Maureen Dowd, "Palmy Days for Jerry": Longing for Things Past

“The Greek word for 'return' is nostos. Algos means 'suffering.' So nostalgia is the suffering caused by an unappeased yearning to return.”

― Milan Kundera, Ignorance

Yes, I'm suffering these days watching America crash and burn. The national debt is in excess of $17.5 trillion, Obamacare is a bust, and Putin has reignited the Cold War with no one in the Oval Office to call his bluff.

Occasionally, I still glance at John McCain's profile and wonder whether a man who turns 80 in 2016 is too old to be president.

Hillary? Other than the fact that she is a woman, where are the accomplishments?

Which brings us to Maureen Dowd's New York Times op-ed entitled "Palmy Days for Jerry" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/opinion/sunday/dowd-palmy-days-for-jerry.html?ref=maureendowd&_r=0), in which she asks a "mellow" Jerry Brown "how he would feel about a Hillary coronation." Dowd informs us of Brown's answer:

"'The polls say that she’s in an extremely strong position,' he says. 'So prominent in her husband’s administration, then a senator, then secretary of state. Those are powerful milestones. I don’t see anyone challenging her at this point.'

So how does he reconcile what he said in 1992 and now? Have the Clintons changed, or has Brown changed?

He crosses his arms and gives me a flinty look, finally observing: 'In retrospect, after we see all the other presidents that came afterwards, certainly, Clinton handled his job with a level of skill that hasn’t been met since.'

Take that, President Obama."

Bill handled his job skillfully in the past? What does this have anything to do with Hillary's capabilities, unless Bill will again be managing the executive branch of government from a semi-detached White House bachelor suite?

"Take that, President Obama"? Is "that" intended to soothe my suffering and my longing for the past? Brown, now 75, doesn't so much as hint at mounting opposition to Hillary's nomination.

It's over. It's done. Maybe it was never any better, but it surely can't get any worse.

[The Ukraine is still in chaos after Putin's annexation of Crimea, Turkey is being ripped asunder by a corruption scandal swirling around Obama's friend Erdogan, and Syrian madman Bashar al-Assad, encouraged by Russian contempt for Obama, is making headway in his bloody civil war with insurgents. Meanwhile, New York Times foreign affairs "expert" Thomas L. Friedman, who is read by Obama, "is off today." ]

You will recall that Friedman would have us believe that Putin's invasion of Crimea was a "blessing in disguise" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2014/03/thomas-friedman-from-putin-blessing-in.html). As much as I miss you, Tom Terrific, take your time returning. Absence makes the heart grow fonder, and maybe I can even grow nostalgic.]

Paul Krugman, "Lessons From a Comeback": California Dreaming

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Lessons From a Comeback" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/01/opinion/krugman-lessons-from-a-comeback.html?_r=0), Paul Krugman asks, "is California still the place where the future happens first?" Commending Governor Jerry Brown for pushing through tax hikes that have given rise to a projected budget surplus, Krugman writes:

"Again, however, reports of the state’s demise proved premature. Unemployment in California remains high, but it’s coming down — and there’s a projected budget surplus, in part because the implosion of the state’s Republican Party finally gave Democrats a big enough political advantage to push through some desperately needed tax increases. Far from presiding over a Greek-style crisis, Gov. Jerry Brown is proclaiming a comeback."

Those tax increases? As observed by The Sacramento Bee (http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/12/high-income-californians-may-pay-nations-highest-tax-rate.html) in December 2012:

"Thanks to passage of Proposition 30 last month, high-income Californians would pay the nation's highest marginal income tax rates -- nearly 52 percent -- if President Barack Obama and Congress fail to make a deal to avoid the so-called 'fiscal cliff,' according to a new study.

. . . .

Proposition 30 added three percentage points to the marginal state income tax rate for California's highest-income taxpayers, bringing it to 13.3 percent. That action raised California over other high-tax jurisdictions to a marginal rate of 51.9 percent, slightly higher than New York City's level. Hawaii was the only other place with a calculated rate above 50 percent."

But not to worry, says Krugman: "serious studies have found very little evidence either that tax hikes cause lots of wealthy people to move or that state taxes have any significant impact on growth."

Unemployment in California? Down to a "mere" 9.6% (see: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/mar/29/business/la-fi-california-jobs-20130330), among the highest rates in the country.

But the real kicker? As recently observed by The Los Angeles Times in an article entitled "California's debt still a heavy cloud over state's future" (http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/13/local/la-me-state-debt-20130114):

"Sacramento is legally obligated to pay many billions of dollars withheld from schools, local governments and healthcare providers as lawmakers struggled repeatedly to balance the books. It owes Wall Street more per resident than almost every other state. And it has accumulated a crushing load of debt for retiree pensions and healthcare, now totaling more than taxpayers spend each year on all state programs combined.

. . . .

When he released his budget plan, Brown vowed to knock down the state's 'wall of debt.' He presented a timeline for repaying nearly $28 billion the state owes to government programs that it raided for cash or deprived of funds over the years, as well as some bonds sold to balance the budget.

. . . .

But numerous reports by state agencies, think tanks and academics have shown the wall of debt to be many stories higher than $28 billion — hundreds of billions of dollars over the next few decades. Brown's repayment plan does not significantly reduce the sizable debt to Wall Street or account for promises the state has made to its current and future retirees but is not setting enough money aside to cover."

Now go back and read Krugman's op-ed one more time. Does the word "debt" appear even once in his opinion piece? Afraid not. A "wall of debt"? What, me worry?

California could be "the place where the future happens first?" It could well be, but it's not going to be pretty.