The most important thing to consider about the Sequester is that it is the result of a bi-partisan compromise. (Just like the other issues involved in the previous Fiscal Cliff). This is important — what we need is action on the economy, but compromise may often be worse than inaction.
Boehner is willing to let it happen and feels it is a disaster.
Unfortunately it probably will happen, but maybe it will show the American public what government actually does and disaster is in damage to the Republican notion that government does nothing of benefit to the people.
There are only 2 real permanent solutions that let us move on to the next budget — let it happen and deal with the problems in the next budget or overturn the sequester and deal with the next budget.
At least Obama said something about not cutting our way to prosperity, but it was in the context of working out a deal for cuts to avoid the cuts.
If Congress continues to push the sequester into the future by making small cuts now, all it does is implement the effect of the sequester while claiming to avoid it.
Until everyone recognizes that you cannot cut your way to prosperity we are doomed to several years of fiscal cliff theatrics and more cuts, until finally we have the recession the Republican party wants us to have. Because only then will those with the guns be able to finally take over from elected officials and run this country like the war lords they think they are.
The GDP dropped a bit due mostly to reductions in government spending.
From this fact, the Republicans in Congress conclude that we must therefore cut spending even more. So, spending cuts lead to slowing of the economy makes the case for more spending cuts. Now say that with a straight face.
Clearly the Republicans do not care about the American economy, they only care about spending cuts.
I know logic and reason is not part of the Republican agenda, but remember the simple definition of insanity — doing the same thing and expecting a different result. If cutting spending is driving the economy to recession, then if you want to avoid the recession, don’t promote more cuts.
What is the point of the Second Amendment?
Security of the State
Neither of these are on the radar of the NRA and their related quasi-terrorist organizations that seem intent in turning the US into Somalia.
Wake up. The Second Amendment explicitly calls for regulation. More importantly it calls for security of the State, not freedom of the individual to overthrow the State (which given the history of the text of the amendment means one of the several States, not the Federal Government).
Consider for example: 2nd Amendment Protected Slavery.
The NRA has gone well past repugnant to the next step — terror. Consider their latest ad campaign.
The NRA failed at using the ballot box in the last election so now they are turning to tactics more typical of terrorist organizations. While the NRA historically supported gun safety that day is long past (a lot like the long past era of the Republican party supporting the environment). Today the NRA is primarily engaged in terrorizing the public with fear mongering and outright lies about the benefits and costs of arming the entire population. Their goal is simply to turn the US into Somalia because they believe they will be the dominant war lords.
Maybe it will be a benefit — by being so extreme a lot of former supporters will step away from them and do what is right for the country.
We (the American public) were conned by the media (and some politicians) into believing that the Fiscal Cliff was something important and that it could be fixed if we could just agree, or maybe if we could agree on cuts. The reality is that the cliff, which was composed of the expiration of Tax Cuts (several different ones), and the institution of spending cuts, was really an austerity cliff. Many of the biggest complainers are totally in favor of going over the austerity cliff (maybe you noticed all the complaints about the result: it did not cut enough).
So, some taxes go up, some stay the same, a few issues regarding indexing for inflation are fixed and we move on to the next invented crisis where the solution to the crisis will be criticized as not addressing some very different problem.
The one question the Republicans in the House (especially) never answered is how does increasing cuts in the budget address the cliff that is caused by cuts in the budget? Perhaps the reason they ignored this question is because they still want to drive the country over the real cliff and drive us back into recession.
The problem with most people who claim to be strong Second Amendment supporters is that they ignore half of the Amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
It is the only amendment that includes the reason for inclusion. Indeed it is the only amendment that demands government regulation in the text.
Boehner’s attempt to show strength by passing a Plan B (or is it Plan 9) in the House has failed. Mostly it shows that a substantial portion of the Republicans in the House prefer destroying the U.S. economy to raising taxes on a small group (financial donors?). Actually maybe their goal is to raise taxes on lower income Americans and if higher incomes are hit that is just collateral damage.
But none of the analysis has discussed whether Plan B would provide any benefit to the economy or what the real impact would be. Mostly it has been talk about who gets a cut or not.
The economic damage from the cliff is limited. By the fall the economy will be better (likely better than today).
The NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre today called for armed guards in every school. If he is honest, he thus demands the required massive tax increase and supports taking the US one more step toward a police state. On the other hand, the added jobs would counter the recessionary effects of the fiscal cliff so maybe the NRA proposal would be beneficial.
Posted in Jobs, Other
Tagged Guns, NRA
Interesting Fiscal Cliff calculator on Washington Post today — playing around with the options, clear winner for the economy is to do nothing about the components of the cliff and to enact the American Jobs act. This has the best net gain for 2013 and the best future gain and the best impact on the future deficits.
Many of the favorites being bandied about do nothing to help the economic impacts of the tax and spending changes and do little to improve the future deficits.
It is important in the discussion to actually hold people responsible for the consequences of their proposals. The only question to ask is “What is the real impact of the proposal?” But today the only question you hear is “How does this fit with my political view?”