Total Pageviews

Sunday, March 18, 2012

Now is our chance


As new candidates begin to pop up for our districts, I'm very thankful that I just might be voting for someone who's closer to my position than the same old" fiscal conservative" nonsense, I've been hearing for many years. We have finally have some grass root Democrats running, but they need some vetting, so if they say they are fiscal conservatives, you know they're just Republicans in sheep's clothing.

There is a time for fiscal conservatism, but it's not an economic principle conducive to growing our city and state or nation. The time for fiscal conservatism is during boom times, making sure we put some aside for the rainy days, that is sure to come. Fiscal conservatives will cut property taxes in a New York minute because their anti-government and survival of the fittest mindset is just a justification for selflessness. They have the luxury of being against government because the Federal highway system is in place, their kids are in private school, and the public libraries and other services have been paid for. No, we need government but the argument should always be how big and how much, and we shouldn't settle for one just answer, as being a truth certain.

You need to watch out for the anti-government fiscal conservatives because they will only present one side of the ledger. You need to ask those candidates what we got in return for those taxes because fiscal conservatives are just worried about their home-improvement project and not about a "bike and walk trail" that will benefit local citizens. It's always about their checkbook because they think they are the only ones paying taxes. I may not be interested in the arts, but I certainly don't mind if our city allocates a small portion of taxpayer money for those projects because we're all taxpayers. Like any other profit and loss statement, a loss this year doesn't necessarily mean higher taxes in the next year because projects will be paid off, new revenues might be coming and whatnot. As I've said before, fiscal conservatives cannot see beyond a spreadsheet in front of them.

I saw where Jared stated that every dollar that goes to the government does not go to the market. That's a simplistic statement to create a “us vs. them" environment. For the past 30 years, a lot of those dollars went to the top 1%, offshore accounts and surely did not create a trickle-down effect. You cannot find an equilibrium if the ideas come from a single source. You do know that every dollar that goes into a savings account does not go into consumption, keeping inventories on the self and prevents companies from hiring.

It the same way with government jobs, and the solution is not privatizing everything because that's the key ingredient for crony capitalism or worse plutocracy. In the last three years the biggest job cuts have come in the public sector, so now those people are not consuming and are on the public dole. About the only thing conservatives and liberals agree on, is infrastructure repair. The ideologues within the Republican Party of today won’t even allow that. The very idea that every person that goes into government, takes that person out of the free market is ludicrous. Some companies are choosing not to hire but instead making employees do more for less and a lot of government employees get their expertise from the government and then acquire lucrative contracts in the private sector.
The government can create the environment for jobs such as funding NASA and reaping the rewards of discovery, infrastructure projects, grants to entrepreneurs, trade talks, and monitoring unsafe practices and legislating tax reform. The United States of America will never adopt a laissez-faire economy, and so as Bill Clinton famously said, “We can only fix what is bad with America with what is good with America."

In closing remember liberals, Democrats, left-of-center of center voters, and moderates, we have our chance for an alternative, but as they say in politics "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." Focus, look what the GOP fiscal conservative governors did in Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio; they went after the unions, they cut taxes and public services but gave lucrative tax breaks to corporations. Be fair, check those states out and see how they compare to the rest of the nation. They won't stop there; check those states that overreached on the social issues. A voice is a wonderful thing to have but many times it starts with baby steps like local elections. I'm guilty of being apathetic, but if we get some different candidates, I'll definitely get off my butt. I have no intentions for voting anyone in my precinct’s City Council race because it’s between two "flip of the coin" fiscal conservatives.


Edith Ann said...

You think Lewis Neitsch is a fiscal conservative? I disagree.

Mike said...

I think you missed the point  that I was trying to make...It doesn't matter how a few people label him,he's a republican and he'll run as a fiscal conservative because that's what his constituency wants....The label fiscal conservative does not anoint anyone unless  it's the will of their constituency...I don't know either one of them but if I din't have a choice of bypassing that entry ,I would vote against Hagen for obvious reasons. 

Bottom line,a fiscal conservative is one who advocates for less taxes,NO deficit spending,tiny government with little or no services, and since we will always run a balance budget they will always be against bond issues  and FOR anything to shrink government.......No,I'm proposing the exact opposite but I am for more balance.

I should have reworded it....

Mike said...

I meant to say that I am not proposing the exact opposite but I would like to see more balance.

Edith Ann said...

No, I don't think I missed your point. Hagan, yes. Neitsch--absolutley not!

They may get to wear those labels because some folks let them, but there are a whole raft of us who are not willing to let them do that! Should we not even try to reveal the truth? It's not hard to do--Lewis Neitsch has a city council voting record.

I am one of his constituents! You are one of his constiuents! We don't have a voice? I think we do!

We have several city councilmen who like to claim they are republican when their voting record clearly indicate otherwise. They like to hang with the republicans because they know this a predominately republican county and they believe that is where the money is.

Mike said...

Now you have completely misinterpreted my

I never said anything about you not having a voice...I haven't had a voice in years but  my time is coming.Then again I'm not complaining.

Those fights of who is republican and who is not ----does not interest me in the least bit...I know I'm not...I am not in awe of Republican's or fiscal republicans and that is what 98% of this blog is about.....I know I must've said "party affiliations do matter in local elections" at least 20 times....Gary Burns can get the ditches cleaned as well as any Dem." ..It's about personalities because they don't make life and death decisions,some people think they do when they vote ,

I think we are on two different tracks and in opposite directions....:-)

One thing for sure ,we will have a large turnout because of the presidential election year.
I will check and count how many house seats and senates the Dems got after Obama wins and two days after that ,I'll catch up on the local races....Now do you get it?
Victoria will be the same,no matter who wins what..IMO

Mike said...

Darn I did it again..Party affiliations in local elections do not matter...IMO

Typing on this iPad using a stylus =more proof reading...:-)

Edith Ann said...

It does matter who wins at the city level. If enough of the 'vote FOR every spending issue' folks get voted out, we will see a different City council for sure. There is a bloc of 4 that needs to be reduced in size.

I do not for one moment believe that these city council guys check their party affiation at the door of council chambers.

With that said, though, one has to look no further that the voting records of a few to see that they are not true to their party. The primary offender of that is Polasek--loves to speak at tea-party events, yet can't control his right hand when it comes time to vote for a spending item.

Now, in my world, I am perfectly fine with his hypocrisy--he's the one who is not being honest here.

So--if these locals were true to their party, then we could legitimately look at party affiliation to guage whether a candidate meets our criteria to receive our vote.

I don't think we are on different pages here. But you admit you don't follow the city much and you know that I do. I don't think I am so far off here.

Anonymous said...

So Lewis Neitsch is a Republican? Interesting, he has not voted in any Republican Primaries since 2000. Maybe he was one of those Democrat spoilers. Then again, he may be one of those closet fiscal conservatives like....Mayor Armstrong.

Anonymous said...

You saw it here, in black and white, Mike says: "I know I must've said "party affiliations do matter in local elections" at least 20 times...."

Hang around Republicans and you can't remember which lie you told last! HAHAHAHAHHA