Less revenue | Same revenue | More revenue | |
Less expenditure | R | R | D |
Same expenditure | X | X | X |
More expenditure | X | X | X |
Note that six of the resulting nine cells are, by mutual agreement, entirely off limits. So the Reeps and the Deeps are completely in agreement over two-thirds of the potential space of responses. They are completely unanimous on the need to reduce Gummint expenditure -- this in the midst of the finest depression we've had in seventy years.
Given the restricted range of responses that are left, it's hard to avoid the sense that the Reeps have the better logic -- may, in fact, be the lesser evil in this restricted domain. Of course they insanely want to reduce expenditures -- but then so do the Deeps. However, the Deeps want to compound the problem by raising taxes. Decreasing expenditure is insane; but raising taxes is also insane, and so the Deeps are exhibiting two different kinds of insanity, whereas the Reeps only have one.
It's easy enough to see why Joe Citizen -- maybe not Jane, quite so much -- tends to confuse government finance with household finance. Both evils, the greater and the lesser, are singing in perfect harmony on this topic; so what's Joe to think?
My chart actually exaggerates the extent of the disagreement. It might make more sense to rework it as follows:
Less revenue | Same revenue | More revenue | |
Less expenditure | Rd | rd | D |
Same expenditure | X | X | X |
More expenditure | X | X | X |
Surely the outcome is foreordained -- less expenditure (though soldier boys and cops are, of course, sacrosanct) and either no alteration in the revenue picture or a slight diminution.
Best we can hope for, eh? Sooner the Democrats cave, the better. At least NPR will have to find something else to natter about.
Comments (26)
Calling it Kabuki theater is an insult to Kabuki theater. How about a diarrhea eating contest?
Posted by Sandwichman | July 22, 2011 4:25 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 16:25
My apologies to Kabuki. It's hard to think of any kind of theater sufficiently insensate to serve as a point of comparison.
Of course, there's always Broadway. Between David Mamet and Tony Kushner....
Posted by MJS | July 22, 2011 4:28 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 16:28
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Odori_Keiy%C5%8D_Edo-e_no_sakae_by_Toyokuni_III.jpg
Posted by Sandwichman | July 22, 2011 4:40 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 16:40
It's a morality play, maybe? As with the Catholic original, the outcome is already assured.
Posted by Jack Crow | July 22, 2011 4:44 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 16:44
How about Bunraku? It's a low budget version of Kabuki done with puppets where the "actors" have no opinions of their own, are manipulated in everything they do, and rarely deviate from the script--just like our political class.
The difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is war, plutocracy and the police state with gun rights and war, plutocracy and the police state with abortion rights. Other than that, it's hard to tell the difference and I wouldn't count on either gun rights or abortion rights being protected.
Posted by Sean | July 22, 2011 4:48 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 16:48
Sandwichman leapt to the defense of Kabuki, and so do I of the morality play, which was often very witty and original, and was never insane. The deficit "debate", by contrast, seems insane to me, in the most literal sense.
Posted by MJS | July 22, 2011 4:56 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 16:56
I vote for inane rather than insane. Or perhaps both.
Posted by Sandwichman | July 22, 2011 5:01 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 17:01
And just where would we be if it weren't for war, plutocracy and the police state?
Posted by Sandwichman | July 22, 2011 5:12 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 17:12
Why is raising taxes insane? Clinton did it and the world didn't end.
Posted by Peter | July 22, 2011 5:33 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 17:33
Clinton wasn't in the middle of a depression. I mean an economic one. He's probably never had an emotional one. I wish he would suddenly be visited by a really bad specimen of the emotional variety. Sunny Bill almost certainly wouldn't know how to cope, and would cut his throat, and that would be one less voluble irritating bore polluting the air with maddening nonsense.
Posted by MJS | July 22, 2011 5:43 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 17:43
I would propose that a raid on the cash reserves of the US domiciled corporations would do no harm to the US working class "economy" or to employment here or anywhere.
Similarly the wealth of the top 5% that has burgeoned ever since Reagan's across the board tax cuts could be tapped without hurting the bottom 3 quintiles. Maybe things would not get better for working folk but also not get worse.
The Federal budget deficit, however, would no longer serve as an excuse to savage SSBs etc. The piles of wealth accumulated over the last 30 years are incredibly huge and if the elites insist on pretending that everything is on the table, then put everything on the table, including revenue. Then you have to look at where the wealth is, at what it is doing for everyone and then grab it.
Of course this won't happen. The citizenry must be punished even more harshly before the next Huey Long appears.
Posted by Boink | July 22, 2011 9:05 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 21:05
The contrived quality of the discussion derives from this deficit-hawk imperative: it's a bipartisan consensus.
A "raid on the cash reserves of US corporations", lovely as that would be, will certainly not happen on the Democrats' watch. And in fact nothing the Democrats say they want will happen on the Democrats' watch -- because they don't really want it.
Except for the reduction in "entitlements", which is, of course, another matter of complete and quite explicit bipartisan consensus.
Posted by MJS | July 22, 2011 10:00 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 22:00
The "contrived quality" is why I think "morality play" is an apt description. Certainly, there were itinerant future Matthyses and Johns of Leiden among them, but where the Church was involved, a significant devotion to pious fraud was also attendant.
And that's what the Dems and Repubs are offering, each towards their own ends - pious fraud.
Posted by Jack Crow | July 22, 2011 10:24 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 22:24
Pious Fraud would be a great name for a character in a novel -- or a morality play.
Posted by Sandwichman | July 22, 2011 11:29 PM
Posted on July 22, 2011 23:29
Great post, Michael, and the outcome is surely foreordained. Though I do think in this instance the donkeys are proposing that the fat cats chip in more. However tepid and tentative the Dems' entreaties, what they're suggesting is not insane. Further taxing Joe Citizen right now would be, but I don't think that's what's being proposed.
Posted by Chomskyzinn | July 23, 2011 8:44 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 08:44
Indeed, taxing the rich into penury would be eminently sane -- if it led to a corresponding diminution in the burden on ordinary Joes. But nobody is proposing that either, as far as I can tell. What the Dems do want is a net increase in revenue. I'll let the house economists comment on the sanity or otherwise of that idea, in the current circumstances.
Posted by MJS | July 23, 2011 9:24 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 09:24
I submit father has his index finger on the key node here
The liberals and apparently lots of rads like taxations
The use of taxes as punishment for wealth hoarding
Is a fatally best reserved till the rev
For now in reform mode stick to wage max hour min
Uncle social dividend max
If the issue becomes
Whether by tax or borrowing ?
Always by borrowing
Tax burden shifting from job holders and petty consumers is noble
But secondary
On the other side of the coin
The demote colicity in payroll tax robbery and
Growth incentive alibis for corporate bribes
Well that speaks for itself
Nice to see several postings that tightly fit the sites original mission
Posted by Op | July 23, 2011 9:29 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 09:29
On the expenditure side
Obviously we have a structural corporate preference for minimized safety nets and social dividends
The transfer system fueled by borrowings increases the wage bargain strength of the jobseekers
Sandy for years has pushed for essentially higher wage rates and shorter hours
Not only directly by hours and rate min and max laws
But also
thru greater more sweden like
entitlements for the people as mere resident humans
Posted by Op | July 23, 2011 9:37 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 09:37
Considered opinion
Always oppose any tax increase any tax increase.....ANY
If we could show you a nice model of tax burden dynamics you,d quickly see the point of extraction hardly ever determines the distribution of that tax's burden among various economic classes
Borrow max inflation max nominal rate min
The trinity of strategic wage class macro
Posted by Op | July 23, 2011 9:44 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 09:44
Leave. The optimal national whole people reformer role
to the mandarin freaks
The science of economic needs to be applied by class oriented and motivated social engineers
Not personally class sublated paragons of whole ness
Posted by Op | July 23, 2011 9:47 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 09:47
Always always more e and less r
Note democrat preferred position today is exactly the reverse
Prolly too many comments by this social engineer manque
but I hope I can smoke out some opposition
With some meat on its bones and teeth that bite more then drama queens
Posted by Op | July 23, 2011 9:56 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 09:56
U post industrial nihilists are such aesthetes
And dabbling generalists
More sharply defined context restricted mental cogs
less cortical free spirits of the circus wagon as tumbril variety
Posted by Op | July 23, 2011 10:00 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 10:00
Ironically, given all of the deficit hysteria and conventional wisdom, Joe and Jane Citizen would quickly rally to a cut taxes\increase spending platform. But of course, who in DC or on Morning Blow even remotely cares what they think?
I suspect the demand for WPA type programs will grow as the pain intensifies, Owen's misgivings (I think) about that old FDR fave notwithstanding.
Posted by Chomskyzinn | July 23, 2011 10:07 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 10:07
Chomwitz
The unemployed over hang isn't big enough or angry enough
Or for that matter wretched enough to prick the liberal conscience enough
No wpa in our time
I ought be clear
I'd love a wpa
Haryana hopkins is a great figure to me
But hell I'm beginning to like Hugh Johnson
The " fascist" head of the NRA
My objection to wpa btw is as a permanent liberal built gulag
Those pwogs who push it tend to be poorly infused with the larner viceroy
Macro paradigm
Example minsky
Yes he saw clearly the internal contradictions of a credit driven market guided economy
But he had no notion of the up side to post war Keynesianism
Primarily because he never deeply contemplated the various price level management mechanisms
Perhaps he quite reasonably figured he needed to cobble his remedy out of elements with cleaner "priors "
Like in this case the wpa
Though I suspect he had public goods fetish too
Like most anti profit
non profit fat cats of the left annex of the academy
There are other better ways to maintain full employment
And lift wage rates
Posted by Op | July 23, 2011 10:54 AM
Posted on July 23, 2011 10:54
whatever, op. retire already.
Posted by Karl | July 24, 2011 10:00 PM
Posted on July 24, 2011 22:00
Chart du jour, US long-term unemployment edition
From FTAlphaville, Posted by Cardiff Garcia on Jul 07 21:00.
The 1970-present chart indicates the percentage of unemployed who have been in that condition for 27 weeks or longer, and sheesh what a spke [becoming plateau] relative to last 41 years.
Before I forget - http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2011/07/07/615961/chart-du-jour-us-long-term-unemployment-edition/
So, comp of capital will be forced to decline and/or corporates will have to change their mode of organization. Govts are commodities.
Posted by juan | July 25, 2011 5:11 AM
Posted on July 25, 2011 05:11