The Premiership of Ms Truss (on the hard right of the Tory party) has
fallen foul of the policy of keeping up spending, whilst cutting lots of
taxes on businesses and the well off - with the shortfall to be made up
by those nice pink unicorns presumably.

As an old codger, I thought it was Labour governments who tried to spend
far more money than the piggy-bank held, but everything seems to have
changed.

On further reflection, the US seems to be in exactly the same state.
Mr Fiscal Responsibility Paul Ryan supervised a huge tax cut for the
wealthy that lead to a massive increase in borrowing.

What is going on?

--
Sam Plusnet

On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 21:28:21 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

>The Premiership of Ms Truss (on the hard right of the Tory party) has
>fallen foul of the policy of keeping up spending, whilst cutting lots of
>taxes on businesses and the well off - with the shortfall to be made up
>by those nice pink unicorns presumably.
>
>As an old codger, I thought it was Labour governments who tried to spend
>far more money than the piggy-bank held, but everything seems to have
>changed.
>
>On further reflection, the US seems to be in exactly the same state.
>Mr Fiscal Responsibility Paul Ryan supervised a huge tax cut for the
>wealthy that lead to a massive increase in borrowing.
>
>What is going on?

Politics.

(invoice in the mail)

On 22/10/22 07:28, Sam Plusnet wrote:

> The Premiership of Ms Truss (on the hard right of the Tory party) has
> fallen foul of the policy of keeping up spending, whilst cutting
> lots of taxes on businesses and the well off - with the shortfall to
> be made up by those nice pink unicorns presumably.
>
> As an old codger, I thought it was Labour governments who tried to
> spend far more money than the piggy-bank held, but everything seems
> to have changed.
>
> On further reflection, the US seems to be in exactly the same state.
> Mr Fiscal Responsibility Paul Ryan supervised a huge tax cut for the
> wealthy that lead to a massive increase in borrowing.
>
> What is going on?

I can answer from the viewpoint of my own country. There have been so
many tax cuts over the years that the government no longer has
sufficient revenue to fund the normal responsibilities of government.
Now, our present government is caught between the horns of a dilemma. On
the one hand, it's obvious to nearly everyone that those cuts need to be
reversed to save the national economy. On the other hand, all of our
politicians have had it drilled into them that raising taxes is
political suicide.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

* Peter Moylan:

> I can answer from the viewpoint of my own country. There have been so
> many tax cuts over the years that the government no longer has
> sufficient revenue to fund the normal responsibilities of government.
> Now, our present government is caught between the horns of a dilemma. On
> the one hand, it's obvious to nearly everyone that those cuts need to be
> reversed to save the national economy. On the other hand, all of our
> politicians have had it drilled into them that raising taxes is
> political suicide.

Isn't that what change of government is for, so each party can in turn
raise the taxes on their non-voters?

Yeah, I see how that doesn't work. It's even worse than a prisoner's
dilemma.
--
For since no male
Has ruled me or has fed,
I think my own thoughts
In my woman's head. -- Lesbia Harford, Fatherless

On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 4:28:26 PM UTC-4, Sam Plusnet wrote:

> The Premiership of Ms Truss (on the hard right of the Tory party) has
> fallen foul of the policy of keeping up spending, whilst cutting lots of
> taxes on businesses and the well off - with the shortfall to be made up
> by those nice pink unicorns presumably.
>
> As an old codger, I thought it was Labour governments who tried to spend
> far more money than the piggy-bank held,

Maybe out your way, but around here the republicans _accuse_ the
Democrat of doing that, but it's actually the republicans who do it.

New Jersey for decades alternated between republican and Democratic
governors, because the republicans would cut taxes and increase spending
(except that they didn't fund the pensions for retired state employees), and
get reelected, and make the deficit soar, and finally the voters twigged to it
and elected a Democrat, who had to raise taxes to try to cover the republican
spending, and so were not reelected four years later.

The current governor is the first reelected Democrat in ages. But he had
a pandemic to deal with, and the windfall of Federal spending.

> but everything seems to have
> changed.
>
> On further reflection, the US seems to be in exactly the same state.
> Mr Fiscal Responsibility Paul Ryan supervised a huge tax cut for the
> wealthy that lead to a massive increase in borrowing.

Paul Ryan??? Where did that name come from? He was briefly the
Speaker (didn't want the job) -- during the Obama administration,
so anything that might have passed both House and Senate would
have been vetoed -- and was plucked out of the House to be Romney's
running-mate in '12.

> What is going on?

Just bog-standard "conservative" fiscal policy.

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:03:02 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter Moylan:
> > I can answer from the viewpoint of my own country. There have been so
> > many tax cuts over the years that the government no longer has
> > sufficient revenue to fund the normal responsibilities of government.
> > Now, our present government is caught between the horns of a dilemma. On
> > the one hand, it's obvious to nearly everyone that those cuts need to be
> > reversed to save the national economy. On the other hand, all of our
> > politicians have had it drilled into them that raising taxes is
> > political suicide.
>
> Isn't that what change of government is for, so each party can in turn
> raise the taxes on their non-voters?

When have republicans ever raised taxes? Their ads are all about how
"we cut your taxes" -- even though the cuts affected low-income people
minimally and rich people maximally. (Except this year their ads are all
about crime -- as if the House of Representatives has anything to do
with "defunding the police" [dumbest political slogan ever] or "bail reform"
or "firing librul district attorneys" -- but it's all they can put up against
"deny abortions even to save the life of the mother." There are a good
half-dozen close House races in the NY media market, also NYS governor.)

> Yeah, I see how that doesn't work. It's even worse than a prisoner's
> dilemma.

On Sat, 22 Oct 2022 08:09:46 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 4:28:26 PM UTC-4, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>
>> The Premiership of Ms Truss (on the hard right of the Tory party) has
>> fallen foul of the policy of keeping up spending, whilst cutting lots of
>> taxes on businesses and the well off - with the shortfall to be made up
>> by those nice pink unicorns presumably.
>>
>> As an old codger, I thought it was Labour governments who tried to spend
>> far more money than the piggy-bank held,
>
>Maybe out your way, but around here the republicans _accuse_ the
>Democrat of doing that, but it's actually the republicans who do it.
>
>New Jersey for decades alternated between republican and Democratic
>governors, because the republicans would cut taxes and increase spending
>(except that they didn't fund the pensions for retired state employees), and
>get reelected, and make the deficit soar, and finally the voters twigged to it
>and elected a Democrat, who had to raise taxes to try to cover the republican
>spending, and so were not reelected four years later.
>
>The current governor is the first reelected Democrat in ages. But he had
>a pandemic to deal with, and the windfall of Federal spending.
>
>> but everything seems to have
>> changed.
>>
>> On further reflection, the US seems to be in exactly the same state.
>> Mr Fiscal Responsibility Paul Ryan supervised a huge tax cut for the
>> wealthy that lead to a massive increase in borrowing.
>
>Paul Ryan??? Where did that name come from? He was briefly the
>Speaker (didn't want the job) -- during the Obama administration,
>so anything that might have passed both House and Senate would
>have been vetoed -- and was plucked out of the House to be Romney's
>running-mate in '12.
>
>> What is going on?
>
>Just bog-standard "conservative" fiscal policy.

Always helpful to recall political scientist Harold Lasswell's
definition of "politics"":

“Who gets what, when, how.”

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Politics-Who-Gets-What-When-How

Aristotle wrote one of the first books on politics, titled: "The Politics" (Politiki) Η ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΗ".

-- Wikipedia.

On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 4:28:26 PM UTC-4, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> The Premiership of Ms Truss (on the hard right of the Tory party) has
> fallen foul of the policy of keeping up spending, whilst cutting lots of
> taxes on businesses and the well off - with the shortfall to be made up
> by those nice pink unicorns presumably.
>
> As an old codger, I thought it was Labour governments who tried to spend
> far more money than the piggy-bank held, but everything seems to have
> changed.
>
> On further reflection, the US seems to be in exactly the same state.

"Seems" doesn't say a whole lot.

> Mr Fiscal Responsibility Paul Ryan supervised a huge tax cut for the
> wealthy that lead to a massive increase in borrowing.

Paul Ryan said "You Have To Spend A Little To Grow A Little". Paul Ryan also supported Bush's 2002 stimulus and supported bailing out automakers in 2008. Fiscal Responsibility? Who have you been listening to? Just sayin'.

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:17:20 AM UTC-4, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:03:02 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> > * Peter Moylan:
> > > I can answer from the viewpoint of my own country. There have been so
> > > many tax cuts over the years that the government no longer has
> > > sufficient revenue to fund the normal responsibilities of government.
> > > Now, our present government is caught between the horns of a dilemma. On
> > > the one hand, it's obvious to nearly everyone that those cuts need to be
> > > reversed to save the national economy. On the other hand, all of our
> > > politicians have had it drilled into them that raising taxes is
> > > political suicide.
> >
> > Isn't that what change of government is for, so each party can in turn
> > raise the taxes on their non-voters?
> When have republicans ever raised taxes?

Every time. I like these three newspaper blurbs:

- By GOP Standards, Bush Raised Taxes 178 Times
(www.latimes.com Sep 16, 1992)

- Why Don't Democrats Attack Trump's Middle-class Tax Hike?
(nymag.com Aug 2, 2019)

- Reagan raised taxes several times after 1981.
-- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/09/28/i-helped-create-the-gop-tax-myth-trump-is-wrong-tax-cuts-dont-equal-growth/

On 23/10/22 02:17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:03:02 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter Moylan:
>>> I can answer from the viewpoint of my own country. There have
>>> been so many tax cuts over the years that the government no
>>> longer has sufficient revenue to fund the normal responsibilities
>>> of government. Now, our present government is caught between the
>>> horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, it's obvious to nearly
>>> everyone that those cuts need to be reversed to save the national
>>> economy. On the other hand, all of our politicians have had it
>>> drilled into them that raising taxes is political suicide.
>>
>> Isn't that what change of government is for, so each party can in
>> turn raise the taxes on their non-voters?
>
> When have republicans ever raised taxes?

A tax cut for the rich is effectively a tax increase for the poor. If
you cut taxes then you have to cut government services. That increases
the cost of living for low-income and middle-income people.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:09 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 23/10/22 02:17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:03:02 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter Moylan:

> >>> I can answer from the viewpoint of my own country. There have
> >>> been so many tax cuts over the years that the government no
> >>> longer has sufficient revenue to fund the normal responsibilities
> >>> of government. Now, our present government is caught between the
> >>> horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, it's obvious to nearly
> >>> everyone that those cuts need to be reversed to save the national
> >>> economy. On the other hand, all of our politicians have had it
> >>> drilled into them that raising taxes is political suicide.
> >> Isn't that what change of government is for, so each party can in
> >> turn raise the taxes on their non-voters?
> > When have republicans ever raised taxes?
>
> A tax cut for the rich is effectively a tax increase for the poor. If

Try explaining that to Reagan. Or McConnell.

> you cut taxes then you have to cut government services. That increases
> the cost of living for low-income and middle-income people.

You haven't been paying attention! The recent PM explained that you
simply borrow to cover the spread.

On Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 10:16:21 AM UTC-4, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 7:45:09 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 23/10/22 02:17, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > > On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 11:03:02 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> > >> * Peter Moylan:
>
> > >>> I can answer from the viewpoint of my own country. There have
> > >>> been so many tax cuts over the years that the government no
> > >>> longer has sufficient revenue to fund the normal responsibilities
> > >>> of government. Now, our present government is caught between the
> > >>> horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, it's obvious to nearly
> > >>> everyone that those cuts need to be reversed to save the national
> > >>> economy. On the other hand, all of our politicians have had it
> > >>> drilled into them that raising taxes is political suicide.
> > >> Isn't that what change of government is for, so each party can in
> > >> turn raise the taxes on their non-voters?
> > > When have republicans ever raised taxes?
> >
> > A tax cut for the rich is effectively a tax increase for the poor. If
>
> Try explaining that to Reagan. Or McConnell.

The GOP knows. Their task is to make most people not know.

Den 22-10-2022 kl. 17:09 skrev Peter T. Daniels:
> [...] the republicans [...] the
> Democrat [...] the republicans [...].
>
> [...] between republican and Democratic
> governors, [...] the republicans [...] a Democrat, [...] the republican
> [...]

> [...] reelected Democrat [...]

I sense a pattern here ...

Is it linguistically justified, or are you merely making a political
statement?

/Anders, Denmark

On Monday, October 24, 2022 at 5:50:37 PM UTC-4, Anders D. Nygaard wrote:
> Den 22-10-2022 kl. 17:09 skrev Peter T. Daniels:

> > [...] the republicans [...] the
> > Democrat [...] the republicans [...].
> >
> > [...] between republican and Democratic
> > governors, [...] the republicans [...] a Democrat, [...] the republican
> > [...]
>
> > [...] reelected Democrat [...]
>
> I sense a pattern here ...
>
> Is it linguistically justified, or are you merely making a political
> statement?

I don't see why the question would even arise.

I have been typing the r-word that way for years.