So how does Bloomberg News deal with this situation? It warns us of “generational war.” It tells us that Social Security and Medicare benefits for seniors will be pitted against “investment in children, education, infrastructure and other programs.”
So Bloomberg would set the young against the old. Apart from the moral imperative against that sort of thing (and when has Wall Street ever worried about damage it may do to society), is it really true? Is the choice really either seniors’ health care or children’s education, but not both?
Baker politely calls bullshit on that. It would be true, says Baker, if…
- you refuse to raise taxes on the wealthy;
- you refuse to reduce large government payments to Big Pharma;
- you refuse to cut the defense budget even as Bush’s wars of discretion wind down;
- you refuse to enact stimulative measures such as more expansionary Fed policy and lower dollar value to enhance the U.S. position in the international market.
In other words, if you refuse to do everything Republicans don’t want to do, you can pit the old against the young.
Here’s a bit of education, children: can you say “the GOP is a den of thieves and liars“? I knew you could! Now… can you say “the Super Committee is going to eat our lunch“? Splendid! Your education is coming along wonderfully well!