Political Discussions
The GOP and Taxes
Posted by clioandme • 1/27/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: gop, taxes
Bruce Bartlett makes an interesting argument about Republicans and taxes. They need to move past their focus on tax cuts and instead engage in conversations about making popular entitlement programs work as well as possible with a minimum of waste. The article includes a look at Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan. www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17936.html
While this would make sense, I suspect many will have trouble letting go of ideology in favor of reality. Still, I suppose such a change is possible.
User Comments
-
Some people have a different view of reality. Most of the people I know who are opposed to entitlement programs don't oppose them because of the money we're spending, but because they believe that they are actively destructive to the economy and to the individuals dependent upon them; that they create a trap rather than a leg up and undermine the free market economy in a way that has long-term impact for all of us. I don't happen to agree with them, but I'm not sure that my perception gets to be cast as "reality" while theirs is consigned to "ideology".-
That was pretty much the thinking during the 90s when Clinton reformed welfare. 'Course in tougher economic times with masses of unemployed whose benefits will eventually run out, such arguments seem to place theory above the lives of actual people.
-
-
Love the argument.. lol..
The title is "GOP must adapt to welfare state"... And you claim that if not on board with this, a person is against reality.
There are so many things wrong with the thinking behind this "Article" that breaking it down would take most of the morning.
Suffice to say that when someone makes the argument that unles you are for a welfare state, you are against reality... One has to wonder if there really isn't a REAL Argument for the idea. Which in all fairness there probably isn't.
Then again, that Bartlett is cranky with the GOP is no secret. And thankfully, probably just a couple of steps up from Ayers when it comes to people the GOP will actually take advice from today. -
Every day we hear John Boehner saying that the answer to our economic problems is tax cuts -- that if we put more money into the pockets of citizens, they'll spend it and stimulate the economy. And if we provide tax cuts to the wealthy, that will provide incentive to hire more and produce more.
It's pure ideology and is void from reality.-
Boehner does indeed appear to be living in a parallel universe. Then again, he's in the House, and remaining House Republicans are sitting in safe seats gerrymandered to promote ideological purity. I just keep thinking that maybe he's just seeing what he can get out of Obama. But maybe he intends to do nothing more than say no for two years. If so, what a joke. I'd expect better from an Ohioan, but maybe that's just me.
Senators and governors have to think about entire states, which can make them a little less ideological.
-
-
"Tax cut, tax cut, tax cut ..." Sure sounds sooooooo last-century, doesn't it? Methinks this ideological mantra has outlived its utility. -
-
If tax cuts worked, the economy should be booming now in the wake of all that the Bush administration and GOP Congress (1994 - 2006) did. No one has ever shown a clear correlation between tax cuts and economic growth. But Forbes and other financial/business magazines have reported on tax dodges, shelters, and evasion by wealthy individuals and some corporations. So I say go get all that money first, then worry about tweaking tax rates.
-
I think the larger argument in the piece cited up top is not about taxes but rather the GOP's relaitonship to the modern welfare state. They advocate tax cuts in order to "starve the beast", a phrase I might have taken from the article. In the current climate, however, people want government to work. Reagan's adage that government was the problem simply no longer obtains. As Obama suggested in his inauguration speech, the ground has shifted beneath the feet of those who continue to preach such visions.
-
Mark- On the contrary, I think government is the problem. Congress is horribly inefficient and there is so much redundancy in government. You have an undersecretary for undersecretaries. Some of the Senators and Congressmen keep staffs (in Washington, forget their regional offices) of over 100 workers. With this kind of redundancy, there is so much red tape to get through that it is a horribly slow process to get anything done. Let us just look at the USPS for a moment. It lost nearly $6 billion last last year and I cannot remember the last time they even turned a profit. They have notoriously slow distribution centers that cannot compete with UPS or FedEx, but the government does nothing about it. Instead of trying to make it more efficient, the Post Master general wants to cut delivery back to 5 days. Government is not the solution, government is the problem. -
And the old GOP fight against the government was to make it work even worse. Exhibit A: Hurricane Katrina. Fighting against the government per se is misguided. The real fight should be to make government work properly, which is where Obama is focusing his efforts.
-
Interesting that you should mention that...
Bush also increased gov't spending past yearly budgets of both 2 and 3 trillion, with the last one nearing 4 trillion.
Large government obviously isn't the answer. -
Again, it's not a question of big or small. It's a question of effectivess. All Bush did was show how poorly cronyism and dogmatism serve the country.
-
Well if it isn't a question of big or small. How about cutting it down so that it doesn't cost so damn much?
In the last 8 years, Bush has more than doubled the gov't spending, and Obama isn't talking about any 2 trillion spending cuts to get it back to clinton levels. So I guess he agrees with what Bush has done. -
You're running in circles now, like a dog chasing its own tail. Only I would prefer to watch the dog.
-
-
There are plenty of examples of private entities failing. So I guess private companies are the problem, also. *rolls eyes*
The USPS isn't in business to turn a profit. They have to service remote areas where private companies won't go because it's not profitable. It's for the commons, which is where we need government services. We need government regulation to work so we don't have salmonella contaminated peanuts being sold to the public. We need government to build our roads and bridges so they are safe to drive on. We need government to take over health insurance so we don't have people who's only interest is turning a profit, making decisions about what treatment we're eligible for.
All this privatization of the Reagan/Bush years has been a disaster. We have Halliburton sucking money out of our economy and not providing much in return. We have Blackwater providing security in Iraq and being kicked out because of abuse.
There is a place for government services but you're never going to have a government that works if you have a government thinks it is the problem. That's why republican administrations almost always fail.-
Never said all government service should be abandoned and you know it.
So your entire argument is a waste of breath.
That doesn't change the fact that what gov't does, private sector does cheaper faster and better when applicable. -
So your entire argument is a waste of breath.
No it's not; I typed it. That said, your argument is a waste of bandwidth. -
OK then last word freak, just because I KNOW you can't hack not having the last word, i'm going to answer.
I was breathing while reading your nonsense. That was the waste of breath.
The oxygen consumed should have been used for something better. Like watching paint dry. -
You're right. You are a waste of good oxygen.
(I can do this all day.
) -
I can't i work for a living.
Guess thats why your in favor of gov't welfare. -
See, there you go again (to quote Ronald Reagan). Because I'm anti-neocon, doesn't mean I'm pro-welfare. And since I'm an independent contractor, I'm able to take a break every once in a while to do something more fun than write code.
-
-
I stopped filing my tax returns in 2004. Many gays have stopped paying taxes until the Federal Government treats OUR families and children the same as others. No Equal Rights? No Taxes Paid.
-
Altough I can understand your sentiment, There are just too many bad jokes in my head right now to comment further.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
