By Fareed Zakaria, CNN
I've been watching the Republicans on the campaign trail and what strikes me so far is that conservatives in America have gone through a strange transformation.
It used to be that conservatism was a hard-headed set of ideas rooted in reality.
Unlike the abstract theories of Marxism and socialism, it started not from an imagined society, but from the world as it actually exists.
"This is the way things work," conservatives would patiently explain to wooly headed liberal professors. "Whatever you may want it to look like, this is what it really looks like."
But consider the debates over the economy these days. The Republican prescription is cut taxes - slash government spending, then things will always bounce back.
Now, I would like to see lower tax rates in the context of simplification and reform, but what is the actual evidence that massive tax cuts are the single best path to revive the U.S. economy? Taxes as a percentage of GDP are at their lowest levels since 1950. The U.S. is among the lowest taxed of the big industrial economies.
So the case that America is grinding to a halt because of high taxation is not based on facts, either past or present. It is simply a theoretical assertion.
The rich countries after all are in the best shape right now with strong growth and low unemployment are ones like Germany, Denmark and Canada - none characterized by low taxes.
Meanwhile, many Republican businessmen have told me that the Obama administration is the most hostile to business in 50 years.
Really?
More than that of Richard Nixon, for example, who presided over tax rates that reached 70 percent, regulations that spanned whole industries like airlines and telecommunication and who actually instituted price and wage controls?
In fact, right now any discussion of any government involvement in the economy - even to build vital infrastructure - is impossible because it is a cardinal tenet of the new conservatism that such involvement is always and forever bad.
That's the theory.
Meanwhile, in practice across the globe the world's fastest growing economy, China, has managed to use government involvement to create growth and jobs for three decades.
From Singapore to South Korea to Germany, evidence abounds that some strategic actions by governments can act as catalysts for free market growth.
But conservatives now resemble the old Marxists who refuse to look at actual experience. "I know it works in practice," the old saw goes, "but does it work in theory?"
Republicans often praise businessmen. Well, one of the first steps any business now takes when confronting a problem is to ask, "How are other companies around the world handling this? Is there a best practice we can learn from?" But in any area, from infrastructure to health care to education, to ask these questions is heresy on the right.
It's a shame. I think we need smart, market-friendly conservative reforms that streamline government, cut costs in health care and empower individuals, but they need to be rooted in reality, drawn from best practices around the world and based on practical measures of what seems to work.
What we have instead are policies that are simply recitations of some free market theory taken out of some book based on no actually existing national economy.
It turns out conservatives have become the wooly headed professors after all.
For more on this, you can read my column in this week's TIME Magazine.
 |
Post by: |
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
There are areas of the constitution that do need to be updated. Additionally, we should at the same time put in term limits for U. S. Senators, U.S. Representatives and Supreme Court Justices, especially since judicial hearings before Congress are no longer legitimate. I cannot believe the authors of the U.S. Constitution imagined "life-time" politicians, and I don't believe it benefits the country, rather it fuels lobbyists
"Additionally, we should at the same time put in term limits for U. S. Senators, U.S. Representatives and Supreme Court Justices"
Wow. You completely missed the most important point he made. You are advocating major changes in our government with no reason to believe they would improve anything. You just believe they would. Under no circumstances should we amend the Constitution of the United States based on a popular but unsupported belief it would be a good thing.
Several states have term-limited legislatures and there is no evidence whatsoever that limiting terms produces better government or better legislation. In fact, two states that had term limits repealed them. Others have considered increasing the limits. Term limits create at least as many problems as they solve and actually increase the influence of lobbyists, on whom freshman members of Congress often rely for information about policy issues.
California has term limits, and the worst budget crisis in the country. Florida and Arizona have them and they have their share of problems too. Term limits will not solve anything. They're an idea that's popular with politically lazy people who want to set up government in a way that it works well on autopilot so they can continue to ignore their responsibility to educate themselves about issues and vote responsibly.
In case no one has explained this to you, we already have term limits for members of Congress; if they aren't doing a good job their constituents can vote them out of office. If constituents aren't doing that, it's their own fault, not the lack of term limits. Don't try to deny me my right to reelect good representatives just because you don't want to be bothered doing your homework before voting.
Mr. Fareed,
On your sunday show you demonstrated an inaccurate and completely biased discriptions of conservatism. Conservative are not always republicans and republicans are not all conservatives. Conservatives believe in limited government, fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, and that although no man or woman has a right to steal the fruits of another mans labor we do have a responsibility to be charitable. You should speak to the lazy libs and the hypocrite libs, the first
USING CALIFORNIA AS AN EXAMPLE IS RATHER SHORT SIGHTED AS ALL OF THOSE IDIOTS ARE LIBERALS.
One day your descendants will realize how intelligent and good-hearted Liberal ideology really is. And they will wake up happy that the world is no longer as it used to be.
California's problems cannot be laid on term limits, when the problem is a result of the referendum system any real cuts or tax increases not only need a 2/3 majority in the state senate and house but also a majority of the voting public in a special referendum. Of course increasing spending just needs a majority in the state government. No matter what your position on social spending, taxes or well anything, everyone should be able to see how the current state of California was almost predetermined by this set up. In short you cannot have system that makes it impossible to raise revenue or cut spending while making it easy to spend on debt and expect not to end up in debt. If California is going to get out of it's hole, it's not term limits that need to go but the current referendum system. Sometimes to much Democracy is as bad as to little... Sometimes.
skytag –
"Under no circumstances should we amend the Constitution of the United States based on a popular but unsupported belief it would be a good thing."
And yet that is exactly what we do, time and time again! Perhaps the most obvious example of this is the Amendment that enshrined Prohibition as the law of the land, surely a change based on the "popular but unsupported (and incorrect) belief it would be a good thing". By the way, the sheer diversity of "expert" opinion on any given subject guarantees that every crackpot idea will find support somewhere.
You see, the same is true for almost any law enacted by humans; which is why, over time, so many are amended, modified, or even repealed – so few of us have the foresight to actually write a good law, one that will withstand and anticipate the changes that time inevitably brings. This is exactly why the Constitutional Amendment mechanism exists – because we recognize that societal change happens.
No one can see the future; this is why the Law of Unintended Consequences is so powerful, so unforgiving, and so dangerous.
/rs/
It should be noted every time a liberal brings up the very high tax rates during the presidency of a conservative, or during a booming economy, that those companies did not pay 70% taxes. The loop holes were as wide as an aircraft carrier. What they have done over the years is close many of the loop holes while lowering that tax rate.
There are many problems here but the author doesn't seem to understand what they are. How about very lucrative retirement packages for politicians. Why is it that CNN never announces just how much money we are paying out to retired politicians an retired federal workers? Let me clue you in...it's a lot more than you would think.
This is just one of the many problems we have. And Mr. Zakaria is lost on one more point. He says that businesses look around to see how other businesses are doing things. Sure, the followers, the ones that come in afterwords. But not ht e trend setters.
Also, he is lost on the fact that China's booming economy is due to several factors, the main one is that the government there was proactive in getting business booming. But he didn't say how. They did so by offering many businesses, many American businesses a very business friendly environment to work in. Very little if any regulation, low taxes, low wage earners, etc...
He might also look to Ireland which enticed many American businesses to come there and set up shop through lower taxes.
Fareed, if you are going to tell a story, tell the whole story.
@8484: "USING CALIFORNIA AS AN EXAMPLE IS RATHER SHORT SIGHTED AS ALL OF THOSE IDIOTS ARE LIBERALS."
Another right-wing drone who resorts to insulting liberals when realty becomes too frightening. And why would it qualify as short-sighted?
Utah and Idaho are hardly bastions of liberalism, but they repealed their term limits. Florida and Arizona are red states with term limits and significant budget problems. The Articles of Confederation had term limits and they were rejected when the Constitution was drafted because they turned out to be a bad idea.
You're obviously one of the brainwashed who is out of touch with reality. Confronted with realities you can't handle you lash out with baseless attacks on liberals because those who have brainwashed you have convinced you that all you have to do is blame liberals and that wins any argument. How can you not be embarrassed to act so foolishly?
@george plunkett: "You should speak to the lazy libs and the hypocrite libs."
Yet another right-wing drone who resorts to insulting in response to reality he doesn't like. If you think liberals have any monopoly on either laziness or hypocrisy you really are out of touch with reality.
@garvin anders: "California's problems cannot be laid on term limits"
I didn't say otherwise. My point is the term limits do not guarantee better legislation or government. I mentioned California, but several states have term limits and there is no evidence term limits result in better legislation or government, and they create problems of their own.
Term limits are advocated by people who want government to work well on autopilot. That's simply not a reasonable expectation in a democracy if the electorate fails to educate itself about issues and vote responsibly. Term limits are not and will never be a substitute for an informed electorate.
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people...they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty." — Thomas Jefferson
@Daniel: While it's obviously true we cannot see the future and the full ramifications of any law or change to existing law, it is also true that we have a large body of historic and at times current evidence to give us some insight so that we aren't exactly acting in the dark either.
Although term limits are not a partisan issue, they illustrate the problem Fareed describes here, the tendency for people to adopt a belief in something even though they have no evidence to support that belief. Many people believe term limits would solve some of the problems we see in our government, but when the evidence and facts are examined objectively it turns out there is simply no rational reason to believe that's the case. They do change the dynamics of a legislature and the legislative process, no doubt. But is the result actually better? All the evidence says no, it isn't.
Interestingly, conservatives are often the ones that:
1. WRITE WITH THEIR CAPS LOCK ON
2. Espouse limited government while passing laws regarding what women can do with their bodies (abortion rights)
3. Want the Ten Commandments plastered on every wall while starting endless wars.
4. Advocate free trade yet preventing us from buying cheaper prescriptions from Canada.
Yes but if Congress is spending 1/2 time trying to get re elected they are not doing a good job. They would do what is right instead of what will keep them their jobs if term limits apply.
2 of the main problems we have in the US are the electoral college and that we are a plutocracy. We also need more than 2 main parties to be a viable democracy. We only have 2. The primary objective of all those in the legislature are to satisfy lobbyist and get re-elected. Our congress people don't answer to us. They answer to huge corporations. Term limits won't do anything. We the people need to become smarter and more active. Its up to us. We need to take back America, and I don't mean the way the Tea Party sees it.
In regards to term limits, it seems like voting kicks the "bad" ones out and term limits kicks the "good" ones out.
Zacky...your lack of intelligence is frightening yet it is an inspiration. I mean if someone with your ideas can have headline post on CNN then a monkey can do it. You forget how lousy the 70s were with Nixon? You think in an economy where they are sending things offshore you are going to grow things by expanding the government? Insane Obama expanded the government debt by record amounts and were did that get us? If it wasn't' for China, we couldn't even fund our debt yet you want bigger government! Yeah tax more people so there is less money to invest and spend. Brilliant. Oh by the way, I thought you were offed by a predator drone strike somewhere in Afghanistan.
1. It was Bush that put us in this debt
2. He never said the 70's were great, only that nixon was more of an enemy to business
3. The 50's had 90% taxes on the rich. Are you going to claim that the 50's were an (economically) bad time?
4. We borrow from China, thus increasing our debt, yes, but 50% of our debt is to the Federal Reserve, a private bank.
the last national debt under bush was 500bil......currently under obama the debt is 1.3 trillion per year. so do tell us how W put us in debt again?
unemployment under Bush avgd 5%, under obama 9%
do tell us how this president is giving us hope and change again? oh he changed everyone from employed to unemployed, from insured to uninsured.
@JayW: "the last national debt under bush was 500bil"
Deficit, not debt.
"currently under obama the debt is 1.3 trillion per year. so do tell us how W put us in debt again?"
Why bother? Facts and logical arguments are powerless against the brainwashing that's been done to you by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
"unemployment under Bush avgd 5%, under obama 9%"
Why are you giving the Bush average? Could it be you're trying to conceal the fact that unemployment was 4.2% when he took office and 7.8% and rising rapidly when he left? One has to wonder why you people are so loyal to positions you knowingly have to use dishonest arguments to support.
"do tell us how this president is giving us hope and change again?"
People like you have no interest in hope or change. All you care about is having people who share your extreme ideology in power.
"oh he changed everyone from employed to unemployed, from insured to uninsured."
This, of course, is a bald-faced lie, but it was already clear honesty holds no value for you.
Archie Bunker – is that you?
GG, are you aware of which branch of government appropriates money? HINT: It is not the executive or judicial branch.
Sorry. There goes the whole "It is all Bush's fault" mentality, right?
And the "BLAME OBAMA" argument as well. They're all liars stealing our tax dollars to enrich other rich men, it's pro-wrestling.
@momomiester. Reading comprehension is important, there are tools to improve yours. You entirely missed the points Zakaria was making. And you are you really that much of a moron to make a racist joke confusing someone from India with Afghanistan or "is it all the same" to you? If it is, you shouldn't be allowed to comment at all.
Just stick to shooting squirrels in your backyard man.
You didn't even listen properly to what he said.
GG & Skytag – Get off the kool-aid – you will begin to feel better. I get a kick out of how you look at numbers. Is that new math, or fuzzy math, or lefty math? What part of trillion don't you understand?
Zakaria confuses marxism and socialism. The socialist governments in western Europe are doing just fine. They are not bankrupt like the US. Their high tax rates allow complete care of their citizens.
Portugal, Greece, Ireland, France, England soon Italy and Spain are contracting. Greece is burning with riots from austerity. England the same. Wake up. Smell the Molotov cocktail. Bush, Obama one in the same.
The twit that wrote this article has no idea how to operate a business. He has no clue that with all the fees, licensing, fines, taxes etc... America has the worst corporate atmosphere. READ A BOOK!!!
Meh. I keep hearing about how terrible the corporations have it, yet they're sitting on $2 trillion in cash, ceo pay and profits are at a record high, and they have more voice in politics now than actual human beings. They get ENORMOUS subsidies, and it is now routine that they control the regulators watching them. They get tax breaks for offshoring American jobs and our tax code is riddled with loopholes than a wool sweater, meaning many don't even pay taxes. The government puts corporate profits before the health of it's citizens and the planet on a daily basis. So this is complete BS! Pardon us if we don't weep for the poor corporations – they certainly aren't weeping for us.
Oh and list off several Socialist nations (and England and Ireland aren't all that socialist) that are contracting, I can list many that are outperforming us (Canada, Scandanavia, Germany) and some capitalist nations that are doing poorly (Japan, Mexico, Africa).
It comes down to a question of values. Our national values is MONEY, that's it. Not life, not peace, not justice, not equality, not the environment – all of those get shoved rudely aside when they conflict with the making of money. So socialism only seems evil because in conflicts with our national value. If we valued the human life, health, happiness, freedom and well-being of our citizens, our current economy and government would seem monstrous. It's funny that we so debase things which have intrinsic value to pursue money – which at the end of the day (or world) will only be zeroes written magnetically on some hard drive somewhere.
There are no socialist governments in western Europe. Some are capitalist democracies that happen to have socialized medicine for pragmatic reasons, and all have more regulated economies than the U.S. There is a greater reliance on policy instead of ideology. But - outside of health care in 8-9 countries - western Europe is not socialist.
Lucifer Liar... yep you are a devil telling lies!
There was a time when I admired hardheaded businessmen. Practical, make it happen people. Then the corporate drones took over and they receive more government welfare than any group on earth... and still whine and carry on as they steal the bank. For example, Bush's buddies wanted a nice third world slave market for their corporations, but they want the stability of a first world army... so Bubba Bush gave them Afghanistan/Pakistan. Ten years and several trillion dollars later... 67 corporations have roosted in Pakistan enjoying the protection of assets provided by the US government and running their little fiefdoms with slave labor. Their names?
ABBOTT LABORATORIES (PAKISTAN ) LTD.
ACE INSURANCE LIMITED
ACNIELSEN PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
AGILITY LOGISTICS (PVT.) LTD
AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY ( PAKISTAN ) LIMITED.
AT&T GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES INTERNATIONAL INC.
AVANZA SOLUTIONS (PVT.) LTD.
BECTON DICKINSON PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
BP PAKISTAN EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INC
CAPTAIN-PQ CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD.
CHEVRON PAKISTAN LTD.
CISCO SYSTEMS PAKISTN (PVT.) LTD
CITIBANK, N.A.
CRESCENT BAHUMAN LIMITED
COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PAKISTAN LTD.
THE COCA-COLA EXPORT CORPORATION
COLGATE-PALMOLIVE (PAKISTAN) LTD.
Continental Biscuits Ltd.
DUPONT PAKISTAN OPERATIONS (PVT.) LTD.
ELI LILLY PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
EL PASO TECHNOLOGY PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
EMC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PVT) LTD.
FMC UNITED (PVT.) LTD.
GERRY'S INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. (FedEx) .
GILLETTE PAKISTAN LIMITED
IBM
INTEL PAKISTAN CORPORATION
INTERNATIONAL FRANCHISES (PVT) LTD
JOHNSON & JOHNSON PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
JOHAN (PVT.) LTD.
J.P. MORGAN PAKISTAN (PVT.) LIMITED
KARAM CERAMICS LIMITED
LEVI STRAUSS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LIMITED
LMK RESOURCES PAKISTAN LTD.
MCR (PVT.) LTD. (Pizza Hut)
MICROSOFT CORPORATION PAKISTAN LIAISON OFFICE
MOTOROLA LIMITED
MONSANTO PAKISTAN AGRITECH (PVT.) LTD.
MULLER & PHIPPS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
NCR CORPORATION
NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
NETSOL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
OBS PAKISTAN (PVT) LTD
OPTIMUS LTD.(HERTZ)
ORACLE CORPORATION SINGAPORE PTE LTD.
PEPSI-COLA INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD.
PFIZER PAKISTAN LTD.
PHILIP MORRIS (PAKISTAN) LTD.
PRESTIGE COMMUNICATIONS (PVT) LTD.
PROCTER & GAMBLE PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
RAFHAN MAIZE PRODUCTS CO. LTD.
RENFRO CRESCENT (PVT.) LTD
RIAZ BOTTLERS (PVT.) LTD. (Pepsi-Cola)
S.C. JOHNSON & SON OF PAKISTAN
SHERATON MIDDLE EAST MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
SINGER PAKISTAN LIMITED
SIZA FOODS (PVT.) LTD. (McDonald's)
TERADATA GLOBAL CONSULTING PAKISTAN (PVT) LTD
TRG (PVT) LTD.
UNISYS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LIMITED
UNIVERSAL LOGISTICS SERVICES (PVT) LTD.
WACKENHUT PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
WPP MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS (PVT) LTD.
VISA INC.
VISION NETWORK TELEVISION LTD. (CNBC)
3M PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS
SUNSOFT (PVT.) LTD.
I hope they enjoyed their ten years, because it is time to move. Shades of the British Raj in India! The citizens paid for an army to subdue the citizens so the East India Company owners could take home billions of pounds. Good for British citizens? No. Good for Indian citizens? No. Good for the wealthy? Sure enough. They were whiner drones, too, don't ya know. I say these corporations need to pay a WAR TAX and drop their bottom lines to reflect the REAL COST OF DOING BUSINESS IN PAKISTAN.
Term limits on the federal level are unconstitutional. We don't need term limits, we need an active, engaged citizenry. Don't blame the people that get elected, blame the people that elect them.
Exactly. Not only do we not need term limits, they're not the silver bullet people think they are. Several states have term-limited legislatures and those states are not doing any better than states without limits. In fact, California has them and they have the worst budget crisis in the country.
There's a process for changing the constitution. It's called amending it. It's not easy to do for a reason. Any constitution that can be changed on a whim because of political fads isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Liberals who don't like this are like children throwing temper tantrums in the face of the hard won wisdom of the world. It you don't like it, leave.
Wait, what constitutional amendments are "liberals" asking for?
There is only one active push for a Constitutional Amendment that I know about. It is to clarify that corporations are not persons. This amendment is necessary to overcome the Supreme Court's insistence on interpreting the 14th Amendment giving citizenship to the freed negroes after the Civil War as also giving corporations rights equal to human beings... including unlimited donations to politicians. Go online to the Move to Amend website to sign the Petition. They believe it will take at least 10 years, but I say with modern communications, it will be much faster.
Absolutely Kathy, just as the cover of Time magazine's latest issue explains – we can not keep quoting the same standards that kept true hundreds of yrs ago. It is time to think to the future with a fresh way of thinking. The perpetual judges on the highest court of the land make me sick. Some of them can't keep from falling asleep, let alone to have a cohesive view about the world now.
we donot have lifetime politicians. here in pa we retired senator arlen spector after 30yrs. his job was up for review every 6yrs and this last time he got voted out, granted it was for a right wing nut job like pat toomey. the system works. no to term limits for congress people or judges
Mr. Zakaria's article fails on several accounts. 1. The level of taxation is roughly double of those countries that have been taking jobs away from Americans (China, India, Taiwan, for example). 2. It's always easy to find the exception to the rule to use as ammunition. Nixon's behavior during the Vietnam war is hardly a typical example of Tea Party politics. 3. His lack of alternative solutions is glaring. It implies that we should simply continue what we're doing instead of changing course.
Expecting solutions to the economic situation to be written in 1,000 words or less is absurd. I note that you haven't supplied any solutions despite the assertion that failing to do so is "glaring" and "implies that we should simply continue what we're doing instead of changing course". I suspect that you actually do know a lot about, or that you at least pay attention to, economics. But you didn't attempt to explain your ideas, probably due to limited space – the same problem Zakaria has.
Did you actually dream up these statements? Like the GOPs, it seems you're out of touch with reality. The tax rate is much higher in both China and India... neither are there entitlements, and the government is hugely involved...
So what are the facts on taxes? Zakaria is correct and the Tea Party dogmatics are wrong on this one.
Here is how US taxes (as a portion of GDP) compare internationally:
http://about.bgov.com/2011/06/14/behind-the-chart-tax-burden-in-u-s-lower-than-in-many-rivals/
Don't just look at the chart in this story, read the analysis for the limitations imposed by having to use the World Bank data for this analysis.
And here is how US taxes in 2011 compare historically within the US:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2011-05-05-tax-cut-record-low_n.htm
You can debate why they are low, but the tax burden is the lowest it has been since 1958.
We are confusing the taxes paid to the Federal Government, with the total taxes paid by an individual in the US which includes Federal taxes, social security, medicare, sales taxes, state taxes, property taxes, city taxes, gasoline taxes, taxes imposed in your phone and water bills etc. Some of the countries mentioned in Zakaria's list they have high central government taxes but they have lower or no state taxes and we most probably pay as much in taxes as they do, with no universal health coverage and mediocre retirement benefits in comparison to Germany, Denmark or Canada.
What is not mentioned here or anywhere is the inefficiencies in our government systems from the Federal to the local level. How this can be solved is a large question mark.
Check the amount of funds per student paid in the advanced countries of the world and even though we pay more per student than anyone else our achievement scores are not at the top of the test scales.
Let us face it Republicans or Democrats have brought us to the difficult economic times we are in because of their very similar policies as far as foreign trade, unfunded benefits, corporate taxation (see the percentage of the Federal taxes paid by corporations over the last 30-40 years, the trend is higher individual taxes vs corporate), unfunded wars, bail out of the Wall street and the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, where it required vast amounts of money to save the major banks from bankruptcy. As of now under the Obama administration I have not seen one of these criminals in Wall Street go to jail.
Yes we have to learn how the other industrialized countries create viable economies and meaningful jobs, but with leadership we have and the inter party bickering can we do what is good for the country?
Amen man. Zakaria's opinion as expressed in this article is weird. Which conservatives is he referring to? And his little summary of "Conservative history" is umm... also totally weird:
" 'It used to be that conservatism was a hard-headed set of ideas rooted in reality.
Unlike the abstract theories of Marxism and socialism, it started not from an imagined society, but from the world as it actually exists.
'This is the way things work,' conservatives would patiently explain to wooly headed liberal professors. 'Whatever you may want it to look like, this is what it really looks like.' "
Lol so let me get this straight... back when the originator of conservative thought decided to come up with some new school of thought called conservatism, he decided to landmark political philosophy with a "hard-headed" position on the status quo which naturally antagonized the lofty, idealistic viewpoints of university professors...
Look Fareed, conservatives and liberals are as old as government. Politicians from both sides can be "hard-headed." But getting down to the point of your article– I'm not sure that conservative reform is possible without using some theory. Currently, we have strayed enormously from where a healthy chunk of the conservative base would like us to be! Think about the trillions of dollars that have recently been allocated for the new health care legislation, certainly that new status quo must be reversed with solid conservative logic, and I think the candidates are doing a good job of talking their voters through the mess instead of just speculating the outcomes of repealing legislaion that hasn't taken effect yet.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't understand what you're saying, Mr. Zakaria. I don't believe that the Republican candidates have become out of touch with their constituents because of a more ephemeral or "theoretical" common platform among them.
GOOD POST THERE, NATE BECK!
Fareed actually alludes to some good points about the failure of modern conservatism in the USA to give solutions. They suggest theory as evidence.
Take the conservative approach to health care: greater competition and free markets will drive costs down and quality up. But where is there ANY empirical evidence of market-driven health care systems controlling cost inflation? There aren't any. There is talk about the greatness of free markets, but no acknowledgment that health care 1) has inelastic demand and 2) there is no transparency of price. For example, I recently had to go to the ER. For the services rendered I was told there's no price. My insurance company will make that price up later. How am I supposed to be be a conscious consumer driven by price and quality if no price exists for any treatment? I signed the paper and received my treatments. Buying health service isn't like purchasing a new vehicle or sweater.
Then there's still admiration for tax cuts, even though the last decade has not panned out the way "it's supposed to". The fact is, we need rigorous analysis of government policies. We can't have a bunch of academic theorists stating how the world SHOULD work. The USA used to be an innovative nation that would comparatively consider other national policies. Now we just have spouts about American Exceptionalism (or Fundamentalism, but that's a whole other deal) and how everything would work out if we followed theory. It's pathetic.
"Think about the trillions of dollars that have recently been allocated for the new health care legislation"
That would require using my imagination because this simply hasn't happened. Making claims that have no basis in reality seems like a questionable strategy for refuting Fareed's claim that conservatives are out of touch with reality.
I've seen the Republican suggestions for reforming health care and they are indeed out of touch with reality. For example, they claim malpractice reform will bring down the cost of health care despite the fact that several states have already implemented malpractice and it *didn't* reduce health care spending in those states.
Mateo offers another example. Health care is a seller's market, and free market pressures in a seller's market push prices up, not down. The free market has failed to bring down the cost of health care any it's been tried, yet the Republicans claim it will do so here even though health care economists will tell you otherwise.
"certainly that new status quo must be reversed with solid conservative logic, and I think the candidates are doing a good job of talking their voters through the mess"
They're spewing a lot of rhetoric to demonize Obama and scare their constituents. They aren't talking anyone through anything.
"instead of just speculating the outcomes of repealing legislaion that hasn't taken effect yet."
Where have you been? All the Republicans have done is issue dire predictions about what the health care bill will do.
"I guess what I'm saying is that I don't understand what you're saying, Mr. Zakaria."
This I believe. He's spot on and since you're one of people who is out of touch with reality it doesn't make sense to you.
"I don't believe that the Republican candidates have become out of touch with their constituents because of a more ephemeral or "theoretical" common platform among them."
He didn't say they were out of touch with their constituents. He said they were out of touch with reality. They're very much in touch with their constituents who share their disconnect from reality.
Another thing Mr. Z is ignoring in his analysis... the world as it was back in the day (and I am old enough to remember) was a white male dominated world and neither he nor I would hold the jobs we hold today in that world. Maintaining that status quo was more important than any hardheaded reality he is talking about. He should thank God or Allah he did NOT live back then. So, moving forward to today... the Repubs still represent that status quo and wanting it back. Well, I do not want it back and I am sick of the corporate welfare program that is currently in place.
@Richard Lefcourt
The government has to collect taxes from the rich. David Stockman agrees too, that there's a dreadful yawning void in the treasury.
Fareed, Stockman seems to be the only few Republicans in the country who are sensible, Get him back to Washington.
"2. It's always easy to find the exception to the rule to use as ammunition. Nixon's behavior during the Vietnam war is hardly a typical example of Tea Party politics."
You're arguing against something he didn't say, the very definition of a straw man argument. He was challenging the claim that Obama is the most business-unfriendly president in 50 years. His example had nothing to do with the Tea Party. So much for you being in touch with reality.; -)
"3. His lack of alternative solutions is glaring. It implies that we should simply continue what we're doing instead of changing course."
Nonsense. That's just not the focus of this article. Fareed has written quite a number of articles offering his ideas.
Not really fair to compare with China's tax % as a percentage of GDP because so much of China's industry is comprised of state-owned enterprises.
What Richard Lefcourt has said about taxes being lower in China, India and Taiwan, is absolutely incorrect.
Try again Richard, put some brain muscle into it this time.
Those like Zakaria that point to two senators/state or the electorial colloge as obviously unfair fail to understand our history as a federal republic. At our founding a balance was struck between the Federalists and the anti-Federalist (later to become Jefferson's Democratic party). This balance was the original constitution the Federalist wanted and the Bill of Rights the anti-Federalist demanded. The whole thing came down to state sovereignty and individual rights versus federal power. What most Liberals want to do is back away from state sovereignty in favor of federal power. It's an old argument that dates back to our founding. For example, if we made the election of senators (as we do US Reps.) more "democratic" and eliminated the Electoral College, as Zakaria suggests, Presidenial candidates would not even bother to campaign in less populated states. They would just campaign in a handful like California, New York, Illinois and Texas (note that most of these most populated states are liberal states) and almost totally disregard the needs of the rest both during the campaign and after elected. Do the math. This is just another example of Liberals pushing for more Federal power and bigger government under the guise of a more "democratic" or "fair" society.
I think that what we really need is more centrism. Both parties are increasingly radicalizing their stands, in a nutshell Republicans think that by making the wealthy wealthier, wealth will trickle down. The democrats think that by putting more resources in the hands of the lower classes will make the economy take off. They are both dogmatic rigid positions. Republicans have their god in Reagan. Democrats follow Keynes.
What I don't see is any moral principle dictating what is to be done. Economy, people is all and the same there not one without the other yet they are divorced from the politician's views. Moreover both parties have been hacked by special interest. For example who would ever give 60 Billion to Exxon for research when oil has been $100.00 dollars or more you guessed it a president with ties to the oil industry.
On health we need to be more humane. A man just rob a bank for $1.00 to be arrested and get medical attention. Instead of shunning each other out politicians should agree in a set of principles (for example the constitution). Yes nobody follows the principles stated there. With social unrest there will be no possible growth. Expecting that the rich who became that way by being selfish, out of the goodness of their hart increase wages is a fairy tale that will never start.
Not to be cynical, but economic principles must be established on the fact that man is selfish as oppose to man being altruistic for the simple fact that we need to control the latter and not the former.
Fareed Zakaria should run for Senator. Until then, let's put him in a role where he can actually influence policy. He's relentlessly rational and habitually points out that the Emperor Has No Clothes. Maybe we're just too stupid to elect people who are more knowledgeable and intelligent than a stuffed animal. What a shame that our Congress can't be filled with people as capable as Zakaria of addressing complexity.
Meh. There's a big difference between criticism and actually having to make decisions.
This is so because American politics has been dumbed down to the point where stupid is taken for smart, arrogance for mutual respect, greed for good, and intolerance for tolerance. Orwell's 1984 has arrived, just a few years late.
Except that Orwell's dystopia was a single party dictatorship where no discussion or dissent – much less active argument and criticism – was allowed...
But the american people are lost, panicked, arrogant, willfully ignorant, undereducated, childish, locked in a self-identity crisis, etc. What's the intelligence level of discussion and dissent today? Pretty pathetic....to the point of pointless....
Modern America is Huxleyan if anything.
Conservatism hasn't lost touch with reality. What has happened is the refusal to continue to tolerate this current level of PC attitude which has made this country weak.
Nice, evasion!
No, what has happened is a failure to rationally discuss the fundamental causes of our problems. I really don't know what's meant by "PC" within the context of Mr. Zakaria's commentary. The nation's fundamental problem is not difficult to understand. The rate of government spending far outpaces the receipt of its revenues. David Stockman's comment in today's debate about the failure of Keynesian economics, whether based in right-wing or left-wing ideologies, was highly illuminating and it should be taken very seriously by all sides. Excessive debt, be it for and overly generous welfare state or military adventures, is causing an exhaustion of our resources in a manner almost reminiscent of Great Britain's condition toward the end of World War II. Unlike Great Britain, I believe we have the wealth in this country to address the problem, but we're paralyzed by a rigid ideological orthodoxy (a right-wing verson of "political correctness" propagated by the likes of Rush Limbaugh) now dominating the GOP that makes progress in solving our economic problems a near-impossibility. Neither left nor the right wing factions of our polarized political culture are without sin. Among Democrats, there needs to be a recognition that middle class entitlements cannot go on forever without undergoing serious, cost-saving reforms. Tom, on second thought maybe in an ironic way you are right. There is a level of a "PC attitude which has made this country weak." But maybe it's not the type of PC" you think.
Strictly speaking I don't think conservatism has lost touch with reality, but too many people claiming to be conservatives have lost touch with true conservatism in their pursuit of the far right fanatic vote.
You mean talking to others respectfully and in a decent manner has ruined the country? Hmmmm politically correct means not calling the President of the United States a nigger? That has RUINED this country? Man, I have heard everything now... and here I thought PC mean a shift to mannerly behavior instead of making vicious remarks. Wow. It RUINED this country. How was a girl to know? My Sunday School teacher said... well, that's another day.
The notion that businesses and corporations take jobs overseas because of the tax rate is absurd. Sure, taxes elsewhere might be lower, but by and far the largest factor effecting the outsourcing of jobs is wages and benefits. Instead of paying an American worker $15/hour, and contributing to a 401k, providing health insurance, etc, a corporation can pay someone in China $5/hour with zero benefits. That's where corporations save all of their money, not taxes. Any Republican who tells you that taxes are an incentive to businesses really just wants to put money back into the pockets of his or her campaign contributor.
Taking jobs overseas isn't all that cheap. Bubba Bush opened up Pakistan for 67 corporations... because their hourly rate may be cheap, but their unstable governments are not. Trillions of dollars and ten years later...
ABBOTT LABORATORIES (PAKISTAN ) LTD.
ACE INSURANCE LIMITED
ACNIELSEN PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
AGILITY LOGISTICS (PVT.) LTD
AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY ( PAKISTAN ) LIMITED.
AT&T GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES INTERNATIONAL INC.
AVANZA SOLUTIONS (PVT.) LTD.
BECTON DICKINSON PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
BP PAKISTAN EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INC
CAPTAIN-PQ CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD.
CHEVRON PAKISTAN LTD.
CISCO SYSTEMS PAKISTN (PVT.) LTD
CITIBANK, N.A.
CRESCENT BAHUMAN LIMITED
COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PAKISTAN LTD.
THE COCA-COLA EXPORT CORPORATION
COLGATE-PALMOLIVE (PAKISTAN) LTD.
Continental Biscuits Ltd.
DUPONT PAKISTAN OPERATIONS (PVT.) LTD.
ELI LILLY PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
EL PASO TECHNOLOGY PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
EMC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PVT) LTD.
FMC UNITED (PVT.) LTD.
GERRY'S INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. (FedEx) .
GILLETTE PAKISTAN LIMITED
IBM
INTEL PAKISTAN CORPORATION
INTERNATIONAL FRANCHISES (PVT) LTD
JOHNSON & JOHNSON PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
JOHAN (PVT.) LTD.
J.P. MORGAN PAKISTAN (PVT.) LIMITED
KARAM CERAMICS LIMITED
LEVI STRAUSS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LIMITED
LMK RESOURCES PAKISTAN LTD.
MCR (PVT.) LTD. (Pizza Hut)
MICROSOFT CORPORATION PAKISTAN LIAISON OFFICE
MOTOROLA LIMITED
MONSANTO PAKISTAN AGRITECH (PVT.) LTD.
MULLER & PHIPPS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
NCR CORPORATION
NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
NETSOL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
OBS PAKISTAN (PVT) LTD
OPTIMUS LTD.(HERTZ)
ORACLE CORPORATION SINGAPORE PTE LTD.
PEPSI-COLA INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD.
PFIZER PAKISTAN LTD.
PHILIP MORRIS (PAKISTAN) LTD.
PRESTIGE COMMUNICATIONS (PVT) LTD.
PROCTER & GAMBLE PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
RAFHAN MAIZE PRODUCTS CO. LTD.
RENFRO CRESCENT (PVT.) LTD
RIAZ BOTTLERS (PVT.) LTD. (Pepsi-Cola)
S.C. JOHNSON & SON OF PAKISTAN
SHERATON MIDDLE EAST MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
SINGER PAKISTAN LIMITED
SIZA FOODS (PVT.) LTD. (McDonald's)
TERADATA GLOBAL CONSULTING PAKISTAN (PVT) LTD
TRG (PVT) LTD.
UNISYS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LIMITED
UNIVERSAL LOGISTICS SERVICES (PVT) LTD.
WACKENHUT PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
WPP MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS (PVT) LTD.
VISA INC.
VISION NETWORK TELEVISION LTD. (CNBC)
3M PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS
SUNSOFT (PVT.) LTD.
Are all in Pakistan doing business. Our boys are dying overseas, not to protect the citizens of the United States, but to allow these corporations to "take advantage of" Pakistans cheap labor. They should be assessed a WAR TAX to reimburse the taxpayers the trillions it has cost to "stabilize" the area and protect their business concerns. Not many countries go to war to protect their corporations' right to move jobs out of the country. And folks are complaining about Social Security... which is all self-funded?
Fareed Zakaria is a liberial reporter that can't see what is in touch with normal Americans. Conservatism has not lost touch with reality. In fact they are the only ones that are in touch with reality. If we don't change how we spend money and take some drastic steps we are going to end up like Greece.
Huh. In touch with reality like two unfunded wars and unfunded tax cuts that make up the lion's share of our budget deficits? I guess it all depends on what "reality" you're talking about. If you watch Fox News or get your information from Rush Limbaugh you have no business – NO BUSINESS AT ALL – talking about "reality" because you are completely deluded.
There's no such thing as an "unfunded tax cut" you idiot. Think about it.
Just saying that whoever presents you with fact that forces you to confront your delusion, does not hide the facts. You can't dispute the facts can you?
I didn't know he was from Liberia
...
Seriously though: what ruins Greece is none of the things that Conservatives want to fix or abolish. Look at taxes: the Greek government is so poor because lots of people paid no, or much less, taxes than they were legally obliged to pay. Tax evasion etc. Why didn't businesses thrive in that environment? Because the state failed to push through reforms, invest in ways that would have made Greece a competitive economy producing things they can actually sell in the rest of Europe, etc.
So in other words Greece is the logical outcome of conservative tax policy.Stop demonizing taxes.They pay for so many things we take for granted.
Sorry, but his comments are spot on. Calling him a liberal doesn't actually refute what he said.
Sure, we need to reform our spending habits, but at the same time if we cut spending dramatically when the unemployment rate is 9% we'll just add millions to the unemployment rolls and end up negating most of the deficit reduction benefit of the cuts. That's reality. You in touch with that?
America's spending habits do need to be reformed, but nothing can be done while the fight between "conservative hard hats" and "hippy liberals" ravages U.S. politics. So much useless propaganda is being spread that the common man cannot even understand what the hell is going on. So many people today are ignorant to world, and even state, politics that they just vote for whoever promises the most. Lower taxes do sound good now, but the entire thought is short-sighted. They say ignorance is bliss, but all ignorance has ever done is destroy.
Did you not watch, or read, what he had to say? He just wants proof that lowering taxes will help us. Normally what happens when we lower taxes is trillions of dollars to the debt. i.e. Reagan, Bush and now Obama. Reagan was smart enough to raise taxes a little bit to slow the ballooning debt. Obama would do the same thing if he had a Congress that would allow him. Now everyone hates taxes, and I'd like to see a flater, fairer system. But it seems like fantasyland these days with all the debt.
Conservatism has lost touch and will ultimately lose the support of the American people. Well, at least those who have a memory longer than a gnat and who don't watch Fox News channel.
are you addicted to pulling fox news into every part of your life? the thing that the American public is getting rid of is liberalism, they see thru the massive push towards socialism from obama that liberal policies do not work. social justice is not the role of government. income redistribution to "balance" the field does not work. liberals seem to assume that everyone is of the same intellect, same ambition, same drive and those that make more money got lucky or knew someone that helped them therefore if all the money was spread around evenly that would be good. however we are NOT all equal in IQ ambition and drive and if you spread all the money around evenly within 5 years it would be back to where it was before getting spread around. why? because some people are dumb, some are lazy, some don't care, some are content with less... and, some are smarter, more ambitious, have more drive and determination, want more... that's what makes this country great. look at countries that try the other way, those would be the countries going under right now ie: greece.
work hard, save, don't be lazy, and you too can acheive. don't hate those who accomplish more than you.
Mike, I'd have to agree with you that we are not all equal in abilities and that we should work for ourselves, not depend on others, but that's as far as that goes. Socialism has been in the US since Welfare Reform Act. You act like the Obama administration proposed the first socialist-like policy. If you want to cut socialist policies in America then vote for the next candidate to cut government positions and see how well it can function.
As an international student who lives in the US, I am seriously amused that Republicans are happy to preach their politics like religion and people are happy to receive it like they do their religion. People did not even question them when they pretended to be defenders of medicare in the 2010 midterms when it is public knowledge for decades that from the beginning Conservatives never liked both Medicare and Social Security. People ask for no evidence. My theory is that their continued attack on good education is working for them. No where in civilized world such politics works. It is a sad commentary on the American electorate. As Jefferson is quoted as saying, ""If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." (as cited in Padover, 1939, p. 89)
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people...they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty." — Thomas Jefferson
zazu, I think so too re: dismantling the American education system. Every single person who I have spoken to who has on a student exchange to the USA during high school said that the quality of high school education was SO low. And those were not all supersmart Einsteins who went on those exchanges, pretty much people from all across the board in terms of school performance. My mother is a teacher in Germany and they have a partner school in the US which she visited, and she said classes were far less advanced than the comparable age here, and teachers really scored 0/10 on measures like applying pedagogics, didactic methods and so on. Of course, there are the schools that prepare the future university graduates, but the rest... It's hard for me to tell the reality on the ground, i.e. how many Americans really believe what the right-wingers preach, but the 2010 elections were quite a bummer for me in that regard.
Interesting that you an Zazu brought education into this discussion, framing it up as the failure of conservatism. Why is it interesting? Because the educational system in the US is very much a liberal institution, from what is taught to how it is run. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe we spend as much or even more on education per child (grade-school to high-school) than countries that you might consider "Better" at education, indicating a worse outcome for greater spending. I'm sure we could argue back and forth about why, but I don't believe there is much of an argument against the statement that the educational system in the US is run by liberals as a liberal institution.
Questioner: Who says it is "liberal" – Why????
What states are involved?
Where does Zakaria come up with this crap?
certainly not from Fox news. There are no facts there just more delusion.
This is not crap. He is spot on.
Obviously not the same place you learn false info, and religious persecution from.
I've been telling people the reality is not their happy place for a long time. The most frustrating aspect of trying to discuss issues with people on the right (and at times with the left) is exactly what Fareed describes. They are truly convinced that the stuff Republican politicians and talking heads like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck is truth handed down from God and can't possibly be wrong.
In point of fact they believe a lot of things real world evidence contradicts, and a good bit for which there is no real world evidence to support what they believe. This is why I butt heads with them so often even though I'm a moderate conservative. I'm a conservative from the "in touch with realty" camp. In my world your theories, beliefs, and assumptions are worthless if you can't support them with real world evidence and logically valid arguments, two things that are pretty much impossible to get from the folks on the far right.
yet, You yourself didn't put one tangible piece of data in your assertion. I want you to look at the page Zakaria's article is on. In his "About us" description, he offers to break down the tough issues for us. That's thoughtful, offering to tell me what the "tough issues" mean to me. Then, look at the headline "Conservatives out of touch". He made that easy for me. I don't even need to read the article. Thanks, man. And if I'm wondering who I should vote for in 2012? Hey, look no further, because Zakaria has put a Barack Obama poster, BAM, right there for me to see.
While I'm at it, I want you to consider the following: why won't Barack Obama consent to an interview with one of the conservative talk show hosts? He made time for Oprah, and all the Sunday shows. And being busy just doesn't cut it with 70+ rounds of golf under his belt. So, why then? Could it be that he would be exposed for his ideologies and would lose support of more Americans? Of course you know it is. He is not frugal with his time in front of the camera, but don't dare ask him to step behind a microphone, sans teleprompter, and engage his critics. I'd love to go on and on, but I think I have strep throat and need sleep. Thanks for all your engaging and encouraging thoughts.
"You yourself didn't put one tangible piece of data in your assertion."
True, and all you can conclude from this is that I didn't provide examples in that particular comment. But I have in other comments and in many others under many other articles. But just so you can't say I'm punting, here are some examples:
- Republican myth: Malpractice reform would bring down the cost of health care and make it affordable to millions more Americans.
Reality: Several states, including California, Texas, Ohio, and Indiana have already implemented tort reform and it didn't bring down health care spending in any of them. That's what the data shows. If tort reform really does bring down health care spending, why Republicans don't show us the proof?
- Republican myth: Get government out of health care and the free market will drive the costs down.
Reality: The free market has never been able to bring down health care spending anywhere in the world it's been tried, and for reasons that are well understood. Every other industrialized country in the world has some implementation of universal health care. In every case government plays some kind of major role in either running or regulating the health care sector, and all of them spend far less than we do. They cover everyone and the best of them beat us on a wide range of measures of health care performance. Better care, lower cost, greater coverage. This is what Republicans want you to fear.
- Republican myth: We need to keep taxes low on the highest incomes so the rich can create jobs.
Reality: The extension of all the Bush tax cuts maintained a tax structure that has failed to produce a significant number of jobs for over seven years now, and businesses are sitting on over two trillion dollars in capital waiting for demand to pick up so they have a reason to hire more people. They have plenty of money to hire people if people were willing to spend money on goods and services. Job growth under Bush was the worst of any administration since they started measuring.
Additional thought: A significant number of people are self-employed or work for small companies whose owners aren't making high incomes. Keeping tax rates low on the highest earners does nothing to encourage people to start their own businesses or small business owners to hire new workers. But you know what would? A universal health care system that doesn't make people feel trapped in their jobs because they need the health care benefits and doesn't give large companies an advantage in attracting talent. How is it good for innovation and productivity for workers to pick employers based on their health care plans? Studies consistently show that our system's heavy reliance on employers to provide health insurance is an impediment to labor mobility and discourages people from starting their own companies.
"While I'm at it, I want you to consider the following: why won't Barack Obama consent to an interview with one of the conservative talk show hosts?"
Why should he? They're not interested in conducting an honest interview any more than they are in objectively reporting the news. They'd just ask loaded questions like "Why do you think Americans want socialism?" and he'd have to spend all his time correcting them, and then given the ideological bent of their viewers they'd all just tell themselves he was lying every time he make a valid point. Look, I've spent years discussing politics online with those folks and talking to them is like talking to my TV. Facts don't matter. Data and studies don't matter. Logically valid arguments don't matter. Demonstrate they're wrong and they'll just call you liberal and claim you're what's wrong with America.
And for the record I saw just such an interview back when Obama was campaigning in 2008 so I'm not just making that up.
"but don't dare ask him to step behind a microphone, sans teleprompter"
Only brainwashed drones on the right say stuff like this. Obama has been interviewed many times and expressed his views without a teleprompter and he's better at it than most people. Way better than Bush, McCain, or Palin, for God's sake. This kind of comment may be red meat for the rabid haters, but it's just idiotic to thinking people.
"I'd love to go on and on"
I'm sure you would, but all you have is baseless speculation so I'm glad you didn't. I offered concrete thoughts. You talked about Obama's teleprompter. Enough said.
Wow, Skytag good job. If only I could articulate my thoughts as well as you.
Good job sir.
I like Zakaria so much but he is intentionally misleading in this article. He knows that income tax rates in America are among the lowest in the world and that our corporate tax rates are among the very, very highest. In reality, it should be the opposite. We should cut corporate tax rates to encourage businesses to bring jobs here. Then, when they reward themselves, as individuals, we should tax them more in the form of higher income taxes. Until both sides can see this magical combination, and only tell half the story as Zakaria does here, we will not have will not have an economic Renascence here in America
Our corporate tax rate is the second highest, but the actual taxes paid are not as high as the rate would indicate because companies use a variety of strategies to reduce their liability. I agree with your position, but I don't think Fareed was misleading in any way.
Yep. They only actually pay about 14%
I don't think it's really that simple. WIth the free flow of capital internationally, corporations (and thus the individuals who run them) are *so* adept at manoeuvering around national tax laws that, if corporations pay only little taxes, so will the rich individuals who would be supposed to make up for that with high income taxes. Germany has both high wages and high taxes, and yet it's doing well.
Yes he is an open minded, I mean "Liberal" reporter. Keep it up!
Ah yes, when you have no counter argument call the other person a liberal. Rush Limbaugh has taught you well.
I am not sure what this has to do with conservatives or rebubicans. Seems to me he is referencing both social and economic libertarians that have always existed, and probably make up most of the "independent" voters in this country. Zakaria references individual tax rates, ignors corporate tax rates, and then cites combined tax revenue with respect to GNP. Under his worldview, a healthy economy could not exist without taxes. He ignores the economic principals understood by some of the early founders (e.g., Hamiton) that concentrated wealth is the fuel for economic growth...something that high corporate taxes (as well as oppresive regulations) and high tax rates on wealthy individuals diminish. The bottom line is that any type of redistribution of wealth inversely affects economic growth as well as opportunity for individuals to pursue wealth. This is not to say there should not be laws regulating individual businesses or corporations (e.g., anti-trust laws), but it should be understood by legislature and regulators that both taxation and regulatory action can have impacts on economic growth.
You're one of those out of touch conservatives, presenting your ideology as if it were some great truth.
What passed for "concentration of wealth" in Hamiton's day would pale in comparison to what we have today, with the top 0.1% of income earners earning almost as much of the total AGI as the bottom 50%. The business community is sitting on $2 trillion in capital waiting for demand to pick up before they invest it in growing their businesses and hiring more people. How much more wealth needs to be concentrated to get us going, all of it?
And while that $2 trillion is sitting idle waiting for demand to pick up, the masses don't have money to spend to create more demand. A thriving, vibrant economy depends on money flowing through it, and that doesn't happen when too much of it becomes concentrated at the top.
The problem with your thinking, which seems to be a fairly common problem with a lot of people and certainly with people on the right these days is the assumption that if some is good more will always be better. If some concentration of wealth is good, more must be better. To hear you people talk there is no such thing as too little taxation or too little regulation. If cutting spending $20 billion from the 2012 budget is good, cutting it $1 trillion would be better.
Speaking of comparisons between tax systems with fast developing countries... China's tax is primarily consumption-based. Corporate taxes there are based on revenue, not profit. Also, higher taxes often result in higher budget deficits, but one has to be careful about making a simple comparison – for a high-growth rate economy, more debt can be sustainable, whereas for a country like the US it's crippling. Lower tax can be beneficial for China, where the growth of income was far outpaced by the growth of GDP, but America is an entirely different matter.
On the whole I agree that tax cuts in the US is not the panacea for all economic ills. Tax cuts at a time of high budget deficit is simply irresponsible – and plenty of people on the right, Greenspan included, agree. I also agree with Zakaria's overall assessment – the GOP candidates on the field are all delusional. You can't cut tax out of trouble; in fact, you cut yourself into a bigger mess.
Many on the right blames Obama for the huge deficit – and I agree some of his policies increased the deficit, but a lionshare of that increase can be attributed to his tax cuts.
well said
My theory is to vote out any Republican. They are so in bed with special interests they don't stand for anything but what will put money in their pockets. They have no brain power or logic.
And keeping people uneducated is good for them. They want people dumb to be their slaves and vote for them. Dumb, uneducated people does not understand logic or think for themselves. They believe anything a Republican tells them.
I don't think special interests are really the problem. I think what Fareed describes is the real problem, that they're now driven by ideology and disconnected by how things work in the real world.
I think our founding fathers had it right by having both paties in office there is more accountability. checks and balances my friend ,because power and money goes to everyones head at some point.
As a conservative I will put it bluntly. There aren't many conservatives left. There are none currently holding public office that I am aware of. Most if not all the comments above appear to have been made by zealots of one flavor or the other verbally poking and prodding at each other. You people will cut your own nose off to spite your face. The new norm appears to be the ends justifies the means by whatever price is required. Conservatives are not limited to one party nor have they ever been in American politics. Suddenly one side has the numerical edge on conservative participation? Sounds more like a group of people have hijacked the term conservative for there own use and all of you including Mr. Zakaria have swallowed it hook line and sinker. Keep drinking the Kool Aid and be eternally pissed off.
True conservatives have had no party to represent them since the Republican party decided to chase after the vote of right-wing extremists.
Of all the causitive factors driving America's decline, none is more damaging than the excessive influence of the corporate world and special interest groups on government and politics – achieved primarily through contributions to political campaigns. A Constitutional amendment written,in part, as follows, would stop that:
Elections to offices of the United States Government, including the Presidency and Vice Presidency of the United States, United States Senatorial and Conressional seats, and any other elected position, shall be funded by Congressional Appropriation. The United States Congress shall set the funding level, for both the nominating process and the election process, for each office, and all viable candidates shall receive the same funds for each cycle. Viable candidates are defined as those who can provide evidence, by signed petition reviewed and validated by the election authority in their jurisdicrion, that five percent of the registered voters in the jurisdiction, in which they seek office, support their candidacy. The only sources of funds that may be used in elections to offices of the UJnited States Government, beyond those provided by the aforementioned Congressional appropriations are: (1) funds drawn from a candidate's personal wealth, not to exceed $100,00.00, adjusted for inflations as necessary, in an election cycly, and (2) financial contributions received by candidate campaign organizations or political parties, from individual citizens of the United States who acquired citizenship by birth or naturalization. All funding to support policical parties shall be limited to contributions from individual citizens of the United States. The only voluntar or unpaid support of candidates and policical parties, that is allowed, is that provided by individual citizens promoting their personal choices. The purchase of attempted purchase of votes in elections is prohibited and violators whall be subject to prosecution. Congress is authorized, through legislation, to impose limitations on contributions from individual citizens to candidate organizations and to political parties to ensure the fairest participation of all citizens in elections.
In elections to offices of the United States Government, and advertising, promotional events or similar activities, sponsored outside the jurisdiction of candidate campaign organizations, whether sponsored by an individual or individuals, a special interest group, a profit or not-for-profit business or organization, or any other entity, is prohibited. The only exception to this prohibition is advertising or promotioan events or similar activities sponsored by political parties. All permissile advertising shall identify the sponsor and the source of funding to support the advertrising.
All television and radio networks and stations operate upon mediums belonging to the public. Therefore, all television and radio networks and strations shall provide, at no cost, equal access to airtime to all viable candidates during both the nominaition and election processes. Viable candidates are as defined above. The Congress of the United States shall set the number of hours to be provided by each network and station for each upcoming nomination and election cycle on a annual basis. This, more than anything else, is what America needs NOW.
Agreed. The corporate culture of "make profit now" makes sense for shareholders, but as a personal ethos, it provides nothing.
The real problem is that Americans themselves have been so heavily influenced by mass media that we as an entire populace are out of touch with reality. The American dream used to be the ability to afford comfort. Now what is it? The ability to get on a reality show? Having a youtube video with lots of hits? Americans used to deal with their problems and learn lessons and grow. Now they take anti-depressants and adderall and have completely abandoned any notion of discipline. Let's face it, we have the government we deserve: a government that does not address reality, that has no discipline, that panders only to our short term and base insincts.
^^^this. The biggest barrier I think to actual progress is the media. The beast has become, for the powerful, a means of molding the minds of the public which has shown again and again to be extremely effective. This influence is what I believe to be behind Bush's undeserved election to a second term and absurd loyalty of the republican base and also president Obama's election to office unfortunately. Maybe I am naive but to me it seems wrong not to have constructed and put into place laws that would check and balance the power of the media. We have to be careful ofcourse because the media should not be controlled or seriously restricted but at the same time the power of the media should not be allowed to be abused by any person(s)
that is very true and there is no where to get objective news. one leans left, the other right. People no longer are responsable for their own actions and we all get a ribbon. In the real world there is a 1st place and a last place we need to deal with it!
Whenever I hear some ignorant, hypocrite, fascist neo-con talk about corporate taxes, I can only laugh. Who cares what the corporate tax rate is? Corporations don't pay it!!!!! Here you go, geniuses.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/08/12/us-usa-taxes-corporations-idUSN1249465620080812
Well, I can't expect much from people who think Rush Limbaugh is intelligent. Dumb republicans!!!!
Hey, where are the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq!?? Hahahahahaha!!!!!!! What a load of hicks.
I know. They always cite the tax rate, not the actual taxes paid.
No. I'm a liberal, but I'm going to push back here... that article does not seal your point.
Here's the argument:
Fareed says: "The tax rate is the lowest in 50 years."
Conservative counters: "But the corporate tax rate is high!"
Liberal counters: "But companies don't pay it! See this report - http://tinyurl.com/4anvjkt "
But the reporting in that article is incomplete. The report quotes "a variety of reasons" that the corporations didn't pay taxes FOR ONE YEAR out of 7. Those reasons were "operating losses, tax credits and [shifting money] to low tax countries." Only the last of these is deplorable. The others are standard tax items.
The article does not say what percentage of the missed taxes are from normal things like operating losses, and what percent are from greedy things like shifting money around.
So I do not accept your counterpoint. It may be true that corporations don't pay the high tax rate, but the cited article doesn't establish that.
@Michael: Most people, including Obama, understand that we need to lower the corporate tax rate to be more competitive. The current high rate motivates companies to pursue strategies that allow them to pay taxes in other countries were the rates are lower.
But that is separate from the issue of personal income tax rates, and it is true that our personal income taxes are lower than the historical average, at a time when we have historically high deficits and debt.
It is ironic that, as Republicans extol the virtues of a "free" market, we are looking over our shoulders at China, a fascist state. Government and business work hand-in-hand. Individual freedom is of little concern. And they are overtaking us at breakneck speed.
One of the limitations of a free market independent of government influence is that there is no entity coordinating the efforts of industry and business. There is no long-term strategic planning. Instead you have millions of businesses focusing exclusively on their little piece of the pie.
"enitiy coordinating" means central control. Freedom is not born out of control.... Every single thing you buy or use is a product of the free market... The coordinating comes from success and failure... When something works it continues... When something doesn't work, it is discontinued...If you don't like it, then don't buy it.. The free maerket polices itself... Jackass!
The truth is, Republicans want very much to emulate the current Chinese model.
I guess the NLRB not letting Boeing expand its business into right-to-work states is your idea of freedom? We are looking ahead to China because the US gov't is making business operate with its hands tied bhehind its back... Not to mention the industry killing taxes and unions
The main threat to our future is budget deficit and uncertainty due to threat of government bureaucracy taking over capital allocation decisions. This is what really makes it difficult for risk takers to invest/undertake new projects. So, while I agree with Fareed that it is not time to raise taxes, I strongly disagree with his promotion of simplistic Keynesian ideas. It is laughable to claim that China's command economy "works", and posit it as a model for the US (which with all its difficulties is still the best functioning economy in the world). Under pressure from Communist Party to raise GDP, China builds malls where nobody is going to shop and cities where nobody is going to live. I was born in Russia, and saw firsthand how easy it is for communist party to dazzle gullible western liberal arts majors with high growth rates... So, Fareed, you promotion of Keynesianism is potentially even more harmful than (admittedly wrong timed) calls to reduce taxes.
Just from reading the commentaries above I'm now convinced that most of us are so entrenched within our own information cacoons and our own chosen ideologies that we refuse to consider any ideas or facts that might challenge or contradict our own embraced versions of the truth. As long as that is our collective mentality, whether we label ourselves liberals or conservatives, our journey toward a very destructive end will be expedited. All I can say is this: A plague on all our houses if we don't grow up!
Who is Zakaria? A Journalist or a just another Professor?
He works for CNN! That means hes important.
If you think the Republican presidential candidates know something special...know something we don't...read AND listen to Fareed's piece here...and you'll see that they are clearly CLUELESS. I'm not the brightest penny in the roll, but somehow I knew all this years ago. Maybe it has something to do with being around during the Reagen years and his failures, especially economic failures...the "trickle-down" theory that even George H. W. Bush referred to as "VooDoo" and which most Republicans STILL think is just fine. It's a proven failure.
Interesting that many countries with high tax rates and more uh, dare I use the dreaded "S" word...socialistic forms of government are thriving (read the piece)? Mind you...SOCIALIST not COMMUNIST...there IS a difference. Pure Marxist Communism doesn't work very well either, as we all should know.
I call upon all right-wing flag-wavers and free-market champions to read the piece...and realize that, to quote an old Barry Goldwater campaign slogan..."In your heart, you know he's right."
Face it...our system is broken...broken by it's single major weakness, GREED. Somewhere between a society controlled by Corporate America (some think we're already there) and pure Marxism (another proven failure) is the right way to go. And trust me...the current crop of "candidates" are, I'll repeat...CLUELESS.
Dick Cheney said Reagan proved deficits don't matter. Why don't we hear this more from Republicans these days?
Regan put the CON in CONservative.
I am so tired of paying for wars I don't want. If you do...please pay more taxes to pay for it. I want my taxes going for education, infrastructure & health care that I can afford. Obama promised in his campaign not to be like G.W. & pay as we go. What happened? There is so much money spent every day distroying and killing but the Republicans want to balance the budget with my husband's meager Social Secuity check? I'm too young for SS and I had to quit my job 6 years ago to take care of my husband. Can't afford outside caregivers. Oh and please, let's not make the ultririch pay anymore taxes. After all they really need that 5th home in Malibu to keep up with the other ultrarich. There is need and then there's greed. That's what is ruining this country. Get yours while you can the hell with the country. That was obvious in the housing market scam. As my name implies I am fed up with both parties. Harry had a great idea. Also limit the campaign media frenzy to 3 months. With today's technologies, 24 hour news cycles, if a voter can't make a decision, they aren't paying attention & no amount of time will help.
Republicans=religious minds=inerrant holy books=talking snake=7 day creation=6000 year old earth=talking donkey=reversal of three-day rigormotis=invisible cosmic dictator=COMPLETE NONSENSE.
It's nice that Mr. Zakaria can give us a diatribe on conservitism if all his life he seems to be liberal in nature. He should have written an article about how the liberalism of today is not the liberalism of, say 10 or 20 years ago. In my opinion, the liberalism of today is more Socialist in nature. Funny how the liberals back in the '60s wanted the government to stay out of their hair. Now many liberals want the government to take care of all their problems, as if the liberals feel the answer to all our problems is government EVERYWHERE from heatlhcare to running the economy. That to me is very strange. And one final note. If the liberals of today, like Mr. Zakaria, had their way, most conservatives would be imprisoned for even THINKING anything that is not liberal in nature. .
You probably realize the most recent mention on this topic was CIA members leaving due to the targeting of anti-war advocates by G.W.Bush.
We need the evolution filter to weed out the liberal socialist. Or a hanging would suffice, start at the top of the big social spenders.
or even better, lets find every jack@$s that still believes in god, f.u.ck him up the as.$ with a broomstick, and light his family on fire while he watches.
The GOP only have one solution. The solution is to turn the Old, Sick, Poor, Unemployed, and Gay people into slaves. Then whip them until they are Young, Healthy, Rich, Employed, and Straight. Or until they are dead. Then turn them into Soylent Green to feed the military. A self sustaining system.
gop is greed over people. Can you talk with someone and discuss world views or is your idea of discussion just labeling and stereotyping people. if you don't want people to be predjudice than you have to treat others like you want to be treated. I have never heard anyone advocate the kind of extreme radical thought you are mentioning. If you want to influence others you have to know how to treat people.
Check the GOP voting records.
GOP stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason.
I agree that conservatives ain't what they used to be. They seem to be becoming desperate, willing to take any position, no matter how bizarre, to win an election or to oppose Obama. The electorate is becoming desperate to elect someone who can take decisive action. Our national government is non-functional. Perhaps the threat of a constitutional convention would get some action. If not, we might consider going to a parliamentary system. At least we would have some action. That is a little like Russian roulette.
When, exactly, are these "hard-headed pragmatist" conservatives supposed to have existed? Give me some concrete examples. I suspect strongly this is revisionist history based on a stereotype. Conservatives have always been ideologues. Now they're just dumber and more entrenched.
Mr. Fareed,
On your most recent show you described the dichotommy of American conservatism vs. liberalism. You used the Nixon administration as an example of what conservatism was supposed to mean, even if it was handled poorly.
But why did you skip over the Bill Clinton, New Democrats who introduced a marriage of liberalism and free trade (even if it didn't work). I really liked your thoughts about best practices internationally and how the US should learn from China and other countries with centralized governments who are making strategically wise industry decisions.
But your two guests didn't speak about that. They gave us the same old spend or don't economic push-pull argument on fiscal policy that we have all heard before. It would have been really interesting to have two entrepreneurs with government contracts debate this topic.
Love the show,
Constantine
Mr. Fareed,
On your most recent show you described the dichotmmy of American conservatism vs. liberalism. You used the Nixon administration as an example of what conservatism was supposed to mean, even if it was handled poorly.
But why did you skip over the Bill Clinton, New Democrats who introduced a marriage of liberalism and free trade (even if it didn't work). I really liked your thoughts about best practices internationally and how the US should learn from China and other countries with centralized governments who are making strategically wise industry decisions.
But your two guests didn't speak about that. They gave us the same old spend or don't economic push-pull argument on fiscal policy that we have all heard before. It would have been really interesting to have two entrepreneurs with government contracts debate this topic.
Love the show,
Constantine
Constantine, like the tone of the discussion but need to push on something here. You mention that the US should look at a mixed model and point to China presumably because of its economic growth. Their growth, while phenomenal percentage wise, is very deceptive. I would hazard a guess they have at least 800 million people living below what we in the US would think of as "impoverished living conditions". Also, America is a little like the guy who broke the 4 minute mile (roger bannister?), and now that is not even considered a big deal. Those that follow have an easier path than those pushing the boundaries.
Great show. Best practices among the international community is an excellent way to assess ideas to move forward, certainly areas like science and medicine turn to global best practices to advance knowledge and patient outcomes. However on US government scene, you forget that you're dealing with the US, a nation that is predominantly 1. Xenophobic. 2. In-wardly facing. Far too many Americans like to leave their blinders on and believe that the current US system is the best of the best. America is too entrenched with itself. Global thinking is not there yet and this needs serious work, not only at the citizen level but our politicians as well. So forget about best practices in a nation that is too closed to learned from others.
Yes, conservatives have lost touch with reality. If you're weary of paying taxes in a "welfare state," the last thing on your agenda should be decreasing access to birth control. One of the most expensive things that a person can do is to have a child. And if that person cannot afford housing, clothing, food, health care, etc for that child, who pays? I would think that conservatives (at least fiscal conservatives) would be all about the birth control bandwagon. What's the better situation: complaining about paying for aid to help a parent provide for their children, or helping that parent to plan to have the children when they can afford to care for them without taxpayer assistance?
Conservative thinking are not based on theory, it is based on reality.
Take a look
Singapore has an economic growth of 14.5% in 2010 and Hong Kong has an economic growth of 6.8% in 2010.
Singapore GDP per capita ranked no 3 globally while Hong Kong GDP per capita ranked no 8 in the world. They are the only non-oil state that has a robut economic growth even when its GDP per capita is highly developed. Singapore and Hong Kong has among the lowest tax mixery, they have no dividend and capital gain tax on investment..
If you look at the ranking of the real GDP growth rate of 2010. Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan are the only non-oil developed economies that is ranked in the top 50. They have 1 thing in common : low taxes.
Fareed Zakaria, the developed economies you mentioned: Germany, Denmark and Canada you mentioned does not even enter the top 100 in real economic growth ranking in 2010. Germany ranks 101, Canada ranks 115, Denmark ranks 131.
Government intervention to help business of course would be desirable but not towards the direction of raising taxes. China does not yet have an efficient tax collection mechanism, as such businessmen keeps more of their own money and reinvested it into the economy and coupled with the fact that the government is pro-business, pro-infrastructure one can see robust growth.
Actually, Liberalism has ALSO lost touch with reality. Liberalism today is becoming more socialist and well socialism leads to communism. Conservatives are becoming a bit more religious for my taste. BOTH have completely lost track of the center of life. With the constant BS spouted in the media, the lies, the smokescreens, the mistrustfulness, editing, butchered truths, the making politicians like rockstars (Obama), everything is so freaking backwards now, perspective has been lost. Liberals will attack the Conservatives spouting off and calling them various defamatory names just to avoid debate/talk and understanding. That then causes the Conservatives to fight back. They are provoking each other and the media is helping and then more suffering, anger, hostilities, frustrations, etc build up. I am so tired of all of it.
I don't really believe cutting taxes and cutting spending will cause the economy to "bounce back". The economy we've had was artificial, not rooted in reality and we're just now experiencing it's inevitable downfall. Unfortunately, it's probably something we have to go through in order to learn some hard lessons. Good thing is that we have some good technology and the internet now to live more sustainable as individuals, so in that respect, I think this whole process is supposed to happen and that it's a natural part of any kind of growing complex system.
Indeed, history is, and has been too easily forgotten. So, perhaps, if it is a 'grounded in reality' approach to governmental and economic reform that the new conservatives are seeking ( the government initiated technology infrastructures of the earlier time period should have done enough to convince anyone of the importance of governmental roles, for both public and private sectors...) then perhaps they, again, need to be reminded of the not too distant past of our virtual economic collapse.
Was this circumstance wrought soley by poor government bureaucracy and constricting regulations? True Fannie mae dropped the ball and did not make the correct modifications while bad loan portfolios were being supplied to the securities market and hedge funds. And it is also true that regulators at the time of all this mess were more respondant to the problem for reasons of, perhaps, job security and, doing what regulators do , focusing soley on the infractions at hand. Perhaps, then, it can be said that when the crisis came it certainly showed the flaws in the governments financial regulation systme.
But lets not forget where the problem blossomed from to begin with... the free market. Country Wide was the first start the program of 'projected market value' , ( given government approval). And from there the trend was set and picked up by other lending institution s such as Option One, Delta Funding, and a circling periphery of smaller mortgage companies and correspondant lenders who, in true free market spirit, ventured out on there own in competing with their larger counterparts by effecting the existing home valuation regime anyway they could. From the outset this should have told anyone it was a growing recipe for disaster. And sure enough, by March of 2006, I remember, it came to fruition.
By that time every home appraisal compamy working in coordination with every variety of sub-prime mortgage lenders and title companies were focusing on one thing: figure a way to inflate property values as high as they could within this very deregulated systme of projected home values. They did. So borrowers kept borrowing, brokers earned high commissions and appraisal companies, in addition to having regular customers, got kick backs. And when the property values on appraisal reports, in the end, were begining to show the unreflectiveness they had with the 'real' market property values, banks had no choice, by imposed regulation, to demand that appraisal values be, ultimately based on respective state standardized real property value tax appraisals....Overnight home values nation wide dropped anywhere from 15% to 40% of their early given values....40%!
Why? many reasons, the overview of which I hope I gave a good description of the unralveling of that system. But the point, moreover, is that this problem was very directly, very blatently, brought on by, shall we say, hyperactive free market thinking. That is not to say that I do not believe in the free market. History has proven that the best innovations in the world have come from it. But it must be acknowledged, also, that great catastrophe can, has, come from it, as well.
So I would say to the conservatives, you are wrong on this one. And that if want work towards the future of a free market system then you must concede the absolute necessity of a regulatory system that is able to step in when someone, as they assuredly will, drops the ball.
I ain't worried about the economy. If we keep marching to the corporate BS line about taxes and blasting "socialists" we will not have to worry about a future, any future. If so many people lost homes where are they now? Why hasn't the UN or anyone else spoken about these economic refugees here in the US? And whatever happened to those 99ers who don't have jobs (or any income), how do they feed themselves? If natural disasters have occurred in China, Russia, Australia, Brazil, and here in the US (all the largest food producing nations) in the last two years, why haven't we heard about any major famines? Remember that congressman who made that crass comment about population reduction a few years ago a got himself skewered for his political insensitivity? Well he was right, it is happening but no one wants to talk about it or even acknowledge that it is happening.
Fareed is an expert on losing touch with reality!!!
ZING!
You can't say that conservatism has lost touch with reality without acknowledging that liberalism has as well. Liberalism appears to believe that there is enough of everything in the world for everyone to have their happy share. First rule of economics: Scarcity. There is and never will be enough for everyone to satisfy their own needs. Wake up and pay attention.
The only that is out of touch is liberalsim. The US Constitution is not out of date and is always amendable. Any attempt to re-write the US Consitituion by liberals is to completely dismantle the US Constitution and it limits on government. Conservatism is freedom. Freedom is never out of touch. Conservatives love people. When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don't see groups. We don't see victims. We don't see people we want to exploit. What we see - what we see is potential. We do not look out across the country and see the average American, the person that makes this country work. We do not see that person with contempt. We don't think that person doesn't have what it takes. We believe that person can be the best he or she wants to be if certain things are just removed from their path like onerous taxes, regulations and too much government. We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life. Liberty, Freedom. And the pursuit of happiness. We conservatives think all three are under assault. We don't want to tell anybody how to live. That's up to you. If you want to make the best of yourself, feel free. If you want to ruin your life, we'll try to stop it, but it's a waste. We look over the country as it is today, we see so much waste, human potential that's been destroyed by 50 years of a welfare state. By a failed war on poverty. Conservatism is a universal set of core principles. You don't check principles at the door. It is liberalism that is constantly trying to redefine conservatism and render the US Constitution moot and this article is further proof of such desires by the liberally biased media that is CNN.
Liberals fight for democratic principles more than conservatives. The Constitutional prohibition of titles has little effect when unlimited money controls everything. Taxes have always been a factor in economics, calling all of them onerous makes no sense. Anyone that can appreciate that the benefits of sanitation, medicine, industrialism, technology and other developments of the 20th century have profoundly changed life has my vote. Unfortunately I see few republicans that even understand the Constitution's principles.
The best evidence available that Zakaria is just another liberal moron is found in this one statement: "...America is grinding to a halt because of high taxation is not based on facts, either past or present. It is simply a theoretical assertion."
Conservatives never said that America is "grinding to a halt" because of taxation. America is grinding to a halt because of some very poor business decisions across multiple industries (banks, credit companies, mortgage brokers, auto industry, etc), many of which were urged to perform stupid acts thanks to progressive policies in Washington. Lower loan standards, for example–all part of progressive social-experimentation from within the
Beltway.
What is insane is the notion that the solution to a devastated private sector is to increase taxes, which is what liberals think. "take more money away from people and businesses and they will prosper." You don't need a PhD in Economics to see what a ludicrous concept it is.
"The Republican prescription is cut taxes – slash government spending, then things will always bounce back." Again, Zakaria has a very limited intelligence. Obama's TRILLION dollar spending sprees did NOTHING to fix the economy. Nor did FDR's New Deal turn around the Great Depression, it ground on for a decade. It took WWII and the desperate need to be productive and save Europe from Nazism that got us out of that cycle.
So if anyone has lost touch with reality, it's the progressives who have squandered trillions of dollars,see no result for it, and thinkthey should try more of the same.
As for all those nations Zakaria says are in the best shape: he wants you to look the other way and not notice that they have ALL imposed austerity measures and cut government spending.
Zakaria is a fool.
We need to move away from "Group Think." The biggest problem I see with our government is that the individual reps are "expected" to vote in the direction of party leaders. If we did away with the parties all-together, then lobbyists would have to 'court' each candidate instead of the leaders of a faction. The representatives would then be free to do their own investigation and "thinking" instead of learning regurgitation from party constituents.
I have worked in corporations where the best way to improve profits and reduce headcount (preferably through attrition) is to increase efficiencies. If THAT could be a main focus of the government, I think they could ultimately reach the savings they are looking for. An example would be the Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) in Indiana. It was a MESS, and within a few years, citizens went from a yearly dreaded event to one of minor inconvenience while closing several offices. Another savings would come from not allowing "special interest" items into bills (read "Pork"). Leave the states to themselves, except where national interest is involved. Get the Federal Government out of it! There's a lot of opportunities – need to present the challenge.
Lifetime politicians, I don't see as an issue. But ONLY if it's not based on a party system. Party systems allow even the voters not to think. Instead of looking at the individual, they simply choose "Republican" or "Democratic" on the voting ballet. Have prelimiary votes to narrow the field down to the TOP THREE! Not the top of each party. The BEST three may be in one or the other party – not that the single check mark voters would ever acknowledge that.
A note on law decision making – don't let law makers make decisions based on human emotion! I remember being in DISBELIEF when 'interest only' loans came out. Wow – what a dumb, irresponsible allowance! If you can't afford the loan, you can't afford the house. Back to what Fareed pointed out – we can look at the past to predict the future. Fact: Housing markets go down. It was a disaster waiting for it's time, and we have hit that time hard.
Tax cuts would help – what would help more is to stop threatening increases. The costs of regulation, Obamacare, Dodd Frank and the hostile rhetoric comming out of the WH does more to scare off Capital investment than cutting taxes. If people were assured of maintaining the status quo that would be a step in the right direction. Instead we get threats & demonization of business & a zero tax on GE and crony capitalist companies. Pleeeaaase what planet are you on Fareed!?
There's such a thing as modern conservatism, but few politicians exhibit that mindset. By nature of conservatism, comes a fear change, and an outdated view of the world. Wanting to cut services that we don't need and allowing free markets to open up is a fine stance, but an illogical one to hold for all cases. Should the FDA and FAA be privatized, or eliminated? Should schools be shut down? We need a balance and few conservatives seem to be of that mindset.
He is singing to the Liberal CNN Choir, that's the core audience, you need to keep them happy with this BS. You see this all the time on CNN, Cafferty does it on a regular basis.
I have just finished reading this article and your editorial on the constitution and let me start by saying you are what is wrong with this country. You are absolutely right, those countries you point to do a wonderful job of elevating the middle class but is the American dream a chance to live in the middle class. No, the American dream is a chance to be the top, and although I landed in the middle class I have no one to blame but myself. I had every opportunity to do more, to be better and for whatever reason I didn't get there. That doesn't mean I don't want my children to have the same opportunity. My dad use to tell me that life isn't fair and everything I see from you makes me think that you believe it should be. It's not, get over it. It seems to me that you made it and now you have remorse. There is nothing more condescending then when a rich person talks about making life fair. I don't hold your success against you, so please don't worry about me. And quit comparing tax rates to that of the 1950's and start comparing them to that of the 1850's. Remember the industrial revolution. This country does pretty good for itself and an inefficient government butting in is the last thing we need.
LOL! Best post of the day. I hope you meant it as satire. What a joke1
Every dollar you pay in taxes is a dollar you earned, but don't have, to buy necessaries and wants. Or save. Or donate to help the less fortunate.
It's a dollar taken from you by implied force to be given to bureaucrats, agencies and politicians to spend as THEY see fit. No sane person argues the govt spends money wisely. We all know it doesn't. What comes back to you in govt services is a fraction of what you paid in.
Why would anyone argue that higher tax rates are, or could ever be, a good thing?
Zakaria, what you fail to mention is the the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. THAT is why our unemployment rates are skyrocketing. Obama and his cohorts are demonizing corporations and want to RAISE corporate taxes. That is pure stupidity. That's why liberals are driving American businesses and jobs overseas.
And you can't just blindly compare income tax rates to companies like Germany and South Korea without comparing things like cost of living, availability of public transportation, etc. Apples to oranges. And if those countries are so great, why do they all envy Americans?
Scott, thanks for the Republican plug.
Now for reality, the reason jobs are going overseas is simple: profit. If it was not more profitable to be overseas the factories would stilll be here. Taxes, regulations, anything else are just scapegoats. We could remove all regulations and cut all taxes, but if profits are higher from overseas factories, thats where the jobs will be.
Profits are higher because they're paying 50-75% less in taxes, and wages are cheaper because they don't have to deal with greedy unions. In other words, they don't have people like Obama, Pelosi, and Reid driving them away.
Wrong premise: Reality has lost touch with Conservatism. That said Reality is what it is. As Albert Einstein reputedly said: "Conservatives are people living ina past that did not exist." Now they are even worse. They are living in a fantasy they cannot control, they do not want to admit has failed, they do not believe in but insist on out of spite, and they use to discredit even thir own best interests: "Trickle-down Economics." The reality is that greed will always prevail not matter what it is called or by whom. The resentment in the US toward countries such as Japan and China has its roots in their success at being greedy.
So you prefer Obama's "trickle up poverty"? Socialism doesn't work. Never has. Never will. And Republicans don't want "trickle down" anything. All we want to do is make our corporate taxes competitive with the countries that are stealing all of our companies, factories, and jobs. Save our jobs. Vote Republican!
Has nothing to do with Socialism. Republicans are the last to want whats best for America. The only thing that matters to them is their corporate bottom line, regardless of what is lost. Democrats are worthless as stewards of the public trust. Repbulicans are corporate thieves pure and simple; they are simply purveyors of greed. Tea-party principles are nothing more than misguided selfish anarchy. Their goal is to go back to the rule of the gun like the "Wild, Wild West!" When the top of a tree gets too heavy for the trunk to bear, the tree topples and dies. That's what is happening economically as a result of Trickle-down economics.
Thanks for proving that you know absolutely nothing about economics, or what Republicans stand for.
As I said before, reality is out of touch with Conservatives. Economics will never cure greed ... and I do know what Republicans stand for. It's just not that which they try to convince others using their rhetoric, lies, and threats. If they truly believed in what they espouse, they would have no fear of radio pundits and would conduct an open meaningful dialogue on how to get the country back to where it should be. There is nothing a country that is united cannot acheive. There is nothing that cannot defeat a country divided.
Scott. You need a new book of cliche`s.
What Zac ommited was the fact that the Engels (of Marx and Engels) family owned sweatshops. The initial motivation for socialism was a response to pure capitalism. Regulations seem to work better. They are still ineffective with loyalty tests. My beliefs should not have to match that of my employer.
Can the desert loose its great oceans? Can an albino lose it dark skin? Can the tundra lose its plush valleys and streams? No, you can’t lose what you don’t have. Conservatives never had a sense of reality. They suffer with collective paranoia. It is either foreigners or the government scheming and plotting to take their liberties or money. It is a wonder they can stand this modern world. They should all go off and meet at Jones town.
And you think liberals are in touch with reality? LMFAO!!!! You gotta be kidding me. They win elections by pushing their fantasies about creating a utopia where people don't have to work for a living. They just steal from the wealthy, and give to the poor. Everyone has free healthcare. Guns are going to be outlawed, and crime will magically disappear. Yeah, that sounds like reality to me. An America without conservatives would be a frightening place to live.
And it's the liberals that push paranoia. Their platform is to use class warfare to create mass hysteria. They demonize wealthy people and corporations, and try to turn poor and middle class people against them. All while ignoring the fact that those poor and middle class people wouldn't have jobs without the wealthy and corporations.
Scott,
You talk as though you know economics. What is your answer to the two questions:
http://www.politicususa.com/en/conservative-journalist-frum
Your dogma does not prove you are knowledgable or correct. It only proves you wear a lot of unshorn wool.
Scott,
Here is a better link:
http://www.frumforum.com/incredible-shrinking-workers-income
Fareed Z has lost touch with America. These people really need to get out of the major news centers like NY and DC and realize that 90% of America does not live like them. They are pathetic. By the way, this guy is nothing more than a mouthpiece for Obama, please CNN, relegate him to trash duty ASAP.
FZ, the US has the highest corporate taxes in the world. PEriod. The countries you list with 'high' taxes are personal taxes. Teh reason people can absorb those taxes is because the prosperity of a country, industrially, benefits its citizens to the point they CAN absorb the tax burden. Can you not understand this simple concept? Lower the corporate taxes, economy starts to recover, people make money, people may more taxes tax revenue based on GDP goes up, see how this works?
And that's how it does work under Obama.
I own a machine shop that employs 24 men and women. Last year I paid $0 in taxes. Why? Because I chose to invest about $200,000 into new equipment. I paid no taxes, I single handedly helped to stimulate at least a miniscule portion of the economy, I retained all my employees, and I've drastically improved my company's capabilities. This year following the same principle I've fixed the foundation on my building, will probably do other improvements (painting, new signage, etc), replaced the backbone of my computer network, and may even buy another machine.
I have yet to be given such a deal by any Republican. Under the circumstances it's kind of hard for me to say "Obama is bad for small business" with a straight face.
Whatever you're hearing from your politicians and pundits, what I've stated above are simply the facts as I've lived them.
That's because you're benefiting from the Bush tax cuts, genius. You know, the ones that Obama and the left want to take away? Let's see if you can still claim how great Obama is when he raises your taxes, and implements Obamacare.
Whether or not everything Fareed has said is 100% correct misses the point. His views of the Republicans are too modest if anything. All of you middle class and under folks who vote for the Republican candidates do so at your own risk. The Republicans would never have gotten into power if they had not played on the ignorance of male, Southern voters during the civil rights battles of the sixties. Look at the political map and see for your self. The folks in the southern states would vote for Hitler if he were alive, and would go to the country clubs in the south and pat the good old boys on the back and tell them what they want to hear. Folks in Mississippi have outdoor bathrooms, make a living cutting pulp wood, and vote for the Billionaire Republicans Go figure.
Another blind sheep that believes whatever BS the left-wing media feeds them. If you're poor or middle class and want to stay that way, vote for Democrats. If' you're poor or middle class and want to improve your economic status, vote for Republicans.
Democrats prey on the poor and ignorant. They spout off about how they're for the "average American". They gloat about their social welfare programs. Well, Democrats have done more to oppress minorities and poor people than any other group of people. They get people hooked on welfare, and turn that into a lifestyle. Instead of helping people work their way up the ladder, they ensure that they stay poor, and barely get by. And they do this just because they want your votes. They NEED your votes. If they didn't have poor people and minorities voting for them, Democrats would NEVER win an election. The Democrats and their programs will ensure that the gap between the poor and the wealthy continues to grow, yet they'll blame the Republicans for it. And the sad thing is that morons like yourself will continue to believe them because you aren't intelligent enough to look at the facts and see what's actually going on.
Fareed is spot on, taxes are at their lowest level since 1950. The reason the economy is tanked is due to NAFTA and sending all of our manufacturing (and corporate HQ) overseas so that the GE's of the world pay no US taxes. I say give a tax break for manufacturing with jobs in the US and tax the churches as they are nothing but PACS anyway.
It is amazing how people can miss the point of the article.
What he is saying is that conservatives were at one time pragmatists, who used to scoff at liberals for being ideological, but that now coservatives are making decisions based on ideology. The belief about tax cuts spurring the economy and tax increases slowing economic growth it is an example of something which can be true but is not necessarily always the case. He points out examples of government action helping the economy, business and individuals and contrasts this with the idealogical belief that many conservatives have against government led programs and solutions.
So nice of you to try to set conservatives right here, Fareed. But, taking your advice would be like a fly accepting directions from a spider. Worry more about your own party, Fareed, and leave conservatism to conservatives. Why not write a column on Obama's bustling economy? How about the success of the Democrat Party's war on poverty? Fareed, bought and paid for by Barack H. Obama and George Soros, and wearing snappy black loafers.
China is not running around acting as the world police, they dont have the social programs that the liberals want to dish out. The people there are not wealthy, they live largely well below our standards. How can you use China as a standard against the united states? The Chinese leaders are playing against us (financial warfare), using their workforce at the expense of their people. Liberal socialism is a problem not a solution, look at the states that are broke, California for one, one of the most liberal. Fareed, go home! Americas problem is social liberal and military spending. We need to be more of a republic and less of a democracy. Fareed, you and people like are you are the problem.
"Conservatism has lost touch with reality," Mr. Zakaria says. Did you just barely noticed that? How long have you been living in the USA? Conservatives have always been out of touch with reality. They portray themselves as rich, religious and sinless Puritans guided by a supreme being.
It is a great idea to be in good terms with the Creator but it is wrong to fake to be in such great terms with Him as these self-styled religious Conservative Republican Puritans do. Republican Conservatives assume that if a person is poor, unemployed and receiving public assistance, it is because such person is an irresponsible, lazy liberal Democrat. Nowadays, there are many unemployed republicans on public assistance because of the inflation recession started by the Republican presidents. Nevertheless, in their speeches, they twist reality and history to make it sound like it is the Democrats' fault of this recession. They assume the American people is too stupid to know the truth.
There are many Christian Democrats but we do not boast to be religious sinless puritans as the Republican Conservatives do in order to deceive the American voters. We Democrats do not use the name of God in vain.
Republican so called Conservatives seem to assume, believe and portray the idea that all Democrats are liberal atheists who supports middle eastern terrorists; that is not the case. We Democrats want the best for the USA; we are in touch with reality. We do not want to turn this government to a fascist totalitarian state as the one the Republicans are leading it to because they are out of touch with reality.
Well said.
As conservatives don't believe in the Constitution or learning American history, and as they seem to owe their allegiance to foreign powers rather than their own, they seem to have also given up Patriotism as well. They've completely botched their election campaign so far, with fringe crazies getting all the publicity while front runners are picked with no personality or new ideas and no chance to win an election. The GOP seems to be the party of self destruction and self defeat on every level.
WAIT WAIT WAIT rewind!!
http://www.newsweek.com/2008/02/16/the-end-of-conservatism.html
2008: The end of Conservatism....
Is this like Al Gore's prediction concerning when the world will implode?
So, conservatism has lost touch? What happened to the end of it??
Yeah...stick to something you know, which does not include any clue of conservatism, what it is, what it should be and what it was.
I notice you made no attempt to address any of his points, opting instead to reference an article about something completely different.
dear Fareed, there is basically nothing wrong with Conservatism. The Republicans could not prevent america from beginning to go downhill. The Obama administration could not stop the slide which had already commenced. This shows that the forces operating from china , india etc had already created a massive momentum. China had already taken away america"s jobs, due to america"s 15 dollars per hour workers, and china"s 5 dollar per hour workers. You were going up the value-scale, and china took advantage of this opportunity. Next to benefit will be the vietnamese, the indians etc. What can you do to revive american jobs and economy. ? Most of your funds are are being wasted in meaningless wars. What will you get from the afghanistan misadventure. What did the 20 billion dollars to pakistan give you. It gave you bin ladin sleeping with the pak generals. How naive and childish can the americans be. The Pakistanis will again snatch your additional 20 billion dollars and send nukes against usa and all the countries. Some countries do not learn.This is america"s fate.
Scott, you hit all the conservative propaganda talking points with this one: "Profits are higher because they're paying 50-75% less in taxes, and wages are cheaper because they don't have to deal with greedy unions. In other words, they don't have people like Obama, Pelosi, and Reid driving them away." Tell me this, why did the exodus of manufacturing jobs take place during the 6 years of a Republican Congress and Republican Presidency? My answer: because the laws, and the enforcement thereof, rewarded their greed. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi had nothing to do with that. It was, and still is, greed pure and simple.
The answer is simple. They didn't. Go look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics data. When Republicans were in control of the White House and Congress, the unemployment rate was 4.6%. After 2 years of Democratic rule in Congress, it nearly doubled to 7.8%. After 3 years of Obama, the unemployment rate is now bouncing around between 9 and 10%.
Unfortunately for you, the actual numbers don't support your radical left-wing agenda. Republicans grow businesses and create jobs. Democrats destroy businesses and kill jobs. Then, they rob from the wealthy, spend most of it on pork projects and paying off crooked cronies, and then give a few of the leftover crumbs to the poor just to convince them that they "care". And stupid people like yourself continue to swallow it hook, line, and sinker. It saddens me that people like you aren't intelligent enough to realize that the Democrats are oppressing you and keeping you dependent on them just so that they can win elections. And it scares me that people like you are allowed to vote and help determine the direction of our once great nation.
oh scotty scotty scotty.......I remember the good 'ol days of Bushy.....2 wars and a housing bubble started when your boys controled the whitehouse and congress.....blinders too tight?. Now look at your pictures of Rush and Hannity on your nightstand and blow them a good night kiss........
Zakaria's understanding of economics needs some refreshing. When he speaks of the proportion of GDP taxed by the government he uses the wrong metric. The appropriate measure is government spending as a proportion of GDP, since that measures what resources are left for private spending. And that proportion is higher than it has been in many years, not lower. Fareed, you can look it up.
Don't confuse me with the facts.
No other country has the freedoms we have in the USA. We are the best and safest and freest place on earth. Why? Because of our constitution. If someone want our constitution to be like Iceland's, then move to Iceland. I believe the world would be better if every nation would adopt a constitution like ours instead of us changing ours. Amendments from time to time are okay. But to rewrite from the ground up is suicide for our country. Only those people who want the USA to fall would propose such a change or else they are totally ignorant of history. I love this country for the freedoms I have and the safety I enjoy in my freedom.
Yeah, Fareed, if Republicans become Keynesian Democrats, then all our problems will be solved. "Some free market theory out of books" that doesn't work. Under what rock has this guy been living?
Wrong Mr. Zakaria. You and the left have lost touch with reality. Big government, big debt, and Marxism are not the answer.
Last article I read from Zakaria he seemed to think raising taxes is a solution to fix the debt. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
We're becoming a plutocracy and oligarchy, where the wealthy controls everything, even yourself!
Lol, Mr. Zakaria saying something good about China? Well, here's the news: China's boom is a derivative of Marxism, which, contrary to Mr. Zakaria's opinion, is nothing but based on reality. The same reality the free-market laissez-faire capitalist theories were based of, that any conservative preaches like a gospel. Only Marxism took a look at the only logical conclusion of the free market – a recurring global crisis – something conservatives refuse to admit.
China's economic success has nothing to do with Marxism. It has every thing to do with a government that realizes that it's number one priority is growing the economy faster than its population.
Yes, the destruction of a nation by liberals is more realistic than ever.
Fareed, what's your take on troop withdrawal in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as limited or no involvement in other Mideast countries? I would like to see us pull out altogether but have grave fears that radical groups will gain a strong presence in many areas and ultimately lead to more attacks on American soil. If that were to happen where does that leave us? What course of action if there for us but to either bomb a country into oblivion or send troops back to fight in other lands. Diplomacy would work with civilized and willing counterparts but I don't see radical extremists as either.
"but have grave fears that radical groups will gain a strong presence in many areas and ultimately lead to more attacks on American soil."
Were we to stop meddling in the affairs of Muslim countries as we have for the past six decades the extremists would have little incentive to attack us. It's our history of meddling in the region that created the problem in the first place.
The story's headline should read "Zakaria has lost touch with reality" considering his misrepresentation of the facts to justify the standard liberal mantra of raising taxes on the rich to solve their spending problem. Journalists with a degree in Political Science don't make the best economists.
I love that CNN is failing, once again, to mention that Fareed Zakaria is an advisor to the Obama administration. Sort of like how last election Donna Brazile was nuetral and a good moderator for a debate and then was hired as a Democratic analyst.
This piece has 'lost touch with reality.'
Conservatives (not republicans or democrats) are among the few people in Washington who ARE in touch with reality, because they are among the few people willing to deal with the bottom line, REVENUE and SPENDING.
Zakaria states that, "Taxes as a percentage of GDP are at their lowest levels since 1950. The U.S. is among the lowest taxed of the big industrial economies" Not once did it mention the issue of REVENUE. That's what he should be talking about. The reason that "tax percentage of GDP is so low" is because REVENUE is so low. The reason REVENUE is so low is because so many people are out of work. One of the reasons reason SPENDING is so high is because so many people are getting checks FROM the government instead of writing checks TO the government. Conservatives aren't against taxes, conservatives are against punishing the people who create jobs. When you punish the job creators with higher taxes and greater regulations, then they won't hire, and if they don't hire then the growing jobless masses will continue to collect money instead of paying taxes themselves. Thus, REVENUE goes down!
Conservatives measure success by how many people are working and paying taxes, liberals measure success by how many people they are 'helping' with unemployment checks. How is that loosing touch with reality?
Quote: "Conservatives measure success by how many people are working and paying taxes, liberals measure success by how many people they are 'helping' with unemployment checks. How is that loosing touch with reality?"
First Off – you misspelled "losing"
Secondly – Liberals are tired of Conservatives that supposedly espouse limited government while passing multiple religious based abortion laws. There are actually just as many well-off liberals as there are conservatives (most artistic right brained folks tend to be liberals – writers, actors etc.. I
To quote John Stewart when he blasted the Crossfire hosts. "Stop, stop, stop, stop hurting America."
Just reading some of the comments here makes my blood boil. Neither side is helping solve the issues at hand. At this point, both sides just want to be right and are putting whatever spin on reality they think will suit their interests... America be damned. The sad part is, the zombies on both sides just take their chosen talking head's viewpoints to heart and don't think for themselves anymore.
What has the country become? Will we ever be able to have reasonable political discourse in this country without the polarized sides drowing out every discussion. The solutions to this country's problems are not on the right or the left. They are somewhere in the middle.
Maybe we should might as well split America into two countries of Democrats and Republicans and see which economy thrives more. Seems more peaceful than putting the elephant and the donkey in a dog fight with large corrupt corporations betting for the win.
One country would have 60% tax rates and 30% unemployment. The other would have 5% unemployment, 15% tax rates, but no museums, no outdoor space and a very high disparity in wealth.
I don't mind that he is liberal and now openly expresses it. However, with this attitude, he should no longer be the moderator of round table shows that claim objectivity and should instead take an opinion driven show like Maddow, Hanity and others.
As a moderate, I'd just like to say that articles like this, whatever their merits, are only for moderates and other conservatives. According to liberals, conservatives have never been in touch with reality, and you can't lose what you've never had. If back in the day conservatives were genuinely realistic–as opposed to "wooly-headed" Marxist-friendly liberals–they were dismissed for being not abstract enough. Now they are being dismissed for being too abstract. Zakaria may well be right, but the fact is, when people want to dismiss you, they'll find a reason.
Ron Paul 2012!
socialism will never replace conservatism, woof!
And recall Alan Greenspan's remarks about de-regulation at the end of his career "It was all dogma." The challenge in the US right now is we are a rhetoric and not a fact based society. The rabid dogs at both ends of the political spectrum have become so effective at "stiring the base" that there is no idealogical middle in the parties or media anymore – even thought most Americans sit in the middle.
The important benchmark is, if fact, what is going on overseas. Instead of service based economies built on healthcare, banking/financial services and media/entertainment we have vibrant balanced economies with a balanced distribution of jobs across sectors. Nowhere in the "ObamaCare" debate was it mentioned that in the US we pay twice per person for healthcare than Japan – the second highest spending country in the world. That fact had it seen the light of day may have helped reshape the debate. But industry lobbiests are too effective to ever let that happen.
They have certainly lost touch with reality. But so have the Democrats. In fact it seems that it has become very American to just never look at results, or listen to others. Instead we pontificate and talk like we have aspergers syndrome, very self satisfied, very blaming toward all others who don't BELIEVE!.
Somebody really needed to say this. Libertarianism has become a psuedo-religion, much like Marxism was (and still is). The Milton Friedman-esque policy of supporting tax cuts at any time for any reason is a great idea, but like Marxism, that's probably not what's best way to run the world.
Fareed, thank you for taking the time to attempt to inform us mouth-breathers about the economy, obviously you're part of the intelligentsia. Lowering taxes would be crazy because that would keep people's money in their own pockets. How is the gov't going to funnel your money to their voting blocks and puppet masters if it's in your pocket? And slashing spending would be insane because then the gov't couldn't borrow and become deeper indebted to foreigners. Also, if we slashing borrowing....I mean spending and "investing", we might have to shut of the printing presses at the Fed. We all know that's a source of magical money and there's never any ill effects when it's poured into the economy. Keep up the good work Fareed, I'm so glad you're one of the geniuses that has the President's ear.
To your first main point, taxes, you're far off base.
The theory for slashing taxes is based on the failure and bankruptcy of countries like Iceland and those soon going into bankruptcy – Sweden and Norway. They have extremely high taxation and still don't cover all of their expenditures, pushing them further into debt. There comes a point in their societies where people stop working – for either apathy or age (about 50-55 in Sweden) – and just ride off of the government. The same problem is starting to happen here – e.g. extended unemployment, abuse of the Welfare system, etc.
Under the idea to cut taxes and cut spending, the American public becomes less dependent on the government and will have to take responsibility for their own lives. I know, it's a cruel thought. Someone having to actually sacrifice their ego to work at a McD's instead of an office. But that's life. There are jobs out there, people just don't want to sacrifice their pride to make a buck and would rather claim unemployment.
The other cuts outside of "public service" are mostly redundancies in the government. There is an insane amount of over lap in the government between many, many agencies that not just spend our money, but cause confusion and jurisdiction issues, wasting more time and effort. E.g. ATF, DEA, FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, and State Department all having to cover international drug trafficking. Makes no sense at all.
Mr. Zakaria makes a simple, yet common mistake. He confuses conservatives with Republicans. Republicans are part of the Political Class that has shared power with the Democrats (don't confuse them with liberals, either). The Political Class has become tyrannical in its pursuit of and desire to maintain power.
Conservatives are people who share some common values. These include, but are not limited to, the notion that people are responsible for their actions and themselves, that government should not be involved in every aspect of life, and that the Constitution was created to guarantee Americans freedoms and liberties. Conservatives believe that these freedoms and liberties are under assault by the Political Class.
Mr. Zakaria, I would have thought you could do better than label people the way you did.
Couldn't agree more, I had been thinking about this exact issue recently. It used to always be said that liberals were pie-in-the-sky dreamers completely unbounded by reality. But now we have conservatives with their mystical ideas about no taxes and outlawing abortion to make this country a magical utopia. I thought liberals were the crazy utopians.
One thing though: "It's a shame. I think we need smart, market-friendly conservative reforms that streamline government, cut costs in health care"
Sorry, being "market-friendly" is exactly what got us ridiculous health care costs. Health care might be the one item where demand is almost perfectly inelastic. You know why? Because we have empathy. As much as conservatives and Ayn Rand objectivists want to argue against it, we have evolved empathy for a reason, so that we can live and work together in a civilized society. What this means is that we have a pretty hard time just letting people die even if they can't pay, so, we just let them go bankrupt instead, after we've treated them. People (typically) don't care about cost when it comes to saving their child's life, therefore you can charge any price you want, therefore demand is inelastic. Free markets and the laws of supply and demand are supposed to be based on choice. How can you have an honest free market in the health care sector when it comes to something that is not a "choice" for most people? I, for one, think that it might be immoral to make a profit on something that determines life or death.
Here's an idea, lets actually start abiding by the US Constitution as it is written and not as it has been perverted.
The purpose of government is NOT to be used by a tool on the right to enforce their morality on others any more so than to be used by a tool on the left to extract the wealth of others. The proper role of government is to protect our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
If followed as written, the US Constitution guarantees that we remain the freest people on Earth. Only when democrats and republicans start using it as a tool rather than a shield do we lose our freedoms.
Change the Constitution? No. Hold our reps accountable for abiding by it? Yes.
"The U.S. is among the lowest taxed of the big industrial economies."
Fareed should know better. This is a complete fallacy. The U.S. has the Second highest taxes on corporations among all nations. Second only to Japan.
Corporate taxes are what you're thinking of, the nominal corporate tax rate is the second highest, but is so riddled with loopholes that the actual taxes on corporations are very low (or zero). We have a very low tax rate when all taxes are considered.
We'd be doijng something very wrong if we can't provide basic services to our people and have a higher tax rate than France or Germany!!
This is really true. There is no correlation with taxes on the rich and the economy. Now, my theory is that government spending but going into debt when they cut taxes has masked that the opposite is true. Higher taxes and government spending and lower taxes on the lower income who spend that money is the key. Low taxes and government spending leading to debt is stimulative to the economy but only in the short run. The maximum money gets into the economy from government and low income having it. The least money makes it to the economy when the rich have and hoard it or spend it overseas. Plus they tend to downsized jobs to get it rather than add jobs to get it. Kind of sad but true.
Fareed,
Funny how you note past Presidents, but you conveniently left out Ronald Reagan who was left with High Inflation, High unemployment, and a high deficit from the Carter Administration. Reagan eliminated the inflation, Lowered the deficit, and created 15 Million Jobs all while Get this..."Lowering Taxes". Wow....You are out of touch with reality and you are not a true American...you are a Liberal Cheerleader.
Reagan lowered the deficit? You need to buy a history book, right away!
Fareed is quite the liberal, eh? Never saw this side of him. Can't you also say that Liberals have gone off the deep end and make no sense when they spew "human rights" – but love abortion like it's candy – and trumpet "free speech" – but not when it's any conservative opinion they do not like.
Both Liberals and Conservatives are rife with inconsistancies – like cherishing the life of a blastocyst, but putting absolutley no value on the lives of thousands of arabs. I love the rank hypocricy of trashing his right to free speech because he disagrees with conservatism by characterizing it as hating the free speech of people he disagrees with. Man that's some sweet double-think. I think modern conservatism is best diagnosed by a complete and utter lack of self-awareness.
Chris, I couldnt agree more.
We keep hearing about how evil socialism is. And how anything which involves spending tax dollars on tax payers is Socialism (despite what the definition in the dictionary states). Now basic neccessities of a modern society like healthcare, education and basic infrastructure upkeep – all things that other developed nations provide for its citizens and which are completely essential to maintaining a competetive economy – are EVIL, objectively BAD on a level of totalitarian communism in the Soviet Union.
It comes down to a question of values. Our national values is MONEY, that's it. Not life, not peace, not justice, not equality, not the environment – all of those get shoved rudely aside when they conflict with the making of money. So Socialism only seems evil because in conflicts with our national value. So we get a bunch of rich, greedy, money-obsessed crooks repeating over and over that the only important thing that we can do as a nation is make them richer, and with enough years and enough repetitions of this theme, a huge portion of our populace have come to believe them. SO we get no great art or archetechture (not cost effective, let's build strip malls and business parks instead), we ravage our environment in the name of jobs (which continue to disappear anyway), and even considering that keeping our citizens healthy and well educated is somehow treasonous. We will destroy anything beautiful if it means a profit, anything objectively and intrinsically good will be gladly bulldozed if someone stand to make a dime. So we let our kids languish in awful schools while the world moves ahead. We stand screaming in the streets that a small sliver of our money might be used to keep someone else healthy and alive. We raize entire mountains leaving poisoned wreckage behind which will never be the same to get at coal which is sterilizing the oceans and suffocating the world we depend on for life. Our religions are turned on their head and the sacred words of God extolling aid to the poor and condemning greed are used to espouse the opposite instead. Truth becomes mutable, fact a point of view, the press a marketing arm of a conglomerate. These are indeed sad days.
So let's destroy everything we used to cherish, everything a normal human not steeped in this culture of greed would value, for enormous fortunes that accomplish nothing except their own growth – which at the end of the day (or world) will only be zeroes written magnetically on some hard drive somewhere.
Socialism isn't evil but it certainly does not trumpet the value of human life either. Socialism mandates that the government determine what level of excellence everyone can achieve. They oppress the free will of people, a free will that the religious would understand is given to them by God when even He knows some will fall. How you determine success is allowed in a free society, but not in Socialism.
No. You are totally wrong. But thanks for proving my point. Once again, the simple and proven idea that a government should provide some very basic services for its people is SOCIALISM!!!! And not just socialism (as understood by nearly everyone else in the world, including its own basic definition), but hardcore soviet-style COMMUNISM!! Why, if you believe that everyone should have access to medical treatment without thought to the profit of some distant and soulless corporation, then you despise life and freedom, and wants everyone dressed in grey waiting in bread lines! Put down the Ayn Rand and pick up a history book, or at least the far superior Great Gatsby.
Authoritarian and totalitarian governments limit the freedoms and aspirations of their people. And very capitalist nations are just as likely to be authoritarian (think Nazi Germany or Saudi Arabia). Is Canada some kind of Soviet nightmare? Sweden? Germany? All are far more socialist than us, all provide basic services to their people and are growing faster than we are at the moment, and none of them have this BS limit on personal excellence – except to say that 1 person should not be able to kick a cancer patient out of his hospital bed and into the gutter to up his profit margin for this fiscal quarter.
Jane, your wrong. Re-distribution of money is not right. You cant penalize the rich for being rich. You cant have a Robin Hood GOVT. If you want to be rich...earn it. Dont expect a handout. Thats not what this country was founded on. If the rich want to donate to a charity..so be...let it be their choice...not the GOVT.
Atually, you can. Redeistribution of money has been viewed as right and good by many cultures including our own in the past, and is and objective good if the wealth is too centralized as economies with high levels of wealth concentration are less competetive and grow less, and their societies are objectively less healthy and happy. And we'd more be penalizing the rich from impoverishing the rest of us. This idea that the only right is the right fof rich people to do whatver they want to the rest of us to make more money is utter crap.
Who is arguing that the only right is the right of the rich? The poor and middle class have the same right to make more money, to choose what job they want, to become a success. The left has such hatred toward people they do not agree with and I just don't understand it.
So you're pro-union, Chris? You support raising capital gains taxes to the same level of as income taxes? You'd support a movement to make offshoring illegal? Or do you support people's right to make money, but only in a way that the only people making more money are the wealthiest few?
"The left has such hatred toward people they do not agree with and I just don't understand it."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Sweet bippy, do you people live on the same planet as the rest of us? Poor, poor conservatives, offering olive branches and back-rubs to the left and then only getting disagreement (HATE!!!) in return.
Jomomma,
Touching story......but not reality. You assume that only Republicans like money. Nope.....the hypocrit democrats like it just as much...but they would like to steal it from the rich to give to the poor. make your own breaks and stop looking for the free handouts.
I never mentioned either party, as it is clear they are about as antagonistic to each other as opponents in a pro-wrestling match. They are comrades in greed. The distinction between the two are only important to people who want to create fake controversy to hide and legitimize their own greed, or for people so stupid they don't recognize the similarities. 30 years of alternating rule between the parties, and nothing has been accomplished except wars, tax-cuts and a bogus healthcare bill that is really just a subsidy for already wealthy insurance companies.
AND- I'm not looking for handouts, I'm doing just fine. In fact, I'm sick of people telling me that if I don't value money over everything else in the world, then I am some poor parasite only looking for a handout. Maybe you should take a look at yourself and wonder just for a moment why the only fairness you are concerned with is the fairness that rich people should be able to get richer at our expense?
The one big point that is lost in all the discussion about the unrealistic perception that GOP members have about the economy is this. At the time when our tax base is the lowest since the 1950's, and the wealthiest members of society are NOT paying their fair share of taxes why is it that for the last 10 years with the Bush budget cuts the economy has not improved? Furthermore, why are we continuing to penalize the already over-burdened Middle-Class and the poor by making additional program cuts? This is absurd. We need to be creating jobs. The wealthy have not been keeping their side of the bargain. Is it right for kids to go to bed hungry in this country? Is it right for youngsters to be kept from attending college because student loans and grants will be eliminated? What kind of future does the GOP have in mind for America? The rate we are declining, we are no better today than many developing nations.
If I were in charge, I'd link tax rates for corporations, capital gains and the upper tax brackets to unemployment. If unemployment goes up, so does taxes. If we reach very low unemployment, then those taxes would be very low. How hard is it to come up with an idea like this? Instead we just get more tax cuts for people who don't need them based on an almost religious faith that they'll do the right thing at their own expense.
Of course, no one wants to admit that prohibition ( pretty much acknowledged today to be an idiotic, unworkable idea)
was a direct result of giving women the right to vote....................
Did he really reference China? Educated or not, you lose all credibility when you claim that the growth in China by a truly MARXIST government is something to be looked up to and revered. The government controls everything in China and the only people that truly enjoy the fruits of their labor are the rulers.
As for conservatives being out of touch, I submit it is intellectuals as yourself who do not live in the real world. You surround yourself with like minded socialists trying to conjure up more power for yourselves. Why is it, sir, that all of the European governments you mention are pulling back from all of the governmental programs? Socialism is soft tyranny, pure and simple.
@George Plunkett
>Conservatives believe in limited government, fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, and that although no man or woman has a right to steal the fruits of another mans labor we do have a responsibility to be charitable.
But that's exactly what he's talking about. You only have concepts of a what a perfect world would be. Hell, I'm liberal and I believe in those things too, but they could apply to a million different policies. And frankly, I'm going to stick on the side that doesn't have a paperthin concept of that sort of economic belief, (which, by the way, makes it theoretical in and of itself.) and then spend the rest of the debate talking about how all Muslim immigrants should be subjected to McCarthyist screening solely for being Muslim, and that 'Family Values' (Whatever the hell that actually means) is being destroyed by Homosexuals demanding basic human rights. If you want to shed these people from 'True Conservatives' then not only would you never vote for them, but you'd outright run them out of your party, and allow conservative policies to actually take more than a passing foothold in your party, with strong central ideals.
Really, I'd vote Republican in a heartbeat if it wasn't catering to neo-victorian practices about civil rights and issues of sexuality, because despite my core agreement with old conservatism, I can't vote for the same group that supports this sort of horrible shade of humanity.
did I read this wrong or was that a hint that we should become more like China, a communist country?
as a conservative I must say they are leaning a little too far to the right however the Dems are tilting just as much. where is the middle of the road party. I want the same respect and rights as the 5% who are pushing laws thru. I dont care if you dont pray and I respect the fact that you wont bow your head but Let me and give me the same cosideration. I dont want to know what you do in your bedroom, we dont need a parade, please stop yelling at me that your gay and proud and I wont yell at you that Im straight and proud or tell you what goes on behind my bedroom door. damn it people when did we quit being americans and start putting new labels on everyone. My distant family is american indian, spanish and english but I AM AN AMERICAN!
and obamaism has destroyed the economy. and im an unbiased independent
Please define exactly what "obamaism" is. Have you forgotten that when he entered office, we were losing over 800,000 jobs a month, the Dow was at 7,000, the American auto industry was virtually bankrupt and the global capitalist system was teetering on the brink of collapse? So how exactly has he "destroyed" the economy?
Conservatism has brought the country to its knees. Deregulation of the finance industry led to the collapse of the global economy and nearly initiated another Great Depression. Conservatives have this naive view that the free market can solve all of humanity's ills. This is delusional. The strongest economies in the world today are China, Germany, and S. Korea just to name a view. All are mercantilist in nature and benefit from large government investments in the economy. What did the US achieve with laissez-faire, supply-side economic policies? Deindustralization, massive trade deficit, shift of wealth to the top 1%, and a perpetual underclass. We need to take the best practices from around the world and apply them at home. Government does need to be streamlined and smarter; however, it needs to play an active role in our economy and society. Americans need to wake up and vote for pragmatic, centrist politicians and abandon ideologies that don't work.
IWasn't it the Repubs, under Bush, who allegedly see the world in black and white?
You claim that taxes in the US are the lowest since the early 1950s. That may be true, but spending and deficits are the highest since WW2. Further, it's not the absolute level of taxes that is relevant, but the relative level vs. competitors. The US has the highest corporate tax rates and is the only developed country which taxes overseas corporate profits. That drives employers overseas and keeps profits unrepatriated, ie overseas. US tax policy encourages housing investment and discourages industrial investment, even though the returns on housing are the lowest of any major class, and industrial plant & equipment has ROI of less than 2 years.
You don't even mention regulations. Health care and energy policy are discouraging enormous sectors of the economy from hiring and investing. Again, relative is important. Reagan was so successful with de-regulation because he was dismantling the stifling economic legacy left during the 1970s, which you correctly attribute to one of the worst economic managers of the 20thC, Richard Nixon, but incorrectly attribute it solely to him (Johnson started the trend toward tight regulation).
Finally you accuse Republicans of woolly-headedness in arguing for reduction in spending, whereas it's known that infrastructure investments help the economy. True, but you should examine HOW Democrats have spent. Most of it has been for non-investment purposes. Subsidies to states are the largest, they were used to keep uneconomic public employees and their pensions at work. Unemployment benefits extension is next, it may be compassionate, but paying people not working is not a path to either economic growth or any lasting improvement in infrastructure capital stock. Some was payroll tax reductions, which is ok, but as a temporary measure much of it is saved. Finally, much of the relatively small portion of true infrastructure spending was siphoned off by NOW and other women's groups who argued against spending on "burly men" industries, even though this was genuinely a "man-cession". They steered a large part of the infrastructure spending into "human infrastructure" by which was meant women dominated fields like teaching and nursing. That despite even Keynes theory that argued for spending on the underemployed economic sectors.
In short, Democratic policies have failed not because of their woolly-headedness, but because of their bald political motivation. They could use a bit more woolly-headedness themselves. Better than corruption.
You are correct to state that we have ONE of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, although Japan's is higher at 40.69%. However, how many American corporations actually pay 35% in corporate tax when all the loopholes are factored in? G.E. paid ZERO corporate tax in 2010. Google paid 2.4%. Citigroup paid 0%. Boeing didn't pay any corporate taxes between 2008 and 2010. The list goes on and on. In fact, the effective corporate tax rate dropped from 50% of all tax revenue in 1950 to a historic low of just 5.5% in 2009. So when a corporation isn't paying corporate taxes, and when Fortune 100 corporations are sitting on $2 trillion in cash reserves, what is their next excuse for not expanding and hiring in this country.
I'll give you the answer in two words.... demand and talent. Consumer demand accounts for 70% of all economic activity in this country. If demand is weak, then companies have no incentive to increase supply. Economics 101. And the engine of consumer demand in this country is the middle class, which has been eviscerated in order to reduce the tax liability of the top 1% as much as possible. The taxes saved by the top 1% are simply not being reinvested in this country.
I deal with C-levels at America's biggest corporations all the time, and have had this conversation more times than I care to mention. They are not "going overseas" because of taxes, regulation or "uncertainty", no matter what the bobbleheads on cable news tell you. Believe me, if consumer demand was higher in this country, they would ramp up to meet it, regardless of the tax burden or what party was in power. They are investing in Asia because India and China have an emerging middle class of up to 750 million new consumers, a vast, highly educated workforce, and governments in New Delhi and Beijing who are investing billions in modernizing their infrastructure. Taxes have nothing to do with it, and neither does regulation (if you'd ever done business in China and dealt with the byzantine government bureaucracy there, believe me you would never again complain about U.S. government regulation).
Why does CNN or anyone gush over Fareed Zakaria so much. I am sick of seeing him interviewed. The guy has an opinion on most subjects on earth and is rather precious about it all. He also has the low blood sugar blues about America's role in the world.
Nobody forces you to watch him, Frank. I could say the same thing about Glenn Beck having an opinion about most subjects on earth and being precious about it, so I choose simply to ignore him. Personally, I always find Fareed's insights highly erudite, well thought out and beautifully articulated. Even when I disagree with him, I appreciate his great intellect and unique perspectives.
Glen Beck Is just another CONSERVATIVE (Prentending) SICKO, thinking of ratings, so as to, to make his millions,.... and nothing else....
Fareed serves the corporate status quo canvassing opinions from the likes of Kissinger whose track record in supporting wars of choice is notorious. His view of the US military is thinly veiled imperialism, but that doesn't surprise me considering the big money he rubs elbows with.
Thank FZ, I see the biggest threat to American life (today) as the so called conservative movement. These people are just plain sick, crazy or both.... Regards e
where do you come up with this stuff. anyone who is on the fringe or extreme is not good for the debate. not the staunch over religious conservs. not the radical over throw the govt. libs nor the progressives who want to give everything we PERSONALLY worked to everyone else because they'll feel better.
the conservs have not lost touch by any means they want people lke to be Respectful our our country and share with you our good life and aspirations and dreams with you and your family. radicals/libs don't care whayt happens as long as it happens no matter the consequenses. wow now that it a sub teenager's view of everything i'm right and i'll shout yo down to prove i'm smart. oh yes, you do it isesantly.
fareed take responsibility for your bretheren tell them they are usually to loud out of line and stop kicking the poor guy selling baseball caps at town hall meetings {seiu thig bet down} and the the black panters voting polling place batting practice.
you guys ae amazing how you justify rudness, violence, intimidation, and now brainwashing our kids in school from k-12. by the time they reach college they're numb from your propoganda and can't think their own thoughts. {all those who parents left it up to the "schools" to raise their kid}.
luckily a large % of us nurtured our kids and guided them with solid foundational tools of thought , civility, and tolerence. they'll stop the downward spiril you guys promote so vigorously.
Dear Fareed,
It is wrong to use China as an example.
It is stil a Central Control economy even if loose around the edges.
By doing thing the FREE way they are improving themselves to a degree, because they dug themselves into a communist waste hole in the first place.
Even I could do much better with the same level of controls. Even You.
Great Depression – Savings & Loan Debacle – Great Recession
Who do people continue to vote the party who's policies and positions eventually create a wreck?
Is it political tribalism?
Is it a blind faith in a message of freedom & liberty / small government / low taxes
Subjecting the nation for years with results that demonstrate incompetence, imbalance, and elite entitlements?
ideas have consequences, so that is reality, means nothing, it changes everyday, right ideals motivate people, the bean counting number crunchers who only use economic arguments are insipid and vacuous, the primitive notions of conservatives, those opposed to change , with an archaic social darwinism , deserve no comment, those who do, those who work, day to day , like eveybody wants to, especially the twenty percent unemployed in the US, find these arguments laughable, my truth is not your truth, when the ideals become real, new ones come, better ones, it is happening, the world awakes each day to the new sun, does not matter what anybody says. This is going forward, and all the crazy politics and religions of history cannot stop that ,or the people.
Zakaria, You need to get a clue and look at the history of lowering and spreading taxes and rates. It has worked every time. Revenues go up. And that's setting aside the notion that the liberal approach has led to $14T in Debt and deficit spending overtaking more and more of our annual budget costs! Some day the debt must be faced directly and as far as we in the Tea Party are concerned the time is now. Obama has to go and all of his deranged clowns too. I only hope we can get as afar as Tax Reform and Privatization before the tides turn. America will work through the rest. ~ Dave
Ann Coulter is a Huge Grateful Dead Fan...
...talk about cognitive dissonance...
...or does it just make even more sense?
bah, I am so confused... lol.
"You are what you do when it counts."
As the owner of a small business that is healthy for now, I just can't understand the 35% federal corporate tax rate. I work in the area of software component development in which we have strong overseas competition. The fact that these companies already have cheap labor added to their ridiculously low corporate tax rates puts us at a huge disadvantage. To be brutally honest, what's going for us right now is that our team's talent is clicking and demand outweighs supply. If this changes in the future then we'll be in trouble.
Absolutely, totally, 100%, dead-on-ba11$ right! Conservatives used to be the smart ones, the educated ones, the realistic ones-rooted in reality of fact. I fear many are mouth breathing, knuckle dragging, short-bus-to-school riding fools now. The odd part is not only do they not try and HIDE their ignorance, they CELEBRATE it...I quote Ronald Reagan, "...facts are pesky things.". As are science, the failure of Reaganomics, the takeover of the Republican party by illiterates, and the ultimate failure of modern conservatism..to wit...to CONSERVE. Whether it be time, money, effort, energy, across any modern subject, modern conservatives don't actually conserve a thing...check out the parking lot of any suburban, white, Republican leaning church parking lot on any Sunday in any city in this country and count the number of gas guzzling SUV's vs. carpooling/transit/flexfuel/electric/hybrid vehicles. This from the Right wing which promotes "what about the children? It.s all about THEIR future!" while destroying everything the future holds AT EVERY TURN.
Are you talking about "conservatives" like Al Gore and his high carbon footprint jet, suvs & house? Most of the SUV owners I ask are Democrats...... Dems motto is "Do as I say, Not as I do" How many "poor" Dems attend 138,000 dinners? Do your homework and learn.
Fareed Zakaria writes another editorial every time CNN thinks it's time to stir up the masses again. What will the next one be on? illegal imigration?
Religious ideas=Immorality=unethical ideas=immoral ideas=tea party=republican party=extremely bad ideas
Who, with a thinking mind, could imagine the republican party doing anything else given its vulgar and repulsive proclivities for all the phony notions that religion (particularly christianity) affords them? Congratulations if you have the imagination to think that they are capable of any thing different. Admittedly, I just can't! Regarding the imagination on this issue of finding some redeeming quality in the conservative republican cause, I concede the trophy to someone else. Republicans know full well that tax cuts have produced no useful results the past decade; but contrawise have produced utter catastrophe. The republicans deserve all the credit for this mess. This is not going to go 'unnoticed'!!
Ask why businesses why they aren't hiring. Uncertainty over this Administation destruction of American industry. EPA regulating carbon dioxide, Obamacare, drilling restrictions, take over of the student loan industry in obamacare, tax cuts that expire in 2012, the breaking of contract law with GM's secured debt holders giving half of GM to the UAW. All fiat currencies eventually return to their intrinsic value. ZERO. Who would invest in anything but gold. There you have it Fareed. Gold proves that America is being finished off by the global elites and your Trilateral Commission. What sort of new global currency will appear and will the anti-american Left cheer when their entitlement check is paid in dollars that worth(less) and can't afford their prescription painkillers.
The first mistake is confusing Republicans with legit conservatives. Republicans are just Dems that use a different brand of b.s. to get into power. Really, there's a one party system in America with just enough hollow rhetoric to fool most people into thinking they have choices.
Exactly OldMo. It is like two criminal gangs. When they both smile for a photo opt like in passing TARP or bailouts you know who just got screwed over. We need more choices, Conservative, conservative libertarian,Tea Party. The left can have their socialists, communists(I mean progressives),union democrats.
Liberals love to spend other people's money. I think that is loosing touch with reality. You can only raise taxes so many times before the economy implodes.
Whose money do the liberals love to spend that hasn't already been spent by conservatives(republicans)...er morons?
What Liberals love to do is to work towards a society where justice prevails, and the primary motivation in both life and business is not helping the haves take advantage of those with less power and/or money. What Liberals do not want do do is spend 'other people's money', whatever that may mean.
Zakaria has hit the nail on the head and I'm proud of his bold statements on national television. The problem is that conservatism in its purest form is very American and not necessarily bad. Poll Americans and the minority consider themselves 'liberal'. This is because we believe in individual responsibility and lack of government interference. We are now in a situation that if the government doesn't interfere however, we will never stay competitive. In other words why on earth should a youngen today be paid 40K /yr. with his philosophy degree when in China someone will work harder for a fraction the cost? In a total free-market America wouldn't necessarily fail, but it certainly would diminish in power (international institutions with proportional global representation wouldn't help either).
So as China builds infrastructure for the future and high-demand green technologies while we sit with our free-market mind numbing philosophy..we will see what the future holds. Governments in global economies invest in their countries, its not communism. It's socialism, and our own country has been socialist forever so don't assume otherwise just because a non-republican is currently in the office.
"Shovel-ready was not as ... uh ... shovel-ready as we expected." –President Obama, laughing about 9.1% unemployment and the failed stimulus on June 13, 2011.
China doesn't work in America. Get with the program, Fareed.
There were only a very few people who commented here that showed any evidence that the either read Fareed's article, or understood it. By and large just reactionarionies playing with themselves trying to get a rise out out of people passing by – much like monkeys in the zoo. This collection of comments illustrates both the promise and the failure of forums like this. There are a couple of pithy, germane nuggets in all those words above, but you have to weed through a lot of dung to get to them. Mostly people calling each other morons while demonstrating their own lack of understanding of history, economics, culture, language, etc. It's sad. By the way, we need more Fareeds putting forth reasoned, cogent analyses about the state of affairs. I don't agree with every point, but I appreciate the ideas put forth in that way. It get's you thinking. If more of the respondents thought before they wrote, and wrote about something vaguely related to the topic at hand, we could really have something. Instead we have something else.
Or maybe the slick political commentator has lost contact with reality. Your shows in general are informative and lively but you seem to have the same disbelief of America's exceptionalism as President Obama has. "The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all." Ecclesiastes 9:11 and by the way, I am not a Christian, just appreciate well written books.
Fareed is just earning his money from CNN.
Conservatives have simply put their foot down, and said 'no more'. This is largely because white people are becoming a minority and so they are beginning to act like one. They are done with compromises. And they're looking for a conflict. This is entirely rational behavior given the circumstances.
Straw men are just that. Fareed is arguing against a straw man.
Hello! dkkebde interesting dkkebde site! I'm really like it! Very, very dkkebde good!
Hello! cagdkcc interesting cagdkcc site! I'm really like it! Very, very cagdkcc good!
Currently I have a TD bank account and a TD Waterhouse account which I just set up. The only thing I am disappointed with for TD is the $29 per trade... everything else is stellar.. account setup time, no other fee's, easy and convient access and transfers since I have a TD bank account etc...