Tea Party's Cold War Roots

[jk]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Indulge me for a second. I'm watching all this from Canada. We have our problems and we've had our share of luck, especially with regard to the timing of our fiscal crises (a Liberal government paid down debt aggressively during a relatively prosperous period of growth worldwide.) Much of our apparent virtue is dumb luck.

But I really think there is one thing we've sidestepped that has been disastrous to America and it is this: the wholesale repudiation of the existence of a common interest among citizens expressed, imperfectly of course, in public services.

I'm sitting here with decent if not exceptional schools; banks that have needed only marginal support (bailing out ABS market as an example) through a world-wide banking crisis; and universal health care. All this with a pretty tolerable tax regime and the best performance of I believe the G20 through the crisis.

This can be put down to the fact that there is enough belief in state power as an expression of common interests that bank regulators - as a key example - can regulate. There is a public utility aspect to banking. It is not like any other business. The creation of credit can be privatised and made more efficient in the process (as in Canada) but only if supervision is correspondingly vigilant. It can't be if the regulatory plumbing has been gutted and it can only be gutted if the whole project of protecting the common interest has been de-legitimised.

Much of what I've seen of American political trends in my lifetime looks to me like a wholesale de-legitimising of any expression of common interest. My favourite example is that of the bankruptcy judge. That is simply an essential service in a capitalist economy and it is completely reliant on state power for legitimacy. And yet somehow the media were able to spin the idea of resolving insolvent banks through bankruptcy proceedings was somehow deemed nationalisation and creeping socialism. (As if the entire mortgage market and banking system had not already been absorbed into the state and essentially nationalised already and was being gamed wholesale by private interests.)

I really think the "big government" meme, especially if it is allowed to be shrunk-fit around essential state functions like regulation, is a political poison pill that is killing the "post-industrial" west.

If this sounds like "big government" to anyone here, fine.

individualism morphed into free market fundamentalism, which was promulgated by corporate media owned by larger and larger entities with correspondingly lessened interest in public service and journalism per se. the "enthusiasm gap" that has hit progressives is, i believe, a reflection of their realization that the government itself has, along with both parties, ceased to function as channels for the expression of common interest. it is merely another instrumentality of power.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

The TARP was passed on October 3, 2008, signed into law by President Bush. Re-writing history is far more effective if you try it, say, fifty years after the fact instead of two.

From The New York Times, updated Sept 7, 2010: "On Feb 11, 2009, Congress gave final approval to a $787 billion bill, THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND RE-INVESTMENT ACT."

Last time I checked, the President was inaugurated in the U.S. on Jan 25, 2009. So in just over two weeks, maybe three, the Demos had passed $787,000,000,000 to fund what is now known as the TARP.

Go read the story for yourself. But this was just the beginning of the spending....... And it would be different if the spending would have created jobs, but the spending created a massive deficit that is now destroying the U.S. economy. In fact, the U.S. economy is a drag on the world's economy now.

Do you want Nancy Pelosi's exact words? The words were, something like, "This is a national emergency....... We were never spoken to like that before by any Federal Reserve Bank System, chairman...... We have to pass this funding bill."

No wonder people are upset. People are not dumb.

I won't post further because I hate the Republicans and always did, but the spending is OUTRAGEOUS. Spending just to be spending is not liberal and not progressive. The Demos spent to bail-out the banks, and help Goldman-Sachs, help Wall Street, and supposedly to help the economy. It was stupid. And it was spending to reward the banks who contributed to the Demo Party.

[leegs]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

[QUOTE=Starving Steve;177768]From The New York Times, updated Sept 7, 2010: "On Feb 11, 2009, Congress gave final approval to a $787 billion bill, THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND RE-INVESTMENT ACT."

Steve Steve Steve - Stimulus <> TARP. The distinction is fairly important IMO. One is arguably un-strategic and wasteful spending on things like roads, weatherization, support of state budgets, the other is the bankster bailout.

I'm not commenting on the merits of either, just trying to clarify.

[jk]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

we've got to keep our $700B bailouts straight. there was tarp for the bankers. there was the stimulus for the shovel-ready. and there's the continued lowered tax rates for the upper 2% of earners [currently in play]. about $700B each. it appears that $700B is our new standard, average sized expenditure for anything that counts. you know what they say: $700B here, $700B there; pretty soon you're talking about real money.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Yes, the TARP was Bush's idea, but the Obama Demos funded the TARP.

Yes, Bernanke was Bush's choice for Fed Chairman. But the fact is, the Obama Demos went along with Bernanke, and they also re-appointed Bernanke to continue-on at the Fed. OUTRAGEOUS!

Shall we follow the money-trail of campaign contributions by the big banks to the Demos? Do you want the amount? Who got what?

I am fed-up!

[oddlots]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

individualism morphed into free market fundamentalism, which was promulgated by corporate media owned by larger and larger entities with correspondingly lessened interest in public service and journalism per se. the "enthusiasm gap" that has hit progressives is, i believe, a reflection of their realization that the government itself has, along with both parties, ceased to function as channels for the expression of common interest. it is merely another instrumentality of power.

Nicely put. Those are my suspicions too. On a fundamental basis though is there any avoiding a return to a recognition of the importance of public sovereignty? What other exit is there?

[jk]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Nicely put. Those are my suspicions too. On a fundamental basis though is there any avoiding a return to a recognition of the importance of public sovereignty? What other exit is there?

that's the only exit that leads someplace nice. i think things are going to get worse before they get better, if they get better at all. [in my lifetime, anyway]

[tastymannatees]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

CT health insurance hikes up to 47%


I took a double hit with my wife and I both being over 55 this year we had 5 company choices with 4 being around $2200- $2300 and one $1700 a month(BCBS) for a family of 3 with no health problems.
We increased the deductible to $10,000 and got it down to $1300 about what we were paying before,
Self employed so we pay the full vig on everything.
If VAT, Cap and Trade and other taxes & mandated spending along with dollar devaluation go up/decline much more it will be interesting to see how much disposable income I will have left, if any.

The Tea Party may be ignorant of the specifics of the financial problem but it does not take a rocket scientist to recognize we are spending and taxing ourselves into oblivion. They are first and foremost a tax protest group not unlike the 4,000 anti-tax leagues that formed during the great depression.

For me charity begins at home not for the big banks, over funded pensions, Government or some idiot who bought a boat and BMW and needs my money for a bail out. Couple of years out methinks many here will belong to the tea party.....

[blazespinnaker]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Unfortunately for the tea party while the solution is a smaller government, it ain't a stupider government.

[oddlots]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Unfortunately for the tea party while the solution is a smaller government, it ain't a stupider government.

Perfect. Sold as zinger of the week

[tastymannatees]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Rasmussen: 70% Say Government Does Not Spend Taxpayer Money Wisely
Rasmussen Reports ^ | October 17, 2010 | Scott Rasmussen

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 61% of Adults think the federal government has too much power and money.
Perhaps that's no surprise since 66% believe America is overtaxed.
Only 14% say the government has too little power and money, and 19% more feel they have about the right amount. These findings show little change from early April 2009.
An overwhelming 70% of Adults say the government does not spend taxpayer’s money wisely and fairly. Just 16% believe the government does spend this money correctly, while another 14% are not sure.
Just 47% of government workers say the government has too much power and money, compared to 65% of those who work in the private sector.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of voters prefer a smaller government with fewer services and lower taxes to a more active one that offers more services and higher taxes.
A plurality of Americans believe that government programs increase poverty in America.
Just 25% of voters believe the current policies of the federal government have put the U.S. economy on the right course.

(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com

Looks like a grass roots movement to me when 70% of the population is at odds with the "genius" ivy leaguers that run our government, surprising they can not read the tea leaves being so smart an all. John Birch does not seem to be the case here... going to be an interesting election night.

I Wonder what the 30% group consists of? Government workers? People who don't pay taxes?

[jpetr48]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Looks like a grass roots movement to me when 70% of the population is at odds with the "genius" ivy leaguers Exactly.

Unless I have missed a key soundbyte, no one for office has started a good debate on what are the new qualification for an elected official. What if we placed our elected officials under the same scrutiny we place on a new CEO.

In the private sector you must bring to the table the givens like intellectual capacity, integrity etc.. Furthermore, the background that shows you have done an organizational or government transformation, necessary restructuring and have run a budget. Then last comes the idealogical principles like centralized or decentralized control. How can we expect a President or any DC elected official without this experience to succeed?

Whether you agree with the TeaParty or not, they have caused us to start a necessary debate. Change in qualification seems to be one starting point.

[oddlots]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

Well I would bet 70 % of the population thought housing prices would always go up so where does that leave you?

I would recommend a walk on the contrarian side.

What do the interests that just loaned up the west, made massive amounts through thwarting the kind of controls (corporate boards etc...that you guys still think mean anything) literally driving their companies into a brickwall intentionally to be bailed out by taxpayers, taxpayers who are suddenly greeted with a vista of a smoking hole where the "new-economy" used to be and the sinking realisation that those low-margin jobs that were happily outsourced during the fake boom years were at least real... what do those interests want you to think.

I would venture that they want you to think that you have no choice but to cave into their demand that you allow them to buy up public property and investments (mineral rights, infrastructure, land) in order to make yourself solvent after having just been cleaned out by them. And how are they going to pay for these public assets and so help (not a chance!) deal with the deficit. Why by giving you back the money they just swindled you out of.

FWIW I have been working and paying taxes since I was fourteen. Apart from a brief stint in High School as a public sector worker in a hospital I have been self-employed or employed in the private sector into my present mid-forties. I''m here because I'm solely responsible for coming up with retirement funds for my family's future security. I don't find any of this is a hindrance to appreciating the swindle I've just described above.

I would refer you to The Parable of the Monkeys:

The Man and the Monkeys: A Wall Street Fable

Once upon a time in a village a man appeared and announced to the villagers that he would buy monkeys for $10 each.

The villagers knew that there were many monkeys in their forest. They left their farms on the plains and went into the forest to catch them. The man bought thousands at $10.

As the supply of monkeys started to diminish the villagers stopped looking. Finding and catching monkeys was soon no longer worth the effort for $10. They started to return to their farms to plant the spring crop.

The man then announced that he would buy monkeys for $20 each. This new higher price renewed the effort of the villagers and they headed back into the forest to find and catch monkeys again to sell.

When the monkey supply diminished even further that summer and the people started to return to their farms, worried they had not made enough money selling monkeys to buy all the food they needed but had not planted any crops yet either, the man raised the price he'd pay for monkeys to $25 each. The hunt was on again.

Soon the supply of monkeys became so small that a villager didn't see a monkey in a day of hunting let alone catch one. Even at $25 each the effort was not profitable so the villagers finally headed back to their farms that fall. After nine month's absence from their farms they knew the time had passed to produce enough food for the coming winter, but at least now they had enough money from selling monkeys to buy food to eat.

But the man wasn't finished. He announced that he would buy monkeys for $50 each! The villagers became very excited. He also explained that he had to go to the city on business and that his assistant was to stay behind to buy monkeys on his behalf.

As soon as the man left the assistant told the villagers, "So you think you have made a lot of money selling monkeys, don't you? But do you want to really get rich?"

"Yes, yes!" said the villagers.

The man's assistant went on. "I have a gigantic, enormous cage filled with monkeys. I will sell them to you for only $35 each and when the man returns from the city you can sell them to him for $50 each and make a fat profit. You don't even have to work to find monkeys at all. Then you can not only buy all the food you need for this winter you call all buy flat panel TVs, too."

The villagers were thrilled. They collected all of their savings together and bought all the monkeys in the assistant's cage then awaited the man's return.

They never saw the man nor his assistant again. All the monkeys that were once in the woods were now in the village. All of the villager's savings were gone. That winter, half the villagers starved.

Moral: Substitute housing for monkeys, lenders for the man, and mortgage brokers for the man's assistant and you get the analogy. As the winter of the US economy arrives, you still have the house you had before the price was bid up. Now that prices are falling back down, who has your savings?

But don't worry. The government won't let you starve. To ensure re-election it will inflate to save the banks in the process by inflation redistribute wealth from savers to debtors, and debtors to creditors.

Now you know how Wall Street works the asset bubble racket.

[Jeff]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

But oddlots, a majority of the villagers thought buying monkeys was a good idea! (Never mind that they were lied into that belief.) What are you, an egghead elite to dare suggest they might be wrong?

A majority of American have been convinced that paying no taxes and making up for the difference through wiping out fraud, abuse and waste is a good idea and will re-establish American greatness! Who are you to say no?

Elite! Commie! Etcetera!

[oddlots]

Re: Tea Party's Cold War Roots

What was I thinking!?! Thnaks Jeff. What a head check. I'm tuning out now... Buh bye.