I was watching the Fox Business pundits late last night. I have to say I was astounded by the lengths not just the normal assortment of Dem PR flacks, but most of the normally-relatively-rational people like Cavuto, were going to give blowjobs to the genius of Obama and bow at the altar over the as-yet-uncompleted tax deal. The shallowness of reasoning apparent across the spectrum was shocking.
First, this is the ONLY thing he has compromised on in two frickin' years. Aside from favors from asylum runaways like Collins and Snowe, EVERY other 'Compromise' so far was just settling factional squabbles within his own damn' Party, and therefore ultimately handled by Reid or Pelosi, not him. Hailing him for a genius move now is like calling a Colts-Redskins game for the Redskins at the half with the Colts up by 14, just because the Redskins finally completed a first down.
Jesus, people. Get a grip! ONE agreement, on which he hasn't ceased namecalling and kvetching yet, is NOT a trend, it is NOT triangulation, it is NOT a sudden astute move of his whole agenda to the center to play for the independents. Journalists are always dying to ram current events into a paradigm from living memory, and their predictive ability therefore blows. For instance, EVERY military expeditionary event since 1970 has caused the literati to trot out inapt comparisons to Viet Nam. How useful, instructive, or predictive has any of that been? That's right, it's garbage.
Those who ignore history may be doomed to repeat it, but those who seek to ram everything in the framework of any particular historical event with only names changed is doomed to be dead wrong about the outcome.
Second, the numbers being played with are total bullshit to boot. I swear some of the pundits said BOTH that it's 850-whatever-billion increase to the deficit AND avoiding the biggest tax hike in U.S. history out of the same mouth. Craptastic drivel! First, the number for increase to the deficit is based not only on the assumption that the demand for revenue (Spending) continues to grow unabated (May well happen), but also that the reduction in taxes will have
NO effect on gross revenue (Which I'm sure the Democrats believe, but the Fiscal Conservatives were spouting the same line, which should be at odds with their whole basis for wanting the damned cuts).
Third, neither side is right.
The Dems are just class warring. They have no rational explanation for why increasing taxes on a $300,000 income is good, while increasing taxes on a $200,000 income is bad. Their position has everything to do with vote-whoring and NOTHING to do with any kind of rational economics.
The GOP, ah the GOP. A lot of what they are saying about the tax deal is BS too, except for the insiders who get special pork deliveries in the deal-making, this is NOT going to deliver on the economic end to anywyhere near the extent they're touting it -
1. The idea that current tax rates are going to be renewed for the short term is pretty well already discounted in share prices at this point and it shouldn't have any earthquake effect on the markets, of course the additional certainty of an actual bill would move it a bit higher as the more-cautious process it.
2. Ten years is like a geological epoch in business, a 'Temporary' tax change that expires in ten years puts the expiration so far away that hiring increases greatly because the time until the bad rates return is longer than 90% of the employees are going to be on board anyway. Two years, though, is NOT a long time, by the time any deal is closed in Congress and implemented, and with all the demogoguery of the next campaign only a year away, you're really looking at an employment window of a year to 18 months, which screams 'Temps' or 'Subcontractors,' NOT 'Hire permanent employees.' Its effect on unemployment rates will be a lot more modest than the proponents are claiming due to the basic flaw of the very limited duration of the rate change.
End of rant. I could be 100% wrong. We'll see.
