Katrina vanden Heuvel: A consensus we can’t afford

[marmar]

from the WaPo:



By Katrina vanden Heuvel


“Why can’t we all get along?” The iconic question has become the fixation of much of Washington’s chattering class. David Brooks and Thomas Friedman censure President Obama for blowing the “Grand Bargain” or not embracing the recommendations of Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, co-chairs of the deficit reduction commission. Self-proclaimed bipartisan efforts — No Labels, Americans Elect — call for putting aside partisan squabbles and electing moderates who can get things done.

All this chatter leaves out one thing — any sense of reality. The old bipartisanship, such as it was, was built on the postwar economy that worked for everyone. Top-end taxes were at 90 percent, providing the resources to invest in essential programs such as the interstate highways, the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe, the G.I. bill and housing subsidies that educated a generation and built the suburbs.

In those days, U.S. companies exported goods rather than jobs, and a decent argument could be made that what was good for General Motors was in fact good for America. It wasn’t perfect. The “other America” lived lives of quiet desperation. Segregation still was brutally enforced. But the bipartisan consensus reflected an economy that was working for many, not just the few.

That is no longer true, and hasn’t been for years. Multinationals ship jobs abroad and park profits overseas to avoid taxes. Wall Street blew up the economy but got bailed out, with the bankers continuing to pocket the big bucks. Three-fourths of the country thinks the recession hasn’t ended. And no wonder: Wages are still falling and mass unemployment inflicts grinding misery. In 2010, the top 1 percent captured an obscene 93 percent of the rewards of “recovery.” ..................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/washington-elites-push-for-a-consensus-that-ignores-reality/2012/04/16/gIQAwgJqMT_story.html

[hfojvt]

1. kick

Simpson-Bowles is a piece of crap, so no surprise that conservatives like Friedman and Brooks would be pushing it.

But electing some Republican moderates would not be a bad thing.

[starroute]

3. Republican moderates??? Good luck in finding any

If you haven't noticed, the GOP has been very deliberately and effectively engaged in destroying what was once moderate wing. Except a last few remnants in New England, it doesn't exist any more, and the people who would once have been part of it are now conserva-Dems.

[Uncle Joe]

2. But, but according to Erin Burnett on CNN the wealthy pay an unfair share in taxes

compared to the rest of us they're hurting, don't you know?

Thanks for the thread, marmar.

[kenny blankenship]

4. "mass unemployment," she says? MASS unemployment???

We don't have high unemployment in this country. We have MODERATE employment.
It's Just Right.

FULL employment would be EXTREME. Good Centrists know that employment figures, and concerns about HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT are the hobgoblins of EXTREMISTS. We are all moderates in this party, and know we are living in the best possible world, through the beneficence of our corporate protectors. We will continue to strive for pro-business conditions, such as falling wages, looser regulations, etc.



We know that an employment to total population ratio that has crashed to levels last seen when women were first entering the workforce has been positive for business conditions since corporate profits are at their all time high. And we will therefore continue to resist the efforts of Red union agitators, malcontents, and "Occupiers" to force us to renounce our Supply Side orthodoxy. We are Moderates, and there is no room for EXTREMISM in our party, whether of the "full employment" variety, or the "Stop Global Warming" kind, or any other. Moderate Global Warming will continue just as it has. Employment will be kept at moderate levels to inspire business confidence. The bust of Reagan stays in its place on the White House mantle, unmoved by a single millimeter. The help will get a 10 instead of 20 dollar Christmas bonus, but the same sound advice as always: Don't spend it all in one place!