This is not exactly the Bernie message-who seems to think that anyone who has a few dollars is just a terrible person. He also made a great point: while yes, we do have some real problems in terms of economic inequality, there aren't many countries doing better right now.
Certainly not those in the EU system.
I've been ticked at Biden the way he allowed himself to be used as a cudgel against Hillary. He's said that wasn't his intention but who knows?
He did recently declare 'we don't need socialism.' Now that Obama has made it so crystal clear that he wants Hillary that might have changed Joe's tune as he takes his role as defending the Obama Administration very seriously.
If that's so, then he can't be a fan of Bernie.
And it's true that Bernie is going beyond saying that the rich must pay their share-which is true and that wages must be raised. He's demonizing anyone who has a couple of bucks. Today, his campaign manager went so far as suggest that it's a 'scandal' that donors were giving Hillary suggestions in terms of messaging.
This is just a donor meeting-every candidate has them. And why not? Is Bernie saying that those who donate shouldn't get a chance to speak with the candidate?
It's also not true that to fund his promises he can just tax the rich. It will require big tax hikes on the middle class as well. That's the choice. In Europe-which thanks to the euro system is far from a Utopia-the middle class pay much higher taxes.
So Biden may be redeeming himself a little-of course I haven't seen his whole interview yet!
P.S. Biden even says nice things about venture capitalists. What's interesting is that some big unions also make this point. Their axe with Wall St is simply that there is a fair division between capital and labor but they don't want to simply destroy capital.
If you want the difference between a Democrat and a democratic socialist it's in what Biden is saying-rich people need to pay their fair share but are not the devil and what Bernie says who says they are in fact the devil.
Certainly not those in the EU system.
I've been ticked at Biden the way he allowed himself to be used as a cudgel against Hillary. He's said that wasn't his intention but who knows?
He did recently declare 'we don't need socialism.' Now that Obama has made it so crystal clear that he wants Hillary that might have changed Joe's tune as he takes his role as defending the Obama Administration very seriously.
If that's so, then he can't be a fan of Bernie.
And it's true that Bernie is going beyond saying that the rich must pay their share-which is true and that wages must be raised. He's demonizing anyone who has a couple of bucks. Today, his campaign manager went so far as suggest that it's a 'scandal' that donors were giving Hillary suggestions in terms of messaging.
This is just a donor meeting-every candidate has them. And why not? Is Bernie saying that those who donate shouldn't get a chance to speak with the candidate?
It's also not true that to fund his promises he can just tax the rich. It will require big tax hikes on the middle class as well. That's the choice. In Europe-which thanks to the euro system is far from a Utopia-the middle class pay much higher taxes.
So Biden may be redeeming himself a little-of course I haven't seen his whole interview yet!
P.S. Biden even says nice things about venture capitalists. What's interesting is that some big unions also make this point. Their axe with Wall St is simply that there is a fair division between capital and labor but they don't want to simply destroy capital.
If you want the difference between a Democrat and a democratic socialist it's in what Biden is saying-rich people need to pay their fair share but are not the devil and what Bernie says who says they are in fact the devil.
ReplyDelete"Biden is saying-rich people need to pay their fair share but are not the devil and what Bernie says who says they are in fact the devil"
Well trying to convince them that their "fair" share is more than they are already contributing is a losing argument....... that should be obvious. Expecting that they will somehow come around and realize how much good they could do for the overall economy by allowing themselves to be taxed more so the govt can spend more is believing in unicorns. Of course the root of this ignorance is the idea that we need federal budgets to be balanced, every dollar spent must be collected in taxes. Get rid of that stupid mindset and we are on our way to actually solving this without coming across as wanting to punitively punish rich people for being successful.
We don't need to raise taxes on anyone in order to have single payer and free college. I should say it this way I suppose...... we don't need to calculate how much to FIRST raise taxes in order to have the money to pay for these things, we simply pay for these things and if we find inflationary pressures to be too high, then we target taxes at areas best able to mitigate the inflation
Unfortunately in our current setup the people who have almost everything under their control, and refuse to let go of enough in order to make the rest of the system stronger, are the devil. They are driven by an irrational ideological hatred of "public goods" and are willing to let a lot of people go hungry, homeless and underserved medically to make their point.
If we're going to get into the whole complex MMT thing in the middle of a political campaign-not my inclination-then by this definition you don't even have to tax rich people at all.
ReplyDeleteThis would then be the best news of all for them. They ought to just say 'You don't need to tax us, just say 'It will be done' 'and there will be free college, single payer, and every other good thing in the world with no taxes.'
What I'm saying is that if we don't need to tax anyone the rich should all just become MMTers.
But of course, it''s not quite as great a gospel as all that as taxes have to be raised to control against inflation. So there are still obstacles in place to just raising $15 trillion if not more in spending in the next 10 years with no one's taxes being raised.
In the MMT theory, though, there's no more reason to criticize the GOPers who want tax cuts to a similar extent as Bernie wants to raise spending by.
Wy not just cut all taxes on everyone to zero and spend as much as possible on all felt social needs?
Delete"Unfortunately in our current setup the people who have almost everything under their control, and refuse to let go of enough in order to make the rest of the system stronger, are the devil. They are driven by an irrational ideological hatred of "public goods" and are willing to let a lot of people go hungry, homeless and underserved medically to make their point."
ReplyDeleteBut far from all rich people believe this. Many are willing to actually pay more taxes. But even these folks are demonized as being 'wealthy donors' when they are trying to support Democrats who will raise their taxes and do more social spending
He never makes any distinction. This is why I say he demonizes rich people.
Yesterday on Twitter there were some Bernie supporters now making a big deal that some 'Wall St donors' were giving her campaign advice. Donors are always able to speak to candidates.
I have a little money now and was considering putting up the $2,700 grand to meet with the Clintons. Now I guess I'm somehow doing something evil in St. Bernie's mind.
Even if you support a candidate you should never be allowed to meet with them ore speak with them.
So I see Biden's comments as welcome.
"Wy not just cut all taxes on everyone to zero and spend as much as possible on all felt social needs?"
ReplyDeleteHmmmmmm, I expected a little more from you Mike, not some straw man. This whole election is consuming you man. Maybe you need to take a break from it.
I'll take a break when it's done and I don't have to hear all this smug talk of 'Feel the Bern.'
ReplyDeleteWhen Hillary has taken her rightful place at the top of the 2016 Democratic ticket. Before that I won't be able to take a break.
I apologize. Greg. You've always been a good friend and great reader but we are on opposite sides on this primary.
I get it. But it's how I feel.
Nanute I suspect is with you which is why I haven't heard from him in six weeks at least either.
Indeed this has happened with a number of my prog friends on Twitter as well.
ReplyDeleteWith some of them we never talk anymore which is a pity.
However, I have met a lot of great Hillary supporters.
I like Hillary supporters as they aren't so absolute about everything. Everything with the Emoprogs is a litmus test. You do this you're not a True Progressive, you say that you're not a True Progressive.
These are the same folks who used to hang out at Jane Hamsher's Firedoglake and wanted to primary Obama in 2012.
Once they are defeated I will be in a better place I guess.
Bottom line Greg, it isn't personal. I don't want this to come between us, but I feel very strongly about this.
ReplyDeleteHe is the wrong choice for the Democrat party and I am going to argue for what I believe in very strongly
Again, after primary it will be different.
No hard feelings Mike, just surprised you tried to take my comment and essentially dismiss it with the "Lets just not tax anyone then", its equivalent to "why don't we just pay everyone exactly the same" in response to people wanting to do something about income inequality. Not a thoughtful response. You are usually less superficial.
ReplyDeleteI'm not against Hillary Im just not a strident supporter, I have my doubts about her. Not about whether she CAN do the job but whether she should do the job. I don't have any Bernie signs in my yard either btw. I have my reservations about him as well. Right now though he is the only one bringing the OBSCENE inequalities of the system to light. I hope he never shuts up about them. Capitalism does not have to have the end points we've reached. Everyone else either wants to dismiss them (the repubs) blame them ON the govt (repubs) or fiddle around the edges by begging the power brokers to just be nicer (Hillary/Obama).
We didn't get a strong middle class for 25 years by "market forces", it came about by policies designed to increase wage share of workers and abilities to negotiate fairly. Plus there were not burdensome debts thrown on people just to get job training and a place to live.
I just don't have much to add to most of your posts. I get a kick out of some of Toms comments and his visions for the apocalypse for the rpeub party when the factions finally have it out (It is inevitable for them when your mindset is for having a more exclusive club you will eventually find fault with everyone else) I just cant do the inside baseball type politics 24/7. It gets tedious and becomes like CNBC talking about the stock markets.
later
I just think what Bernie would do would be to split the Dem party. We saw something like this in Maine where Emoprogs insisted on a True Progressive and the Center Left and Left split the vote and Paul Lapage won twice.
ReplyDeleteThe main problem now is the stagnation in wages. She has put forward proposals that I think will do a lot to help.
I get that you can't please everyone.
Tom's comments about the GOP destroying itself was much funnier when I wasn't concerned over the Dems. Once the primary is over and she has won I'll no doubt write about other stuff.
If you followed me over the years-as you have-you'll see that I focus on where I think the important news is.
For me the debate over monetary and economic policy are less important right now than the primary.
I find I can't focus on anything else-even the Super Bowl came and went with little excitement for me.
Yet, there is the real worry that maybe the economy is slowing down now-hopefully not. The political ramifications of that could be terrible.