Elizabeth Warren wants America to be more like China

This is such a coincidence.... (0.00 / 0)

I am in NYC at the FFANY Footwear Expo, and I just finished dinner with a number of people and the discussion was about manufacturing in China.  All agree that within 10 years China will have a massive medical crisis on their hands due to the neglect on the environment.  

This neglect comes not from the private businesses that are allowed to operate in China while they pour toxic chemicals into the rivers and streams.  It is because the government refuses to acknowledge the problem until it is too late.  They refuse to acknowledge the problem because it is not in national interest.  A government that is driven by power and revenues will inevitably make the wrong decision when it comes to the environment.  Guess what the liberal idea of government is?  If you said power and revenues you would be right.

And as far as spending infrastructure money is concerned - China 15 years ago was largely dirt roads and unstable factories.  They had a lot to spend just to catch up to us.  I imagine they spent a lot more on televisions and radios as well - because they didn't have any before.  If Elizabeth Warren is fond of China she is welcome to go live there and relish in the amount of government spending.  It has been proven time and again that government spending hoping that business will follow does NOT work!  Government spending should always follow the investment of private business.  If government is leading the way turn and run the other way.  

We are headed for a 'Fiscal Cliff' and the country just elected a dope whose motto is 'Forward'.  

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 02:36:25 AM UTC

Floored by this too (0.00 / 0)

I was floored when I saw this ad as well. Does she think we should have a one-child policy too?

---

by: seascraper @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 02:42:48 AM UTC

Lizzy- China Has GHOST CITIES. (0.00 / 0)

http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline...

They interview a Hong Kong based Real Estate analyst in the video, and he states "China Has 64,000,000 empty apartments."

"It's not the quantity of GDP, its the quality of GDP, and they are just building stuff for which there's no demand."

---

by: powwowwizzylauren @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 10:36:51 AM UTC

A lawyer compares us to China ? (0.00 / 0)

A country that has limited rule of law.  They can built things quickly there as the government just takes your property. Sort of like college tuition ?

China spends a large amount of money on infrastructure as they had none - I traveled to Guangzhou 25 years ago a city of 4+M - there wasn't even a highway to the city - one two lane road. China needed to spend to keep up with it's economic growth.  

---

by: roarkarchitect @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 12:25:01 PM UTC

America again (0.00 / 1)

Can someone please explain to me what the heck the phrase "America should be America again" actually means? And don't tell me to watch Scott Brown's video, because I have and it doesn't answer the question. What is it that Scott Brown and his supporters want to return to? Higher levels of federal investment in infrastructure? Higher federal income taxes? More federal employees? Those are all things we had under, say, President Reagan.  

---

by: brudolf @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 14:18:54 PM UTC

Wow, you can be wrong about everything... (0.00 / 0)

No, we did not have higher levels of federal investment in infrastructure under Reagan. No, we did not have higher federal income taxes. He dropped the top tax rate to 28%! He cut federal employees and we had fewer federal employees, excluding military servicemen and women (we can now do more with fewer).

As for letting America be America again: that means encouraging and incentivizing the entrepreneurial spirit; it means believing that as individuals we have the power to change our own lives through hard work, determination, and ingenuity and that we don't need the government to tell us how to improve our lives or tell us how to live. It is promoting an ethic of self-reliance that was brought here by every imigrant population; a belief that you can start at the bottom and work yourself into a better life. It continues to be true. I've seen it. My father's generation of his family lived it.

All of these issues are evidentently the antithesis of the current Democrat party. Their policies are in the process of killing an entire industry segment (coal fired power plants) through regulation; it kills jobs, drives up the cost of energy to no real benefit, and impoverishes hard-working people. Or policies which prevent Boeing from opening a plant in South Carolina; killing thousands of jobs in construction and manufacturing. Or policies which prevent domestic production (off-shore restrictions, federal land restrictions, lease restrictions, etc.) and transport (XL Pipeline!), leaving us dependent on foreign sources of energy (Obama to Brazil after PAYING THEM $2B to execute deep sea drilling off their coast: "we want to be one of your best customers.")

But worst of all, and what you should be most embarrassed by, is the failure of the current Democrat Senate (and President Obama) to honestly and forthrightly deal with our nation's fiscal problems. President Obama has forwarded budgets to the house and senate that have failed to draw even a single vote of support, from Democrats or Republicans, for the last two years. The Democrat Senate, which you would apparently support by supporting a Warren candidacy, has failed to pass a budget for over three years. THREE YEARS! If there's one thing that has defined being American since our inception, it is the willingness to confront tough problems and deal with them head-on. The Democrat party has chosen not to. It is time for us to "be America again" and deal with our problems in an honest fashion, and not by passing the buck to our kids.

---

by: NewEnglandDevil @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 15:56:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here are my sources (0.00 / 0)

1. Re federal infrastructure spending:
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/defau...
(see Table A-1)

2. Re federal income tax rate:
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/...
(conservative website)

3. Re federal number of federal employees:
http://www.opm.gov/feddata/his...

What are your sources?

---

by: brudolf @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 17:43:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Seems (0.00 / 0)

your first source says water and transportation spending in the 80s was BELOW what it is now.  Hell, I'm trying to find a graph that says otherwise.
Seems your second link says that Reagan inherited a top rate of 70%...brought it to 50%...then brought it to 28%.  We are currently at 35%.

Do I need to look at the 3rd link?

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 19:06:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Reading (0.00 / 0)

1) In absolute dollars, spending in the 80s was below what it is now. However, as a percentage of GDP it was higher - and that's the point.

2) The second link points out that for all but Reagan's final year in office, the top income tax rate was higher than it has been for Obama's time in office. That was my point. President Obama has not, of course, raised the top rate.

3) Yes, please look at the third link.

---

by: brudolf @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 19:11:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

2.6 vs 2.4% (0.00 / 0)

two tenths of one percent

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 19:35:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ah..... (0.00 / 0)

so you want to pick the specific statistic to match what you say.  Well, I say spending IN REAL DOLLARS is what matters and THAT means that we are currently spending at higher levels than in ANY of the Reagan years....since the table only goes to 2007...I bet we're spending DOUBLE...or were those shovel-ready jobs non-existant and all that fat $$ we gave the fearless leader wasted?

Wow...Reagan couldn't go from 70% to 28% in one year.  I'd rather be where Reagan went with an opposition Congress....than where Obama is right now and wants to go...is trying to go with every breath of class warfare he brings forth.  Or didja miss the latest attempt to raise taxes on small business owners?

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 19:54:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

that data includes the post office employees (0.00 / 0)

Here is an interesting chart - but it also includes civilian DOD employees.

---

by: roarkarchitect @ Wed Aug 01, 2012 at 01:00:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

wait (0.00 / 0)

You mean the size of the federal civilian workforce shrinks or stays relatively flat under GOP congresses?

Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Wed Aug 01, 2012 at 01:46:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Couple quick comments (0.00 / 0)

1) Interesting you don't respond to the what does it mean to be American again - isn't that part of the argument?

2) Under Reagan infrastructure spending dropped 0.2% as percentage of GDP. As you've acknowledged, in real or inflationary dollars, we spent less under Reagan.

3) Why do you think infrastructure spending should be that high indefinitely? Once you build a bridge, or an airport, a road, a water treatment plant, a wwtp, etc. it costs much less to maintain than the initial capital costs. Water and wwtp are built with 20-50 year lifetimes in mind inclusive of population growth. In addition, we've improved treatment technologies so that the infrastructure originally treating 10Mgpd can now treat up to 30Mgpd. These efficiencies reduce costs and therefore expenditures.

4) As noted previously, Reagan's goal was to get to 28%, and he did it.

5) I was surprised to see that federal employment did increase by about 5% under Reagan; however, that is the price of dealing with a Dem Senate and House. Here is the graph showing federal civilian employment under Obama through 2011: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org...
Under Reagan, the federal gov't grew about 5% in 8 years, under Obama, the federal government has grown 10% in about 3 years.

So, are you done being dishonest about Reagan's legacy?

---

by: NewEnglandDevil @ Wed Aug 01, 2012 at 03:53:38 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Straw man alert! Warren is NOT praising China (0.00 / 0)

Whoa, talk about taking a one-liner out of context!  You actually spent hours creating a video just to talk about China and try to associate Warren with "liking" China or saying we should generally "be like China"?  In her original ad, she calls China "our competitor"!  But of course you don't include that in your attack video.  This is a bizarre propaganda attempt, nothing more.

She says "even China" (our biggest COMPETITOR) is spending 9% on infrastructure.  But we spend only 2.4%.  The point is that WE ARE NOT KEEPING UP in our spending on infrastructure with our biggest competitor.  She says NOTHING about the environmental problems and instances of misguided spending.  Why?  Because that's a completely different problem.  She is talking about looking over her specific point-by-point rebuild plan.

Here is her original ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Here is her plan:

http://my.elizabethwarren.com/...

The Rebuild Now Plan

Invest in Air and Surface Transportation. Our highway, transit, rail, and aviation infrastructure is critical to the functioning of our economy. By transporting goods and workers, this infrastructure allows businesses to succeed. Rebuilding this infrastructure, including supporting airport and air traffic improvements and competitive infrastructure grant and financing programs, is critical. This effort will lead to Massachusetts receiving at least $850 million and would support about 11,000 jobs here in the Commonwealth.

Fix America's Schools. No child should be forced to attend a school that is crumbling and that doesn't have the basic science and computer technology to teach the skills that are necessary for a competitive global economy. We should modernize 35,000 public schools, from making emergency repairs to improving energy efficiency, removing asbestos, and upgrading technology. Facilities for community colleges should also be modernized so these schools can offer better job training. Under this plan, Massachusetts would receive $378 million for school modernization that could support 4,900 jobs. In addition, Massachusetts would receive an additional $68 million to support community colleges.

Make Wireless Broadband Available. In an increasingly connected economy, high-speed wireless service is essential to the functioning of business - and of everyday life. It has become a basic necessity, just like roads are. We can invest in a plan that will deploy high-speed wireless to 98% of Americans. Building on the MassBroadband 123 initiative will help ensure affordable, quality access to high speed Internet across our state, including in Western Massachusetts.

Create a National Infrastructure Bank. To leverage public and private sector dollars to finance important infrastructure investments, a National Infrastructure Bank should be developed, capitalized at $10 billion. This bank would be able to invest in a range of infrastructure projects, without fear of political favor. Here in Massachusetts, where water pipes and sewer systems are often generations old, a national infrastructure bank can assist cities and towns in financing smart plans to repair and rebuild these basic services.

Support the Partnership for Sustainable Communities. The Partnership is a joint effort of the Department of Transportation, EPA, and Department of Housing and Urban Development that is designed to help communities improve transportation choices and affordable housing, in a way that is environmentally sustainable. In Massachusetts, the Partnership has helped support new stations and renovation of existing stations on the Fairmount Commuter Rail line. The result will be better transportation options for Roxbury, Dorchester, and Mattapan, in addition to new housing units in the area, and redeveloping more than 30 contaminated "brownfield" sites. The President has requested $100 million for the Partnership, which could be paid for by repealing the oil and gas R&D program, which has mandatory funding under the 2005 Energy Policy Act until 2014. Repealing this program would save $150 million over a decade.

Give States More Flexibility to use Highway Funds for Transit Projects. Right now, Congress allows about 20% of revenue in the Highway Trust Fund to be spent on transit, with about 80% devoted to highways. For states like Massachusetts, mass transit, rail, and buses can sometimes be a better investment than adding another lane of highway. Yet some Republicans have attempted to dictate the direction of transportation development, proposing to remove transit funding from the Highway Trust Fund. We need a more comprehensive approach that breaks down barriers and silos to encourage efficient spending on transportation. We should work to revise transportation programs so states like Massachusetts have the flexibility to best allocate funding for our transportation needs - not cripple states' ability to invest in transit. Because these changes will create flexibility in current funding, rather than add new funding, they will be cost neutral.

Reinstate Tax Breaks for Commuters. Last year, employer-provided transit benefits were tax free up to $230 per month, the same amount that drivers were allowed for parking expenses. The transit benefit dropped to $125 per month at the beginning of this year. The tax code should not favor drivers over transit commuters, thereby incentivizing congestion and demand for gasoline. Rather, the transit and parking benefits should be the same. Making this change permanent is estimated to cost between $1.4 and $1.8 billion, and will be fully paid for by ending the special tax break for corporate jets, which will raise $2 billion over 10 years.

---

by: amfriedman @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 20:41:31 PM UTC

Interesting. (0.00 / 0)

I just heard about the National Infrastructure Bank yesterday on Bloggingheads.
http://bloggingheads.tv/videos...


---
"That it ceased to exist, I'll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said." - Metropolitan (1990)

---

by: Patrick @ Tue Jul 31, 2012 at 23:53:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

none-union workers need not apply (0.00 / 0)

As not doubt she will require all public works projects to be bound by PLA agreements.  

---

by: roarkarchitect @ Wed Aug 01, 2012 at 01:03:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeesh. (0.00 / 0)

I hadn't see her ad before reading this, so I just watched it now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?f...

She doesn't say we should be like China is every regard or even that we should have the same percentage of GDP spent on infrastructure.  Warren simply thinks that current infrastructure spending at 2.4% of GDP is too low.  Is is possible to spend more than we do on infrastructure and not build desterted cities like China? Of course it is!

What is Scott Brown's position on infrastructure spending?  Do we spend just the right amount already, or too much, or do we need to spend more?

---
"That it ceased to exist, I'll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said." - Metropolitan (1990)

---

by: Patrick @ Wed Aug 01, 2012 at 01:19:49 AM UTC