Posted on 07/22/2004 6:47:58 AM PDT by AdrianSpidle
Guys, you've got to read this:
THE KILLER REPUBLICAN ECONOMIC ARGUMENT
http://pep.typepad.com/public_enquiry_project/2004/07/the_killer_repu.html
Read what?
Try a little cut and paste tactic on the url, then hit enter.
Wassamattau?
July 22, 2004
THE KILLER REPUBLICAN ECONOMIC ARGUMENT
As my neighbors and I brace for the physical impact of the DNC here in the Boston area, I'm trying to get emotionally ready for what I know will be egregiously inaccurate economic arguments - DEMOCRATANOMICS - formed in part by my brother-in-law Prof Brad Delong of UC Berkley and former Asst Treasury Secretary in the Clinton administration.
There are two huge fallacies in their economic arguments that need to be directly addressed by Bush supporters:
1 - YOU CAN'T ASSIGN ECONOMIC EFFECTS TO SIMULTANEOUS POLICY CHANGES. There is always a time delay between when economic policy changes occur and when their effects show up in the economy. This delay is determined by the relative value of the economic momentum of the policy change and the existing economic momentum in the economy as a whole as well as the value and direction of any other economic events such as the internet bubble burst and 911.
I've proposed ADRIAN'S THEORY OF ECONOMIC MOMENTUM which provides a framework for actually measuring and predicting these effects... see below.
The political points to be made are:
A - The great bust of 2001 was the result of the decision of the Clinton administration to not take a recession in 1996 or 1997 which allowed the runaway boom (accelerating economic momentum) that crashed so devistatingly in 2001.
B - This decision is directly responsible for the devestation that was subsequently afflicted on the American job market.
2 - THE BULK OF TAX CUT ECONOMIC STIMULATION RESULTS FROM THE MOTIVATION OF THE INVESTOR CLASS TO INVEST THEIR RESOURCES BECAUSE OF THE INCREASED RETURN THAT COMES FROM MARGINAL TAX RATE CUTS AND NOT THE SPENDING OF TAX REFUNDS.
This means that the Bush tax cuts which are derogated as "a give away to the rich" were exactly the best possible tax cuts if improving our economy is your primary goal. I assert that this is never the Democrats primary goal and that their main goal is always to buy votes and pay off supporters.
THIS ISN'T SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND so let's not let the Democrats get away with their silly and dangerous DEMOCRATANOMICS.
Adrian's law of economic momentum
1 - An economy in motion tends to stay in motion in the same direction.
2 - This is a measurable factor called economic momentum.
3 - ECONOMIC MOMENTUM = the rate of change of the economy times the level of the economy; or
EM = THE CHANGE IN GNP OVER A TIME PERIOD X THE VALUE OF THE GNP
The first factor is an differential and the second factor is an integral.
4 - This results in a graphable curve that would allow us to relate economic shocks and effects solving the time delay problem in relating economic levels and administration actions.
Adrian the commonsense economist
I guess there are many that aren't aware of cut & paste, or won't bother to read an article they just can't "click" on. ;)
Just kidding!
I think I really nailed him last time we argued tax cuts, with my question "Do you really want your employer to be the declared enemy of this country's tax policy?" You know, brother, the dude who signs your checks?"
The Republicans are killing the economy?
Huh? And just what was Clinton supposed to have done to "take a recession?" The main economic policy happening of that time was that a Republican Congress had balanced the budget, reformed welfare, and cut taxes, all over the bitter opposition, naturally, of Clinton and the dems. Inflation and unemployment were low, the budget was balanced, the dollar was strong, etc. Pretty good times. The Gingrich-Armey boom.
It will take wiser heads than mine to sort out and properly weigh the contributing factors to the bubble. I suppose the natural tendency of a long boom to overshoot is one ingredient. The dotcoms overheated and the Y2K maneuvering figured in as well. I suppose it is a fair criticism that the feds were asleep at the switch on unsound public offerings and the Enron-Worldcom cooking of the books, but that's not the same thing as saying that the government should have deliberately "taken a recession."
And then there are those who don't post the entire articles in order to generate hits on their websites. Then there are those who do it to lure conservatives to sites with viruses or pop ups. Then there are those too lazy to post the entire article. Then there are those who won't take the time to learn HTML protocol. Then there are those not intelligent enough to learn HTML. Then there are...
Just click on the source title...it is designed to direct you to the page.
The website is the poster's personal blog. He's just trying to generate hits. He's using FR for free advertising. That's why he didn't want the article reprinted on FR>
Besides, the article is pure sophomoric ecoblab.
Okay! ... Okay! I give up!
And some, like me, who can't keep their big mouths shut. ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.