# Stupid liberal idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 20, 2011, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086 "2011-04-20T15:35:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 170
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3381 "2015-04-27T11:23:10Z")
[Funny you should mention the Pentagon and healthcare](http://www.politifact.com/new-hampshire/statements/2015/apr/21/evan-bayh/former-senator-evan-bayh-says-fastest-growing-defe/) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3382 "2015-04-27T11:27:03Z")
Which means that even less money is going towards our fighting forces. I’m not claiming the DoD is underfunded, just that if you’re going to bitch about spending growth being less than you’d like, that you treat all budget categories the same. If the Pentagon can get by with 10% less, so can everyone else. Especially since not everyone else has to also account for growth in health care costs. The military has had to tighten its belt a lot more than the agencies funded under the domestic discretionary category. We’ve also made a decision as a country that we a) won’t cut entitlements, and b) won’t raise taxes on the middle class. Not even on the upper middle class. Not even on the pretty darn rich. Only the richest of the rich, and there just aren’t that many of them, so revenue gains from that group are minimal. Meanwhile, we cut taxes on ourselves even more with every passing election. The only outcome of those priorities is shrinking discretionary spending in both the domestic and defense spheres. So quit bitching and embrace your small government. You voted for it. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3383 "2015-04-27T12:10:46Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > b) won’t raise taxes on the middle class. Not even on the upper middle class. Not even on the pretty darn rich. Only the richest of the rich, and there just aren’t that many of them, so revenue gains from that group are minimal. On the middle class, you’re probably mostly correct. Not on the “pretty darn rich” and higher. There’s lots of revenue that could be gained by restoring taxes to Clinton-level rates for incomes about $250K or so. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3384 "2015-04-27T12:42:51Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The Pentagon budget is at its lowest point as a % of the total budget since 1998:… > The main driver of this seems to be an ever increasing share of the budget going to mandatory spending(SS and health care programs). In future, please have a coherent point in mind before you start ranting randomly. In the post I objected to, you wrote that “[despite flat spending, we] still have Social Security …” Now you’re attributing the lowered spending on military to _increased_ spending on SocSec. Can you grasp the inconsistency? Do you understand the difference between a clear argument and random babble with lies mixed with irrelevant factoids? Oh. BTW, military spending has increased in absolute terms since 2005 and increased as a share of GDP. I think it’s also increased as a percent of the budget (though that’s a very STUPID basis of comparison) when related expenses like VA are included. But at least, after 2 rounds, we finally got you to point to the misleading webpage that gave you your misleading numbers. In future don’t post any “facts” without cites, please. Over and over and over we learn that adaher is a master of confusion, lies, and misleadings. Whenever I see an adaher post with uncited “factoids” I’ll write _ **AFFAWCAI** _ – “All ‘facts’ from Adaher without cites are ignored.” ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3385 "2015-04-27T12:44:19Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > only the richest of the rich, and there just aren’t that many of them, so revenue gains from that group are minimal. _ **AFfAWCAI** _ ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3386 "2015-04-27T13:38:48Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > In future, please have a coherent point in mind before you start ranting randomly. But then he wouldn’t be **adaher** , would he? This is the same guy, remember, whose “solution” to understaffing problems at the IRS is to cut its budget - to “punish” it and thereby teach it to do better. > [@](#): > > Oh. BTW, military spending has increased in absolute terms since 2005 and increased as a share of GDP. Its effectiveness and usefulness vs. the real world it has to face, maybe not so much. A lot of money is going to administration of pet projects in a lot of districts, but are we better off for it? > [@](#): > > In future don’t post any “facts” without cites, please. Since that isn’t going to change, how about we just keep laughing at him? Pity is, he does show occasional signs of lucidity and awareness of reality. There’s something there, if it could only force its way past all the partisan talking points that are so much easier and so much more fun. So many of his colleagues show no such ability that it’s all the more tragic in his case. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3387 "2015-04-27T14:53:25Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > On the middle class, you’re probably mostly correct. Not on the “pretty darn rich” and higher. There’s lots of revenue that could be gained by restoring taxes to Clinton-level rates for incomes about $250K or so. We already did over 400K. There’s not that much more to be gotten between 250K-400K. Now 100K and up, then you’re talking. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3388 "2015-04-27T14:58:17Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > _ **AFfAWCAI** _ Stupid liberal idea of the day: that you can gain large amounts of revenue by taxing the top 1%. Total revenue gain from ending the Bush tax cuts for those making over 250K: just under a trillion over 10 years, or just under $100 billion per year. [http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/08/27/cbo-nearly-1-trillion-saved-by-letting-bush-tax-cuts-over-250000-expire/](http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/08/27/cbo-nearly-1-trillion-saved-by-letting-bush-tax-cuts-over-250000-expire/) That’s not nothing, but it doesn’t even approach the fiscal challenges we face. There is no alternative to cutting discretionary spending. And no particular evidence that agencies can’t handle those cuts, because we have no evidence that the money they have is spent wisely and plenty of evidence that it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3389 "2015-04-27T15:00:05Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > There is no alternative to cutting discretionary spending. How did we get _surpluses_ under the last Clinton administration? Or the legendary prosperity of the Eisenhower years? Hint: Not by gutting Social Security. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3390 "2015-04-27T15:05:23Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > …we have no evidence that the money they have is spent wisely and plenty of evidence that it isn’t. I love that conservatives see American exceptionalism in everything and everyone except the government. We’re the most successful country in the world, with the largest government budget. That _is_ evidence. Beyond that, we have a lot _more_ evidence that people don’t spend their own money wisely. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3391 "2015-04-27T15:12:16Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > How did we get _surpluses_ under the last Clinton administration? Or the legendary prosperity of the Eisenhower years? Hint: Not by gutting Social Security. Spending as a % of GDP fell during the Clinton years to 18%. No, we didn’t gut Social Security, although we did cut SS by raising taxes on SS benefits. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3392 "2015-04-27T15:21:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I love that conservatives see American exceptionalism in everything and everyone except the government. We’re the most successful country in the world, with the largest government budget. That _is_ evidence. Beyond that, we have a lot _more_ evidence that people don’t spend their own money wisely. There are three reasons the theory of American exceptionalism doesn’t apply to our government: 1. We are a nation with a limited government. We recognized the evils of government and so limited the power of that government. There has never been a theory of American exceptionalism that involved having the most awesome government. What makes us exceptional is having the most hamstrung government while still being able to perform its basic duties. 2. The US is a large and diverse nation. Canada recognizes the shortcomings of this and gives arguably more control to provinces than we do to states. Even many small countries, like Sweden, see virtue in decentralization. Thinking that DC can impose solutions on a diverse, vast country like ours is a Stupid Liberal Idea. 3. The nature of our country and culture means that we’re going to have less devotion to the idea of government than other countries. We have bad government for the same reason we have bad soccer teams. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3393 "2015-04-27T15:59:59Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Spending as a % of GDP fell during the Clinton years to 18%. Mostly because GDP grew 31% from 1993 to 2001 [($8.5 trillion to $11.2 trillion)](http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/oct/29/tim-kaine/tim-kaine-says-bill-clinton-presided-over-biggest-/) ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3394 "2015-04-27T16:28:42Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > We already did over 400K. There’s not that much more to be gotten between 250K-400K. > > Now 100K and up, then you’re talking. I don’t believe you without cites. Show the math, and we’ll see what your definition of “not that much” is. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3395 "2015-04-27T16:47:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > There are three reasons the theory of American exceptionalism doesn’t apply to our government: > > 1. We are a nation with a limited government. We recognized the evils of government and so limited the power of that government. There has never been a theory of American exceptionalism that involved having the most awesome government. What makes us exceptional is having the most hamstrung government while still being able to perform its basic duties. This is a statement of opinion, not fact. > [@](#): > > 1. The US is a large and diverse nation. Canada recognizes the shortcomings of this and gives arguably more control to provinces than we do to states. Even many small countries, like Sweden, see virtue in decentralization. Thinking that DC can impose solutions on a diverse, vast country like ours is a Stupid Liberal Idea. “Thinking that DC can impose solutions…” is an incredibly vague and simplistic statement, and largely false in any case – DC (the federal government) does in fact often “impose solutions” on this vast and diverse country. > [@](#): > > 1. The nature of our country and culture means that we’re going to have less devotion to the idea of government than other countries. We have bad government for the same reason we have bad soccer teams. This is another statement of opinion, and even if it’s true, this is far from immutable. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3396 "2015-04-27T16:59:12Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This is a statement of opinion, not fact. It’s mixed. There can be no doubt that, factually, the federal government is one of limited, enumerated powers, and not one of plenary authority. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3397 "2015-04-27T17:07:32Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s mixed. There can be no doubt that, factually, the federal government is one of limited, enumerated powers, and not one of plenary authority. Okay, the first sentence “We are a nation of limited government” is true, but so mundane and uninformative as to be pointless. Yes, our government doesn’t have unlimited power – this isn’t particularly special in the modern era. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3398 "2015-04-27T17:08:14Z")
You left out a rather large part of the quote. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3399 "2015-04-27T17:12:52Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Okay, the first sentence “We are a nation of limited government” is true, but so mundane and uninformative as to be pointless. Yes, our government doesn’t have unlimited power – this isn’t particularly special in the modern era. I don’t know if I agree, although the reason I’m thinking of may well be inapplicable to the discussion and thoughts **adaher** was having. In most of the world, governments aren’t limited. That is, they may limit themselves, but there is no legislative area in which they may not tread. In the United States, our dual-sovereign system means that the federal government can only legislate in the specific areas granted to it by the Constitution, and it’s the states that have authority to legislate in any area – except areas preempted by the feds. That’s not trivial, and it’s unusual enough that a year doesn’t go by here on the SDMB in which someone disputes the truth of that proposition. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2015, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3400 "2015-04-27T17:25:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I don’t know if I agree, although the reason I’m thinking of may well be inapplicable to the discussion and thoughts **adaher** was having. > > In most of the world, governments aren’t limited. That is, they may limit themselves, but there is no legislative area in which they may not tread. In the United States, our dual-sovereign system means that the federal government can only legislate in the specific areas granted to it by the Constitution, and it’s the states that have authority to legislate in any area – except areas preempted by the feds. > > That’s not trivial, and it’s unusual enough that a year doesn’t go by here on the SDMB in which someone disputes the truth of that proposition. It’s not trivial, but it’s not the only way in which governments are “limited”. For example – various forms of freedom of speech and freedom of religion granted by many countries’ founding documents constitute a “limit” on government power (and “legislative areas”). There are many other examples, as I presume you can imagine. So I’ll dispute that “In most of the world, governments aren’t limited”, unless you’re strictly talking about the dual-sovereign state/federal system. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086.md?page=169) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086.md?page=171)