If Wasserman-Schultz ends up supporting the Gang of Six road to poverty bill, as she probably will because the “Democrat in the White House” loves it, then West is right. She is vile and despicable.

I second that motion. In fact I would extend the comment to any so called democrat that supports the bankers agenda over the needs of the citizenry. As for the “leaders” of the democratic party, well let us just say they are vile, despicable and gutless.

Good morning, pups. It’s Dowd and Friedman today. In “From Gallipoli to Singapore” MoDo says the Murdoch empire pandered to the lowest common denominator, but its tactics turned out to be too low for a repulsed British public. Now, if only the American public would become repulsed… The Moustache of Wisdom has a question: “Can Greeks Become Germans?” He says the story of the economic crisis in Greece is a story about values.

Here they are.

The coffee and tea are ready, the cold drinks are in the fridge, and today I’ve got apple spice muffins. At work we’re in the process of switching over to electronic medical records. It’s been an absolute nightmare. The practice across the street apparently had 6 months of chaos. I’m hoping our experience won’t be that bad, but so far it’s not looking particularly hopeful. Have a great day.

Hear! Hear! Any “Democrat” who supports that POS is no Democrat. Period.

The American public is repulsed but the msm will never report that. Ruling caste and their toady media will never be honest when it comes to anything that might threaten their power stranglehold.

Does anybody know what set West off? For your edification, here is DWS:

Incredulously, the gentleman from Florida, who represents thousands of Medicare beneficiaries, as do I, is supportive of a plan that would increase costs for Medicare beneficiaries … unbelievable from a member from South Florida…

Yep. It’s the old GOP as the victim canard again and no doubt the media will be spinning it that way again. It seemed pretty mild to me, especially when compared with the response.

I saw Bachmann and Ssssteve King going on about how the floods on the MS river mean we need to stop payment on awards to black farmers for the decades of discrimination, known as Pigford case. Reminds me of the classic cartoon of Nixon popping out of a sewer manhole.

West was originally a radio host, known for getting the big $ by being nasty stuff. Seems to be the common thread among teaGOP sorts.

This is why the ignorant and apathetic don’t deserve to vote. Even a cursory glance at these peoples’ histories was enough to tell me what they are but enough people bought into the propaganda that we’re stuck with them for at least another year and a half.

‘Fraid that’s my take, too, we need people to qualify to vote. Of course, have had this discussion with a friend who points out that then we’d have to have chosen types picking who qualifies, and we already have that, it’s the town clerk. Pathetic.

‘Fraid that’s my take, too, we need people to qualify to vote.

Yep. Though it draws up shades of Jim Crow and pol taxing and is not a popular position among liberals, it would save a lot of trouble.
EDIT: At minimum we need to eliminate party line voting. Make then go through the ballot at the very least.

we need people to qualify to vote.

what qualifications would you require?

Basic intelligence and knowledge of history would be my choice, but I can’t go the distance with those requirements, as mentioned above, because then we’d have to choose the ones to decide who qualifies, and that isn’t a good prospect. There are too many ways to highjack the tests, and the selections.

It will be most interesting to see what the House blue dogs do with this one.

This is why the ignorant and apathetic don’t deserve to vote.

Now hold on. The administration’s 2012 re-election game plan is based on a large supply of
low information voters. We don’t want to screw that up. How else is O going to get a chance to save everything we hold dear by taking it off the table once and for all?

Not so much the people who vote rather the methods of voting. Right now we have systems in place across this county that are totally corrupted and can produce a “result” to the wishes of USACorp and have nothing to do with the actual votes placed.

I do agree that we need to diminish the power of The Party, a “None Of The Above” vote forcing run offs would be one solution but then again with The Party in charge of voting no changes will be made.

There are too many ways to highjack the tests, and the selections.

i agree.

i also think most progressives (including me) wouldn’t qualify if basic macroeconomic literacy was required.

imho, progressives are the only ones showing they perceive that almost a decade of trickle down economics led to economic disaster, so that repeating the practice would only guarantee worse disaster.

Of course, what a logical conclusion…/s Funny way to overturn caselaw.

You know, I’m not even considering esoteric theory like politics and economics. I’m speaking about basic knowledge of the candidates and issues of the day. Unfortunately the party in charge at the time will almost certainly write the tests and write them to favor the incumbent party/candidate. I didn’t say it was workable but if a fair way could be found, it would save a lot of trouble.

Sickening that these are the votes to decide which direction the country goes.

Good morning all.

Thanks for the post, Attaturk.

No matter the individual’s background, show me a progressive voter and I’ll show you an informed voter. Show me a party member and I’ll show you a reflexive voter. That’s why the major parties hate us: They don’t want informed voters. They want people who will march obediently under their banners and let them do the thinking. Period.

Q: what would be the economic impact of an immediate suspension of payroll taxes?

i also think most progressives (including me) wouldn’t qualify if basic macroeconomic literacy was required.

It would depend on which school of economics constructed the test. If the freshwater school wrote the test, saltwater economists would fail. And vice versa,

Flaw in that because without choosing a party, in most states that eliminates primary voting.

oh and btw, congrats to WI for last night’s election results.

basic knowledge of the candidates and issues of the day

jmo, but i think basic issues of the day include enough of an understanding to be able to judge policy. for example, see my question @24.

Unfortunately the party in charge at the time will almost certainly write the tests and write them to favor the incumbent party/candidate.

totally agree.

and right now, it seems to me, that both parties have a vested interest in keeping us misinformed. :(

As we know, payroll taxes were cut out, and the result was practically nil, because it’s a drop in the bucket. The big nick out of U.S. finances is from the nonpayment of taxes by the larger part of the corporate world.

Blue dogs are the same as Republicans, imho. I believe they will knock each other down in a rush to support it. “Shared sacrifice, fiscal house in order, bipartisanship,” and all.

It would depend on which school of economics constructed the test. If the freshwater school wrote the test, saltwater economists would fail. And vice versa,

and if i constructed the test (a really bad idea!), both freshwater and saltwater would fail. :)

and right now, it seems to me, that both parties have a vested interest in keeping us misinformed.

That much is certain. Gotta go.

As we know, payroll taxes were cut out, and the result was practically nil, because it’s a drop in the bucket.

only 2%, a full payroll tax holiday would be a bit more than 3 times that.

The big nick out of U.S. finances is from the nonpayment of taxes by the larger part of the corporate world.

what do you mean by u.s. finances?

i like fairleft’s, “shared prosperity”

okay, cut back, and yes, it was minimal. u.s. finances; That would refer to federal spending, but I don’t like the word since it’s often used to include SS and Medicare.

The fairleft seem to be precious few. I saw an ad on c-span yesterday put out by House democrats that channels Ronald Reagan, not FDR. We are in a heap o’ shit.

When it comes to a payroll tax holiday — i.e., cut — there is a prominent school of economists (freshwater) who believe that the entire amount will be saved and not spur spending and demand.

I think that’s ridiculous and not consistent with empirical evidence. But it shows that the so-called discipline of economics — or at least the so-called profession of economics — is not much help in determining whether or not this is a good idea.

(Of course, that is why economics is in crisis.)

doesn’t “saved” include paying down debt?

even if the freshwater school was correct and it would all be “saved” (not that i buy it), wouldn’t that also be a good thing in the midst of a what koo calls a balance sheet recession?

I saw an ad on c-span yesterday put out by House democrats that channels Ronald Reagan, not FDR.

house democrats?

wow.

Have heard a ‘business reporter’ at WaPo stating as if it were fact that if they were ‘confident’ that consumers have money saved and will spend it. I really can only conclude that the economics writers have just shut out the working persons- often living from paycheck to paycheck – who are the largest part of the consumer element.

It would improve their balance sheet but not necessarily increase their spending. Improvement in one’s balance sheet does not necessarily trigger spending. According to freshwater economists. Because consumers whose balance sheets have been improved “internalize” the government’s need to raise taxes in the future to “pay for” the tax cut.

I’m not supporting the view — just explaining it. It is of, course, batshit crazy.

For working class folks, my view is that nearly all of it will be spent. But one has to keep in mind the amount we are talking about. If it’s a couple of hundred dollars a month, it won’t come close to filling a one trillion dollar hole in spending.

So the overall mpact might be very small. Still worth doing, of course.

“internalize” the government’s need to raise taxes in the future to “pay for” the tax cut.

that part i definitely agree is bat-shit-crazy.

The important thing here is that these “theories” give Obama the support he needs to ignore unemployment and concentrate on the deficit and debt. In the past, most economists would have rejected these theories out of hand. Now, however, politics reigns.

It’s called “Ricardian Equivalence.” A theory resurrected from the dead to justify the government doing nothing in a recession.

Agreed, that almost all income will be spent by working people. Continuing to justify making the corporate class the object of increased confidence, by cutting taxes and giving loopholes, is provably wrong, though. It was the entire jobs program of the bush admin. and failed.

I saw an ad on c-span yesterday put out by House democrats that channels Ronald Reagan, not FDR. We are in a heap o’ shit.

Yes, we are in a “heap o’ shit.” Quite agree and utterly unsurprised that House so-called “Democrats” would channel Zombie Reagan. Let’s face it: the Overton window has been pushed so insanely far to the right, that Tricky & Reagan ARE “liberal” by current standards… except, of course, that they’re not “liberal” at all.

Today’s alleged “Democratic” politician is nothing more than a Reagan Republican in disguise. Whyever would they NOT channel their all-time hero. We all know that Reagan Republicans love to hump Daddy’s coffin on a regular basis, and we all know who Obama genuflects to daily (other than kissing the butts of his corporate Overlords)…

“The Mustache of Wisdom has a question: “Can Greeks Become Germans?” He says the story of the economic crisis in Greece is a story about values.”

Somehow the work habits study that has the Greeks as the second hardest working population – right behind South Korea – seems to not made an impression on a media that selects a narrative and never changes despite the facts that are pointed out to them.

I love the irony of an 1817 idea that Ricardo discussed and indicated he did not believe true now has his name -Ricardian equivalence

Your confidence will decrease and you will spend less if you know your government is in debt

It is the old confidence fairy that never seems to show up – as Krugman has noted many times.

But economist Robert Barro sold it and the conservatives will never get off the narrative.