Park Slope: The Blue Half of the Two Americas

DIBS;

Unfortunately, it seems that those who believe in free markets and free trade are in for a long winter ahead. Speaking as a conservative and a Republican, we have no one to blame but ourselves for this state of affairs. My blood boils when I think of how the Republicans squandered their opportunity for meaningful reform when they had both houses of Congress and the Presidency. I blame two people in particular: Tom DeLay, who lost sight of our principles and allowed the Congress to decay into a spending free-for-all, and George Bush, who, as nominal head of the party, didn't knock some heads to put a stop to it. He never exercised the power of the veto.

Now all we have to look forward to is watered-down socialism. I agree that the inevitable corruption will actually be helpful, in that we won't get all the government that the new Messiah envisions.

Polemcist: you are correct about Park Slopers. They are folks who feast on the architectual remnants of a time and ethos that is anathema to them. The self-contradiction in their thoughts will lead to paralysis. We are headed for another Jimmy Carter presidency.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2008 11:29 AM

Northsloperenter;

If you look at my post above, I don't hide from the fact that Republicans deserve to be taken to account. Having said that, your analysis is above is the stuff for cable-TV foodfights, not for a thoughtful discussion. In particular, your analysis of the credit bubble is way off the mark, in that it was a bi-partisan affair, which the NYT recently documented.

Who signed the law that deregulated the banks? Bill Clinton.

When the head of the Federal bureau that regulates commidities (a woman whose name escapes me at the moment) argued that credit derivatives ought to be regulated in the same manner, who went to "pay her a visit" and shut her down: Robert Rubin (a democrat), Larry Summers (ditto) and Alan Greenspan (republican).

The fact is that both parties have feasted off of cheap money, for different reasons. It will be interesting to see how they react in the years ahead.

I am dismayed that neither candidate had the political courage to give it straight to the American people. Both went around promising new benefits like candy, when both know full well that they should be preparing us for a new era of austerity. Neither called for sacrifice.

It is going to be interesting to watch, no matter who wins.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2008 12:16 PM

Bxgrl;

I disagree. I'm certain that he used the word "sacrifice" in a rhetorical sense. However, I am talking about a specific policy proposal, such as proposing a reduction in social security payments and the like. Not only has he not done that, but he is promising more entitlement candy to folks.

Social security and especially medicare are the 800 pound gorillas in the room. Unless something is done, they will consume the lion's share of the federal budget in just a few years. Few politicians want to touch this "third rail" truth of electoral issues, for fear of losing votes. In this regard, Obama is pretty much the same.

.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2008 8:32 PM

Snark Slope;

What in the world are you talking about?

Note the following report from the CONGRESSIONAL budget office:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/88xx/doc8877/Chapter4.7.1.shtml

The first sentence of the report states it all. For further confirmation, look at the section concerning defense spending as a percentage of GDP. It is at low levels compared to the cold war days.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2008 9:52 PM

Snark Slope;

If you want to rest your case on a statement that does not take into account inflation or the growth of the GDP, well, so much for the quality of the argument.

The fact of the matter remains that our defense spending as a percentage of GDP is at very low levels compared to most post-WWII periods, especially the cold war period.

It also remains a fact that SS, medicare and the interest on the debt consum more than 50% of the federal budget, and their share grows every year.

If you want to advocate that Obama should cut our defense spending down to levels of hostile countries like Russia, China and Iran, be my guest. I'm sure he'll take that advice and watch his level of support plummet. The fact is that is he is calling for an increase in our troops in Afganistan.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2008 7:21 AM