You can't handled the truth: Cutting taxes doesn't cut the deficit

by: Paul Rosenberg

Fri Nov 05, 2010 at 10:30

In my previous diary, "Taxes in fantasy land", I combined a Rachel Maddow segment on the fantasy bubble of rightwing media with conservative-reported snapshot story about Tea Party fantasy beliefs about taxes and the size of government.  But later in her show last night, Rachel herself took on the topic of rightwing tax fantasies as a direct challenge to the main$tream media:

I am convinced this is a test. This is of test of whether we as a country can communicate rational around factual information. With all of the resources we devote to covering politics and with everything we spend purportedly to try to understand what's going on in Washington politics, can we explain and understand that the first thing being proposed by the new Republican majority in Washington is that we should tackle heart disease by cooking up a passel of deep fried cheese? That we should tackle the deficit by adding $700 billion to the deficit? That is what they want to do first thing.

Of course, this is a test that the M$M has been failing for 30 years now.  That's how long the GOP has been arguing--based on the cartoonish "Laffer Curve"--that cutting taxes will reduce the deficit, with spectarularly failed results:

The media has accepted this absurdity, despite it's unbroken record of refutation by reality for thirty years now.  Why should the media change now, just because Rachel Maddow points it out to them in single syllables?  Does she really tink they have functioning brains?  Apparently so:

This is empirical world. If you add $700 billion to the deficit to pay for rich people, you've added $700 billion to that deficit thing, which is not a way of making that deficit thing smaller. Thing plus 700 billion does not equal smaller thing. The announced first major policy initiative of the new Republican House of Representatives is to add $700 billion to the deficit. By extending the Bush tax cuts for the richest people in the country. they are trying to get away with saying this will reduce the deficit, not increase it. They are not telling the truth. I think we are all capable of understanding that. I think even with the media we've got, we are capable of understanding that a fried cheese diet is not a heart healthy diet. Why is the White House signaling they might be willing to go along with the Republicans on this instead of killing the Republicans on this?

You know, mindless repetition of outright lies worked for the GOP.  Could mindless repetition of the truth be an effective antidote?

Here's the full segment:

Paul Rosenberg :: You can't handled the truth: Cutting taxes doesn't cut the deficit

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Moral Fact: (0.00 / 0)
It does regular Americans no good to pay off this odious debt.

Default. Either by printing trillions of fiat dollars, or by a full-throated honest default.

The "left" (is there such a thing?) should be fighting to ensure that new money goes directly to people in the form of grants, rather than loans.

I prefer government hiring, rather than handouts, or a multitude of programs because the best social program is a good job.

Finally, Access Blogging, the goal of which is bloggers making rank in their coalition, is onanism. All that matters is the impact on real peoples' lives.

For the past 2 years I have sat back and watched "the left" entertain the notion that Obama represented actual change when it was nakedly apparent that he did not from even before the election of 2008!

Things are now worse (as predicted).

It's time for a return to the intellectual honesty and standards that characterized blogging on the left from 2004 to 2007. Tell the truth no matter the electoral consequences AND YOU WILL WIN!

Taxing the rich will hurt the economy? Baloney! (4.00 / 1)
Taxing the rich will hurt the economy? Baloney!

It is total hogwash that it affects small business investing!

By Jack E. Lohman

Let's make this real simple.

I was a small business owner for 25 years. If I wanted to add more jobs or invest in new technology, I did it with pre-tax corporate dollars, not by taking an enormous salary that would be taxed. I screwed the taxman by investing company dollars rather than personal dollars. End of story.

The argument today that taxing the rich will hurt job growth and the economy is pure BS. It will only hurt the economy of the rich guys who got huge salaries and don't want to give any of it to the government.

It might cost the making of one or two yachts, but tax increases on the wealthy will do more good than bad.

I don't blame them, though. They've seen how the politicians can bargain their taxes away, giving subsidies to other wealthy guys who help fund their elections. Bribery, yes! Get payola out of the system and see where government settles.

Small businesses are not investing or hiring because the politicians have destroyed demand for product by fostering the outsourcing of jobs of the people who once bought that product. The politicians were paid via campaign bribes to pass bills like NAFTA and CAFTA, and the country now must pay the price.

Companies who would not themselves tolerate such a conflict of interest internally, are more than happy to have politicians on their payroll externally.

So the rich guys give cash bribes to politicians to stand in front of the camera and lie about the need for them to keep their money, and then the Pols vote for tax cuts in congress. All while the real small businessmen that create jobs worry about keeping their companies afloat.

What else would you expect from a corrupt political system?

Jack Lohman


Open Left Campaigns



Advanced Search

Powered by: SoapBlox