Completely Irresponsible

[Beavah]

Yah, travelin' internationally in da last few weeks, it's been truly amazin' watching the U.S. Congress and da train-wreck gawking by our international friends. If ever a group proved themselves completely incapable of governing intelligently and responsibly, da Tea Party Republicans did. The message is probably the same one as always, that electing politicians and lawyers instead of people who actually understand things is a bad idea, and electing ideologues instead of pragmatists is a terrible idea.

 

For da record, in the short term at least, yields on Treasury Bonds are incredibly low. If any of us could borrow at a bit over 1% interest we would, eh? Any reasonable inflation or growth makes that beneficial, if yeh invest it. So anyone who actually understands business would say "Borrow and invest!" at these rates. We should be borrowing and investing in infrastructure that leads to growth or supports growth: in high speed communication, in roads and bridges, in updating da power grid, in research. We should be makin' more SBA loans and help states and municipalities fix water problems. Any and all of those things will bring more than 1% return in economic growth.

 

And anyone with at least a little bit of a brain would recognize da economy has been limping along only with unusual support from da federal reserve and da stimulus funds, and that with those ending we were in for a return to recession without a calculated investment in infrastructure.

 

Everyone who has half a brain also knows that we can't support da current Social Security, Medicare, Defence, and Veterans programs with a tax rate that predates most of da current forms of those programs. So yah, sure, we can sustain da current tax rate, but only if we return things to where they were when this tax level was last in place: no federal highway system, limited vet benefits, an isolationist and small military, no Medicare, a retirement age much closer to the current life expectancy, etc. That's why every Republican or Democrat who has ever sat on a deficit reduction commission has realized it's necessary to both contain costs in a substantial way and to raise revenues somehow.

 

It would have been nice to see some presidential leadership, eh? But it would have been nicer to see some statesmanship, or at least some adult behavior from da Congress. Instead we got spoiled brat childishness threatening to default and costing us our credit rating. It won't matter in the short run, because there aren't any alternatives to Treasuries and the dollar.... yet. It's hurt us in the long run, though, because everyone in da world now realizes that our political class is completely irresponsible and mostly just stupid, and they're lookin' for alternatives. Credibility is an easy thing to lose, and a hard thing to regain.

 

What does all this have to do with Scouting? I'm not sure. I think, though, since da schools don't teach this stuff and yeh don't pick it up from da partisan media, we scouters have to make some efforts to teach our future citizens how things really work, and how to think, and above all how to put statesmanship and duty ahead of partisanship, no-tax pledges made to special interest lobbyists in exchange for contributions, and (gasp) even personal re-election.

 

B

[shortridge]

we scouters have to make some efforts to teach our future citizens how things really work, and how to think, and above all how to put statesmanship and duty ahead of partisanship, no-tax pledges made to special interest lobbyists in exchange for contributions, and (gasp) even personal re-election.

 

For some people, a no-tax pledge is statesmanship. Just depends on how you look at it.

 

Scouters should, at the most, be teaching governmental structure and personal responsibility. Let's leave the politics and further extrapolation of what "civic duty" means to parents and families, shall we?

[sherminator505]

Shaking one's meaty fist in the air and shouting "I REFUSE TO COMPROMISE!!!" is hardly statesmanship, whether you're talking about a no-tax pledge, preserving government programs as they are, or some other point of view. For that matter, neither is cheering the trashing of America in the world market, but I digress...

 

[vol_scouter]

Beavah,

 

ou claim to be conservative but your posts speak otherwise. S&P's and Moody's were saying that the budget needed to be CUT by $4,000,000,000,000.00 which is what the Tea party was calling for the congress to do. Irresponsible is being kind to the democrat party. The government must cut spending by tackling the entitlement programs that the democrat party steadfastly refuses to do. The electorate spoke by sending the Tea Party into office to decrease spending - they overwhelming won the last election. Michelle Bachman is right, any tax increases need to be across the board. It is wrong for 51% of the public to pay no net income taxes. If spending cuts are deep enough, modest increases across the board in taxes will not likely cause economic problems. The democrat party is irresponsible. Al Gore is calling for an Arab spring for America - looking at Syria, Libya, somewhat Egypt, and other countries - that is armed rebellion! The democrat party under Obama seems bent on the destruction of this country and from Gore's comments it seems that they don't care if they destroy it economically or by force.

[Eagledad]

>>

Shaking one's meaty fist in the air and shouting "I REFUSE TO COMPROMISE!!!" is hardly statesmanship, whether you're talking about a no-tax pledge, preserving government programs as they are, or some other point of view. For that matter, neither is cheering the trashing of America in the world market, but I digress...

[BDPT00]

If we'd get rid of about 50% of our govenment, we'd be a lot better off. Cut the budget in half, and get rid of all of the people and agencies that control our lives. They're not doing a very good job of it.

I'm sure glad we don't get all of the government we pay for though.

BDPT00

[shortridge]

Yah, we don't need half of those darn police, paramedics, road repair crews, schoolteachers, bus drivers, sewer system operators, food inspectors, workplace safety investigators or criminal prosecutors that are on the public payroll right now. They're just trying to control our lives!

[Beavah]

Yah, vol_scouter, I'm an old school conservative, eh? I'm definitely not a modern "conservative". No real conservative considers defaulting on da sovereign debt a political option. That's just lunacy.

 

What S&P actually said was that the long term debt should be cut by $4T, not that the budget needed to be cut by that. Why modern conservatives either can't read or insist on just fabricating stuff is a mystery. It ain't hard to read the S&P report instead of a nitwit's blog. The presumption in da S&P models was that the Bush tax cuts would be allowed to expire in 2013, but in light of the recent political debate they had to recalculate assuming they might not be. So S&P presumes that added revenue needs to be part of the equation, just like everyone who can do arithmetic, and in the absence of that we have a problem. Couple that with da significant number of congresspeople who were willing to default, to Hades with da Nation and the consequences, and they have a point.

 

Funniest thing I saw recently was da head of Tea Party Nation talkin' about how cuts to defense were unacceptable, and that we should really be building new aircraft carriers because that would provide jobs and get the economy movin'. Yep, that's right, da fellow thinks good ol' Keynsian federal spending will stimulate the economy, but doesn't think that cutting all kinds of other spending will hurt it. No doubt about it, just irresponsibly stupid.

 

Nope, I ain't a modern conservative. I don't get my jollies over shuttin' down the FAA, idling workers on security projects and costing da nation revenue, and then head out of town on a month long vacation. I'm one of those old school fellows who must be a neo-liberal because I believe in responsibility.

 

Now personally, I don't hyperventilate about Al Gore so much. Da fellow is a bit of a fop. Always has been. Besides, Arab Spring started as students and workers assembling peaceably to petition da government for redress of grievances. That's at least a few steps better than da next fellow to join the Republican presidential race, who at one point advocated secession (aka treason). . All just political ranting. No reason to get your dander up.

 

As for da rest, it's Defense, social security, medicare, veterans benefits. To balance da budget without adding revenue, you must eliminate one and severely cut another. Which do yeh choose? At least representative Ryan had part of da equation, even if he couldn't do math. He was willing to obliterate Medicare. All he needed to add was one more - obliterate defense, social security, or all vet programs. How'd that work out for him? Did the electorate respond positively? Yep, there are serious problems with da entitlement programs. But we can't blow 'em up overnight without hurting real, live people. Yeh have to be more responsible than that.

 

Personally, I confess there's a part of me that wants to give da Tea Partiers their entire wish list. Eliminate Medicare, trash Social Security, default on the debt, tax the crap out of unemployed families and let da kids die of treatable conditions. No Obamacare! No Medicaid or AFDC. Kids don't need vaccines. The country doesn't need roads or air traffic controllers either.

 

The resulting catastrophe would wipe da Tea Party brand of foolishness out for at least five generations. Maybe then I could find a real Republican again.

 

Beavah

 

 

 

 

[Gunny2862]

Beavah,

I think you are painting the Tea Party with a pretty wide brush drawing from a narrow sample or amalgamating various points into a crazy mishmash.

Something could be helping you with that would include that if you speak with a hundred Tea Party claiming folks you'll probably get a hundred different points on various issues from them and just because you put those points together it doesn't necessarily follow that those individual points are points that 51% of them would agree with. And there is no Party Office that speaks for the majority of Tea Partiers.

 

But unlike either of the other major parties the common thread would be that they want a smaller(thus less expensive) government. How to get there is a matter for discussion - clearly it would have to include entitlement reform.

 

But one thing also drives the common folk and their discussion of the issue - is that our politicians play the game unfairly(duh), we the folk consider when we speak of the budget to include the way our house works - (plan spending go get employment of some fashion to bring in required income,divide it up = budgeted spending), our government does more off-budget spending than on budget and that depending on why the politician is speaking of the off-budget items is either in or out of the budget which muddies the issue and the discussion. Especially when it isn't clear to those who haven't done any homework but rely on the media to inform them that the off- budget items (while not the whole problem) are the major items that will require trimming, reformation, or deletion.

[scoutingagain]

The basic arithmatic is pretty simple.

 

You can't have an all world military, bigger than the rest of the world combined, the most expensive medical costs in the world, an aging population dependant on entitlements, i.e. Social Security, Medicare, pay interest on debt that been wracked up over a generation and have some of the lowest tax rates in the world.

 

As Beav has noted, you either gut govt. services, including the military, Soc. Sec., Medicare or raise revenues, or some combination of both. It's not rocket science.

 

SA

[Kahuna]

Whew! I'm so relieved to know that the president and the Democrats had no responsibility in this for not fixing it when they had control. And those durn Tea Partiers have no business at all doing what they pledged to do when they were elected. It's just un-congressional.

[sherminator505]

More generally, I was referring to too many people on both sides of the aisle who have either forgotten how to be statesmen or never bothered to learn. It's easier for us to toss around words like "teabagger" or "Obamacare" but I expect a little more from our leaders in DC just as I try to extract more from myself.

[BrentAllen]

Beavah,

You do realize that more Democrats voted against raising the debt ceiling than did Republicans? So, who was more willing to default??

 

I don't know why you try so hard to be a conservative, when you clearly aren't.

[CalicoPenn]

Social Security and Medicare are NOT entitlements - not in the neocon right wing sense of the word. If they are entitlements at all, it is because you PAID separately into it and are "entitled" to the benefits that you PAID for. Social Security and Medicare benefits are not paid out of the general fund, and their relation to the debt is not as folks think - that we're borrowing money to pay for Social Security and Medicare. No, we're borrowing money to pay BACK the money we borrowed from Social Security and Medicare. Social Security and Medicare are Debt Holders, NOT Debtors.

 

If there should be any time for folks to say we will not compromise, it is on cuts to Medicare and Social Security, with one exception - we should have no problem cutting Medicare programs that weren't eased in and paid for, like the Prescription Drug plan. When you borrow money from a bank, and later on decide you can't figure out how to pay it all back, you can't go to a bank and demand that the bank cut their expenses to make up for your irresponsibility, can you? Yet that's exactly what the "Tea Party" congressfolks are doing - saying we can't pay Social Security and Medicare back for the money we borrowed from them and the solution is to cut Social Security and Medicare.

 

As for the "Tea Party" - there are still folks out there who want so much to believe that the Tea Party is the small, grassroots effort it started as and are in complete denial that the Tea Party has been thoroughly taken over by the right wing with an agenda quite different from what they want. It is the right wing that is in front of the media everyday, drumming their "tea party" message. There may be no national tea party office, but there are an awful lot of tea party groups and individuals from the GOP right wing taking on that role for themselves. Fortunately, many people are finally waking up to that and are wondering how they let themselves be co-opted so easily.

[packsaddle]

Here's the problem with comprehensive healthcare:

"No program will work unless people want it to work. Everyone must have a stake in the process.

By sharing costs, consumers would have a direct economic stake in choosing and using their community's health resources wisely and prudently. They would be assisted by requirements that physicians and other providers of care make available to patients full information on fees, hours of operation and other matters affecting the qualifications of providers. But they would not have to go it alone either: doctors, hospitals and other providers of care would also have a direct stake in making the Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan work. This program has been designed to relieve them of much of the red tape, confusion and delays in reimbursement that plague them under the bewildering assortment of public and private financing systems that now exist. Health-cards would relieve them of troublesome bookkeeping. Hospitals could be hospitals, not bill collecting agencies.

 

Comprehensive health insurance is an idea whose time has come in America.

There has long been a need to assure every American financial access to high quality health care. As medical costs go up, that need grows more pressing.

Now, for the first time, we have not just the need but the will to get this job done. There is widespread support in the Congress and in the Nation for some form of comprehensive health insurance." Richard Nixon - 1974

 

Evidently, as Jon Stewart pointed out, Nixon was a communist.