Tax Cuts Cause Deficits

Little tax-cutting piggies grow up to be big deficit hogs!

Am I the only one amused by the Republican Party’s obsession with the national debt? After all, their boys Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush are the ones who racked up the largest deficits in American history, the latter handing it off to Barack Obama who is now being circled by the very hogs who once suckled at the deficit-leaking teat. The GOP reminds me of a drug addict who converts to a fundamentalist religion—either way you look at it they’re still obnoxious.

Adding to the hypocrisy is a new study that appeared in the Cato Journal, which reveals that one of the very worst things one can do to reduce deficits is cut taxes. William Niskanen looked at the economy from 1981 to 2005 and discovered a startling correlation—cutting taxes did not reign in government spending; in fact, the more taxes were slashed, the more spending increased. In other words, Niskanen’s study refutes a core assumption of supply-side economics as articulated by Jude Wanniski, George Gilder, and Arthur Laffer, key architects of what came to be called Reaganomics. Part of their argument that progressive income taxes needed to be rethought rests on a belief that high taxation supported non-productive economic activity that, in turn, caused rising prices and unemployment. Slash taxes and spending must follow, they argued.

It turns out that this is the sort of “voodoo economics” that George H. Bush said they were back in 1980—tax cuts are almost always accompanied by increased spending and bigger deficits. David Stockman, Reagan’s budget director, later admitted what Niskanen just proved. (Niskanen’s scholarship was independently verified by University of Alabama professor Michael New.)

I can hear the complaints now—just another disgruntled liberal who can’t get over how Ronald Reagan saved the American economy. It won’t wash! William Niskanen, like Stockman, was a Reagan insider; he was a member of Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisors. The Cato Journal isn’t exactly a screaming lefty rag either—it’s put out by a libertarian think tank. So read it and weep. The new economic math is tax cuts = increased spending = bigger deficits. Maybe we ought to try something different—like taxing the hell out of rich people and multinational corporations.

VINCERE IS A LOSER

I'd rather watch "Springtime for Hitler!"


Vincere (2009)
Directed and written by Marco Bellocchio
In Italian with subtitles, 128 mins. Not rated (nudity)
*


Does this sound like a promising movie premise? How about a film about the love life of Benito Mussolini? You know—the good old days when the twentieth century dawned and dashing young Benito was a revolutionary socialist atheist with enough fire to burn the candle at both ends with a wife and a mistress. Then let’s snip away all the connective narrative tissue that might ground viewers in the story and jump to World War I. Then let’s jump again to when Mussolini comes to power in1922—with the help of the Catholic Church—and finds it expedient to stick Ida Dalser, his mistress (and perhaps bigamous second wife), in a mental institution and her son, young Benito, into a boys’ academy run by nuns. Now let’s watch both Ida and young Benito go insane. Sound like a great movie? Let’s not mince words: Vincere, Italian for “win” is a loser of a film. In fact, it flat out sucks—easily one of the year’s worst films.

Oddly, it has gotten some critical acclaim. Part of this is because some American and British critics think that any director from continental Europe must be an auteur. The real reason, though, is that the film looks stylish, as long as you don’t probe very deeply. Director Marco Bellocchio has been making films since the early 1960s, but only Enrico IV (1984) and Elena (1997) have made much of a splash. Despite nearly fifty years of filmmaking Bellocchio does the sort of things one might expect of a film school student. Vincere looks good, but only upon first impression. Bellocchio superimposes cartoon graphics, newsreel footage, and flashbacks over the main narrative. He also drains the color from frames to give a film noir feel to telescoped time sequences. There are also several painterly moments; one scene of Ida climbing the bars of an outdoor asylum porch in a raging snowstorm is stunningly beautiful.

Good stuff, yes? Well… like a film student, Bellocchio doesn’t seem to know that a one-trick pony is only good for one spin around the ring. Like this stuff the first time? How about the second? And the third? And… Equally amateurish is the manner in which he tried to break conventional narrative. It’s as if someone told him that it’s oh-so-cool to do that these days. This works well for an interior mystery such as Memento, but the technique simply makes no sense whatsoever for a biopic. If you don’t walk out—not a bad option—you’ll spend much of your time trying to figure out who’s who, where you are in time and space, and whether you should care.

Even more damning is the utter lack of character development. I suppose it’s a talent of sorts to make a monster like Mussolini (Filippo Timi) boring, but it doesn’t make interesting viewing. At least Ida (Giovanna Mezzogiorno) shows some emotion in the early steamy sex scenes—poor old Benito doesn’t even seem plugged in then (so to speak). And once Ida is dumped, she spends the rest of the film having things done to her and ceases to be anything other than a cardboard character. Even more baffling is young Benito. The film takes us through his life from age nine to twenty-six at lightening speed. His transition from sunny, dutiful son to stark raving mad takes place in an instant and makes no sense whatsoever.

Don’t even dream of seeing this film unless you first read about Mussolini’s life because there’s not enough narrative thread in Vincere to knit an infant’s sock. After you have read about Mussolini, another question will arise: What’s the point in making this film? It’s not a love story, it lacks the development necessary to make it a tragedy, there’s not enough depth for a character study, and—the clincher—the very notion of humanizing Mussolini is repulsive. What Mussolini did to Ida Dalser was horrific, but it ranks fairly low on his rap sheet. The crowning moment of Il Duce’s career came in 1945, when partisans of Free Italy lined him against the wall and shot him. I don’t wish this fate for Bellocchio, but the world would no worse if a page was torn from the Fascist playbook and every copy of this film was burned.

Kevin Burke and Cal Scott Knock Down the Genre Walls

KEVIN BURKE AND CAL SCOTT
Suite
Loftus 004
* * * * *

Since the days of the Bothy Band in the 1970s Kevin Burke has been the standard against which Irish fiddlers are measured. The years and the road have not dulled his creativity or passion; this collaboration with guitarist extraordinaire Cal Scott is among Burke’s finest projects. It also throws us a curveball. It opens ands closes with three crisply rendered sets of reels, jigs, and waltzes, but sandwiched in the middle is “The Irish Session Suite,” four movements that move between traditional music, the tense solemnity of the Russian Romantics, and a mashup of string quartet and a folk ensemble. It forces us to hear well-known session favorites with completely new ears. Burke plays with the spirit of a man possessed. He’s still the standard of excellence in his craft. Catch Burke and Scott at Memorial Hall in Shelburne Falls on May 21. If you are not within driving distance of western Massachusetts check out the full tour schedule at http://www.kevinburke.com/html_concerts.html

Here’s one of several good YouTube clips of Burke and Scott together: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8nPNEnbkOU&feature=related

Angels and Demons Video Review

Angels and Demons (2009)
Directed by Ron Howard
138 mins. PG-13

* * ½

We recently caught Angels and Demons on video, a film we ducked when first released because of mediocre reviews and better theater options at the time. So what’s the verdict? The film is set in Vatican City and the Italians have a perfect phrase for it: cosi cosa, an idiomatic expression that roughly translates “so so.”

Here’s what we learned from seeing Angels and Demons. Dan Brown knows how to write a thriller and Ron Howard knows how to direct action, but Brown doesn’t translate very well on the screen and Howard doesn’t know how to hire good screenplay writers or get great performances out of actors. The film and book are widely viewed as sequels to Brown’s blockbuster hit The Da Vinci Code, though Brown actually wrote Da Vinci Code three years after Angels and Demons and the latter’s plot, though complex, is a more conventional murder mystery that should’ve worked better on film than Da Vinci Code.

It does, but only marginally so. As in The Da Vinci Code, Angels calls upon Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks), a Harvard symbologist, to decode Roman Catholic mystical practices linked to an unsavory past. In this case, a bit of anti-matter has been stolen from the Swiss scientists who created it, and all fingers point to the Illuminati, an 18th century secret society banned by the Vatican—in part for its embrace of Enlightenment ideals—and thought to be extinct. The stakes are high; a popular pope has just died, cardinals have convened to elect his successor, the top four candidates have been kidnapped, and the Illuminati has threatened to kill one per hour until midnight, at which time they will allow the antimatter “God particle” to come into contact with matter, thereby blowing all of Vatican City and much of Rome to the sweet hereafter. It is up to Langdon to unravel arcane clues concerning the four elements of ancient science (Earth, Air, Fire, and Water) and prevent murder and a smaller scale Big Bang. And it’s up to the Vatican’s acting administrator, Camerlengo Patrick McKenna (Ewan McGregor), to decide whether to break the cardinals’ convocation and evacuate St. Peter’s. Each man has his counsel, Langdon’s is Vittoria Vetra (Ayelat Zurer), who created the God particle, and McKenna’s is Cardinal Strauss (Armin Mueller-Stahl), a man of simple faith and strong will. With these parameters established and a maniacal killer loose, Angels and Demons becomes a classic beat-the-clock thriller.

The Da Vinci Code was criticized by some as an attack on Catholic theology; in Angels the attack on the church is literal and more care is taken to see faith in a positive light. In the end it doesn’t really matter much because neither film version comes close to providing the excitement of the books. One problem is Hanks; he is positively wooden as Langdon and thereby unconvincing as either a scholar or a detective. Zurer is assuredly better than was Audrey Tatou in Da Vinci Code, but there are no sparks between her and Hanks, hence there’s not much for her to do except get in harm’s way. In fact, of all the film’s central characters, only the wily Mueller-Stahl turns in a strong performance.

Howard’s direction is strong when filming action and special effects sequences, but his inability to give characters depth or coax good performances from his actors exposes major logic errors that were less noticeable in the book. What are the odds, for instance, of unraveling each clue at exactly two minutes before a cardinal is to be executed? Why does Vetra, a nuclear scientist, suddenly possess a knowledge of symbols that rivals Langdon’s? Why would an assassin shown to be completely amoral choose not to kill Langdon and Vetra simply because they aren’t armed? (Gee, I don’t know—maybe because they’re on his trail and are the only two who could stop him!) Why do plotters holding all the cards insist on planting elaborate ruses and delaying action in the first place? Are we to believe that fanatics love their games more than their causes?

For all of this, Angels and Demons has its rewards. Visually it’s a treat—a sort of Vatican travelogue merged with a sci-fi film. For all the high-falootin’ symbols, it’s also a mindless fluff, the sort of thing you can watch on a night in which you want to turn off your brain and indulge in sinful escapism. That makes it—yep!—a cosi cosa summer film. We suggest saving it for a rainy midweek evening; you can seek redemption with a better film over the weekend.

Tim Eriksen: Solo Soul

TIM ERIKSEN
Soul of the January Hills
Appleseed Recordings 1120


At the height of the folk revival there were numerous singers scouring the hills and dusty songsters in search of old ballads. Records were filled with tales of lust, adultery, unrequited love, and blood-curdling tragedy, and were populated with knights, travelers, milk-white steeds, homesick sailors, and imperiled maidens. Because they were story songs, voice and lyrics took center stage. Somewhere along the way these things gave way to slick arranging, studio production, and clever packaging. Tim Eriksen’s latest CD is a throwback—fourteen a cappella songs, many in minor keys, that resurrect the days of folk balladry and mountain gospel. His elides, dry tones, and plaintive intonations are evocative of a younger Ralph Stanley—without the band. Eriksen’s voice is a powerful instrument in its own right, though listeners weaned on thick instrumentation may find it a tough slog at first. Eriksen’s curveball take on standards such as “Amazing Grace” might also shock initially. Stick with this record until the wonderment of the narratives and the ability of the human voice to cut to the emotional quick takes hold. Could Hollywood make a better story than ”Queen Jane?” Could Nashville studio tricks make “I Wish the Wars Were All Over” more powerful? Nope!

Those living within driving distance of Albany can catch Tim Eriksen at the Old Songs festival this summer on June 26-27. If you’ve never been to Old Songs you’re missing out on both wonderful music and a nostalgia trip worth taking. As its name suggests, slickness takes a back seat at Old Songs. You get to see just how good performers are when there’s not a lot of technology around. I suspect that Eriksen will be leading sacred harp singing in the sheep barn at some point in the weekend—this is an experience not to be missed. More grace pours from that old shed than you’ll ever hear in church. The final schedule is still in progress, but check out other details here.

Another Triumph from Carrie Rodriguez

CARRIE RODRIGUEZ
Love and Circumstance
Ninth Street Opus 0001

* * * * *

I was impressed by Carrie Rodriguez’s first two records, but her latest absolutely floored me. It’s a dozen covers so skillfully done that some of the original artists might be tempted to enter the witness protection program. And it’s absolutely true to the album title; Rodriguez casts herself in the role of a take-charge lover—tender on occasion, but also one not afraid to lasso a bad boy (“Steal Your Love”), be cynical (“Waltzing for Dreamers”), or admit that she’s dangerous prey (“I’m Not for Love”). When you cover songwriters like Lucinda Williams, Richard Thompson, Ry Cooder (“Big Love”), and Townes Van Zandt (“Rex’s Blues”), you’d better have the chops to back it up. Ditto forays into iconic turf such as “I Started Loving You Again”(Merle Haggard) and “I’m So Lonesome I Could Cry” (Hank Williams). Suffice it to say that Rodriguez holds her own and more, coloring her oh-so-sweet timbre with expressive ornaments aimed at enhancing each song’s emotion core. Kudos also to producer Lee Townshend; the lush arrangements and jangly guitars on “Big Love,” “Steal Your Love,” and “I Made a Lover’s Prayer” evoke the work of Daniel Lanois, though Townshend also has the insight to let Rodriguez stretch her wings on some pure country, some indie folk, and even a Latino ballad. Rodriguez balances beauty and grit, traditional and new, complex and simple…. If this isn’t her breakthrough album there’s no justice!

Pro Sports May 1

May Day May Day

May 1 is always a good day to take stock how the hockey playoffs are going and what’s up in Major League Baseball.

No, it’s not a good time to comment on basketball; thanks to the TV contract with CBS the NBA (Numbingly Boring Association) season won’t end until two days before next season opens. The NBA is a bad product these days—horrible officiating and players who shoot handguns better than jumpers. If officials actually called traveling violations, its hyped “stars” (read LeBron James) would average 2.3 ppg. My only prediction goes out to fellow New Englanders: there’s no way the Celtics make it past Cleveland in round two.

NHL

I was way off about several predictions for the first round. I’m still stunned that New Jersey went out so quietly. Looks like Ilya Kovalchuk is as soft as critics claim. There’s a better chance you’ll see sweet corn growing in downtown Newark than Kovalchuk’s return to the Garden State. I also blew the Bruins/Sabers and Canadiens/Capitals. I really thought the Caps might make a run for the Cup; it turns out they were running for the golf course. The Bruins upset of Buffalo was less stunning given how banged up the Sabers are. I was right that the Penguins would find Ottawa pesky—a break here and there and the Pens might have gone home too. I went 4-4 in the West and pretty much called each one on the nose except I thought the Wings would dispatch Phoenix more easily.

So how about Round Two? Boston and Philly is a toss-up, but I’ll go with the latter in seven simply because the Flyers have more depth. If Tuka Rask keeps the hot hand, though, the Bruins could prevail. Montreal has given the Penguins fits all year, but the Pens should prevail on talent, unless Malkin is anxious to get back to Russia. I’ll take Pittsburgh in six.

Speaking of toss-ups, Vancouver and Chicago should be hockey at its best. It’s a shame they’re meeting in round two as they may be the best two teams in the NHL at this juncture. Just because I want to see a Canadian team move on I’ll take Vancouver in seven but the only thing that would surprise me is if the series was boring. The Red Wings looked old at times against the youthful Coyotes, but here’s betting that San Jose continues its record of losing big games: Wings in six.

MLB

It happens every April—teams not expected to do well get off to a hot start and casual fans jump on the false hopes bandwagon. The other thing that’s as predictable as an arrogant Goldman Sachs representative is that Red Sox Nation will declare the season lost after ten games (and regain their fanaticism on June 1).

Let’s start with the surprise teams and whether they will continue to startle. Toronto opened well but the wheels are already coming off. I picked them for last in the AL East. They may escape the basement, but they’re headed south. Ditto Oakland, even though it plays in the AL’s softest division. The Mets and Nationals are running 1-2 in the NL East right now. Hope they enjoy it because by June 1 they-suck-reality will have struck. And that’s truly the case for the NL West-leading Padres, who will nonetheless finish as one of the worst teams in MLB. On a more positive note, Tampa has been sizzling and though I’m not 100% sold, I may have badly underestimated the Rays. I’ll get back to you when I see what happens when Tampa gets bloodied in a Fenway or Yankee Stadium series—an inevitability in a long season. The other team that may fare better than I predicted is the Angels—not because they are particularly good, but because Texas and Seattle might not be any better.

The latter two teams are teetering on the Red Alert list. It’s only April and Texas pitching is already suspect. If Feldman, Harrison, and Harden don’t pick it up, it will be a very long summer. It may be time to trade one of their catchers for a proven arm; if the Red Sox dangle Buchholz, jump! Seattle has injuries galore, but there’s a bad vibe pall hanging over the Mariners. A .244 team batting average isn’t good enough to win. Another surprising Red Alert team is the Braves, my pick for the NL Wild Card. They’ve not pitched or fielded well, and only one starter (Prado) is hitting over .300—not good! And then there are the Reds, with a team ERA of nearly six, no starter hitting over .280, and a drug scandal hanging over a top pitcher (Volquez). If these patterns continue into June it might be time to blow up this team. For sheer incompetence, the Orioles take the cake. April was simply brutal for the O’s. We knew that their young pitchers might not be ready, but this team has too much talent to be this bad. Look for Dave Trembley to be among the first managers fired. I suppose one could also call the Cubs and Astros disappointments, though I never expected much from either. I’ve also been on the money that the Dodgers have less than meets the eye. Then there are the Royals and Pirates. Both have less talent than Taylor Swift, which is to say none. It’s criminal that either franchise is allowed to use an MLB logo.

The Giants and Twins have been pretty much as good as I thought, though I predict both will get better. Barry Zito is 3-0 and the Giants’ team ERA is under three; if this team hits moderately well it will win the NL West. And look for the Twins to begin their annual surge around mid-June. The Phillies have been uneven, but this is a glitch; this team is way too good and will catch fire when the air heats up. So will Albert Pujols of the Cardinals and that’s just scary as the dude is already playing like what he is: the best that MLB has to offer.

Okay East Coast fans, the moment you’ve been waiting for: Yankees and Red Sox updates. The skinny is that both will be fine. The Red Sox pitching is simply too good for this team to have long slumps and the Yankees will club their way up the ladder, particularly when Teixeira and A-Rod warm up. The open question is which team’s weaknesses might allow Tampa to get to the postseason.

Steal should be taken literally in the Red Sox’s case. Let’s not mince words—their catching couldn’t throw out a one-legged dog. They may need to eat PED-boy Ortiz’s contract, move Victor Martinez to DH, and get a catcher. They also need another bat; they’re deluded if they think Beltre, Scutaro, and Varitek will continue their pace (or Pedroia for that matter). The rest are what they are—average to mediocre, except for Youkilis. I’d bet the farm that he’s over .300 by season’s end.

The Yankees need Granderson to be more consistent, but that may not be in his makeup. And I don’t like any of the other offseason moves. Guess what? Nick Johnson has health issues! Who could have predicted that? Is it too early to say that Javier Vasquez II isn’t much better than the first time around? If there’s an opportunity to send him back to the NL, take it—Sergio Mirtre can give as many innings as Javy. That said, with guys slumping the Yanks are still leading the league in on-base percentage and are among the leaders in slugging and team average. Robbie Cano is the best second baseman in baseball, Andy Pettite has been awesome, Jeter continues to dazzle, Posada is playing like he’s 25, and there’s always Mariano. Be afraid… be very afraid.