Woodstock CT Café

You Can’t Fix Stupid, Part 1 … Woodstock’s version.

I find the broad brush maligning of the Democrats as “liberals” or “left-wing extremists” and Republicans as “right-wing extremists” tiresome, anti-intellectual rhetoric. As far as Rush Limbaugh goes, he’s just a blowhard that is in it only to feed his ego and his pocketbook. The only extremists I can think of are the almost extinct registered members of the KKK, American Nazi Party (do they still exist?), and ‘like-minded people’ (the people that Powers prefers). Some extremists acting alone, like Timothy McVey, were just warped. Maybe I’m naïve. Don’t hesitate to straighten me out on this point if I have missed something.

Certainly our current President and past Presidents, and all Vice Presidents, do not fit into any extremist category left-wing or right-wing. Since both Obama and Bush II were elected by close to 50% of the voters, doesn’t this fact validate them both as near the middle? Barry Goldwater, Republican Presidential candidate in 1964, got only a third of the vote so maybe he’s the most extreme presidential candidate we’ve had (remember he said “In your heart you know I’m right”), but I don’t think of George McGovern, Democratic Presidential candidate in 1972, as even close to being an extreme liberal even though the only state he won was Massachusetts. In many ways, if he had been elected McGovern would have faced similar problems that Obama is facing today – an unwanted war and an oil crisis. I often think of McGovern’s failed election because of a map of the states with one blue state that proudly stated “We Nixed Nixon!” next to the bar in an Irish Pub just off of Cambridge Square. I voted for McGovern and believe that if he had been elected, things would have gone much better for the country in the 1970’s and early 1980’s. I don’t think that extremists have played any significant role in our society in the last 40 years.

What has played a significant role in our society is stupidity – that is, the stupidity of the electorate and the people who don’t vote for no reason at all except apathy … although if people don’t vote because they are apathetic, I would just as soon leave them out of the decision making. It’s the stupid voters that are the problem. Some of these stupid people have normal or above average IQs but they are stupid because of their biases and prejudices that prevent them from assessing facts and evidence with sound reasoning and judgment.

The stupidity of the electorate is best demonstrated by their election of Nixon in 1968 and Bush II in 2002. Before these elections took place, I was in disbelief that either Nixon or Bush could get elected. In Nixon’s case his candidacy (and his nolo contendre VP) was bolstered by the grinding of the Vietnam War and the growing unpopularity of Johnson who showed his appendectomy scar to the nation.

“During a time of war in Southeast Asia when the stakes for this nation were great, Humphrey confronted an agonizing choice: whether to remain loyal to his president or to the dictates of his conscience. His failure to reconcile these powerful claims cost him the presidency. Yet few men, placed in his position, could have walked so agonizing a tightrope over so polarized a nation.

Near the end of his long career, an Associated Press poll of one thousand congressional administrative assistants cited Hubert Humphrey as the most effective senator of the preceding fifty years.” This comes from here.

But the nation went crazy in 1968 with the assassinations of Martin Luther King (April 4th) and Bobby Kennedy (June 5th/6th) which was followed by riots and the burning of several inner cities. At the Democratic Convention protesters of the Vietnam War and several notable newsmen were beaten up by the Chicago police and this was all viewed on nationwide TV (a scene not unlike Iran today). So Nixon was elected with 43.4% of the vote to a close 42.7% for Humphrey, while George Wallace garnered 13.5% of the vote (stupid people). Electoral vote-wise it wasn’t even close though (see the first map on the left).

Left to right electoral maps for the 68 election, 72 election, 76 election, and the 80 election, respectively (click on the maps to see them full size):

The travesty of Nixon’s first term is that even more stupid people elected him for a second term while he and Kissinger lengthened the Vietnam War by another 4 years using the absurd slogin “Peace with Honor.” Read the rest of this entry »

Historical Tables can be found at www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf

and a article in the Economist sent by Kevin here.
“…policymakers must learn from the errors that prolonged the Depression…”. Admin

by Gendarme

I will stick with my statement:

“Republicans support rampant spending, expansion of entitlement programs, and reduction of taxes on the wealthy, leaving an even greater burden on the backs of the truly hardworking taxpayers. Tax collections as a proportion of total from corporations have steadily declined for several decades, as have tax rates for the wealthy.”

Some facts:

1. Entitlement programs have grown steadily under both Republican and Democratic administrations for fifty years (Source U.S. Budget Historical Tables).

2. CBO 10-year budget projections always miss the mark broadly because they do not predict economic recessions/expansions; wars; or legislative changes to tax rates and entitlements. This is well understood by economists.

3. Corporate tax collections as % of total FEDERAL tax collections have steadily fallen for fifty years (Source is U.S. Budget Historical Tables).

4. Top marginal personal income tax rates have declined steadily for fifty years (Source U.S. Budget Historical Tables).

5. Corporate tax rates are just the starting point – your friends at the right wing Tax Foundation forgot to tell you that deductions reduce corporate tax rates to the lowest in the world (Source U.S. Budget Historical Tables).

6. The Obama deficit in response to the economic crisis is not a basis for criticism – it is the correct fiscal policy, despite Taxpayer’s lack of understanding of basic macroeconomic management. I bet before the election on a re-up of stimulus by YE 2010, coming under discussion now.

I have had reason to watch the California economy closely for twenty years and it has boomed/busted four times – 1983, 1991, 2001, 2008. California is the 10th largest, most entrepreneurial, highest technology, most diverse and best financed economy in the world. Taxpayer is clueless – don’t anyone panic.

That dispenses with that empty rhetorical broadside. Taxpayer really should get some handle on this information before he attempts to drown everyone out with his “Limbaugh schtick”.

by Pomfretite

I agree that the towns in this corner of the state need a comprehensive plan for growth that includes commercial development, but I think that we ought to continue to be critical of what kind of development we permit. Whoring ourselves to whomever is able to pay the most in taxes is not a reflective strategy. What is the purpose of making where we live more affordable if we are no longer able to enjoy living here?

Putnam’s downtown should be an example rather than their ash landfill. The businesses in Putnam’s downtown are locally owned and serve local people. Each business opened asking, “what is Putnam missing?” Each business had a different answer, which is why they compliment each other. They are located immediately adjacent to other businesses and visiting one business usually means passing others.

Rather than determining how the residents of our area can pay lower taxes, we should determine what types businesses our area is missing that will pay taxes while adding character to our communities. While Putnam’s Main Street would be out of character with Pomfret or Woodstock, we could benefit from higher density commercial development. Encouraging new businesses to locate adjacent to existing businesses helps both by generating foot traffic. To do this we ought to lower lot size requirements in our commercial villages, encourage residential units above retail and encourage on-street parking.

I would like to hear ideas from other people on alternatives to big-box retail.

by Con

Your comment (to A Taxpayer) subtly implies that you somehow know my political beliefs (you don’t). My comment (and this one) is limited to one particular group of conservatives who’s opinions I’ve heard or read extensively. I have no idea what is the basis for any of your flawed assumptions regarding what I believe (or regarding the true causes of California’s problems), but you do illustrate nicely (i) this incorrect notion these conservatives have that they know exactly what others are thinking (often based on tortured and incorrect extrapolation); (ii) how they constantly skip over numerous rhetorical ‘steps’ that are necessary to make a fair, honest and disciplined argument or truly prove a point; and (iii) the tendency to simply blame democrats/liberals for absolutely all problems while predicting (as you put it) “that liberalism is destroying the fabric of our country”. There’s nothing fair, balanced or enlightened about any of that – opinions are not facts and repeating them or screaming them at full volume doesn’t change that fundamental truth.

I said “many similarities to McCarthyism” and you come back with Pat Buchanin rhetoric? Were you trying to provide another illustration? Even in an article about California’s economy, that man can’t resist disparaging race and diversity. His analysis is half-baked and some of that article is just twisted. You talk about ‘telling the truth’, when all of these interpretations are NOT the truth, but mere opinion (on both sides). For example, it’s no foregone conclusion whatsoever that one policy vs. another caused any of the problems in Europe, California, America etc. – people far smarter than us have spent lifetimes studying these matters and they don’t agree – they do their best and give educated opinions (and so much depends, in the first place, whether a given economist believes in Keynesian theories or New classical macroeconomics or what). Read the rest of this entry »

The title reflects Tax’s acknowlegment that he/she is a conservative Republican. Admin

by A Taxpayer

At the Federal level, the Bush II administration budget racked up a $500 billion annual deficit and added more than $4 trillion to the national debt over eight years of governance. During the first Bush term, when the Republicans controlled Congress, government spending grew on average at an annual rate of over 4 percent – far higher than during the previous Democratic Clinton administration. So here you have a point.

I think that George Bush’s rampant spending and expansion of entitlement programs was irresponsible and atypical of a true conservative Republican. Certainly Mr. Bush’s spending and deficit running was no where near the degree of degree what President Obama has accomplished in his first 100 days. I do understand the unprecedented nature of the economy which President (corrected by Admin) Obama inherited, but I am not convinced that his initiatives and budget are the most effective spending measures that could fuel the economy now or for the future.

As far as spending outlook, the Congressional Budget Office puts out a 10-year forecast that includes a projection for government spending. The forecast, at the end of the Bush spending spree, saw government spending in 2009 at about $3 trillion, increasing to $4.3 trillion by 2018.

Well, under the Obama administration, Federal spending for 2009 turned out $900 billion higher than was expected and Obama plans to spend $4.9 trillion in 2018, about $550 billion higher than the CBO’s projection.

Looking at the entire 10 years, and extrapolating out the CBO number to include an estimate for 2019, Obama has proposed that government spending over the next 10 years be $5.3 trillion higher than the CBO projected just last year.

And this already includes the expiration of the Bush tax cuts in 2010! Read the rest of this entry »

by Ron

The process of luring businesses to the town of Woodstock has been an issue for more than a couple of decades at this point in time.

Crabtree & Evelyn is a small business that has always had limited growth for jobs in this town. They where a solid tax payer but as they try to survive via Chapter 11 or any other Chapter does it help the town grow in covering it’s costs?

Those that lead our town have used what they think is correct in getting businesses into town – but those people have been short sighted in their views.

We need people who understand business (not farming) to pull in businesses to change the town’s tax base. But the majority of the town’s folks don’t want that. Thus we stay in a taxes/spending/growth of schools and local government spending death spiral with no taxable businesses and the growth of housing because the farms are folding and selling off land.

Look at how we as town’s folks want to help business – (We don’t want that kind of Business here approach!) Read the rest of this entry »

by Con

I don’t think A TAXPAYER fully qualifies, but the trend out there is definitely to make utterly vague, extremely dire predictions (”They’re killing our national economy…” and “…if we are ever to save our country.” – Post #2, 43). The current conservative trend is ‘Fear-Mongering through Fortune-Telling’ (and to talk about OUR President as though he’s going to ruin the nation).

I listen to a lot of talk radio – almost to a person, the right-wing commentators rely heavily on vague (always vague) and extreme statements about what bad things liberals and democrats WILL do – not what they HAVE done (listen to ‘Patriot’ on SIRIUS Sat Radio for a few days). These are historical and in some regards Seminal times and in the face of needed progressiveness, conservatives are reacting like, well, reactionaries: with FEAR (many similarities to McArthyism).

The extremism, divisiveness and flat-out anger they seem to feel against the Obama Administration is breathtaking. They speak about Obama with this unique, code-laden language of ‘otherness’, subtly implying that OUR President is ‘different’, deserves disrespect and ridicule and that he and his followers are somehow not TRUE Americans (more than a few actually call him an enemy to America).

They also talk about Democrats and Liberals as if each and every one is hard-wired with exactly the same set of wrong beliefs (each quote is real, from SAT radio: “The ONLY Liberty embraced or desired by Liberals is for Gay Marriage and Abortion”). They rely heavily on Value Judgements in addition to other fear-based rhetoric (”they don’t even drive American-made cars!”) always expressed with vehement self-righteousness.

Then there’s this growing trend of pure invention – making stuff up. I’ve heard many, many conservative radio jocks actually (i) invent hypothetical problems, then (ii) invent a detailed and wrong-headed democratic/liberal behavior or reaction which they are certain is accurate (because they think they know exactly what democrats/liberals will do in any and all circumstance); and THEN (iii) proceed to their main talking point, which is a scathing, detailed criticism of the hypothetical wrong liberal behavior THAT THEY JUST INVENTED – they take calls about it and talk for hours with self-righteous, smarmy, ‘mutual-admiration society’ back-and-forth. I’ve heard it all so many times it’s getting boring.

 More on Crabtree & Evelyn from the Telegram

Here’s an excerpt:
“Retail sales accounted for 56 percent of the Crabtree & Evelyn’s $107.5 million in revenue in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2008, according to Bloomberg News. The company had operating losses in each of the past several years and projects it will lose $13.3 million this year, it said. ”

Excerpt from article by Vinnee Tong, see the Associated Press article

“The Woodstock, Conn.-based company reported in a court filing that it has debt totaling $10 million to $50 million and assets in the same range. The company is privately held. The company runs 126 retail stores as well as wholesale, export and online businesses.”

Crabtree & Evelyn

PTOtoday appears to be a good reference and source of discussion on important PTO issues.

June 9th, 2009 by Tim Sullivan at PTO Today
 
This heated debate between PTO Mom and Anthony Walker about a PTO’s role in a local education vote from a Connecticut website (the Cafe) is interesting on several levels.

First, it’s a real look into the passions that are so much a part of local politics, especially around schools. I give credits to both sides here for their engagement.  Much better than the opposite (apathy).

But the debate captures very well what almost inevitably happens when the local PTO or PTA gets actively involved on one side or the other of a political issue. Politics by definition are divisive.  And groups that take political stands need to do so expecting acrimony.

The PTO critic Anthony Walker captures the danger:

“I did not know that my children were being used to raise money for an organization that can advocate for anything. I would be happy to have my kids raise money for the WEF, since they have it in their by-laws that they can not advocate for any political issue. Whether we like it or not, and I don’t, this has become a political issue.”

I’ve been saying for a long time that the vast majority of parents/members of local PTOs and PTAs don’t think of the parent group as a political organization. They think of it as a parent involvement and community-building and support organization.  This debate captures that fairly well.

For the record, I don’t have a problem with this Connecticut PTO.  Sounds like they have a very active, successful group and they were above board in their work here.  We’ve worked with many groups (PTAs obviously and also many PTOs) who do feel like politics is part of their function, especially on school issues.

But it’s my observation that political work and “grow community/build involvement at school” goals are often in direct conflict with one another.  Good for PTOs to be fully aware of that before heading down the political path.