I think I'm for it

I voted against Bush II, twice. (I voted against his father as well). I was, and am, totally opposed to the wars he started and I was deeply disappointed that Obama carried on with those same war policies. The views expressed by my votes did not carry the day however, and via a twisted, convoluted path we come to the edge of a (so called) fiscal cliff. (Given the hyperbole that is now common in all American politics and media, I would bet a big cup of coffee that there is no cliff involved. A speed bump maybe, a curb perhaps, most likely just a continuation of the downward grassy slope the American economic system has been on for several decades now.) A part of that "cliff" is a raise in every one's taxes, big cuts in defence spending, and equally big cuts in domestic programs.

I think we should just go over the cliff. First, this appears to be the best law this particular congress could come up with. Less than two years ago they fought over this thing for weeks. It isn't likely they are going to do a better job now. Second, my guess it is the only way that military spending will, in fact, be cut.

But mostly I think we should go over this cliff because this is a democracy. Regardless of which individual voted which way, those elected to office made military and economic policies that were enacted on behalf of the USA. All of us are responsible for the consequences of those policies, and one of those consequences is that the country is deeply in debt. Budgets have to be cut and taxes have to be raised, cuts and increases that should touch pretty much every citizen.

This isn't to say I think the tax code is fair. I don't think anyone, left or right, Democrat, Republican or off the reservation, is deluded enough to think that taxes in this country are fairly collected and wisely spent. But that is something we are all in together as well. The fact that rich people pay a lower tax rate than middle class working people is clearly a serious breech in good governing. Fixing that should be a part of all of us paying for the decisions made in our name; middle class taxes go up, upper class taxes go up a lot more.

The Republicans are wrong (as usual) in insisting that all "budget balancing" be born by cuts in programs that mostly benefit the middle class and poor; leaving the rich untouched and accumulating even more of the nation's wealth at the top of the economic pile. It is kind of amazing that, given the outcome of this last election, they are clinging to their "protect the rich at all costs" rhetoric. Then again, the T-party / Conservative / Religious right party walked away from being rational a long time ago. No less a luminary than Mr. Rick Santorum, once serious contender to be the Republican nominee, has said, "We will never have the elite, smart people on our side."  I guess he is smart enough to have figured that out.

The Democrats are wrong in insisting that the middle class be spared any responsibility for decisions made, laying the burden mostly at the feet of the rich. Lets be honest, for the most part white, middle class working guys are the foundation of the Republican party and mostly backed Mr. Bush's wars. What kind of warped rational suggests they shouldn't provide a big chunk of the money needed to pay for them?  And, much as I don't care about protecting the unearned assets of the rich, simple math reviles that all of the money the rich have isn't enough to pay down the dept being accumulated at the current spending levels.

And, as usual, both are wrong in their desire to protect the military budget.

So, let us all drive off the cliff together. It actually looks like the best alternative to what the Republicans would do if they had their way unchallenged, or what the Democrats would do if they had their way unchallenged. In fact, since both seem to hate the current law equally (though they had equal parts coming up with it) it is probably a pretty good law.

In other words, the Democrats AND the Republicans both hate it? I think I'm for it.