What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

Part of the mythmaking of the Gipper is that he singlehandedly changed how people felt about the gubmint. In fact he did no such thing, but rather harnessed how people were already feeling into a winning campaign. When Reagan won the Presidency the country had seen a decade and a half of societal disfunction, be it the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Oil Embargo, the collapse of manufacturing, etc.

Similarly Obama isn't changing people's minds, he's simply riding the wave of a younger, more liberal electorate that is rejecting right wing economic and social conservatism much in the same manner as self obsessed Baby Boomers rejected the liberalism of the people who came before them.

The trick is can you put into law how people currently feel or do you let the moment pass by. Reagan's lasting impact was in foreign policy. His domestic policies have long been rejected by most of the populace, especially those under 50. For instance, few would argue credibly that the country is more socially conservative than 30 years ago, and the last vestiges of his economic policies have been obliterated in the past few years with re-regulation, tax hikes on the rich, and defense spending cuts all passed with Republican votes.

So, with Obama, does he get into law where the country wants to be? Gay marriage will most likely be decided by the courts so that's an easy one. The big remaining questions revolve around 1) The budget, and who pays to reduce the deficit. 2) Gun control, long thought to be untouchable even though 90+ of the populace favors background checks for everyone, and 3) Immigration, again presumably an easier one because the GOP can't afford to make a stand on that one purely for electoral reasons. Should be an interesting year.
 
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

Rover said:
Part of the mythmaking of the Gipper is that he singlehandedly changed how people felt about the gubmint. In fact he did no such thing, but rather harnessed how people were already feeling into a winning campaign. When Reagan won the Presidency the country had seen a decade and a half of societal disfunction, be it the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Oil Embargo, the collapse of manufacturing, etc.

Similarly Obama isn't changing people's minds, he's simply riding the wave of a younger, more liberal electorate that is rejecting right wing economic and social conservatism much in the same manner as self obsessed Baby Boomers rejected the liberalism of the people who came before them.

The trick is can you put into law how people currently feel or do you let the moment pass by. Reagan's lasting impact was in foreign policy. His domestic policies have long been rejected by most of the populace, especially those under 50. For instance, few would argue credibly that the country is more socially conservative than 30 years ago, and the last vestiges of his economic policies have been obliterated in the past few years with re-regulation, tax hikes on the rich, and defense spending cuts all passed with Republican votes.

So, with Obama, does he get into law where the country wants to be? Gay marriage will most likely be decided by the courts so that's an easy one. The big remaining questions revolve around 1) The budget, and who pays to reduce the deficit. 2) Gun control, long thought to be untouchable even though 90+ of the populace favors background checks for everyone, and 3) Immigration, again presumably an easier one because the GOP can't afford to make a stand on that one purely for electoral reasons. Should be an interesting year.
Click to expand...

Free Rover! We can't pay you much, and some frankly won't contribute anything, but please release him and we'll see what we can pay you:D
 
pirate said:
Free Rover! We can't pay you much, and some frankly won't contribute anything, but please release him and we'll see what we can pay you:D
Click to expand...

Sez you! For $9.95 a month plus shipping and handling, you too can subscribe to All Rover All The Time by received my own newsletter, complete with astute political observations! Also, while I will occasionally allow guest contributions, I refuse to publish Klan speech unlike Ron Paul who used that avenue to make himself rich. ;)
 
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

unofan said:
Ill make the prediction that the right 20 years from now will look remarkably like today's left. Amazing how demographics change over time.
Click to expand...
If that's the case, what will the left look like?
 
joecct said:
If that's the case, what will the left look like?
Click to expand...

Tough to say. Liberalism is starting to run out of causes! Seriously, if universal health care is enacted, gay rights becomes non-controversial, etc I'm not sure what else is left out there. My personal big cause would be energy independence, but I'm not sure liberalism is ready or willing to adopt that mantra. Unfortunate, because you can tie that in to climate change.

I imagine the budget debate, and who pays what taxes will always rage on.
 
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

LynahFan said:
I've still got a couple bucks left, so they can always go after those. ;) I keed, I keed....
Click to expand...

Socialism only works until you run out of other people's money. France will soon find that these policies won't work, what with all the rich leaving.

I can't wait to see what governments do with trying to obtain road maintenance money, now that they aren't getting as much money from the gas taxes due to people driving alternative energy vehicles...
 
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

Rover said:
Liberalism is starting to run out of causes!
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but to a progressive, it is all about the struggle of virtue over vice. As long as human beings remain human, progressives will never lack for a cause; fanatics are fanatical after all.

It may be liberalizing drug laws, it may be about licensing prostitution (with mandatory vaccinations and frequent tests for STDs of course). My bet would be that their next cause celebre will be to outlaw commercial chicken farms. We'll see.
 
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

FreshFish said:
Perhaps, but to a progressive, it is all about the struggle of virtue over vice. As long as human beings remain human, progressives will never lack for a cause; fanatics are fanatical after all.

It may be liberalizing drug laws, it may be about licensing prostitution (with mandatory vaccinations and frequent tests for STDs of course). My bet would be that their next cause celebre will be to outlaw commercial chicken farms. We'll see.
Click to expand...

I believe "cynical" is the term I like to use.

BTW, there is no longer a way to stop the government from over-spending: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323539804578259910309186042.html
 
FlagDUDE08 said:
Socialism only works until you run out of other people's money. France will soon find that these policies won't work, what with all the rich leaving.

I can't wait to see what governments do with trying to obtain road maintenance money, now that they aren't getting as much money from the gas taxes due to people driving alternative energy vehicles...
Click to expand...

Same thing with conservatism. You can only hand out so many special interest tax breaks and watch the Mitt Romney's of the world park money overseas before you run out of cash. Simply put the gubmint needs money to operate, and that's a concept too many a con, and I don't just mean teabaggers, just can't wrap their minds around. If I asked a typical USCHO knuck what the best tax rate is, they'll answer zero in all seriousness even though that answer has no basis in reality. Kinda helps explain the plight the Republican party is in with the voters right now. People are sick of this kind of illogical BS.
 
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

Rover said:
Same thing with conservatism. You can only hand out so many special interest tax breaks and watch the Mitt Romney's of the world park money overseas before you run out of cash.
Click to expand...

That's not at all "conservatism" that's merely the Republican form of "crony capitalism."

You don't seem at all aware of the huge differences between career politicians who are not left-wing, and conservatism as a coherent, well-grounded philosophy (e.g., Milton Friedman; if you have never read Capitalism and Freedom you should, you would find it eye-opening), especially given what you've heard from geezer and others here about how conservatives have almost no political representation at all these days.

Principled conservatives would never give out special interest breaks to anyone. The basic concept is that innovation and experimentation and individual initiative and collaboration provide better results than central planning. The political left and the political right both engage in central planning as a sop to their donor base. Neither are "conservative" in the meaning of a principled way of thought; both are merely politically expedient.

What we see is crony capitalism on the left (more Solyndra, anyone?) vs crony capitalism on the right (more overspending on fancy defense projects while basic maintenance is ignored). What we see is government instrusion on liberty by the left (in the name of "justice", ha!) vs government intrusion on liberty by the right (in the name of "security")

Left vs right in politics usually has frustrated conservatives on the sidelines wondering if they ever will be heard by anyone.
 
Last edited:
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

FreshFish said:
That's not at all "conservatism" that's merely the Republican form of "crony capitalism."

You don't seem at all aware of the huge differences between career politicians who are not left-wing, and conservatism as a coherent, well-grounded philosophy (e.g., Milton Friedman; if you have never read Capitalism and Freedom you should, you would find it eye-opening), especially given what you've heard from geezer and others here about how conservatives have almost no political representation at all these days.

Principled conservatives would never give out special interest breaks to anyone. The basic concept is that innovation and experimentation and individual initiative and collaboration provide better results than central planning. The political left and the political right both engage in central planning as a sop to their donor base. Neither are "conservative" in the meaning of a principled way of thought; both are merely politically expedient.

What we see is crony capitalism on the left (more Solyndra, anyone?) vs crony capitalism on the right (more overspending on fancy defense projects while basic maintenance is ignored). What we see is government instrusion on liberty by the left (in the name of "justice", ha!) vs government intrusion on liberty by the right (in the name of "security")

Left vs right in politics usually has frustrated conservatives on the sidelines wondering if they ever will be heard by anyone.
Click to expand...
Hear! Hear!
+1
 
Re: Strands in the Tapestry: the Business, Economics, and Tax Policy Thread

FreshFish said:
That's not at all "conservatism" that's merely the Republican form of "crony capitalism."

You don't seem at all aware of the huge differences between career politicians who are not left-wing, and conservatism as a coherent, well-grounded philosophy (e.g., Milton Friedman; if you have never read Capitalism and Freedom you should, you would find it eye-opening), especially given what you've heard from geezer and others here about how conservatives have almost no political representation at all these days.

Principled conservatives would never give out special interest breaks to anyone. The basic concept is that innovation and experimentation and individual initiative and collaboration provide better results than central planning. The political left and the political right both engage in central planning as a sop to their donor base. Neither are "conservative" in the meaning of a principled way of thought; both are merely politically expedient.

What we see is crony capitalism on the left (more Solyndra, anyone?) vs crony capitalism on the right (more overspending on fancy defense projects while basic maintenance is ignored). What we see is government instrusion on liberty by the left (in the name of "justice", ha!) vs government intrusion on liberty by the right (in the name of "security")

Left vs right in politics usually has frustrated conservatives on the sidelines wondering if they ever will be heard by anyone.
Click to expand...

I believe this is one of the reasons why NYS has a conservative party. Obviously I don't necessarily agree with some of the fascist social tactics brought by these three parties, but economically, the conservatives seem to have a better idea of what's going on, along with the libertarians.
 
FreshFish said:
That's not at all "conservatism" that's merely the Republican form of "crony capitalism."

You don't seem at all aware of the huge differences between career politicians who are not left-wing, and conservatism as a coherent, well-grounded philosophy (e.g., Milton Friedman; if you have never read Capitalism and Freedom you should, you would find it eye-opening), especially given what you've heard from geezer and others here about how conservatives have almost no political representation at all these days.

Principled conservatives would never give out special interest breaks to anyone. The basic concept is that innovation and experimentation and individual initiative and collaboration provide better results than central planning. The political left and the political right both engage in central planning as a sop to their donor base. Neither are "conservative" in the meaning of a principled way of thought; both are merely politically expedient.

What we see is crony capitalism on the left (more Solyndra, anyone?) vs crony capitalism on the right (more overspending on fancy defense projects while basic maintenance is ignored). What we see is government instrusion on liberty by the left (in the name of "justice", ha!) vs government intrusion on liberty by the right (in the name of "security")

Left vs right in politics usually has frustrated conservatives on the sidelines wondering if they ever will be heard by anyone.
Click to expand...

Fishy I often see conservatives try to make this point, and its all well and good. I don't disagree with your premise. The problem is the reality of the situation is that so called "traditional" conservatives (the Reagans, Friedmans, etc) no longer exist in either political or activist circles anymore. Or if they are, they're reeaally quiet.

So feel free to state that the modern day GOP with its elected officials and backers in the media & donors don't represent true conservatism. Problem is, who does then? Whether willingly or not, "traditional" conservatives have allowed their main lever of power, the Republican party, to be taken over by lunatics lock, stock and barrel. My suggestion is that these people start re-asserting themselves or they risk falling further into irrelevancy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top