Very simplistically and superficially, yes. However, let’s bring in some history here.BigBallinStalin wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:saxitoxin wrote:2. Trying to Deep-Six ObamacareBut now that they feel its future is protected and it’s safe from repeal, Democrats are becoming more vocal about parts of the law that they want changed or eliminated — even kids’ dental coverage. Four Senate Democrats — Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken of Minnesota, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Joe Donnelly of Indiana — are co-sponsoring a Republican bill to repeal the law’s medical-device tax. Ten House Democrats are co-sponsoring a bill to repeal the law’s Independent Payment Advisory Board, a controversial panel that is designed to keep Medicare spending in check.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/a ... 88717.html
Who doesn't like political compromise?
This is one of the main problems with any position supporting public policy X. Public policies must go through this political process--where exemptions are made and the reasonable parts of the policy are resisted and sometimes removed (e.g. that advisory board, that medical-device tax).
This is one of many avenues where the favored policies of well-intended voters lead to bad outcomes.
So, according to you, the fact that Democrats are pushing for things that people want is just inherently bad? Or what is it you are trying to say?
They pass Bill X and with it, some means of paying for it, then some of the very Democrats who passed bill X are seeking ways to remove some of those means for paying for it. If they're successful, then all they've done is spent more money and then removed some of the means to pay for it.
That would be extremely stupid in any business, but with government it makes total sense. Most voters don't understand how this works, and if they do, they don't care because they still want their government goodies.
I would say that this is happening because few politicians can afford to actually have a real “vision” or perhaps just that our ideas of who “knows stuff” has shifted so highly in the past 3-4 decades. That is, it was possible for scientists in the 1950’s to come up with evidence and convince folks that we needed, say to floridate our water, pay for school lunches or even seek alternatives to oil. (that last requires some explanation… scientists then were not really and truly seriously considering that because they did not have the knowledge we do now, about when they had done so, other sources were found).
Today, the widest consensus of scientists in the history of our planet saying “global warming is real” gets razzes and jeers. Partly, life has sped up, partly, there is so much more information out there its getting harder and harder to tie it together sensibly and partly, those in power have consolidated themselves not just in the US, but internationally to such an extent they rival the robber Barons of the 1920’s. The next step is to be like the Gregorian monarches, but on a global scale.
Anyway, while the Democrats are not innocent, this is really a Republican game. Reagan started it, but he was directed by people who made real sense. Bush did not even have to make much pretense.
But here is the thing. The damage caused by BP was very permanent and long-lasting, not just a PR game or an economic blip. Global climate change is real and will have real impacts that cannot just be changed by economic games and pretenses.
NO political party or views will matter unless they all start paying attention to real problems brought forth by science. Economics can be a tool, as can various political games, but the goal MUST ultimate be resting upon what is best for humanity.
OH, in other words, that IS what business does, its just that they pass the costs onto other people.