Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger
There have been some new developments in the Wisconsin story since my last post on the subject, Is the Scott Walker Story Just the Tip of the Koch Brothers Political Iceberg?. More than six hundred comments have been left 
at that post—and it takes a long time to load the page. I thought it best to write up a new post for people who would like to continue the discussion on the subject of Governor Scott Walker, the protesting workers in Wisconsin, Walker’s anti-union budget repair bill, the AWOL Democratic state senators, and various and sundry other things related to the subject.
Today, I’m just providing links to some news stories on the subject for you.
Wisconsinites were locked out of their capital building. WBAY (ABC)
Scott Walker’s budget defunds Planned Parenthood and targets contraception access. (Huffington Post)
AFL-CIO plans another big rally at the Wisconsin Capitol for this Saturday. (TPMDC)
“that is exactly what should have happened. Didnt Johnson pull it out?”
See Maury you should learn your history before you write, as hard as that may be for you. The hardest blow against the lock box was struck by Ronnie the puppet, with help from pseudo-Democratic Senator Pat Moynihan.
Ronnie and Pat also raised SS taxes under the myth they were saving the system. You can’t argue this stuff with any integrity, if you simply are ignorant of the facts.
“Spouting what he was spouting on Maddow’s show, he is a communist in all but name.”
Unlike you Maury, I have known real communists and I know their beliefs from the many arguments I’ve had with them. Michael Moore isn’t close to being a communist, but you can’t understand that because you don’t really know what a communist is, or believes.
rafflaw,
Disciplined reaction is not a Democatic Party strong suit … democrats usually react all over the place with everyone trying to grab the microphone at once and get his/her face on camera.
Not this time and that tells me plans were set and everyone had been given his/her marching orders. Discipline yourself … don’t give the republicans a target with a face, their target is the people … force them to stay on target.
I know people like to bash the Party … I certainly have done so … but not this time … so far they have managed quite well and refrained from shooting themselves in the foot.
And they have managed to give every republican failing a face … really, it has been quite well done.
“You were right about Iain M Banks’
Gyges,
I know and given that he’s been writing for a while, and quite popular in GB, how did it take us so long. I’m only about 6 months ahead of you in his discovery. I like Vance, but I’m not into short stories. I like something that takes me time to read. In the British vein though I also Recommend Richard K. Morgan and charles Stross. My son-in-law, who is an SF fan and shares his kindle account with me has also fallen for Banks and so I’ve got mucho reading ahead.
Re: Your first point about Free Markets is that what these Bozo’s don’t get with their bandying about terms they don’t understand is that the idea is good, but the execution and tendency to game whichever market, destroys the benefits. That is why governments and regulation are needed. Rand’s biggest stupidity in the world she imagined in Atlas Shrugged, is to imagine that her Alpha heroes weren’t going to run everything a few years after they took power.
“As an analogy: If everyone in a Texas Hold Em” Tournament could start out with all the money they wanted, those with the most
would generally win. ^The tournament is kept fair by those who run it by having everyone start out equally. I use poker for my analogy because poker is really a game of who has the money.”
Well that is not a very good analogy at all. If you look back to the period after the civil war (where we had as close to a free market as was possible) there are numerous examples of fabulous fortunes being created from literally nothing but hard work and an idea. J.C. Penny, Woolworths, Standard Oil, US Steel, and many others. The “Robber Barons” created fabulous wealth and most were born poor as church mice.
Creating wealth is not gambling, it is sustained mental and physical effort over many decades, most people do not want to pay the price or have the dedication necessary to do it. You don’t know the first thing about what it takes. The fact that you would use Texas Holdum as an analogy tells me all I need to know.
Maury,
You can believe whatever you want, but History does not support your claim. We have not had an unregulated market place in this country in my life time and we have had some great economic times during my 59 plus years. Right now the markets are somewhat regulated and Wall Street has been going crazy for the last year or so. I think the people in Sweden might have a problem with your claim that Socialism will hold back the standard of living.
These seem mildly appropriate.
http://xkcd.com/605/
http://xkcd.com/552/
Maury,
Are you in a safe place…..is there anyone you can call… Do you feel at this time like hurting yourself….How about others….Please tell me what state you are in….The voices that you hear….are they telling you things…. Please call someone maybe they need to start you on a regimen of medicine to assist in your well being….it is ok that you are not like other folks…it is good to be different…really….but sometime differences can be bad unless regulated….
Maury,
You are so good for bad information….It was His Highness Geo the First….
“The problem is that the “Free Market” is merely an untested theory because there never has been one in humankind’s history.”
The time in our history when we had as close to a free market as has ever been was the time when we saw the greatest expansion of our economy.
I think it safe to extrapolate that a totally free market would provide for quite a high standard of living for everyone.
We can also say that most socialist countries have a standard of living commensurate with the level of market freedom they allow.
Maury,
Your information is incorrect to level of being intentionally misleading. The Lock Box was discussed in the 2004 elections when Bush and the Supreme Court stole the election from Gore. Al Gore was the one suggesting a lock box so that the Republicans wouldn’t steal from it. Mr. Bush did not agree, but he didn’t have to. He had the Supreme court and vote fraud in florida to put him over the top.
Blouise,
I am not so sure that the Dems were ready for this latest Teapublican assault, but they reacted well. If we can get President Obama to use his bully pulpit, the Dems can make evern more hay on this issue.I agree with your review of the problems that the Republicans have created. The real test for the Dems will be to keep these different demogrphics energized and to get them to the polls in 2012.
Mike S. and Elaine,
Maury has a consitent problem with the facts which are probably related to where he is getting the misguided information.
“Had social security been put in a “lock box” instead of mingled with Federal funds there would be no problem.”
that is exactly what should have happened. Didnt Johnson pull it out?
Mike Spindell:
“So he throws in another jab by implying Michael Moore is a communist, which he isn’t.”
Spouting what he was spouting on Maddow’s show, he is a communist in all but name.
What I find most interesting about this particular time is the manner in which the democrats have identified and personified the enemy in the form of specific governors and put the Koch face on corporations.
The republicans have not been able to do the same because the democrats have not allowed any one leader to jump out and claim attention. The republicans are stuck with groups to vilify (Unions, teachers, receptionists, firemen, etc) but no one person to fix in the public’s mind.
The democrats have made “working families” and “the middle class” and “women” their identified groups under republican attack.
It’s fascinating and shows me democrats were fully prepared for this republican war.
I’m not going to confuse the ramblings of the latest Troll with the actual plans being enacted by the republicans within several of the states they took last November.
The republican agenda is the same in each of the states but the strategy is carefully worked to meet the realities within each state.
Wisconsin got away from them and they were forced to come from behind the curtain of “budget” to reveal the reality of the plan which is defunding the Democratic Party by stopping the auto-deductions of Union dues from public service employees’pay checks. That’s the whole plan in a nutshell.
Republicans have a huge problem looming … the younger generation isn’t interested in their abortion issue. They don’t react positively to their homophobia issue. They are, on the whole, far less racist than their parents or grandparents and they support the equality of women in the work force.
Okay, that’s problem number one. Problem number two for the Republicans is the sheer number of young, educated women within the workforce and holding or on track to hold executive positions in business. Also the number of women in professions like medicine and the law have greatly increased. These women are not sympathetic to traditional Republican values like abortion, big religion, gay marriage etc.
Problem number 3 is the growing number of registered black and latino voters and the growing number of educated black and latinos within business. Once again, these voters are far less supportive of Republican values, though the older ones can be caught up in the abortion and gay issue.
Had Republicans stuck with the old “conservative” values … responsible spending, smaller government etc. they would be better positioned to appeal to the younger voter. But they didn’t and the problem is huge for them and the future of the Republican Party.
What we are seeing now is a short term solution … it is foolish in that it has driven many loyal republican union members from the fold and increased the Republican Party’s reliance on mentalities so aptly displayed by our Trolls.
The battle is joined and democrats are very busy taking advantage of the weaknesses of the republicans. In Wisconsin Walker was forced to come out from behind his curtain of “budget” responsibility and reveal the bare-knuckle reality of his position … defunding the democrats.
Each state will now enjoy its own special set of strategy … punch and counter-punch. Recalls will be on every ballot and we are going to see what Bob,Esq aptly calls ” … some creative legal theories popping up in this weekend’s papers.”
Lawyers are working hard. Everybody else needs to do the same.
Mike,
Two things:
Tangential, to your point, is the fact that the Free Market mythology is based on a misunderstanding of economics. A competitive free market is the most efficient at allocating resources. The problem is that people skip that first modifier. Not all Free markets are competitive.
The second is completely off topic:
You were right about Iain M Banks. His Culture novels are fantastic and Transition is astoundingly good. Also, if you like Jack Vance, there’s a great anthology of short stories written in honor of him called Songs of the Dying Earth. It’s a bit long,I had to read it interspersed with two novels, it was just too much Vance to do in one sitting. Luckily, that’s no problem with short story collections.
“The only difference is that I know economic collectivism doesn’t work because of the empirical evidence of the last 150-200 years.”
Well we know it didn’t work in Russia and China, perhaps one could add Cuba to that equation. Your problem is that both countries were communist, not socialist, or mixed socialist/capitalist. The evidence shows that in countries that have had mixed economies, things have gone pretty well for the majority of the people. Knowledge of history would also show that countries where a plutocratic oligarchy exists: Saudi Arabia, NAZI Germany, Fascist Italy, pre-war Japan, to name a few these countries did not fare well since the majority of people were poor and the majority of the wealth flowed to the top.
You and many even erudite people believe in the incredible myth known as a “Free Market. These people and yourself are holding that up as a shining example of the way to run the world. The problem is that the “Free Market” is merely an untested theory
because there never has been one in humankind’s history. Even the man who coined the term, Adam Smith, did not believe in a “Free Market” as defined by you and your ilk.
The purpose of business is profit, which I have no problem with. However, an entity maximizes their profit by getting a larger market share and from its perspective ultimately controlling it.
At the point that happens the market is no longer free. The purpose of government is therefore to regulate the marketplace, thereby ensuring that the market is fair. People, like yourself, who espouse a free market disdain government regulation and if one were to adopt their perspective, shortly free markets wouldn’t exist.
As an analogy: If everyone in a Texas Hold Em” Tournament could start out with all the money they wanted, those with the most
would generally win. ^The tournament is kept fair by those who run it by having everyone start out equally. I use poker for my analogy because poker is really a game of who has the money.
Right now, without sound regulation, as currently exists in the Banking Field, we have no free market and so the prices are not set by one’s ability to produce, but by one’s ability to manipulate the freedom out of the market.
“a simple google search shows that, at or a little bit above, 50% of the federal budget is the amount spent on social entitlement programs. Defense is 17%.”
The key word in the above is “simple” because that 50% includes in its definition of “entitlement program” Social Security as the major expense. Social Security is NOT an entitlement program, even though many “experts” and political fools denote it as such. Social Security is provided for by direct taxation. That for most people who are in the cutoff range is equivalent or greater than the income tax they pay. Had social security been put in a “lock box” instead of mingled with Federal funds there would be no problem. It is currently running at about $120 million surplus, but that surplus goes into mingled funds and is thus used for other expenses. Even without a current fix social security is good until 2035.
However, SS has become a regressive tax in that the burden is not equally shared. Because of the cutoff point, about $100,000,
those making below that figure are paying a higher share of combined taxes, than those with the higher salaries. If the cutoff point were raised, any problems would disappear. Therefore the real question is do our wealthier citizens pay their fair share of taxes and the answer is no.
Maury,
I believe military/defense spending is closer to 22%–about the same as for Social Security. But…don’t forget that the great majority of working people pay into Social Security. That’s why they are “entitled” to Social Security payments when they are retired.