tax cut the drained the revenue surplus.

But we can blame the bulk of it on Republicans 30 year push for total corporate and banking de-regulation, irresponsible tax cuts that did NOT stimulate the economy as promised, irresponsible wars of adventure, all clothed in a religious and “libertarian disguise”.

The minority of the blame falls on the Democrats for their spineless, weenie-like inability to stand tough or even stand together, when they were in the minority OR held the majority.

Forget the jail time…I don’t want to support them even at a subsistent level jail term let alone prop up their failures with necessary items like TARP.

I want all of their wealth confiscated and they can plan to donate twice that amount in fines to pay off their societal debt. Let them use their “talents” in a white hat way for something other than personal aggrandizement.

Maybe a white collar chain gang?

Anarcissie
Whatever your definition - it’s not because of the deficit. It’s the housing bubble that exploded the global economy. The only role that government had was deregulating Wall Street sufficiently to make that kind of criminal trading possible. If government had not paid the TARP to rescue Goldman Sachs for one thing, the economic collapse would have been much worse. And that’s because Goldman Sachs owned the toxic mortages bonds that defaulted. Their failure would have triggered the failure of most of the banking industry. There should have been some jail time however.

Anarcissie: “because their entire métier, their shtick, is to take advantage of and lord it over others whom they have subjugated.”

Pretty much, yeah.

well breakdowns come and breakdowns go
what we gonna do about it?
that’s what I wanna know - p simon

Your whole post was excellent, by the way.

It’s a different kind of depression.  Bush and Obama, following the tradition established by Reagan, responded to the crises of 2006-2008 by giving the banks and other financial institutions huge bundles of money and credit.  As a result, the markets for equities and collectibles have continued to inflate, and in areas where there is a lot of financial business, like New York City, a complete collapse of real estate prices has been temporarily avoided.  Some of the money trickles down into increased employment, or more realistically reduced unemployment.

However, there is a big problem with this money, and that is that it is unrelated to labor.  Value comes from labor.  If money is unrelated to labor, its value is fictional and can collapse at any time.  If the government has been printing money, the result is severe inflation.  However, if the government has been inflating credit, the opposite occurs: credit money disappears and the financial system seizes up.  If both money-printing and credit inflation are both occurring, then obviously the result is highly unpredictable.  As things become unpredictable, investor and consumer confidence fall (as they are falling now) and both demand and capital disappear from view.

Underlying these shenanigans, there is supposed to be a real economy where people labor and produce goods and services they and other people really want and can use.  However, in the U.S. that economy has been leached out by the aforesaid shenanigans, plus a deliberate policy of union-busting and deindustrialization.  We, the Americans, are producing less than we use, and when we have to live within our means, it isn’t going to be easy.  It will be called a depression.  It can’t be very far off now.

Unfortunately, humans usually deal with their problems in the worst possible way, so I anticipate the rise of leaders calling for war, repression, witch-hunting and so forth as a solution for the problem.  The recent collapse of the financial system has already been explicitly blamed on poor people, especially the improperly pigmented.  Muslims, especially Arabs, are regularly demonized in the media and by politicians.  The Jews cannot be far behind.

There are positive, constructive ways to deal with the problems we face, but the last people on earth to propose or enact them are our political and corporate leaders, because their entire métier, their shtick, is to take advantage of and lord it over others whom they have subjugated.

Anarcissie
‘We are in a depression’

Maybe you are, but the signposts are nowhere near what they were during the thirties. The DOW, NASDAQ are doing well. The joblessness is about the deterioration of the middle working class. I just got a new job with a capital investment firm in Century City California, with several other real job opportunities I had to forgo.

We are in a depression.

It’s painfully tiresome to keep hearing this misleading cant on what’s wrong with the economy - namely - government spending. Without government spending we would be in a depression. It’s soooo stupid. But then that is so uniquely American.

I am convinced that most people don’t like their jobs, or wouldn’t like them if they thought they had any choice.
**************

Gee, why do you think they call it “work”?  I remember a comedienne (name forgotten) saying she read that she should do what she likes and is good at: “So you think I can get paid a quarter million a year to masturbate and shop?”

As for OddSox right-wing “consumption tax”:  It’s totally regressive and punishes the people at the bottom of the ladder most, the people who must spend EVERY DIME they have just to make it—now you’d add another 5-10% to their already-meager incomes.

I’m lucky—my wife and I work and make decent incomes, enough so we can save a little AND contribute to our 401Ks. That already would have us paying a lower % of our income in “consumption tax” than people at the poverty line. And as income goes up, people save more—even if it’s only being able to increase their contributions to their 401k (Now about $16,500/year—a bit more than the average person on unemployment gets).

But rich conservatives LOVE the idea of “consumption tax” instead—because they won’t have to pay accountants to hide their income and know that EVERYTHING they buy—or don’t choose to buy, is how they pay taxes and it may well be lower than their income tax.

And what about corporations?  They technically don’t “consume” much of anything—everything is a supply to the product they sell, therefore in a consumption tax society corporations will mostly likely pay….NOTHING! (and they won’t have to pay billions to tax attorneys and bribe politicians to do it).

Republicans are setting the nation up for a horrible, catastrophic situation that will make the Great Depression seem like a cake-walk.  A vast un-controlled “experiment” whose results are very predictable but nobody will admit it.

Meanwhile, Republicans play hardball and Democrats play wiffle ball.

faultroy:

“The last time I looked, I thought we were living in a Republican Democracy. Usually that means that what the people want they should get. The people usually demonstrate this by electing representatives that match their views. They send these people to Washington in two groups: one to the House of Representatives, the other to the Senate. During the most recent elections, there were elections that overwhelmingly favored Conservatives in the House. That seems to imply that ‘the people’ chose. Ostensibly they choose fiscal conservatism.”

Really?  Okay.  Then tell me why, when Obama was elected by a huge plurality - and thus had a more “liberal” mandate from “the people” - including, very specifically, a mandate for as close to a universal health care system as could be achieved - the GOP became the “party of no” and simply refused to accept the “will of the people?”

It never fails to amuse me how conservatives are all fine and dandy with the “will of the people” when THEY are the ones on the receiving end, but NOT so happy - indeed, completely obstructionist - when the “will of the people” is not with THEM.

Peace.

The last time I looked, I thought we were living in a Rpublican Democracy. Usually that means that what the people want they should get. The people usually demonstrate this by electing representatives that match their views. They send these people to Washington in two groups: one to the House of Representatives, the other to the Senate. During the most recent elections, there were elections that overwhelmingly favored Conservatives in the House. That seems to imply that “the people” chose. Ostensibly they choose fiscal conservatism. But apparently this is not appreciated nor accepted by the current President nor certain demographic groups known as “liberals.” Since it appears fairly obvious that “the people” have made their desires perfectly clear—(ie.lower the debt/don’t spend so much/cut the size of government)I’m wondering what people have to do in order to get their message to those in power? To be honest, when there is such a dramatic skewing of the vote in favor of one party, why do we have to do this ridiculous dance? It’s not Obama’s business to make these calls. Under the Constitution of the United States—as clearly stated—the House of Representatives is clearly responsible for the finances of the Country. They must initiate and approve of all financial expenditures. The President nor the Senate can do this. So, if there is such an overwhelming conservative presence in the House, which intiates and decides matters of finances, why are we having this discussion? Give them what they want and let them pay for the consequences. If the voters are not happy with the results, they will vote in new politicians—kinda like they did with the influx of new freshman House members. There would be no impending shutdown if the President and the Senate did as the House requests. After all, that is how the Constitution wanted it or it would not be written that way.  If you don’t like the system, than change it, but don’t ignore it.

Uh…excuse me?  Unless I am missing something, all of this is largely symbolic, since the Senate is unlikely to accept, much less approve, much or most of this.  Yes, the House is currently in thrall to the TP and the extremist wing of the GOP.  But they cannot enact law all by themselves (thankfully).

In fact, as I have said elsewhere, I welcome all of this absurd extremism, since it is backfiring, as more and more people reject the TP/GOP, including not only independents, but also many conservatives.  Keep it up, Boehner & Co. - you are so myopic that you don’t realize you are sabotaging yourselves!

Peace.

Republicans win where Democrats fail and vice versa - once the people get tired of this calculated political pendulum - of a two party system -
in alternating incompetence,
they might introduce other directions and might actually find a party that isn’t a malignant outgrowth of the oligarchy.

DieDaily, April 2 at 10:56 am

That your second effort is much less “ambiguous” and undefined than was your first offering seems obvious enough, and the logical answer to your second attempt is a resounding ...so?

That your barely concealed contempt rebounds on you rather than insults me would be obvious if you weren’t such a moron…oh well it takes all kinds I suppose.

Nice chatting with you .....I hope you do get your head removed from your rectum some day soon though.

Funding - what is it now? - three wars with complicity by both parties prevents
any real deficit reduction.  Until we get out of all this “world’s policeman”
posturing, we’ll never have the resources to address the real domestic problems
that afflict this nation:  Crumbling infrastructure, failure to keep up with the needs
of a modern society, lack of education and even adequate food for a significant
portion of the population, byzantine and costly health care issues - even with the
recent legislation, which the T-partiers want to gut.  Oh, and extending welfare to
the rich through tax reductions.  Wait a minute, we’ve already done that, and the
current budget impasse is basically over covering that feckless cost to the nation!

I’m not a fan of ‘The Political Compass’ and other such nifty political charts.  You can, of course, characterize people’s political ideas and desires with any number of dimensions you want, and code your own theories into the questions and how they’re evaluated.  Some libertarians, for example, characterize unrestricted capitalism as ‘economic freedom’ whereas someone with different perceptions and sensibilities would not see much freedom in being subject at work to an organization owned and operated by rich people and governed by a hierarchy of authoritarian bosses.  Another difficulty with actual human beings is that their preferences are often mutually contradictory, not only the abstract but in material fact.  Obviously, no one is required to think consistently, and few people do.

In the old Left-Right dichotomy, the Right was the party of the powerful, the rich, those of high social status, those who cultivated the military virtues; the Left, of those who preferred peace, freedom and equality.  This division goes back to the invention of permanent military organizations and slavery.  There may be some value in it, at least as metaphor.  But I can’t see much use in multiplying the number of dimensions, at least as it’s been carried on so far.

DieDaily, April 2 at 4:49 am:

@anarsissy “Who wants more labor?” Err, um, me and
everyone sane, for starters?

Look, it’s simple, and I see that most of the commenters get it. You want to regulate the sh*t out of the large corporations and leave the small business the h*ll alone. It’s real simple. ...’

I am convinced that most people don’t like their jobs, or wouldn’t like them if they thought they had any choice.  What they want is not to do what someone else tells to do, but the things they get by submission to a boss: money, stuff, possibly power and social status.  You may want to work harder—in which case your participation in the amusements of Truthdig blogging is questionable, you could be working—but most people don’t.  There is nothing particularly sane about wanting more labor that I can see, although I agree it’s a complex question; many a slave wants only to polish his chains.

Onward. I have little interest in regulating the sh*t out of large corporations.  I would like to make them irrelevant by successfully encouraging their replacement by non-coercive, cooperative institutions.  I don’t know where you get my supposed enthusiasm for regulation from.  Maybe you’re actually talking about someone else.

Gosh, where to continue—about half of people who define themselves as leftists are unenthusiastic to hostile about gun control.  Socialism doesn’t mean ‘regulation by the government’ but ‘ownership of the means of production by the workers.’  Your usage of ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ is confused and ahistorical.  And so on….

For those who don’t quite follow culheath & DieDaily, take a look here: 
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
Take their test.
Amusing and revealing.

DieDaily,

yer right for the most part…but is there not as much potential for ossification standing in a perfect middle? I find myself all over the map from time to time; sometimes a stern libertarian type, sometimes a raging empathy drenched oommie, both of whom detest my parental center. I like the flexibility and I realize that’s what you are calling for. Only the dead can handle inflexibility with any aplomb. The rest of us eventually seem ruined by it.

I really like your offerings, man…welcome back.

@ardee, I’ve been gone for about a year and,
pleasingly, much has changed and improved. Please
don’t tell me that you are still as vague and
ambiguous as ever in your almost-disparagements. A
year is a long time in which to learn how to think
and argue. So bring on something specific, why don’t
you?

Let me clarify:

Leftists (so-called) hate it when the State bans
abortions, bans gay marriage, bans medical marijuana,
and so forth. With me so far? Simple enough for you?
If not, then, specifically, what part of that
statement is false, lol.

Rightists (so-called), on the other hand, hate it
when the State bans gun ownership, unpopular
statements of dissent [however retarded they may be],
and the right of individuals to sell sh*t [whatever
that sh*t is] without bureaucratic interference
interference. Simple enough? If not, then,
specifically, what part of that statement is false,
lol.

Oh, and what sort of aphasia caused you to ignore my
very first and most important point (i.e.: “You want
to regulate the sh*t out of the large corporations”)?
What you think a bunch of anarchists in mud huts can
do that?

Dude, step back from the left-right divide and enjoy
the scenery. It’s getting more sane and pleasant and
elastic all the time and I’d hate to see you continue
to petrify.

Why Republicans win:

When you have only one voice speaking to the public then you obviously have only one opinion becoming as truth, regardless of how silly that opinion may be, despite how wrong the direction they choose.

With a huge majority in both Houses and with a Democrat in the White House as well Democrats couldn’t pass gas! Contrast Shrubya’s fifty three Senators during his administration getting every damn thing he wanted excepting the privatization of Social Security.

As Democrats struggle with the dichotomy they face, appeasing the corporate check writers who own both parties while watching the increasing alienation of their former base, who lose homes, jobs and futures, we all lose.

As to this rather puzzling statement:

The Leftists used to fail to see that an overbearing central government can BAN the right to chose, the right to gay marriage, the right to medicate with herbs. The Rightists used to fail to see that an overbearing central government can BAN the right to
bear arms, the right to dissent, the right to
innovate and profit from it.

I suspect that DieDaily lets his/her own allegiances color the truth of political opinion in order to make a silly point. Socialism as a strong central govt is just a propagandized statement from yet another anarchist. Might I suggest that he/she read up on the subject prior to making stuff up about it?

@culheath: Damn, thanks! Now if only I’d spell-checked
my post and fixed the dozen or so stupid typos! My
fingers don’t seem to keep up, or faithfully
transcribe, my thoughts. Alas, perhaps next time I
won’t be honored with my pants hanging at half mast…

Die Daily”

Thank you for the clarity. Making yours the comment of the day on my site.

@anarsissy “Who wants more labor?” Err, um, me and
everyone sane, for starters?

Look, it’s simple, and I see that most of the commenters get it. You want to regulate the sh*t out
of the large corporations and leave the small
business the h*ll alone. It’s real simple.

The reason corporations spend an impressive amount on
buying small startups right, left, and center is that
large, centrally controlled dinosaurs have sluggish
nervous systems and inevitable systematically reward
rung-jumping psychopaths while crushing the “dissent”
of their most enterprising, innovative and energizing
innovators. It’s not rocket science. On a level
playing field (i.e. one one devoid of the “regulatory
capture” achieved by behemoth lobbies over their
long-subverted, revolving-door “watch-dog” [i.e. lap
dog] agencies) the small and decentralized beat the
crap out of the large and centralized nearly every
time. Google was created in a garage, Facebook in a
dorm room, Einstein’s Relativity in a patent clerk’s
less than roomy office, and the American Revolution
in a pub. Think about it.

Socialism has a powerful role to play, and we can’t
go bandying about the phrase “all hail the free
market” when we’ve never had much of a free market
and at this rate never will. Presently we privatize
all occasional Wall Street gambling profits while yet
we simultaneously nationalize all their gambling
losses. And yet a simple Toben tax (transactional tax
of <1%) would correct all that! ALL!

It’s not “right” vs. “left”. It isn’t and it never
has been. It’s a vertical divide. Freedom vs. Authoritarianism. Venal acquisitiveness vs. social
consciousness. Exceptionalism vs. sanity.

I stopped commenting here about a year ago because I
was not happy about the artifical Left and Right
peasants ceaselessly ragging on eachother all the
time beneath the occasional star-burst of a rose-
colored flare fired up the Waspington Post. It’s hard
to stand by and watch one set of slaves rag on the
other and vice versa.

But the tide is definitely turning. I want to come
back now because for the first time the so-called
Left and Right (god bless their earnest if ignorant
souls) are beginning to see that there is little to
choose on this false axis, and much to choose with
regard to freedom vs. authoritarianism.

The Leftists used to fail to see that an overbearing
central government can BAN the right to chose, the
right to gay marriage, the right to medicate with
herbs. The Rightists used to fail to see that an
overbearing central government can BAN the right to
bear arms, the right to dissent, the right to
innovate and profit from it.

I don’t believe, after the fiasco that is Bush-Obama
(same diff), that either side is so sure that THEIR
version overbearing government is the answer. Statism
is sick and dying. Thank goodness. Congrats, people!
I’m truly heartened. I began to doubt whether you had
it in you. But article after article, comment after
comment, I see that in your hundreds and thousands
you are waking up to the obvious. Fighting Rep vs.
Dem is and always was a distraction. The fight is
vertical not horizontal. So let’s get to it!!! The
religious Far Right are a bunch of utopian-myth—
control-freaks! The radical Far Left are a bunch of
utopian-myth-control-freaks! F*ck both of them (they
are the same…freaks…half-humans that would drag
the sane down into their midst by force and violence)
and get free! Welcome to the Center, WHERE WE DO WHAT
WE NEED TO DO AND WANT TO DO WITHOUT TOLERATING THE INTERFERENCE OF HALF-FORMED FREAKS.

More Labor, as in Jobs, of course!

oddsox, April 1 at 6:34 pm:

‘... As for taxes, yes, Anarcissie, when you tax something you discourage it.  We tax labor instead of consumption.  But we want more labor, not less. ...’

Who wants more labor?

we need to fear the fundamentalist Christians, primarily Tea Partiers,
who believe the world is six thousand years old, women belong in
the home, people lived with dinosaurs, there is an everlasting hell,
etc. these are the loonies in power now. what is also of course scary
is that so many of us are so whacked as to vote for them. Scary Shit.
we gotta keep fighting the madness.

The Republicans are focused and smart.. they are following Goldwater’s advice to go duck hunting ‘where the ducks are’.. but he wasn’t talking about ducks and neither is the Republican House.. it’s about voters, and specifically voters WHO WILL VOTE.

Obama and the faithless, gutless Democrats crushed the populist movement that swept them into power with their betrayals on everything from torture and Guantanamo to health care and the green economy.. And it continues unabated
and in our face.

The Republicans are ethically bankrupt.. but they can speak in the tongues of the religious and so called moral right! Here’s one Republican star, Huckabee, speaking about his admiration and obedience to one David Barton, a “Christian historical revisionist” who contends that “the United States of America is a Christian nation” and the separation of church and state is a “liberal myth.”

HUCKABEE: I don’t know anyone in America who is a more effective communicator [than David Barton.] I just wish that every single young person in America would be able to be under his tutelage and understand something about who we really are as a nation. I almost wish that there would be something like a simultaneous telecast and all Americans would be forced,
forced — at gun point no less — to listen to every David Barton message. And I think our country would be better for it. I wish it’d happen.

He actually supports indoctrinating the US citizenry at gunpoint! It’s crazy, yes? But that’s the kind of thing that will cement their base for the next elections..

And .. if Obama and the Dems and even their proxies here at Truthdig can’t speak out against that.. then what are they waiting for? They are faithless and without any ethical standards.. and on top of that they won’t even play at being liberals to attract our votes!

Adios!

Shut it down!  Go ahead, shut it down!

The republican key to success is that they know how to demonize, helping themselves in the short run, fundamentally undermining democratic capacity in the long run, http://www.deliberatelyconsidered.com/2011/03/anger-hate-demonization-villains-and-politics/

Hey Anarcissie—I knew our paths would cross again!

“...your proposal isn’t as dumb as Conason’s article.” 
Thanks for the backhanded compliment.
(what’s my rebuttal?  Oh yes it IS!?)

Seriously, Conason has nothing to worry about here, but I’ll pull up short of calling his column dumb. 
Cuts are coming, though.  They have to, better now than later—a painful bottom line & we can only hope they’ll cut more fat than muscle & bone.

—-

As for taxes, yes, Anarcissie, when you tax something you discourage it.  We tax labor instead of consumption.  But we want more labor, not less.
And a little less consumption wouldn’t hurt us.
Besides, labor must come before consumption.  So more of the one can never be the cause of an imbalance by less of the other.
So eliminate FICA/Medicare taxes.  That’s a huge break for the working class & anyone who employs them.  No quicker or better stimulus than that.
Use sales tax revenues to fund Social Security/Medicare.  The tax swap should be revenue-neutral, and it would be at about 3%.

AlmaRose & Par4, leave the income taxes alone.  They’re already plenty progressive, with 70% of revenues coming from the top 10%.  Maybe tweak them a little at the top end, back to Clinton-era levels (39.6%), but then lock in the current rates as permanent.  Still a great deal for high-earners & Repubs will go for it—a slight increase in exchange for stability.  It’ll both raise revenues and encourage the wealthy to turn loose of some of their treasure, too.  (Top 10% account for 40% of consumer spending)

My sales tax idea would exempt groceries, rent, utilities & meds—where the poor spend most of their money. 
But an afternoon at the movies?  Yeah, you’d pay an extra 40-cents for that.  Would you mind if it meant your neighbor or spouse could go back to work?

—-
Old biz:  I did read the anarcho-communist praxis you recommended last month on the 3/4 Sirota thread.
Thanks for sharing—I wish you luck with it & would definitely be up for the oatmeal cookies part (though my favorite is chocolate chips w/walnuts).  The obstacle I see is securing a venue for the convivium of communal housing and for the free food, book and dry goods stores.  In this country, the land’s pretty-much all taken. 
But perhaps a federal land grant would work if the right decision makers could be convinced. Someone like Sen. Bernie Sanders might an initial go-to guy.

While living in Oregon, I was aware of some alternative living communities near the coast, you might also investigate Potlatch festivals for support and contacts. Confess much ignorance here, and communal living is not for me.  But, again, best of luck with it.

“The Republicans are playing chess while the Democrats are playing Checkers.”  great observation, Mack!

If we immediately go to a consumption tax and eliminate ALL income tax (corporate & individual) then companies like GE will have to pay their fair share!  And…rather than move offshore, the US will be the new tax haven and we will have an immediate influx of companies relocating to the US.  Also higher net worth individuals should be given an express route to immigration with the requirement that they must purchase real estate within 6 months or they get kicked back to their country of origin.

oddsox—Presumably if you tax consumption, you will get less consumption, that is, a fall in demand, which will lead to a decline in return on capital (because there will now be an excess of it), lack of reinvestment, decline of employment, and a general recession.

Anyway, that’s what would happen in a traditional industrial economy (if the money were real).  This is why sales taxes are stupid, as well as unfair.

But at least your proposal isn’t as dumb as Conason’s article.

Way to totally miss the point.  I always wonder if this sort of crap is just misinformed or a deliberate attempt to stupify progressives.

“But it is also the story of a Republican minority within a minority that is getting its way because nobody else in Washington is reckless enough to promote a government shutdown.”

No, it is the story of how the one party we have in this country, creates a kabuki act to justify the “good cop” Democrats allowing the “bad cop” Republicans—who are a minority in government—to steal all the workers money and give it to the rich.

Its not rocket science.  They are all working for the same elites and the only complicated part is to realise the Democrats have to *pretend* to be the good cop.  Yes that’s right when you play good cop / bad cop, both roles are ACTING.

“satisfying the most extreme elements in their base”

That’s bullshit the Tea Party is being ignore by the right as much as Obama spits on the left.  Its all done for the benefit of the bosses.  This whole article is another variation on that joke,

CEO takes 11 out 12 cookies and turns to the Pwogies and says, “watch out - the Tea party wants a piece of your cookie”.

Oooooh yeah.  Fear the all powerful tea party you pwoggies!  Don’t notice its the CEO that took eleven cookies.  God this is pathetic.

“at the moment, President Obama seems to be willing to accept additional cuts”

No fucking shit.  he probably was the one to push for them.

BigB, the Yin is alive and well.
The Right is being checked and balanced.
Note their failure to repeal the health care bill.
They felt obliged to make the token effort to appease their Tea Party supporters, and now they can say they’ve tried.
Doubt you’ll ever again see a serious effort to fully repeal the law.

As for disunity on the Left, I’ll defer to Will Rogers, who said:
“I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.”
and
“Democrats never agree on anything, that’s why they’re Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans.”

Since Rogers said these words, Dems have won 10 presidential elections.  If unemployment figures keep falling (8.8% today, no foolin’) Obama should win again in 2012.

On unemployment:
Since the 1950s, payroll taxes have accounted for a steadily increasing percentage of federal revenues.  They now nearly match those from income taxes. 
How can we be surprised at high unemployment when we place such a tax upon labor?

Rather than tax labor, we should tax consumption.
Now is the time to eliminate payroll taxes altogether.
Fund FICA/Medicare with a non-regressive, point-of-purchase National Sales Tax (3%)

A government shutdown?
That was supposed to have happened on March 6, remember? 
Not to worry—all bluff.  Just horse-tradin’ goin’ on here, and lately the Repubs have been more skilled at it. 
The Repubs know that if there is a shutdown, rightly or wrongly, they’ll be blamed for any-and-all misery that follows.
They may be dumb, but not stupid.

PIFFLE PRATTLE

From Krugman’s latest column:

Two weeks ago, Republican staff at the Congressional Joint Economic Committee released a report, “Spend Less, Owe Less, Grow the Economy,” that argued that slashing government spending and employment in the face of a deeply depressed economy would actually create jobs. ...

  Here’s the report’s explanation…: “A smaller government work force increases the available supply of educated, skilled workers for private firms, thus lowering labor costs.” Dropping the euphemisms, what this says is that by increasing unemployment, particularly of “educated, skilled workers” — in case you’re wondering, that mainly means schoolteachers — we can drive down wages, which would encourage hiring.

It is with this prattle, which makes no economic sense whatsoever (and is why Professor Krugman, Nobel Laureate in Economics, descends upon it like a vulture upon fresh meat), that the Replicants are winning over the hearts and minds of middle America?

Which says much about the hearts and minds of Americans and very little about their sense of economic policy. Are they that simple? I hope not.

There is an unchecked wacko right in america because there is no longer an organized left in america. There is no ying to their yang, so the balance of power has shifted. And the scales will not be tipped back into balance by lightweights like Barry, Harry and Nancy.

When, as a governments shut proceeds to degrade of treasury notes and increase the cost of borrow, the MSM better make it plain just who the smart alecks are who ignored economists advise on both sides of the debate.

The scheme to tranfer blame worked in the mid-term election. Are the Replugnican in over-reach mode already?

So, we are supposed to give in to blackmail and extortion.

A crazy psychotic holds a gun to a person’s head.  He says “If you don’t do what I want, I’ll blow his brains out.  And if I blow his brains out, it’s YOUR FAULT!”

Crazy psychotics are holding the nation hostage.  We live under the delusion that if they pull the trigger, it’s OUR fault and not theirs.

So when and where do we draw the line in the sand?  If you are Obama, Pelosi and Reid, that line doesn’t ever seem to exist.

And so the craziest ones in the relationship win.

And America loses.