Nothing in, make it up.
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/05/17/style/20090517-DESIGN_index.html?ref=alicerawsthorn
http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/12/27/arts/20091228-DESIGN_2.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/opinion/kurgman-battles-of-the-budget.html?ref=opinion
The centrist fantasy of a Grand Bargain on the budget never had a
chance. Even if some kind of bargain had supposedly been reached, key
players would soon have reneged on the deal — probably the next time a
Republican occupied the White House. For the reality is that our two major political parties are engaged in a
fierce struggle over the future shape of American society. Democrats
want to preserve the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society —
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — and add to them what every
other advanced country has: a more or less universal guarantee of
essential health care. Republicans want to roll all of that back, making
room for drastically lower taxes on the wealthy. Yes, it’s essentially a
class war.
The fight over the fiscal cliff was just one battle in that war. It
ended, arguably, in a tactical victory for Democrats. The question is
whether it was a Pyrrhic victory that set the stage for a larger defeat.
Why do I say that it was a tactical victory? Mainly because of what didn’t happen: There were no benefit cuts.
This was by no means a foregone conclusion. In 2011, the Obama
administration was reportedly willing to raise the age of Medicare
eligibility, a terrible and cruel policy idea. This time around, it was
willing to cut Social Security benefits by changing the formula for
cost-of-living adjustments, a less terrible idea that would nonetheless
have imposed a lot of hardship — and probably have been politically
disastrous as well. In the end, however, it didn’t happen. And
progressives, always worried that President Obama seems much too willing
to compromise about fundamentals, breathed a sigh of relief.
There were also some actual positives from a progressive point of view.
Expanded unemployment benefits were given another year to run, a huge
benefit to many families and a significant boost to our economic
prospects (because this is money that will be spent, and hence help
preserve jobs). Other benefits to lower-income families were given
another five years — although, unfortunately, the payroll tax break was
allowed to expire, which will hurt both working families and job
creation.
The biggest progressive gripe about the legislation is that Mr. Obama
extracted less revenue from the affluent than expected — about $600
billion versus $800 billion over the next decade. In perspective,
however, this isn’t that big a deal. Put it this way: A reasonable
estimate is that gross domestic product over the next 10 years will be
around $200 trillion. So if the revenue take had matched expectations,
it would still have amounted to only 0.4 percent of G.D.P.; as it turned
out, this was reduced to 0.3 percent. Either way, it wouldn’t make much
difference in the fights over revenue versus spending still to come.
Oh, and not only did Republicans vote for a tax increase for the first
time in decades, the overall result of the tax changes now taking effect
— which include new taxes associated with Obamacare as well as the new
legislation — will be a significant reduction in income inequality, with
the top 1 percent and even more so the top 0.1 percent taking a much
bigger hit than middle-income families.
So why are many progressives — myself included — feeling very
apprehensive? Because we’re worried about the confrontations to come.
According to the normal rules of politics, Republicans should have very
little bargaining power at this point. With Democrats holding the White
House and the Senate, the G.O.P. can’t pass legislation; and since the
biggest progressive policy priority of recent years, health reform, is
already law, Republicans wouldn’t seem to have many bargaining chips.
But the G.O.P. retains the power to destroy, in particular by refusing
to raise the debt limit — which could cause a financial crisis. And
Republicans have made it clear that they plan to use their destructive
power to extract major policy concessions.
Now, the president has said that he won’t negotiate on that basis, and
rightly so. Threatening to hurt tens of millions of innocent victims
unless you get your way — which is what the G.O.P. strategy boils down
to — shouldn’t be treated as a legitimate political tactic.
But will Mr. Obama stick to his anti-blackmail position as the moment of
truth approaches? He blinked during the 2011 debt limit confrontation.
And the last few days of the fiscal cliff negotiations were also marked
by a clear unwillingness on his part to let the deadline expire. Since
the consequences of a missed deadline on the debt limit would
potentially be much worse, this bodes ill for administration resolve in
the clinch.
So, as I said, in a tactical sense the fiscal cliff ended in a modest
victory for the White House. But that victory could all too easily turn
into defeat in just a few weeks."
-
3 Jan 2013: Martin Kettle: It's kept Obama and the euro from the cliff edge. What Bismarck called the art of the possible is now a key political skill 82 comments -
2 Jan 2013: French and Spanish registrations tumble to record lows, with new car market expected to continue decline throughout 2013
-
.
No comments:
Post a Comment