Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

TMFBlacknGold (98.78)

Why Grover Norquist is an Idiot

Recs

9

July 14, 2011 – Comments (7)

    Sorry to state the obvious, but this guy is really starting to piss me off. The longer this political show about the debt ceiling drags on, the more I hear about Grover Norquist, and the more I want to take that silver spoon out of his mouth and smack him upside the head with it.

    In case you don't know, Norquist is the super-conservative activist who has the Republican party by the balls. He has never been elected to public office, but has "over one hundred" signatures on his petition to never raise taxes. That little pledge drive has driven a huge wedge compromise for raising the debt ceiling. Now, while the debt ceiling will most likely get raised for the 81st straight time in a row, it still doesn't make this guy just go away.

     Norquist's father was a wealthy Polaroid executive, which is probably where he got his conservative roots for small government and little taxes. That's fine. Believe whatever you want, but lowering taxes and easing credit for long periods of time does not create economic growth. It instead feeds bubbles and creates problems down the road. Look at austerity measures across Europe. They include not only a hefty cut in government spending but a major hike in tax raises and are often a last resort for filling a nation's coffers.

    This excerpt from an article motivated me to write this:

If someone thinks about breaking the pledge, he likes to remind them of President George H.W. Bush who made the famous pledge, "Read my lips. No new taxes."Bush broke that promise two years later, and lost the election to Clinton. "The American people were very angry. He had a successful presidency, except for the tax increase," Norquist recalled.

   While Bush I's tax raising policies may have been a factor in him losing to Clinton, it wasn't as if voters rushed to the polls to punish the incumbent Bush for that reason alone. Besides, when Clinton was faced with the realities of the economy he too raised taxes while Republicans controlled Congress. So want to bust out the history books Mr. Norquist or remember the history that fits your agenda?

    I'm not trying to make a case for red or blue here, I'm trying to make a case for Foolish common sense. Both sides will need to do what is right for the American people, not just now, but for the long-term. We cannot afford to kick this issue down the road for our future selves, our kids, or our grandchildren. We do need to cut spending, especially that in entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and pension programs - flying directly in the face of Democrats. We also need to raise taxes/reform the tax code and close loopholes to healthy and profitable industries.

Showing the range with a political blog....

BlacknGold

7 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On July 14, 2011 at 9:20 PM, vriguy (78.17) wrote:

In this context, people always seem to forget that Ross Perot took a lot more votes from GHWB than Bill Clinton, and effectively threw the race to Clinton.

Report this comment
#2) On July 14, 2011 at 9:49 PM, TMFBlacknGold (98.78) wrote:

A full 67% of Americans favor a deal to raise the debt ceiling that includes taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations, according to a poll released Thursday by Quinnipiac University.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/14/news/economy/debt_ceiling_taxes/?hpt=hp_p1&iref=NS1

Report this comment
#3) On July 14, 2011 at 10:54 PM, VExplorer (29.63) wrote:

I have no problem with minor tax raise, but I don't like it for rich only. IMO: poor should pay too. Flat tax for 99% from poor and up will OK for me. If VAT will replace sale tax it will OK for me. And I agains the debt ceiling rise IN GENERAL. Go ahead with DEFAULT! Why not? I remember how Russia did it in 1998 and exit just great from it.

Report this comment
#4) On July 15, 2011 at 9:03 AM, TMFBlacknGold (98.78) wrote:

A few things. I actually do agree with some proponents of a flat/fair tax. There are some issues with it, but it would certainly do away with some of the problems with the current system.

Russia didn't default and exit just great from it. They lost much of their territory, fell from superpower status (hurts a bit on the world stage), and suffered a population exodus among other things. In fact, while Russia is a BRIC nation they have one of the largest demographic problems of all industrialized nations. Their workforce isn't expected to keep pace with their aging population.

 Russia has rebounded from the lows of 1999-2000 only because of their massive oil reserves. Ever notice how Russia asserts its dominance more when oil prices are high? Gazprom runs Russia, not the other way around.

Oh, and Norquist is still an idiot ;)

Report this comment
#5) On July 15, 2011 at 9:25 AM, CluckChicken (41.37) wrote:

"IMO: poor should pay too. Flat tax for 99% from poor and up will OK for me. If VAT will replace sale tax it will OK for me."

I don't have a problem with the poor paying taxes but I don't think that they should pay as much as the middle class or the wealthy. I feel this way for two reasons, one they are poor and don't have much/any money and two they tend to spend all the money they have.

It might be fine for you if a VAT tax replaced a sales tax but not for those that live in places that do not have a sales tax.

I don't think Norquist is an idiot because he doesn't want taxes raised because his goal is to get rid of the government. I think he is an idiot because of his goal.

Report this comment
#6) On July 15, 2011 at 11:58 AM, VExplorer (29.63) wrote:

"Russia didn't default and exit just great from it. They lost much of their territory, fell from superpower status (hurts a bit on the world stage), and suffered a population exodus among other things."

 Russia lost colonies, not his core territory. People in ALL big cities live pretty well. These peoples as retiring to resorts of Turkey, Bulgaria and another "poor" countries of EU as Americans to Florida. Russia is bad not because it is poor, but because it is corrupted. But people have had another mentality an, actually, preffer that environment.

 Demographic is a problemof ALL developed countries (including US). All these countries sees immigration as solution. Most of immigrants are poor and bad educated.Competition for "good"immigrants are going higher (I know as I immigrated 3 times from one country to another). Will see which "Union" will win.

Report this comment
#7) On July 15, 2011 at 4:50 PM, leohaas (31.08) wrote:

Well, you may not like mr Norquist (I certainly don't), but an idiot he is definitely not. I'd call him focused and brilliant. He has never waivered from his strategy, and now he's got the party by the cojones, like you point out correctly.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement