Kevin Drum writes:

If, right now, you were to offer corporations and the rich a choice between (a) passage of EFCA or (b) a return to Clinton-era tax rates on high incomes, they wouldn't even blink. If you put a gun to their head and they had to choose between one or the other, they'd pay the higher taxes without a peep.

Lucky for corporations and the rich, they did not have to choose as the "most progressive Administration and Congress in a generation" did not pass EFCA and extended the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

Imagine that.

< Sunday Afternoon Open Thread | The Benign Neglect Of Tax Policy >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Sadly, the only (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by NYShooter on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 05:51:42 PM EST
    Place(s) that the public can discover the truth about anything is here, on blogs, or your public library. Certainly the MSM, or our school system won't tell the story of why the greatest periods of growth, for the greatest numbers of people occurred during the times that unions were strong.

    Even Rockefeller became a billionaire then; imagine that.

    Interesting Comment (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 06:11:49 PM EST
    in the Comments section of the Kevin Drum article

    "I know it is getting into scary liberal talk that Very Serious People get uncomfortable with, but the only reason that labor lost all of this power was because the right wing was able to scare them away from Democrats with black people and other wedge issues. The Dems stood on principle on race (and good for them!) but we're either near or are at the point where it is counterproductive for minorities too to continue to let everyone's civil rights hinge on whatever the financial class wants to tolerate."


    Rockefeller became a billionaire (none / 0) (#8)
    by me only on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 08:05:21 PM EST
    when Standard Oil was broken up.  That was in 1911.  Unionization at that times was about 10.5% of the non-farm labor in the US.

    Today unionization is about 9% of non-farm labor.


    Today unionization is about 9% (none / 0) (#9)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 08:18:33 PM EST

    More than that in government and about 7% in private industry.

    And Yet (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by The Maven on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 05:59:28 PM EST
    practically not a day goes by without yet another indication that the Administration indicates its intent to move to the "center" (always conveniently determined by the Beltway media to be further to the right of wherever Obama previously had been) so as to combat the phony perception that up to this point it's been ferociously anti-business and waging a class war.  (Ha!)

    As the right wing keeps moving what only a few short years ago was considered to be loony territory into what is now deemed mainstream conservative, Obama seemingly chases rightward after them, abandoning more and more core principles the Democratic Party once stood for.

    What's especially pathetic is that virtually no one in the mainstream media ever so much as hints at this, pretending instead to paint Obama as still coming from the liberal end of the political spectrum, and thus feeding this false meme.

    Well, (none / 0) (#4)
    by NYShooter on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 06:18:33 PM EST
     the Right and the Beltway can paint Obama anyway they want because he has shown himself to be the "blank canvas," or more cynically, "empty suit," that many have described him as.

    As long as every source of information: schools, MSM, and/or the Democrats themselves have clamped a censored sign on teaching the public what Democratic values really mean (or used to, anyway,) for most Americans.......paint away.


    More and more (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Maryb2004 on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 06:54:22 PM EST
    the mainstream bloggers seem to live in hypotheticals instead of reality.  Maybe because reality sucks.

    I think in five years ... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 07:11:40 PM EST
    bloggers may discover socialism and think they invented it.  Or they might just discover Cuba think it's India.

    Anyway, one of those of things.



    Kevin's a bit slow ... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 07:06:25 PM EST
    He gets to essential the right point.  But, geez, does it take him an age.  And that "age" is mostly made up of mealy-mouthed excuses for taking so long.

    It's like watching a kid work out his first problem with fractions.  

    Paul Ryan wants to privatise Medicare (none / 0) (#10)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 09:19:14 PM EST

    "Republicans have chosen House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin to deliver the State of the Union response. Mr. Ryan has outlined a vision of smaller, less-intrusive government, extending to popular programs such as Medicare, which he would turn increasingly over to the private sector."

    Talk about your death panels. (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 09:44:17 PM EST
    Ryan's plan would turn Medicare into a system of vouchers that seniors/disabled would use to purchase insurance and healthcare on the open market.

    In the absence of the cost controls inherent in the current Medicare reimbursement system, seniors/disabled would soon find health care to be very unaffordable.

    I cannot for the life of me figure out why Obama thinks Ryan is a smart guy with good ideas. Yeah, i know, PPUS, but Ryan is just not very bright.


    When one stops trying to think of (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by Anne on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 08:35:33 AM EST
    Obama as a Democrat whose goal, underneath all the bipartisan BS, is to advance Democratic ideas, and starts thinking of him as a Republican hiding behind the Democratic brand, who is more comfortable with, and who philosophically aligns himself with, Republicans, his affinity for Paul Ryan's intellect and ideas makes perfect sense.

    I think, as a Democrat, Obama is a lost cause; he needs to be dealt with - strategically, politically and ideologically - as a Republican.

    As for Ryan, and the rest of the "less intrusive, smaller government" contingent, how about they start by ceasing their efforts to use the government to impose on the entire populace their own beliefs on abortion, sexuality, religion, marriage and every other personal and private matter?  


    Obama has no ideas (none / 0) (#12)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jan 23, 2011 at 11:18:53 PM EST
    of his own or at least no convictions.

    I think he really believes that history will look kindly on him if he compromises no matter what the consequences are to the nation.

    I don't believe the real state of the nation is even a consideration for him.  He may not be capable of grasping the concept.


    If you put a gun to their head (none / 0) (#13)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 08:00:41 AM EST

    If you put a gun to their head...

    Where do you suppose this violent rhetoric will lead?

    Maybe at another site (none / 0) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 08:38:47 AM EST
    this jibe would make sense, not at this one.

    Well. (1.00 / 0) (#16)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 08:51:11 AM EST

    just keep it in mind the next time you call the kettle black.

    weak, very very weak (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Dadler on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:31:44 AM EST
    yes yes, all those raging armed liberals out there will hold a gun to your head. the numbers of moveon members and credo members and democracy now viewers who have weapons is terrifying. and the threats coming from the left are truly stupefying.  

    return to reality, please, if it's not too late.

    sorry i didn't punch up this comment a little more, but I thought punching up would be too violent a term to use.



    Get back to us when ... (5.00 / 0) (#20)
    by Yman on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:17:52 AM EST
    ... the use of common metaphors causes the left to form militia groups and engaging in acts of violence.

    I know (none / 0) (#17)
    by lilburro on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:26:20 AM EST
    it's really a shame BTD won't take responsibility for his rhetoric, he could've been Vice President after all.  Where is the leadership.

    That's actually the point (none / 0) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:15:28 AM EST
    I did not write in condemnation of "violent rhetoric." The re was not pot calling at all at this site.  

    An odd hypothetical (none / 0) (#21)
    by lilburro on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:36:30 AM EST
    if Obama were to trade EFCA for ending the Bush tax cuts, the unions would go nuts.  And I wouldn't want to see that anyway, politically or policy-wise.  A really sh*tty deal...perhaps indicative of how much big business owns this country.

    so that got neither (none / 0) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:42:31 AM EST
    EFCA nor repeal of the Bush tax cuts. Nice job.

    Well EFCA (none / 0) (#23)
    by lilburro on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 10:59:17 AM EST
    would've looked better on the table than unemployment insurance, which should've passed anyway if they were willing to put some pressure on the GOP.  But if it were a choice between EFCA and the outright repeal of the Bush tax cuts, I would choose EFCA.  Assuming the extension of the cuts was as it is now, only temporary.