Skip to main content

Since POTUS is revamping his cabinet positions, it's time to replace an incompetent Tim Geitner with a nobel prize winning economists whose interests are apolitical.   Paul Krugman op ed in todays NYT is something the Dem Congress needs to seriously read and memorize.  He consistently demonstrates he has a better grasp on how to fix the economy than the politicians do.

Playing Taxes Hold ’Em

This is my favorite part.  

And there’s a broader lesson here. This is no time for a Grand Bargain, because the Republican Party, as now constituted, is just not an entity with which the president can make a serious deal. If we’re going to get a grip on our nation’s problems — of which the budget deficit is a minor part — the power of the G.O.P.’s extremists, and their willingness to hold the economy hostage if they don’t get their way, needs to be broken. And somehow I don’t think that’s going to happen in the next few days.
Here is my suggestion.  

Put the original proposal (NOT THE 2ND PIECE OF GARBAGE) back on the table and take it to a vote in the Senate.   If you can pass it in the Senate, the challenge will be getting it to a vote in the House.  If you can get Boehner to let the House vote on a passed Senate bill,  you might see some Republicans cross over.  


However, if they didn't pass it, the blame gets placed squarely back onto Boehner and his extremist party.  Considering that the public sees them as whacko out of touch extremists anyways   Republican Party Too Extreme, Majority Of Americans Say: Poll,  their lack of action will have a significant backlash against them.

Besides, I still think that letting everything expire and then starting over will be a much more effective strategy.  And apparently Mr Krugman agrees that a bad compromise is worse than no compromise at all.

From a business point of view, there is no incentive to invest as long as I can sit on my money and watch it grow and not pay any taxes on it.   It's only when I have to pay taxes on that money do I invest it in something tangible.  Perhaps the Dems should start by attacking the lie that people who make over $250K are job creators.   They are not.   This is another issue that Mr Krugman has consistently written about over the past few years.

Lastly, POTUS Obama apparently doesn't understand bargaining.  Instead of going up to 400K annually, he should have gone down to $150K annually so he could raise taxes on the members of the house.  I bet that would have gotten their attention.  

Perhaps it would be wise to replace Mr. Geitner whose background is trenched deep in corporate economics with someone who understands Economics for everyone.  Then perhaps they might have a chance to get a broader public support which could enable them to take back the House of Reps in 2014.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (19+ / 0-)

    Visit the Iraq Memorial Quilt @

    by pollchecker on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 06:38:19 AM PST

  •  been loving Krugman lately (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kharma, chicklet, Nica24

    thanks for this

  •  In the long run, maybe fiscal cliff ain't so bad. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WuChier, chicklet, Nica24

    A short tem contraction may be what is needed right now. Time to stop feeding defense as a growth multiplier.

    From fiscal year 2012 to 2013, federal tax revenue is expected to increase by 19.63%, while spending outlays are expected to decline by 0.25%.[1](table-1.6)[note 2] Relative to the size of the economy, these changes would raise 2013 tax revenue to 18.4% GDP, above its historical average of 18.0% GDP, while reducing spending to approximately 22.4% GDP, still above the 21.0% GDP historical spending average.[2]

    "If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

    by Kvetchnrelease on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 07:02:32 AM PST

  •  Probably wouldn't get a vote in the Senate... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Wino, chicklet, mightymouse

    But then the filibuster reformers could use that to highlight their need for reform in the Senate.  

    The NRA is the Gun Manufacturer Lobby. Nothing more. Their pontification about the second amendment is nothing more than their ad jingle. They're the domestic version of the Military Industrial Complex.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 07:03:33 AM PST

  •  Didn't Krugman turn Obama down last time (0+ / 0-)

    Krugman is at the pinnacal of his career right now, and maintains complete intellectual autonomy.  Unless he has higher political ambitions, why would he want to join any administration - it would inevitably require some level of compromise.

    Please, call me "Loris."

    by s l o w loris on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 07:10:03 AM PST

    •  For the good of the country (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      It would be nice to see someone put aside their personal ambition and do something for the good of the country.  It will only boost his career since it would be a 4 yr term.  We need a leader in the Department of Treasury.  Geitner is nothing but a corporate lackey uncapable of giving us any nuetrality at all and certainly not capable of doing what is right for the nation and not someone's career regardless of the field.
      Krugman has won a Nobel Peace Prize.  What's left but to do something challenging because it is the right thing to do at the time.

      Visit the Iraq Memorial Quilt @

      by pollchecker on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 07:14:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I read the article, thanks for the link (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    First you should know that Krugman does not want to be appointed to any position in the government, and he wouldn't accept it if he were asked. It won't happen.

    And the weird thing is that in the article, Krugman actually contradicts his own conclusion. Two paragraphs above the closing which you quoted, he says this:

    This means that any real deal with Mr. Obama would be met with mass G.O.P. defections; so any such deal would require overwhelming Democratic support, a fact that empowers progressives ready to bolt if they think the president is giving away too much.
    That looks like we are exactly where he says we need to be -- the power of the far right broken, and empowered progressives -- because any deal now needs them on board as the wingnuts have now taken themselves out of the game entirely. Maybe Obama' s offer in effect simply called their bluff and it forced them to reveal the fact that they were never going to vote for anything? How do we know for sure? Reality-based answer is, we don't know what he was thinking.

    But however we got here, this would seem to be the prefect time for a "grand bargain" -- whatever that is supposed to accomplish, to be made. Now, while Boehner can still call a vote and let the Democrats pass something.

    Probably that won't happen of course. Personally I have given up any idea of any deal -- readying for our paychecks to drop next month, ready for my brother's unemployment checks to be cut off and they are preparing to move in with other relatives because even their cheap house-sharing rental situation now will be unaffordable. Ready for things to get worse for a lot of people, and then see what happens next.

    But unlike most here, I'm not looking forward to those things happening, and I would be happy if the Democrats did somehow pass something that would avoid all that.

    Anyway, whether Obama actually knew this is where we would end up, and is a great politician, or if he's a bumbling fool and the wingnuts "saved him from himself" as Krugman claims -- I think will never be agreed on by all and people's opinions are entrenched.

    Personally I don't think either of those views is correct, and the truth is more in the middle -- Obama is smart but also somewhat naive and overly optimistic (by his own admission) but he's not a moron or a fool. And I don't think he's the devil or a republican.

    Either way, the outcome now is -- according to Paul Krugman -- more empowered progressives. At least for the moment. So I hope they somehow make something of their advantage.

    •  progressives aren't empowered (0+ / 0-)

      Because the Dems don't place value on the progressives in the same manner the GOP places value on the right wing nutcases.  
      The Dems have the attitude "where you going to go, who you going to vote for"?  The GOP's attitude is one of placating their base to keep them on board.  That's what happened in 2010.  The progressives didn't vote and the nutcases did.  You know the results.  
      Now the question is did the Dems learn anything as a result?  If they did, they won't make a bad deal.  If they didn't, they will give the farm away to make that bad deal for the sake of appearances.

      Visit the Iraq Memorial Quilt @

      by pollchecker on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 09:45:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site