Permacarn’s Weblog

The current state of our economy is not one of enthusiastic confidence and unbridled investment. We’ve got significant debt as a nation that we’re all going to have to pay off for many years to come. But before we as a nation start paying it off, both presidential candidate’s tax proposals plan on adding to it for the next few years. John McCain the self proclaimed ”economically conservative Republican” is speaking out against his opponent Obama on the tax front. But the two candidates’ tax proposals and their projected consequences viewed side by side show that for a Democrat, Obama’s plan appears to be the one thats more conservative.

In a recent authoratative analysis provided by The Tax Policy Center stated that “Senator Obama’s plan would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt (including additional interest costs), while Senator McCain’s plan would add $4.5 trillion.

The analysis also showed that under Senator Obama’s plan revenues would total 18.2 percent of GDP in 2013 compared to McCain’s plan where the revenue yield would be 17.8 percent. A difference of .4 percent doesn’t seem like much, but when we’re talking GDP, that’s huge.

And while John McCain is pandering to Middle America saying that he’s in touch with what everyday Americans are experiencing when he lives in the lap of luxury with his millionaire heiress wife and says things like the drawdown of troops in Iraq isn’t important and that economists don’t know what they’re talking about, he doesn’t tell Middle America that his tax plan is designed to significantly benefit those in the upper-most income brackets. He doesn’t tell you that Obama’s plan is more suited to people who don’t make a significant amount of money.

John McCain has taken issue with economists. Primarily with ones who say that his gas tax holiday wouldn’t have a positive affect on the economy. At his most recent town-hall meeting hosted by Fox News, John McCain was quoted as saying of such economists “They’re the same ones, I guess, that didn’t tell us about the housing subprime lending crisis. They’re the ones that didn’t tell us about the dot-com meltdown. And they’re the ones that didn’t warn us about inflation that’s coming up.”

Actually, they did tell us about all those things. If John McCain listened to economists he would have heard a number of warnings.

The subprime lending crisis warnings have been sounding for a few years now.

“I’m one guy in a research department, but many people in our mortgage team have been
suggesting that there was froth within the market,” said Jack Malvey, the chief global
fixed-income strategist for Lehman Brothers. “This has really been progressing for
quite some time.”

Others on Wall Street echoed Malvey’s stance. “We’ve contended for a while that there
 was an issue in subprime debt,” said Neal Shear, global head of trading at Morgan
Stanley. “A year ago, we were aware that delinquencies were going to rise.”

It wasn’t that there were no predictions, it was that there were so many people who held
mortgage backed bonds that didn’t understand the risk and were blinded by earning high yields that it gave the market an appearance of doing OK. Many people (but not some economists) fell sway to the idea that if the market is doing well there is no problem.  

Regarding the Dot Com bust, there were plenty of warnings from some from the most influential men in American monetary policy. Warren Buffet and other economists including US central bank chairman Alan Greenspan warned of the dot com bubble as early as 1999 for Mr. Buffet and 1996 for Greenspan. It wasn’t that economists didn’t predict it. It has been argued that Mr. Greenspan didn’t take any action until late 2000 in an effort to provide the Democrats with political capital in the form of prosperous economic times.

And about the warning that inflation is going up, there were also numerous presages. In April of 2005 Policymakers at the Federal Reserve, as well as many other economists expressed some concerns about future inflation. It wasn’t that nobody predicted the rising inflation we’re experiencing. They DID predict the inflation we’re experiencing.  

Honestly, our country could benefit from a president who listens to economists.

While arguing his case for the gas tax holiday, John McCain called out Barack Obama on the gas tax holiday citing his votes in support of a gas tax holiday when gas was a dollar fifty a gallon. But had John McCain been listening to what Obama has been saying, he would have heard Barack Obama say that the gas tax holiday he supported was a failure and cost the people more than it benefited them. He would have heard Obama say that he has experience with this kind of thing and that what the economists are saying is right.

Dennis Kucinich issued articles of impeachment yesterday.

By the tone of his speach, Kucinich seems to know that the impeachment is unlikely to go through. It seems that his goal is to merely bring to the nation’s attention that the rhetoric coming out of the mouths of the most powerful people in the country only serves to weaken our national security. The articles of impeachment also serve as a reminder that it is up to the people serving the electorate in the House and the Senate to check the power of the Legislative.  

Hooray, Kucinich!

Obama has clinched the nomination after receiving the necessary 2118 delegates becoming the first African American to be a presidential nominee. Now all there is to do is convince Clinton to concede. At her speech, which some expected to be a concession, she announced that at this time she is not going to make a decision. But that doesn’t change the math.

Man it feels good to be right.

You can expect to see a lot more of this kind of thing happening in the coming weeks and months and years. McLellan says in his forthcoming book that the Bush administration “veered terribly off course” in Iraq. This from the man who stood in front of the press from 2003 to 2006 and defended the actions of the administration. Why would a man who worked so hard and for so long for the Bush administration wait until now to make known his feelings?

Perhaps it has to do with him trying to regain his credibility. In his book What Happened McLellan said that in October 2003 his assertion that Rove and Libby were not involved in the ouster of CIA operative Valerie Plame were untrue and that he had unknowingly provided that false information and points the finger of blame directly at the president and his closest advisors.

Look forward to Scott McLellan’s character assassination.

I enjoy the fact that I can surf around the community of weblogs on wordpress and engage in discussion and debate with people who share my views as well as those who completely disagree. I’ll even go so far as to put links to their blogs on my page when they reply to my comments, even if they don’t agree with me.

This evening I was reviewing some of the many posts and came across a site that, in my opinion and the opinion of actual sourced documents, had some of their facts wrong. So I went about the process of reading several of their most recent posts and made my comments in the same demeanor that they were speaking in. I responded to their accusations, reminded them of the indiscretion of their own candidates within the Republican party, corrected some of their atrocious grammar, and I even conceded a few points to them. Then the replies came. I though I might be able to evoke a debate that would evolve into something more than outrageous accusations, but the tone they maintain throughout their site remained. They even marked one person as spam just because they didn’t agree with what they had to say. No sooner did I discover this pathetic tactic did I realize that the comments I made on their site disappeared alltogether. I then looked over their site and found that their were actually quite few comments. Which could mean a few things; 1) they are a Nazi or communist and refuse to post comments that go against their political ideology or are weak enough to rebut, 2) they don’t have many people visiting their site (which would give me solace), or 3) people get to the site and because of their horrible grammar and writing ability their visitors are unable read or are given a headache upon doing so. I’m not exactly sure where they are from or what demographic they represent. Their use of the English language is weaker than some of the illegals that I worked with in the kitchens of the campus restaurant as a college student. Anyway, if you feel like getting censored by an ignoramous or reading titles that ALL end in exclamation points go to goodtimepolitics.com.

Ok, so I’m editing this post to include word for word this loons response to me calling him out.

Permacarn said 30 minutes ago:

Deleting comments and marking the comments of others as spam who do not share your point of view is pathetic. I wrote about why you suck at permacarn.wordpress.com

In these videos you’ll see the reason why no one should vote for John McCain.

You’ll also see and hear a few other interesting things.

This video shows how much McCain hated Bush after losing to him in the 2000 Republican primaries. But he still goes on to endorse him 5 times in a row. We also hear a familiar theme in the realm of spiritual advisors where George Bush is pressured to repudiate what pastor Pat Robertson was saying about a McCain vice presidency. McCain seemed quite upset when forced to say he wished not to be considered for vice president. I wonder how much different our country would be if McCain had been elected president in 2000, before 9/11. And doesn’t John King from CNN look young?

This video shows George Bush endorsing John McCain and McCain gratiously accepting and looking forward to campaigning with him once again in whatever capacity our busy president can muster. It will be interesting to see how little Bush actually campaigns as John McCain should seek to distance himself as much as possible from George Bush. But that’s pretty much impossible considering McCain endorsed and campaigned for George Bush… twice.

So after actively seeking controversial pastor John C. Hagee’s endorsement, then regretting doing so but being glad to have it, John McCain has decided it’s time to reject it. I wonder what exactly it was that drove McCain to do so? Hagee’s recent acknowledgement that Katrina was punishment brought down upon the people of  New Orleans for a gay parade of large scale (Gee, I didn’t know God had collateral damage when he’s divying out his wrath)? Or was it that Hagee believes Hitler was a messenger of God and killed all those millions of jews so that they could be sent back to the promised land of Israel?

I suspect this is going to upset a lot of Evangelicals who are fans of Hagee’s. I wonder how McCain is going to go about courting the Evangelical vote now. Maybe some other “agent of intolerance”?

Apparently it has upset Hagee enough to say “You can’t reject my endorsement… because I withdraw it!” He released a statement soon after CNN reported McCain’s rejection saying that he would remain outside of the 2008 election.

This video finally explains in a soft and fuzzy kinda way the malicious reason Clinton is still running.

I never thought I would see a video of Michelle Obama with Metallica playing in the background. But, there it is. True Republican BS.

So if you watch CNN or any other news network for that matter and have been paying attention to the Democratic Primaries in any way you’ve probably heard pundits report that alot of Hillary Clinton supporters are saying that they wouldn’t vote for Barack Obama if he were the nominee. So I wanted to come up with a way to explain to those people why they should just chillax for a minute and change their eagerly and overly resentful attitude. I doubt it will have much of an effect but perhaps will give pause.

So you’re in a group of people who combined have just the right amount of money to buy a candy bar and you’ve got a choice between three kinds. There’s the one you really like thats got all the good stuff in it you like. Then there’s the one thats kinda similar to your favorite, a few ingredients are different but the basic formula is still there. Then there’s the one you’re allergic to. You ate one a while back and you had a severe reaction to it. So you vote for the one you really like. But there’s a split decision in the majority of the group between your second favorite that has a few different ingredients and the one you really don’t like. Your favorite candy bar is no longer a choice and you’re foced to recast your vote for the two remaining. One of your friends whom you most recently got into a tiff with is on the side that wants your second favorite and is trying to convince the group to go for that one. They really don’t want that third candy bar. So out of spite you forget your allergic reaction and vote for your least favorite. The group that wanted the bad candy bar won it with your vote and you were stuck with a candy bar that makes you sick.     

So here’s the breakdown. Hillary Clinton is your favorite candy bar. Barack Obama is the candy bar that has a few different ingredients but has the same basic formula. Politically, the two are similar except on a few issues like Health Care and foreign relations. John McCain is the third candy bar that you had an allergic reaction to. The metaphorical allergies of which I speak are the policies of a Republican administration. The last eight years have been a true test of our nation and of its leaders and it appears our leaders have failed our nation. A John McCain candy bar (administration) would no doubt bring on the same allergic reaction you experienced in the past.

The tiff spoken of in this parable that you had with your friend was the Democratic Primary. Its been hard on all of us as Democratic voters to see the candidate we love to be spoken of badly. But thats no reason to go voting for the completely opposite thing that you know is bad when it comes to politics or candy bars.