Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

What *are* you blithering about?

Let me get this straight - you’re claiming that there’ll be a landslide in favour of Bush partly based on a single economic report? At any time in recent history, you can find dozens of financial pundits saying that the economy is about to collapse, or about to boom, or going to continue steadily growing.

The report in question seems to be nothing but a series of straw men — “Screaming for President Bush’s head, liberals are trying to make the case that failure in the economy will lead to the president’s re-election defeat next year…” — or ad hominem attacks — “this group of harpies - the gang that can’t shoot straight.”

I don’t suppose there’s any chance of, oh, I don’t know, seeing something positive about the Republican party’s chances here instead of demonising the other side? Or some kind of response to the false information debacle?

No. I thought not.

While it is true that leading economic indicators are pointing to a modest growth in GDP beginning later this year, and that the unemployment statistic is a lagging indicator, one must not ignore the effect of Republican policies and both their short term and long term consequences.

In the short-term, beginning in January, the impending election and falling approval ratings for the President will act as a damper on the stock market. If the Republican effort to scale back overtime pay is successful, we will see workers working longer hours with less pay, which means less purchasing power, which means less demand and slumping sales. The Child Tax Credit checks about to hit mail boxes will have little effect since the bulk of that money will go to credit card companies and they are not purchaser’s of consumer products or services. Finally, the short term projections for GDP growth appear to be in the tech sector, not the manufacturing and serivces sector. This will not enhance economic growth in the short term; it will only serve to increase productivity gains in the long term.

In the long term, 2 years and beyond, the national debt, approaching 7 trillion dollars and the growing federal budget deficits mean large increases in interest payments by the federal government. When the federal government competes for borrowed money, consumer interest rates rise and money supply shrinks. Finally, with this kind of fiscal irresponsibility and growing of the federal government, either taxes will have to go up or government services, military defense spending, transfer payments, both domestic and foreign, will go down, and that translates directly to lower consumption and lowered GDP growth.

Kudlow, is a supply sider of the Miltion Friedman camp, and thus chooses to ignore or selectively forget the slump that was brought about after the Reagan administration by the Reagan era tax cuts and government growth.

Oh, Binkley, only an out-of-touch GOP blue blood would be happy to see more temp workers and self-employed.

Why?

Because these are jobs without benefits like health care, and in the case of the self-employed expose more lower-income workers to higher taxes.

Only a complete elitist would tout these facts.

You are so wrong that it would amaze me if you can make a right turn.

Robbie D.

Larry Kudlow wants the Fed to debase the currency because he knows the $4 trillion in stimulus is only creating jobs in India and China.

What was sold as domestic stimulus may be the greatest foreign aid bill in the history of the world. There is no penalty for billionaires taking the money they’re saving on taxes and investing it overseas — none.

This is the Bush economic policy: jobs for India. I’d vote for him if I were an Indian.

Can someone better explain the overtime Bush policy? I’m no fan of Bush, but I don’t see anything too wrong with the proposal. It sounds like some high paid hourly workers will loose overtime, but lots of lower paid hourly workers will gain. Am I wrong in assuming that?

Bush is currently has an approval rating of 55% and it is going to be possible to beat him just like it was possible to beat Bush SR.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/7/13/211507.shtml

Darrel,

Here are a couple of many sites to check out.

http://www.aflcio.org/issuespolitics/ns03282003a.cfm

http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/briefingpapers_flsa_jun03

I personally don’t agree with this. I know many people who don’t work overtime because the company does not want to pay for it. But what will save them when the one protection is gone?

Olympia:

I’ve read articles mentioning that ‘millions of workers will loose overtime’ but, at the same time, doesn’t this allow many to gain overtime pay? My understanding is a lot of companies (Like WalMart and HomeDepot) will juggle hours of workers so that they never have to pay consistent overtime. They may allow 10 hours over overtime one week, but will cut the person’s schedule by 20 hours the next week to make up the difference.

My understanding is that this bill is to prevent such things.

All that said, I’m really not sure why we make a big deal out of overtime pay. It seems to be a rather arbitrary concept. Some people get it, some don’t. If you want to be fair, ALL workers, regardless of status should be entitled to it.

Darrel

Spoken like someone who doesn’t get it or need it.

Nice.

Sure some will gain OT, but many, many more will lose it. Why doesn’t GWB just extend the laws to add those who deserve it?

I’ll tell you why: the pattern of lies.

He asks for something good, and uses it to hide the evil that is his real motivation.

GWB lies. Always. Get it straight and you won’t be fooled again.

You know, if this site is going to be a place for rational discourse, we are going to need to steer away from articles that read ‘this group of harpies’ or ‘the gang that can’t shoot straight’ or the like.

Any point the article makes is worthless — if the author can’t bother to not stoop to petty, 2nd Grade name-calling, forget him.

Just becuase someone else wrote it, so what. That just makes it ad hominem by proxy.

You want fun, check out the responses to Howard Den’s blogs on Lessig’s site. Richard Bennett absolutely imploded yesterday in a fit of right-wing paranoia that is so patently funny it almost obscures who plainly sad it is.

He’s just beside himself that (a) Dean addressed issues and (b) no one there cares what he wrote.

Bush had Black Thursday last week. Richard has Black Monday this week. It is such a joy to watch neo-cons shrivel back into the anti-matter.

It was a nice ride.

Ride’s over.

Move on.

Clarifying my last post:

No one there cares what Bennet wrote.

I must admit, I find it amusing that it took you three posts to get to your point that no one at Lessig’s blog cared what Bennett wrote. Evidently, you cared enough to post three times about it.

For anyone who’s interested, I’ve got a post at my blog about Dean addressing his “issues.”

Greg, I have been accidently double posting a lot. Sorry to offend you. I am anxious to get the progressive agenda rolling, and I keep hitting submit too many times.

And, next time you tell us to read something, give a link.

Even if you post it 3 times.

Unless you think “Greg’s Blog” is as ubiquitous as Yahoo and we all know the URL. ;-)

If I go to your blog, am I going to see facts or the same fact-free broad stroking dribble that has choked the GOP column on WatchBlog?

clicking on gregs name takes you to his site. i also think it was a bit early to claim a triumph by bush and his economic plan. we’ll have to wait and see.

Robbie,

If you go to my blog (click on my name—I thought most people knew that’s how you go to individual’s blogs), you will find what you find here: news, opinion and commentary. My blog, Begging to Differ, is a collaborative blog. One of our contributors regularly posts things that are quite critical of Bush. As you might guess (from the fact that I’m an editor on the Republican WatchBlog), I’m a bit more sympathetic.

Robby, the act is wearing thin. Every time someone post’s something on the *Republican* (there’s a clue for you) WatchBlog, you accuse them of being Republican. If you were objective, you’d take the Dem and Third Party editors to task for constantly criticizing Bush instead of posting only postive things about their parties’ candidates. But that would, in my opinion, be misguided.

This forum exists to provide all parts of the political spectrum with a place for news, opinion, and commentary. There’s no restrictions on what each side may post about. Democrats may post about Bush, Republicans may post about Democrats, and Naderites may post about whatever.

Frankly, if you think anyone has been engaging in ad hominim attacks in this forum, you should take a good, long look in the mirror.

Tom,

I agree. Where the economy goes, so goes Bush. No matter how popular he may be now, he’s not going to survive if the recession continues. Conversely, no matter how worked up the Democrats get over Nigerian uranium, if the economy turns around, Bush will be tough to beat.

Certainly, the economy is not out of the woods yet, and it’s got to get quite a bit better, in my opinion, before Bush can win reelection.

id like to say, even as a lefty, i dont see anyone beating bush unless theres some huge scandal, much larger than the “16 words” controversy, or the economy sinks further.

Greg,

Point well missed. ;-)

>Every time someone post’s something on the *Republican* (there’s a clue for you) WatchBlog, you accuse them of being Republican.

No, I accuse them of being out of touch with America.

Rob

ok the house and senate and white house are in control of the republican party and we are the ones that are out of touch? Ok.

I will believe this, when I see it. You guys are great at buying your own propaganda.

Bush’s new labor policies are a disaster waiting to happen. Essentially, he is going to okay companies giving big titles to workers so companies can cheat them out of overtime.

It’ll just sink our productivity deeper into the hole that’s already been dug. Why? Because nowadays companies demand outrageous profits, and they mostly get it by denying workers things like job security, benefits, and overtime.

They’ll eliminate jobs, not because they are redundant, but because they want a bigger PE ratio. What really happens is that people who have to do a million things at once, who have to take on additional responsibilities end up cratering or at least sagging under the pressures. They begin to not care about the business they work for. That means that they will be no more productive for that company than they have to be.

The pressures at home will take their toll, as men and women are kept from their families, and unable to maintain both their own and their family’s health. When GOPs talk about family values, they certainly don’t mean being home for your children or having enough energy at the end of the day to do anything but try to bleed off tension.

In the end, the health of this economy depends not on cheap labor for big business, but on the existence of a middle class which has discretionary spending at its disposal. When the middle class is eroded, sunk in debt, paying for the latest health crisis brought on by a lack of visits to the doctor, then it can hardly fulfill this role, and any recovery will be a short and modest one at best.