dagblog - Comments for "FDR's skull will be put on a spike ..."

just a

artappraiser — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:17:26 +0000

In reply to FDR's skull will be put on a spike ...

just a FYI;

http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/president-owns-everything-7460#comment-9...

"MrSmith ... There are many

MrSmith1 — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 13:26:50 +0000

In reply to MrSmith...There are many of

"MrSmith ... There are many of us who are very upset with what Corporate America has done to America's middle-class."

Chuck, What makes you assume that I'm not one of that 'us'? ...

"Do not assume that an opposite, but equal reaction cannot occur in this country ..."

And the beauty part is, we can blame it all on those East Village radicals in the 1980's and their slogan; Eat the Rich. LOLOL

That the whole austerity mess

we are stardust — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 13:16:43 +0000

In reply to OK. But you're in charge of

That the whole austerity mess was pre-planned is now clear to me. Obey had warned earlier of a manufacuted bond crisis that we would be told signaled 'the end of capitalism and our economy' if Drastic Measures weren't enacted.

I watched some television last night (network; CBS, I think), and an ad came on featuring a coiffed, well-dressed politician on a stage with enormous flags, telling the assembled fans that he would raise your taxes, and spend trillions on programs, rack up debt for future generations, etc., all with a jovial, energetic voice. The crowd of course, went into confused mrmurs and 'Huhs?'.

Then it cut to a screen about fixing the national debt: NOW. Couldn't read the letters of the sponsors (the teevee is tiny), but that sucker and others will be running day and night, until Americans are begging them to cut programs for people, NOT have a jobs program, etc. (The NO TAXES meme was subtle, but effective.)

If there's one thing we know as a populace, it's how to love to being served shit on a fork and love eating it.

There will be a move to NOT raise the debt ceiling, and NOT fund unemployment benefits. It will be interesting and likely frighteneing to see how that goes, too.

Hope you and Benen are right,

Obey — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:42:21 +0000

In reply to Benen is pretty much the

Hope you and Benen are right, O. But my point is just that liberals are being much too sanguine in discounting the ability of the GOP to trigger a bond-market revolt and then not 'waste the crisis' that ensues, as Rahm would say. If the Dems present a united front, yes, everything will be fine. But I think that is highly unlikely given the current kabuki in the beltway.

"It's like he's turning a

Obey — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:48:58 +0000

In reply to OK. But you're in charge of

"It's like he's turning a minor non-issue into THE national debate ... by design ... pre-planned and scheduled."

- What do you mean 'like'? Of course that is exactly the point of setting up this commission. That is it's one and only purpose - providing bipartisan cover for entitlement cuts. It's just not something you do unless ... you want entitlement cuts. Or, at least, are willing to negotiate with the corporates about entitlement cuts.

"Isn't focusing on the deficit right now the stupidest thing we could be doing if we want to get jobs going and the economy moving?"

- Focusing on anything but jobs is pretty stupid. Some deficit reduction doesn't need to to be harmful though. Closing loopholes in tax law that allows offshoring of corporate profits, for instance, won't hurt the economy. A carbon tax would create a lot of investment as industries have to restructure. Which would be great for the economy. A Public Option would cut the long-term deficit, and improve the competitiveness of US industries (outside the health care sector, obviously) and have an immediate effect on premiums, improving disposable income. A tax on casino-banking would VASTLY improve the efficiency of the banking sector - forcing them to underwriting standards and be more serious about exploring productive investment opportunities.

But of course no one in the beltway is talking seriously about that stuff. They are all focused on destroying the one part of the government that is fully funded for the foreseeable future: Social Security. And cutting SocSec benefits - even if the cuts are implemented with a lag, would have pretty immediate effects on consumer demand. People will save more to make up the lost future income. And less consumption means more lost jobs, which means less ability to save, etc, as the vicious downward cycle kicks in.

We live in strange times.

MrSmith...There are many of

chucktrotter — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 06:38:55 +0000

In reply to Seems to me that's what

MrSmith...

There are many of us who are very upset with what Corporate America has done to America's middle-class. We do not attend town cry-ins, march on the Mall or write editorials. If the wealthiest two% of America's greedy continue to bleed our majority dry, there will be repercusussions. Years ago, I watched the movie, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killing_Fields_%28film%29 I stongly advise the upper two% to watch the movie and respond accordingly! I hold NO mercy for the greedy bastards! Although I am disgusted with the results of what occurred during the period I refer to -- Do not assumme that an opposite, but equal reaction cannot occur in this country. I am locked and loaded!

OK. But you're in charge of

kgb999 — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 06:34:47 +0000

In reply to Have a credible liberal

OK. But you're in charge of getting it together.

Isn't focusing on the deficit right now the stupidest thing we could be doing if we want to get jobs going and the economy moving? Didn't Bernake's essentially dump another $900 Billion that's going to end up invested overseas (if understand what was said on that other thread)? NOW we go all austerity ... without a damn thing invested in jobs since 2009?

One valid response here could be unified ridicule of the very idea ... and the guy who thought this commission was a smart move in the first place. I think we need to focus on Obama - he didn't HAVE to issue an executive order creating this commission. It's like he's turning a minor non-issue into THE national debate ... by design ... pre-planned and scheduled. Hang him with this. Make him own it 100%. The pussyfooting around trying to pressure congress while he screws us time and time again from the White House is getting old. Don't know how popular that idea will be with the troops, though.

Maybe I'm not thinking about this rationally at the moment. I'm pretty damn pissed. We knew this exact thing was coming, but actually seeing it ... and it dropping while Obama's out of the nation to make it look like he has nothing to do with it and can't be asked any questions. Uuuugh.

That is clearly not their end

kgb999 — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 06:03:03 +0000

In reply to Benen is pretty much the

That is clearly not their end game. The Social Security part of the plan is absurd. Doesn't have a thing to do with the deficit. It even says so, right in the document (pg. 43). They just tacked Social Security on "for its own sake, not for deficit reduction." It's like Sarah Palin at a damn vice-presidential debate ... answering whatever question they want regardless what was asked.

If I were a conspiracy-minded type, I'd say they need the cash from the Social Security trust fund. All the rest is window dressing. Whatever they have in mind, it will move our $2.4 trillion into a place where it is exposed to their economic disaster. Some sort of administered privatization scheme is my guess. They'll say it needs to be "managed" more efficiently so it produces enough returns that they won't have to touch benefits or some such nonsense. This is the completely fabricated "fear" part so people say OK.

The air is thick with the desperation of the the wealthy - they are stuffing every penny they can get their hands on into mattresses instead of investing in the economy. The foreclosure house of cards seems set to collapse. Economists are saying it looks like they've sold the same notes into securities several times over - and added swaps ... and they've resorted to flat-out forgery to keep it propped up. They need trillions. They need it liquid. And they need it fast. And they need to hide it. Someone's about to take one hell of a fall. Their plan seems to be consume 25 years worth of retirement surplus in one big gulp and hope that's enough to fill the belly of the beast ... and then work out how to pay for social services later when whatever toxic crap they buy with our money "recovers". If my guess is right, that's some risk-socializing shit there.

I sure hope you and Krugman are correct about it not going anywhere. But the Clintonites are ALL ABOUT the proposal. Triangulating like a mutharfuker.

This proposal has already come under withering assault from the ideological wings of both parties. To those on the right, we say that over the past twelve months you have campaigned relentlessly and ruthlessly on reducing federal deficits [...] Now there is an opportunity for conservatives to support real fiscal responsibility rather than mouthing symbolic platitudes.
To those on the left, we say that we cannot ignore our burgeoning entitlement crisis any longer. By 2030, our country is projected to spend sixty-eight cents of every federal dollar on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on the debt. That is a portrait of a federal budget on autopilot, unable to invest in our children, new energy technologies, infrastructure and innovation. It is the budget of an also-ran nation, not a thriving one. And we will not be able to afford the safety net that we spent 80 years creating and perfecting.

How delightfully centrist. Money distributed from Social Security doesn't count as "Federal Dollars". It is specifically isolated from any federal budgetary spending by law. They are full-on lying about the nature and structure of Social Security and hiding it by mixing with stuff that is unrelated. This is directly from those aligned with the people RUNNING the Obama administration right now. If we start to hear this basic argument repeated anonymously by "administration insiders" ... we're fucked.

Of course what we would rally

cmaukonen — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 05:41:19 +0000

In reply to Guess who are the only people

Of course what we would rally like to see are big cuts in military spending but here is the catch. There are simply fat too many companies where the major part (it not all) of their business is military and other government contracts. So big cuts there would impact the economies of more than a few states. Which is the main reason for republicans (and more than a few democrats) hawkish stands. A real Catch 22.

Guess who are the only people

kgb999 — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 05:03:25 +0000

In reply to FDR's skull will be put on a spike ...

Guess who are the only people in America who think this hunk of steaming crap-policy is a good idea? Seriously. Guess first. Then look.

These are the true enemies of the middle class ... those masquerading as an amporphus yet impossible abstract ... starts with a "C". IMO, they are more dangerous than the "right" at this point. If those sons of bitches are "progressive" ... color me liberal ... or conservative ... or whatever.