Economy

Rave

A Do Nothing Congress – Great!

Posted 25 days ago|36 comments|256 views
The Result Of Congress Doing Nothing
Written by
Altruist
Eugene, OR
The conventional wisdom is that nothing will get done in Congress this year because since it is an election year, the Republicans will do everything they can to obstruct any of President Obama's Programs.

Normally I would consider this a travesty. That means that we will get no job programs and that nothing will be done to get the economy going again. It means that nothing will be done about comprehensive immigration reform. It means that nothing will be done to enhance our education system or to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure.

The Republicans are delighted, because they thing because they think that government is evil and that the less government the better. Be careful of what you wish for!

The Republicans may not have thought this one through, but despite that, or maybe because of that, the governments inaction will result in something good happening.

Because of the inaction of Congress, the National Debt and Deficit will be reduced by $17.1 trillion in the next ten years.

That probably surprises everyone, because most people think that if current government policies continue, that the debt will spiral through the roof. Where does the $17.1 Trillion come from?

The majority of the savings will come because at the end of the year, if Congress does absolutely nothing, the tax policy will revert to what it was under President Clinton, who had $200 billion surpluses projected indefinitely.

The expiration of the "temporary " Bush Tax Cuts will save $3.3 trillion. Another $1.8 trillion in savings will come from allowing other "temporary" tax cuts expire, and another $1.2 trillion will come from the "sequestration" cuts mandated by the failure of the "Super Committee" ($600 billion from the Military and $600 billion from domestic programs). A final $.9 trillion will be achieved in interest savings because this money will not be added to the National Debt. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post...

So this year a Do Nothing Congress may not be so bad. Especially when you consider that many of the essential domestic spending programs are shielded from cuts. Medicare and Social Security would be protected as would nearly three-fourths of federal funding that states receive and federal funds for the Children's Health Insurance Program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplementation Nutrition Assistance Program, and highway programs.

Of course if Congress did its job and actually did pass some legislation that was good for the country, they could get the economy going again with investments in jobs, education, rebuilding our infrastructure and the other things that President Obama advocated in the State of the Union Address. If Congress did this, manufacturing would get a boost, consumer confidence would increase, businesses would start hiring again and millions of people would be paying taxes instead of being dependent on government services. This would save additional trillions of dollars.


EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
25 days ago: A much more rational plan would be to achieve the $1.2 trillion in sequestration savings in a planned method cutting waste and fraud and unnecessary programs instead of taking an across the board ax to crucial programs, but that would require cooperation of Republicans.

If the Republicans who control Congress are re-elected they will continue the Bush Tax Cuts and enact many more for the rich and the corporations and the National Debt will balloon much more.

We need comprehensive fair tax reform. That will never happen if the republicans have their way. They will continue to give more and more tax cuts to the rich and the corporations, and the middle class will disappear because they will be stuck with all the bills.

All but 13 of the Republicans in Congress signed a pledge never to raise taxes for any reason, which is why they refused to pay for their two wars and their tax cuts to the rich. That is why the National Debt is in such a mess.

Two thirds of the public including 53% of Republicans think the rich should pay higher taxes, but that will never happen, and we will never have fiscal sanity until all of those Republicans that have signed that pledge are gone, and the new representatives do what the people want.
25 days ago: Al. I don't think you know how to read an accounting ledger.

Explain to us how you think that letting the "Bush" taxcuts expire will save any amount of money. Don't you mean move it from one account entry (taxpayers) to another account entry (government)?
25 days ago: Holy Cow Cypress.

These liberals honestly believe they are the smartest people in the room.

Holy Cow! How'd they get in charge?

Hey Al. Is your reasoning the same reasoning you use to say cow flatulence is flooding low lying islands around the world?

You liberals know so much about things that just are just dead wrong.

25 days ago: "Savings"?

AL. IT AIN'T YOUR MONEY.

Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
25 days ago: What I and the economists are saying is that if we just go back to the policies as they were before Bush blew up the economy, that everything will be much better than it is now.

Of course those are the most conservative economists. I personally think that we should go back to the tax policies we had before every other war in the last century and have top tax rates of 90%.

Even Adam Smith would be shocked at the theft of the public's money by the rich. Mitt Romney isn't making $20 million a year from his hard work! This is unearned income. He doesn't have to break a sweat and he pulls in $60,000 a day for doing nothing! That is why he thinks it is just chump change, when he talks for a couple of hours and pulls in $30,000.

We aren't saying that the rich are bad guys or that they shouldn't make something. We are just saying that it is just plain fair that those with all of the money should pay their fair share. They should pay the same rate as their secretaries, a minimum of 30%.

TCG is right it is just moving phantom money from the Cayman islands and from the books of the 1%, where it is doing no good, back into production where it can create jobs, rebuild infrastructure, and provide for schools, teachers, police, and firemen.

Taxes are the price of civilization. Thanks to unpatriotic folks like Red who think that the nation should crumble, that all of the other developed nations should buy up America for scrap, and that we should go back to the hunter gathering era, nothing will get done, and the nation will save $17.1 trillion. Thanks Red!
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
25 days ago: Of Course you have to understand why Red is so upset now. Newt Gingrich (Who thinks Mitt should pay no taxes at all) thinks we should spend all of the public's money to put a colony on the moon. That is a view shared by Red, that Big government should take all of my money and yours and burn it up in rockets to the moon.

But to be fair, Newt thinks that private investors should invest billions in mining operations on the moon. If all of you free marketers think that is a good investment, e-mail me and I can give you a good buy, so you can get in on the ground floor. I'll sell you good mining land on the moon for only $100 an acre!
23 days ago: Uh, .....er...... Al. If we spent the money on space science that Obama is currently spending on GM or Green Energy or light bulb police, etc., we'd have a bunch of you progressives chasing cows around that were grazing on the Moon trying to affix fart balloons to them.

Give me a break.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
21 days ago: Whoever first mines the moon will rule the world. There is enough stored energy in the first three feet of the moons dust to power the Earth with practically unlimited electricity for the next thousand years.

The best part is it will be totally impact free on Earth's environment, as it would be converted to microwaves in facilities on the moon and beamed to Earth to be converted into electricity.

I know, I know. It renders the need for massive wind farms, solar arrays, and geothermal penetrations obsolete. So, of course, the Liberals will be against it, because it wasn't their idea.
25 days ago: Al. The Cayman Islands is not an offshore U.S. tax resort.

Next arguement....?
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
24 days ago: Sorry I said that the Republican obstructionism would result in $17.5 trillion - I meant $7.5 Trillion.

So TCG If your guy Romney doesn't have his money in the Cayman islands as a tax shelter, why does he have money there? Also why the Swiss Bank Accounts? http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/romney-fai...#.TyTWFIH4Lf8
23 days ago: HEY AL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IT AIN'T YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
21 days ago: This is a well-written article Al. My family reads what you have to say.
Good reasoning behind what you wrote.
It is better to return in such difficult times to what worked for us as a Nation.
I love this Country and there is no other place in the world like it. It is obvious when you travel you can see the difference. Everything may go from bad to worse, and then make a change back to start over again because the people won't allow this country to be taken away from them. Clinton did a lot of good and made changes to benefit the people. I will vote for Obama if he has that awakening and sweeps these guys in the dust corner where they belong. I don't care what color our President is as long as he does good by us. It has been a matter of distrust because the Republican battering puts him in a very poor light. If he can redeem some of those past mistakes and make good on his promises, he has a good chance. I believe he is up in the polls against Romney. It may be that the budget may just fall into place and make itself solvent again.
16 days ago: Al. Banks in the Cayman Islands are not a tax haven for America. You had best check your facts. Now if your thinking the U.K., France, EU... yeah maybe...
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
20 days ago: Thanks Sunny. I think Obama will do fine because he is working for fairness and justice and the republicans are just working to help the rich and their corporate sponsors.

Red and Box you are right that their probably are a lot of minerals on the moon. The surface has been peppered with asteroids for billions of years and there is no erosion.

The problem is minerals are very heavy and the raw ore would not be cost effective to get off the surface and back to earth, so you need to set up a smelter to extract the metal from the ore there and then you could set up a rail gun to shoot the metal ingots into space and into the earths gravity well where you have to have vehicles capture them and guide them to the surface without wiping out major cities.

I love all of this space stuff! I am an Engineer after all.

The problem is that it will take a major investment that one nation could probably not bear alone. It will have to be an international effort to set up all of this stuff and it will be decades before the investments could be repaid.

Right now we need to invest in rebuilding our own country. Then down the road we should develop the technology by mining all of the similar material that is right here on earth - on the bottoms of the ocean floor which is covered with manganese nodules.

The reason Red is so angry is that everyone laughed at Gingrich when he made the suggestion, because everyone knows that the idea is nuts right now. All of the corporations that would be do.ing the heavy lifting would need about 50 years of intense government subsidies to get the thing off the ground and they all know that raising taxes to pay for such a huge expenditures is impossible with the Republicans in office, and besides the corporations don't plan 50 years down the road, they just look at the next three quarters.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
20 days ago: The Russians have announced plans to have a base on the moon by 2014, and to be extracting He3 by 2017. The Chinese plan to have a manned base by 2021. He3 will have a projected worth of $3 billion/ton.
20 days ago: Of course. We aren't even in the race.
That's bad. Think of the consequences.
18 days ago: I love all the space ventures too.
I would hate to see the moon being stripped of its vital minerals. After all, like the sun, it is essential to us for gravity, light, etc. Who really knows the damage that would be done by mining it.
Also, wouldn't it be terrible if we started poluting space with all kinds of manufactured junk floating around in it. Man seems destine to destroy anything that he touches. What about law in space? Who is going to set those rules?
In our oceans, 50 miles out, and it is lawless region.
20 days ago: Corporations are not people or concerned about people. That I can attest to. They are the cause of the position this country is in.
As far as mining on the moon goes, nothing is impossible. On the other hand, what if it caused a disturbance or imbalance in the natural order of things. We don't know. We don't want that pristine place to be ruined and exploited as the Earth has been for the sake of profit. Look at the problems we are having in nature. If that sort of exploration becomes privatized, we are in trouble. It would be a new challenge. There are people with trillions of dollars that money making is all a sport to them. Again, we can't stop science or the adventure spirit in the hearts of mankind to explore.
19 days ago: Uh....er....Al.

When you lower taxes, revenues increase to the government.

It's called economics boys and girls.
19 days ago: I was curious about the lower taxes comment. I found this article helpful in explaining it.

http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2011...

The article says how if tax rates were lower, people had more of an incentive to work and to invest their money, therefore, the government gets more tax revenue from lower tax rate (smaller slice) than from a larger slice from the bigger pie (higher GDP).

Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
19 days ago: That's absolutely how it works. Even John F. Kennedy, the Democrat darling in the beginning of the socialist revolution, said the same thing. Somewhere along the way, the Democrats have been hoodwinked into thinking that higher taxes are the way to go, because they think they are going to more free services paid for by the rich folk. trouble is, when you run out of rich folk, who do you get the money from?

Interesting result of the proposed higher taxes called for by high profile Liberals.
They are leaving the US in droves, headed for countries with more fair tax structures.
Content Removed by sunny2
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
19 days ago: Cutting taxes has never generated more revenue. After Reagan cut taxes everything went south and he had to raise taxes 11 times. This false economic theory is what resulted in our current huge national debt. Bush tried it for 8 years and he had 0 net jobs created and doubled the National Debt.

Most of the wealth in this country is not generated from working. It is unearned like Romney's money. Making money by gambling with other people's money. The entire argument about working harder if they don't take so much in taxes falls apart because all of the speculation is all greed and not at all connected to the free market principles.

Our country thrived with a 90% top tax rate for 30 years and if we get back to the Clinton tax policies we can get back to balancing the budget and paying off our debt as he did.

The part of the theory that is correct is that if you invest in the economy with stimulus you can grow more jobs and then you get more tax payers who use less government services and pay off more of the debt. It is growing the economy and the jobs that creates more revenue not lowering the taxes.

The best way to generate revenue is with a financial transaction tax, because it generates hundreds of millions while reducing volatility, and it doesn't discourage work, or jobs, or slow down the economy.


Before we start mining the moon for He3 we need to develop fusion here. NASA has plans to get back to the moon by 2020 with a permanent colony by 2024 and by then we might have fixed our own country so we can afford it if we can keep the Republicans out of government, and get the rich to pay their fair share. http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/1...

We are starting to test a new manned exploration vehicle and in the meantime smaller vehicles and robots are one tenth the cost of manned missions. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-200658...
19 days ago: Uh? Uh? Uh? Duh? - Correct if you live in República Bolivariana de Venezuela (Uh? CITGO) or China (Uh? APPLE). Viva da REDS!
19 days ago: Al? Which half of Congress are you referring to?

I'm sure your answer will be the "Bush" side.

Duh...... Here we go again..........

Don't waste your time with this schmoe anymore.

Let the schmoe be mine to own.
18 days ago: Al, did you see this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/02...

Super Earth being the best candidate to support life. A thousand, two thousand years from now will be fantastic in space travel. This Super Earth if it turns out to be the real thing is 4 x bigger than our earth.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
18 days ago: A planet of that size, if it has the same material makeup as Earth, would not support human life as we know it. You would weigh 4x what you do on earth, and the atmosphere would be 4x as dense. Your heart would not be able to supply blood as efficiently, and your bones and connective tissues would stand up to the strain. I myself would weigh 800 pounds, and if I ever sat down, I probably would never be able to get up again.
18 days ago: Holy! It is funny how you said that, but very true. The author should have written that too when they put these articles together. The writers make it sound so easy to accomplish this mission in space.
I know altitude affects me. The Rocky Mountains are a place where the air can be thin, and when you are up in the higher mountain regions, you feel tired and weighted down like you can't catch a breath, or walk. I don't like that sensation because I get claustrophobic from lack of air even though I am outdoors in this spaciousness. Sometimes the air is so thin there even though the wind is blowing around; you still can't get enough oxygen. Many people carry those small emergency oxygen canisters when traveling in Colorado. I hate to think though that it is impossible to live on another planet.
16 days ago: Yea right Al. Like we need flatulence balloons stuck up cow's butts to keep us from having to mow our grass on Christmas Eve.

This is like Alice in Wonderland.

Buy a mirror Al!
16 days ago: initytv.comcast.net/tv/Super-Bowl-XLVI-Commercials/174943/2193309046/Chrysler%3A-Halftime-in-America/videos?cmpid=FCST_hero_tv

Al, did you see our hero, Clint Eastwood, step up.
This guy is the greatest.
16 days ago: It took a big man like Clint Eastwood to put it all in perspective.
He is a real American and someone to look up to.
He validated everything we have been saying, Al.
16 days ago: Clint Eastwood sure did step in it. I wonder how much they had to pay Libertarian Clint Eastwood for his Dirty Harry to promote a non-American owned business that builds products in Canada and Mexico with that commune concept. Some Hero.
16 days ago: I love that guy.
He says it as it is.
16 days ago: The American way is to excel and make money. If it is a way for people to talk and support our country, God bless them. People are working. When the government gets it right and brings back manufacturing here, then everything will be okay and there won't be any need. Meanwhile, Clint Eastwood, is the greatest.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
15 days ago: Interesting article Sunny. It did say that there were probably not too many heavy materials like metals on this planet. It also said that it was thousands of light years away and that we would probably never send a probe out that far. (A light year is the distance that light would travel in in a year.)

One day we might find some way to travel faster than light as in Star Trek, but even if we did find some magical way to get to this planet, it probably has it's own life on the surface, and if we could find a way for the gravity not to smash us the foreign microscopic bugs would kill us.

There will never be another planet that suits us as well as this one because we evolved in this biosphere and are perfectly suited for it.

Eastwood did a good job of letting people know that it wouldn't be smart to change coaches in the middle of the game if we are winning. 23 straight months of job increases despite the obstructionism of the Republicans who have been doing everything they can to harm the nation is pretty good. He wasted the first three years trying to work with the Republicans but the he realized they would never do what is best for the nation. Now that he has learned everything is working better and if we can get the obstructionists out we can solve all of our problems next term.

If the Republicans get back in they will revert to the same exact policies that Bush used to destroy the economy.
15 days ago: I agree absolutely.
Live and learn. We all do.

As far as space probing, we don't have that knowledge yet. You start to wonder how far we will be 10,000 years from day.
They will find a way. Where there is water there is life. We can't shut ourselves down to think it will never be. How many times have we been proven wrong. How many new discoveries have been made.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
14 days ago: You are right. I've always been a big sci-fi fan and think that if we can keep from killing off the race and learn to live sustainably that we will eventually spread out throughout the solar system and maybe the stars.

Currently our biggest challenge is fixing our broken government and healing the environment. Then we can stop the poverty and starvation worldwide, end human rights abuses and bring about universal peace.

If we spread out across space now we would be like a cancer destroying alien civilizations we came upon. We need to learn that all life is sacred. we need to develop a reverence for other cultures and other philosophies and ideas.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.