Monday, July 12, 2010

Tax Cuts for the Wealthy vs. Unemployment - No Change We Can Believe In

Well, it's finally out in the open now.

Sen Jon Kyl (R-AZ) finally detailed the reasons for his
(and the rest of his party's) unrelenting opposition
to the extension of emergency unemployment benefits.

To him, they are a "necessary evil", and thus they need
to be fully offset by "spending reductions" elsewhere.

Here's the story on The Huffington Post

At the same time, Sen. Kyl also went on to explain that
"tax cuts", unlike unemployment benefits, don't need to
be "offset" by spending cuts elsewhere, because
"they pay for themselves".

And the economist he cites as proof? That eminent
economist and Senator from Kentucky,
Mitch McConnell.

Now I don't blame Sen. Kyl. As a loyal, obedient member
of the Senate Republican caucus, he has to speak the lines
he's told to, even if they don't square with the facts.

And the fact is, that of $787 Billion in stimulus spending,
$450 Billion was tax cuts skewed toward corporations
and the wealthy. This was supposed to "stimulate" new
investment and hiring. And we can all see how that turned out.

And to The Thinking Nationalist, it's a very, very tired and
overplayed theme.

It's nothing more than "trickle down" economics,
dressed up in fancy rhetoric to stimulate class envy
and resentment. And I can understand this.

If you're a small businessman, or self-employed, and
You aren't seeing any benefit from all of the "stimulating"
activity going on, and you aren't benefiting from this
miraculous economic recovery, why shouldn't you
have a tax cut?

After all, the unemployed are (or were) getting Theirs,
the Too-Big-To-Fail banks got Theirs, and as long as they
agreed to keep outsourcing and offshoring jobs, the Big
Corporations got Theirs....

Where's Yours?

I feel your pain.

But, to the GOP and their fellow travelers among the
"Blue Dog" Democrats, you don't matter.

You aren't lining up to stuff dollars in lobbyists' pockets
to hand to the GOP and the entrenched politicos of the
Democrat Party . You aren't working the corridors of
Capitol Hill, with lobbyists in tow, with pre-written bills
or amendments to bills, pressing your case directly, where
it matters.

And if you're going to do that, don't forget the manila
envelopes stuffed with large amounts in small
denominations for your favorite Congresscritters.

After all, in the Halls of Power, money talks and
you-know-what walks.

And don't even think about mainstream Democrats.

If you aren't an Ivy-educated, certified Intellectual,
you just don't count. But don't blame yourself if you're
not at that exalted level.

After all, mainstream "liberal" Democrats, including
the president, care more about winning the "intellectual"
battle more than anything else.

Their idea of a "win" is a critically acclaimed Op-Ed in
the Times or the Washington Post. Or a blog post
on Huffington. Or a guest appearance on the PBS
News Hour.

After all, those audiences understand all the "nuances"
and the "irony" involved in trying to represent the
"progressive" agenda. And they also understand that
this has absolutely nothing to do with representing
the voters back home.

After all, Everyone who is Anyone knows that they
(meaning you) just don't get it. That means you don't
count. And don't be thinking "Tea Party".
The "Tea Party" doesn't shock anyone anymore.
There's no scare there.

Just a bunch of mindless rural rubes ready to vote
Republican, to their own detriment.

So if you think your voice isn't being heard in
Washington (and you can be assured it isn't),
Mr. or Ms. Independent Voter, you need to do something
different. You need to think outside the box.

And that means voting Third Party.

Now, don't get me wrong. If you're dissatisfied with the
way things are going, and your incumbent isn't getting
the job done for you, go ahead and Vote For The Other
Guy, no matter what, as long as there's a credible difference
between the two.

But in some places that may not be enough. Some states
are so Blue or Red that winning the Primary means a
ceremonial walk-over in the General Election.

Or, there's so little difference between the two candidates
that either could just as well be a member of the others'

And that's just not good enough.

So if that applies to your state, vote Third Party.

If you're Conservative, vote Libertarian instead of
Republican. If you are liberal or "progressive", vote
Green, Socialist or even Communist.

And if enough of us do this, we're going to have a
great mixture in Congress and in the state legislatures
as well.

I'd love to see some Republican leader bust his gut
trying to get a "compromise vote" out of some
died-in-the-wool Libertarian. And I think the
Democrats would go nuts if they had to "coalesce"
with Green, Socialist, or Communist legislators.

Who knows - out of all that, you might get Change
that some of us might believe in ... for a change.

1 comment:

  1. I believe that the term: wardheeler, is more appropriate than congresscritter.