| | Agreed that he can put together packages with built-in give aways, and bargaining chips. And much of what he does is campaigning - and the goal of campaigning is simply to get reelected so he can do what he really wants. And that is the level we need to focus on. What is his most persistent, and most important drive? What will he willingly throw everything else under the bus to get?
--------------
He proposes to eliminate the mortage deduction which would be a major hit for the home construction trade which is in bad shape right now. In many ways the housing market bubble is holding the economy down and continuing to bleed it - making it the last place you'd want to further stress. The very, very large number of people who are under water on their mortages would be the ones who might suddenly found that they could no longer pay on a mortgage that before was possible because of the tax reduction it provided. It would make foreclosures soar and home purchases drop. When foreclosures become a greater crisis, he may have the political power to roll back forecloses, ignoring the fact that that would lock in the housing collapse and prevent a recovery - and put lenders into crisis - who he will have to bail out - but that will take us closer to a collapse of our monetary system.
His proposal to eliminate the state and local income tax deduction will make it harder for the 'underwater' states and local governments get there heads above water. Their citizens would be left with less disposable income for spending in the states that most need more spending. Currently the fed is letting the person reduce the load of those costs by about 1/3. Where will it hit the worst? In those states that have the very highest taxs, which not incidentally, have the worst deficits. Can you spell "to-big-to-fail" while looking at states like California? Bailing out the big states that are teetering on the verge would take us awful close to a collapse of our monetary system.
His proposal for the payroll tax reduction should be talked about in honest terms: It is purposely under-funding the Social Security program - by 50% - at a time when it is going negative (more money going out than coming in) and when the recipients of social security are rapidly growing and the people who work (the contributors) are on the decline. If he wanted to collapse the social security system, this would be a way to hasten that day. (As a side note, I wonder why Obama thinks that the Republicans aren't going to point this little fact out to the Seniors?)
He also eliminates the charity 'loophole' - it will vastly reduce the money given to private charity since most of that money comes from the wealthy. With that money gone it will drive up the number of people who draw more heavily and are more dependent on the government entitlement programs. This is clearly an important area for government to work towards having a monopoly on.
He also wants to eliminate corporate 'loopholes' especially for oil companies. The man is like a bulldog. His goal from the beginning was to make the costs of energy 'necessarily skyrocket.'
I'd say the 'bargaining chips' are the things like taking away the deductions for corporate jets. It plays to the left - his base - it's red meat for unions and business haters, but the real purpose is to have things that the Republicans will refuse to pass and that he can then campaign on. It is important to make the Republicans look they are tools of the wealthy lobbyists so no one will notice when they accidentally end up fighting for free markets or smaller government. He never wants the argument framed as "Central control of everything" versus "Small government and free enterprise"
The single common theme running through almost everything he does is Cloward-Pivens: Cause the current system(s) to collapse by expanding them beyond what can be supported. Then in the ensuing crisis of the collapse 'save' things by putting in place whole new structures that can be expanded in the degreee of control till ultimately they reach the far left's nirvana of full central control of everything.
For them, every issue is just a lever for increased central control: The goals of redistribution, globalism, green issues, social justice, helping the poor, diversity, creating jobs, fixing the economy, protecting the old and infirm, etc. are really just means to the real end.... Doesn't matter what the motivational facade is - just look behind the curtain and you see the far left never taking their eye off the goal of massive, ever-increasing centralized control.
Looked at from this point of view he isn't the least bit disintegrated. He is consistent and effective and is pushing his agenda in a steadfast and unwavering fashion. Can anyone name a single instance where he went the other way - even a tiny bit?
|
|
