tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post7415643601136045849..comments2024-03-19T03:55:23.248-05:00Comments on Althouse: "As a member of the House Budget Committee, I've seen firsthand just how extreme Paul Ryan is..."Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger250125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1666304060711382892012-08-14T13:36:19.371-05:002012-08-14T13:36:19.371-05:00What I am not seeing however is any flexibility at...<i>What I am not seeing however is any flexibility at all on tax rates, or on military spending, or with the exception of one commenter, a drug war that has stupid written all over it.</i><br /><br />Then you're not paying attention, and have chosen to see only what you want to see.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-26008683556890141552012-08-14T13:18:07.951-05:002012-08-14T13:18:07.951-05:00@harrogate,
You tipped the hat to Maslow's pyr...@harrogate,<br />You tipped the hat to Maslow's pyramid without catching the point.<br /><br />The so-called safety net you support reduces incentives for anyone to expend effort to rise up the pyramid. It heavily incentives people to reduce effort and self-responsibility.<br /><br />As such, the safety hammock needs to be cut down.<br /><br />Too many people who are fully capable of supporting themselves do not, simply because they don't have to. And too many others do not maximize their effort because they perceive that the administration currently in charge of the nation punishes effort and success in order to reward political support.<br /><br />Thishar,s the nation's productivity, wealth, and success.Nathan Alexanderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17618170642379567187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-20368891754481534642012-08-14T11:20:14.055-05:002012-08-14T11:20:14.055-05:00harrowgate--will look forward to your continuing o...harrowgate--will look forward to your continuing observations--thank you for contributions.Roger J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12639676792043324100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-75054126568593228462012-08-14T11:17:55.343-05:002012-08-14T11:17:55.343-05:00Am I happy to pay more taxes to make sure that the...<b>Am I happy to pay more taxes to make sure that these people are ok? To make sure that maybe they even are enabled to rise, if only just enough that they might be in a position to read to their children, or at least encourage their children to take reading seriously in school? To be able to give good medical care to their children and good food? <br /><br />As one o the patron saints of this blog might say, "You betcha."</b><br /><br />Who is stopping you? IRS accepts payments above your minimum required amount.<br /><br />Do you know that returning to the spending levels in 2008 would be a cut of massive proportions? This massive increase, which was SUPPOSED TO BE TEMPORARY, is now the damned budget baseline.<br /><br />Slash it back to 2000 levels. Period.damikeschttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02133230009952160269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-61920300404440295572012-08-14T11:16:27.335-05:002012-08-14T11:16:27.335-05:00Yashu, Matthew, Revenant, Roger, and anyone else I...Yashu, Matthew, Revenant, Roger, and anyone else I am forgetting: Thanks for the conversation.<br /><br />And yashu, thanks for coming back in with the request that I take Ryan's 2011 speech at face value, and consider the values clash in a more fair minded way. <br /><br />Looks like Althouse is blowing up with new posts so this thread is soon to be graveyard material. But I am thinking about your comment, and will respond to it sometime soon on a fresh thread.harrogatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02026095215683554629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-30061965396837551282012-08-14T11:15:05.561-05:002012-08-14T11:15:05.561-05:00People who say such things are entirely unaware th...<b>People who say such things are entirely unaware that Medicare is ripped off by $60 billion in fraud per year.</b><br /><br />I'd advocate a 95% tax rate on any company that says that get you a "free" scooter from the government. That shit is infuriating.damikeschttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02133230009952160269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-65478097311953095342012-08-14T11:13:39.833-05:002012-08-14T11:13:39.833-05:00And if Republican politicians are so willing to co...<b>And if Republican politicians are so willing to compromise so long as actual spending cuts accompany tax increases, then why doesn't the pledge nearly all of them (including Romney and Ryan) sign, say they will never vote for a single tax increase, UNLES that increase is accompanied by actual spending cuts? Instead of saying, simply, "no tax increases whatsoever." I am sorry but the GOP as it is currently configured cannot say in good faith that it is willing to budge on taxes.</b><br /><br />Because they watch history.<br /><br />Bush lost the election in 1992 largely because he made the mistake of compromising with the Democrats and raising taxes --- and getting zilch in spending cuts.<br /><br />Until I see IMMEDIATE spending cuts, I'll oppose a dime in tax hikes.<br /><br /><b>And I also favor long term tax increases</b><br /><br />Ditto.<br /><br />Heck, let's follow Glenn Reynolds' idea. Impose an immediate 20% surtax on all movie ticket sales, DVD sales, PPV sales, downloads, etc. for movies. Same with music. Limit lifetime charitable donations to $5M. Remove the mortgage deductions for homes whose value is above $250,000.<br /><br />Add in a tax rate of 90% on contingency fees.<br /><br />Add in a rax rate of 75% for every nickle over what their last 5 years average public salary was when a government official leaves the gov't to lobby the gov't for an industry.<br /><br />Let the groups that claim to want to give more ACTUALLY GIVE MORE.damikeschttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02133230009952160269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-74640634026765085572012-08-14T11:12:50.272-05:002012-08-14T11:12:50.272-05:00anyone who is a fan of the Coen Bros is a friend o...<i>anyone who is a fan of the Coen Bros is a friend of mine</i><br /><br />Ditto! yashuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716156754089411837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-37506491869583208782012-08-14T11:12:05.096-05:002012-08-14T11:12:05.096-05:00oops--although "confess to undertanding a ser...oops--although "confess to undertanding a serious man."Roger J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12639676792043324100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-90681172797250585602012-08-14T11:10:11.314-05:002012-08-14T11:10:11.314-05:00harrogate, your personal story is moving (thanks f...harrogate, your personal story is moving (thanks for sharing it), and your sympathy for others is honorable. <br /><br />But you insist on framing the issue here as an (obvious) moral choice instead of a complex set of empirical questions. You're going with something that <i>feels</i> altruistic-- but what if that was not, in effect, what was most beneficial and least harmful to the very people you're concerned about? <br /><br />You say: <br /><br /><i>Am I happy to pay more taxes to make sure that these people are ok? To make sure that maybe they even are enabled to rise, if only just enough that they might be in a position to read to their children, or at least encourage their children to take reading seriously in school? To be able to give good medical care to their children and good food?</i><br /><br />You posit a causal relationship, an if-then relationship, between 'you paying more taxes' and 'making sure these people are ok.' But what if that premise is incorrect? And what if there turns out to be a causal relationship between 'you paying more taxes' and 'these people being worse off'? <br /><br />That's why I linked that Obama video in an earlier comment-- about raising taxes "for purposes of fairness," even if you end up with less money to help the very people you want to help. (Not to mention, less jobs, and in the long run without entitlement reform, a debt crisis that will force entitlements to be slashed, willy-nilly, brutally and abruptly.)<br /><br />In May 2011 Ryan says this: <br /><br /><i>This is not the time to go wobbly. They (Democrats) are going to run these attack ads at us regardless. This is a time for leaders to be leaders. This is not a time for us to follow our fears, this is a time to lead because if we don’t address our countries fiscal problems we are going to have a debt crisis and the people who are going to get hurt the first and the worst are the people who need government the most, the elderly and the poor.</i><br /><br />Now, you may say he's wrong, or what he's saying is false, or he has the wrong priorities. But if you at least grant the possibility that he's being sincere, then he sees the issue here as a moral one too, just as you do, and he's concerned about the very same people you're concerned about. <br /><br />It's all very well for you (and Dems in general) to keep framing the issue here as one of morality on one side, cold economics on the other. But what if both sides share many of the same moral concerns, but differ in their analysis, diagnosis, and prescriptions to bring those concerns to bear in effect, actuality, reality? And what if it turns out that the policies and politicians that make you "feel" more moral have worse consequences (especially over time) for the most vulnerable, than the policies and politicians demagogued as heartless?yashuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12716156754089411837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-71153721288412078432012-08-14T11:10:05.469-05:002012-08-14T11:10:05.469-05:00harrowgate--anyone who is a fan of the Coen Bros i...harrowgate--anyone who is a fan of the Coen Bros is a friend of mine--have seen everything they have done, although to not understanding "a serious man." Well done.Roger J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12639676792043324100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-43577598500449789462012-08-14T10:51:09.127-05:002012-08-14T10:51:09.127-05:00On a somewhat differentnote .On a somewhat different<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDfhwPetrqo" rel="nofollow">note </a>.<br /><br />harrogatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02026095215683554629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-19788853288429984102012-08-14T10:32:27.761-05:002012-08-14T10:32:27.761-05:00Harrowgate--thank you for a very good post--it sou...Harrowgate--thank you for a very good post--it sounds like you had admirable parents--and I agree fully that parents reading to their children is a sine qua non of success downstream.<br /><br />I will fully admit that microeconomic theory focuses only on aggregate basics. As such, Maslow's hierarchy helps explain human motivation, and as you point out that the lowest rung on Maslows hierarchy has to do with survival needs. Self actualization, the highest of Maslows needs remains something an individual has reach. I suppose a government should attend in some fashion to those survival needs, but I would submit our governments at all levels, including charity which is not insubstational, attend to those needs as well. I have no problem with defining the "safety net" in terms of Maslows survival needs. It works for me. The issue of course is the degree and the amount. A political question, and this is where your discussion of values comes in.<br /><br />I would submit that values, of course, operatioalize political choices, and when one advocates a certain policy prescription, they are advocating as a value. But as I recall from political philosophy, a value is something that has to amenable to being resolved by the political process. America has chosen a republican system to choose between competing values. It isnt perfect, of course, because of the venality of politicians, but as Winston Churchill famously said, it the best we have to offer (apologies for mangling the quote)<br /><br />On a personal note, I have appreciated your arguments--I probably dont agree with many of them, but you do an excellent job of putting them up for discussion without the usual snark and vituperation that, regrettably, characterize the blogosphere. Please do carry on.Roger J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12639676792043324100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-87461863076904153372012-08-14T10:16:50.044-05:002012-08-14T10:16:50.044-05:00Considering the Ryan budget proposes higher than a...Considering the Ryan budget <a href="http://news.investors.com/article/622012/201208131805/ryan-budget-is-not-radical.htm?p=full" rel="nofollow">proposes higher than average revenue and spending</a>, I don't see why you keep harping on hurting the most vulnerable among us.<br /><br />Unless, you just don't have a clue what's in the Ryan budget, and it is a boogeyman to scare people with.Matt Sablanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15885240752820005149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-58744480816985407432012-08-14T10:12:11.940-05:002012-08-14T10:12:11.940-05:00Roger,
My reference to Maslow was a hat tip to Na...Roger,<br /><br />My reference to Maslow was a hat tip to Nathan Alexander's comment. Though I disagree most emphatically with what Nathan has to say about the pyramid, I applaud him to the nines, for saying owning ideas that so many others who are defending the Ryan budget, deny even exist.<br /><br />The issue of being able to survive is a tricky one because not everyone is going to agree on what exactly constitutes survival. But food stamps and health care coverage and housing and, while it may seem like an abstraction, education, all belong in any serious conversation about our most vulnerable, our citizens who are most alone. <br /><br />Are there always going to be people who game the system to avoid putting forth effort and making sacrifices? of course. But I have known many in my own life who have fought tooth and nail to stay afloat and who have taken federal assistance in the process, and gotten off it when they could, though for many, it took a pong time to be able to get off of it and some never could. Because the world is not made up of Ayn Rand caricatures. The conversation we are having is freighted, on a national level, with the misconception that we are only talking about a rare breed of person, who fights hard to take care of themselves and their children, but get crushed consistently anyway. <br /><br />I remember once in graduate school. (cue the snarks about graduate school, here, from some quarters, natch). A professor said to us on the first day of class, the thing I will remember the most of anything any faculty member ever said. He said, "the reason you are here is because someone read to you when you were small."<br /><br />And since I just gestured that way, I will continue a bit to somewhat break my own protocol and say something about myself here in the comments, for what it is worth. I grew up in a very sketched out neighborhood, a trailer park. And I was lucky--just lucky, that was all!--to be the only child in the neighborhood whose parents read to him and insisted he take school and sports and culture, in general, seriously.<br /><br />And many of the people I grew up with went on to struggle, took jobs where they could but never really had the tools to advance. They lacked cultural capital. Some are gone now, sadly. <br /><br />I am talking about decent human beings, people who have been great friends to me and who love their children and their wives as much as Mitt Romney and Barack Obama do. Not vermin, not ticks, not inhuman dead weight to be cut from the ship of state. But decent American citizens always seemingly one step away from ruin.<br /><br />Am I happy to pay more taxes to make sure that these people are ok? To make sure that maybe they even are enabled to rise, if only just enough that they might be in a position to read to their children, or at least encourage their children to take reading seriously in school? To be able to give good medical care to their children and good food? <br /><br />As one o the patron saints of this blog might say, "You betcha."harrogatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02026095215683554629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-24395430159870891802012-08-14T10:11:28.339-05:002012-08-14T10:11:28.339-05:00In some cases, when you need money -right now- it ...In some cases, when you need money -right now- it is a thing you do because your alternative is too unappealing. In this case, if we were to cut enough spending/streamline it so that we could actually apply extra dollars to reducing the deficit, I could see an argument being made (because paying down debt faster is good to reduce interest/get you out of debt.) Of course, the raw amount of money needed means it may make no appreciable different.Matt Sablanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15885240752820005149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-57080316751115264402012-08-14T09:58:09.329-05:002012-08-14T09:58:09.329-05:00I am still perplexed about how raising taxes (via ...I am still perplexed about how raising taxes (via tax rates or costs of the health care plan) is a good idea. Basic supply and demand theory here: a reduction in available income reduces demand; a reduction in demand shifts the supply curve downward, and the supply curve in the aggregate is what produces will produce in light of reduced demand. The other side of the theortical argument is that increased demand, in the form of dollars to spend, will encourage suppliers to produce more to meet increased demand. <br /><br />Where is the theory wrong?<br /><br />Roger J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12639676792043324100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-44183505376464517702012-08-14T09:52:43.216-05:002012-08-14T09:52:43.216-05:00That's why I favor long term spending cuts tha...<i>That's why I favor long term spending cuts that are careful as possible not to abandon people at the bottom of the "Maslow" pyramid</i><br /><br />People who say such things are entirely unaware that Medicare is ripped off by $60 billion in fraud <b>per year</b>.<br /><br />People who say such things are entirely unaware that people on welfare are buying beer, cigarettes, and getting tatoos.<br /><br />It must be nice to have such a simpleton worldview.Brian Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01772632205321099314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-26013302491356448932012-08-14T09:50:22.937-05:002012-08-14T09:50:22.937-05:00Once you cut spending, it can never impact the eco...Once you cut spending, it can never impact the economy/debt again (unless it goes back up.) Raising taxes has an effect on the economy as long as it stays high. It is painful, and maybe necessary, for awhile. Unless, of course, the goal is just to lower spending for a little while, then raise it again and start us on this trajectory again.Matt Sablanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15885240752820005149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-35035973387308488532012-08-14T09:50:04.406-05:002012-08-14T09:50:04.406-05:00Harrowgate--I have followed your arguments and I a...Harrowgate--I have followed your arguments and I agree with some. But I do need to ask you about your use of the "Maslow" hierarachy which is pointed to individual and not social applications; eg, basic needs, social needs and ultimately self actualization. Could you expand on your point, please.Roger J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12639676792043324100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-79027429222145094912012-08-14T09:49:57.925-05:002012-08-14T09:49:57.925-05:00That's why I favor long term spending cuts tha...<i>That's why I favor long term spending cuts that are careful as possible not to abandon people at the bottom of the "Maslow" pyramid</i><br /><br />But of course raising taxes must never be "careful" and when you're not really informed on these issues government spending "helps" those "at the bottom"<br /><br />It must be fun to have such a simpleton worldview.Brian Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01772632205321099314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-48536041114274110912012-08-14T09:48:45.315-05:002012-08-14T09:48:45.315-05:00But the Dem base, while not libertarian, accepts t...<i>But the Dem base, while not libertarian, accepts the libertarian's point there.</i><br /><br />Really?<br /><br />So it is I guess a big mystery how Democrats who support the war on drugs keep getting elected, huh?Brian Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01772632205321099314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-4356314812052071702012-08-14T09:47:41.013-05:002012-08-14T09:47:41.013-05:00harrogate said...
And that's to say nothing o...<i>harrogate said... <br />And that's to say nothing of the drug war which both parties support but which the Democratic base consistently points out is a drain on the country's spirit, blood, and economic resources<br /></i><br /><br />Really?<br /><br />How about some links to this "thought leadership" by the Democratic base on this issue?<br /><br />I mean, I can offer some that demostrate the libertarian right has made the most headway in this area.<br /><br />Or are you just lying again?Brian Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01772632205321099314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-74307829803520892042012-08-14T09:46:22.582-05:002012-08-14T09:46:22.582-05:00"Because the tax increases would be for a tar..."Because the tax increases would be for a targeted purpose: Paying off the debt faster. The spending cuts would be because we're spending too much. Different purposes, different durations."<br /><br />But wait. What about keeping the debt down once it is pared down? That's why I favor long term spending cuts that are careful as possible not to abandon people at the bottom of the "Maslow" pyramid. And I also favor long term tax increases similar to the Clinton era rates. Along with lots of other moves we could be making.harrogatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02026095215683554629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-2712403969285818872012-08-14T09:42:41.214-05:002012-08-14T09:42:41.214-05:00I fully understand the fact that the libertarians ...I fully understand the fact that the libertarians relentlessly point out, and take with the proper moral seriousness, how shamefully we waste resources and lose opportunities regarding marijuana. I regularly praise the libertarians for this and slam equally upon the Dem and GOP leadership and the GOP base for continued stupidity on this. <br /><br />But the Dem base, while not libertarian, accepts the libertarian's point there. So that's a real presence as well.harrogatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02026095215683554629noreply@blogger.com