Whatever Slate Magazine says, it's actually the opposite, because [appropriate yet esoteric documentary evidence found two clicks from the Wikipedia entry on the topic], which is better.
I understand why people don't pay me to write that. What I don't understand is why they pay writers at Slate.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Stimulus vote today?
Presumably, we'll be saddled with an additional $900b debt, of which only a tiny fraction will be able to make up for the decrease in consumer spending, and a still smaller fraction of that going towards the infrastructure development the country will so definitely need to grow out of this.
If I were an advisor to Obama, I'd have him call a joint session of Congress to have two economic teams, conservative and liberal, Hayekian and Keynesian, battle it out. Each side would elect a leader, who would be able to give a 45 minute PowerPoint presentation, replete with graphs and pie charts and other visual aids, to promote their vision of what is the best interest of the United States based on their own doctrinal vision. A theoretical primer, if you will.
After the presentations, packets containing each team's proposals, based on real world figures, would be presented to the Senate to include, exclude, and modify into a real stimulus bill.
THAT is goddamn compromise.
I'm convinced that most of Congress has no fucking idea what's going on. The stimulus is purely political. This is the crux of the problem, thus, why we're spending so much money on things that will not fucking do anything, even in theory, to promote economic growth. They don't know how to do it, because they don't understand economics. They're just throwing money at the problem, to make the bill "big enough," and calling it a day. Political bullshit at its finest, and ultimately, its most countereffectual, which is the same thing.
If I were an advisor to Obama, I'd have him call a joint session of Congress to have two economic teams, conservative and liberal, Hayekian and Keynesian, battle it out. Each side would elect a leader, who would be able to give a 45 minute PowerPoint presentation, replete with graphs and pie charts and other visual aids, to promote their vision of what is the best interest of the United States based on their own doctrinal vision. A theoretical primer, if you will.
After the presentations, packets containing each team's proposals, based on real world figures, would be presented to the Senate to include, exclude, and modify into a real stimulus bill.
THAT is goddamn compromise.
I'm convinced that most of Congress has no fucking idea what's going on. The stimulus is purely political. This is the crux of the problem, thus, why we're spending so much money on things that will not fucking do anything, even in theory, to promote economic growth. They don't know how to do it, because they don't understand economics. They're just throwing money at the problem, to make the bill "big enough," and calling it a day. Political bullshit at its finest, and ultimately, its most countereffectual, which is the same thing.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Health Care Reform
Just read Krugman's column from Jan. 29, Health Care Now.
I can't argue with him about the economics of it. I'd love single payer yesterday.
He mentions why the entire column is shit in this paragraph:
First, if you tip the Republicans off to your hand now, before the stimulus is done, you make Harry Reid's job even more difficult than it is right now. And the man has a hard time meeting minimum expectations as it is.
Second, you need to give Obama time to catch his breath. How about we get an HHS secretary who can take some of the responsibility for selling this to Congress? Can we upgrade the White House computers to XP? In the meantime, let him get some easy bipartisan wins on stupid shit. Everybody has to get to know each other, like it or not. If you start out clubbing baby Republicans with the baseball bats too soon out the gate, they will hate you and obstruct everything for the next two years. I know, they already hate you. But they will hate you so much more. Shock and Awe will not work with these people. Obama will need some quick wins, learning how to work with these assholes on stuff they really don't care about but will go to the mattresses on. Gays in the military--stuff that helps America without spending a lot more money on government stuff would be nice.
Third, if the stimulus does nothing, and I have a feeling it will underachieve in a spectacular way, then you're left with two potential whammies. One, the market will crash right in the middle of the health care debate, and two, the spectre of having to raise taxes to pay for all of this shit exactly when the economy starts to improve--not when you wanted the stimulus to do it, but when it naturally recovers, if it recovers, years and years later, you would effectively kill the momentum of the recovery.
Fourth, I think you gain momentum for universal health care when the unemployment rate start creeping up and more and more people are taking the status of their employment a lot more seriously than they are right now. I think we're in for a bad first half of the year. This will do little to decrease public support for something like universal health care.
Fifth, the benefits of universal health care will be immediate, and will greatly improve millions of Americans' quality of life. What Krugman is advocating is a simultaneous left and right. I'm in favor of a one-two punch. I really want to land both squarely on the jaw of one of the most pressing problems our country faces, as powerfully as we possibly can. Can't do that if your feet aren't set.
Does universal health care help strengthen the economy? Absolutely, I think it does. Is it the right thing to do? Yessir. Do I want to stomp Republicans whenever I get a chance? Fucking A. Is this the most absolutely worst time to bring it up? Goddamn right it is.
I can't argue with him about the economics of it. I'd love single payer yesterday.
He mentions why the entire column is shit in this paragraph:
Finally — and this is, I suspect, the real reason for the administration’s health care silence — there’s the political argument that this is a bad time to be pushing fundamental health care reform, because the nation’s attention is focused on the economic crisis. But if history is any guide, this argument is precisely wrong.Maybe. It's still wrong to bring it up now. I'm not sure how you can make the argument that Obama is not doing enough with the stimulus and then turn around in the next column and say that he should immediately work to implement a hugely complex social spending program.
First, if you tip the Republicans off to your hand now, before the stimulus is done, you make Harry Reid's job even more difficult than it is right now. And the man has a hard time meeting minimum expectations as it is.
Second, you need to give Obama time to catch his breath. How about we get an HHS secretary who can take some of the responsibility for selling this to Congress? Can we upgrade the White House computers to XP? In the meantime, let him get some easy bipartisan wins on stupid shit. Everybody has to get to know each other, like it or not. If you start out clubbing baby Republicans with the baseball bats too soon out the gate, they will hate you and obstruct everything for the next two years. I know, they already hate you. But they will hate you so much more. Shock and Awe will not work with these people. Obama will need some quick wins, learning how to work with these assholes on stuff they really don't care about but will go to the mattresses on. Gays in the military--stuff that helps America without spending a lot more money on government stuff would be nice.
Third, if the stimulus does nothing, and I have a feeling it will underachieve in a spectacular way, then you're left with two potential whammies. One, the market will crash right in the middle of the health care debate, and two, the spectre of having to raise taxes to pay for all of this shit exactly when the economy starts to improve--not when you wanted the stimulus to do it, but when it naturally recovers, if it recovers, years and years later, you would effectively kill the momentum of the recovery.
Fourth, I think you gain momentum for universal health care when the unemployment rate start creeping up and more and more people are taking the status of their employment a lot more seriously than they are right now. I think we're in for a bad first half of the year. This will do little to decrease public support for something like universal health care.
Fifth, the benefits of universal health care will be immediate, and will greatly improve millions of Americans' quality of life. What Krugman is advocating is a simultaneous left and right. I'm in favor of a one-two punch. I really want to land both squarely on the jaw of one of the most pressing problems our country faces, as powerfully as we possibly can. Can't do that if your feet aren't set.
Does universal health care help strengthen the economy? Absolutely, I think it does. Is it the right thing to do? Yessir. Do I want to stomp Republicans whenever I get a chance? Fucking A. Is this the most absolutely worst time to bring it up? Goddamn right it is.
Too sad.
Justice Ginsburg has been hospitalized with pancreatic cancer.
My best, and my most heartfelt thanks to both Justice Ginsberg and her family. She is a valiant woman, and her positive influence will leave a lasting mark both upon the Court, and the country.
My best, and my most heartfelt thanks to both Justice Ginsberg and her family. She is a valiant woman, and her positive influence will leave a lasting mark both upon the Court, and the country.
I almost posted this yesterday,
but I did not want to admit the defeat of the western economy. Presumably out of self interest.
We are that close, and it is that dire. And it appears that finally Obama is getting it.
I've told you, I tell you, and will continue to tell you that the enormity of the problem--and the enormity of the only logical solution--is almost incomprehensibly awesome.
There has been a vacuum of leadership that Obama, for whatever reason, has been unwilling to rightfully step into.
Congressional democratic leadership are mindless, soulless puppets of no discernible vision. They display the leadership instincts of sheep, who have been successfully played and shepherded by the inept Republican bumblers who have just had their asses handed to them in an electoral rout not seen in decades--consider the height of the Republican House advantage in the 1990s: 24 votes, which they achieved in 1994. The Democrats in the house currently have a 77 vote edge.
In the two years they have been in power, they have not made one decisive stand for the interests of the United States of America. Not one. Obama has wrongly allowed them the opportunity to show their meddle on an issue of such importance.
Give them a microphone and they will dribble platitudes of no consequence from their worthless mouths. They speak of generalities and the need for decorum and forbearance and restraint. Feeble in mind and adverse of the slightest risk, they cede initiative to shadows.
They do themselves, their party, the American people, and the Constitution a disservice.
This farce needs to end. I believe in the separation of powers of government. I believe in the ability to find bipartisan solutions to common problems. I believe in compromise. And I sure as fuck do not believe in the superiority of the theory of the unitary executive.
But Obama is going to have to kick them in the ass. Very, very hard. And make them do his bidding. I believe this not because the President should, but until we have a change in leadership, the President must.
There are no words to describe the current bill as anything other than a shameful, hopeless, tragic farce of deliberative politics. This is not American government at its finest hour, and we do not have the ability to wait for Congressional statesmanship to show up. The President must kill this bill right now, submit a new one mindful of introductory fucking macroeconomics, and inflict as much pain on Democrats as possible to pass. the. bill.
For those of us who have been following the stimulus progress, I think we realized today that it's over. Congress is unwilling to provide the economy what it needs to stop the free fall.
And there is nothing anybody is going to be able to do to stop it once its gets rolling, and oh brother, it hasn't even started yet. You will know it's started when the market rallies the second time after this piece of shit bill passes. The first will be the sucker euphoria, the second rally will be the vultures, the shorts, covering. And then I do not see a floor.
If you haven't already, immediately start putting away six months worth of living expenses into your savings. Assume high energy prices.
Dear reader, good luck. You will need it.
If you prefer to go out swinging, call, do not e-mail, your senators. http://www.senate.gov
We are that close, and it is that dire. And it appears that finally Obama is getting it.
I've told you, I tell you, and will continue to tell you that the enormity of the problem--and the enormity of the only logical solution--is almost incomprehensibly awesome.
There has been a vacuum of leadership that Obama, for whatever reason, has been unwilling to rightfully step into.
Congressional democratic leadership are mindless, soulless puppets of no discernible vision. They display the leadership instincts of sheep, who have been successfully played and shepherded by the inept Republican bumblers who have just had their asses handed to them in an electoral rout not seen in decades--consider the height of the Republican House advantage in the 1990s: 24 votes, which they achieved in 1994. The Democrats in the house currently have a 77 vote edge.
In the two years they have been in power, they have not made one decisive stand for the interests of the United States of America. Not one. Obama has wrongly allowed them the opportunity to show their meddle on an issue of such importance.
Give them a microphone and they will dribble platitudes of no consequence from their worthless mouths. They speak of generalities and the need for decorum and forbearance and restraint. Feeble in mind and adverse of the slightest risk, they cede initiative to shadows.
They do themselves, their party, the American people, and the Constitution a disservice.
This farce needs to end. I believe in the separation of powers of government. I believe in the ability to find bipartisan solutions to common problems. I believe in compromise. And I sure as fuck do not believe in the superiority of the theory of the unitary executive.
But Obama is going to have to kick them in the ass. Very, very hard. And make them do his bidding. I believe this not because the President should, but until we have a change in leadership, the President must.
There are no words to describe the current bill as anything other than a shameful, hopeless, tragic farce of deliberative politics. This is not American government at its finest hour, and we do not have the ability to wait for Congressional statesmanship to show up. The President must kill this bill right now, submit a new one mindful of introductory fucking macroeconomics, and inflict as much pain on Democrats as possible to pass. the. bill.
Quote of the Day
Let me tell you something that we Israelis have against Moses. He took us 40 years through the desert in order to bring us to the one spot in the Middle East that has no oil!
Golda Mier
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Don't Have the Votes
Oh for fuck's sake (a phrase which is clearly becoming the number #1 alternative name for this blog).
Democrats do not have the votes in the Senate for cloture on the stimulus bill.
Which means more tax breaks for Paris Hilton.
I actually heard about a pretty good proposal from the Republicans. The focus is on housing, and specifically extending and expanding the current $7,500 tax credit for first time homeowners, as well as moves to help lower interest rates, with a target of 4%. Practical ideas, surely, that I can support.
Obviously it's better than handing out money to ever goddamn government program that Democrats have tacked onto the bill, I guess for new copiers and clerical temps or whatever else that money is supposed to be spent on to "stimulate" the economy. Once you're out of infrastructure ideas, guys, stop spending. I've alluded to this before--not enough spending is worse than spending too much, but you absolutely cannot throw the money away. It will rob you of future economic growth. Free condoms and 26 more weeks of unemployment are good things, I think, but not in a stimulus bill.
Tax "relief" is, again, retarded, and the inability for Republicans to understand this is frustrating. However, providing carrot and stick incentives using tax credits to temporarily (& artificially) floor housing prices is a good way to staunch the bleeding, provided the band-aid sticks.
The proposal cannot stand on its own. It will have to work with a variety of other programs that target other sectors of the economy, that are designed to get people back to work and keep them there. Otherwise you're just attracting more suckers, adding more foreclosures 12 months from now, plus or minus a percentage or two, as more and more suckers lose their jobs. There's a big difference between delaying the inevitable and retooling your economy to become less reliant on the magical ability of housing to make everyone rich.
It's a stimulus bill, not a Christmas list, of which not a penny will be paid from 2009 tax receipts. In other words, Democrats are going to have to grow up, and not support spending on social programs that do not stimulate the economy. Separate bills are needed for that stuff.
I have to say I chafe a little at the idea that initiative for smart spending comes from R's and not D's, but it in no way diminishes my support. It's a good idea.
Democrats do not have the votes in the Senate for cloture on the stimulus bill.
Which means more tax breaks for Paris Hilton.
I actually heard about a pretty good proposal from the Republicans. The focus is on housing, and specifically extending and expanding the current $7,500 tax credit for first time homeowners, as well as moves to help lower interest rates, with a target of 4%. Practical ideas, surely, that I can support.
Obviously it's better than handing out money to ever goddamn government program that Democrats have tacked onto the bill, I guess for new copiers and clerical temps or whatever else that money is supposed to be spent on to "stimulate" the economy. Once you're out of infrastructure ideas, guys, stop spending. I've alluded to this before--not enough spending is worse than spending too much, but you absolutely cannot throw the money away. It will rob you of future economic growth. Free condoms and 26 more weeks of unemployment are good things, I think, but not in a stimulus bill.
Tax "relief" is, again, retarded, and the inability for Republicans to understand this is frustrating. However, providing carrot and stick incentives using tax credits to temporarily (& artificially) floor housing prices is a good way to staunch the bleeding, provided the band-aid sticks.
The proposal cannot stand on its own. It will have to work with a variety of other programs that target other sectors of the economy, that are designed to get people back to work and keep them there. Otherwise you're just attracting more suckers, adding more foreclosures 12 months from now, plus or minus a percentage or two, as more and more suckers lose their jobs. There's a big difference between delaying the inevitable and retooling your economy to become less reliant on the magical ability of housing to make everyone rich.
It's a stimulus bill, not a Christmas list, of which not a penny will be paid from 2009 tax receipts. In other words, Democrats are going to have to grow up, and not support spending on social programs that do not stimulate the economy. Separate bills are needed for that stuff.
I have to say I chafe a little at the idea that initiative for smart spending comes from R's and not D's, but it in no way diminishes my support. It's a good idea.
Daschle Out.
And Obama says, "Sorry."
I like Tom Daschle. If he hadn't been a punk, he would have been an honest broker who probably could have gotten a lot of the health care reform done, due to his overwhelming popularity in Congress. But he is a crook, so I'm sorry, too.
This is kind of why it's important to keep your nose clean, guys.
Anyway, without further ado,
I nominate Howard Dean for, eh, consideration for nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Even if they hate him in Congress, he can use every cabinet meeting to lobby for the continuance of the 50-state strategy.
I like Tom Daschle. If he hadn't been a punk, he would have been an honest broker who probably could have gotten a lot of the health care reform done, due to his overwhelming popularity in Congress. But he is a crook, so I'm sorry, too.
This is kind of why it's important to keep your nose clean, guys.
Anyway, without further ado,
I nominate Howard Dean for, eh, consideration for nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Even if they hate him in Congress, he can use every cabinet meeting to lobby for the continuance of the 50-state strategy.
Quote of the Day
The only reason I get any girls at all is because of who I am...a rapist.
Rodney Dangerfield.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
