8 thoughts on “Big Time

  1. 108 says:

    I disagree. You (and Brooks) are avoiding the practical to muddy the waters with the philosophical.

    The country can’t keep borrowing a trillion dollars a year.

    Minus a trillion dollars in spending we still have robust government.

  2. I have always admired David Brooks for his intellectual honesty, which seems to be lacking in most consevative circles.
    While I disagree with the “small government” crowd on principle, I would appreciate the argument if I thought they were being intelluctually honest and consistent.
    Please don’t try to hide your disdain for social programs behind the “lower taxes will help stimulate the economy and create jobs for poor people” mantra. Their real constituents are the rich and powerful, the large corporations, and they need to make the “we’re on the side of the little guy” argument to obfuscate the real agenda.
    The President said in his inaugural address “”The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works” Sound familiar?

  3. PM says:

    So, all you “cut spending” types–seems that the house republicans have already backed off of their pledge to cut $100 billions from the budget.

    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/House-Republicans-Already-Walking-Back-Pledge-to-Cut-100-Billion-From-Budget-6447

    Not even in power one day and they are backing away from their central campaign promise. I suppose it won’t be long until they are back to their old tricks, and will will be increasing the deficit thru unfunded tax cuts and spending increases and earmarks for republican constituencies…….

    Got to be Proud of old man Boner!

    1. Ellen Mrja says:

      Respect here, all right? He also had the biggest — uh — what d’ya call it? — oh yeah, I remember — gavel the more qualified, rarified and sanctified members of the house reported they could remember.

  4. So where was his voice of ‘reason’ when it mattered these past 12ish years? When told by this handlers to be quiet and toe the line, there he went asking in his inside voice ‘which toe.’

    Anyway, to your question of big or small government…for setting policy, it doesn’t matter the size of the kabuki theater troupe, does it? For providing govt services, the size depends on your govt budget and your willingness to accept deficit spending…and your willingness to drive around closed bridges…and your willingness to home-school your kids (and future coworker / employees).

    Or maybe it comes down to a person’s willingness to change things…because if it continues to remain this low, then it doesn’t matter, does it…because they will merely accept being taken for the ride the oligarchs are taking them.

  5. john sherman says:

    There’s an interesting smash coming between the libertarians and the social conservatives. Many of the former have no problem with homosexuality, smoking dope or gambling, but it’s exactly the opposite with social conservatives who fiercely oppose them, except maybe gambling when it’s done in the church basement.

    The problem with the tea baggers is that they’re fake populists ginned together by Dick Armey and the Koch brothers. The history of American populism, whether the FL, NPL, IWW or the Grange, is a fierce antagonism to big business. De facto the tea baggers are doing the bidding of plutocracy.

    In general, that’s what’s wrong with libertarianism–a blinkered view of how our economy actually works. In many respects competition is a great idea, particularly in business, but the enemy is not big government, but big business. A couple of months ago the the strib had an interesting business section; on the first page was a story about a Minnesota medical device maker which made a monitor for diabetics that alerted them when their glucose readings got too low. The device had cleared the FDA, gone into production, and the first product run had sold out, so the company was looking futilely for funding for a second run. On the inside was a story about how mergers and acquisitions, which are more likely to cost jobs than create them, were going great guns. Big business has no interest in competition because it’s unprofitable to them..

Comments are closed.