A liberal Republican's lament about contemporary politics:

A great essay by Mike Lofgren.

Longish, but reads quickly. Doesn't hold back at all. I consider it essential reading.

I agree with everything he writes, including economic and demographic observations. Mostly it's about Republicans but Washington Democrats get deserved criticism.


posted by Quiddity at 9/04/2011 03:40:00 PM

Consensus developing on Obama's jobs speech:

Dave Weigel tweets:

EXCLUSIVE: Obama's speech isn't going to change anything anyway

Ezra Klein in a less snarky mode:

Obama’s speech will achieve nothing. It will go nowhere because it has nowhere to go. A speech can rally the base, and maybe even temporarily change the topic in the news. But it can’t change the fundamental fact of politics right now, which is that the two parties disagree on the most profound question in Washington. It’s not: How do we fix the economy? It is: Who should win the next election?

So long as Republicans and Democrats disagree on that, there will be no significant cooperation on substantive issues. Boehner simply will not cut off his party’s candidates at the knees, especially its presidential contenders, by handing Obama a major economic accomplishment. Because he controls the House of Representatives, that means Obama -- and, by extension, the U.S. -- is not going to get a major economic accomplishment.

SITE NOTE: Been down with the flu for a week. Who gets the flu in August? Bummer.


posted by Quiddity at 9/01/2011 09:10:00 PM

The essence of the modern Republican party:

Marco Rubio says it out loud:

Except for the Reagan Administration, to be quite frank, both Republicans and Democrats established a role for government in America that said yes we will have a free economy, but we will also have a strong government, which through regulations and taxes will control the free economy, and through a series of government programs, will take care of those in our society who are falling behind. That was the vision crafted in the 20th Century by our leaders. ...

These programs weakened us as a people. You see, almost forever, it was institutions in society that assumed the role of taking care of one another. If someone was sick in your family, you took care of them. If a neighbor met misfortune, you took care of them. You saved for your retirement and your future because you had to. We took these things upon ourselves in our communities, our families, and our homes, and our churches and our synagogues. But all that changed when the government began to assume those responsibilities. All of a sudden, for an increasing number of people in our nation, it was no longer necessary to worry about saving for security because that was the government's job.

For those who met misfortune, that wasn't our job to take care of them. That was the government's job. And as government crowded out the institutions in our society that did these things traditionally, it weakened our people.

Weak vs Strong. Spartan values. It's Ayn Rand's vision and the Republicans are 100% in favor of it.

If you are in trouble, you'd better have relatives or neighbors to help you out. If you don't have people to help you, tough.

Jonathan Chait and Conor Friedersdorf comment on Rubio's speech.


posted by Quiddity at 8/24/2011 11:46:00 AM

On collective-action:

This week Warren Buffett said that he thought taxes should be raised on wealthy people like him. In response, may on Fox News have derided that stance and asked why Buffett doesn't write a check for "his" amount and be done with it.

Mark Kleiman wrote an excellent post on this issue. Here it is reproduced in its entirety:

Why I want to pay higher taxes

by Mark Kleiman

Megan McArdle is extremely smart, but this post is hilariously wrong, both logically and empirically.

Megan claims, if I understand her correctly, that no one wants his or her own taxes raised, only taxes on others, because if you really wanted more money spend on something you’d just make a contribution. She acknowledges the collective-action argument, but somehow seems to think that since the amount of tax paid is a continuous, real-valued variable rather than a binary variable that problem somehow goes away. But it doesn’t.

Take me, for an example. I’d like to see the National Science Foundation budget double, from the current $6 billion to $12 billion. (In the long run, I’d go much higher.) And I’d prefer to pay for that increase entirely out of increased income taxation on people making more than twice the median family income, a group into which I fall. I don’t have the figures handy, but my share of that additional taxation might come to something like $300 per year. ($6B is about $60 per household, but if the increase were financed entirely by taxing high-income households then each high-income household would have to pay considerably more than $60.)

So, says Megan, why don’t I just write a check for $300 to some outfit that finances the same sort of research the NSF does? (There’s no mechanism that would allow me to make a contribution directly to the NSF, as opposed to the General Fund.)

But that question answers itself: it’s easily worth $300 to me to increase spending on basic science by $6 billion, but it isn’t worth $300 to me to increase spending on basic science by $300. So I’m willing to vote for the tax but not to make the contribution.

Collective action problem. End of story.

posted by Quiddity at 8/20/2011 12:01:00 AM

One of John Stewart's better moments:

About Warren Buffett and Fox News' relentless campaign to insulate the rich and attack the poor.

part1

part2

link(s) corrected

Though Stewart scores, in the end it's depressing when you consider how much pull Fox News has in shaping our political discourse.


posted by Quiddity at 8/19/2011 08:14:00 AM

Poetry corner:

There once was an Obot named Ray,
Firebaggers he'd verbally flay,
and Paul Krugman he hates,
for the truth that he states,
"Hail the Prez" is all you should say.


story


posted by Quiddity at 8/17/2011 04:09:00 PM

Shorter Rick Perry:

If that treasonous Ben Bernanke ever shows up in my town, we'll organize a necktie party for the Fed chairman.

posted by Quiddity at 8/16/2011 11:48:00 PM