[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: Answers before questions (click to view)
Date: March 10, 2009
Interesting piece by the conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer in last week's Washington Post. The money-line is when he describes President Obama's plan to deal with America's worsening economic crisis, a plan which Obama always pledges will involve heavy reform to the nation's education, environment, and healthcare regimes, as "greatest non sequitur ever foisted upon the American people."

There are many roots of the economic mess, Krauthammer writes, "but the causes of the collapse of the financial system does not include the absence of universal health care, let alone of computerized medical records. Nor the absence of an industry-killing cap-and-trade carbon levy. Nor the lack of college graduates."

It's good for the President to have a plan to address America's woes. But some cause-and-effect logic is required as well. At the end of the day a leader's first priority should be to solve the urgent problems of the present, not simply the more ambitious, long-term problems he may personally find most interesting.

There's a second story being alluded to in this toon as well:

Obama apparently most teleprompter-dependent president ever.

[CanadianJeff]

Or you know the politicians could do nothing at all about the economy except pass laws to prevent the bubbles (housing, inflation, etc) from forming again and let the free market sort things out with tax breaks for all to pump our own money into the system where we want it rather then government spending it all on our behalf.

Or you know we could deny common sense...

Give a man a few thousand dollars extra this year on his taxes to invest or spend and odds are your going to have a few billion of our own dollars pumped into the economy old school free market style.

[Psudo]

I don't know that frequent use of a teleprompter is a negative trait. It could be a fairly reasonable over-correction for the verbal guffaws of the Bush Administration. It's understandable for Obama to want to prevent such mistakes as a way of demonstrating he is not more of the same problem as the last administration.

Using teleprompters is thus fine. But Obama's dependence on them, if the allegations are true, is bad. It gives the appearance of your views being fed to you from calculating policy writers rather than coming from your own understanding and reasoning. It leaves you susceptible to an awkward stall in your communication in the rather likely event of equipment failure.

Is professionalism for independence a worthwhile trade?

[commanderkai]

Heh, one of the funnier comics I've read lately, thanks

[Kwyjor]

It was my understanding that a major cause of Americans declaring bankruptcy was a sudden medical emergency sinking them tens of thousands of dollars into debt. Would universal health care not serve to alleviate this? Lifetime student debts probably don't help much either.

[GenericHito]

Really? I haven't heard that anywhere. Where are you getting your information?

[Psudo]

I've heard of that happening, Kwyjor. It could be argued as part of the reason for the normal bankruptcy rate, but it's not related to the current economic crisis. It's perhaps a long-term issue, but definitely not the short-term emergency.

[Les-R]

Indeed.. the current crisis has to do with a general depression trickling down into the overall economy from investors opting-out of the capital markets due to a lack of confidence in the reliability and trustworthiness of the high-finance sector.

[Voyager]

I have borderline crippling asthma, and frankly, it's far more likely to kill me outright than it is to bankrupt me. The great total for a rather extensive prescription list is only about $100 USD a month. That would be a bit much if I were working for minimum wage, but if I was, I wouldn't also be living in LA, where the air is a toxic fume and you spend your days stuck in traffic sucking down tar and monoxide.

Personally, I'm more concerned that I'm going to end up with some bereaucrat on the opposite side of the country making decisions about things that are as individual as fingerprints, and can drop you in eight minutes flat.

[Taospark]

Kwyjor wrote:

It was my understanding that a major cause of Americans declaring bankruptcy was a sudden medical emergency sinking them tens of thousands of dollars into debt. Would universal health care not serve to alleviate this? Lifetime student debts probably don't help much either.

Student aid can only help so much. Even if you were to double the federal Pell Grant to $7,000 a year, that still wouldn't be enough to cover the $25,000 annual tuition at many top schools. (That's not even counting room and board.)

The real solution is to either better fund public colleges across the country or simply not go to colleges that overcharge tuition simply to subsidize non-educational costs like a $5 million dormitory or a $10 million sports program. Of course, that depends heavily on people actually going to colleges based on the quality of education and not how they do in March Madness.

[CKASlacker]

CanadianJeff wrote:

Or you know the politicians could do nothing at all about the economy except pass laws to prevent the bubbles (housing, inflation, etc) from forming again and let the free market sort things out with tax breaks for all to pump our own money into the system where we want it rather then government spending it all on our behalf.

Or you know we could deny common sense...

Give a man a few thousand dollars extra this year on his taxes to invest or spend and odds are your going to have a few billion of our own dollars pumped into the economy old school free market style.

Yeah, but that's assuming that people will actually *spend* the extra money (and spend on the local economy) as opposed to saving / travelling internationally, etc. Tax rebates won't do much good to the domestic economy if they're quickly shuttled away to a Caymans' offshore account, or spent on a 1st class trip to Paris, etc. But probably a bigger problem is people simply saving "for a rainy day" - and what with the doom and gloom of various economic forecasts you can't really blame anyone for saving a bit in case they're jobless in the near future.

From an ideal economic stimulus standpoint everyone would spend every penny they make and save zero. But that's not practical or advisable from a personal standpoint - and you could argue that our lack of personal financial responsibility is what got us into this mess in the first place.

[Psudo]

Saving money still allows banks to circulate money (unless you assume they're saving it in a jar buried in the back yard). And spending overseas gives foreign nations more liquidity, which allows them to import more goods from us. There are uses of money that don't help the economy, but I think they're less common than you portray.

My complaint about tax rebates has more to do with degradation of ownership than economic ineffectiveness. Why should our money have to pass through government's hands before it's officially ours?

[CanadianJeff]

I would agree with your Pusdo but tax breaks are the only way I can think of that you would get the money back into the hands of the people and into the economy without printing more money.

[commanderkai]

Psudo wrote:

My complaint about tax rebates has more to do with degradation of ownership than economic ineffectiveness. Why should our money have to pass through government's hands before it's officially ours?

I'd have to agree with you completely on this. I think that all these tax breaks and loopholes should be closed, for a lower tax rate. So let's say a middle class family pays (just choosing a number) pays 25% of their income as taxes, but they get 5% rebate due to their writeoffs, I'd rather have the tax rate lowered to 20% to keep the money circulating in the economy, and removing all loopholes and writeoffs that exist today (ranging from mass transit, to donations to charities, and whatever else)

[raydan]

commanderkai wrote:

I'd have to agree with you completely on this. I think that all these tax breaks and loopholes should be closed, for a lower tax rate. So let's say a middle class family pays (just choosing a number) pays 25% of their income as taxes, but they get 5% rebate due to their writeoffs, I'd rather have the tax rate lowered to 20% to keep the money circulating in the economy, and removing all loopholes and writeoffs that exist today (ranging from mass transit, to donations to charities, and whatever else)

I don't consider these 2 loopholes and write-offs.

If you remove the deduction for charitable donations, I wonder what effect that would have on the amounts they receive. People who give small amounts during the year may continue giving and not care, but the biggies may cut their donations.

I don't think people who take mass transit take it because of the deduction. Cut that one out.

Another thing, if you get a 1000-2000$ tax return, you're more likely to go out and buy a big ticket item. If instead, you get 20-40$ more on your pay each week, what will you spend it on. Booze, cigarettes and porno.