The so-called “Supercommittee” is done. Failed, kaput. The gulf between Democrats and Republicans was simply too great. Let the finger-pointing ensue. But who is to blame?
The left would point to anti-tax activist Grover Norquist and his “no new taxes” pledge for preventing Republicans from going along with Democratic demands to raise taxes. I agree that Grover has been very effective in fighting tax hikes and for this he should be celebrated, not derided.
After all, the $1.2 trillion in spending cuts that was supposed to be the target of the Supercommittee was less than this year’s deficit! And, as I’ve noted before, the size of the federal government has doubled (from $1.9 trillion to $3.7 trillion) since Clinton left office. Clearly, the “Supercommittee” needed to focus on spending cuts and, if Congress was allowed to further increase spending (absent Grover’s pledge) it would have done so.
So, thanks Grover for keeping tax hikes at bay. Now, we need to force Congress to allow the supposedly “automatic” cuts to happen.
12 Replies to ““Supercommittee” failure and blaming Grover Norquist”
It seems to me that both parties put the least likely people to be able to reach an agreement for their representatives. It was made to fail, purposely. What are the lessons learned here?
Interesting to note that the guy who runs this “think tank” claims to be non-partisan, and yet is most obviously an extreme right wing advocate, up to and including giving space to what norquist says.
Amazing that a party can talk people into going out, finding a stick of suitable diameter, telling them to then sharpen to a fine point one end of said stick; and then proceed to poke yourself in the eye over and over again with said stick.
8 years of tax cuts to the wealthiest and where is the prosperity? Where is the job creation and innovation?
Amazing that people who consider themselves to be so bright are wholly unable to see the facts of 7 years of such policy.
For a fact, government grew ever larger under bush. The second largest growth was under ray-gun. And this is what the fiscally responsible party does with its mandate for smaller more efficiently run government? Seriously? Not to mention the deficits and the attack of a sovereign nation with completely false, read lies, information. Amazing!
I don’t like taxes, but federal spending is the real problem. That is what is holding our economy down. All politicians are at fault as you note.
The problem is that raising taxes will only set the table for more spending. So, where is the prosperity? It has been eaten up by big government! Holding the line on taxes is merely a political tool to force the politicians of both parties to reduce spending and the size and scope of the federal government.
Like, for sure…like, ama-zing, riiiiiight?
He’s just crazy out of his mind to think that taxing people’s incomes wouldn’t, like, fix everything…riiiight? I mean, like, who does he think he is to suggest that a lobbyist who works for government taxing and spending reduction is like, a good thiiiing. Like, that would mean that in-divid-uals would, like, have to choose what they spent their own money on, and stuuuff. And, that’s just, like, soooo crazy…riiiight? Like, who wants to have to mess with making their own choices on how to spend their own mon-ey…right? It’s just soooo time con-suming. And government is just sooo really, really smart, efficient and stuff…like, ser-iously?
I’m not really sure what par-tis-aaaan means, and stuff, but I am just, like, soooo sure that you are not one! You are, like, a genius, and stuff.
We should, like, take the sharpened sticks that, like, that Presidential guy, and stuff, like, handed out to, like, the Oc-cupi-er’s, and, like, use them, to like, de-mand, like, more govern-mental taxes and, like, spendiiiiiing, and stuuuff. That way, like, everyone could be, like, as smart and a-mazing as you, and stuff.
Socialism rocks, and stuff!
NOONBALLON, certainly as infantile a response as can be posted, or is that your attempt at cogent riposte?
The knee jerk pigeon holing, never posting without the simplistic usage of “Socialism” as though using such an attempted castigation adds solidity to what passes for an argument.
Even the email name is indicative of a child’s mind, which is why you so readily wrote in a way as to evoke the “valley-girl” which dates your age. paul, what are you doing pretending to be a teen girl from California?
Amazing how the right is never able to process “Facts.”
I know…riiiight? An infantile response to an infantile post. What can I tell you…your genius just brings out the best in me.
I’m sure that this is because you would never attempt castigation with something akin to a sharpened stick analogy, or the lack of its credence and the misguidance of its target.
Love the way you bring the facts to the table. Don’t sweat it though, girl-friend…I’m sure Momma’s still proud of her wittle Ratzdick, and her princesses’ brilliant facts.
“Paul, NOONBALLOON just made fun of my facts again.”
Me thinks you’re taking yourself a little too seriously…Like, seriously?
Take some time to come up with some facts, and what they might mean for future generations…I’ll be happy to tell you why your related assumptions are a-mazingly incorrect, and stuff, and then, you can hit the dictionary to attempt an insulting retort that we can all enjoy…K…valley girl-friend.
Factually I never claimed to be a “Genius” simply of sufficient intelligence to discern claptrap for what it is. And call your weak attempt of castigation for what it was, weak.
Factually I wager I am far more of a Capitalist than you have ever been being as I have supported myself 100% commission in “Finance” the most Capitalist of enterprises. Receiving remuneration only above Beta. So, your dullards use of the “Socialist” sobriquet was one of many indications of your certain penchant for ad hominem attacks, and a certain member of the third estate.
Factually, the bushcheney tax cuts added to the deficit and in no manner created employment.
Factually, such voodoo economics were never taken seriously even by its proponents. Merely a device to further enrich the already wealthy.
Factually, whenever you have the vast disparity of income created and abetted by bushcheney, you get a severe recession.
Factually, republicans stated during the bushcheney years that Deficits did not matter! Now that there is a Democrat in office, all of a sudden republicans claim “Deficits matter.”
The starve-the-beast ideology seeks to burn the country over what is claptrap economics.
Factually, republican ideology has enriched the top .1% as never before, and increased poverty amongst the population of regular folks. Unless you are a multimillionaire, you have no reason to vote for policy creation which aids only that group. And given your simplistic language and syntactical structure, you do not come across as a wealthy male, only a petty one.
Call me out next meeting tough guy, I relish meeting you one on one.
Despite my sarcasm as to your “genius”, I will complement you on your own recognition and discernment of your own level of intelligence as being ”sufficient”. That is to say, in so much as I may find some measure of sufficient enjoyment from that which you claim to relish.
As to the weakness of any attempts at castigation…he who castigates the first stone…girl-friend.
So, let’s start from the top…shall we?
Why would you assume the field of Finance to be synonymous with the philosophical system of Capitalism? Do Socialist systems and countries not have ministers of finance; just as they have ministers of propaganda, or environmental Czars? Or, perhaps you’re bragging as to your own personal contributions towards the financialization of the existing system…in relation to an effective collapse? Please do tell me that you have not and are NOT dating Barney Frank!!! And, if so, please tell me that you did NOT let him remunerate your Beta?
Tell me that you have the ability to comprehend the roll that financial commissions/fees/side-payments/kickbacks, whatever you’d like to call them, within a “pump-and-dump” scheme, ultimately played in this whole national and international mortgage backed derivatives game of musical chairs, which now places your anointed messiah in the mess that he campaigned so hard to preside over. And please, convince me that you believe that his intensions are NOT to use this failure as a mechanism for the conversion of a mixed economy to a more socialist system (i.e., a cradle to grave Nanny State)! If you can convince me of that, then you are a genius.
You seem to be full of conflicts…although, and “let me clear”, I am enjoying each of them. This third estate dullard does indeed enjoy calling out sufficiently arrogant elitists…so let’s continue…
I will tell you that I’m as promethean as they come, and that is exactly why Socialism, and its promoters, is unappealing to me. All insults and pejoratives aside, yours or mine, it simply boils down the ability vs. the inability of each of us to preside over our own decisions and lives…from that of our own dedication and hard work, when compared to another’s…so tell me, isn’t it subjugation what you really you relish, and are advocating for? Or are we back to square one, whereas you are assuming that everyone, here, is a Republican…and that Republican = Bad, while Democratic = Good. If so, then who’s the real dullard, here? I don’t begrudge you for being a Democratic, and while I can’t speak with knowledge as to anyone else’s political affiliation, and neither can you, I can tell you that I have the personal privilege of being both despised and sought after by both parties, as I am a member of neither one. Individual ideas and actions are what interest me. I won’t defend the misdeeds of either party, or its members, and I have yet to see a post were the RGF has attempted to do so. However, I will juxtapose them and make thoughtful choices towards my own independence. Is not reasonable…or should we just fall-in-line and repeat the montra of one of either side?
Consider this for a moment; Is it plausible that “Bush” structured his own strategy and deficit spending in a way that would make even the most ardent Socialist to follow him think twice about attempting to buy votes by expanding the “Nanny State”? Or would that conflict with the school of thought that labels him as too dumb to devise a “strategery” in any form. If it is plausible, then what does it say about a person who would in FACT double-down on the demand-side spending with zero tolerance for supply-side domestic production incentives… do I really need to quote the figures for this administration’s debt spending and monetary inflation?
I’ve got news for you, it was in FACT the legislative branch of government (House and Senate) that upset the apple cart for both of these more recent Presidents. All roads lead back to Fannie and Freddie, moral hazard and the incentives and potential penalties that were provided within the mtg. lending markets, along with all of those side-payments, which usurered in the picking of winners and losers (i.e., Hank Paulson’s picks—he is an admitted Democrat, and before becoming the Treasury Secretary, he was also the CEO of Goldman Sachs. Similar to Jon Corzine, of MFing Global, by the way) and the thinly veiled nationalization of the country’s larger financial institutions and company’s like GM, which continues to evolve through the present term. Although, the current Adminstration’s actions have served only to hold down the normal “bounce” that history would typically reflect from such a severe and prolonged recessionary period.
I can go on and on and on…so bring your best…but you really shouldn’t be worried about my level of wealth or poverty…you should be worried your own, and consider your own ability to create and/or keep it within your homey’s vision of the proper control and redistribution of it. Don’t cha think? No, seriously, try thinking.