I'm with the Republicans on this one
Not gonna lie, I've been paying pretty good attention to everything going on with this budget BS going on in Congress right now and I can't help but come to the conclusion that the Democrats are being absurd. I usually play it pretty moderate (for the last couple years being 100% GOP has been pretty dumb), but with the Dems screaming that the Republicans budget cuts aren't fair, deaf to anything but the Tea Party screamers, blah blah blah they are starting to sound like raving loons. I really feel that at this point we desperately need these deep cuts, and allowing the government to shut down because you have to save every damn inefficient social program under the sun is incredibly irresponsible. Maybe Harry Reid's "it's all the GOP's fault I can do no wrong" speech just got me going, but this really annoys me.
Congress is having trouble agreeing? Call the papers! This is getting way to much media attention...again. This isn't going to be any different than the last couple dozen times. On the 11th hour they'll come to some quasi-agreement consisting of an extended deadline, token cuts, or perfunctory debt ceiling raise.
Yeah, you're completely right. The Federal budget is completely meaningless, it does not matter at all what is decided, if it shuts down no one will even notice, and the media should just give up and focus more on things that matter, like bringing me more articles on Snooki.
Austerity might not be the best move right now, as the negative economic effects of austerity in Europe have shown.
But, fuck that shit. I just want lower income tax.
Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. It would be nice to actually make some meaningful cuts in entitlements, etc. However, I don't think for a second that will actually happen.
and what do you expect those that rely on your taxes do, go get jobs? sheesh...
Talk about insanity!!
Regards
The Republican budget cuts have nothing to do with economics. It is about defunding things they object to on partisan grounds. If you agree with Republican policies, maybe you can support them, but if you want to look at it in good conscience, both parties are refusing to make any actual budget cuts. However, at least the Democrats are being honest about their thinking, and understand the basic Keynesian concepts at work. The Republicans are being intellectually dishonest, and profiting from such. They are pretending to favour fiscal responsibility, when in actuality their cuts are simply skin deep and targeted at programs they dislike. The expense of delaying the passage of a budget at this point is almost equal to the amount they expect to cut. Rather than fucking around with a fight over discretionary non-defence spending, it would have made more sense to take that political capital and time and tackled defence and entitlement spending.
Whats your point? Democrats favor insanity level spending and blaming everything on Bush and current republicans. Republicans favor cutting with drasticly lower insanity spending and blame the Democarts for being social welfare vote panders. Does it really matter? Theres is only one thing we can do and thats cut spending. You can argue to raise taxes all you want but its a moot point. There has to be budget cuts. I favor 6 billion in cuts with a deficit of 3 billion over the next 10 years over a few hundred billion in totally "skin deep, we are making progress, for the media" cuts and a projected 7 trillion dollar deficit. Which we all know is just total horseshit its going to be more like 10 trillion.
Sorry, I don't think I follow. Firstly, Democrats would be right to blame Bush and the Republican party for the deficit; Republicans simply do not understand the idea of countercyclical budgeting, although the Democratic party is too pussy to point that out. Democratic spending levels are not "insane," they are based in Keynesian ideas that have been accepted economics for decades. Budgets need to be reformed, but not at all how the Republicans are going about doing it. I did not argue that we should raise taxes; we are going to have to, but not now; that defeats the point of Keynesian spending.
The expansion of the Federal government and deficit is a long term problem that needs to be met with long-term solutions, not attacks on services you disagree with.
And I have no idea what your figures mean.
This is exactly what is going on. Both sides are agreeing we need to cut but there are ideological differences and a lot of the things Reps want to cut are pretty serious issues that just can't be slipped into a bill. I don't know much about this and pretty much everybody here doesn't because they are not on the floor and just reading news articles but it seems like we'd be OKAY if we didn't cut billions of dollars more by Friday midnight in the grand scheme of things and this can be debated later on.
There are two choices, raise the debt level and borrow more money, or cut a bunch of overlaping crap and entielments that dont benefit society in any way. The democrats want to borrow and spend the Republicans want to cut and close the gap that way. Problem is they are all a bunch of pussies who stick their thumbs in their asses and then suck on them, with the exception of Ryan who actually has the balls to talk about the seriousness of the situation.
Eh, Republicans are taking the opportunity to defund things they oppose. The democrats took the opportunity "stimulate" their own pet projects. How's that high speed rail coming (there seem to be eminent domain issues in many states, as well as questionable revenue projections)? I can't really be upset with the GOP defunding what it doesn't like.
What does bother me is why this hasn't been resolved. It's embarrassing. Is our government so efficient that there isn't one budget that both parties can agree on slashing? Its not even like the gap is that big.
The point is there isn't a right answer. Everyone's got an opinion that they're sure of. From wallstreetoasis undergrad sophmores to dumb shmuck politicans everyone "knows" the way out of the deficit.
When we get down to the grits of the issue, no one would deny that it's an economics issue. I'd bet a good percentage of congressmen haven't taken basic courses in economics. If they have it was probably so long ago that they don't know which way the supply and demand curves shift. Let's everyone just for ONE second have an honest debate and talk about the real issues. Let's start consulting with the economists, hell let's even put them in the senators seats.
It's not about having balls or beings pussies. It's really just far more complicated then that. The fact is there is no easy answer.
You got the head economists at major banks like Goldman and MS (at least this was true over the summer) disagreeing about whether we'd be back on track for steamroller growth or japanified by now. You have academic economists debating the relative merits of monetary/fiscal policy, arguing the both present risks of hyperinflation vs. liquidity trap (each, of course, would require the exact opposite monetary/fiscal policy). THESE ARE COMPLICATED ISSUES. I just FKING HATE watching TV and listening to these confident dbags act like they got it figured out.
What is the right answer? I have no idea. Neither do any of you. So stop faking it.
When it comes down to it everyone's out for their self interest anyway; a scarce few actually care about macroeconomic well-being.
Bernanke for President 2012!
End rant.
Im not claiming to have the answer, I am just pointing out what in general has to be done. What pisses me off more than anything is that democrats just scream, wail and call people racists, killers of the elderly, or what ever they think will help their cause. Instead of sitting down and explaining their views they demonize anyone who doesnt agree with them.
Very true. Republicans, of course, employ similar tactics. It's really all you can do when you have little to no understanding of the underyling issues.
So no Republican has ever brought up "death panels," the "death tax," or Obama's birth certificate?
I'm sorry dude, but that shit goes both ways. It's sad, but it's also politics. You might think this is a new low for political discourse, but those founding fathers which we so revere were not much better. Aaron Burr SHOT Alexander Hamilton
Also, I'd really like to survey politicians and ask them to define liquidity trap
Honestly, the tactics used by Dems are a lot more cogent but still somewhat distracting from the main point as jsmort11 said. "Death panels," birth certificate, and calling Obama and secret muslim and a nazi are not even in the immediate debate and is stirring up unwanted controversy and rallying a base on things that are just not relevant.
I agree with you that both sides do similar things. I disagree that the democrats have offered up any useful or even remotely plauseable "solution." They bitch and moan about the republicans loving the status quo and not wanting change in any way. Yet they make total asses out of them selves when they defend the status quo of spending to the death of their career.
I would really like to see some legitimately educated people in Washington. JD's are great, but they should not be voting on fiscal policy. I sometimes wonder what would happen if you just filled the legislature with Econ, PolySci and Business PhDs.
Everyone I knew in college considering law school was goddamn phobic of numbers. I doubt many even took econ beyond 101 in undergrad. These people should not be setting national policy, they should be drafting contracts or something.
Short of being openly Nazi or communist, I would vote for anyone with a phd in econ automatically. I'm not registered to vote because I hate politics but I'd make an exception.
Firstly, you lose your right to complain about politics when you're not even registered to vote. Seriously, that is pathetic.
Secondly, an econ PhD is hardly the best qualification you can have for office. Sidestepping the issue that a ton of barely qualified people get econ PhDs from shitty schools, there are two very distinct schools of economics, and they are not particularly compatible. There is a massive difference between the economics you learn at Chicago, and the economics you learn at Princeton. If you think only one of those models is valid, why would you vote for someone who will base all their assumptions in a different model?
Thirdly, the majority of econ PhDs live in a ridiculous pseudo-universe where ceteris paribus rules, tail risk doesn't exist, and their model dominates.
Agreed. Wish there was a better alternative to the two party system. They don't have anything threatening them so they pretty much say whatever they want.
Wouldnt it be better to elect people who dont carry tons of advanced degrees. If you think about it people who think in a straight forward maner, don't give a fuck about PC, and actually get shit done instead of always watching where they step would be much better.
links from krugman, american progress, and slate. Well that tells me all i need to know about drexelalum. Your keynesian drunk econ-professor must be proud.
I realize dukeofduke is troll of the highest order, but damn near all of the House members are stupid (senate gets a reprieve, but not completely). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to run for congress. These people were on the community water board or personal injury attorneys before becoming Congress members. They truly represent "the people" and the people are by and large retarded.
Ryan's budget has problems, but I'll take it on "better than anything else i've heard" grounds. The Economist, hardly a bastion of conservative thinking, even praised it. Someone has to deal with entitlement programs...the can has been kicked down the road too many times. You wanna cut some defense spending too? Fine with me but that aint the biggest issue.
]
he was running for county treasurer, and didn't win...but if he had joined congress he'd probably be in the upper echelon
Maxine Waters is probably the worst, and Corrine Brown (seen here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgbBP9Em00A& ) is certainly up there. There are plenty just like them.
Numquam facere exercitationem sit debitis. Eveniet ad aperiam omnis dolores autem. Voluptatum dolor cumque eveniet exercitationem ut corrupti omnis. Recusandae laudantium rerum sed vero.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Vel a quidem deserunt veniam itaque corporis numquam. Nesciunt possimus qui tempora velit dolores fugiat.