Andrew Hall
Dennison Place (The Circles)
Login to Send PM
Oh, this made my libertarian heart flutter this morning :
If the Tea Party went downtown ...
It is, alas, naive fantasy to think so. The Tea Party people and most Republicans in general aren't truly against government manipulation and subsidies. They are just against it went it is not to their benefit. Eliminating the middle class/suburban subsidies just isn't going to happen regardless of the overall better outcome and the fact that is fits with the stated ideals.
A.
kit444
Elsewhere
Login to Send PM
Andrew Hall wrote >>
Oh, this made my libertarian heart flutter this morning :
If the Tea Party went downtown ...
It is, alas, naive fantasy to think so. The Tea Party people and most Republicans in general aren't truly against government manipulation and subsidies. They are just against it went it is not to their benefit. Eliminating the middle class/suburban subsidies just isn't going to happen regardless of the overall better outcome and the fact that is fits with the stated ideals.
A.
+1
If there's been a hue and cry from the Tea Party against the mortgage interest tax deduction, I haven't heard it.
howatzer
Login to Send PM
kit444 wrote >>
Andrew Hall wrote >>
Oh, this made my libertarian heart flutter this morning :
If the Tea Party went downtown ...
It is, alas, naive fantasy to think so. The Tea Party people and most Republicans in general aren't truly against government manipulation and subsidies. They are just against it went it is not to their benefit. Eliminating the middle class/suburban subsidies just isn't going to happen regardless of the overall better outcome and the fact that is fits with the stated ideals.
A.+1
If there's been a hue and cry from the Tea Party against the mortgage interest tax deduction, I haven't heard it.
Has there been a hue and cry for this from anyone?
kit444
Elsewhere
Login to Send PM
howatzer wrote >>
Has there been a hue and cry for this from anyone?
http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/the-home-mortgage-interest-deduction-kill-it
If an organization's primary stated objective is the reduction of unnecessary government spending and benefits, the omission of such a major one is glaring.
Andrew Hall
Dennison Place (The Circles)
Login to Send PM
howatzer wrote >>
kit444 wrote
If there's been a hue and cry from the Tea Party against the mortgage interest tax deduction, I haven't heard it.Has there been a hue and cry for this from anyone?
It is doubly political suicide to do so. Not only would the middle class object (people only want *other* people's subsidies eliminated,) but the Realtors and Homebuilders are both at the very upper tier of lobbying money.
eta - Eliminating the various property tax subsidies in Ohio would about halve the budget deficit.
A.
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM
The tea party movement *could* be good for urbanism. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the movement to jump on the repeal of the home mortgage interest deduction as a cause just yet, however. One might find a little bit more traction trying to work school choice into the forefront of the consciousness of the movement, since there is already a strain of hostility there towards the existing public school establishment. That could do a lot for urbanism, but the subsidies for suburban homebuilding and suburban (and exurban and rural) infrastructure are too popular. Indeed, I get the sense from some rural tea party activists that the main reason they want the government to save money by driving down costs elsewhere is so that it could spend the exorbitant amounts necessary to keep paved four-lane highways running through the middle of the wilderness.
Urban governments have often caused their cities self-inflicted wounds, and state and federal governments have often stacked the deck, wittingly or otherwise, against urban development. However, most of the policies on all three of those levels that really retard urban development are simply not in the tea party's crosshairs. Zoning codes, historic preservation ordinances, and other building restrictions that typically burden developers far more in urban than suburban areas are the kind of thing that libertarian wonks (e.g., Ed Glaeser) talk about, not populist firebrands. Liz Lessner is probably the one leading the charge against development-retardant parking meter policies, to the extent anyone is; if she's a tea party activist, she hides it well. And, of course, the nascent tea party was in full-throated opposition to the Columbus streetcar line.
The tea party's policy priorities may align with urbanist issues on some specific issues, but unfortunately, at least for the moment, I think that that's more by coincidence than convergence of principles.
berdawn
near that stretch of N. High Street in the Short North
Login to Send PM
I've not seen any evidence that teabaggers are anything other than Republicans.
ETA:
http://www.publicreligion.org/research/published/?id=386
Andrew Hall
Dennison Place (The Circles)
Login to Send PM
gramarye wrote However, most of the policies on all three of those levels that really retard urban development are simply not in the tea party's crosshairs. Zoning codes, historic preservation ordinances, and other building restrictions that typically burden developers far more in urban than suburban areas are the kind of thing that libertarian wonks (e.g., Ed Glaeser) talk about, not populist firebrands. .
I don't agree at all. The pro-suburban subsidies are orders of magnitude more loaded against the urban than the barriers against. While historic preservation ordinances, for example, are an obvious irritant, most concientious developers recognize that some type of semi-consensual bumpers are an overall good thing. Yes, they do often become barriers, but on the whole there are far more positive subsidies to suburban development than negative against urban ones.
The problem is that there is a psychology of dependence cultivated about issues like mortgage tax credit which has made them seem natural and thus pass without notice unlike obstacles.
A.
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM
No, I agree ... maybe I was unclear in what I wrote above. When I progressed into talking about specific policies of cities ... zoning codes, meter policies, streetcars ... I was talking specifically about self-inflicted wounds by city governments (though in hindsight, I shouldn't have included the streetcar in that, since that was shot down by suburban interests).
I agree that the subsidies for suburban homebuilding and infrastructure are larger obstacles, simply because of how much they skew the ground rules of the game. (However, I'd also hazard that those, too, are not exactly high on the tea party's target list at the moment.)
Andrew Hall
Dennison Place (The Circles)
Login to Send PM
gramarye wrote (However, I'd also hazard that those, too, are not exactly high on the tea party's target list at the moment.)
I think the original article had a large dollop of dripping irony on it.
A.
Andrew Hall
Dennison Place (The Circles)
Login to Send PM
rus wrote >>
Roscoe wrote >>
Every "tea-partier" I know desperately wants a Federal flat tax and school vouchers at the local level.Yep. Any promotion of urbanism would only be accidental.
You are missing the point. Deliberately, I don't know.
Many aspects of suburbia have been heavily subsidized so that those who desire them are NOT paying the full price. Removing subsidies, which is a stated Tea Party goal, would result in suburban/urban shifting. If people truly believe those goals, then they should be prepared for the consequences *and* be more than willing to pay the price for their own choices.
A.
rus
Login to Send PM
Andrew Hall wrote >>
rus wrote >>
Roscoe wrote >>
Every "tea-partier" I know desperately wants a Federal flat tax and school vouchers at the local level.Yep. Any promotion of urbanism would only be accidental.
You are missing the point. Deliberately, I don't know.
Many aspects of suburbia have been heavily subsidized so that those who desire them are NOT paying the full price. Removing subsidies, which is a stated Tea Party goal, would result in suburban/urban shifting. If people truly believe those goals, then they should be prepared for the consequences *and* be more than willing to pay the price for their own choices.
A.
No, I see your point. The elimination of all subsidies may have the effect you outline, but it's not as if the tea party types I've met were pro-urban. Far from it, in fact.
Andrew Hall
Dennison Place (The Circles)
Login to Send PM
rus wrote No, I see your point. The elimination of all subsidies may have the effect you outline, but it's not as if the tea party types I've met were pro-urban. Far from it, in fact.
Hence, despite your romantic attachment to them, they are little different than any other welfare queen who feels entitled to their piece of other people's pie.
A.
rus
Login to Send PM
Andrew Hall wrote >>
rus wrote No, I see your point. The elimination of all subsidies may have the effect you outline, but it's not as if the tea party types I've met were pro-urban. Far from it, in fact.
Hence, despite your romantic attachment to them, they are little different than any other welfare queen who feels entitled to their piece of other people's pie.
A.
Yes, perhaps I do have a romantic attachment to some tea party ideas.
Point I'm trying to make though is even if the tea party types support ending, in effect, suburban subsidies that's not because they're pro-urban but because they'd be anti-subsidy. The effect might be the same, of course.
groundrules
Login to Send PM
You know what? fuck the tea party. It's a political fad that we'll all have forgotten in 6 years. For historical examples from recent memory, see Reform Party, Green Party, etc. All cases where temporary momentum influenced a single election, only to fade into relative obscurity. Hell, remember Sarah Palin? barely, right?
Snarf
Dystopia
Login to Send PM
groundrules wrote >>
You know what? fuck the tea party. It's a political fad that we'll all have forgotten in 6 years. For historical examples from recent memory, see Reform Party, Green Party, etc. All cases where temporary momentum influenced a single election, only to fade into relative obscurity. Hell, remember Sarah Palin? barely, right?
agree/like/+1
misskitty
Columbus
Login to Send PM
Whatever happened to the Guns and Dope party I can get down with that, LOL
But really the Tea Party is a pain I am sure they would rock much more if they were not so hell bent on getting nothing done except some complaining. I would bet that even people that would like to live under the no state idea also hate the tea party. I don't believe they are one in the same.
CMH Gourmand
(King of) the (Clinton)ville
Login to Send PM
For the record I agree with A. Hall on this one.
I am for a flat tax - makes sense but does not make sense for the systems that beneit from that - tax software, classes, some accounting fees, lawyers, etc.
Same for mortgage interest deductions - does it help my taxes, a little but not a lot - but this does benefit many other industries and helps sustain them.
Both of these things together means a lot of people interested in things not changing.
The things that need to change the most are Social Security, Medicare, Health Care and Defense spending - until these core programs and gigantic costs associated with them are addressed any other fiscal changes are drops in the bucket.
I have now formed the bucket party - I can suggest things to fill that bucket with.
You must log in to post.
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus. Click here to visit TheMetropreneur.com.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
