Compromising Our Way Into Debt

Compromise. It’s what we all say we want out of our leaders in Washington.

But what is the current compromise on the Bush Tax Cuts? Well, not to resolve the issue, certainly. Better to simply kick the can down the road two more years – continuing to borrow money for rich people’s tax cuts, in other words – while at the same time extending unemployment benefits yet again.

How much worse could a compromise possibly be? Not only is it “Not 100% of What [Barack Obama] Want[s] or What the Republicans Want,” its really not anything that either side wants at all. For Democrats, its kicking themselves in the ass in two years time – when another election coincides with another vote on raising taxes – in exchange for a few extra months of unemployment insurance that is a practical vote of no confidence in their ability to lead. For Republicans, its a capitulation on unemployment insurance in exchange for a continued higher national debt.

On the other hand, there is no scenario under which taxes increase that doesn’t make Democrats look bad as the majority party. Paul Krugman‘s idea of letting everything expire and then letting the Republicans try to talk their way out of it ignores the fact that this is precisely what they’re good at.

The dysfunction in Washington seems to have no bounds whatsoever.

By Tommy Belknap

Owner, developer, editor of DragonFlyEye.Net, Tom Belknap is also a freelance journalist for The 585 lifestyle magazine. He lives in the Rochester area with his wife and son.

2 replies on “Compromising Our Way Into Debt”

Speaking for myself and like minded individuals, I am happy that the unemployment benefits were extended and not overly upset that the taxes on “rich” people will not be raised. My sense of fairness tells me that both are the right thing to do. Two sets of people, in theory both hard working, were set to be punished – not a good thing.

The only way to get the deficit under control is to focus on reduced spending – by either cutting the number of federal jobs or by reducing the rate that these workers are paid.

Hey, ElmerJK! Thanks for commenting.

I’m not broken hearted by either event, myself. My point is simply the theater of economics when all either side wants to do is score a political point. They both talk a good game about their ideologies, but when it comes right down to it, they just walk away with goodies for their constituencies and call it a victory.

I’ll haggle with you on the last point, though: Medicare is where deficit reduction is at. And health care reform, which is pretty much the same thing.

Comments are closed.