Greider in The Nation: Obama's Bad Bargain...voicing fallacious arguments of the right.

[madfloridian]

Obama's Bad Bargain

The most distressing outcome of the deficit hysteria gripping Washington may be what Barack Obama has revealed about himself. It was disconcerting to watch the president slip-slide so easily into voicing the fallacious economic arguments of the right. It was shocking when he betrayed core principles of the Democratic Party, portraying himself as high-minded and brave because he defied his loyal constituents. Supporters may hope this rightward shift was only a matter of political tactics, but I think Obama has at last revealed his sincere convictions. If he wins a second term, he will be free to strike a truly rotten “grand bargain” with Republicans—“pragmatic” compromises that will destroy the crown jewels of democratic reform.

The president has done grievous damage to the most vulnerable by trying to fight the GOP on its ground—accepting the premise that deficits and debt should be a national priority. He made the choice more than a year ago to push aside the real problem—the vast loss and suffering generated by a failing economy.

As a conservative reformer, Obama embraced a bizarre notion of “balance.” The budget cuts he first proposed would have punished the middle class and vulnerable three times with a big stick, shrinking Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits while hitting the wealthy only once with a modest tax increase. When Democrats complained that this wasn’t fair, Obama adjusted the “shared sacrifice” to a dollar-for-dollar ratio. Take a dollar from working stiffs who need these programs, take a dollar from the superrich who don’t need a tax break. How fair is that?

Obama’s facile arithmetic essentially scrapped the Democratic Party’s longstanding commitment to progressive taxation and universal social protections. The claim that cutting Social Security benefits will “strengthen” the system is erroneous. In fact, Obama has already undermined the soundness of Social Security by partially suspending the FICA payroll tax for workers—depriving the system of revenue it needs for long-term solvency.

His last paragraph is quite powerful, but I won't post it here. Read it though, and think about the stress and the anger that is being felt by so many segments of our society now. Teachers, seniors, the needy, and the disabled.

I know there are many in our party, and probably quite a few in the Republican party who care about the lesser of us in our country.

Now they need to start telling the truth, and they need to do it loudly. All we hear is what the right wing wants us to hear.

Greider is right. Our party decades ago adopted the policy of catering to business so they would not have to deal with the rest of us without that much money. They said so years ago, I use their own words.

And they have succeeded all too well.

President Obama once told a group of bankers... "My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.".

He's done quite a job of protecting them from us, I think.

Greider made a lot of good points in that article. And this part stands out:

Instead of mimicking the penny pinchers, Obama will have to say something about the nation’s real problem—the sick economy and the terrible consequences facing millions of families.

Amen to that.

[msongs]

1. where are the jobs Mr. Obama? and where are the jobs congresspersons for that matter nt

[madfloridian]

37. They never even mention jobs.

It's very sad because we are in crisis truly. Yet all we hear are the RW talking points about the fiscal crisis and debt while they do all the wrong things to help fix it. :shrug:

[defendandprotect]

55. Ironically ....

I think GOP did campaign on jobs last election --

and then immediately, of course, tossed aside --

If we're not already in a depression and I think we are --

we will soon be!!

[chervilant]

60. hmm...

Our 'financial experts' and 'erudite economists' keep moving the bar, so to speak. The feds use some standard economic measures to define 'recessions' and 'depressions,' but we lowly members of the hoi polloi aren't considered smart enough to understand such economic matters.

The google reveals that many economists define recession as "two or more quarters of reduced Gross Domestic Product (GDP)." Then, "(i)f a recession continues for a long time," we're in a depression. A long time? What specifically constitutes a 'long time'? Can I say that being un- or under-employed for the better part of the last three years constitutes a long time?!? Seems like it to me...

In the most recent release of information (today, from the US Dept of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis): "For 2007-2010, real GDP decreased at an average annual rate of 0.3 percent." By their own definition, the much vaunted economists seem to have admitted we've been in a depression, lo these past four years. hmm...

Do people have a CLUE what is a depression? How many of the hoi polloi think that all economic activity stops during a depression? (Don't laugh, I've had students address this very issue, by asking if the economy just 'stops'!) The Powers That Be really don't want us to know, and they do NOT like it when we ask astute questions.

I think you are spot on when you suggest we're already in a depression. Furthermore, I think Obama will continue to help the Corporate Megalomaniacs cram their disaster capitalism down our throats, as they use this manufactured debt ceiling crisis to justify destroying Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. I think the coming two or three decades will be bloody, and deadly.

As an old woman, I don't expect to survive. BUT, I may spend as much of my homeless years as I possibly can parked in front of the White House--a grim reminder of the damage done by Obama and the obscenely wealthy Corporate Megalomaniacs who own and control him.

[defendandprotect]

66. Thanks for the info -- and agree with you --

Our 'financial experts' and 'erudite economists' keep moving the bar, so to speak. The feds use some standard economic measures to define 'recessions' and 'depressions,' but we lowly members of the hoi polloi aren't considered smart enough to understand such economic matters.

The google reveals that many economists define recession as "two or more quarters of reduced Gross Domestic Product (GDP)." Then, "(i)f a recession continues for a long time," we're in a depression. A long time? What specifically constitutes a 'long time'? Can I say that being un- or under-employed for the better part of the last three years constitutes a long time?!? Seems like it to me...

In the most recent release of information (today, from the US Dept of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis): "For 2007-2010, real GDP decreased at an average annual rate of 0.3 percent." By their own definition, the much vaunted economists seem to have admitted we've been in a depression, lo these past four years. hmm...


And ...


Do people have a CLUE what is a depression? How many of the hoi polloi think that all economic activity stops during a depression? (Don't laugh, I've had students address this very issue, by asking if the economy just 'stops'!) The Powers That Be really don't want us to know, and they do NOT like it when we ask astute questions.

I think you are spot on when you suggest we're already in a depression. Furthermore, I think Obama will continue to help the Corporate Megalomaniacs cram their disaster capitalism down our throats, as they use this manufactured debt ceiling crisis to justify destroying Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. I think the coming two or three decades will be bloody, and deadly.

As an old woman, I don't expect to survive. BUT, I may spend as much of my homeless years as I possibly can parked in front of the White House--a grim reminder of the damage done by Obama and the obscenely wealthy Corporate Megalomaniacs who own and control him.



I think people are looking for people selling apples in the street --

Yet, the homeless were on our streets for a decade or more after Reagan and then they were

whisked away. No Soup kitchen lines, but we are all aware of those collecting food for the

hungry and that those neighborhood pantry shelves are always near empty.

Because it isn't exactly the way it was in 1930's, they seem to be missing it -- ???


And, actually, sometime last August, there was an article on Yahoo where Obama was calling

it a "Depression" -- I picked the article up to post here, but don't always do it right away

and when I went to post it I noticed that "Depression" had been scrubbed and replaced by

"Recession."

Agree re Obama -- he's a corporatist and obviously is in the wrong party -- purposefully.

Most of all we need a humanist in the White House -- !!

If I gave any real thought to Obama, I'd be wondering if he was a Manchurian candidates --

seems to be robot like.

I was very concerned about this presidency from the first days -- but never expected anything

like this record of destruction.



:hi:

[roxiejules]

71. Sen. Schumer is working on jobs: 'Immigration is a Job Creator'

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59311.html

http://www.nj.com/hudson/voices/index.ssf/2011/07/senator_chuck_schumers_distort.html


Schumer, the Senate's third ranking member and the Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security held a hearing Tuesday titled "The Economic Imperative for Enacting Immigration Reform" with the typical witness list that included only those who support more immigration.

"We decided we ought to start highlighting the fact that immigration creates jobs rather than takes them away,” Schumer, the No. 3 Senate leader, said in an interview. “Everyone agreed that is how we are going to start talking about immigration, as a job creator.”

Schumer called in business leaders to talk about the need for more highly skilled workers and mayors whose local economies have benefited from an influx of lower-skilled immigrants.

[Tom Rinaldo]

2. Couldn't agree more

Sure Obama's priorities are mpre humane than today's Republicabns. He's a Dole Democrat when we need FDR 2.0

[madfloridian]

8. Indeed we do need that, Tom.

:hi:

[WinkyDink]

3. Obama might find out that those pitchforks, like the proverbial buck, will stop with HIM.

[SusanaMontana41]

59. I'm ready to hit the streets. This isn't about a person or a Party, ftm.

It's about policy.

Everyone here would be screaming, were anyone from the GOP doing what Obama is doing.

[Big Blue Marble]

4. Powerful comments!

Thank you for posting.

[EFerrari]

5. This is exactly what I've been thinking.

Until this is over, I'm only reading transcripts because watching the president repeat conservative myths makes my stomach turn.

[Gabi Hayes]

6. I stopped listening a long time ago.

Empty words; part of a tradition that began with the preamble to the constitution

living a life of illusion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tiOMu_Bf8Q

[Gabi Hayes]

9. holy SHIT!

who does Joe Walsh look like @15 seconds in?

wow

[Melissa G]

47. Exactly what I have been doing.

I can only read transcripts and barely that. Having a Democratic president using republican frameworks like 'entitlements' instead of social program insurance that we have paid for is nauseating at best. Too many conservative republican talking points to bear coming from a Dem president.

[Mimosa]

7. Bill Greider wasn't born yesterday. He has perspective from decades of study.

From the OP link:

The president has done grievous damage to the most vulnerable by trying to fight the GOP on its ground—accepting the premise that deficits and debt should be a national priority. He made the choice more than a year ago to push aside the real problem—the vast loss and suffering generated by a failing economy.

As a conservative reformer, Obama embraced a bizarre notion of “balance.” The budget cuts he first proposed would have punished the middle class and vulnerable three times with a big stick, shrinking Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits while hitting the wealthy only once with a modest tax increase. When Democrats complained that this wasn’t fair, Obama adjusted the “shared sacrifice” to a dollar-for-dollar ratio. Take a dollar from working stiffs who need these programs, take a dollar from the superrich who don’t need a tax break. How fair is that?

Obama’s facile arithmetic essentially scrapped the Democratic Party’s longstanding commitment to progressive taxation and universal social protections. The claim that cutting Social Security benefits will “strengthen” the system is erroneous. In fact, Obama has already undermined the soundness of Social Security by partially suspending the FICA payroll tax for workers—depriving the system of revenue it needs for long-term solvency.

I think President Obama actually BELIEVED the Rethugs were dealing in good faith. He probably believes they are at base 'good people' who simply disagree. However the Rethugs view Obama as the leader of a 'war' against all they hold good and decent.

[Gabi Hayes]

13. amen. remember when $200 Billion seemed like a LOT of money?

http://www.amazon.com/Who-Will-Tell-People-Democracy/dp/0671867407

see the first customer review

then check out Secrets of the Temple, if you haven't already

[Mimosa]

16. Thanks, Gabi.

I'll look up those books. :D

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. Second guessing Obama is getting tiresome.

:shrug:

[madfloridian]

31. It's getting tiresome seeing seniors used as political pawns...

by a Democratic president.

[Bluesbreaker]

69. There's no guessing involved, unfortunately

The president showed his hand repeatedly during this debt-ceiling debate. He's not just willing, he's eager, to cut Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Prior to this he appointed the members of his Deficit Reduction Commission and ensured it was stacked with anti-social security members, like co-chairs Alan Simpson and Eskine Bowles. In fact, the membership was heavily skewed to the right. Why would a Democrat do such a thing?

Couple this with the kid glove treatment Wall Street has received from this administration, beginning with the failure of the DOJ to indict any of the perpetrators of the most massive ponzi scheme in history, from the TBTF banks to the ratings agencies to the mortgage lenders.

Every manufactured crisis Obama bargains away more programs and services and turns it into another opportunity to shift more of burden to the middle class and poor, while avoiding making the wealthiest and most powerful pay anything remotely close to their fair share.

[russspeakeasy]

42. I think the Prez believes a lot of shit that just ain't so.

For example, he thinks he has my vote.:hi:

[defendandprotect]

56. "I think President Obama actually BELIEVED the Rethugs were dealing in good faith"....

I think President Obama actually BELIEVED the Rethugs were dealing in good faith. He probably believes they are at base 'good people' who simply disagree.

:eyes:



You're right, Wm. Greider wasn't born yesterday ....

Supporters may hope this rightward shift was only a matter of political tactics, but I think Obama has at last revealed his sincere convictions. If he wins a second term, he will be free to strike a truly rotten “grand bargain” with Republicans—“pragmatic” compromises that will destroy the crown jewels of democratic reform.

The mask is off -- it's over --

[kenny blankenship]

10. "I think Obama has at last revealed his sincere convictions."

If you dropped a pebble in there, you would die of boredom waiting to hear it hit something solid.

[Armstead]

11. Greider is always great -- Lightyears beyond Krugman

He's a traditional liberal who knows a boatload about politics and economics.

Unfortunately, traditional liberals are considered thecfarvleftvfringectgesecdays.

[madfloridian]

12. Heck, even moderates are considered far left fringe these days.

:think:

[avaistheone1]

19. Yup.

Pretty crazy.

[defendandprotect]

57. They know who liberals are and they still fear us -- it's a liberal nation --

the rest of it happens because their wealth has bought control over government

and media --

the rest of it is rw propaganda -- "newspeak" --

and they will continue to try to confuse the public by demonizing concepts and words!

[rufus dog]

14. As someone who is generally a supporter of Obama

I can't disagree.

Sometimes you have to take the fight to the opponent. The time was during the Bush tax cut expiration and he refused, now we are dealing with the teahadist terrorists.

Hate to say it folks but I see no pretty ending to this thing, we are looking at a side that refuses to be governed by a democracy and that will do whatever it takes to impose their will on others. It doesn't appear that a peaceful resolution is available other than continuing to give in to their terrorist demands that will result in a never ending dip into the sewer.

[dgibby]

25. Obama has taken the fight to the opponent.

He's taken it to us.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

17. I share your sentiments in your last sentence.

It's pretty rough.

[Armstead]

18. Deserves a K

[Raksha]

20. K & R

[OHdem10]

21. Republicans can get away with remaining indifferent to the

suffering of poor and Middle Class to some degree.

Obama does not appear to understand this is the death knell for a
Democrat.

Mr President: I understand you feel deeply and are compassionate.
I am a bit on stoic side also. You have to let loose every now
and again. Cool is good but too much cool can be misinterpreted.

Further, understand, the GOP have been working at having a
50 year run in control of the Government. This got really
side tracked when they lost in big numbers--actually thrown
and Dems voted in. Since the GOP have a real party, they are
in constant motion and planning. Right now, they want the WH
and Senate so much they can already taste it. They are focused
on one thing--taking back the Senate and WH. You are in the
way---so expect no favors and expect to be sidetracked, obstructed
whatever it takes to keep them in a winning position. Just be
prepared.

You must get past mimicking or appearing the green eyeshade Republicans
and and their penny wise pound foolish legislation and actions.
(The FAA Debacle--more is being lost than saved). Pull a
Harry Truman every now and then.

[madfloridian]

28. Good post. When you compromise with extremists, we all lose.

You are right, a certain amount of cool is good....but now we need some real compassion shown.

It's like we are floundering without a real leader.

[seeker4ever]

77. Do you really think Obama doesn't "understand?"

[Lorien]

22. What many of us have been saying for a while now:

"To be blunt, progressives have to pick a fight with their own party. They have to launch the hard work of reconnecting with ordinary citizens, listening and learning, defining new politics from the ground up. People in a rebellious mood should also prepare for the possibility that it may already be too late, that the Democratic Party’s gradual move uptown is too advanced to reverse. In that event, people will have to locate a new home—a new force in politics that speaks for them."

[xchrom]

23. Recommend

[TheKentuckian]

24. Great Piece

[bvar22]

27. Cutting Government Spending & Weakening the Safety Net during a recession & Jobs Crisis

are NOT Democratic Party values, policies, or traditions.
That is not even Republican Lite.
THAT is standard, mainstream Republican Dogma.

Worse than that,
it has FAILED every time it has been tried.
Its NOT like we haven't gone down THAT road before.

Where are the guys speaking UP for Democratic Party Values? :shrug:
I thought we elected "Democrats" in 2008.

[madfloridian]

30. "standard, mainstream Republican Dogma"

Yes, it is. And yes, we elected a WH and congressional majority in 2008. But they never took over the messaging.

[ProSense]

29. When

did the President make this claim:

"The claim that cutting Social Security benefits will 'strengthen' the system is erroneous."

It seems people are criticizing the President based on claims made up out of thin air.

[chervilant]

62. Really?!

Would that I could unreservedly support or applaud our "democratic" president. However, the vast majority of the tools infesting our political offices these days--INCLUDING Mr. Obama--are neither exceptionally erudite nor diplomatic.

And the reason to include that (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) potentially in this package is if you’re going to take a bunch of tough votes, you might as well do it now, as opposed to trying to muster up the political will to get something done further down in the future.

Weasel words, methinks, Mr. Obama!

Sometimes this parental feeling toward mainstream Americans is expressed in more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger this-hurts-me-more-than-it-hurts-you tones. This was the condescending tone in which President Obama declared: "We must eat our peas."

(quote from a July 23, 2011 post by madfloridian)

Mr. Obama pegged the meter on condescension when he asserted that "YOU progressives" view the glass as "half empty," rather than half full. Cenk provided a great commentary on this stark glimpse of Obama's apparent disdain for progressives. What punishment do you think our Paternal President has in mind for all of us 'naughty progressive children'?

Quite a number of DUers, you included, are still willing to carry Obama's water, despite his many shortcomings and serious missteps. Where are your critical thinking skills? Can you not assess Obama by what he is DOING rather than by what he is SAYING?

Ten years from now, when I take my inevitable Kevorkian Kocktail -- because I haven't had a job in those ten years, and I'm tired of mooching off of family and friends -- at least, I won't be thinking, "Thank GOD I voted for the lesser of two evils!"

Disaster capitalism run amok, with virtually no push back from the functionally illiterate, easily manipulated, fear-mongering, hate-mongering hoi polloi...

Embarrassing, these days, to be a member of this species.

[ProSense]

68. What the hell does that prove?

I asked, when did the President make this claim:

"The claim that cutting Social Security benefits will 'strengthen' the system is erroneous."

The information that you provided doesn't include a statement by the President about cutting benefits.

[chervilant]

70. Goodness!

You insist on standing firm on that trite, mendacious assertion?

My entire first quote was Obama's rather weak and oblique 'justification' for offering up Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid 'changes' to motivate the GOP to 'raise the debt ceiling' (a fine piece of Kabuki Theater, btw).

I grieve for the countless members of the hoi polloi who seem to revel in their ignorance...

[amborin]

32. K&R Obama deliberately charts this course, starting w/ including useless tax breaks in the stimulus

[ChiciB1]

33. Thank You For this Post... I'm Still Confused As To Why There Are Still

so many here who simply BLINDLY BELIEVE that he "has our back." Perhaps we might now have to say "he's broken our back." I really don't like making comments like this, but I simply can't apologize for making them.

I DIDN'T want to see this go down this way... EVER! And what is becoming rather evident is the fact that he's actually beginning to lose more support as time goes by. It's just very sad and more than distressing.

No, don't have a link, just heard a couple of polls that were quoted by Tweety last night. Guess you can just check with him.

[madfloridian]

40. I just saw this post at Daily Kos..

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/29/1000282/-Conyers-spills-the-beans-on-Obamacall-for-WH-protests?via=siderec

"At a press conference held by members of the House Out of Poverty Caucus Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich), the second most senior member of the U.S. House, was pointed in his criticism of the White House regarding jobs and cuts to Social Security the President put on the table last week. "We've got to educate the American people at the same time we educate the President of the United States. The Republicans, Speaker Boehner or Majority Leader Cantor did not call for Social Security cuts in the budget deal. The President of the United States called for that," Conyers, who has served in the House since 1965, said. "My response to him is to mass thousands of people in front of the White House to protest this," Conyers said strongly."

It wasn't the Republicans who called for cuts to Social Security...it was the president.

[ChiciB1]

44. Yes, I Think There's Another Thread Talking About This Here... I Keep

saying I'm speechless, but I keep RANTING!

[hifiguy]

34. Kicked and recommended!

:kick:

[Jefferson23]

35. I don't think what Obama is attempting is about bargaining, more in line with a give away. n/t

[Dappleganger]

36. k&r, Everyone needs to read this!!

[liberation]

38. Two things to note regarding Mr. Obama and this administration:

Remember when he said all those platitudes about Reagan during the campaign, and some here were trying to find all sorts of creative reasons as to why a Dem candidate would praise the patron saint of the GOP? Well, it turns out that as usual a cigar is just that: a cigar. And Obama did in fact admire Reagan, of note that he has not stated publicly (that I am aware of) a similar level of admiration for a Democratic presidential figure a la FDR for example.

And the real important issue: Zeke Emmanuel (Rahm's brother) went on the record during the initial days of this administration (early 2009) citing that the two main policy issues for this administration were going to be the "reform" of health care and social security/entitlement. It is amusing to see how the manufactured crisis and narrative have followed, basically as if they had been planned from the get go.


I mentioned the Reagan fiasco, because I have read (in this site and elsewhere) plenty of people trying, rather desperately in some cases, to insist that Obama's actions or words means something different, or that there is some kind of doubleplusperfect chess game going on in which the masterful plan will be revealed in the end, and that it can't be revealed to us lesser souls for we lack the capacity to grasp such level of genius. And in the end, it may turn that as usual Ocam and his razor were right all along: a cigar is just a cigar...

[madfloridian]

39. "basically as if they had been planned from the get go."

Yes, I think so. I believe it has happened as planned.

[chervilant]

65. Well,

there ARE a few of us who retain our critical thinking skills.

Occam would have had a field day with the Obama sycophants...

[madfloridian]

41. Our own party offered us up to the extreme right wing.

I can not wrap my head around that at all.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/29/1000282/-Conyers-spills-the-beans-on-Obamacall-for-WH-protests?via=siderec

[louslobbs]

43. Excellent post .

K&R
Lou

[on point]

45. Are we witnessing the destruction of both parties?

The extreme right wing has been taken over by an even more extreme and crazy right and have proven yet again they are too delusional and incompetent to be in government.

The democratic party in its move ever further to the right, especially in Obama and the blue dogs, now occupies a space to the right of the Rockefeller Republicans.

The real democrats left behind by their party and the progressives need a new home as the democratic party has clearly betrayed them. The independents also see the clear need for someone else other than the repuke loons.

Both groups want the agenda by huge majorities in the 70+ % range to be

Cutting military spending
Increasing taxes on the rich
Cutting corp tax breaks
Single Payer / public option health care
A Keynesian jobs program (even if they think of it as just 'more jobs')

These things will significantly improve our financial situation and we all agree that getting our debt back down in the long term is a good thing.

Have both parties completely foundered on the rocks here and the time is not only ripe for a new parties but that the country desperately needs them?

[hulka38]

63. I've believed for a long time now

that priority #1 for progressives is to pry control of the Democratic Party away from the DLC. The DLC, as long as it is in control, will not allow the GOP to be skewered with the truth.

[chervilant]

67. hmm...

More to the point, the vast majority of both parties are now aligned with the Corporate Megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics, and our global economy. For these obscenely wealthy hedonists, hegemony is sacrosanct. They will use EVERY means available to safeguard their hegemony, including (but not limited to) destroying Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unions, and public education.

[suffragette]

46. Agree with this, but also add the bad bargain with G20

especially since much of the direction seems consistent with the restructuring changes proposed by them and associated think tank and Obama has already noted his "violent agreement" with these proposals (note the quote that follows refers to "between parties" in terms of members of G20 not our national parties):
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-obama-g-20-press-conference-toronto-canada

And because a durable recovery must also include fiscal responsibility, we agreed to balance the need for continued growth in the short term and fiscal sustainability in the medium term. In the United States, I’ve set a goal of cutting our deficit in half by 2013. A number of our European partners are making difficult decisions, but we must recognize that our fiscal health tomorrow will rest in no small measure on our ability to create jobs and growth today.

~~~


So I think this has really been an issue in which there is violent agreement between the parties. We have to make sure we’re not rushing to the exits too quickly and all at the same time. But we also have to be mindful that the debt and deficit levels that many advanced countries have right now are unsustainable and have to be dealt with in a serious way.

~~~


Even if -- the financial crisis made it much worse, but even if we had not gone through this financial crisis, we’d still have to be dealing with these long-term deficit problems. They have to do with Medicaid; they have to do with Medicare; they have to do with Social Security. They have to do with a series of structural problems that are not unique to America. Some of it has to do with an aging population. And we’ve got to look at a tax system that is messy and unfair in a whole range of ways.


See for more on this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1458909&mesg_id=1459213


Tony Blair just gave a speech with striking similarities, unsurprising since he favors these changes too. It's not long, read the whole thing:

http://www.theage.com.au/business/the-world-we-used-to-know-is-no-more-and-is-still-changing-20110727-1i08h.html


In the United State (sic) right now, and in the European Union, we have got major structural problems that we need to deal with. This financial crisis has exposed the need for us to change and tackle these structural problems, but it hasn't actually created it. It may have accelerated it, it's made it more urgent, but even if this financial crisis had not existed, even if the euro zone didn't have its challenges … there would still be a deep-seated need for long-standing and long-term reform. Underlying these issues are short-term questions whose credibility in my view radically depends on the long-term credibility of the measures to sort out the underlying problems.

When I look at the US, as we speak the US are trying to work out how they handle the budget and the debt ceiling they have at the present time. The truth is, President Obama, in my view, is absolutely right to say this ought to be a big plan that is for the long-term. But it's also got to be one that deals with some of the entitlements, some of the issues to do with tax, reform, change - which are hugely important as to whether even if you get over the short-term issue of the debt ceiling, you're taking the long-term measures necessary to put the economy in good shape.

And in Europe, the truth again is that the eurozone crisis has not created the need for change in Europe. The need for change in Europe has been there for a long time. What it's done is concentrate our minds on doing it. And that means alongside monetary union we have to have fiscal coordination. We cannot continue with a social model in Europe that was fit for the mid to late 20th century but is unfit for the challenges, the demographic, education and otherwise of the 21st century. What that means for us in Europe, whether we like it or not, is there is going to be fundamental change to things like pensions and welfare and public services. So those reforms are going to have to be taken on by the current generation of leaders. I know from personal experience how hard it is to reform any system. My experience of change-making is that when you first propose a change people tell you it's a disaster. When you're making it, it's absolute hell, and after you've made most people assume life was always like that. That's the rhythm of it, and it's tough to do. I know in Australia you've got the resource base of the economy, and that is immensely important. But even with that base, the fact is for modern economies like ours, it is going to be up to us to create the circumstances in which we are managing that process of change and transition, and educating our people for the world in which they are going to live, which has that process of change at the heart of it.

~~~

The agenda for government is going to shift from very heavy bureaucratic, old-fashioned monolithic systems of public service provision. It's going to go more towards empowering to a strategic concept of government, rather than a concept of a government producing and delivering things for people.


Stumbled on the following site when looking up some info on G20. http://www.oecd.org
Found the following report interesting. Haven't made my way through all of it yet, but here are some sections related to above. Note - much more there. Be especially sure to see chart that last paragraph quoted is from:

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/35/30/46390343.pdf

How could structural reform contribute to fiscal consolidation?
While budget positions vary greatly within the G20, countries have reiterated their commitment to the fiscal consolidation targets established at the Toronto Summit, including at least to halve budget deficits by 2013 and to stabilise or reduce government debt-to-GDP ratios by 2016.

~~~

By the same token, policies that would encourage private saving in deficit countries, such as the United States, by for example scrapping income tax deductibility for mortgage payments or shifting the personal income tax further to a consumption base, would have an influence on the current account.

~~~
As for employment-friendly policies, the simulations suggest that there is much gain in alleviating the tax burden on labour income. For example, an alignment of labour tax wedges among the advanced countries of the G20 to the level of those countries with the highest employment rates could raise employment rates in the reforming countries by close to 3.5 percentage points on average in the long term. The simulations also show that employment rates could be raised by reforming unemployment insurance (reducing the replacement rate of unemployment benefits), raising spending on active labour market policies for the unemployed and reforming pension entitlements by raising the standard retirement age and moving pension systems to actuarial balance.

~~~

Pension reform
Move to actuarial neutrality (implicit tax rate set to zero) in 2011 and increase in standard retirement age over 2011-2015
Australia, Canada, Germany, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, United States, EU



Note the use of similar key words, especially in regard to "structural problems" and "structural reform" or restructuring.

[blkmusclmachine]

48. It takes a while to drown America in a bathtub. It also takes a lot of willing participants.

n/t

[madfloridian]

49. Indeed.

I still find myself amazed that it is a Democratic administration that is perhaps bringing Norquist's dream to fruition.

[grahamhgreen]

50. "To be blunt, progressives have to pick a fight with their own party." Better that the leaders start

to enact our real solutions to the countries problems - what they're trying aint workin'.

[XanaDUer]

51. It is very very disturbing to me to see a Democrat president

mouth BS that sounds like it should be coming out of a Republican's mouth. What is up with that shit?

[defendandprotect]

52. Wm. Greider is the kind of democrat who should be in the White House -- !!

It was shocking when he betrayed core principles of the Democratic Party,

portraying himself as high-minded and brave because he defied his loyal constituents.

Supporters may hope this rightward shift was only a matter of political tactics, but I think

Obama has at last revealed his sincere convictions. If he wins a second term, he will be free to strike a truly rotten “grand bargain” with Republicans—

“pragmatic” compromises that will destroy the crown jewels of democratic reform.



And as far as "having no place to go" -- I think democrats are the right kind of people and will

hold onto their principles --

To be blunt, progressives have to pick a fight with their own party. They have to launch the hard work of reconnecting with ordinary citizens, listening and learning, defining new politics from the ground up. People in a rebellious mood should also prepare for the possibility that it may already be too late, that the Democratic Party’s gradual move uptown is too advanced to reverse. In that event, people will have to locate a new home—a new force in politics that speaks for them.

Unfortunately, I don't think America has ever really been political -- ordinary citizens don't

much discuss politics -- and I often listen in to conversations in restaurants/bars listening

for such discussion. It was happening when W was president -- but I think too many still have

absolute faith in the Democratic Party and a (D) president they would never expect to betray them.


Also note that Greider is also suggesting that there may be nothing left of the Democratic

Party -- after 20 years of Koch Bros. DLC infiltration of and influence over the party, I also

doubt it.

The question isn't only "what's left?" -- it's also "who's left?" --


We certainly didn't know who Obama was when we elected him --

And given the SILENCE of the Dem Party over decades on urgent and essential issues, it seems

we may have put a lot of Obama's into Congress -- !!!


We can, imo, rely on those who self select to inform us -- those like Rep. John Conyers --

and Sen. Bernie Sanders -- former Rep. Alan Grayson -- and the many liberals, like Greider,

who aren't afraid of telling truths that many would prefer not to hear.

We fail to listen at our own risk --

This won't all end with Social Security and Medicare -- we are on a suicidal track with Global

Warming and capitalism's exploitation of nature --

Any attempt to remedy that situation fails because of the control the OIL and COAL industry

have over our Congress/government --

and that is the same control which has brought us corporate/fascism and its destruction of

our economy -- unemployment -- attacks on safety nets over decades now.



Good luck to us all -- and THANK YOU, Wm. Greider!!

[defendandprotect]

53. As always, thank you Madfloridian -- and Wm. Greider -- !!

[soryang]

54. It was never "dollar for dollar"

It was more like 3 or 4 dollars for the rich, with more trickle down and supply side nonsense from his Chicago School friends from the NY Fed.

And it was Obama that put Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid on the table for his Friedmanite buddies from Wall Street.

[MissDeeds]

58. K&R n/t

[Overseas]

61. We Remember Herbert Hoover. We Remember It Didn't Work.

Because people were not working and spending.
We remember that when the private sector was hoarding cash and not creating jobs, more cuts did not help. They crashed the economy further.

Our people were ill and in pain and displaced from their homes. Painful budget cuts prolonged their suffering.

What saved and revived our economy were brilliant public works on a massive scale. We were dreaming about those infrastructure upgrade projects, rebuilding our nation with our fellow Americans, when we voted for the Democrats in 2006 and 2008.

We Democrats were supposed to know in our gut exactly how excellent good government can be. We take pride in government services like environmental protection and medical services for the indigent. We love Medicare's 3% overhead. We paid our Social Security Insurance and look forward to that safety net, since most workers' wages haven't risen in decades.

Our people are once again ill and in pain and displaced from their homes. We need an end to this Vampire Hooverian Approach. The Ryan Plan again.

No more Vampire Hoover.

I want green engineering infrastructure upgrade projects across our nation, and mass transit systems funded as fundamental to our national defense, community clinics for the indigent, cultural commissions for tourism big and small, environmental clean up projects, and lots of fabulous and arduous jobs.

We have seen good government and want it to function that well again.

[Doctor_J]

64. Yup. This is why I call him the Appeaser

I can't for the life of me figure out why he caves in, all the time

[libmom74]

72. I always love reading your posts!

This article nails it. I think this is why so many Democrats/Liberals are frustrated with Obama, compromise is one thing but there are certain principles that you never compromise. Obama doens't seem to have that line that he refuses to cross, nothing is sacred, even Clinton with his obvious moral failings drew a line and let the Republicans throw their hissy fit and shut down the government and they lost because of it.

[pam4water]

73. K&R

[FredStembottom]

74. Greider: someone I truly respect.

Have been reading him for decades(?) now. One of the people we weighed in my wife's and my decision to Depression-proof our family back in the early 90's with some fairly radical changes.

With the O admin..... it's all getting worse and more long-term than we planned. Electing Dems to power was to be our ending point. The point at which we would return to a more "normal" life. I am beginning to feel that we only successfully set up for the 2 of us and that our young adult children will not be able to enact a similar strategy and make it work for their families. Not to mention the friends and family members who followed more conventional "success" advice and have lost so much.

They need Democratic POLICIES!!!

:mad:

[Kaleko]

75. K & R

[certainot]

76. left can't frame shit as long as it ignores the radio- left orgs must fix the fucking radio

what left needs to get through their heads is that team limbaugh (think tanks) have a louder bully pulpit.

i'm not saying there might have been a way to repeat the cheney line that deficits don't matter and get that going, if he had and made it work, and the right though it was bad for them- ie. he was going to get a bigger stimulus, they would have mapped out a strategy and pounded out the talking points and messaged over it.

actually, asking for a larger stimulus, and or another one, was already fought out and won by limbaugh and sons- they, as lead for the rest of the media, determined that small stimulus was too big and unaffordable as is, just like the left let them determine single payer was no good.

and all because the left ignores those 1000 radio stations.

[madfloridian]

78. The right wing invested hugely in their media noise machine.

The left has never made that investment.

It's showing now.