[FoRK] How Barack...

[geege schuman]

Fairness is not equality.  That's your slippery slope, my good man.

G

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:

>
> On Apr 18, 2008, at 9:31 AM, geege schuman wrote:
>
> > I'm still not getting how a statement about fairness got translated into
> > a
> > socialist agenda.
> >
>
> Socialism = the mistaken notion that the role of government is to ensure
> equality of economic outcome.  This is precisely --- by his OWN ADMISSION
> --- what motivates Obama to support increasing the cap gains rate, never
> mind whether that would reduce tax revenues.
>
>  Anyway, tell me again how the tax CUTS have helped our economy?
> >
>
> Which ones?
>
> The Bush tax cuts haven't done much good for the health of the overall
> economy because in general they are FAKE.  If tax cuts are not accompanied
> by corresponding spending cuts, the net impact is negative over the long
> haul.
>
> OTOH, it can easily be demonstrated that certain tax cuts (such as the cap
> gains reductions under Clinton and Bush) correspond to increases in revenues
> *under those tax categories.*  I know this doesn't resonate with anybody
> that isn't a supply-sider to begin with, but facts are facts.  (We can argue
> causality at some other time.)
>
>  As The Donald once said to Wolf Blitzer, "The economy just seems to do
> > better under a Democrat."
> >
>
> I believe I've made that point here before;  through the beginning of
> Bush's first term, over the preceding 30+ years, any randomly-chosen day
> under a Republican president was 6x as likely to be recessionary as any
> randomly-chosen day under a Democrat president (all other factors being
> equal.)  Furthermore, anybody who is paying attention KNOWS and is
> INFURIATED BY the fact that the GOP's rhetoric about "fiscal responsibility"
> and so forth is a complete LIE, diametrically opposed to their ACTUAL
> behavior (over the last 8 years at least.)
>
> I'm not arguing which party does better shepherding the economy.  Neither
> Bush nor Obama are truly representative of their party.  Just as Bush is
> really a representative of the lunatic, theo-fascist, far right-wing fringe
> of the Republican party (which, perhaps, is a bigger part of that party than
> any of us really expected before about 8 years ago), so I'm now getting the
> sense that Obama is the representative of the far-left fringes of his party
> --- and those "fringes" may be a lot bigger than we expect.  At least,
> that's how it's starting to feel to me...
>
>
> jb
>
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>