US Politics

[Tumbling Dice]

Reducing the budget deficit is the most important issue facing America right now.  I think the government needs to increase its revenues, AND it needs to cut its expenses if they want to make a big dent in the deficit.  However, according to the CBO, if the White House and Congress can reach a budget deal that extends the tax cuts and avoids reductions in spending, the deficit will be about $1 trillion for this budget year, which would be only $100 billion less than the deficit in the last fiscal year ending September 2012.  The UK coalition government has managed to cut the UK budget deficit by a quarter since 2010, while at the same time one million new jobs were created.

That's impressive! And here I thought you all were much more socialist than we. Guess I was wrong! Go UK!! Do they detail where/what those 1 million new jobs are? That's the tricky thing here w/ our unemployment numbers. They don't readily tell where the new jobs are and what they are. Hence, one has no idea if they are the same level/quality of jobs that were lost. I suspect not.

I don't know what the jobs are, although it's fair to say that some were part-time and/or low paid jobs.  But, of course, a job is a job.  We've laid off public sector workers and the vast majority of the jobs created are in the private sector.  What I do know is that the level of employment in the UK right now is the highest since records began.  In the latest figures, youth unemployment has also fallen to below one million, so that's some good news.  Also, the UK economy has just come out of recession, at a time when the EU has fallen back into recession.  Our unemployment rate is at 7.8%, which is well below the EU average.

[The Unknown Caller]

Again, despite TD's spin, we just 'came out of' a second recession which was totally self-inflicted due to poor economic management and contractionary policies.  Most people wouldn't consider it much of an achievement to climb out of a hole if it's one you just dug yourself into unnecessarily! Similarly, youth unemployment coming down is of course good news, but that's only after it's risen to catastrophic heights due again to a badly designed, flawed economic policy.

Now of course the government has been backing down on its original, spectacularly failed policy and trying to give more under-the-board stimulus which is easing the effects of its previous misguided policies a little, though not enough.

To be clear, the US needs to reduce its deficit, absolutely! But they should only look at the UK as an example of exactly what not to do; no sudden lurch into austerity from an economy not yet strong enough to handle it. They should look instead to their own performance in the 1990s when they successfully managed to reduce the deficit significantly and create growth and jobs at the same time rather then the UK government's failure to do either adequately.

[Tumbling Dice]

That's impressive! And here I thought you all were much more socialist than we. Guess I was wrong! Go UK!!

Unfortunately, it's an awful lot worse than it looks. TD has cited a few selective facts without placing them in context.

The UK's GDP growth has been slower and worse than Japan, the USA or even the Eurozone over the past two years. We have also created less jobs than the USA over that period. Plans to reduce the deficit are also very badly behind schedule; TD notes that it has fallen by a quarter, however it was meant to have fallen by over a half under the government's plans, and they have badly lagged. For half of 2012, we were actually back in recession again, with a net negative of growth.

Yes, we all know that our target to cut the deficit hasn't been achieved, due to a underestimating how bad the economic slump in the Eurozone would be.  But we have cut the deficit by more than the US have managed despite their 'stimulus'.  And if you want to talk about targets being behind schedule, look no further than President Obama's targets in cutting the deficit and reducing unemployment.  The UK growth rate is now predicted to outstrip the EU average.

[Tumbling Dice]

Again, despite TD's spin, we just 'came out of' a second recession which was totally self-inflicted due to poor economic management and contractionary policies.  Most people wouldn't consider it much of an achievement to climb out of a hole if it's one you just dug yourself into unnecessarily! Similarly, youth unemployment coming down is of course good news, but that's only after it's risen to catastrophic heights due again to a badly designed, flawed economic policy.

Now of course the government has been backing down on its original, spectacularly failed policy and trying to give more under-the-board stimulus which is easing the effects of its previous misguided policies a little, though not enough.

To be clear, the US needs to reduce its deficit, absolutely! But they should only look at the UK as an example of exactly what not to do; no sudden lurch into austerity from an economy not yet strong enough to handle it. They should look instead to their own performance in the 1990s when they successfully managed to reduce the deficit significantly and create growth and jobs at the same time rather then the UK government's failure to do either adequately.

This is what you call TUC's spin.

[mdmomof7]

Political DJs I think!   

[imaginary friend]

Reducing the budget deficit is the most important issue facing America right now. 

I think the government needs to increase its revenues, AND it needs to cut its expenses if they want to make a big dent in the deficit.  However, according to the CBO, if the White House and Congress can reach a budget deal that extends the tax cuts and avoids reductions in spending, the deficit will be about $1 trillion for this budget year, which would be only $100 billion less than the deficit in the last fiscal year ending September 2012. 

Both those claims are patently false.

First off, our biggest problem over here is jobs. Our infrastructure is falling apart, yet the US House of Representatives refuses to greenlight any programs to rebuild them. Hundreds of thousands of jobs would open up within a few months, but all they've cared about was trying to deny Obama a second term.

Secondly, under the Clinton-era tax rates (39.6% top rate on income and, I think 25% on capital gains), our country ran trillion-dollar surpluses. Under the Bush-era tax rates (35% and 15% respectively), we're running trillion-dollar deficits. I've pointed this out here before, although not to you specifically.


edited to add: two interesting things have popped up, no idea if they're true, but I'll try to keep y'alls posted if/when events unfold.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/12787-why-rove-failed-to-deliver-ohio-on-election-day-what-happened-in-ohio-this-time-around

http://wonkette.com/489966/anonymous-claims-it-stopped-karl-rove-from-hacking-the-election-by-hacking-orca-we-think

[Tumbling Dice]

Reducing the budget deficit is the most important issue facing America right now. 

I think the government needs to increase its revenues, AND it needs to cut its expenses if they want to make a big dent in the deficit.  However, according to the CBO, if the White House and Congress can reach a budget deal that extends the tax cuts and avoids reductions in spending, the deficit will be about $1 trillion for this budget year, which would be only $100 billion less than the deficit in the last fiscal year ending September 2012. 

Both those claims are patently false.

First off, our biggest problem over here is jobs. Our infrastructure is falling apart, yet the US House of Representatives refuses to greenlight any programs to rebuild them. Hundreds of thousands of jobs would open up within a few months, but all they've cared about was trying to deny Obama a second term.

Given that the fiscal cliff is fast approaching, getting a deal on the budget is the most pressing issue right now and both sides are agreed that the deficit needs to be cut.  The Repubs want spending cuts, except for defence, and to reform the tax system, whilst the Dems want tax rises for 3% of the richest Americans and some spending cuts.

Secondly, under the Clinton-era tax rates (39.6% top rate on income and, I think 25% on capital gains), our country ran trillion-dollar surpluses. Under the Bush-era tax rates (35% and 15% respectively), we're running trillion-dollar deficits. I've pointed this out here before, although not to you specifically.

I hardly think anyone would suggest tax rises because it would increase growth!  Tax rises are proposed to reduce the deficit.

[briscoetheque]

I'd kill for a 39% tax rate

[Domenico of Lovetown]

I live in New Jersey.  As the clean up efforts along our shore (and in NYC and Long Island) begin to transition to rebuilding, it will be interesting to see how much climate science will impact some of the tough decisions to be made.  Will they try to recreate the communities exactly as they were or will significant changes be made?  There has been some talk of "Managed Retreat" where some areas may need to be completely abandoned.

The planning decisions that will be made shortly will tell us much about what officials actually believe even if they don't mention climate change by name.

[Maximus]

We poor backward racist Republicans--wait a minute what's this? You mean the only African American Senator is a Republican, really--- I thought we weren't representative of American...Wait a minute he was appointed by an Indian American GOP GOV, who happens to be female--Can't be--wait a minute there are more female GOP GOVs than Dems--No way It can't be, wait a minute there are more minority GOP Govs than DEMS say it aint so

Before the election (Now it is actually worse for Dems):

Out of the twenty-nine Republican governors, twenty-five are male and four are female. These are Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico, Governor Mary Fallin of Oklahoma, and Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina.

10% of Democratic governors are female while 13.8% of Republican governors are female.

Now let’s move to race. Out of the twenty Democratic governors, nineteen are white and one is black. This is Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts.

Out of the twenty-nine Republican governors, twenty-five are white, two are Hispanic, and two are South Asian. These are Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Governor Brian Sandavol of Nevada, Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico, and Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina.

5% of Democratic governors are minorities while 13.8% of Republican governors are minorities.

Conclusions

A Republican governor is marginally more likely to be a woman, and about 2.8 times more likely to be a minority, than a Democratic governor. http://my.firedoglake.com/inoljt/tag/minorities/

“By the way, Democrats wish they had the diversity of speakers and deep bench to show America,” said Todd. “The Democrats wanted a keynote speaker that was Hispanic and they had to dig inside a red state to find a Hispanic mayor.”

Todd noted that the GOP is featuring a broad range of Hispanic elected officials like New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, Texas GOP Senate candidate Ted Cruz, Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.

“One thing the Republican party has are a lot of elected officials to help deal with this issue of going against the grain on the fact that their mostly white — their support base is a white, Southern part of the party,” said Todd. “The face of the Republican party of elected leaders – Democrats wish they had that diversity.”    Chuck Todd NBC News

Sen.-designate Scott, 47, will become the only African-American currently serving in the Senate and the first black Republican to serve in the upper chamber since the 1970s. He will also be the first black senator from the South since Reconstruction.

So basically the Dems have an attitude towards minorities, vote for us we will give you stuff, but we really don't want to share too much power. That is why I can't see why minorities vote for the dems can't they see they are being used. They have a better chance at executive leadership and senate seats in the GOP. They are truly more represented in the GOP.

[The Unknown Caller]

"Look! Look! We have some Hispanic and African American people! We CAN'T be racist now!"

This is absolutely a winning strategy for groups which disagree with your policies on virtually every single issue. Definitely.

Here's a suggestion; maybe the very very rare and unrepresentative minorities who join the GOP are more likely to rise through the ranks because a party dominated by elderly white men is desparate to prove that it isn't racist and can't think of any acctual policy innovations which might make it less repulsive to every single non-white-elderly-male group in the country.

The fact that you 'can't understand' why minorities vote Democrat even though you refuse to listen to them on any issues and keep appointing incredibly unrepresentative members of those groups is a pretty good indicator as to why you won't be winning them any time soon.

[Maximus]

"Look! Look! We have some Hispanic and African American people! We CAN'T be racist now!"

This is absolutely a winning strategy for groups which disagree with your policies on virtually every single issue. Definitely.

Here's a suggestion; maybe the very very rare and unrepresentative minorities who join the GOP are more likely to rise through the ranks because a party dominated by elderly white men is desparate to prove that it isn't racist and can't think of any acctual policy innovations which might make it less repulsive to every single non-white-elderly-male group in the country.

The fact that you 'can't understand' why minorities vote Democrat even though you refuse to listen to them on any issues and keep appointing incredibly unrepresentative members of those groups is a pretty good indicator as to why you won't be winning them any time soon.

Where are all the Minority Gov and Senators and the DEM party? The DEMs have a benevolent overlord mentality to minorities.

In the Republican party much like the Republican attitude in general it is a meritocracy do well move up, you don't need to be dependent. The dems want you dependent on them. As long as the minorities toe the dem line they are fine as soon as the disagree the dems savage them.

[The Unknown Caller]

^ This is a beautiful example of why your party got so utterly, thoroughly thrashed among every single non-white demographic and most non-Christian, non-male demographics too.

You can't solve the problem when you don't even have a remotely coherent diagnosis.

[Maximus]

we will see what happens in 2014

But lest look at some firsts in the Bush admin:

The First Black SEc of State
The First Black Female NSA
The First Female Sec of State
First WC Alberto Gonzales, the first Latino to hold the job (2001–2005),
First AG Alberto Gonzales, the first Latino to hold the job
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR Gale Norton (2001–2006) was the first woman to hold this position.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Bush: Ann Veneman was the first woman to hold the position.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Carlos Gutierrez (2005–2009) was the first Latino to hold the post.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Elaine Chao (2001–2009) was the first Asian American in the position.

I could go on and on. It is funny Bush's cabinet was a lot more diverse than OB's at top level positions (lower cabinet jobs Obama has more Asians)

[The Unknown Caller]

And what a massive success they were in showing that the GOP understands the needs and concerns of ethnic minority communities!

Support for Republican Presidential Nominee
African Americans: 2004 - 11%     2008 - 5%    2012 - 7%
Hispanic-Americans: 2004 - 40%   2008 - 31%  2012- 26%
Asian-Americans: 2004 - 44%      2008 - 37%   2012 - 28%

Shockingly enough, it turns out that promoting policies which no ethnic minorities support while openly tolerating outright racists as vocal forces within your party manages to outweigh occasionally appointing unrepresentative ethnic minorities.

Again, the fact that you think "But we appointed some!" is an argument here is exactly why your party loses so badly among these groups time and time again.