Monday Musings: February 8, 2010

Watching the Sunday morning round of political shows, I listened to Alan Greenspan deliver his whiskered old dogma that lowering taxes would certainly help bring the economy out of its funk. Then, an ad came up for the woman who would like to replace Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, Sue Lowden.

Sue is an all American success story.

Family from the old sod that came to American to work in the coal mines. Sue bused tables in New Jersey to take the runner up place at the Miss America pagent, and fly off with Bob Hope on a USO tour.

Or something like that. It’s the same old political ad.

Her plan for success in Nevada: lowering taxes.

I wish it were that easy. Simple cause and effect.

This whole tax thing confuses me. I mean, people from all over moved to Nevada because the taxes were so low.

How much lower can you go? The current governor, Jim Gibbons, a fierce opponent of taxation in all forms, is about to send the entire educational system of Nevada over a cliff. He apparently is a fan of how California bankrupted their school system in the hot pursuit of tax relief, and what a roaring success that’s been.

Lowering tax rates can be a good thing - depending on a complex number of factors, in a messily diverse inter-related web of relationships. To apply simple cause and effect to this is naive at best, or cynically disingenuous at worst.

According to some experts, a tax cut does not necessarily help or hurt an economy. You must consider what the revenue from those taxes is being spent on before you can determine the effect on the economy. Such as two wars that we can’t win, but neither Sue nor Alan Greenspan mentioned that.

I mean, if a tax cut is simply directed at one large industry, the cut might be good for their bottom line, but lousy for the economy as a whole. Take takes off the back of one part of the society - much like Prop. 13 in California years ago, and it can turn into an object lesson about unintended consequences.

The Tea Party folks also seem to like focusing on the ‘big picture’ of ‘everybody just knows that lower taxes are good. Period.” This seems kinda superficial, and well, begging larger issues. They prefer to discuss the theoretical, what the founders woulda, coulda done rather than homing in on real world examples to support their case.

Conservative think tanks, like the Cato Institute, try to draw parrallels between tax cuts and how the economy performed during this or that administration. These claims don’t really hold up in that they don’t refer to principles of reason and science - and perform due diligence experiments to test the hypothesis tax cuts do improve the economy. Can they point to an absolute proof that says lower taxes benefit economies under all or any circumstances?

Probably not.

Here’s the bottom line, when you hear Sue Lowden - or Sara Palin - beating the Tea Party drum for tax relief, don’t they owe America some hard specifics - verifiable proof -  to support this taxation premise?

Or, is the very sound of their voices, telling us what ‘just sounds like it ought to be true’, enough for us?

A side note on Taxation here in Nevada.

A few, mostly Progressives, are calling for an intiative that would adjust taxes imposed on mining - really big deal here in Nevada - that might be more in line with the real world rather than the 1800’s. This is particularly important since the state is in the hold for nearly $1 billion.

The true believers - the lower tax folks, like Sue and Sara (hey, that could be the seed for a song!) say this would certainly be wrong. The Canadian mining companies would surely go elsewhere - and take those huge mines with them.

Here I go, I have another silly question. Since when is it patriotic or even sensible for American taxpayers to subsidize foreign corporations - like the CANADIAN mining companies operating here in Nevada for years?

Yup, let’s keep the money rolling on back to Canada. That’s sure to help the economy here in Nevada.

But, back to Sara.

Can anybody listen to this and tell just what the fuck this woman is talking about?

I mean, her lips move a lot and she drops the word ‘freedom’, ‘rights’ a lot, along with a lot of being ‘proud to be American’. She talks about terrorists that want to destroy America, but not much about what she’d like done about it. Specifics please? She mentions Reagan a lot. And talks about reasons to be fearful.

She talks, and talks, and talks. Much like she accuses Obama of doing.

Sara is long at mockery: “How’s that hopey-changey stuff?” Short on policy specifics unless resurrecting the ghost of Ronald Reagan past is policy.

But what did she say?

Oh, that “a professor of law” just can’t cut it as a Commander in Chief. (and the crowd goes wild!)

Yeah, a community college washout would be waaaay better!

People all over the world want to know “is Alaska still that beacon of hope.”

I think my head is about to explode.

She did, eventually, some up with real answers for the crowd, on the economy and national security:

“My plan is quite simple,” Palin answered. “To support those who support the foundation of our country when it comes to the economy. It is free-market principles that reward hard work and personal responsibility.”

And on national security: “It’s easy to just kind of sum it up by repeating Ronald Reagan when he talked about the Cold War, and we can apply it to our war on terrorism. We win; they lose. And we do all we can to win.”

There you have it. Doesn’t that just make your heart swell with pride? Or fear.

If you think Sara Palin is scary, read the results of a poll as explained by Reno Gazette-Journal writer, Cory Farley, about what the Tea Party set really does believe.

Finally, who can really complain about the Saints winning their first SuperBowl?

Now, I’m going to try and have a good week. 

You do the same.

maven

Update on Monday, February 8, 2010 at 08:11 by mavenandmeddler

This is what I get for becoming so disgusted that I walk away from one of her speeches: I miss the best part!!!

For those wanting to know more about the Wasilla Teleprompter, click here!

Thanks, Colin.

Comments

[ColinFromLasVegas]

I watched that whole Ms. Sarah Palin speech. I have to admit that I had to take a break three times and could not watch it all at once though. A man can only take so much, you know.....

I have three comments about it to add to what you said, Mave. If you'll indulge me.

First, at the beginning of her speech and somewhat towards the end, she kept looking over to her left at I guess were some veterans. She kept pointing them out and thanking them for their service.

Which is fine, but to me, it really seemed contrived, something that was suitable for her purposes in the speech and when she spoke, it just didn't sound genuine to me. It was more like she wanted to make sure that everyone out there knew that she waved the flag and they should join her and do it to, something to make sure that all in attendance were on her side.

As a retired Navy veteran, if this indeed was the reason she did this, I find it despicable and abhor it.

Maybe it's just me. But that's what I saw.

Second, besides the fact you pointed out that she was talking in vague generalities like a ClusterFox News pundit, it seemed as if she were talking down to the audience; as if she were talking to kids and that she must educate them in the right things.

"Now make sure you wear clean underwear. Because you never know when you end up in an emergency and have to go to the hospital. Oh! And don't wish for hopey changey stuff..."

Kinda dumb. Maybe I read that wrong too.

And lastly, a trivial thing. But I'm sure you will find it funny.

Ms. Sarah Palin HAD to make sure she threw out that teabagger bordering-on-the-trivial talking point of President Obama using a teleprompter. When she threw that in there, I immediately rolled my eyes. But teabaggers being low on intellect and fact checking, they loved it.

But then the most remarkable thing happened and was pointed out by the Huffington Post after her speech, Mave.

They have a picture of her at the lectern with her arms spread out, palms of her hands out towards the audience. Look on her left palm. SHE WROTE ON HER PALM IN BLACK INK! To make notes to herself.

And if you don't find that funny, this might though... She wrote five or six things. And the third one down, she realized she made a mistake. SO SHE DREW A LINE THROUGH IT!

In other words, Ms. Sarah Palin realized she made a mistake and went into a panic. Wait, wait! I can't clean my hands to erase it and start over. Because it will delete the other four or five things I wrote. And I'm not sure I can remember them to write them on my palm again. So, better just to draw a line through it. THAT WILL WORK!

Later on, during a question and answer period, you actually see her look down at her left palm before answering a question.

A commenter on the Huffington Post coined it aptly. He/she said that this from now on, will be forever known as.....(drum roll).... THE WASILLA TELEPROMPTER!