RE: Democratic Party Fiscal Conservatism

["Max Sawicky" <sawicky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with JD but would add, regarding
key obstacles to the Dems 'waking up':

*  ascribing the 'fabulous 90's' to interest rate
reductions, and the rate reductions to deficit reduction.
The new book by Blinder and Yellen is pretty good testimony
to the contrary, especially coming from them;  I think this
part of the debate is winnable.

*  thinking they can nail George Bush for 'stealing' the
Social Security trust fund, and use that to win back the
Congress in next year's election.  This is hard to refute,
except ex-post.  Whether the Dems win or lose next year,
it's always possible to blame or credit any number of
things for the result.

*  misunderstanding the fate of the future economy and
Soc Sec to depend on debt pay-down, from a solvency
standpoint.  The grasshopper/ant fable.

*  lack of popular pressure, following JD, for affirmative
spending policies, which in turn fortifies Dem timidity in
promoting such policies, creating a vicious circle.

mbs

[was: Re: [PEN-L:16340] RE: Re: RE: Re: Jane D'Arista on Doug Henwood's
Show]

Mat wrote:
>When will the [US Democratic Party] left wake up to the mistake
>and reverse their positions, so that this opening for increasing
>spending, cutting taxes or whatever can be done in a more progressive
>way? Will spending be military or penal Keynesianism or will it be on
>much needed social programs, spending that will improve lives of working
>people?

when will they wake up? only when there are obvious signs of popular
discontent (just as the events in Seattle, etc. have pushed the powers that
be on a little toward more reasonable positions on trade issues). The main
influence on the Democratic Party is the massed power of campaign
contribution-givers. It's only when there's a countervailing power that
things will change.

Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine