Comments on: On Loving and Leaving the Democrats

By: Dr_J

Dr_J — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 04:05:08 +0000

Thanks, Roro, I picked up from George. Your claims to be advocating liberalism by taxing everyone for the next generation were hyperbole too, right?

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:37:26 +0000

If anything, more and more of the public will realize that the Democrats have left them, except to tax them.

By: archangel

archangel — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 23:51:56 +0000

“Let's dance, my little Sprockets!”

You know you crack a lot of us up, right? (Even though most of us are probably a little 'cracked' to begin with. )

By: roro80

roro80 — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:24:34 +0000

Thank you, Dr. J, for your extremely astute observation that I was using hyperbole. You sure are clever to have figured that one out.

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:39:34 +0000

NP. You had just made the post as a 'reply' to mine, so I 'assumed' you were talking to me.

Time to go to a new thread. This one has gotten…tedious. Let's dance, my little Sprockets!

By: Dr_J

Dr_J — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:15:54 +0000

Yes, George, it is a caricature. No one literally polled about free ice cream either.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:23:11 +0000

Dr J--

So, who made the argument that Europeans live to be 150 years old?

You're obviously exaggerating and caricaturing the arguments you don't like.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:13:27 +0000

Austin Roth–

I was actually directing my comment about Republican financial irresponsibility to the whole vast internet, not you.

Since you have comments on this very thread complaining about that, I guess I thought it obvious that I wasn't talking about you. Sorry to be sloppy.

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 05:44:58 +0000

US debt pays damn near zero interest, is denominated in US Dollars and sells like hot cakes.

Um, yeah, that is why recent bond sales have tanked so bad we had to have the Treasury print funny money to buy our own debt.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopic...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087...

http://www.nationalpost.com/rss/story.html?id=1...

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 05:10:15 +0000

Well, China is sure getting nervous now, as are a lot of other countries.

They can stop buying anytime they want, nobody is putting a gun to their head...

Oh, that's right if they stop buying our debt, we won't be able to buy their crap and their export dependent economy will collapse, cry me a river...

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:40:21 +0000

DQ -

Well, China is sure getting nervous now, as are a lot of other countries.

Remember, past performance is no guarantee of future results!

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:24:27 +0000

GS - please find the post where I said Republicans were the embodiment of fiscal restraint. I believe I have used the same expression against both sides, that they are giving drunken sailors a bad name.

I am not saying that the Republicans would have done necessarily anything different than Obama (execpt i really don't think they would have taken over GM/Chrysler, ignored bankruptcy law concerning debt seniority, and handed the company over to the unions. I really don't)

I am the 'A pox on both their houses' guy, remember? They are the opposite sides of the same coin. I think the entire government is subverted and corrupt.

And if I were to lose my job and find myself on the edge of being destitute, would my views change? As our newest Senator used to say, 'When I was young, I protested against the draft. But now that I have turned 27 and am no longer eligible, my views have changed dramatically."

By: Dr_J

Dr_J — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:06:39 +0000

You are the master of the cryptic comment, George. Perhaps you mean to imply I'm standing in their way somehow? Those arguments have all been made on these very pages, not like I'm making this stuff up.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:57:56 +0000

Dr J–

Maybe people who disagree with you should be allowed to make their own arguments?

; )

By: Dr_J

Dr_J — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:49:26 +0000

Sorry if my meaning is too hard to apprehend, there, George. I'll be more literal. People who pronounce Europe's health care systems hands-down better than ours, people who claim porkbarrel giveaways and long-term capital projects provide short-term stimulus, and people who paint the government-programs-yet-to-come as more efficient and reliable stewards of our interests than those run by the politicians we have are all either dishonest or ill-informed about the benefits of the policies they're championing.

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:41:58 +0000

But I'm not aware of anybody at all implying that Europeans live to be 150 years old.

Jeanne Calment, World's Elder, Dies at 122

That's the best they have been able to do, a measly 122 years. Imagine how long that woman would have lived, had she had access to American know-how and medical care.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:24:06 +0000

Dr J--

I agree with you that we, as a culture, aren't honest about what the costs are. And I agree with you that the result of such a dialog might take any of the dimensions you suggest.

But I'm not aware of anybody at all implying that Europeans live to be 150 years old.

Right?

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:20:04 +0000

he single biggest difference between then and now is then those who lent actually believed they would get paid back.

The Federal Government has been issuing bonds of one sort or another for the last 225 years, and it has never defaulted, not once...

With that kind of track record, everyone who is loaning money to the Federal Government expects to be paid back. If for some reason the Federal Government was unable to pay back the federal debt, it would be the least of our problems.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:15:39 +0000

Austin Roth--

Sure, some debt is better than other debt. But the distinction between good debt and bad debt is mostly subjective.

If you had a good job in 2007, lost it in 2008, and were in danger of losing your house in 2009, your subjective view of the Bush and Obama stimulus packages might be somewhat different than it now is.

(Not that I'm wishing anything bad on you, of course.)

I agree with what JSpencer said in the first comment to this thread. Both Bush and Obama responded with the conventional wisdom for dealing with recessions: increased government spending.

I also agree with JSpen's nervousness about the level of debt. It's possible that Obama's policies will fail.

If so, then what?

The notion that Republicans are somehow the party of fiscal responsibility is not supported by evidence.

By: Dr_J

Dr_J — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 01:56:01 +0000

Maybe you think the people currently alive should suck it up and pay more taxes now so future generations won't get stuck with our bills?

What I think is we should be honest about what the costs are. People claiming entitlement programs are paying or will pay for themselves are being deceived or less-than-honest themselves about costs. People implying Europeans live to 150 are not being honest about benefits. People citing poll results that 70% of the public supports free ice cream aren't encouraging an honest analysis of trade-offs either.

If we could have such a dialog, there would probably be give and take in a number of dimensions. They might involve raising taxes, or lowering expectations, or embracing more serious systemic reforms. We might even decide that our grandparents had it much worse than us in every dimension, our grandchildren will probably have it much better, and we really are going to stick them with a bunch of bills. I'm not necessarily against any of those outcomes, but who knows? It's a conversation we're not having today.