Patterico's Pontifications

The idea is that when the private sector withdraws from the economy by cutting back on capital spending and laying off workers, it is up to the government to take up the slack, if necessary via deficit spending.

The idea is that Baracky wants to go on a dirty socialist spending bender I think. He promised a budget with a net spending decrease not two months before the election. He’s a liar I think. It’s very sad. The government doesn’t just have to take up the slack you sad little neophyte, it has to instill confidence, and Baracky? It’s not happening.

happyfeet (4eacbc) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:59 am

I’m not going to bother following the link to read some drivel that is probably best left unread, but happyfeet’s excerpt is enough for me:

when the private sector withdraws from the economy

to point out to Hiltzik,

The private sector IS the economy, stupid!

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:07 am

He promised a budget with a net spending decrease not two months before the election.

Yeah, but that was before we had the biggest emergency evah! We can’t rely on the failed policies of deficit spending. We need to reach new heights of deficit spending or I’ll kill this kitten.

You like kittens don’t you? You don’t want this kitten to die, do you?

Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:27 am

If this comment of mine (on the editorial) sneaks through the layers of ~~comment~~ fact-checking,’ I’ll be surprised. But I will chuckle.

For me, the most infuriating part of the “stimulus plan” is the $650 million addition to the “Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program.” I know that Mr. Hiltzik is no fan of the cable co’s, but this seems excessive. Why can’t people buy their own darn TVs?

carlitos (edf43b) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:41 am

Steven Pearlstein in the Washington Post.

what’s striking is that supposedly intelligent people are horrified at the thought that, during a deep recession, government might try to help the economy by buying up-to-date equipment for the people who protect us from epidemics and infectious diseases, by hiring people to repair environmental damage on federal lands and by contracting with private companies to make federal buildings more energy-efficient.
What really irks so many Republicans, of course, is that all the stimulus money isn’t being used to cut individual and business taxes, their cure-all for economic ailments, even though all the credible evidence is that tax cuts are only about half as stimulative as direct government spending.

sleepy (09c352) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:01 am

This is my favorite excerpt:

Because the 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913, this rather dated DeMint’s mind-set. In any event, he didn’t offer a proposal on how to fund the government, including his paycheck, without an income tax. He just complained that the stimulus plan involved a lot of spending. He would prefer that it all be in tax cuts,apparently on the grounds that the tax cuts enacted under the Bush administration in 2001 bequeathed to us an economy that has performed so well.

That pretty much says it all.

Ed from PA (836625) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:12 am

You like kittens don’t you? You don’t want this kitten to die, do you?

Kill it! Kill it! God knows Bush wants it dead. That kitten isn’t worth any more than an Iraqi life that he never seemed to value. Check that. Maybe Bush did value a kitten’s life more than an Iraqi’s. Let’s put a hold on the kitten-killing for now until we can reach Bush for comment. After all, Bush knew everything. Right guys?

🙂

Ed from PA (836625) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:21 am

Not to be outdone by Peter and Hacks, EfP and sleepy are strong out of the gate today.

JD (b2da6e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:24 am

While the ‘kittens’ comment was tongue-in-cheek, one obnoxious commenter here did indeed defend not posting the S-CHIP bill on the White House website for 5 days (per their pre-election ‘ethics’ promises) by saying it was “so kids don’t DIE from lack of healthcare.”

So you know, if you don’t want kids to DIE, by all means, let’s pass this stimulus bill ASAP. After all, that $650 million increase in digital TV conversion funding is urgent. For the children. To watch Family Guy.

carlitos (edf43b) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:36 am

That kitten isn’t worth any more than an Iraqi life that he never seemed to value.

That’s true. But the kitten is useful in manipulating the rubes, so you need to hush, Ed. Baracky can kill the kitten later, but he needs it right now. He doesn’t give a shit about Iraqi lives either, but it would be bad juju to throw them under the bus right now. In fact, talking about them at all is not helpful because of the whole Judgment to Lead thing, so again, hush.

Check that. Maybe Bush did value a kitten’s life more than an Iraqi’s.

Oh, you’re talking about Bush? You know he isn’t the president anymore, and has nothing to do with this bill, right, Ed? You might also note that Bush didn’t free 25 million kittens and give them the opportunity to create a representative kitten democracy. Or maybe you won’t because you’re not very bright.

Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:37 am

While the ‘kittens’ comment was tongue-in-cheek, one obnoxious commenter here did indeed defend not posting the S-CHIP bill on the White House website for 5 days (per their pre-election ‘ethics’ promises) by saying it was “so kids don’t DIE from lack of healthcare.”

And that bill isn’t going to take effect until 4/1/09, so obviously Baracky hates children and wants them to die for the next 2 months. A 5 day delay in signing would have no effect whatsoever on the implementation of the bill.

Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:39 am

oh. So I for sure have to quit smoking by the end of March. I can do that.

happyfeet (71f55e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:52 am

As a “business” writer, Hiltzik should know that there’s more value in creating something hard to duplicate (informed coverage of the Los Angeles and California economy) than a commodity item (yet another cranky anti-Republican rant).

But ranting against the Republicans is much more fun to Hiltzik, and oh so much easier to do than actually cover business. That might require real work.

Now that Hiltzik is back in full propaganda mode, wonder when he’ll resume the sock puppets?

Nofanofpoliticalrantsdisguisedasbusinessreporting (0ea407) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:09 am

one obnoxious commenter here did indeed defend not posting the S-CHIP bill on the White House website for 5 days (per their pre-election ‘ethics’ promises) by saying it was “so kids don’t DIE from lack of healthcare.”

Not to mention that under this bill, 60% of the kids covered under SCHIP already have health insurance, so they are enrolling four uninsured kids for the price of ten.

What really irks so many Republicans, of course, is that all the stimulus money isn’t being used to cut individual and business taxes, their cure-all for economic ailments, even though all the credible evidence is that tax cuts are only about half as stimulative as direct government spending.

If that is the case, I hope Steve Pearlstein, Peter, and every other leftist that’s rubbing one out over the government adding a trillion dollars to our national debt is going to reject any tax refund they might get this year, and give an additional chunk of their personal wealth to the government, in order to make this possible. Lead by example, chumps.

Chris (2d8013) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:11 am

Hope you don’t mind a plug for an actual business story: While Hiltzik was harrumphing his way through yet another anti-Republican “business” column, my colleague Chris Bagley was doing real reporting, on a high-end real estate broker couple whose grand plans went awry.

A couple who made a name and fortune in high-class coastal real estate have crashed into bankruptcy and are asking a court to erase more than $40 million in debt, including $625,000 that stemmed from alleged misuse of a helicopter loan.

According to court filings, property records and interviews, the couple, Robert and Loraine Dyson, shut down their Solana Beach real estate brokerage, an affiliate of Sotheby’s International Realty, in October. They also filed for personal bankruptcy and have apparently scotched plans to develop an equestrian resort and estates in central Riverside County. . .

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., who wants DRJ back! (0ea407) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:46 am

That pretty much says it all.

Ed, having taken a break from his morning bong orgy (aka Ed the Head), continues to use another’s thoughts and comments as a substitute for his own. Why do you think they call it dope, Heady?

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:21 am

Let’s not attack the honorable MR Hiltzik for espousing his liberal views. After all, those liberal views have proven to be correct over these many decades. Conservatives have said people need to work for their money while liberals have chosen to give people the money and not require any work. That welfare system proved to be a massive unmitigated success. If a man is hungry, it is much more important to give him a fish instead of teaching him how to fish.

So, with their great successful record, it is completely unjust to demand someone build a business when liberals can just give you the business instead.

John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:48 am

“. . .even though all the credible evidence is that tax cuts are only about half as stimulative as direct government spending.”

So, under Pearlstein’s theory, 100% direct government spending would be even better. Of course, that’s why the Soviet Union is such an economic powerhouse today.

Official Internet Data Office (46b165) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:08 pm

carlitos,

That’s hysterical. Let me know if it works.

Patterico (ae31b0) — 2/6/2009 @ 1:08 pm

Hiltzik is such a pitiful excuse for a business columnist. I could give him a list of topics to discuss. One might be the woman with the eight IVF babies who has been living on Workers Comp disability for 10 years while she had 14 kids and wasn’t married. She has a college degree and has been totally disabled all this time.

No, I guess the LA Times wouldn’t want a story like that.

Mike K (8df289) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:02 pm

Hiltzik is such a pitiful excuse for a business columnist. I could give him a list of topics to discuss. One might be the woman with the eight IVF babies who has been living on Workers Comp disability for 10 years while she had 14 kids and wasn’t married. She has a college degree and has been totally disabled all this time.

No, I guess the LA Times wouldn’t want a story like that.

Mike K (f89cb3) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:02 pm

Whoops a comment hiccup.

Mike K (8df289) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:09 pm

For a view through the looking glass at journalistic credibility, read this.

But humor me, and consider this alternate history: Imagine if Gutenberg had invented a digital modem rather than a printing press, and that for centuries all of our information had come to us online.

Further, imagine if we held a press conference announcing the invention of an intriguing new product called the “newspaper.”

That press conference might go something like this:

“We’re pleased to announce a new product that will revolutionize the way you access information. It will save you time and money and keep you better informed than ever before.

“Just consider the hours you’ve spent on the internet looking for information of interest to you. We’ve hired specialists who live and work in your hometown to cull information sources and provide a daily report tailored to your community, your friends and your neighbors.

“We also know that you sometimes wonder whether you can trust the information you see online. We plan to introduce a painstaking new process called “fact-checking” in which we actually verify the information before we pass it along to you. . .

(emphasis mine)

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., who implores DRJ to remain at Patterico! (0bc786) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:25 pm

I had a subscription to Esquire magazine. I canceled it when an article on the length of the sleeves on a man’s suit turned into a “President Bush looks like a chimp” article.

The left wing is devolving into into a full blown hate group.

tyree (ad0b00) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:17 pm

Hiltzik is such a pitiful excuse for a business columnist. I could give him a list of topics to discuss. One might be the woman with the eight IVF babies who has been living on Workers Comp disability for 10 years while she had 14 kids and wasn’t married. She has a college degree and has been totally disabled all this time.

No, I guess the LA Times wouldn’t want a story like that.

Comment by Mike K — 2/6/2009 @ 4:02 pm

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-octuplets7-2009feb07,0,2129396.story

You spoke too soon, Mike. Can I expect a retraction/apology any time soon? Of course not. Apologies are below you.

Perhaps the reaction will be something like: Yeah, but that story doesn’t come down as hard on the new mother as we’d like. I am kind of excited to hear your responses. What inane gripe can we come up with about this story so that we can discredit it? 🙂

Ed from PA (836625) — 2/7/2009 @ 6:48 am

Eddy’s now apparently experiencing a severe case of passive – aggressiveness, coupled with an emerging bout of paranoia. The curse of Mary Jane strikes Eddy down again.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:40 am

What does that personal attack have to do with my comment, Dmac? Nothing. Even if you were going for style over substance with that one, you still lost.

Ed from PA (836625) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:11 am

Was that a “business” column, EfP? Since the “business” columns are the topic, I am sure that your link will point us to a business column, won’t it?

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:11 am

“…you still lost.”

Hmmm. The point of his posts here at Patterico become much clearer.

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:12 am

It was a LA Times article, JD. And thank you for coming up with the inane disqualifier that I predicted you (or somebody) would in comment 25. You guys are so predictable.

Ed from PA (836625) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:12 am

You are a little child EfP. Go read the title and topic of this post. You really are a douchebag. Go back to your bong.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:24 am

You are a little child EfP. Go read the title and topic of this post. You really are a douchebag. Go back to your bong. Your inane gripes got tiring the first time you dropped by, and have only gone downhill since.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:26 am

JD:
You’re just pouting because you exhibited the exact behavior I predicted you would and you were called out on it. I suppose an unfounded accusation of drug use restores your credibility in the eyes of your fellow ideologues. Congratulations.

Ed from PA (836625) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:30 am

with that one, you still lost.

And yet you go for the Trollbait, every time. It’s also become abundantly clear that you’ve never held an actual paying job in your infantile life, and have never had a meaningful conversation about anything other than your new level in World of Warcraft. Methinks you’ve suffered quite a few atomic wedgies in your unfortunately miserable existence as well.

And you’ve yet to clean out your cat’s litter box upstairs – better hurry up, or your Mom’s not going to make you another Happy Meal for lunch today.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:33 am

I suppose an unfounded accusation of drug use

It’s not unfounded after witnessing the way you converse, Stoner Boy. A few more hits off that pipe and we fear your short – term memory banks will be completely obliterated.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:37 am

Dmac:

I would be interested to know what evidence you have for your personal attacks. I certainly hope that your only evidence isn’t a contrary viewpoint. If you can’t come up with any concrete reasoning behind your rather “infantile” conjecture then I have to assume you are equally comfortable arguing policy debate without such evidence.

Ed from PA (c313be) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:40 am

EfP – Enjoy your self-proclaimed victory. Don’t hurt yourself patting yourself on your back.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:02 am

We need to reach new heights of deficit spending or I’ll kill this kitten.

You like kittens don’t you? You don’t want this kitten to die, do you?

Comment by Pablo — 2/6/2009 @ 5:27 am
(Laughing so hard I could pee on myself!) That is the funniest post you have ever sent, Pablo. Bravo. Seinfeld should be jealous.

Emperor7 (1b037c) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:26 am

“I would be interested to know what evidence you have for your personal attacks.”

Ed from PA – Are you denying the fact that you use drugs?

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:43 am

You spoke too soon, Mike.

I’m sure Mike can answer for himself, but I’ll go ahead and give my response.

The negative characterization of the LA Times columnist, if not the paper in general, was in regards to him doing a piece — an op-ed type of piece — that expresses indignation, or even outrage, at a woman (single, no less) having a lot of children while being on the public dole.

The typical liberal (eg, Michael Hiltzak), far from excoriating such people, is more likely going to proclaim “oh, how touching and noble her story is! Our government providing a valuable, vital safety net for all the heartbreaking situations out there!! Thank goodness we have politicians like Obama in charge of our society!!”

Mark (411533) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:43 am

An Ancient Rome history joke

Teacher: Why did Julius Caesar buy crayons?

Pupil: He wanted to Mark Antony!

Emperor7 (1b037c) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:44 am

Why don’t you let Mr. Hiltzak speak (or write) for himself, Mark.

Ed from PA (c313be) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:11 am

Ed, given Hiltzak’s fondness for sock puppets, how do you know he hasn’t?

SPQR (72771e) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:21 am

If he has written on the subject then we should read it before we guess what he thinks. Doesn’t that make more sense, spqr?

Ed from PA (c313be) — 2/7/2009 @ 12:06 pm

Don’t hurt yourself patting yourself on your back.

I have a feeling he’s not patting himself on the back, if you catch my drift.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 12:35 pm

given Hiltzak’s fondness for sock puppets,

then we should read it before we guess what he thinks.

Which means Eddy has no idea what you’re referring to – more intelligentsia on tap.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 12:36 pm

Yep, I noticed that it went over his head, Dmac.

SPQR (26be8b) — 2/7/2009 @ 12:39 pm

I don’t speak ‘stupid’.

Ed from PA (c313be) — 2/7/2009 @ 12:43 pm

Ed, your denial flies in the face of all the evidence of your comments.

SPQR (26be8b) — 2/7/2009 @ 12:46 pm

Yet again, the game is given away.

What’s wrong with the LA Times?

It publishes views we don’t like.

Horrible. Shocking.

Worse, it makes us feel stupid. And we spend our days and nights searching for ways not to feel stupid.

The Rush Limbaugh program and Fox News Television provide suppositories but alas, they wear off eventually. We still find ourselves reading the LA Times and, wham, that crazy old stupid feeling descends again.

Our needs our large, nearly infinite, in fact.

How dare the LA Times deny us another ideological teat.

How unfair.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/7/2009 @ 3:24 pm

I don’t speak ’stupid’.

It seems that’s all you know and speak.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/7/2009 @ 3:34 pm

Our needs our large?

That latest screed is the talking point of the week for the Leftists. Not only are you not original, you are not very good. Hack Scum, indeed.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 3:37 pm

Yep, I noticed that it went over his head, Dmac.

What head?

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 3:38 pm

provide suppositories but alas, they wear off eventually.

Actually, you’re fulfilling that very need all by your lonesome, Hackey. Job well done!

that crazy old stupid feeling descends again.

Sounds like the theme song for your appearances here. Or maybe we could play the theme from the old children’s TV show Shari Lewis and Lamb Chop, since your blatant sockpuppetry has been exposed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamb_Chop_(puppet)

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 3:46 pm

Oh no. Boo Hoo.

Dmac called me a sock puppet.

I’m telling…

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/7/2009 @ 3:48 pm

Where is AD, formerly known as “Another Drew”. He’s been scarce these days.

Emperor7 (0c8c2c) — 2/7/2009 @ 4:02 pm

Show don’t tell.

That’s a good rule, isn’t it?

And this very minute, dmac and his little posse of echo-barking, trembling puppy men, are wondering why their mouths taste of lead, monofilment and a hint of their own blood.

Hook, line and sinker. Down the gullet.

That’s why.

“Our paper.”

On that thin little word, dmac scurries straight to the nipping-mad allegation: Ah hah: Proof you’re a sock puppet. Gothcha?

But the one one caught here is you, Dmac, for exposing ad nauseum, ad absurdum, how pathetically low your standards of evidence are.

What does it take to convince dmac something’s true?

A foul breeze? A broken twig? The moon’s alignment? A word?

Who cares, it’s ALL in his head.

yeah, I’m a sock puppet alright.

You just keep right on believing that, along with the war in Iraq being won, Saddam having WMDs, the banking meltdown being Carter and Clinton’s fault, or is it that Senate Lion Barney Frank?, and lower taxes producing more revenue.

Yes, dmac, there is a tooth fairy. And she’s a straight, white Republican, for sure.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/7/2009 @ 5:35 pm

PWI, again.

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/7/2009 @ 5:39 pm

So now Hacks Scum is denying that reduce taxation led to the highest tax receipts in history?

Hacks is intelleckshuallee sooopeereor too all of you rooobz. It nose stuf. Stuf yoo cood nevah unnerstan. Yoo shood just lissen to it, and submitt yor will to yor morel bettors.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 5:46 pm

PWI, again.

Eric, they always, always go for the TrollBait and expose themselves for the cowards they really are.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 5:56 pm

First we had this:

Oh no. Boo Hoo.

Dmac called me a sock puppet.

I’m telling…

Followed immediately by this:

What does it take to convince dmac something’s true?

A foul breeze? A broken twig? The moon’s alignment? A word?

And then the big finish:

little posse of echo-barking, trembling puppy men

I guess the Troll never heard of the word projection, because he’s wallowing in it.

Dmac (49b16c) — 2/7/2009 @ 6:00 pm

If he has written on the subject then we should read it before we guess what he thinks.

Oh, and given the lengthy track record of the political slant of Michael Hiltzak, it’s quite a stretch to theorize he’d never do a column slamming a woman for having a multitude of babies while also being single and dependent on government hand-outs.

The question that now needs to be posed is what planet do you live on?!

Then again, it’s no wonder that so many on the left label their biases as “progressive” instead of liberal when even they themselves can’t figure out — or aren’t willing to acknowledge — the fundamental way their minds tick.

Mark (411533) — 2/7/2009 @ 6:50 pm

“reduce taxation led to the highest tax receipts in history”

Hey, it’s the Magic Fist of the Marketplace again!

Here’s a thought: let’s reduce taxes to ZERO!

Then revenue will be INFINITE!

We can pay for five wars without end!!

Of course the scary liberal socialists who control the media, the schools and my TV remote control would never let that happen.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/7/2009 @ 6:53 pm

Hack Scum – Have we, or have we not, had the highest tax receipts in this history of our country, under President Bush?

I know you prefer to argue with the charicatures in your head, but surely you can answer a simple question.

I wonder how the $750,000,000,000 spending bill Baracky is pushing compares to the money Bush spent in Iraq.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 6:59 pm

Dmac, #60. Too true. Last night I had someone carrying on about biology, and clearly mixed it up with politics…and kept repeating that people who disagreed with him were stoopid or uneducated.

Projection, I guess.

Fact is, it is MOSTLY about politics with these people. And that is fine; it’s their right. But when they start misrepresenting factual issues…that’s different. Especially when, when you call them on it, they begin changing their definitions.

Just political puffery. But why should it bother me? DC is full of it, in all sense of the term.

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:00 pm

#59 JD:

Hacks is intelleckshuallee sooopeereor too all of you rooobz. It nose stuf. Stuf yoo cood nevah unnerstan. Yoo shood just lissen to it, and submitt yor will to yor morel bettors.

At least “Peter” shows an ability to communicate an idea, even if they are badly flawed.

This one’s got nothing, but even a blind squirrel can find an acorn now and then:

Here’s a thought: let’s reduce taxes to ZERO!

Then revenue will be INFINITE!

Well, not quite. But I think it would be ironically surprised that the legitimate functions of our government, Constitutionally mandated, could be covered by the voluntary contributions of individuals quite handily.

Certainly for a lot less than I have been shelling out, anyway.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:02 pm

You are all racists and extremists. You will be the first to be silenced by Teh One.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:11 pm

“Here’s a thought: let’s reduce taxes to ZERO!

Then revenue will be INFINITE!”

Hax – Alternatively, we can keep raising taxes and follow the Democrat plan of taxing our way to greatness in the socialist footsteps of Western Europe. You keep talking, we decide. Sutveys repeatedly say rational people prefer lower taxes and less government. Your mileage obviously varies.

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:15 pm

Stiglitz says the Iraq war weighs in at around $3 trillion, all in.

So, indeed, JD, that’s a comparison that does add some perspective to the stimulus/banking rescue/mortgage bailout spending.

Why don’t the dirty socialist liberals get it?

If we had cut only been willing to cut taxes more, it would have paid for that $3 trillion, with a few trillion left over for several other wars without end and a “faith based” jacuzzi in the home of every (native born) American.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:43 pm

The post’s point is that Hiltzik, supposedly a business writer, actually spends much of his time bashing Republicans and conservatives and advocating Democratic and leftist agendas.

Since Hiltzik is obviously happier opining about politics, he would be more appropriately employed at an openly leftist publication like The Nation. Then the LA Times could replace Hiltzik with a business reporter who actually cares to write about business.

Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., who wants DRJ back! (0ea407) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:02 pm

See, Hacks Scum likes to argue with positions not actually presented. An army of strawmen is left torched in Hack Scum’s wake.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:03 pm

Stiglitz says the Iraq war weighs in at around $3 trillion, all in.

Many people of all political stripes have analyzed the Great Depression of the 1930s and concluded it wasn’t neutralized, much less eliminated, by Roosevelt’s New Deal but by the advent of — and extreme, unique nature of — World War II. So I guess liberals should be goading Obama into another round of something even more draconian than the Iraq War? (of course, with Obama’s kum-bah-yah, Neville-Chamberlain-redux foreign policy and naivete, anything absurd is far more possible).

Moreover, if history repeats itself, Obama’s and the Democrat’s spendthrift stimulus package will end up being about as ineffective as FDR’s New Deal, or, based on more recent history, Japan’s pork-larden public-works program during the 1990s.

Mark (411533) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:14 pm

Been to Japan lately Mark?

Nice place.

You can always get a cold beer.

Over there in Iraq, you can’t often get a cold beer.

Place is all tore up.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:36 pm

Asahi Super Dry. Mmm.

Hax, are you going to answer any this?

Have we, or have we not, had the highest tax receipts in this history of our country, under President Bush?

carlitos (bb4a62) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:52 pm

Over there in Iraq, you can’t often get a cold beer.

Difficult to get a beer in any predominantly Muslim country.

Place is all tore up.

More telephones, cars, infrastructure than before the war just means it was all tore up before the war started.

That is some real stupid you got on display there. bupkis.

EW1(SG) (e27928) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:55 pm

Hax Vobiscum –
You may be unaware of this but there was a time in the not to distant past when words and names that played on Latin language were used to smear the Catholic Church. You might want to rethink your handle to avoid offending people.

Rampant partisan “reporting” helped President Obama get elected. This is not a good thing for our country. We need journalists to bring up their level of professionalism.

tyree (ad0b00) — 2/8/2009 @ 10:53 am

Over there in Iraq, you can’t often get a cold beer.

Does the implication you’re trying to make indicate you’re one of those ass-backwards liberals who believes it’s somehow compassionate and humane to be tougher on — or more cynical towards — George Bush and the US military than on the Butcher of Baghdad, Sadaam Hussein?

Mark (411533) — 2/8/2009 @ 11:05 am

tyree, thanks for mentioning that. I figured it was a journalism joke – “hacks be with you” – but you may be right.

carlitos (bb4a62) — 2/8/2009 @ 11:08 am

You may be unaware of this but there was a time in the not to distant past when words and names that played on Latin language were used to smear the Catholic Church.

Hax is just ensuring that his benediction is true.

Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/8/2009 @ 11:36 am

You may be unaware of this but there was a time in the not to distant past when words and names that played on Latin language were used to smear the Catholic Church.

Handle ipsa loquitur.

Nofanofcampaignpromises (0ea407) — 2/8/2009 @ 11:52 am

Et tu, medicus….

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:00 pm

Hello Eric,
I just don’t seem the point of arguing over Hax’s handle. There doesn’t appear to be any anti-Catholic slur in the word play, and I am aware of the various anti-Catholic slurs that have been historically used.

Worrying over rather distant connections to historical wrongs is what got us into this PC mess to begin with. To use another apt Latin expression: de minimis non curat lex.

Nofanofcampaignpromises (0ea407) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:17 pm

Lil Carl sounds confused.

He’s arguing that increasing government revenue is a good thing? Or not?

The economy grew more slowly under the Bush administration than at any time since the Great Depression.

If the economy is growing more slowly, yet tax revenue is rising to a record, well then, let’s do the math, shall we?

Decide which way you want it, carlitos.

If tax revenue rose to a record, but economic growth lagged, where did the revenue come from?

Do the math, carlitos, do the math.

The Laffer curve implies accelerating economic growth. No accelerating economic growth, no curve, no Magic Fist.

Tax revenue rose to a record because the “cuts” the Bush administration touted were actually delivered to a slim segment of taxpayers.

Most others saw increases, mostly due to stricter enforcement of the rules by the IRS.

And some taxes were RAISED, under Bush.

I live abroad. My rent deduction was eliminated by Bush. Gone. Zap. My taxes went up, plain and simple.

Do that math, carlitos. You’ll see what I mean.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:18 pm

Eric,

That above was me.

And I still want DRJ back!

Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:19 pm

Eric, the post under nofanofcampaignpromises was mine, I mean.

I am signing on from various computers today, and sometimes an old name is cached and I don’t notice it.

Bradley J. Fikes, C. O.R., who wants DRJ back! (0ea407) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:21 pm

I see that Hack Scum is still trying to argue with positions that others have not held. Shocka.

JD (fb1fc9) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:27 pm

“Tax revenue rose to a record because the “cuts” the Bush administration touted were actually delivered to a slim segment of taxpayers.”

You would be wrong Hax breath, the average American family received a 6% tax break under Bush and I believe 10 million people came off the tax rolls. The tax cuts for the rich is liberal mythology.

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:33 pm

“Most others saw increases, mostly due to stricter enforcement of the rules by the IRS.”

Hax – What is your evidence of stricter enforcement and it’s impact on collections?

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:35 pm

Daleyrocks: Do you believe in magic?

Do the math, then get back to me.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:36 pm

“Do the math, then get back to me.”

Hax – This is a non=math blog. Answer the question.

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:38 pm

C’mon daley. The guy lives abroad. He must be smarter than the rest of us! Besides, he uses diminutive nicknames for people with whom he disagrees, which is a sign of a half-vast intellect.

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:42 pm

No problem, BJF.

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:42 pm

Hax – Why not look at the percentage of tax receipts accounted for by each income decile at the beginning, middle and end of Bush’s Administration if you are looking for a way to back up your point. See how that works out for you. I’m here all week.

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:44 pm

Now you are just being crue, daley. Tip of the hat to you.

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:45 pm

Eric – I want to see the magic happen!

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:50 pm

“He is a cruel man, but fair.”

Recognize the source, daley?

Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:52 pm

Carlitos- you could be right, and I have too thick a skin to really care, but I have found over the past few years that the liberal wing of American life harbors an incredible numbers of hate groups.

tyree (ad0b00) — 2/8/2009 @ 4:04 pm

Actually looking at the data from the IRS would contradict all of Hack’s fantasies about how the various tax reforms actually altered the amount of tax revenue collected from the upper brackets. His delusions could not stand it.

SPQR (26be8b) — 2/8/2009 @ 4:15 pm

SPQR – I believe that is why he has remained silent on this thread while continuing to vomit on others.

daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/8/2009 @ 4:55 pm

hax,

Have we, or have we not, had the highest tax receipts in this history of our country, under President Bush?

you wrote 13 lines of full-stop text without answering this simple question.

hint:
1 – yes
2 – no

on a positive note, you live abroad. on behalf of the commenters here, thanks.

carlitos (bb4a62) — 2/8/2009 @ 5:39 pm

Carlitos:
If you have “decile” data that supports your assertions, bring them on.

If you don’t have the data, shouldn’t you stop pretending you do and find another way to support your point?

If you have the data, it should only take you a second to cut and paste them into your explanation of why deficits hit a record under Bush.

If you don’t have the data, you’ll just keep backpedaling with some nonsensical whining about how I won’t do your research for you.

The only way for tax revenue to increase, without raising rates, is to have an increase in rate of economic growth.

Since we know that economic growth under Bush was the slowest since the Great Depression — despite massive spending increases — we know that the tax base could only have increased at less than the historic average.

So, either Bush didn’t really cut taxes significantly, or any significant cuts were offset by equally significant increases elsewhere.

The data show that the lion’s share of increase in tax revenue came from corporate taxes — unsurprisingly, a rate not lowered by the Bush administration.

Corporate tax revenue rose rapidly because the IRS pursued stricter collection and enforcement policies, which, in economic terms, is exactly the same as INCREASING TAXES.

The bottom line is simple: the economy grew slowly, but tax revenue rose. That can only mean one thing: any cuts in rates were insignificant, or offset by rate increases elsewhere.

It’s also a little weird that carlitos would be arguing that an increase in tax revenue would be a sign of economic efficiency, especially when however fast tax revenue grew, it was wildly outpaced by spending increases.

As for the question of tax burden/tax rates under Bush, the New York Times has a good overview here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/08/washington/08tax.html?_r=1

The conclusion: Rich families were the undisputed winners from Bush’s tax cuts, but people in the bottom half of the earnings scale were not paying much in taxes anyway, before the cuts or after, as a percentage of the overall burden.

Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/9/2009 @ 3:25 am

You see folks, it cannot even answer a simple staight-forward question of fact. It cannot even bring itself to acknowledge basic simple facts. It chooses to argue with starwmen, make shit up, and create a new narrative that provides an alternate universe so it can be more comfortable.

Still lying about Zogby too, huh?

JD (e17dac) — 2/9/2009 @ 4:47 am

I live abroad.

Montana is abroad? Who knew?

Pablo (99243e) — 2/9/2009 @ 6:03 am

2/6/2009

Nofanofrepublicans Gives Readers the “Business”

103 Responses to “Nofanofrepublicans Gives Readers the “Business””

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out