President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
August 17, 2005 08:00 AM UTC

Wednesday Open Thread

  • 76 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

It’s not just for name-calling.

Tweet
Share

Comments

76 thoughts on “Wednesday Open Thread”

  3. Did anyone notice that the Suthers website has “waves” spelled wrong at the bottom of the Campaign Trail section?  They spell it “waives”  Just maybe they are spending too much time in the courtroom.

  4. Did any of you attend the Arapahoe County Men’s Club this morning to hear John Caldera speak on C and D?  For those of us who are trying to find any reasonable justification for NOT voting for C and D, can someone from the whacka-do side of the Republican Party tell me why I should vote against voting for it?

  5. CDOT has abandoned the driver, in favor of it’s own employee’s convenience and feathering the nest of its own internal bureaucracy. They could have built a tunnel under U.S. 6 by now, yet its still closed. That would have alleviated the mess on I-70, if they’d worked expeditiously and got it open. At the drop of a hat, anymore, they close the road and let the traffic back up, devil may care. It’s the drivers who pay the fuel tax and CDOT’s bills. They should be the first priority. Gov. Bill Owens and the mass media have apologized for their gross incompetence long enough. I major investigation and reform is needed.

  6. Starting off early I see.  Yes, I do fart from time to time.

    I could talk about my opinions in places around the world … especially today, but I am too busy. 

    Sorry, no International discussions today … I just farted.

  10. Tricky Dick –

    Taking billions out of the private sector and putting it in the hands of the completely unaccountable state government is a terrible idea.

    These people hardley know what they’re doing with the 15 billion we already give them, and you want to give them more?

    They have prime real estate in downtown Denver, which would rent/sell for a tremendous rate and what do they do with it?  Use it for storage!

    Worse then that, I am so sick of every liberal in the world crying about the economy and then asking for more money.  First off, if Colorado’s economy was hit with a recccsion, doesn’t that effect the people of Colorado too?  Why does the state expect us to float them when times get tough, do they come and pay my plumber to run a water line at my house when i get a pay cut?  Of course not. 

    You have little Andy Romanoff running around yelling “the roads, the roads”.  You really think they’re going spend this money where they say they will?  Don’t kid yourself.  That money is going to every pet project the Ds can dream up.

    It only gets me more irratable because we finally are coming out of the recession, and they want to do the one thing that gauruntees slower private sector economic growth: RAISE TAXES on consumers.  Its just asanine.

    And finally, because it does nothing to deal with 23.  And if you think there is a snowballs chance that the D’s will fix 23 after they steal enough money to pour pork into their districts and pet projects for the next 10 years, you’re crazy.

  11. Hey, wait a minute on 23.  Seems to me that 23 was passed by the citizens, not only the D’s and therefore, it needs to be given some respect.  If you want to change 23, make your own proposal and put it on the ballot.  Otherwise, don’t blame 23 on  the D’s we all did that.

  12. Tricky Dick,

    If you want more tax and spend, there is no reasonable justification not to vote for C & D.

    For tax increase vote yes on C. The legeslature will gladly spend more of your money.

  14. The $15B state budget is largely committed by law. After Medicare and 23-required spending, there’s practically nothing left.  If you think higher education is important (or, for that matter, anything other than Medicare and K-12) then you have to pay for it.  Period. 

    Anyone with any actual experience with the state budget is for C&D, even Owens. Brian Vogt, Owen’s current Technology Secretary (replaced Marky-Marc) said at a public forum at Fitzsimmons last week that either we pass C&D this year, or we pass some version of it next year or the year after or the year after that because the state is ungovernable without some kind of change to TABOR. 

    You all can talk about “tax and spend” as if it were anathema, but if you actually want an effective state government, taxing and spending are required.

  16. Gee Goldwater just wants water without knowing if it has gold in it or just farm runoff.  Water quality and testing is just another waste of money?!

  17. “Why does the state expect us to float them when times get tough, do they come and pay my plumber to run a water line at my house when i get a pay cut? Of course not.”

    This isn’t about WHEN times get tough, this is about AFTER times get tough.  Do they come and tell you that you can never get a post-recession pay raise to get you back to where you had been?  Of course not.

    Like Goldwater said, we’re finally coming out of the recession.  But the state can’t just recover to where it had been.  That’s why this issue is being referred to the people.  This isn’t a giant increase in the size of government – it doesn’t even get us back to where we would’ve been without the recession.  It’s a chance to ask people to give up a rebate they haven’t seen in years, keep vulnerable services like higher ed alive, and – if the economy is still strong – have a decrease in the income tax rate after five years.

  18. From Democracy for Colorado’s website:

    “The first priority of Democracy for Colorado is helping to elect politically progressive, fiscally conservative candidates dedicated to honest government.”

    I love this.  Fiscally conservative.  Dave Thomas, Suzanne William, and the like– these aren’t the bluedogs, folks.

  19. Chris – We all passed TABOR, but your happy to castrate it, and not 23?

    Anon Coward –  Anyone with budget experience?
    How about Lola Spradley?  She hates TABOR and even she knows that C is nothing but a liberal tax increase.  Beyond that, “tax and spend” is a disgusting way to run a government.  If we spent more time analyzing way to add efficiencies into our current programs, and made the legislature accountable for the disgusting amount of waste thats out there, they wouldn’t need to keep taking money out of my pocket.

    C Fan – First, if I could, I would like to congratulate you on the single most trite, and semi-retarded name I have seen today.

    Second, you can’t be certain that it wont put us beyond the projected size of gevernement from some parallel non recession having universe, because we don’t know how much money the state will actually take in, we can geuss, but its an estimate at best.  The same people who can double count 500 million dollars this year are not the most reliable people to nail all the figures for projections going forward.  Even if you’re right, which I don’t think you are, governmnent DOES NOT have to grow by the maximum allowable limit every year.  I know that a difficult concept for many of you out there, so I’ll repeat it: Government does not need to grow by the maximum every year.

    Before you start whining, I’ll ask your question for you, “well where are we going to cut 400 million dollars?”  I would be perfectly content to see reforms made to change the recipient status for Medicaid, especially cutting the 300 million we spend on illegal aliens, PERA reform to define liabilities, and OH MY GOD: maybe only increase funding to schools who actually improve!

    Accountability?!?!  What, where?!?! I know, its novel, but lets try it.

    When they fix the problems, I’ll be the first in line to give them more money, but the truth is, and I know you hate this C fan, if we fixed the problems, we wouldn’t need more money.  And then where would you and your liberal buddies get their funding for all the bullshit programs they keep promising…

  21. Dan,

    You obviously don’t drive that stretch of road much, do you?  I missed being in the US-6 rockslide by a couple of minutes; I used to drive Clear Creek Canyon almost every day.

    US-6 merges with I-70 East of Idaho Springs (well before the rock slide); if it were opened, the only people who would benefit would be the gamblers headed up to Black Hawk and Central City, and then only because they wouldn’t be stuck in traffic until Exits 244 or 243.  (The rock slide is somewhere near mile marker 237).

    Tunnelling is horribly expensive; CDOT is choosing the cheapest solution to resolving the US-6 rockslide problem, and their choice has not had any effect on I-70 detour traffic from the weekend.

  22. Goldwater,

    No-one on the “No” side of the C&D fence has identified those $400 million (next year only) funds that would resolve the budget crisis without serious negative impacts.  Do it, and I’ll personally vote against C&D.

    And, unfortunately in today’s reality, government does need to grow by the maximum TABOR-allowed limit – plus some – every year.  State governments are getting more and more unfunded burdens dropped on them, and are having to shoulder double-digit inflation on many of their services.  We simply cannot afford to ignore the realities of the State budget.

    If you think C&D go too far, you should work to get a cap set in place on them in the 2006 elections.  We need a cure for the budget problem now, not when the State finances are shattered and services have been hacked to little bits.  Every year we hold off is another year we have to make up with an even bigger compensation.

    “Twenty five dollars for me…”

  23. CD-7 Poll –

    Lets be honest here …

    This data is not accurate. I would take the bet at 100 to 1 odds, that someone is artifically raising these numbers with duplicated votes.

    Where is my copy of my vote? This electronic voting is pretty damn scary! With the recent Presidential vote in Ohio and Florida, whereby electronic voting from Debold was shown to be very inaccurate and an obviously swayed (reversed) decision with computer programming, with a claim that once again we put a President in office from power-hungry Republicans (taking away our right of Liberty and an accurate system that represents the true voice of the people), I suggest, that “ColoradoPols” create a paper trail, with the names of those who “voted” for this CD-7 poll.

    Actually, if you want an accurate poll, provide us an address, with the sponsorship of the Denver Post or KMGH TV, where you can send in your vote, casting a true representation of the opinions of the public for a primary.

    I don’t believe ANY of these numbers. AND, not until we have a paper trail in all of these elections … this is all bunk and makes our voting system suspect.

    The voice of AMERICA can be robbed so damn easy …

    It is our duty to change this reality, unless we want to lose our liberty again and again…

  24. Phoenix,
    Cut $400,000,000. from proposed spending evenly. Don’t target one program over another. Cut every program (even dildos) by the same percentage point.

  25. DP Headline:

    Owens’ economist floats $200 million budget idea
    by Chris Frates
    Denver Post Staff Writer
    March 15, 2005; Page B-02
    Section: DENVER AND WEST
    Article ID: 1249969 — 412 words
    Gov. Bill Owens’ chief economist has discovered an accounting change he says can put $200 million back into the state’s wallet.

    The discovery comes as legislation intended to fix the state’s budget problems is expected to get its first hearing in the Senate today.

    The finding, proposed by economist Henry Sobanet, would change the way the state accounts for spending required by Amendment 23, a voter-passed initiative that requires annual increases in funding…

  26. Tricky Dick is retarded.  He says: “Taking billions out of the private sector and putting it in the hands of the completely unaccountable state government is a terrible idea.”

    Um, unaccountable state government?  WTF do you call elections?  What do you call public hearings?  The PRIVATE sector is unaccountable to anyone.  the PUBLIC sector is accountable almost to a fault.

    Man, GOoPs are stupid.

  29. Tricky Dick is retarded? GOoPs are stupid?

    When did Tricky Dick say “Taking billions out of the private sector and putting it in the hands of the completely unaccountable state government is a terrible idea.”

    come on pacified, get on game sister.

  30. Sorry Tricky… that was for Mr. Goldwater.  Regardless, the point is still stupid.  Everything run in by the public sector is way more accoutnable than anything in the private sector, and saying otherwise means you’re retarded.

    The comments section on this blog is horrendous to read.  You think with the new domain, they could have, you know, got better software.

  33. The $200 million for by the Amendment 23 accounting change is already included in the shortfall for the 2007 budget.  Good try, though.

    Keith – you propose taking $400 million out of the prisons, Medicaid (which would trigger a 2-for-1 or 1-for-1 Federal matching reduction), road funds (also with sometimes Federal matching reduction), and higher education equally?  That will be entertaining…  You wonder why the folks favoring C&D say they have to target higher ed – it’s because they aren’t dumb enough to start with the other options.

  35. Ok, no name calling.  I’m done with work, no stress.  I’m supposed to be “pacified”, right?

    I’m socialist on some things, yes, because it makes more sense on some things: education, utilities, health care.  But I really don’t care what shoes, toothbrush, house you buy.  I don’t always trust corporations, who’s sole mission is to make profit for shareholders, when it comes to some things.

    The most accountable way of doing anything is to have the government do it.  Unless you’re dealing with “top secret” stuff like military, etc. (which doesn’t really happen at the state, county, or city level) all the information about whatever projectthe government is undetaking be open and available to the governed by mandate of law.  That’s what makes it a public.

    Saying “unaccountable state government” is complete nonsensical blather existing only in some false world constructed by the poster.  What does the poster thing elections are?  Or public hearings?  If the poster wanted, I’m sure his/her state representative would gladly find and show how the state spent every last penny last year.

    I don’t always trust government or politicians either.  But the advantage of having the government do something is I actually can have a direct affect (through voting and the political process) as can all of the governed.  And in the end, government is always accountable to the people through elections, something the Board of Directors at any corporation are not.

  36. I keep hearing arguements from pro-c people that the economy has been bad therefore we should pass c, or the job market has been slowing so therefore we should pass c, or we will need to open the doors of the prison and let out all the child-molestors so therefore we should pass.

    I don’t think the laws of Economics have changed since I went to college, but if you raise taxes, unemployment goes up, growth goes down, prices for goods and services go up.  How does it follow that raising taxes is going to improve the economy?  I’ll bet if you’ll also find that prisons fill up faster with higher taxes!!!

    Why don’t pro-c people just give it to us strait?  They want more money to spend on government projects.

  38. pacified…  Yes, you are a socialist.  That was tried once and the people had a really good sense of what was going on in the government.  NOT!!!  Oh, by they way the USSR no longer exists in case you missed that headline.  I’m sure the people of China are holding their government accountable for all the wrongs they do.

  39. The whole thing about economists finding accounting mistakes is not worth anyone’s attention.  They find ways that are technically not illegal to restate findings so that their bosses are painted in a more flattering light.  Didn’t Owens speak ad nauseum about our recovered economy and state surplus for the four or five months leading up to the last gubernatorial election.  The day after the election he went on the news and spoke of budget cuts, no money to fix roads, and massive furloughs and position cuts within the state.

  40. Phoenix,

    If we were not to spend 400 mil across all descretionary expenditures evenly. How much shortfall in proposed prison spending would that be?

  44. Keith – I’m sorry, I’ve been at a vigil all evening, and not somewhere I can just spout off the results of a breakout involving prisons.  The numbers were just posted the other day – why don’t you go figure it out?  Then divide by $36,000 (per prisoner) to find out how many people we’ll have to release.  And then go convince the good Governor that prisons aren’t the only answer.

    To whoever noted the double-billing in the budget – if you read the article where that claim appeared, it doesn’t specifically say the numbers were double-booked when figuring out the total budget; what is said is that some numbers are posted on multiple budgets because they are multi-departmental funds that aren’t easily seperated.  That was actually a “footnote” passed on by a State Legislator, IIRC; they know the real numbers, and $500 million won’t be magically appearing.

    Goldwater – I’ll believe the $300 million in Medicaid for illegals claim the same time I believe someone knows just how many illegals there are and how many are working “within the system”.  No-one really knows any of it – that’s part of the charm of the problem.  I’d be just as likely to believe that illegals aren’t taking from Medicaid much at all, but are instead driving up private healthcare costs because they often resort to the emergency room where they can’t be turned away.

  45. Keith – the shareholders board is rarely accountable to “the public”.  Even groups like CALPERS don’t often have that kind of control over a board.  Far too many boards are made up of corporate “buddies” who have no interest in mind other than that of already rich corporate-loving folks.

    I’m probably not as “left” as pacified on government services, but I’m willing to call a spade a spade: corporate governance is more insular, less accountable, and less in the interests of “the People” than your average U.S. government entity.  If you think corporations have changed much since the mine riots of the late 1800’s, think again; they’d do exactly the same thing all over again if they figured they could get away with it.

  46. got it “right”:

    Economic studies actually show that tax rates have little to do with overall economic growth worldwide.  If you think about it, taxes go to governments, which spend them hiring companies and government employees, which re-distributes the money back around again.  In the end, the organization spending the money doesn’t really matter much.

    Taxes supposedly make people feel less willing to spend, but that doesn’t seem to be borne out in surveys of industrialized nations around the world.  Taxes in this country symbolize “big government”, which we have historically been paranoid about.  But I also believe we are not the society that generated the Founding Fathers; our much greater population leads to a decimated ability to survive on our own in bad times – heck, you have to pay to get a hunting permit, and you can’t hunt year-round…  Today’s society requires different solutions, and our government has modernized to those challenges.  Washington hoped that as the world became more enlightened, that this country would always be at the forefront of liberalism; I believe today’s government, while not perfect, strives for that position.

  47. Your latest line change on the gov’s race only gives further proof to how absurd it is.  MH sends out a piece of junk mail to 100k people and suddenly he’s the overwhelming favorite?  Not very “insider” like.  More like a rookie mistake.

  48. Phoenix,

    I think you are branding all corporations with the same “lets destroy everything for the sake of profit” mentality.  There are some corporations are like that, but it a very small fraction of all the corporations in the US.  Further, if you don’t like these evil entities, boycott them like the CEA is doing to Wal Mart.  Of course what the CEA doesn’t tell you is that their retirement portfolio includes millions of dollars in Wal Mart stock, but that is another issue. 
    In every country where the government has tried to control private industry it has failed because central planners simply cannot plan for every contingency, whereas in a price based market millions of decisions are made on a daily basis to better suit the market needs.  The government can only hinder the process (as it should in some very rare cases.)

    As for being accountable to the public, corporations should not have to be accountable to anyone but their shareholders.  Wal Mart is a classic example.  People who have no knowledge about running a multi national corporation want Wal Mart to change how they do business because it would make the person feel good about themselves.  Why should they do anything these people say?  Unless they own stock Wal Mart shouldn’t listen to them.
    Finally, I would like to know which economic studies specifically show that tax rates do very little to effect economic growth.  I want the name of those studies and surveys.
    Phoenix, if you think the liberalism of today can be compared to Washington and the Founding Fathers, you are just plain ignorant.

  49. I don’t believe all corporations follow the self-centered model I describe.  Costco for example pays good wages, provides benefits, doesn’t do all the heinous things Wal-Mart does, and still competes effectively in the marketplace.  Ben & Jerry’s was a model of responsible corporate citizenship through its incredible growth period.  I often purchase according to ethical principle, but I am part of a small minority at this point; corporations listen to the market, and the market says it doesn’t care what companies do.  Business courses teach the simple fact of the matter – as a businessman, your job is one-sided: maximize returns.  I don’t believe that is the best way to advance society; Republicans say they concern themselves with morals and ethics, but I haven’t seen anyone from the GOP out in the lead on corporate ethics lately.

    I am a firm believer that most things are best run by the private sector, and that government serves a regulatory – not ownership – role.  Some public services appear to be in the exceptions category, but even there I believe we could do well in a properly regulated private endeavor.  But when we assign effective citizenship to corporations and deny the People the ability to override a profit-driven entity, we take away what I see as the proper balance between the two.

  50. For a study on this, see this Financial Times article.  It’s subscription or trial only; a graphic excerpt can be found here; it shows us pretty much tied with France in per-capita GDP growth.  (this data is from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development – the OECD)

    The key is “per-capita”; conservative economists like to cite the fact that European GDP has gone up more slowly than the US GDP; what they fail to account for is that the US has a much higher population growth to fuel that GDP rise.  When this is accounted for, no discernable differences can be seen.  Ireland, with the lowest tax burden, stands out as having exceptional growth over the last decade, but China isn’t on the chart at all, and its growth – in the last half-decade at least – is just as stellar; needless to say they would be on the opposite end of the tax rate chart.

    As to the comment about “liberalism” – of course today’s liberalism isn’t the same as that of the Founders.  That was the whole point of Washington’s comment; what the Founding Fathers failed to understand, he hoped time would provide understanding.  You equate Liberalism with Socialism, and that is incorrect; Liberalism is solely about understanding and caring and its application to public policy, but Socialism is solely about government vs. private control of services.  One can be Liberal and Socialist, or Conservative and Socialist, or…

  51. Phoenix,

    If C fails and we don’t have 400 mil to spend. What is the percentage shortfall in proposed spending if we were to cut across the board evenly? I can figure this out but, I don’t know how much money there is in discretionary spending. Does anybody have that number?

  52. As a former OSPB guy you can cut the shortfall by eliminating salary increases for the current fiscal year and freezing them for two years at inflation only this will eliminate any need for further cuts or you can securitize tobacco and have a flush budget but John Andrews and the gang opposed that effort, which would have eliminated the need for C&D to be on the ballot. Make no mistake Sen. President Andrews gave us C & D it didn’t have to happen, but then again losing the Senate didn’t need to happen on his watch either.

  54. Securitizing the toboacco settlement would be yet another one-time fix; we would have to put C&D back on the ballot in another couple of years anyway.  Additionally, the tobacco settlement was supposed to be purpose-spent, not used for prison and highway funding…

    I could not find specific budget numbers on salary increases, but the recommended increase was $39 million in merit-based increases, plus an additional $17 million to even out the differences between public and private sector employees.  At $56 million, this is still only a fraction of the budget shortfall for next year.

    Since you keep asking, Keith – here is the Free Colorado budget breakdown.  Prison spending accounts for just under 10% of the General Fund, so I would expect to have to release 1,000 prisoners to make up for the cut.  However, that does not take Amendment 23 requirements into account; doing so would up the number of prisoners getting out of jail “for free” to about 1,800.  Does that help?

    PS – Total State spending is $14b, General Fund is $6b, but “flexible” spending is probably under $4b, so $400 million is almost a 10% chop, and some of that is Federally matched.  I’m not going to hold to the $400m figure, I think it’s a bit high.  But it’s an easy starting point; even at half that , it’s significant.

  55. Securitizing the toboacco settlement would be yet another one-time fix; we would have to put C&D back on the ballot in another couple of years anyway.  Additionally, the tobacco settlement was supposed to be purpose-spent, not used for prison and highway funding…

    I could not find specific budget numbers on salary increases, but the recommended increase was $39 million in merit-based increases, plus an additional $17 million to even out the differences between public and private sector employees.  At $56 million, this is still only a fraction of the budget shortfall for next year.

    Since you keep asking, Keith – here is the Free Colorado budget breakdown.  Prison spending accounts for just under 10% of the budget, so I would expect to have to release 1,000 prisoners to make up for the cut.  However, that does not take Amendment 23 requirements into account; doing so would up the number of prisoners getting out of jail “for free” to about 1,800.  Does that help?

  56. Securitizing the toboacco settlement would be yet another one-time fix; we would have to put C&D back on the ballot in another couple of years anyway.  Additionally, the tobacco settlement was supposed to be purpose-spent, not used for prison and highway funding…

    I could not find specific budget numbers on salary increases, but the recommended increase was $39 million in merit-based increases, plus an additional $17 million to even out the differences between public and private sector employees.  At $56 million, this is still only a fraction of the budget shortfall for next year.

    Since you keep asking, Keith – here is the Free Colorado budget breakdown.  Prison spending accounts for just under 10% of the General Fund, so I would expect to have to release 1,000 prisoners to make up for the cut.  However, that does not take Amendment 23 requirements into account; doing so would up the number of prisoners getting out of jail “for free” to about 1,800.  Does that help?

    PS – Total State spending is $14b, General Fund is $6b, but “flexible” spending is probably under $4b, so $400 million is almost a 10% chop, and some of that is Federally matched.  I’m not going to hold to the $400m figure, I think it’s a bit high.  But it’s an easy starting point; even at half that , it’s significant.

  59. That’s my intial read based on the “pessimistic” numbers.  I am guessing that those “cuts” are only part cuts, and part failure to adjust for inflation and population growth.  And, as I said, I think the $400m figure is a bit high, and the 10% number excludes Amdt. 23 K-12 and other GF-but-not-discretionary expenditures as well (not the increases, which are now to my understanding exempted from TABOR, but the base-level spending which is not…)

  60. Phoenix has a case of the “once you start funding a program you can never stop funding it” disease.  It is politics 101: politicians want to win elections so they create their own base by creating government programs to give away the taxpayer’s money, then they take credit for being such a benevolent and caring elected official. 

    And before you say that our country has evolved since its founding how can you explain that 95% of the social programing didn’t exist before FDR?  Our country has been around for over 225 years, why did everything change all at once?

  61. Pheonix,

    If your arguement follows, why don’t we just give all our money 100% tax rate to the government and they can just spend it on government programs and for government employees. 

    When President Bush lowered the tax rate, what occurred was overall growth in the economy.  Not to mention there was overall growth in tax receipts.  I think you ought to go back and take a closer look at all these studies you claim to have in front of you.  It doesn’t make sense.

    If I’m a small business owner, you better believe that my growth is stiffled when the government increases taxes.  I have less customers willings to buy my products because both the consumer and the producer have to eat the cost to governement.  In addition, if you look at a very simple supply-demand curve you will see a “dead-weight” cost.  This constitutes a loss in efficiency or a loss in growth.

  62. Bob:

    Maybe because FDR and Eleanor were visionaries?  FDR went a bit too far, and he was slapped down for it, but his vision got us out of a Depression and through a war.  Truman’s follow-on Civil Rights actions were similarly revolutionary.  Prior to FDR, the country had been taken over by corporate interests; Teddy saw it for the problem it was…  And prior to the late 1800’s, the country was not industrialized and didn’t face the same circumstances.

    Take the Internet as a modern example; when it was young, it had no regulations.  Now, we have anti-spam laws, laws to deal with data theft, etc.  These laws grew up out of a need to prevent lawlessness in a “society” that changed from a sparsely-populated land into one that is quite crowded.  The Roosevelts were the first Presidents who dealt with the changes brought about by the Industrial Revolution head-on.  Without FDR, all other things being the same, the rich would now all be in the Bill Gates stratosphere while the middle class would all be poor.

    Got It Right: I am only pointing out fact in rebuttal to the “lower taxes = better economy” point, not making an argument of my own for higher taxes.

    When President Bush lowered the tax rate, he did nothing one way or the other for the economy, except to possibly hinder its recovery.  The fastest way to inject money into the system during an economic slowdown is not always through “trickle-down” economics – that’s only good if corporations are having a financing pinch; it’s through direct investment 1st and infusion of spending money into the lower classes 2nd that an economy can recover when financials (interest rates, etc.) are already good.  Bush has not created enough jobs to keep up with population growth; adjusted based on employed population percentages over the years, unemployment is still at 6.5%.  And barring deflation, revenues will go up every year no matter if we put a monkey in office; today the CBO released figures saying the newfound revenues are short-term only.

    While you as a small business owner in, say, the car sales business may have direct financial consequences from additional taxes, other small and large businesses benefit from the additional construction contracts, printing services, etc.  The money those people make goes back into the economy, and you might make an extra car sale or two to offset your losses.  Money doesn’t just stop at the government when you pay your taxes; it circulates just as surely from government as from any other expenditure.

  63. Oh, and Bob:

    If you want me to recommend we stop funding something, how about we spend less money on a department that specifically directs Federal money to religions, and instead of a department make it a policy?

    Or how about we eliminate any group called the Office of Special Plans, epecially when they’re designed to “re-evaluate” intelligence for political purposes?

    How about we eliminate the $12 (15?) billion in subsidies we pay to the petrofuels industry every year?  Or the billions we pay agrobusiness instead of small farmers?

    Or, we could drastically reduce Medicaid, CHIP, Food Stamps, and Welfare payouts by mandating a location-based living wage standard.

    We could resolve all of those pesky illegal immigrant problems if we stepped up and created strong protections against counterfeit documents and created a way for employers to validate their employee’s status.  According to some, that alone would save hundreds of millions…

    Locally, I’m all for reducing the prison population: how about we let people go who don’t pose a threat to society and committed victimless crimes on the privacy of their own person?

  64. More importantly than having to respond to shareholders, corporations have to respond to customers. That is the key of a free market society. If you stop buying the products or the (people stop working for that corporation), the corporation either adapts or goes out of business. When you dictate how a business may or may not operate, you stiffle growth. Look at the failed experiments of the Soviet Union. 100% government control resulted in…anyone? The break up of the Soviet Union.

  66. Phoenix,

    As Senator Moynihan once said, “everyone entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.”

    FDR may have been a visionary, and he may have led the U.S. during WWII, but the programs he established at the start of WWII (which by his own words were supposed to be temporary) have failed.  Ask any credible economist what caused the end to the Great Depression and 95% will tell you that it was the start of WWII, factories started working, men went to war, and everyone who wanted a job could get one.  As for the “corporate interests” sure there were plenty of corrupt people in the corporate world, but FDR didn’t take care of them, that process was started under Teddy and continued under Taft.

    Your rich vs. poor argument, is false from the word go.  You can only accept your premise if you say that there is a finite amount of wealth in the world, that for someone to gain means that someone has to lose.  That is completely false; people create new wealth all the time.  Let?s take a baker, he takes ingredients that are available to anyone and makes pies, which he sells for a profit.  The end product is worth more than the raw ingredients so he makes a profit because people who buy the pies what it more than they want their money.  But his gain isn’t a loss for anyone else. 

    As for your economic recovery theory, it is full of holes.  As was said in an earlier thread, if your logic is correct we should raise taxes to 100% and then we would all be rich.  First, your basic premise that “Bush has not created enough jobs to keep up with population growth” is flawed because last time I check the president wasn’t responsible for finding citizens jobs.  The Bush Administration has fostered a better business climate by reducing taxes, allowing business to invest in capital improvements and hire more employees.  In addition, by cutting taxes he has increased the amount of revenue paid through taxes to the government and even though the large increase that we are experiencing in revenue may not be maintained at its current levels, it will continue to increase. 

    As for your last point, it is a government controlled economy in its purist form which tries to reallocate wealth through the tax code.  In a market economy millions of decisions are made on a daily basis that can respond to market pressures. In your gov’t controlled economy the central planners in Washington who are deciding how to reallocate the wealth can never keep up with the changing market demands.

    Finally you are right, money does not stop at the government, but if I was an investor I would never put my money into a company where a dollar goes in but only .60 cents of less comes out.

  67. I don’t have time to rebut your entire statement of lies but why don’t you show the facts that backs up this statement, particularly the part about how Bush?s tax policy has caused more jobs.

    “The Bush Administration has fostered a better business climate by reducing taxes, allowing business to invest in capital improvements and hire more employees”

    Companies are spending Bush’s tax cut give away on overseas investment and money back to their shareholders.  The money is not being spent on more workers as each month?s labor stats so painfully show us.  And us the regular citizens have to pay higher taxes when companies don’t pay their fair share and use the money from Bush’s tax give away to fund their operations oversea or back to the shareholders, which I am sure are really hurting.  You want to say the money is going from the Rich to Poor when in fact the current tax policy is causing taxes to go up higher on the poor to supliment the less taxes on the Rich.

    Keep the lies coming, it is the only thing that keep Bush’s failed domestic (and international) agenda alive in some peoples head.

  68. Marshall, of course more money is being spent on workers. Thats why the unemployment rate is only 5%, 1 point away from being what Phoenix calls great. Less taxes means more jobs. Dude, we’re living it. Its all around you.

  69. Marshall, you are just wrong.  According to the CBO the top 20% of wage earners pay 80% of the taxes in the U.S. and the 50% pay 96.3% of taxes.  No one who is below the poverty line even pays income tax and most below $30,000 pay very little.  To say that the rich are not paying their fair share is ignorant.

    As for the Bush economic policy creating more jobs, just pick up a basic economic book to find out how economies work. 

    And those shareholders you villify are all around us, including the CEA, AFL-CIO, the Teamsters, and a host of other unions.

  70. Keith – see my correction elsewhere on the unemployment numbers; the government is only reporting a 5% unemployment, but percentage of population in the workforce is down more than a full percent since 2000.  6.5% is probably a more accurate figure.  There are 150,000 new people entering the workforce every month; times 60 (five years times twelve months), that’s 9 million new workers; Bush has created around 1.5 million new jobs – that means we are proportionally down 7.5 million jobs since Bush took office.  By no controlling measure can the figure of 5% unemployment be justified.

    The logic that says that we’ve gained jobs is as accurate as that which says the State budget has increased every year since 1992.  True in a literal sense, but utterly dishonest to a true statistical understanding.

  71. Bob – let me quote the Wikipedia article on the Great Depression.

    Thus the statement “it was World War II that ended the Depression”, while often asserted by partisans as proof that the New Deal “failed” is, in fact, the view that the architects of the New Deal themselves saw as the reality: that as long as Europe was marching towards war, Japan was engaged in imperial conquest, and the international debt and trading system were still organized in an attempt by creditors to be paid back for World War I at pre-war values for gold, that a full solution to the economic crisis was impossible.

    The New Deal instituted various corporate reforms, including wage and price controls, the FDIC, and controls on predatory lending.

    Nowhere do I claim that no-one could have risen from the ranks of the poor under a non-FDR system, but it is that system that regulates the floor of our economy today; prior to the FDR era, few controls existed preventing things like the mine riots and brutal enforcement of corporate interests by the government.

    I would ask: would you feel better as a worker living under the early 1900’s system at a factory, mine, or farm?  No safety standards, no standard work week, and little pay?

  75. The Pro-C folks are filming a commercial tomorrow at 9:00 am at the Denver City Park Boat House.

    See if we can get some ‘Vote No, it’s your dough’ in the shot.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

243 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!