Cut-and-paste lies did not work!!

Why the next four years would be different

because the next four years would not start with the economy in free-fall

If only Obama

From the transcript, about a quarter of the way through the Presidential debate October 3rd:

MR. ROMNEY: Number two, let's look at history. My plan is not like anything that's been tried before. My plan is to bring down rates but also bring down deductions and exemptions and credits at the same time so the revenue stays in, but that we bring down rates to get more people working.

 

If only Obama had pointed out that Romney's plan to "bring down rates to get more people working" HAS in fact been tried before. Regan tried it (remember the 'Laffer curve'?) and Bush tried it. They have also tried it in recent years in Britain and elsewhere.

Every time it has been tried, the policy of cutting taxes or tax rates has resulted in ballooning deficits.  Even when accompanied by savagely reduced government spending, as in Britain, reducing taxes DOES NOT result in compensating higher growth of the economy. This is supply-side "fairy dust" and it does not work.

If the new wrinkle is that the existing "revenue stays in" then how, exactly, is that supposed to put more money in people's pockets to create the predicted economic growth? How does that "get more people working"? It doesn't !
 
How can you cut rates by 20 percent and keep the same revenue anyway? Eliminating deductions can't do it. There simply are not enough deductions available to compensate for a 20 percent drop. Deficits increase,  rolling into an INCREASINGLY inflated debt.
 
 

Rep vs Dem model of how economy works

The pending American election poses one big question:

How to strengthen the economy ?

The answer depends on how you think the economy works.


***

Republicans think it all comes down to motivation: They believe that many people will work hard and be productive if, and only if, the alternative is starvation. According to this world view BOTH eventual success AND opportunity in the first place are created by effort alone.

In this model of the world the Haitian economy is a mess because people have found a way to subsist with minimal effort. Stop enabling this and everyone will get up off their ass and get to work.

Romney’s magic formula for economic recovery is to make real the threat that your children will starve if you don’t hustle; In his worldview, that hustle is the ONLY missing element for economic recovery.

  

***

Democrats have a different model: They believe that effort, though necessary, is not sufficient. Building a business also requires access to consumers, to a workforce with relevant skills, to affordable credit, to usable public infrastructure and to physical security.

Most of all it requires a functional education.
 
Democrats believe that government has a unique role to play in removing barriers to entry to the world of productive activity. Locked doors stand between many people and the marketplace; Government unlocks them.

 

Reince Priebus

Perhaps the GOP's Reince Priebus is trying to hide an uncomfortable truth... He is a secret greenie!


Reince Priebus
=
Prince Rebus [i.e.
 I b Prince ReUse]

 

or
maybe he actually is cold hearted...

Reince Priebus
=
Brine super ice

Justice and Mercy

By the end of his book Haight was representing Liberals as believers in equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome. He did not acknowledge the change in his position, though, so I wonder if the chapter 7 statements reflected an overlooked residual, pre-edit state ?

Anyway I still disagree with the author about a few points. He contrasts what he describes as a liberal lack of some kinds of moral measurement with more numerous conservative dimensions of morality as if these were opposing responses. I actually believe that mercy is often applied by liberals only after they have gone through the same justice calculations as conservatives. In the courts, 'sentencing' follows 'conviction', it is not an alternative to conviction.
 
This is not just a metaphor; Conservatives are much more likely to favour mandatory sentencing for crimes. Liberals can also believe an act is wrong, but ask that before we condemn the actor let us remember that the guilty are sometimes confused by complexity, mistaken about missing information or constrained by the power of others. These conditions do not make an act less wrong, but they may mitigate punishment.

For liberals guilt and knowledge are matters of degree. For conservatives, these are absolutes. Haight is mistaken when he describes Liberals as less complex or less nuanced than Conservatives.

Jonathan Haidt and the Righteous Mind

I am about halfway through "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion” by Jonathan Haidt. So far it has been quite persuasive, but I just stubbed my toe on chapter 7: The moral foundation of politics.
Haight says:

“Everyone cares about fairness, but there are two major kinds. On the left, fairness often implies equality, but on the right it means proportionality – people should be rewarded in proportion to what they contribute, even if that guarentees unequal outcomes.”

  
I myself have NOT observed that “On the left, fairness often implies equality” of outcomes. Perhaps a handfull of communists believed that generations ago, far away across the planet but no-one I’ve ever met thinks it would be a good idea.
 

My left-leaning friends are just fine with unequal outcomes. What they do want to see is widely available opportunity… access… having a chance.

 

What anyone does with opportunity is up to the individual. We benefit from rewards earned by our own effort and skill. It is, however, profoundly unfair to condemn to eternal misery someone who was never allowed to compete in the first place, or who ran handicapped by illiteracy, bigotry, malnutrition or illness.

  
Taxation is NOT about redistribution of wealth.
It IS about removing barriers to competition and supporting a democratically designed institutional framework of opportunity and accountability for everyone. It is about public health and safety. It is about maintaining the system that made your own acheivements possible.  

   

Haight claims to have been raised a liberal, then he says things like this. It is not the first time in this book that I have questioned his statements, but this one is outrageous.