Dr.Jeffrey Sachs:Two Parties, No Solutions to Jobs

Retired Mizer

Star
Registered
This article explains why I am not enthused with either the president and his plan, or the Repubs and theirs right now:

With President Obama's speech on Monday and Speaker Boehner's speech yesterday, we can put the Democratic and Republican Party economic plans side by side. What is stunning is that neither side offers a serious diagnosis or a solution. The truth this time is not in the middle, a compromise of the two views. The truth, alas, requires a new view, and probably a new party.

The President's plan is another example of short-run gimmickry. The President wants to cut taxes in 2012 and raise them afterwards. The idea is to give a quick jolt to the economy, on the theory that the economy mainly requires a temporary stimulus to get it back on track. This is the same stimulus approach that has been tried since 2009. We have a learned the obvious: a series of short-term gimmicks does not add up to a long-term strategy.

The Republicans want a long-term strategy, but one that would take us in the wrong direction. The Republican mantra, repeated relentlessly since 1980, is that tax cuts and deregulation are the solution to growth and employment.

The Republican tax theory is simple: higher taxes reduce economic growth and job creation. Since government spending must be paid for with taxes, either now or in the future, cutting government spending is necessary for tax cuts and job creation.

The problem with the Republican position is simple: it's wrong. Government spending helps with job creation (and higher incomes) if the spending raises the productivity of workers. An economy without a public education system might have jobs, but they will be jobs digging ditches. An economy without a national science foundation might have jobs, but jobs at low wages selling the products of Chinese high-tech companies. An economy without interstate highways may have jobs, but they will be sweeping floors at a local restaurant rather than selling products to world markets.

Continued:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/two-parties-no-solutions_b_966637.html
 
The solution is fuck a job...The plan should be start groups that share wealth, spread money...that might sound drastic but it's basically what the stock market does it spreads wealth among connected, informed groups. The 21st century was suppose to be the "Information Age' when people connected by computers would get more access to knowledge and info that would help build wealth it didn't pan out for several reasons but the idea is still good.
 
Thanks for this.

I have come to regret that my undergrad concentration was not in finance, perhaps then maybe I would have a better idea what might actually work in these particular circumstances. I am one who tends to believe that most solutions probably lie somewhere between the various positions. But, even if that would be true, in what has become an extremely polarized climate, there is little evidence that even reasonably intelligent people can set aside their acrimony to reach compromise.
 
in what has become an extremely polarized climate, there is little evidence that even reasonably intelligent people can set aside their acrimony to reach compromise.

It's about controlling emotions, shaping opinions and perceptions that's one aspect of power and capitalism thats seldom discussed.. in public anyway lol.
 
It's about controlling emotions, shaping opinions and perceptions that's one aspect of power and capitalism thats seldom discussed.. in public anyway lol.

As much as I am a progressive partisan,the 2 party system as it is composed today is nothing but two sides of the same coin-both parties committed to their corporate benefactors while the solutions to the problems that everyday American face economically lie in direct contrast to what the corporations will allow our elected politians to do. We need to get rid of money in politics urgently! But here on the politics board you guys already know this fact!

 
The interest of corporations use to be the same as individuals 'What was good for the Fords or Rockefellers' used to be good for America. I don't know what changed personally I tend to blame Bill Clinton for everything thats wrong with the world today. I do think mass media and mass persuasion is the real culprit and Clinton used the Bully Pulpit like no other President to move a ego-manical agenda thats still unfolding.
 
The interest of corporations use to be the same as individuals 'What was good for the Fords or Rockefellers' used to be good for America. I don't know what changed personally I tend to blame Bill Clinton for everything thats wrong with the world today. I do think mass media and mass persuasion is the real culprit and Clinton used the Bully Pulpit like no other President to move a ego-manical agenda thats still unfolding.

I actually think it began with Reagan and continues on to this day,BUT- you are correct about how Clinton played a huge part in all of this fuckery. The some of the corporations low points since 1982 include lax regulation,overseas multi-national corporations growth, and this gem,the 1999 Financial Modernization Act aka the repeal of Glass-steagall, which harmful effects,accurately predicted by former Senator Byron Dorgan at the time way back in 1999:



 
Back
Top