The Ant & The Grasshopper
Why Republicans Are Losing the Deficit Debate They Should be Winning:
A Story of More vs Enough: More or Less
As is:
• Medicare & Medicaid are unsustainable
• In 10 years or less the deficit will be 100% of the GNP – New Worth of the Country
• Social Security will see major cutbacks
And all the while, unemployment is 9.2% and despite Obamacare, health insurance costs are dramatically up – and yet the Republicans are losing the debate on deficit reduction and the debt ceiling.
Why?
The Democrats sell more NOW and the Republicans are selling less rather than sufficiency/sustainability – enough later .
No one wants less – now – even with the prospect of ‘more’ in the future. To get less means one isn’t right, isn’t better, is worse. To get more – one is right, better, and good – worthy.
And America is a culturally a country of ‘more, better, now’ not wanting to face the prospect of less, worse, later even if more is unsustainable.
And the R’s haven’t been able to demonstrate there will be less – much less going forward.
And that is why the Republicans are enduring MORE-tal wounds in this debate.
Until, the prospect of LESS – benefits not being there – are not just words – but created as visceral images, fuzzy spin words ‘like framework’ and non specificity will win for the Democrats.
Herein is the challenge: how EMOTIONALLY to demonstrate both how less will become more better yet enough (the ant) yet the consequence of continued live for today spending (the grasshopper) will create less tomorrow. This message must be viscerally felt at the gut level – like a gun at the head to get this message through (which is exactly what the Grasshopper Democrats do anyway.)
The Republicans have to force the Democrats to demonstrate ‘where’s the beef’ of their non proposal proposals while showing the alternative in the future: Little Caesar’s Cat Food.
PS: The Democrats are Ant Eaters.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Monday, July 11, 2011
“Revenue Enhancements, Shared Sacrifice, Gov’t Spending To Invest’ aka LESS II
“Revenue Enhancements, Shared Sacrifice, Gov’t Spending To Invest’
aka LESS II
The Democrats employ euphemisms. Instead of increasing taxes, it is revenue enhancements and closing loopholes. Instead, of increased spending, investment is the word used. Columnists like Fred Brown of the Denver Post to avoid admitting property tax increases, state the tax rate remains the same, though the property value has declined and the amount of tax remains the same. (This is, to ironically use Brown’s own term, definitional drift. And, Brown, one can suffocate & die in high drifts).
These are words of mass distortion by 14kt phonies who are gutless linguistically dishonest weenies who never meet a parsing they didn’t love.
And both the Republicans and Democrats employ the phrase – shared sacrifice.
What do the words and phrases revenue enhancement, shared sacrifice, and government investment have in common?
The avoidance of the reality of LESS.
more sells, LESS doesn’t.
We don’t want LESS.
To have ‘LESS’ means we are ‘LESS’ – LESS worthy.
How so?
In our society/culture, if:
• one is right (more so than others), he gets more (if not) he gets LESS
• if he gets ‘more’ he is better, if not he is ‘worse’
• if he is better, he is good, if not he isn’t good or bad
And good, is one ‘o’ away from God.
Further’more’, if one gets ‘more’ – his net (assets less liabilities) is greater resulting in a higher ‘net worth.’ Thus, he is more ‘worthy’ – more worthwhile. The LESS one has in comparison, the LESS worthy – worthwhile one is.
Per this heuristic, more validates; LESS invalidates worthiness.
We get what we deserve. And as a result, we get the Fred Browns, and spin of increased taxes into revenue enhancement, increased spending into investment, and other words of mass distortion to avoid the reality of LESS .
Worthiness or lack thereof tied to more or LESS – and that’s the LESSon of lies, damn lies, and the linguistic dishonesty of our politicians (and many too many columnists).
The real factor to consider is ‘what is ENOUGH?’ – but that’s another futile discussion.
Post Scripture: There will be LESS – the difference today is instead of the politicos promising a chicken in every pot, they will promise ‘pot’ with every chicken – as they play chicken.
aka LESS II
The Democrats employ euphemisms. Instead of increasing taxes, it is revenue enhancements and closing loopholes. Instead, of increased spending, investment is the word used. Columnists like Fred Brown of the Denver Post to avoid admitting property tax increases, state the tax rate remains the same, though the property value has declined and the amount of tax remains the same. (This is, to ironically use Brown’s own term, definitional drift. And, Brown, one can suffocate & die in high drifts).
These are words of mass distortion by 14kt phonies who are gutless linguistically dishonest weenies who never meet a parsing they didn’t love.
And both the Republicans and Democrats employ the phrase – shared sacrifice.
What do the words and phrases revenue enhancement, shared sacrifice, and government investment have in common?
The avoidance of the reality of LESS.
more sells, LESS doesn’t.
We don’t want LESS.
To have ‘LESS’ means we are ‘LESS’ – LESS worthy.
How so?
In our society/culture, if:
• one is right (more so than others), he gets more (if not) he gets LESS
• if he gets ‘more’ he is better, if not he is ‘worse’
• if he is better, he is good, if not he isn’t good or bad
And good, is one ‘o’ away from God.
Further’more’, if one gets ‘more’ – his net (assets less liabilities) is greater resulting in a higher ‘net worth.’ Thus, he is more ‘worthy’ – more worthwhile. The LESS one has in comparison, the LESS worthy – worthwhile one is.
Per this heuristic, more validates; LESS invalidates worthiness.
We get what we deserve. And as a result, we get the Fred Browns, and spin of increased taxes into revenue enhancement, increased spending into investment, and other words of mass distortion to avoid the reality of LESS .
Worthiness or lack thereof tied to more or LESS – and that’s the LESSon of lies, damn lies, and the linguistic dishonesty of our politicians (and many too many columnists).
The real factor to consider is ‘what is ENOUGH?’ – but that’s another futile discussion.
Post Scripture: There will be LESS – the difference today is instead of the politicos promising a chicken in every pot, they will promise ‘pot’ with every chicken – as they play chicken.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)