A jukebox that only plays one song

The deficit is high, the debt is growing, the war’s financial costs are exorbitant, and the nation is just coming to grips with the need for a sizable investment in the nation’s bridges and infrastructure.

Given this environment, the president has a plan: more tax cuts.

President Bush said yesterday that he is considering a fresh plan to cut tax rates for U.S. corporations to make them more competitive around the world, an initiative that could further inflame a battle with the Democratic Congress over spending and taxes and help define the remainder of his tenure.

Advisers presented Bush with a series of ideas to restructure corporate taxes, possibly eliminating narrowly targeted breaks to pay for a broader, across-the-board rate cut. In an interview with a small group of journalists afterward, Bush said he was “inclined” to send a corporate tax package to Congress, although he expressed uncertainty about its political viability.

“Uncertainty”? I realize congressional Dems haven’t delivered many victories on military and/or national security policy lately, but there is simply no way Congress is seriously going to consider another irresponsible tax-cut package. That Bush would even recommend it suggests his connection to reality is tenuous.

What on earth could the president be thinking? Apparently, he’s going for tax cuts because he’s run out of other ideas.

The focus on economic issues on Bush’s last day in Washington before leaving town today for most of the rest of the month reflected a White House strategy to confront Democrats on tax and spending issues. With most of his second-term domestic legislative agenda in tatters and his strategy in Iraq under bipartisan fire, Bush appears eager to return to familiar issues that animated the beginning of his presidency and might rally disaffected Republicans behind him again.

Fascinating. Bush has no policy agenda to speak of, and can’t think of any new ideas. So, he’s apparently come to the conclusion that he should seek corporate tax cuts, not because they’re needed, but because he has nothing else to offer. He’s like a jukebox that only plays one song.

Speaking of the nation’s finances, the downturn in the housing market has caused quite a bit of unease among economists and investors. To help soften the blow, a variety of experts are calling on policy makers to allow Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy mortgages and mortgage-backed securities, and consider bailouts of lenders threatened by the subprime home-loan crisis.

Bush rejected both ideas out of hand.

Bush threw cold water on proposals to have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac come to the rescue: “The first thing we back is reforming these entities. It’s time to get them to focus on their core business in the first place. And we put forth a reform plan. . . . Let’s get them reformed first, and now is the time to get it done.”

Some analysts argue that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac already have the ability to pump more money into the troubled mortgage markets. Instead of buying more mortgages, they could package them into securities for sale to other investors, and the backing of the government-chartered firms could give investors the confidence to buy the securities, analysts say.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of the Senate banking committee, said some on Wall Street are “on the edge of being panicked” about mortgage markets. “There’s a prominent notion that the regulators should get together and do something,” he said. “And a good number of people think Fannie and Freddie are the answer, including some very conservative people.”

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae owned the mortgages or mortgage-backed securities, they would be better able than other investors to renegotiate terms to prevent borrowers from losing their homes.

Frank said it is the White House that has held up reform of the companies by opposing legislation the House passed this year to create a stronger regulator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Once in a while, I have to wonder if the president just doesn’t like America.

sometimes i get the feeling that these clowns just sit down and try to think of all the ways that they can screw america, on purpose……..

  • Ahh, one more dip into the cookie jar of America’s treasure, if only to ensure tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Might as well, huh? The populace gets fed up with the handouts, elects Democrats to fix the mess and create a surplus, during which the conservatives dig up some psuedo-scandal that disgusts just enough people to give them control again. Rinse, repeat.

    Conservatives do not believe in ‘big government;’ –that it cannot work. And then they get elected and prove it, time and time again. We’re in a circular hell, fixing/ruining/fixing ‘problems,’ bastardizing the very idea of America.

  • I think this is great news. First, it finally answers the question “is Bush evil or stupid?” We can now safely say “stupid.” His bad politics is our gain.

    Please, please, please bring a tax cut bill and put what little is left of your political capital on it, just days after the Minneapolis briedge collapse and reports on the neglected state of infrastructure, after another mine collapse, a month after New York steam tunnels explode, in a summer where airline on-time performance hit its lowest figure in 13 years, and when magazines are doing their annual Katrina retrospective. If there was ever an (overdue) environment in which to convince traditionally brow-beaten Democrats that one really can vote “no” on a tax cut, this is it. To get the public to finally realize what Grover’s bathtub has truly wrought. To have a debate that educates people on why you really do need some government spending here and there.

    Oh yes yes yes. Lets go there.

  • There is one reason for all of this and it is the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2008. The only hope the GOP candidate has, no matter whom it is, to win is to shout the GOP lies loder than ever. The American people need to ignore the crappy economy and growing wealth gap and focus on the fact that the tax and spend Democrats want your money.

    I wish my faith in the American people was great enough to believe this will never work. Alas, I have seen too many poor choices made by the electorate since the early 90s and cannot count out the tried and true GOP plan.

  • What on earth could the president be thinking? Apparently, he’s going for tax cuts because he’s run out of other ideas.

    What do you mean “other ideas?”

    How long do you let a giant science-fiction insect suck your skull? Because he’ll keep going until your head implodes unless you do something to get him the fuck off you.

  • The major unknown today is how the sub prime mortgage mess will affect the economy. If Bush is worried about that then the answer probably is to reduce interest rates or increase the deficit over the very short term.

    Cutting taxes will increase the deficit over the intermediate term. They can’t cut the taxes fast enough to put money in your pocket this month.

    But don’t forget that cutting taxes is the cure to every problem.

    We had surpluses when Bush was running for President so we should cut taxes.
    We had a slowing economy so we should cut taxes
    We had 9-11 so we should cut taxes
    We had a recession so we should cut taxes
    We had a slow recovery so we should cut taxes

    Did I forget any?

    Bush’s poll numbers are down we should cut taxes

    Today is Thursday we should cut taxes.

  • It does seem to be the one thing they reach for, when all else fails, doesn’t it? It’s because we’re all supposed to be shopping away our fear, you know, racking up the sales at the mall; shop early and often, but whatever you do, don’t bother trying to save any money: it only helps the terrorists.

    Just go shopping. It will make you feel better about the roads and bridges that are falling apart, the food you aren’t sure is safe to eat, the drugs that might kill you before they cure you, the higher cost of health care, the decline in essential services because the revenue to pay for it is dropping, whether you will still have a job next week, and whether your spouse will ever be employed again, how you will pay for your kids’ college, whether you will ever be able to afford to retire.

    Yeah, go shopping. I’m sure you can think of something you just have to have that only costs $1.29.

  • $1.29? But Anne, I just got an $8000 raise, at least on average. I should spend it all, and then put a little more on credit for good measure. Otherwise the terra-ists win!

  • Let’s be honest about this—the only way that Bu$h is going to give a rat’s posterior about “infrastructure” is if the wings fall off Air Force One, half-way between DC and Crawford, with one wing landing on Cheney, the other wing landing on Rove, the burning fuel landing on Gonzo, and the fuselage (with Bu$h still inside, of course) landing atop a GOP primary debate with all the candidates fielding questions from Coyote-scat Robertson, Flush Limbaugh, Shill O’Reilly, and Spew Hewitt.

  • Well, Zeitgeist – by the time you factor in what the tax cuts really end up costing, I figure the $8,000 raise we all allegedly got nets out to about $1.29.

    But, if you have extra – lunch is on you!

  • I would be curious to know where the money to continue the war in Iraq is going to come from?

    Taxes pay for the things Bush and the GOP don’t like (i.e. every social program out there) but they do pay for things they love (wars, weapons, and spying).

  • “I would be curious to know where the money to continue the war in Iraq is going to come from?”

    oh, that’s easy – our children, our grandchildren, their grandchildren and who knows how many more generations beyond that.

  • The best way to make US businesses more competitive would have been to provide national, single-payer health care. The cost of providing health care to current employees as well as retirees is a major burden yet it goes unmentioned. That fact would lead a cynic to suspect that Bush is interested more in another transfer of wealth than he is in competitiveness.

    As for transferring those sub-prime mortgages; isn’t it interesting how, now that everyone has squeezed what they can out of them, it’s suddenly time for a Federally backed bailout? Several blogs have been raising red flags about the dangers of sub-prime lending for months and somehow none of this information reached beyond blogdom. Right.

    Why, in both cases, am I reminded of Monty Python’s “Dead Parrot” sketch.

  • “Advisers presented Bush with a series of ideas to restructure corporate taxes, possibly eliminating narrowly targeted breaks to pay for a broader, across-the-board rate cut.”

    If we weren’t in the hole we’re in now,. isn’t this the type of tax cut that we’re supposed to prefer?

  • Just a Corporate Military Industrial alcoholic. A thousand’s not enough and one’s too many.

    But of course, keeping in mind the recent Congressional repeal of the Fourth Amendment, I wouldn’t be surprised to see King George receive the ransom for his corporate masters.

    I noticed the Dick-tator hovering ominously and unnecessarily in the background of King George’s edict. He looked ready to twist a few arms.

  • “What on earth could the president be thinking?” -CB

    You give the guy more credit than I do. I assume he stopped thinking years ago.

  • How many corporate bucks just went to the RNC ??
    It’s not about tax cuts, it’s about dollars, votes, and most importantly, distraction. AM radio needs something to squawk about with DC is on vacation.

    If it drives the blogs crazy, then it’s probably a good idea as they see it.

  • On August 9th, 2007 at 9:30 am, neil wilson said:
    “The major unknown today is how the sub prime mortgage mess will affect the economy.”

    This is really not an unknown factor. I work in the industry and it is going to take about 2 years to recover from this. After that point most of the ARM products wil have adjusted to a point where if a default is likely it will happen.

    The defaults and foreclosures will flood the housing market and lower the prices. At the same time reduced availability to sub-prime borrowers will shrink the pool of people who can get a loan. This will ripple through the economy and it will hurt. Eventually it will stablize and we will recover. This is a bubble and it has burst. States across the country are addressing these issues and already have corrective regulations in place.

    Tax cuts for corporations will do nothing for the economy. It will, however, prop up corporate profits and investor returns. They are proposing to pump the money into the wrong half of the equasion. Luckily, the Democratic Congress will never allow this to happen. Right?

  • just bill: sometimes i get the feeling that these clowns just sit down and try to think of all the ways that they can screw america, on purpose……..

    Is it possible for one man, one organization or one ideology to be so wrong this many times without some kind of a plan? A broken clock is right twice a day. It takes a very smart clock to avoid those two daily occurrences.

  • You don’t seriously think we ought to be bailing out sub-prime lenders and the wealthy investment housess that supported them do you? It’s like the S&L shit all over again. The industry made risky loans to folks they knew wouldn’t be able to pay them back and then got made whole again by the Feds. Why in the world should their risky behavior be rewarded with a bail-out?

    Remember, sub-prime is the nice term. The street term is predatory lender. These are the guys who talk people into refinancing a nearly paid home to do rehab and then jack the rates through the roof. Everyone who ever touched a sub-prime loan ought to pay the price for aiding and abetting this crime against low-income borrowers.Why spread the pain around and let them off the hook. Crooks wrote the paper, mortgage bankers bought it and bundled them, and Wall Street bought and sold mortgage-backed securities.

    Let them all hang. Maybe then they’ll understand the pain of the grandmother who lost her house to one of the loans they made money off of.

  • Personally, I find watching the hedge funds going down in flames quite enjoyable. As for those morons who thought the law of gravity had been repealed, “go see the chaplain and get your t.s. card punched,” to use an old military expression that pretty much means what Dick Cheney once said to Senator Leahy.

    I hate to say this, but it took the Great Depression to get rid of Traditional Republican Economics for 50 years. I hesitate to think what it’s going to take to get rid of Bushonomics, but we’re just seeing the start.

  • Absolutely, the sub prime lenders should take their losses and shouldn’t be bailed out.

    However, there is a risk in doing that.

    Pretend these numbers are correct.

    If the government don’t spend $100 billion to bail out the lenders then there is a 1 in a million chance of having a recession like 1990.

    Obviously, we shouldn’t bail them out and take the risk,

    However, what if we know that if we don’t bail them out then there is a 90% chance of causing a panic and having another great depression.

    Then, obviously, we need to hold our noses and bail them out.

    The problem with what I am saying is that we don’t know what the odds are, we don’t know what the risks are, we don’t know very much.

    My point was that if we are really concerned with the sub prime mess then tax cuts are not the solution. Lowering interest rates is more likely to be the solution.

  • “I hate to say this, but it took the Great Depression to get rid of Traditional Republican Economics for 50 years. I hesitate to think what it’s going to take to get rid of Bushonomics, but we’re just seeing the start.” — Tom Cleaver

    I feel the same way. What troubles me still — and this corporate tax cut is a good example — is that Bush has so much time left to screw up more of America. The corporate tax cut may signal that Bush will concentrate his remaining months on enriching his friends to an even greater degree. You might call it a “surge.”

  • The other advantage of Neil Wilson’s conclusion (address this issue with interest rate reductions, not tax breaks) is where it applies the relief. Tax breaks for the rich, or pure corporate bail-outs, take the pain away from the lenders, funds and other financial institutions while doing nothing for the individual citizens who are in a bad financial situation (albeit to some degree of their own making – I don’t have a huge amount of sympathy for anyone in any part of this problem). Reducing rates moves their ARMs back down, and increases demand activity in the housing market, keeping them from losing the value of their equity.

    This is not mere softy-liberalism: contrary to Rethug trickle-down theory, the real driver of the economy is mass consumption. Take away any discretionary spending ability and consumer confidence from the bottom 2/3rd of the consumer economy and watch the whole house of cards crash down.

    And before it can happen again, this might be a fine time to point out that regulation is not always a bad word.

  • It’s so interesting – many millions of Americans are losing their homes, the mortgage industry is shredding itself and Bush has NO policy ideas.

    Ah yes, proactively assisting regular W-2 wage earners is just sooooo Democratic

    No doubt, defeating a tax cut, ANY tax cut will be spun by the R’s as a Democratic tax increase.

    Once again Bush is playing a Lose-Lose game. From the day he was elected it’s been lose-lose. (Except for the wealthiest 1% and Halliburton)

  • sometimes i get the feeling that these clowns just sit down and try to think of all the ways that they can screw america, on purpose…….. just bill @ 1

    Yeah, when I started feeling that way 2/3 of the time I decided it was true.

  • As a bonus for bush, both words are only one syllable, easy to pronounce, and, should the need arise, he is fairly certain that he can spell them.

  • If there is one thing the Bushies know for sure, it’s that many people and corporations will sell there souls for a “tax break”. It worked perfectly in 2000 and probably is still as effective today. That’s what our Country has come to. Greed instead of the Common Good.

  • George the Lesser never seems to get it right; even when the problem has been identified for him. The problem for U.S. corporations competing in the world market is not excessive taxation. It’s the health care costs in their operating budgets that foreign companies by and large do not incur.

    Therefore the obvious corporate welfare program that we could all support is singe payer health care.

    Think outside the box George.

  • Before you start delving into the Bush psyche as to the reasons for tax cuts, remember this.
    George W. Bush still has several years of life left in him. After he leaves the White House, what will he be doing?
    If his past is any indication, he will be making bad business decisions and allowing his corporate buddies to bail him out.
    This may be his last chance to do favors for, and otherwise “butter up”, the corporate buddies.

  • You Left-wing people are truly idiots.The reason big corporations got tax cuts is because they hire people.If we let the Democrats win taxes will increase on everybody.
    Hillary Clinton was pictured on a magazine say “Big business loves Hillary”.
    She owns stock in 1 of the big oil companies too.
    The Democrats are filled with Liars.
    I know somebody that will cut John Edwards hair for $400 up to $1200 too.

  • You are some Left-wing loonies,you don’t know nothing about what you all are talking about.The tax cuts were given to those that hire people.Right now we have historically low unemployment.if you raise taxes like the Dumb-O’-craps wanna do,you will double and triple unemployment,like Jimmy Carter,the worst President ever did.
    Beside,you want Hillary Clinton to keep getting her money from big oil and John Edwards to be able to pay for his $400 and $1200 haircuts,don’t you?

  • Comments are closed.