Black Hole....errr The Political Roundtable

[montestewart]

And FWIW, take a look at the "smart stats guys" right here on this board - tend to be more Libertarian/conservative, especially on fiscal matters. Make of that what you will...

Oh wait, I know this one; statisticians are all cold-hearted bean counters. That's it, right?

[BanndNDC]

So i guess (based on those stats) Texas has really really crappy high schools. Combining all those facts we are left with the following conclusions: 1) Texas has slightly above average elementary and middle school teachers 2) Wisconsin has average elementary and middle school teacher and by implication 3) Texas has really bad high school teachers and 4) Wisconsin has really good high school teachers.

Texas students went from above average to way below average after spending 3-4 years in a Texas high school. Wisconsin students went from average to way above average after spending 3-4 years in a Wisconsin high school.

Interesting facts (dont get the whole need to compare students based on race thing though)

[BanndNDC]

http://www.wkow.com/Global/story.asp?S=14185537

oh my oh my. the video of the WI capitol police tackling the state representative who tried to enter the building. things have just turned for the worse.

[Kanyewest]

One could just as easily assert that private school teachers are underpaid. Or that they simply do less demanding work.

In most cases the work of private school teachers is FAR less demanding, imo. Teaching at Anacostia H.S. is a whole lot different than teaching at Georgetown Prep.The average private school teacher wouldn't last a day in an inner-city public school classroom, dealing with unprepared kids, some of whom are hungry and unhealthy, discipline issues, uninvolved parents, etc.

Understood. But no amount of pay increase for the teacher or fancy facilities for the school will help these kids. The problems with these kids' educations are the circumstances that lead them be unprepared, hungry, undisciplined, etc.

I could see enough money being thrown at the problem that could reduce some problems especially in poorer regions. The system is often gamed by people who make higher incomes moving to different districts with better education systems. Of course, the big problem appears to me is that most don't want to pay for others being educated (i.e. tax dollars shouldn't go from Montgommery County to PG County).

[hands11]

Good post, pcbothwel. As I raise my own kids, I'm finding that the single most important thing I can teach them is to work. It's a tough sell at times, but we've been able to create a virtuous cycle at times and the kids catch on. We've had good teachers, as well as some crummy teachers. What matters is the kids putting in the work on their own.

I usually side on the Macro view of these things. I find it best to consider major trends and issues that have a hand in leading this nation over a cliff. If you step back, it is clear how and why we are here and what needs to be done to fix it.

Most of this countries problems are the direct effect of a handful of things.

The baby boomers. The "Me Generation" They didn't pay their way.
The equal right movement of the 60s. More importantly, what happened before that.
The communication age and the change of media market share. Consolidation of media
The integration of Wall Street into ever facet of our lives.
The person-hood of corporations and the change in Campaign Finance rules.

Boomers. They are such a huge group and as they made their way through every age, they had an over weighted influence on things. As the "Me Generation" they didn't finance there own way. They kicked the can down the road with Tax Cuts that were not paid for so they accounted all this debt. Basically they squeeze the sponge dry. They wanted it all. Big house. Two cars. Vacations. But they didn't want to pay their way so they put it all on a credit card their kids have to pay back.

Equal Right
Things where out of balance and to correct them they made them out of balance the other way so people could catch up. That made for a bitter group of white man. The disadvantaged where given some advantages. This reverse discrimination created new scares. Well after 40 years, things have gotten a lot better. Some things just take time. It may have been the right thing to do, but it was a hard pill to swallow for a lot of people and they are bitter over the process. These are your Tea Partiers. And now that women can work, the fabric of the home is harder to hold together. Between women working and the acceptance of divorce, society has had to make major adjustment as to what a family looks like and how to raise kids. Many of my family member have been blessed enough to have their wife's stay home and be active in the kids life's and their education. As a result, they are amazing and talented kids/young adults. There are other ways to do it, but it would be hard to argue that having a parent fully dedicated to the home and the kids isn't a winning model. It also connected the neighborhood and the community. Much of this country has lost this way of life.

Media Age
There used to be 1000's of independent radio and new outlets. Ton of reporters. And we all watch mostly three primary networks. News was more news. Now it is politics and spin. There is good and bad to this. Now a days it is easier for people to live in a bubble. You listen to the people who say what you believe and there are lots of choices so it is easy for spin and lies to persist. Hell, something like 30% of people still think Obama is not an American. But when there were just 3 networks and that was all anyone could watch, there were moments that the country would share as a group. For example, I remember when Roots came out. Everyone watch it. It was an American experience and everyone was talking about it. It raised awareness. The country as a whole grow from it. We talked about it in school. Most people also watch Mash, Happy Days, The Jeffersons, All in the family. Those shows entertained but they also educated. We all watch Evil Knievel jump the canyon. There was a common thread. I remember on the Jeffersons seeing the first black and white kiss on national television. While there is a lot of bad happening, we have made some progress. Things are way better for Black people then they were in the 60-70s. Same with women.

Wall Street and the internet age
So much less of our economy was tied into Wall Street. Then computers happened and on line trading. Yahoo stock tracking. The bubble of get rich quick happened and there was a huge transfer of wealth to Wall Street. People used to having Savings accounts. They felt safe. They didn't need to make risky investment just to try to keep up and survive. People had pensions. 30% of people were in Union and the Middle class held 30% of the national GNP. People would live a simpler, safer, more predictable life. This didn't translate to everyone at the time. It was way better for white man. The goal was to share this experience to everyone. That started to happen but we never got there. White became bitter over not getting the job or getting into the school they wanted because of quotas and set asides. Then the Wall Street started to take over. Everything became about maximizing profit. Junk bonds happened. Hostel take overs. Corporate greed. High leveraged buyout and dismantling of factories where the assets where sold off and worker kicked out of their jobs. That started in the 80's. And the idea was born that Government was the problem. Trickle down was introduced. Unfunded tax cuts and massive debt was the way.
Then add in the Savings and Loan crisis. Another huge transfer of wealth to the rich. The this last Wall Street Banking Crisis. It's shifted from people and government for the people to Wall Street, Banks, Corporations and a Government for themselves. Union member ship went from 30% and the middle class having 30% of the wealth to something like 15%. And along for the ride, the middle class now only holds 15% of the wealth. There is a 1:1 relationship between union membership and the amount of wealth the middle class holds. The rich has gotten richer and they have taken over the government.

The person-hood of corporations and the change in Campaign Finance rules.
The corporatism of American and the influence of the wealthiest Americans along with Wall Street now have taken over. Consolation of money, power, political influence and mass marketing of messaging is where we are. There has been a huge transfer of wealth from the masses to the wealthiest few. And much of that wealth was on credit card spending ( National Deficit ) From 1 Trillion per Reagen to in the 80's to 13 Trillion today. I saw this happening since I was 15 except one brief moment when the debt was being paid down when Clinton was president.

Today. Time to pay the pipper for all this BS.
13 Trillion and 90 something percent of the GNP. Is that bad? Hell yeah. Have we been here before. Yeep. Post WII. IIRC, I think the debt to GNP was at 120% or there about. We can pay it down but it isn't going to happen over night and it isn't going to happen by cutting spending on the backs of the poor. Cutting spending is good, but it has to be the right kind of cuts.

The people as a whole get what needs to happen. The recent pools show it.
Cutting 20 or 60 billion by cutting services to the poor just BS. The people want the rich to pay back more since they have accumulated so much of the wealth over since the 70/80's. 800 Billion in tax cut to the richest 2% is way more than anything you will get from cutting these small programs. Same thing to changing the estate tax laws. Lastly, they need to trim the military. You can save another 100 billions a year there.

We need to be in the 500 billion a year range, not 20 billion. And there are clear and fair ways to get there. Cutting spending in investments in infrastructure and education and the poor is exactly the wrong thing to do. But the right cuts along with the right investments will allow us to grow our way out of things. 90% debt to GNP is not a deal breaker but the trend needs to start getting reversed so it gets down to 80% then 70% and so on. The key is to do the right things and stick to them. We were on the right path under Clinton. We know what works and what needs to get done. Health care reform was exactly the right thing to do. And now the states hopefully get freed to do their own programs. If they are smart, they will follow Mit and Omaba and cut out the insurance companies who are another who accumulators of the middle classes wealth.

Union busting like what is happening in WI, is exactly the wrong thing to do. Middle class people income not in unions is directly correlated to union wages. Break the unions and the whole middle class will only suffer more.

The focus needs to be on building the middle class and building infrastructure. Long term investments in education and technology. The breaking up of the influence of Wall Street, Corporations and the rich's influence over a government that is for the people. Taxing the rich more. Health care reform. There is a party that stands for this principles and one that has play a huge role in disinformation and the wrong policies that have gotten us in this mess.

Sorry, it couldn't be anymore clear. I just hope the American people as a whole wake up and smell the coffee before the richest, Wall Street, Banks, Insurance companies oil companies/ The Republican Party rigs the system so badly that it takes riots in the street to change it. We have done it before. It was called the 60s. I can happen again. But it doesn't have to be that way.

Eventually people will figure it out.

[hands11]

or one could simply point out that there are certification standards in public schools. you need a degree in education to teach in public schools, you dont for private schools. while i personally don't buy the notion that an education degree makes one a better teacher i will acknowledge that it presents a higher cost for the individual and if higher entrance costs are required for the individual then higher compensation seems proper.



fish: i think the issue is, we haven't decided what a primary school education is supposed to achieve. i think it should be about developing critical thinking, a desire to learn independently, and basic math/reading skills. most of those are very hard to develop statistics on.

i've had the opportunity to work with college students quite a bit lately (generally higher achievers (at least grade wise) as well) and i've seen a decrease in critical thinking skills over the past few years. they know more about some things but also know a lot less about others and independent analytical skills are worse. on the surface, in terms of being involved etc , things are better but the depth isn't there. When we were growing up the American primary system was possibly the best in the world and you could tell during interactions with students from other countries that our traditional system of classroom debate and focus on critical thinking worked. nowadays, students from other countries are far more impressive and ask far more insightful questions. something is off in our system/society and it is way more than just an issue of unions and lazy teachers.

This is right on target. Kids should be tough to think, work in groups, how to learn, how to tackle problems, how to think outside the box. They should be encourage to follow their interests. Having many family members who were home schooled, I see the effects of this kind of teaching. They are all well educated and balanced kids and all have established skills be it music or art or entrance into the military for nursing. Everyone should be educated to be a engineer or scientist.

[BanndNDC]

Thinking about this education thing and those statistics showing texas good at elementary school and wisconsin good at high school.

Those are some interesting stats and i think it would behove us to try and figure out why texas is good at early education (but bad at later education) and vice versa for wisconsin. having just as many biases and stereotypes as the next guy im gonna go out on a limb and make some assumptions.

what's clear is that neither the conservative nor progressive wings of our political culture have the complete answer. both ideologies have aspects that are good and aspects that are bad. both also have massive blindspots and refuse to ever contemplate that something might be wrong or their theories may be inappropriate.

my assumption/stereotype is that texas (standing in for conservatives) values control and conformity while wisconsin (standing in for progressives) values chaos and diversity. based on the statistics each one is clearly beneficial at one stage and detrimental at another. factor in my anecdotal comparative experiences with montessori schools (very beneficial at the beginning but if done too long begins to hurt) and a pattern begins to emerge.

early childhood education should be about fostering the desire to learn. freedom to go at different paces and explore individual interests helps instill a long term desire to learn (and figure things out for yourself). Montessori style for ages 4-6. it's about learning to like to learn. chaos and diversity is good.

elementary school is about drilling fundamentals. learning the building blocks. basic language, math, science and history knowledge. non controversial stuff and basic social interaction skills. conformity and rote learning dont hurt. texas style. this is where national standards are most useful and would be uncontroversial. this is also where standardized testing and nclb type results tables are most valuable. technology does nothing here and for god's sake dont give them all ipads. control and conformity are good.

middle school is a transitional period that i havent figured out the balance for. but is where analysis and critical thinking skills begin to be formulated. paces need to be differentiated. but basic skills need to be advanced. classic books need to be read (dead white guys are relevant). basic knowledge is either known or not known by the end of middle school. control and diversity are good.

high school is where horizons are broadened and critical thinking skills are learned. freedom is important. tables and knowledge test scores are less important and a focus on them can have a detrimental impact on learning (teaching to the test at the expense of skill formulation). for the first time (in the educational progression) the questions are more important than the answers. the ability to fire non-inspirational phone it in teachers is important here but at the same time basing it on test scores works to incentivize mediocrity. chaos and diversity are good.

i think we should let the conservatives and the statisticians have control of elementary school and let the progressives and the dreamers have control of high school. we need inspirational teachers in high school and devoted teachers in elementary school. teachers of those two phases should be treated differently and negotiated with separately (since their motivations and skill sets should be different so should their incentives (financial and performance).

meh, there's nothing original or particular insightful in these thoughts. but i do think it is important to conceptualize how the ideal works before trying to change the system.

[montestewart]

^
Is there a link to the high school stats? I don't see it above, and all the stats above seem to show Texas with better scores.

The scores above show how well the systems gear toward passing that test, broken down by race. It's debatable whether that, or ACT/SAT scores, or any other single measure shows the success of an educational system. It would be interesting to see what the ACT/SAT scores broken down by race show, and further interesting to see how all break down by race, household income, family education, etc. across all states. The competing stats claims both seem to tell a story, but it takes a lot more information to really give a clear picture.

PS: I like to think that a teacher can be both devoted and inspirational. Maybe that's just me.

[dobrojim]

I think the motivation to learn is strongly biased by the perception of
real opportunity. Kids are not stupid. If it seems clear to them that
real opportunity is a long shot, why bother to work hard. The general
tendency for immediate gratification takes a very firm root.

A major issue I have with conservative thinking as it is practiced
today is their near religious belief in the US as the paragon of
opportunity and social mobility. The stats say otherwise.
We rank nowhere near the top in many measures of social
and economic mobility. An actual meritocracy would be a
wonderful thing. I think we're a long way from that situation.

I think these issues have a lot to do with how hard our kids
work to become educated.

dear hands - I think we agree in a number of areas but I find reading
your posts tedious. They could be greatly enhanced by a modicum
of proofreading, not that I am a model of perfection by any means.
Just a thought.

[hands11]

Thinking about this education thing and those statistics showing texas good at elementary school and wisconsin good at high school.

Those are some interesting stats and i think it would behove us to try and figure out why texas is good at early education (but bad at later education) and vice versa for wisconsin. having just as many biases and stereotypes as the next guy im gonna go out on a limb and make some assumptions.

what's clear is that neither the conservative nor progressive wings of our political culture have the complete answer. both ideologies have aspects that are good and aspects that are bad. both also have massive blindspots and refuse to ever contemplate that something might be wrong or their theories may be inappropriate.

my assumption/stereotype is that texas (standing in for conservatives) values control and conformity while wisconsin (standing in for progressives) values chaos and diversity. based on the statistics each one is clearly beneficial at one stage and detrimental at another. factor in my anecdotal comparative experiences with montessori schools (very beneficial at the beginning but if done too long begins to hurt) and a pattern begins to emerge.

early childhood education should be about fostering the desire to learn. freedom to go at different paces and explore individual interests helps instill a long term desire to learn (and figure things out for yourself). Montessori style for ages 4-6. it's about learning to like to learn. chaos and diversity is good.

elementary school is about drilling fundamentals. learning the building blocks. basic language, math, science and history knowledge. non controversial stuff and basic social interaction skills. conformity and rote learning dont hurt. texas style. this is where national standards are most useful and would be uncontroversial. this is also where standardized testing and nclb type results tables are most valuable. technology does nothing here and for god's sake dont give them all ipads. control and conformity are good.

middle school is a transitional period that i havent figured out the balance for. but is where analysis and critical thinking skills begin to be formulated. paces need to be differentiated. but basic skills need to be advanced. classic books need to be read (dead white guys are relevant). basic knowledge is either known or not known by the end of middle school. control and diversity are good.

high school is where horizons are broadened and critical thinking skills are learned. freedom is important. tables and knowledge test scores are less important and a focus on them can have a detrimental impact on learning (teaching to the test at the expense of skill formulation). for the first time (in the educational progression) the questions are more important than the answers. the ability to fire non-inspirational phone it in teachers is important here but at the same time basing it on test scores works to incentivize mediocrity. chaos and diversity are good.

i think we should let the conservatives and the statisticians have control of elementary school and let the progressives and the dreamers have control of high school. we need inspirational teachers in high school and devoted teachers in elementary school. teachers of those two phases should be treated differently and negotiated with separately (since their motivations and skill sets should be different so should their incentives (financial and performance).

meh, there's nothing original or particular insightful in these thoughts. but i do think it is important to conceptualize how the ideal works before trying to change the system.

Sounds a lot like it was when I went to school. We had standardize test in JHS. They wanted to make sure you were getting the basics and if you needed help. One thing I would add to the younger middle school age stuff is .. being exposed to music and playing instruments because that goes hand in hand with being creative and self esteem. Early foundation stuff should have a good bit of enjoying life stuff. Everyone doesn't have a happy home. Learning to enjoy life is something that can hold people back a lifetime and that stuff is formulated at an early age. Creativity should be encouraged. So should dreaming big and learning to work toward dreams. That is what separates us from drone like thinking countries. Sports is also important. That is what my home schooled relatives got. They got to try things and explore their talents be it art, or love of animals, cooking, athletics, etc. They volunteered. They help those less fortunate.

I don't have much worry about them. They got a balanced eduction about life and their talents. Unlike me who was graduating college and still know knowing what I wanted to do.

[hands11]

http://www.wkow.com/Global/story.asp?S=14185537

oh my oh my. the video of the WI capitol police tackling the state representative who tried to enter the building. things have just turned for the worse.

Now who saw that coming.

This country has lost its soul. The militants are trying to take over.
Only good news to come out of this is that the masses will eventually wake up and this is just what is needed to do it. Power to the people. Funny how the same people that rebelled against capping Wall Street bonuses after tax payers money bailed them out have no problem capping teachers earning based on the idea that it involves tax payer money.

So Finland is kick our ass in education. Nice.

[dobrojim]

I don't always get to watch but Stewart (Daily Show) was esp good
the other night.

http://shar.es/3yfHP

re corp taxes - this is what I am talking about

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/02/28-2

[nate33]

Bring back highly progressive 60s era income tax rates (indexed for inflation).
Stop profitable (in many cases, extremely profitable) corporations from paying ZERO in taxes.
Amend the Constitution to explicitly state that corporations do not
share the same rights as actual people, especially with respect to
a right to a redress of grievances/free political speech.

While I understand the desire to return to the "glory days" of the 50's and 60's with highly progressive taxation, I don't think that's going to work anymore. In the 50's and 60's, Asia was full of backwater, poverty-stricken, third world countries and Europe was still rebuilding from the war. America had no competitor except for communist Russia.

We can't go back to those conditions. This is a global marketplace now. Raise corporate taxes too high and corporations will move overseas, taking their jobs with them. The same goes for individual taxes, although individuals are probably a bit less willing to move around.

I think an argument can be made for moderately higher individual high-income tax brackets, but it would be a big mistake to raise corporate taxes anymore. Indeed, I think corporate taxes should be lowered since we currently have the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world.

[hands11]

Bring back highly progressive 60s era income tax rates (indexed for inflation).
Stop profitable (in many cases, extremely profitable) corporations from paying ZERO in taxes.
Amend the Constitution to explicitly state that corporations do not
share the same rights as actual people, especially with respect to
a right to a redress of grievances/free political speech.

While I understand the desire to return to the "glory days" of the 50's and 60's with highly progressive taxation, I don't think that's going to work anymore. In the 50's and 60's, Asia was full of backwater, poverty-stricken, third world countries and Europe was still rebuilding from the war. America had no competitor except for communist Russia.

We can't go back to those conditions. This is a global marketplace now. Raise corporate taxes too high and corporations will move overseas, taking their jobs with them. The same goes for individual taxes, although individuals are probably a bit less willing to move around.

I think an argument can be made for moderately higher individual high-income tax brackets, but it would be a big mistake to raise corporate taxes anymore. Indeed, I think corporate taxes should be lowered since we currently have the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world.

Large corporations are flush with cash and may pay no tax. Close the loop holes if you want lower corporate tax across the board. That is what Obama was advocating. Corporation problem isn't not having enough money. The problem is there isn't enough of a market here for them to sell to like there once was.

What needs to happen isn't complicated. But doing it is because of the power of money.

If they are US companies that want to move over seas, just make the tax system hear make it not worth them doing it. If they are non US companies already outside the country, that is one thing. But if they are moving out of the country to avoid helping balance this countries budget which they helped create then make it so there is no advantage to doing it. We are still a major market. If you want to play, you have to pay. This is part of the problem with unrestrained free market capitalism. There has to be some portion of patriotism and the government should set up the system to benefit this country, not multinational companies.

Close the corp loop holes then you can look at the corp tax rate. Make things level and fair.
End the child tax credit. Why am I paying for you to have kids?
Get off this property tax model of paying for education. There should be zero property tax. Just make the state and country taxes cover that. That will allow us to stop subsidizing banks with this stupid mortgage deduction model and it will allow housing to go to it's true market price. Again, why should people that rent pay more taxes then those who buy? Specially in a society that is much more mobile then it was before. A mobile work force is of value to the country. Why give them less disposable income when they move and rent. This model is actually impeding the free market and encouraging bubbles like we just saw.

End the Bush tax cuts for the rich and change the estate taxes back
Cut some of the defense spending and wrap up these wars
Invest in infrastructure to rebuild this country and the middle class. We have a hugely underutilized construction work force. Support collective bargaining because even non union workers in the middle class are represented by their negotiation. We need a strong middle class with disposable income. That is what makes this country upwardly mobile and a great market place. Not a few rich people.

Push to get this country off gas cars as fast as possible even if you subsidized to do so. This would stimulate one of our largest remaining industries and stimulate the economy. We are doing to opposite. We are subsidizing the oil companies directly, and indirectly via wars. Just a huge waste that can be fixed by shifting the money to something that is a better investment. There is to much national security at risk to support the oil model. Plus things like what happened in the gulf both by weather and things like BP happen. Oil is just a terrible model for this country at this stage of the game. It's time to let go of oil and move forward to the better options.

Do those things, and this country would be right back on track stronger than ever.

[DCZards]

Indeed, I think corporate taxes should be lowered since we currently have the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world.

Lower corporate tax rates? Not when most corporations and their slick tax lawyers already find so many loopholes that they already end up paying little or no taxes.

[nate33]

Indeed, I think corporate taxes should be lowered since we currently have the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world.

Lower corporate tax rates? Not when most corporations and their slick tax lawyers already find so many loopholes that they already end up paying little or no taxes.

I'm all for closing the tax loopholes for the big corporations. But we need to lower the overall tax rate as well.

And hands11, your demand-side stimulus won't work. We've had demand-side stimulus for 25 years now, that's what got us into this mess in the first place. We've enabled people to borrow beyond their means just to keep consumer demand going. Now those chickens are coming home to roost.

Our problem is our inability to compete in manufacturing. We don't produce anything that consumers want at a price they're willing to pay. Until that is fixed, no amount of wealth redistribution will make a difference. The bottom 40% of wager earners don't even pay taxes for cryin' out loud.

[nate33]

Oh, and hands11, regarding your talking point that corporations are "flush with cash", please read this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 85344.html

[hands11]

Indeed, I think corporate taxes should be lowered since we currently have the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world.

Lower corporate tax rates? Not when most corporations and their slick tax lawyers already find so many loopholes that they already end up paying little or no taxes.

DC

Stick to the talking points

1) Public Unions are bad. Because governing bodies and Corporate bodies over actual bodies. It's all about smaller government unless we you need to override someone negotiated contractual rights.
2) Cut all taxes to zero because we all know 100 billion trillion x zero would raise the most revenue
3) Shut down all the social programs. Why, because that is what Jesus would do. AMEN.
4) Dont touch our guns. Why, because we need to over throw the gov one day. Guess they didn't see what happened in Wako. Best was this radio guy I just heard complaining how wrong it is you can't have guns on college campuses. Yeah know, to stop things like the VA shooter.
5) End all abortions. Why. Because potential life is more important that actual living people.
6) Government is the problem because we all know how assume it is to live like Afghanistan people.
7) States rights. Well unless that state is recounting their votes, then have massive law suits from
the Federal level via the Supreme Court shut it down.
8) Screw ideas like green energy or environmental issues. Why ? The world is going to end soon anyway. Screwing everything up is what needs to happen so Jesus will return sooner. Something tell me that when he does, he is going to be pissed at the people who screwed it all up regardless of how they labeled themselves. I think he will be able to see through that.
9) Drill Baby Drill - Why, because it's hot when a MILF like Sarah says it. Ummmmm. Trick down baby.

[Severn Hoos]

Bannd - thanks for the post, I really do appreciate the thoughtfulness and willingness to look beyond the surface and one's set of preconceived assumptions to think of why things are the way they are. I have more thoughts but time is short, will post again soon. (And I know it's difficult to provide tone in a post, please know that's sincere, no green font!)

Hands - thanks also for your well-thought post. It really opened my eyes.

[hands11]

Indeed, I think corporate taxes should be lowered since we currently have the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world.

Lower corporate tax rates? Not when most corporations and their slick tax lawyers already find so many loopholes that they already end up paying little or no taxes.

I'm all for closing the tax loopholes for the big corporations. But we need to lower the overall tax rate as well.

And hands11, your demand-side stimulus won't work. We've had demand-side stimulus for 25 years now, that's what got us into this mess in the first place. We've enabled people to borrow beyond their means just to keep consumer demand going. Now those chickens are coming home to roost.

Our problem is our inability to compete in manufacturing. We don't produce anything that consumers want at a price they're willing to pay. Until that is fixed, no amount of wealth redistribution will make a difference. The bottom 40% of wager earners don't even pay taxes for cryin' out loud.

That is not true demand side and it is not what we have had for 25 years. 20 years of the last 28 years were supply side under Reagan and Bush. Come on. I know you know that. The trickle down, low taxes, consumption model build on highly leveraging everything is a Republican born economy. Those are the economies of Reagan and Bush. You lower taxes and try to grow your way out of it. The is a Republican mantra. Only problem there is when you do that you have to exponentially grow faster and faster to keep up to the lost revenue and with that you have fake wealth and bubbles. Just run the number on a spread sheet. There is a diminishing return on cutting taxes that is unsustainable. True demand side is based on more workers and decent/better wages and higher savings, not leveraging your hyper inflating house, stocks, and extending more credit on your credit cards.

Only economy worth mentioning in the last 25 year was under Clinton. He not only reversed the Reagan deficits but he grow the economy and created surpluses. He raised taxes and worked with his congress to cut spending on the military among other things like investing in people. They also funded education programs to retrain adults and reformed welfare to try to help people brake out of that dead end wasteful way of living. And when you get to stay home a few days when you wife has your child, you can thank Clinton for that also. Quality of life matters. Now that is some collective bargaining. The people elect a president who looks after their best interests. Also, they did pay as you go.

As for the bottom 40%, you are right about focusing there. Those are the people that need to be giving a path to more earnings so they are paying more taxes and can honestly afford to purchase things. There is a path to doing that and we have done it before. It's called massive pubic works projects and unions that fight for higher wages when the economy is in the position to do it. The kind of things we did post The Great Depression.

See, that is another great lie of Republicans. The Government has never created a job. That is the biggest bunch of BS I have no idea how they get away with saying it or not laughing when they do. Government both employ millions of people and also funds projects for private industry to bid on that employs millions more. When they do those bids, they have guidelines and standards. Tell Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics the government never created a job. I guess they hired all those workers just because they felt like it. No, they did it because the government funded a project and they won it. My fathers company and my existing company suck big time off the Government nipple. Sure they are privately held jobs but they wouldn't exist without the government at the Fed, State and Local levels spending money. It just so happens that mine employment is centered about law enforcement and helping them lower their overhead while better protecting the public which is a good use of their money. They are investing now to say money later. Dry up the government spending and there are going to be a whole lot less people with jobs or at a min. less money to spend.

See, I see both parties as useful. When unchallenged, the Dems in government becomes blotted and lazy. Like most systems, they have a cycle of usefulness. Periodically they need trimmed back and rebuilt. The republicans provide that pressure to make that happen. They helped recreate the Democratic party that exists today. But their usefulness is not in governing or policy. Mainly because they are the arm of Corporations, the wealthiest, Wall Street and the ultra religious right. That thinking is between myopic to greedy depending on which of those voices is yelling the loudest. But those people have been given a voice and the louder it is heard, the more the majority will wake up against it.

The problem this time around was that we were on the right path after 8 years of Clinton and they came in to tear things down when things were working. 8 years of Bush where not only 8 wasted years when we could have been advancing on a good path ( lost opportunity cost ), but he dug such a massive hole while he was at it. Those 8 years will end up setting them country back 20 years if we are lucky enough to climb out of the hole at all. Sadly it can at a time when there is more global competition.

The only good I can see that has come from it is that people may finally be waking up and learning more about governments, politics, and economics. Our government is basically a corporation formed by the people for the people where we elect the board and we decide what products we want it to produce and under what rules. We also decide how much we want the CEOs pubic and private to contribute back to the system. Its a very interesting concept to get your brain around. The government is us and it plays a roll in forming both public and some private markets, that then pay back into the system.

Threw our electing people we can influence the creation of a whole new markets that generates both public and private jobs for us. Be it the DHS or electric cars or the internet. That is what government does best. Had they never done the R&D on satellites and launched them, we would not have private industry cell phone, GPS devices, etc. Free markets play a roll in innovation but much of it is on the backs of innovations spun from the government directly or indirectly throw funded projects. The government is us and government jobs and spending are a vital part of our system.

I would hate to see everything privatized. All our parks sold off. No national direction. That would mean that WE THE PEOPLE don't have a corporation anymore and we can direct our economy. Hey, free market discover some great things, but they also discover crap. Lead toys, etc. Sometimes the free market need directed for our common good. This is our home owner association and it is a good thing.

It you want corporate privatization take over, just want Back to the future 3 or Robo Cop or something like that. By the same measure, Demolition Man isn't the way to go either. Contact is about how it happens today.