@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Everything's a con when you've already pre-decided that the other side is acting in bad faith.
True enough, but that failing - by that I mean the assumption of bad faith on the other political side - is fairly widespread on these forums, and I doubt that you could argue that you are free of it either.
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Yaknow, you come across as such an asshole in pretty much every post. It's amazing - almost as if you're actively trying to be as much of a stereotype as possible. Cycloptichorn
Perhaps the stereotype is as much in the lens through which you see things as it is in what Finn wrote.
Overall not much of a counterargument.
It is true that, now almost three years into the current administration, most of us have fairly well made up our minds about the actors in the current political drama. Moreover the debate about our economy and the complex, two dimensionsl problem of high public debt and a weak and stagnated recovery from a deep recession that we face today has also largely crystallized among us here. These issues are widely debated, not just here on A2K but everywhere else including among those who style themselves as experts on the economic issues involved.
In my view it comes down to which of the two components one believes is the more urgent of the two and has a more pervasive and lasting effects on the other component. Many self-styled Keynesians declare unemployment and recession as the driving problem, assuming the resulting increased debt will not severely limit future economic activity. Others, my self included, worry more about the lasting effects of high public debt (particularly with the several prominent sclerotic examples in Europe before us), and the likely adverse effects of increased dependency on the social and economic behavior of the population arising from the short term fixes being proposed (here too there are prominent European examples of these bad consequences prominently before us).
The sad aspect of all this is that both sides of the political spectrum have contributed to the causes of the current problem, but neither acknowledges his part in it. In the same bad spirit the political actors have failed to find any synthesis. Democrats preach class warfare and "tax the millionaires with private jets" (when they really mean anyone with an income over $200K) , until now without any expressed willingness to address the inexorable rise of forecast public debt due to entitlement costs, including Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security (indeed they still engage in the worst kind of political demagogery over this). Republicans, concerned more about the debt and aware that no feasible combination of tax increase and discretionary spending cuts will solve this aspect of the problem, are reluctant to go along with otherwise justifiable short term measures.
Beyond all that is the problem of our chronic and growing negative balance of trade. The only lasting way to solve this problem is to increase our labor productivity and efficiency. We can't do it with protectionism or refusing to join the growing body of trade treaties afoot in the world; and we can't do it by following the programs advocated by organized Labor Unions who have already destroyed most of our industrial base. They are working on our aircraft iundustry now (Boeing) and we need to stop them. Finally, we can't do it if we follow the lead of rabid environmentalists who want us to return to the bucolic world of 1830.
