21 thoughts on “Excuse Our Coups!

  • Scottie, before there ever was Trump the candidate, Ted Cruz held the title of the most disliked politician in Washington. The reason is he was a grandstander rather than a deal maker. In my view, he almost single handedly caused the US to defaults on its debt, until ten female Senators stepped in with less than 24 hours to go to resolve the issue. In essence, they told Cruz to go stand in a corner. He did this over debt, but the same guy voted for a tax bill to increase the debt by $1.5 trillion.

    Donald Trump may now have taken the mantle as the most disliked politician, but Cruz remains unliked. Keith

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hello Keith. Yes I remember that. That is part of the hypocrisy I was talking about. How do we get people to see it? I remember Graham said that you could shoot Cruz on the Senate floor and no Senator would convict you.

      On taxes and the deficit. The Republicans have spent decades thinning the incoming revenue of the country by cutting the taxes on the wealthy and large corporations. It is like a person taking a pay cut year after year after year. It seriously cuts in to the budget and what you can afford to buy. Eventually if your income is cut deep enough you have to put things on credit. Even pairing down expenses only helps a little and never enough as prices keep going up and things must be bought to survive. Eventually in this state you have an emergency and you have to borrow far more than is wise or comfortable just to handle the emergency. The only real solution is to raise the income received. You need to bring in more money. The country and the people are in the same boat here. The people need more money to survive and the country needs to raise taxes way back up to where they were decades ago. Other wise just put up the Hover town signs now. Hugs

      Like

      • Scottie, I forgot that line about Cruz. As for the debt, both sides are culpable. We need both revenue increases and spending cuts to resolve our problem. The math will not otherwise work, so says the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.. As for the tax decreases, I like to say any politician can sell a tax decrease, but that is a disservice to addressing the real problem. Keith

        Liked by 1 person

        • Hello Keith. I would agree to spending cuts as long as they do not come from programs that assist the people to afford to live. We did not get into this problem by helping the lower income people too much so why should they pay to fix the problem? The problem was caused by shifting the tax burden on to the lower incomes from the upper incomes. Also I would remind you that a committee is only as good as its members. Would this committee have on it members of congress that were involved in cutting those taxes for the wealthy and shifting the burden in the first place? If so then they would of course recommend cuts to the very programs that barely keep people living now. I know a guy who is 74 years old. Worked all his life but at low paying jobs. He makes about $1,100 a month in social security, all the money he has to live. We recently had to find him assisted living or nursing home care. It was a nightmare. He had to qualify for Medicaid and then they allowed him to keep only $30 dollars a month of his Social Security. $30 a month. Gone is any quality of life. He shares a room now with a stranger because that is all that the government pays for. 74 years old. Worked all his life. But couldn’t get a job for more than minimum wage. Tell me do we cut his income further? Do we cut fuel assistance to the poor so they can freeze to death to increase the military budget each year? See Keith every time I read of the cuts part of the argument it is never the subsides to wealthy corporations like the oil and gas industries or cut back to Northrop Grumman / Lockheed Martin , but it is always Medicare / Medicaid and Social security, snap and food assistance programs. Basically it is the poor who need government help who lose. I think that needs to stop now if we really want to have a country and not a slave labor market place that uses people up before they die young for the oligarchs in charge. Hugs

          Liked by 1 person

            • Hello Nan. It is worse than most know. It cost Diane over 3 grand to pay for his first month because he had to be in assisted living / nursing home to qualify for Medicaid to pay for assisted living / nursing home coverage. Lucky she had it and was willing to use it for him, and most people wouldn’t have been able or willing. There is more but I will share with you another time. Hugs

              Liked by 1 person

          • Scott, the sad truth is we have waited so long, the cuts will need to be deeper than before. My biggest beef with Obama, who I liked as president, is he shelved the Simpson Bowles Deficit Reduction Committee report. That was ten years ago. The report called for $2 of cuts for $1 of tax increases. If we had started discussions of changes with that, we would not be in dire straights even before the pandemic relief. Kieth

            Liked by 1 person

            • Hello Keith. Again look at the framing. It is $2 cuts against $1 in increased taxes. Reverse that to even have a starting point! Again cutting services for the poor has been claimed since Reagon as needed to help the budget, saying it is the spending that is the problem. Yet as I said before that did not make the debt or deficit decrease did it? Cutting services to the poor never caused the problem we are in and it must not be the solution in getting us out of the problem. The fact is that cutting taxes after tax cut after cutting income sources caused the problem. Look at what the tRump tax cuts for the wealthy added to the problem.

              Look at what you wrote, we will need to cut deeper than before. No we don’t. We need to increase taxes back to where they were higher than we would have before. The reason is clear that we wouldn’t have to raise them so high if they had not been lowered so much. As I have mentioned before the times of the greatest economic boom and the rise of the middle class was when the tax burden was highest on the wealthy and corporations, which can afford it, and lowest on the lower incomes. During that time the services to the lower income and advances of the country were far greater than now. Think of what was accomplished in the 1950’s with the high tax rates for the wealthy and businesses, things like the interstate highway system, increased fully funded educations, improved home ownership opportunities, and later the moon landings in the late 1960’s. The government had the money to do things for the people, for the betterment of the country.

              Now wealthy people have whittled away at those tax revenues. They have squeezed the incoming money lines. Do more with less they screamed. Look where it got the country! The country is a wreck while the wealthy are taking ever more of the country’s GDP. That has to be reversed.

              Keith just look at other countries to see the model that works. Canada offers more services to the people and still has less debt than the US. Countries world wide manage to offer better services to the people because they do not slash taxes to give huge income jumps to the highest earners. The framing is wrong and if the US wants to be a developed country than the well being of the people has to be put before the draining every cent of the country upward to the wealthy. Hugs

              Liked by 1 person

              • Your Canada example? The “complaint” I’ve heard (from guess where?) is how high their taxes are. What seems to be the problem with this argument is people overlook (or ignore) how much the country uses that money to help its citizens. In this country, it all goes into the pockets of those who already have more than they could ever want to need.

                Liked by 1 person

                • Hello Nan. Your comment got me thinking, as you know I like to back my opinions with facts and sources. So I did a quick search and found the information. I posted two of the articles. I also read an interesting article that showed how unlike the US, Canada is raising rates on higher incomes and has the wealthy pay more of the tax burden. Must be nice to have a government not bought and paid for by the very wealthy. Hugs

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Hello Nan. Just for those reading along who may not read the two articles I posted. People in Canada pays about the same in taxes as the people in the US, some times less and some times more. However they also pay a lot less for their social security pensions and they have universal healthcare. Among other benefits the Canadians get for their taxes, which means in the end they pay less. Hugs.

                  Liked by 1 person

              • Scottie, I will have to say I disagree with you. We have a growing problem with that will exceed $40 trillion if left unchecked by the government. With about $3.5 trillion in revenue, if we did not spend one dime, then it would take fifteen years to pay it off with the interest cost. The interest cost will be a much larger share of our budget. Before the pandemic, our annual costs were about $4.5 trillion. So, we need to do something about it and it will take both expense cuts and tax increases. This is not outdated modeling. This is simple math. Keith

                Liked by 2 people

                • Hello Keith. Lets take the idea that if you print more money it devalues the existing money. That was true on the gold standard and many economist kept that thought. Do you agree with that? Hugs

                  Like

                • Hello Keith. You say it is math. Yes and the great thing about math is it works in many ways. You can configure it to solve the problem as you want. If you want to solve the problem with cuts then you will need cuts. If you want to solve the problem with out it you can. Your choice. Hugs

                  Like

  • I didn’t watch the video (surprise! surprise!), but I did take a studied gander at that picture of Trump … the REAL Trump. Old, baggy eyes, wrinkled skin, mouth hanging open like he doesn’t understand what’s going on …

    A TRUE image — one that he works very hard to keep under wraps.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Hello Keith. I disagree. We simply know what a prior group said based on outdated modeling of an economy and fiscal policies that may not still apply. Here is the breakdown who voted for it, “… only 11 out of the 18 commissioners (five Republicans, five Democrats, and one independent) voting to endorse the commission’s blueprint]”. It was disputed even then and I doubt the math of it would stand our time. I did not look into the individual members or their ages, but were they all running on the same economic theory that some economist such as Robert Reich disavow today as they did then?

    https://robertreich.org/post/1549020696

    At their best, presidential commissions focus the public’s attention – not only on the right solution to some important problem but also on the right problem. Sadly, this preliminary report does neither.

    As to solution, the report mentions but doesn’t emphasize the biggest driver of future deficits – the relentless rise in health-care costs coupled with the pending corrosion of 77 million boomer bodies. This is 70 percent of the problem, but it gets about 3 percent of the space in the draft.

    The report suffers a more fundamental error – the unquestioned assumption that America’s biggest economic challenge is to reduce the federal budget deficit.

    <

    The preliminary report of the President’s deficit commission doesn’t help. It’s another example of budget-deficit mania generating more heat than light.

    The premise of the commission was not universally accepted, and it was widely panned. There are some who agree with it and it seems you are one. I side with those who did not then and do not now. I wont even address anything that is framed “twice as much cuts as raising income” because those cuts come from the programs that help the poorest people and need more funding now to work correctly. As I said the cuts never come from programs helping the wealthiest people, that is never thought to be a problem by the wealthy. They only see programs helping the poor and of course social security as the drain on the country. Social Security for a single person is not enough to live on in most areas, that is a fact, cutting it wont make anyone’s life better. Raising the retirement age has been fine for some like congress people and maybe office workers, but it is hell on those who have rough hard jobs that require strong bodies. It was shifting the majority share of the countries GDP to the wealthy instead of being used to help the people that has caused the problem. The shifting of the tax burden from the wealthy to the lower incomes. You want to fix the problem, shift that tax burden back. I bet we could fix the entire budget problem if we returned to the tax rates and system of the 1950-1955 with just minor tweaks for current inflation. Fix the whole thing and make it better. But that would make the wealthy and the large corporations that pay much more taxes and screaming tears of blood.

    No Keith the solution is not cuts unless we start with subsidies to wealthy corporations, corporate / wealthy loopholes, and the defense contractors. Those shouldn’t be getting government money anyway.

    It comes down to what you believe the government’s job is, to care for the wellbeing of the people, or to support capitalism for the making of profit. While the wellbeing of the people can include restrained regulated capitalism, capitalism run amok with out controls kills the wellbeing of the people.

    Again Keith we only need look to the Scandinavian countries, Canada, and other developed nations to see a better mix of taxation and programs for the people. We do not have to reinvent the wheel, just admit ours is lopsided and needs repairs. I found this an interesting read, agreeing with some of it, and not other parts. Hugs
    https://harvardpolitics.com/is-it-time-to-get-over-bowles-simpson/

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.