home

Part 2 of The Deal

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 09:50:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

David Dayen:

John Boehner’s statement[. . .]:

Stopping all the tax hikes is a good first step [. . .] but much more needs to be done, including cutting spending, permanently eliminating the threat of job-killing tax hikes, and repealing the job-killing health care law[.]

This is one step along the road to the Norquistian dream of endless low taxes, starving the government of revenue, and the necessary reaction to that of cutting services[.]

Laissez les bons temps rouler.

< The Bush/Obama Tax Cuts | The Zombie Lie: Raising Taxes Impedes Growth >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Part 2 of The Deal | 14 comments (14 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Thank god (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by lilburro on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 10:13:18 AM EST
    Obama has a great track record when it comes to parrying Republican lies and reframing debates.  Otherwise I'd be worried.

    Heh. (none / 0) (#2)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 10:15:20 AM EST


    Parent
    The "Norquistian Dream" (none / 0) (#4)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 10:59:26 AM EST
    does not make sense to me,  even when I try to peek into their gilded vision of America as it works for them.  Of course, I start with jettisoning any altruism or concern for the poor or working classes and move to their own self-interests.  But, I still have trouble with it:  if the poor and even middle classes become hopeless and  are deprived of their dreams of betterment, they tend to move from expectations, to complacency and then to unrest.

    Norquistian government deprives the masses of their notion of the American Dream--be they real or illusory.  If we think of the populace as a Bell shaped curve, some will always require assistance in the grid of life. The Norquist ideology is devoid of an historic base, ignoring events such as the French Revolution, or the re-ordering of European aristocracy after the first world war. Since history is not their strong suit, you would think that they might be struck by the looks on Camilla's and Prince Charles faces, as their big, black Rolls Royce was pelted and spray painted, to a chorus of 'off with their heads".  But, if they are true to historic ignorance, their answer would be less and not more safety nets and more and not less oppression.

    Their answers are gated communities and (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 12:32:40 PM EST
    new and improved crowd control measures.

    Parent
    Somehow I found (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 01:00:14 PM EST
    am link to some of the new crowd control devices last week, such as sound blasters, microwaves, lights that make one feel seasick, and more.

    Frightening stuff.

    Parent

    Frightening stuff is right (none / 0) (#7)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 01:42:42 PM EST
    They will be used in the good old U.S. of A if the masses ever try to fight against their fate.

    Parent
    i took a course in college (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by CST on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 02:25:53 PM EST
    that discussed gated communities in the context of social impacts of architecture/engineering.

    The really ironic thing about gated communities is - who do you think they hire as guards?  Answer - mostly people in the demographic they are trying to "gate" out.

    You end up relying on the huddled masses to keep you secure from the rest of the huddled masses.  Which only works as long as the masses play along...

    Parent

    CST, the people in the 'lower' classes (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 02:42:49 PM EST
    frequently, if not most always, accept the ideologies of the rich. Their support of 'the system' keeps oppresive systems in place.m
    False Consciousness, Marx called it.

    Parent
    Maybe because (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 04:23:31 PM EST
    They all believe that maybe they, too, will someday be rich?

    Parent
    I wonder about that (none / 0) (#11)
    by CST on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 04:41:14 PM EST
    Because the fact of the matter is, the vast majority won't be.  I don't know how you would even see a path to that these days.

    The income divide just keeps growing and growing.

    I somehow doubt that most low income people today expect to ever be rich.

    Especially if we keep electing tea partiers.

    Parent

    I think it falls under the category of (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 04:45:03 PM EST
    "hope".  Nolt the fake kind that is sold as a political slogan, but real hope.

    I don't think most people think they will be rich, but they dream to have at least a nice, comfortable middle class life.

    Jed Bartlet said it best (when discussing the estate tax):

    Bartlet : "It doesn't matter if most voters don't benefit, they all believe that someday they will. That's the problem with the American Dream, it makes everyone concerned for the day they're gonna be rich."


    Parent
    infuriating (none / 0) (#14)
    by CST on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 04:47:57 PM EST
    by the time you're rich, that extra % on your taxes won't matter as much anymore.  That's the whole point.

    A nice, comfortable, middle class life doesn't come by giving tax cuts to the upper class.

    You can have that life for the low cost of $200,000 a year...

    Parent

    True, and political stability (none / 0) (#15)
    by KeysDan on Sat Dec 18, 2010 at 10:08:27 AM EST
    relies on both hope for betterment and investment in the status quo--home ownership, for example, has been recognized as being important and tax and other policies encourage this aspect of the American Dream.  Also, social safety nets, such as social security, contribute to the sense of investiture.  The tinkering with these foundations (elimination of tax credits for interest, or eviscerating other  safety nets that are a part of the social contract), in turn, runs the risk of tinkering with stability.   As they say, if you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.

    Parent
    yup (none / 0) (#12)
    by CST on Fri Dec 17, 2010 at 04:41:49 PM EST
    see election, 2010 edition

    Parent
    Part 2 of The Deal | 14 comments (14 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment