College of Political Knowledge
Lecture #
Political courage is doing what is best for the country, not what is expedient for one’s political career….Washington has No one with political courage….just political cowards (a strong word, I know…..but sometimes the truth hurts)……or as I call them CENTRISTS! (a post to follow…stay tuned)
This is one of those subjects that will not be easy to analyze….there is a wealth of angles from which to approach the subject……I will start with the last debate in Washington….the tax cuts proposal that both Left and Right have a problem with…
The media is talking with those on the Left and the right that have voted NO on the new tax bill….they are being portrayed as some kind of hero for standing on principles…..this is mostly bullsh*t!
It is called “corralling” ……the two leaders of each house, the majority and the minority, round up the required votes to pass the bill and once that is accomplished they allow some to vote in opposition to the bill….it is a way of padding a resume for the next run for office……there is NO political courage in this!
In reality, the US Congress has NOT been a serious institution for 40 years or more…..they have NOT really attacked anything of consequence, they only tackle little battles while the war rages on….they have been immature, nay…..cowards, for close to 50 years and soon it will be too late to repair the damage they have caused….and when that occurs, I hope that history will NOT be kind to them and paint them as the cowards they were and are….
The media when they make these idiots out something they are not, are doing NO one any good and are just part of the problem with our governing system…political courage is just a catch phrase in today’s politics….it NO longer exists…..the system dashes all hopes for political courage……the system is corrupt and NO one wants it to change….the prestige, the power, the cash all work in conflict to the people’s desire and that will continue because NO one wants it to change…..NO ONE HAS THE POLITICAL COURAGE TO CHANGE IT!
A VERY good post. I wouldn’t argue with a word of it. That’s kind of boring, but credit where it’s due I say…
Thanx…..appreciate the props…..tomorrow I have a post planned about centrism (is that a word?)…..more pn the middle thingy….
A centrist — a moderate, someone that weighs all sides, a reasonable person — is now a coward? Is it now brave to discount opposing ideas? Is it brave to think that you have all the best ideas and intentions, and no one else does? I think not.
I think it’s a lot more brave to at least listen to other ideas, sound out their thought process, and if reasonable agree with or adopt their points, rather than to stick to one’s ideologically faulty guns. I find that closer to ignorance than bravery.
Exactly – that’s how I read what Lobotero was saying… From what I’ve seen there are few if any moderates in the US administration – some who pretend when it suits them, it’s true, but none that fit your description.
If that was NOT Lobotero’s intention then I totally disagree, but my interpretation was that there are none who will willingly dissent from their party (bearing in mind that the parties are opposite extremes – in US terms).
Sticking to one’s PRINCIPLES (like any of them actually have any) is brave, sticking to one’s IDEOLOGY regardless is cowardly as well as stupid – in my opinion.
LOUDelf…..most so-called centrists are opportunists……no I do not discount other opposing ideas….but I also think that principles must stand for something……look at the tax cut thing…..opportunists! Nothing about itr shows any bravery…… I disagree….standing on one’s principles is not ignorance in any way…..sitting on the fence and falling to the most expedient side is not bravery…at least not to me….
I also do not consider a moderate as the same as a centrist…I realize that may be semantics….but a moderate to me is someone who may be a social liberal and a fiscal conserv and beliefs in the principles of the two sectors……I think the media has tried to make mods and centrists as the same but to me they are not….
“standing on one’s principles is not ignorance in any way” — unless facts and information are presented to the contrary, yet the stand is made. This is all too often the case of the ideological left and right.
BTW, thanx for the visit always a pleasure…..
In my way of thinking….a moderate uses sources to get to the meat of a subject or issue or situation……like I have said…I believe the media has created this whole centrist thing……and now they are trying to cash in on it by this No labels thing….(tomorrows post)……
Who cares who created it? IF it can be truly brought into being, it is the ONLT conceivably available way forward. To me, a centrist is one who will vote for something of which the right might approve and another thing of which the left might approve and probably for other things which neither would support – ALL ACCORDING TO PERCEIVED MERIT! There lies the difference – i.e. “No Labels” according to merit, NOT ideology.
I apologize…the post on centrists will be delayed until next week…..tax cut bill was passed and though it needed a bit of attention…
Thanks for having me. Please understand that my comments/responses may be sharp, and are never intended to be personal, but just to shoot holes in a comment or argument I disagree with. Just wanted to make sure you know I never mean any disrespect here.
Loudelf….never crossed my mind…as I tell everyone….I do not mind if you disagree as long as we keep it civil then all is good……believe me , I am an old fart and have been dealing with politics for over 40 years….I really enjoy a good discussion…..sometimes I get off track but it is because I do most of my writing at early hours of the morning and coffee takes a few to kick in….
On re-reading the whole of this post, it would appear that I missed at least some of the point of it. I agree with much of what you say, but how is voting in a centrist manner cowardly? IMO there is NOTHING that is good about sticking to your ideology – in fact I think that ideology is at the heart of much that is wrong with the world of humans in all sorts of fields.
Ideology by its very nature requires a person to believe regardless of the facts – to have “faith” in fact, which is sheer BS and simply a way of heading off awkward questions about all sorts of things.
Yes, of course there are many who vote in what appears to be a principled way but is only in fact “playing the political game”. Nevertheless, that is exactly what we want, but for real, not for devious motives.
The biggest difficulty appears to me to be that the US has so many assholes in politics that it’s pretty hard to spot the odd genuine one amongst all the crap. In spite of that, we do simply need more of them and if they don’t vote the way you (or I) like, that’s simply tough – if they truly are following their consciences and not some crap party, good for them!
Right now, it is all a political game……look at the two dirty words on politics….tax and spend……unfortunately, taxes are needed if a government is to truly function as an instrument of the treatment of the people……I have NEVER had a problem with taxes, as long as they are shared by everyone and everything……I have NO problem with spending as long as it is spending on things that keep the country moving forward, like education or health care……I will NEVER side with those who want wars of intervention……..I consider that an ideology….but if I pull back on any of it then I have abandoned my ideals for expediency…..
The left is ALL about ideology just as much as the right is – it’s all fixed position bullshit – until THAT changes, NOTHING will change!
Your IDEALS may be totally wrong (just as mine may well be). If ANYONE in politics sticks to their ideals regardless of reality then they are doing a disservice to the country as a whole. We are all human, we are all fallible. It takes REAL courage to admit it even to yourself when you discover that something you thought was so just isn’t – OR that something you hold dear for yourself is simply a bad idea for the masses. THAT is what I call being a moderate and THAT is what I applaud about the “NoLabels” thing.
I am an old radical….so yes I can change my mind….but in the long run it is about what is best for all people……there is NOTHING wrong with compromise….but not if it does not make things better…like the new tax bill….all it does is add to the debt…..and this from the people that promise to watch out for the next generations…this is cowardly….
Probably, but then if most of these people weren’t assholes, they wouldn’t be politicians. Being a politician, like being a lawyer, or an accountant, or a doctor, or some other professional was once something to be admired and respected – not any more.
However, a politician who puts country before party (and therefore before ideology) IS to be admired and championed in my opinion – IF it is genuine and not just for political effect.
Agreed….my concern is my country and its people….and at times I may sound a bit callous but I only want what is best…..at times that also mewans I am hard headed also…LOL
Naturally – nothing wrong in that…
Cutting spending reduces debt. Raising taxes in a down economy can accelerate the plummet, and thereby reduce future intake. The solution is simple: Don’t raise taxes on anyone… cut spending. I’m sure any one of us could find billions of dollars wasted every year to be cut.
You know if economics was an exact science you would be right…..since it is all theory that seldom seem to work……with that said…..we have nad tax cuts for 8 years and the economy tanked…..and now conservs will have more ammo to try and kill SS…..less money coming in will no doubt make it insolvent quicker……..but this new tax bill was not that much courage……most of it was political maneuvering for 2012……we will see just how many jobs will be created come the first of the year…..
It’s really not theory. If someone gets 65 cents on the dollar one day, and suddenly they get only 61 the next, they will have 4 fewer pennies on the dollar to spend. Considering our top 5 percent of income earners account for 37 percent of consumer outlays, you can bet that a big chunk of this would be hurt. This is not a theory, but a reality you can test in any environment. The problem is that most people and politicians fail to even understand the basics of economics, and therefor view it as some theory (much like those who discount man-made climate change on the basis that you couldn’t possibly calculate it) that is too difficult to understand, and therefor you just need to get some economists that can speak to some small dubious statistic rather than simplistic sense.
As a business owner, I can tell you for a fact, the less I have to spend, the less-likely I am to hire — no theory there.
I must admit I largely agree with you, LOUDelf – all exept the bit about climate change. That’s not because I dispute that it’s happening – it may, or may not, be and the same applies to the cause(s) of it – what I dispute is the poor science and the honesty and integrity (or rahter the lack of it) of many of those behind the theory. We shall of course see at some point, but if we are spending a huge amount of time and money (as Europe and the UK are doing) in order to achieve absolutely nothing even if all the predictions are correct, then I cannot regard us as anything other than stupid – or duped by huge financial interests – perhaps even larger than big oil.
However, that doesn’t alter the simple truth that the less you have as an individual, or as a whole country, the less you SHOULD spend and anything that reduces what you have to spend is a bad thing. The theory of the left seems to me to be that increasing taxes gives the government MORE to spend and THAT will expand the economy. Sorry Lobotero, but like Loudelf (if I’ve understoood him) I think that’s HIGHLY inefficient and it just doesn’t normally happen that way.
Nevertheless, simply handing OUR money to the jerks on Wall Street and in the Banks helps no one but those jerks themselves.
…and THAT is why my view is that the true answers lie somewhere in the middle with parts of the solution appropriate from both sides of the argument.
I understand all that you say….let me ask then….now that you get to keep the 4 cents will you add jobs in this economy?
I think you miss the point somewhat – WITH the 4 cents, if you NEED more staff, you MIGHT employ an extra person. Without, you will clearly try even harder to avoid it. It’s all a question of degree (and the size of the firm you’re talking about of course).
Of course, if they’d taken ALL of the money they gave to the w… sorry – BANkers – and gave it ALL to small to medium sized businesses (REAL ones that is) then the US might well be doing OK by now.
I thought he was talking about my comment on the tax deal…..where if the3 rich keeps their cash they will hire more people……and then I just ask if he would hire more now in this crappy economy……
Probably not. Who knows? But if there was money sloshing around the economy (our money that is – or yours at least in the US), rather than just the financial sector, then things would be different. A vibrant economy producing things (hardware or “software”) of REAL value requires people and creates jobs. If you just give loads of cash to bankers, what do you expect? They pay themselves huge sums and then sit on the rest – that’s what they do for chrissake!
Once again I agree…….the tax deal was cut with the promise that it would stimulate hiring, among other things…..something I doubt…..
Sorry for the radio silence. The year-end is a killer in one of my businesses. Anywho…
The rich don’t need to hire, they just need to spend. Although, I guess they are the ones TO hire, as I have rarely heard of the poor hiring. As Quinn said. If they don’t have the money, they won’t spend. If they do have it, they may. The American dream is to have a chance to prosper. There was never a guarantee. The government needs to allow this, instead of impeding this with social engineering and wealth redistribution to anyone.
LOUDelf, nice you see you again…..and I know what you mean before my forced retirement….year end was a bitch….
They are spending according to CNBC…..but they are buying luxury items and such or they are buying other companies, which no doubt will lead to more lay=offs……..please do not misunderstand….I am all for people making money and doing well….I also think that there is a price to pay to a society that allows one to do this……
You have got so much reading to do to catch up…….LOL
What can be called a luxury item depends on the person doing the calling – a washing machine may be a luxury to some and a mere necessity of life to enable one to employ one’s servants to others – well, you get the point.
If the money is spent, particularly on goods, it DOES benefit the country as a whole.
If you are right and there is a price to pay, then it’s up to society to collect payment – don’t expect it to be offered just because they like your face…
The news is diamonds, yachts etc……..luxury items, like ones mentioned, does little to put people to work or get the whole economy moving…these industries were already stable….oh I know…….we will continue to crap on the rest of society to allow a few to get more…..the usual story….
Sorry, I don’t agree and I think that is the fallacy. All these “luxury” items cost money and require workers at some level and in some form – even if it’s only sales staff. Just because you don’t want what is produced is irrelevant – the only important thing is that it IS produced and sold.
Say you are a salesman working on commission and being paid 5% (for instance). You’re a damned sight better off selling one boat a year worth 4 million dollars than a thousand washing machines and it’s probably a lot less work. Additionally, the production of the boat probably supports more workers in its construction and delivery too.
Looked at in that light, the GOP is right – all you need is lots more people to get rich and buy boats and diamonds! 😈
Yes they do but since nothing has deterred these people from buying in a crisis most of the substructure is intact….no need to hire….the the wealthy had to cut back then there is a possibility that it would create something….but so far it has created nothing….that would help an ailing economy…..except keeping some employed……I understand what you say…but I still do not see where there is any help…….
Hmmm… I get your point, but I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one… Good discussion though
As always excellent conversations….more people need to see how well it can be done…..thanx
Luxury items have to be produced. This means jobs. It doesn’t take more people to produce an economy car than a luxury one.
“I also think that there is a price to pay to a society that allows one to do this” Thoughts like this are what have caused many jobs to go overseas. When businesses that can manufacture in multiple locations have to pay a society tax in one, and not the others, the answer for them is simple. Same with the wealthy… many of them can go elsewhere and not pay high taxes… and many do when they’ve gone up in the US.
I’m hearing lots of theories here, but those don’t work for me. In business, I go with realities. If the government pulls more money out of my check, I have to compensate. When I compensate, that means I have to pull more out of the business. That’s where it hits my hiring, i.e. jobs. Simple math.
Yes, I more or less agree with you, LOUDelf.
However, I can understand how people like Lobotero feel when time after time the assholes who created the current problems seem to be the ones that are getting rewarded – directly or indirectly with the public’s money.
Personally, if there was no such thing as too big to fail, then I wouldn’t expect the banks and finance houses to owe anyone anything, but they and a lot of the bigger industries HAVE been bailed out with public money and THEY DO have a debt of gratitude to pay to ordinary people – for quite some time!
So basically you are saying that business does not owe anything to the country but the people do…..are you saying that because of say…taxes…that US companies have gone overseas? If so, then in my state business gets pretty much a free ride for 10 years or so…and yet they cannot get anyone to build in the state……and that was before this economic crisis……
A small business is a different animal…yes the math may be similar, but it is different….like now….big business is not hiring but rather using money to buy other companies…..is that helping the national economy? I understand the small business, I once owed one and I did not have the creative accounting possibilities of some of the big business….so I say that are a different animal…..
Businesses are not people. They are structures, either physical or economic. They pay taxes, usually at a higher rate than individuals. Higher costs — yes, including taxes — definitely drive businesses overseas in whole or part.
If you have a problem with large business (which I also do), approach those on the left that supported the auto bailout, the bank bailout, and so on. These did not help the little guy all that much, but perpetuated the conglomeration of big business which as you point out does not do the hiring. However, we are speaking of personal taxes. You raise the taxes — even on the Obama-labelled rich only — you are targeting a huge portion of small businesses. I know, I’m one. As someone already paying in the highest tax bracket, I can tell you that with less money coming in to my family, I would not expand my hiring, but would contract it, possibly even be forced to find extra money in the business including laying off. Then what? Up the unemployment tax to pay for all of the people that were then laid off? Where does it end?
Bottom line: Our government is a textbook case of inefficiency. The only way they ever cut spending and look for efficiency is if they are forced, as in a drop in future intake due to lower taxes. The interesting thing is that when we’ve dropped taxes, we’ve seen the governmental intake increase a couple of years later. Raising taxes has had the equal and opposite effects — more money short-term, less long-term. The way to fix this is to return the US to the place where people can come (or remain) and have a chance to make it big. This is done by lowering costs of business and living. If this means that our congresspeople have to cut their staffs by 25% and read bills themselves, so be it. If this means we have to bring governmental pay back to 2008 levels, alright. If this means that we have to remove redundant programs like education and let the states handle them, the let’s get started. It’s tough medicine, but when looking for answers, we look toward success, not failure.
I cannot argue with you on the business thing….I have been out of it for 15 years……but then there is small businesses like yours….these are the ones that need the relief in whatever way….as our politicians keep saying….they are the engine of our economy….but yet do NOTHING to start the motor…..my problem is with the help that large corporations get because they have bought their fringe benefits in the shape of politicians….as far as politicians go… I think they should be paid by the piece of legislation that becomes law……no progress no pay!
Sounds like you’re saying corporations and politicians are “friends with benefits”. That’s funny 🙂
BTW, in case I missed telling you…I appreciate your input on the business stuff…..I for one have been out of it for far too long…always nice to have a perspective other than my slightly left leaning…..