Amity Shlaes on 2010 vs. 1932

{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }

ponce July 11, 2010 at 10:20 pm: Do the Bush tax increases kick in this year?

Reply
Darrell July 12, 2010 at 12:58 am: The Bush tax decreases expire this year. The Obama Tax Increases kick in this year. Not a matter of semantics, but a good measure of ponce’s willingness to tell the truth. Anyone within arm’s reach of ponce? You know what to do.

Reply
Texan99 July 12, 2010 at 4:51 am: It reminds me of the Queen Latifah bit in a movie whose name I’ve forgotten. She tells a girlfriend how her husband had explained it was her fault he was cheating on her. She picked up a knife and explained it was his fault she was stabbing him.

There’s often an essential confusion about the difference between criminal and victim, which goes along with an even deeper confusion about cause and effect.

Reply
richard mcenroe July 12, 2010 at 7:15 am: I stopped taking the article seriously after Amity blindly repeated the 10% unemployment mantra.

No one believes this. Anyone watching unemployment knows it is approaching 20% natinwide, and is already over 20% in states like California,when you count in all the people whose benefits have expired and simply disappeared from the government tracking system, as well as people who have simply given up looking for work. These are numbers Obama’s apologists were always eager to highlight for Bush….now,for some reason,not so much.

Factor in the seasonal unemployment smacking our kids in the face this summer, and the numbers are even worse.

Reply
ponce July 12, 2010 at 7:33 am: Bush signed the bill that increases taxes next year, Darrell.

Obama wasn’t even in the Senate when the bill passed.

Believing that Obama is somehow responsible for the upcoming tax increase is beneath even the most slack-jawed Limbaugh/Beck listener.

Reply
richard mcenroe July 12, 2010 at 7:56 am: Ponce if you were any more two-faced you could bite your own ears.

Bush signed tax cuts with an expiration date. It is the responsibility of this Democrat administration and this Democrat congress if they do not choose to renew them. No one else’s.

Reply
Texan99 July 12, 2010 at 8:13 am: Ponce has a point. If you believe a tax increase is a horrible and dangerous mistake, the right way to look at the Bush tax cuts is that they were inadequate because he didn’t successfully overcome the spite, envy, and ignorance that caused his legislative opposition to prevent the taxes from automatically staying in effect longer. Because any tax cut that requires later Congressional ratification to remain in effect is vulnerable to renewed bouts of spite, envy, and ignorance that will further damage the economy. Many of us believe that what’s been wrong with the Republican party for some time now is its inability to overcome obstruction of that kind.

Of course, if that shortcoming is a blemish on Mr. Bush, it’s an oozing sore on ponce and his fellow-travelers.

Reply
ponce July 12, 2010 at 8:20 am: It is a windfall, Tex.

No doubt the lackeys of the rich (the Republicans) will resort to their usual histrionics to save their masters the from having to pay a few extra bucks in taxes even as they fight tooth and nail to deny America’s unemployed extended benefits.

This will spotlight the differences between the two parties nicely for the upcoming election.

Reply
Texan99 July 12, 2010 at 8:55 am: You know what often doesn’t work well? Demanding money from people with the argument, “C’mon, it’s only a few bucks, hand it over.” Especially on a repeat basis.

Reply
I R A Darth Aggie July 12, 2010 at 9:28 am: Darrell, you are better man than I.

I wouldn’t have been nearly so polite.

I’m guess I’m just good.

Maybe ok.

Reply
Foxfier July 12, 2010 at 10:53 am: The jobless rate back then may have been 25%, but the 10% today is unemployment, not “jobless.” Even ABC news had to mention “the drop in unemployment is likely due to their unemployment insurance running out”, what, last week? (Radio news, so I can’t link.)

Reply
Foxfier July 12, 2010 at 11:31 am: (oh, and by the BLS’s definition, the classic bums who got odd jobs? If they worked at least one day in a week, for any amount of time, they were employed….)

Reply
Foxfier July 12, 2010 at 11:52 am: Year and a half ago.

They’d be using the November numbers, talking about how it might “jump” to 7%…and how the guy’s calculations make it more like 16.5%.

Reply

Cancel reply

Reply to richard mcenroe:

Amity Shlaes on 2010 vs. 1932

Search this site

Links and Things

Pages

Archives

New Posts

Site Admin