2010 Could Easily Be Disastrous For Democrats

[Martinus]

If you find nothing wrong in the fact that people die of curable illnesses in the richest and most scientifically developed nation on Earth, then I don't really have anything to say.

Who exactly are you addressing?

Not you.

[Jaron]

Is it your position that citizens of our great republic should have no responsibility to one anothers well being?

Should they?

Yes.

We are countrymen.

We are not total strangers living in isolation in a confined space.

[derspiess]

If you find nothing wrong in the fact that people die of curable illnesses in the richest and most scientifically developed nation on Earth, then I don't really have anything to say.

I hope you will enjoy your revolution, when it eventually comes.

You're not going to get me with that false sympathetic crap.  I believe in individual economic responsibility-- that is what made us such a rich, developed nation.  And like I said, I also believe in private charity.

[Martinus]

If you find nothing wrong in the fact that people die of curable illnesses in the richest and most scientifically developed nation on Earth, then I don't really have anything to say.

I hope you will enjoy your revolution, when it eventually comes.

You're not going to get me with that false sympathetic crap.  I believe in individual economic responsibility-- that is what made us such a rich, developed nation.  And like I said, I also believe in private charity.

Sympathetic crap? I am just saying that I will cheer when American soil runs red with the blood of your kind.

[Valmy]

Sympathetic crap? I am just saying that I will cheer when American soil runs red with the blood of your kind.

Hey if people do not like the way we do things they are free to move to Poland where the compassionate people live

Actually we are compassionate the issue usually comes down to political philosophy and the role of government and all that.  The issue is not that some people want to help and others want them all to die horribly.

[Jaron]

If you find nothing wrong in the fact that people die of curable illnesses in the richest and most scientifically developed nation on Earth, then I don't really have anything to say.

I hope you will enjoy your revolution, when it eventually comes.

You're not going to get me with that false sympathetic crap.  I believe in individual economic responsibility-- that is what made us such a rich, developed nation.  And like I said, I also believe in private charity.

That is fine and all, I also believe in individual economic responsibility but there is simply no excuse for the richest, most powerful nation in the world to have its citizens sick and dying because they can't afford health care. Are there lazy people who will sit back and let the system take care of them? Yes, of course, but there are hard working people who draw a tough lot and end up having their lives destroyed. We need to do more to help these people. IF for no other reason than that we're the most powerful nation the world has ever known and we CAN do something about it.

[Sheilbh]

Of course it was done in a fucked up way but it is Congress after all.

I'm not convinced by this.  I think the bit that it's been meant to do so far it has done.  It and TARP and bailouts are unpopular but they've worked.  I think in Autumn or January of this year no-one though that we would be returning to growth this summer - albeit tepid growth - rather than closer to the end of this year or next year. 

The problem with TARP, bailouts and the stimulus is that they're easy to argue against because all people like me, who thought they were right, can say is 'it would have been worse'.  We've only got a hypothetical idea of what would have happened without it.

I can only hope the Republicans see the need to reform the system even if they come to power because I believe it is needed.

It looks like the public option's totally dead.  So, hopefully, more Republicans will now get involved with real ideas.

If you find nothing wrong in the fact that people die of curable illnesses in the richest and most scientifically developed nation on Earth, then I don't really have anything to say.

I find it pretty extraordinary that people don't view it as anything to do with them.  It's totally alien to my thinking and the way we look at it in the UK.

[Savonarola]

I'm not convinced by this.  I think the bit that it's been meant to do so far it has done.  It and TARP and bailouts are unpopular but they've worked.  I think in Autumn or January of this year no-one though that we would be returning to growth this summer - albeit tepid growth - rather than closer to the end of this year or next year. 

IIRC many economists predicted that the recession would end in the summer of this year.  The government clearly did not understand the extent of the problem; their economists predicted 9% unemployment by year's end if congress did not pass the stimulus package.

[Admiral Yi]

I'm not convinced by this.  I think the bit that it's been meant to do so far it has done.  It and TARP and bailouts are unpopular but they've worked.  I think in Autumn or January of this year no-one though that we would be returning to growth this summer - albeit tepid growth - rather than closer to the end of this year or next year. 

The problem with TARP, bailouts and the stimulus is that they're easy to argue against because all people like me, who thought they were right, can say is 'it would have been worse'.  We've only got a hypothetical idea of what would have happened without it.

"It worked" is a defense against an accusation no one except Hans has made.  You could double or triple the size of the stimulus and it would certainly "work" but would that working be worth it in terms of the amount added to the deficit.  Then you've got all those Reed and Pelosi re-election bells and whistles.  Then you've got the infrastructure portion of the package, which, as Hans pointed out rightly this time, was devoted to anything but shovel-ready projects.

It looks like the public option's totally dead.  So, hopefully, more Republicans will now get involved with real ideas.

Another interesting question is how the progressive gang of 70 will backpeddle on their promise to vote against anything that does *not* include a public option.

[Sheilbh]

"It worked" is a defense against an accusation no one except Hans has made.  You could double or triple the size of the stimulus and it would certainly "work" but would that working be worth it in terms of the amount added to the deficit.

Okay, I'll be more explicit.  It worked and it was worth it.  Without TARP, the bailouts and the stimulus we'd be in a far, far worse economic situation than we are now - though I don't know how bad.  I think that the bailout and TARP was Bush's best and most important decision.

Then you've got all those Reed and Pelosi re-election bells and whistles.

Have you any details of what these are?

Then you've got the infrastructure portion of the package, which, as Hans pointed out rightly this time, was devoted to anything but shovel-ready projects.

Shovel ready is a silly phrase.  What Hans is pointing out is that government takes time to spend money - not least because of anti-corruption regulations on how money can be spent.  This is well-known and normally a criticism of stimulus spending.  If you pass a stimulus bill in a normal recession then it can often cause more damage than it solves because most of the money won't be felt/spent until about 18 months after it's passed.  By that point, in a normal recession, that money then largely has an inflationary effect because growth is really rebounding.

I explicitly during the stimulus arguments that one of the reasons I supported it was because I think we'll need a boost in 18 months because this isn't a normal recession (and we want to avoid a W). 

Meanwhile taxes have been cut (in my opinion this was a waste) and state governments have received a great deal of money to plug holes in their budgets in the short-term, not least because state government is funded a lot by sales and property taxes which were really stinging.  That's important because I think with widespread swinging cuts or tax increases that would have been required by the states - because I don't think many of them are allowed to have debt - would have really hurt growth.

Another interesting question is how the progressive gang of 70 will backpeddle on their promise to vote against anything that does *not* include a public option.

I don't think they were serious.  But I agree.

[Razgovory]

If you find nothing wrong in the fact that people die of curable illnesses in the richest and most scientifically developed nation on Earth, then I don't really have anything to say.

I hope you will enjoy your revolution, when it eventually comes.

You're not going to get me with that false sympathetic crap.  I believe in individual economic responsibility-- that is what made us such a rich, developed nation.  And like I said, I also believe in private charity.

Sympathetic crap? I am just saying that I will cheer when American soil runs red with the blood of your kind.

Soon.   I've already signed up to be an Obama commissar.

[Malthus]

If you find nothing wrong in the fact that people die of curable illnesses in the richest and most scientifically developed nation on Earth, then I don't really have anything to say.

I hope you will enjoy your revolution, when it eventually comes.

You're not going to get me with that false sympathetic crap.  I believe in individual economic responsibility-- that is what made us such a rich, developed nation.  And like I said, I also believe in private charity.

Sympathetic crap? I am just saying that I will cheer when American soil runs red with the blood of your kind.

Soon.   I've already signed up to be an Obama commissar.

"Obammissar" 

[PDH]

Of course, the Republican comeback has been tainted now...

[Admiral Yi]

Okay, I'll be more explicit.  It worked and it was worth it.  Without TARP, the bailouts and the stimulus we'd be in a far, far worse economic situation than we are now - though I don't know how bad.  I think that the bailout and TARP was Bush's best and most important decision.

I don't know how much worse the situation would be either.  AFAIK there's no body of economic theory that says what the optimal amount of Keynesian stimulus is in any given recession.  So maybe we can agree that it's impossible to tell if it was worth it or not.

Have you any details of what these are?

Reid's high speed Vegas-LA rail line, Pelosi's wetlands protection something or other.  Grabon could tell you better than I, he got a post card from Pelosi listing all her fabulous pork for the year.

Shovel ready is a silly phrase.  What Hans is pointing out is that government takes time to spend money - not least because of anti-corruption regulations on how money can be spent.  This is well-known and normally a criticism of stimulus spending.  If you pass a stimulus bill in a normal recession then it can often cause more damage than it solves because most of the money won't be felt/spent until about 18 months after it's passed.  By that point, in a normal recession, that money then largely has an inflationary effect because growth is really rebounding.

I explicitly during the stimulus arguments that one of the reasons I supported it was because I think we'll need a boost in 18 months because this isn't a normal recession (and we want to avoid a W). 

Yes, I remember your argument about preventing the W from before.  What doesn't make sense to me is delaying *the majority* of spending to counteract a hypothetical double-dip instead of spending it now on an actual and real V.  Makes it look very much like infrastructure spending falls under the category of "spending I would like to do at some point" rather than "spending I need to do to prevent a deep recession."

[garbon]

Then you've got all those Reed and Pelosi re-election bells and whistles.

Have you any details of what these are?

Here's what SF (alone) got:

$50 million to rebuild a bunch of streets.
$124.3 million for SF Transit Authority, BART and Caltrain
$20.5 million for SFO
$1.5 million for various artists
$16.5 million to hire cops
$1 million to found the Mission Neighborhood Health Center (in my neighborhood).
$17.2 million for SF parks
$17.9 million for SF Housing Authority
$3 million for the removal of lead-based paint from low-income homes
$8.7 million to provide short term housing for the homeless.

All are more or less worthy causes but I'm not sure what relevance many of them have in an economic stimulus package.