Paul Krugman, The New York Times, January 14, 2008
Suddenly, the economic consensus seems to be that the implosion of the housing market will indeed push the U.S. economy into a recession, and that it”s quite possible that we’re already in one. As a result, over the next few weeks we’ll be hearing a lot about plans for economic stimulus.
Since this is an election year, the debate over how to stimulate the economy is inevitably tied up with politics. And here”s a modest suggestion for political reporters. Instead of trying to divine the candidates” characters by scrutinizing their tone of voice and facial expressions, why not pay attention to what they say about economic policy?
In fact, recent statements by the candidates and their surrogates about the economy are quite revealing.
Take, for example, John McCain”s admission that economics isn”t his thing. “The issue of economics is not something I”ve understood as well as I should,” he says. “I’ve got Greenspan”s book.”
His self-deprecating humor is attractive, as always. But shouldn’t we worry about a candidate who’s so out of touch that he regards Mr. Bubble, the man who refused to regulate subprime lending and assured us that there was at most some “froth” in the housing market, as a source of sage advice?
I’m surprised Krugman doesn’t understand economic policy. Anyone with half a brain can see that the gush of dollars being added to the economy over the last few years is causing this recession. Proof of this is provided by the gold and oil price repeatedly hitting new highs.
Since the rich pay most of the taxes, and provide jobs, isn’t it a shocking idea that they might stimulate the economy if given tax cuts?
Krugman likes one of the hated rich, Hillary Clinton. Is that allowed?
Not one word about reducing the size of govt as a way to release money into the private sector, where the jobs are created.
Not one word about killing inflation.
I read every word. What a waste of time.
Comment by grimgold — January 14, 2008 @ 10:06 am
Grim worte: “Since the rich pay most of the taxes, and provide jobs, isn’t it a shocking idea that they might stimulate the economy if given tax cuts?”
Grim, the rich have gotten enormous tax cuts over the past seven years and good-paying jobs are still being eliminated or flying overseas. I know of several people who were making $70K and up in IT; now their jobs are being done by Indians in Bombay and New Delhi earning $20,000 per year.
If you tied tax cuts to providing work for Americans, you might have something, but that’s not the case these days.
As a portion of their income, the rich also don’t pay most of the taxes — they have a top rate of 35 percent, but most rich people pay nowhere near that amount. After taking all of the tax dodges available for the wealthy, some pay next to nothing in taxes. The tax burden in this country is borne mainly by the middle class, and that strata of society is getting thinner every day — that’s why we’re in a recession heading to a depression.
Comment by RS Janes — January 14, 2008 @ 7:25 pm
I think that Mccain would have been the end of our economy. He was nothing more than the puppet of his senior advisers.
Comment by beau — February 22, 2009 @ 4:48 pm