Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
One Winged Egret
![]()
![]()
I'm reasonably sure the road are newer than that, so it probably doesn't have much correlation.
Senator Sanders's Proposed Policies and Economic Growth
. Romer & Romer analyze Gerald Friedman's evaluation of Sanders's policies (5.3% growth and 300,000 jobs/monthly!). Both are economics professors at UC Berkeley, and Christina Romer was chair of the Council of Economic Advisers. They conclude that:
Second, in assuming that demand stimulus can raise output 37% over the next 10 years relative to the Congressional Budget Office’s baseline forecast, Friedman is implicitly assuming that the U.S. economy is (and will continue to be for a long time) dramatically below its productive capacity. However, while some output gap likely still exists, the plausible range for the output gap is much too small to accommodate demand effects nearly as large as Friedman finds. As a result, capacity constraints would likely lead to inflation and the Federal Reserve raising interest rates long before such high growth rates were realized.
Third, a realistic examination of the impact of the Sanders policies on the economy’s productive capacity suggests those effects are likely to be small at best, and possibly even negative.
I believe the usual procedure is for Sanders supporters to find some tenuous connection of the authors' to Hillary Clinton or the ebil DNC, and thus dismiss the whole report as fabricated.
Schild und Schwert der ParteiSanders' policies are indeed aimed primarily at the demand side, and assume a great deal of slack production capacity and slack labor force participation. It is the opinion of many of the cited economists that, while we may have had such slack eight years ago, it has atrophied, and if we try to force 5% catchup growth, we'll run into a hard wall of supply capacity before we return to the GDP trend as of 2006.
edited 26th Feb '16 5:00:58 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Okay. Who upgraded the Robot's software?
Seriously, I wonder if Rubio had hit the Despair Event Horizon before the debate and went in with a pure give-no-fucks attitude, because that's the best explanation I can come up with for Rubio suddenly turning around and whacking Trump like that.
Rubio emptied a whole fighter jet's worth of missiles on Trump in...what, 3 minutes?
And to get a nice look into my parents' heads-they think that Rubio was "being mean" by saying that Trump has never worked for any of the money he has, and because of this Rubio is a socialist. Srsly.
"Somehow the hated have to walk a tightrope, while those who hate do not."Krugman: Twilight of the Apparatchiks
To summarize, the Republican Party elite is mainly made up of people who've gotten their comfortable positions by repeating the establishment's orthodoxy to each other and to the media ad nauseam. "Lower taxes, less government, fewer entitlements." They have become convinced that, because they believe in this wholeheartedly (or at least as long as they get paid for believing it), that the voters share their concerns. Unfortunately, this is false, and it's created a monstrous blind spot.
Rubio is the apotheosis of this ideology. He thinks that, by attacking Trump's "conservative credentials", he can win over voters who have, in the minds of Rubio's associates, been deluded by his stardom, blinded by his appeal to baser emotions. But he's wrong in very fundamental ways. The typical voter who supports Trump:
- Does not care about "small government". They are fine with Social Security, Medicare, welfare, etc., in a general sense. They just don't want it going to blacks and Hispanics.
- Does not care about "supporting the free market" through tax breaks and whatnot. Many of them probably agree that Big Business is just as much a problem as Big Government.
- May or may not be motivated by religious dog whistles, such as abortion, but is deeply homophobic.
- Is deeply racist and/or misogynistic, whether they consciously recognize it or not.
- Is utterly disgusted with the political establishment in general and its patent corruption and alienation from the needs of the American people.
Edited to fix a few things.
edited 26th Feb '16 7:00:20 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
The NYT looked through some polls and reported that Trump supporters are the most reactionary on basically all social issues
– a third of them wish the South had won the Civil War, want to ban gays and lesbians from entering the US, think the Japanese internment camps were dope, etc.
edited 26th Feb '16 6:49:10 AM by majoraoftime
