The Case for Choosing Life

by: David Sirota

Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 09:00


Yes, I know you probably thought from the headline that this post is all about why you should be against a woman's right to choose - it is anything but. The phrase "choose life" may be conservatives' abortion shibboleth, but, as my new newspaper column today shows, it better sums up the economic decision communities all over America must now face when it comes to taxes, spending and budget deficits.

For the last week or so, I've been reporting on the state of the tax debate in places like Oregon, Colorado Springs and Pennsylvania (among others). Voters there - and soon, everywhere - are being asked to choose between tax hikes on the ultra-wealthy and massive spending cuts for basic social services. That is, they are being asked to choose between economic life and economic death.

It's the same choice Congress will be forced to make quite soon, thanks to President Obama's solid proposal to end George W. Bush's high-income tax cuts - but also thanks to his awful proposals to potentially ram Social Security/Medicare cuts through a commission and freeze non-defense domestic spending.

Colorado Springs and Oregon, in particular, provide the clearest examples of what the tax reform-versus-spending-cuts choice means in real-world terms. The former is - at least in terms of basic social fabric - on its way to becoming an economic dystopia straight out of a post-apocalyptic sci-fi movie, the latter just voted to try to avoid that same fate.

As I said, the choices those two communities have made are going to confront each of us in some way at some point soon, regardless of where we live. The budget challenges are real and they are geographically unavoidable. Here's hoping we make the right choice - the same choice we made in the early 1990s when during a recession we modestly raised income taxes to preserve some basic social services, and ended up creating a budget surplus and a solidly-growing economy.  Here's hoping we make the same choice - the choice of economic life and not economic death.

Read the whole column here.

The column relies on grassroots support -- and because of that support, it is getting wider and wider circulation (a big thank you to all who have helped with that). So if you'd like to see my column regularly in your local paper, use this directory to find the contact info for your local editorial page editors. Get get in touch with them and point them to my Creators Syndicate site. Thanks, as always, for your ongoing readership and help contacting local editors. This column couldn't be what it is without your help.  

David Sirota :: The Case for Choosing Life

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
This is the core issue as I wrote about before: "Quality of Life versus GDP in America" (4.00 / 3)
Right now we are still solely focused on GDP at the expense of Quality of Life. It is not that GDP is unimportant. It is that GDP can not be the sole factor in the economic health of a nation.

France recently has embraced a shift for accounting for GDP by including additional indicators of the state of its economy:

"France's president on Monday urged other countries to adopt proposed new measures of economic output unveiled by a panel of international economists led by Joseph Stiglitz, the US Nobel Prize winner."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1af2... 11de-a88d-00144feabdc0,dwp_uuid=0e3b4494 227d11dd-93a9-000077b07658.html

There are concerns about GDP:

"Increasing concerns have been raised since a long time about the adequacy of current measures of economic performance, in particular those based on GDP figures. Moreover, there are broader concerns about the relevance of these figures as measures of societal well-being, as well as measures of economic, environmental, and social sustainability."

http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitous... ndex.htm

http://mydd.com/users/bruh3/po...

If the U.S. were to embrace a more complicated view of its economic life in the public, then issues like those you describe would be easier to address. Because we are forced to push complicated ideas into simple frames, we can not address quality of life. That's my theory.


Good stuff and spot on, bruh... (0.00 / 0)
Our GDP number is whacked. Our productivity number is whacked due to off-shoring. So we send jobs overseas and because of labor arbitrage, that shows up as an increase in productivity and so on...

I haven't seen the details of this months BLS, but judging by the hedline I'd guess these are totally fudged numbers.

We're not creating jobs. There are more unemployed people (over 15 mil) than there are total manufacturing jobs (less than 11 mil).

Down the Wabbit Hole we go....

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
The blame is all to the fed but not to the states. (0.00 / 0)
Great article David!

The Administration and Democrats en masse have been so unwilling to offend the Right they've lost the offensive and keep getting driven back over the cliff, unable to ever counter the tea-bagging/Right-wing hype hype.
In fact, more than 30 states have raised taxes since January of 2009 yet nary a peep out of 1 Republican nor were any media comparisons done, but one. The NYT had a great piece last year proving how salient your point is:

"while the stimulus had undoubtedly helped states, the cutbacks and tax increases at the state and local level threaten to offset much of its economic impact.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09...

Unless the Dems toughen up, and get to the damn point, the tea-baggers can have them.

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.


[ Parent ]
Indeed (4.00 / 1)
The Dem leadership isn't willing to offend the righties for one reason: they both share the same neo-liberal ideology. The only real differences between them lie in manners and such surface qualities.

As it exists right now, the neo-liberal regime in DC is very much buy-partisan. There are a lot of non-neos in the House Dem caucus, but sadly they aren't in leadership positions. So this is why I refer to leadership specifically. No sense in lumping in the Grayson's and Weiners, eh?

All the partisan hysteria, or most of it, is just kabuki to distract people with on cable. When leadership of both parties subscribe to an ideology which demands low taxes on rich people, dismantling the New Deal, high poverty, homelessness and unemployment rates... it's pretty much  a lock as to where policy is going to go regardless of what comes out of the White House press office.

But now we have two examples of paths to take: Oregon and Colorado Springs. Both entities made their decisions almost simultaneously. One seeks to improve living conditions and it's economy, while the other seeks to establish the kind of neo-liberal dystopia that would make Milton Friedman blush with envy.

So two very different paths are going to play out for all to see. And soon.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
"choose between tax hikes on the ultra-wealthy and massive spending cuts for basic social services." (0.00 / 0)
The problem is that the Republicans are talking about increasing taxes generically, and I suspect that most people listening to them are not hearing the "on the wealthy" side of the proposal. Since Reagan, who was one upped by Bush II, the wealthy have made out like bandits on the tax schedule. Wealth inequality continues to increase.

But the average taxpayer, Repuhlicans and Democrats alike, is not hearing it. The Democrats, in particular, seem to have a communication problem with the public in that tax hikes means tax hikes for everyone. In any case, that's how the Republicans are treating it when they address the issue, and they are getting away with it.


We need someone like Frank Luntz (0.00 / 0)
Who helps us invent a phrase like, "Billionaire Revenue Gains" or such to sell this tax hikes.  Of course, Frank Luntz and the like all work for the billionaires already ;)

[ Parent ]
Well, the "Bonus tax"... (4.00 / 2)
...sure is a step in that direction! This really should be pushed through, as long as bankers are unpopular.

[ Parent ]
We have Lakoff. (0.00 / 0)


"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates

[ Parent ]
Do we even have a working DNC anymore? (0.00 / 0)
I see what's-his-name at events, but haven't heard a peep out of him.

I have a slogan suggestion that came from a Republican in Louisiana and may serve at least the Progressive's well to help stop the public perception that Dems will give away the treasury. How's this:
"[Progressives offer] a hand up, not a hand out."
;]

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.


[ Parent ]
The Dem leadership also made out under those tax cuts (0.00 / 0)
... since they are all very, very rich. So they don't want to raise taxes on themselves, for the most part. There are a few exceptions, but they are exceptions. Is Obama going to want to pay taxes on his newfound $200 Million (just guessing, based on Clinton's $100 Million plus "inflation of favors") when he leaves office? Somehow I doubt it.

The tax increases will come, but they will be regressive taxes. Since part of the economic agenda is to destroy the middle classes, this only follows.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
Bravo--It has needed to be said for a long time (0.00 / 0)
Terrific, a 'case' description of conservative Utopia: based on I've got mine and I want yours [your tax money].

This is a great topic. (4.00 / 1)
I'm increasingly of the opinion that the solutions to these problems are not going to come from DC. So the more people are willing to take up the mantle of economic sanity on the state and local level, the better off those people will be.

State and local tax burdens are so low on the upper classes there's a lot of room to fiddle with rates. DC doesn't see the tent cities, the homelessness and the public health crisis. They only see their own bank account statements FedEx'd in from the Caymans.

I for one would be greatly heartened to see a lot more localized efforts, since that's probably the only way some of these problems are going to be addressed in a constructive manner.

Colorado Springs will always choose the dystopian option--it's culturally ingrained with them. But they are a special case, as anyone who's spent time there will attest. Perhaps Oregon's example is more representative. I mean, that's an anti-tax state that just voted en masse to help themselves, rather than waiting for the DC ruling elites to start acting like decent human beings.

They will be glad they did.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox