FRIHOST • FORUMS • SEARCH • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Economists Object to Obama's $Trillion+ Spending Plan





jmi256
It seems that Obama has tried to spin his spend and tax plan as something that economists agree as on as a good move. The facts is that there are many, many economists, some of who are Nobel Laureates, who disagree with the plan to increase the US government's spending and therefore taxation of her citizens.

The "plan" that Obama and the Democrats have put out stimulates government spending, not the overall economy, and has long-term negative consequences. It's turning into Obama and the Democrats' common MO to use lies and distortions to further their agendas.

Source = http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf

Quote:

"There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy."
— PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA, JANUARY 9 , 2009

With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true.
Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan's "lost decade" in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

• Burton Abrams, Univ. of Delaware
• Douglas Adie, Ohio University
• Ryan Amacher, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
• J.J. Arias, Georgia College & State University
• Howard Baetjer, Jr., Towson University
• Stacie Beck, Univ. of Delaware
• Don Bellante, Univ. of South Florida
• James Bennett, George Mason University
• Bruce Benson, Florida State University
• Sanjai Bhagat, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
• Mark Bils, Univ. of Rochester
• Alberto Bisin, New York University
• Walter Block, Loyola University New Orleans
• Cecil Bohanon, Ball State University
• Michele Boldrin, Washington University in St. Louis
• Donald Booth, Chapman University
• Michael Bordo, Rutgers University
• Samuel Bostaph, Univ. of Dallas
• Scott Bradford, Brigham Young University
• Genevieve Briand, Eastern Washington University
• George Brower, Moravian College
• James Buchanan, Nobel laureate
• Richard Burdekin, Claremont McKenna College
• Henry Butler, Northwestern University
• William Butos, Trinity College
• Peter Calcagno, College of Charleston
• Bryan Caplan, George Mason University
• Art Carden, Rhodes College
• James Cardon, Brigham Young University
• Dustin Chambers, Salisbury University
• Emily Chamlee-Wright, Beloit College
• V.V. Chari, Univ. of Minnesota
• Barry Chiswick, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
• Lawrence Cima, John Carroll University
• J.R. Clark, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
• Gian Luca Clementi, New York University
• R. Morris Coats, Nicholls State University
• John Cochran, Metropolitan State College
• John Cochrane, Univ. of Chicago
• John Cogan, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
• John Coleman, Duke University
• Boyd Collier, Tarleton State University
• Robert Collinge, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
• Lee Coppock, Univ. of Virginia
• Mario Crucini, Vanderbilt University
• Christopher Culp, Univ. of Chicago
• Kirby Cundiff, Northeastern State University
• Antony Davies, Duquesne University
• John Dawson, Appalachian State University
• Clarence Deitsch, Ball State University
• Arthur Diamond, Jr., Univ. of Nebraska at Omaha
• John Dobra, Univ. of Nevada, Reno
• James Dorn, Towson University
• Christopher Douglas, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
• Floyd Duncan, Virginia Military Institute
• Francis Egan, Trinity College
• John Egger, Towson University
• Kenneth Elzinga, Univ. of Virginia
• Paul Evans, Ohio State University
• Eugene Fama, Univ. of Chicago
• W. Ken Farr, Georgia College & State University
• Hartmut Fischer, Univ. of San Francisco
• Fred Foldvary, Santa Clara University
• Murray Frank, Univ. of Minnesota
• Peter Frank, Wingate University
• Timothy Fuerst, Bowling Green State University
• B. Delworth Gardner, Brigham Young University
• John Garen, Univ. of Kentucky
• Rick Geddes, Cornell University
• Aaron Gellman, Northwestern University
• William Gerdes, Clarke College
• Michael Gibbs, Univ. of Chicago
• Stephan Gohmann, Univ. of Louisville
• Rodolfo Gonzalez, San Jose State University
• Richard Gordon, Penn State University
• Peter Gordon, Univ. of Southern California
• Ernie Goss, Creighton University
• Paul Gregory, Univ. of Houston
• Earl Grinols, Baylor University
• Daniel Gropper, Auburn University
• R.W. Hafer, Southern Illinois
• University, Edwardsville
• Arthur Hall, Univ. of Kansas
• Steve Hanke, Johns Hopkins
• Stephen Happel, Arizona State University
• Frank Hefner, College of Charleston
• Ronald Heiner, George Mason University
• David Henderson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
• Robert Herren, North Dakota State University
• Gailen Hite, Columbia University
• Steven Horwitz, St. Lawrence University
• John Howe, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia
• Jeffrey Hummel, San Jose State University
• Bruce Hutchinson, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
• Brian Jacobsen, Wisconsin Lutheran College
• Jason Johnston, Univ. of Pennsylvania
• Boyan Jovanovic, New York University
• Jonathan Karpoff, Univ. of Washington
• Barry Keating, Univ. of Notre Dame
• Naveen Khanna, Michigan State University
• Nicholas Kiefer, Cornell University
• Daniel Klein, George Mason University
• Paul Koch, Univ. of Kansas
• Narayana Kocherlakota, Univ. of Minnesota
• Marek Kolar, Delta College
• Roger Koppl, Fairleigh Dickinson University
• Kishore Kulkarni, Metropolitan State College of Denver
• Deepak Lal, UCLA
• George Langelett, South Dakota State University
• James Larriviere, Spring Hill College
• Robert Lawson, Auburn University
• John Levendis, Loyola University New Orleans
• David Levine, Washington University in St. Louis
• Peter Lewin, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
• Dean Lillard, Cornell University
• Zheng Liu, Emory University
• Alan Lockard, Binghampton University
• Edward Lopez, San Jose State University
• John Lunn, Hope College
• Glenn MacDonald, Washington
• University in St. Louis
• Michael Marlow, California
• Polytechnic State University
• Deryl Martin, Tennessee Tech University
• Dale Matcheck, Northwood University
• Deirdre McCloskey, Univ. of Illinois, Chicago
• John McDermott, Univ. of South Carolina
• Joseph McGarrity, Univ. of Central Arkansas
• Roger Meiners, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
• Allan Meltzer, Carnegie Mellon University
• John Merrifield, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
• James Miller III, George Mason University
• Jeffrey Miron, Harvard University
• Thomas Moeller, Texas Christian University
• John Moorhouse, Wake Forest University
• Andrea Moro, Vanderbilt University
• Andrew Morriss, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
• Michael Munger, Duke University
• Kevin Murphy, Univ. of Southern California
• Richard Muth, Emory University
• Charles Nelson, Univ. of Washington
• Seth Norton, Wheaton College
• Lee Ohanian, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
• Lydia Ortega, San Jose State University
• Evan Osborne, Wright State University
• Randall Parker, East Carolina University
• Donald Parsons, George Washington University
• Sam Peltzman, Univ. of Chicago
• Mark Perry, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
• Christopher Phelan, Univ. of Minnesota
• Gordon Phillips, Univ. of Maryland
• Michael Pippenger, Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks
• Tomasz Piskorski, Columbia University
• Brennan Platt, Brigham Young University
• Joseph Pomykala, Towson University
• William Poole, Univ. of Delaware
• Barry Poulson, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
• Benjamin Powell, Suffolk University
• Edward Prescott, Nobel laureate
• Gary Quinlivan, Saint Vincent College
• Reza Ramazani, Saint Michael's College
• Adriano Rampini, Duke University
• Eric Rasmusen, Indiana University
• Mario Rizzo, New York University
• Richard Roll, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
• Robert Rossana, Wayne State University
• James Roumasset, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa
• John Rowe, Univ. of South Florida
• Charles Rowley, George Mason University
• Juan Rubio-Ramirez, Duke University
• Roy Ruffin, Univ. of Houston
• Kevin Salyer, Univ. of California, Davis
• Pavel Savor, Univ. of Pennsylvania
• Ronald Schmidt, Univ. of Rochester
• Carlos Seiglie, Rutgers University
• William Shughart II, Univ. of Mississippi
• Charles Skipton, Univ. of Tampa
• James Smith, Western Carolina University
• Vernon Smith, Nobel laureate
• Lawrence Southwick, Jr., Univ. at Buffalo
• Dean Stansel, Florida Gulf Coast University
• Houston Stokes, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
• Brian Strow, Western Kentucky University
• Shirley Svorny, California State
• University, Northridge
• John Tatom, Indiana State University
• Wade Thomas, State University of New York at Oneonta
• Henry Thompson, Auburn University
• Alex Tokarev, The King's College
• Edward Tower, Duke University
• Leo Troy, Rutgers University
• David Tuerck, Suffolk University
• Charlotte Twight, Boise State University
• Kamal Upadhyaya, Univ. of New Haven
• Charles Upton, Kent State University
• T. Norman Van Cott, Ball State University
• Richard Vedder, Ohio University
• Richard Wagner, George Mason University
• Douglas M. Walker, College of Charleston
• Douglas O. Walker, Regent University
• Christopher Westley, Jacksonville State University
• Lawrence White, Univ. of Missouri at St. Louis
• Walter Williams, George Mason University
• Doug Wills, Univ. of Washington Tacoma
• Dennis Wilson, Western Kentucky University
• Gary Wolfram, Hillsdale College
• Huizhong Zhou, Western Michigan University

Additional economists who have signed the statement
• Lee Adkins, Oklahoma State University
• William Albrecht, Univ. of Iowa
• Donald Alexander, Western Michigan University
• Geoffrey Andron, Austin Community College
• Nathan Ashby, Univ. of Texas at El Paso
• George Averitt, Purdue North Central University
• Charles Baird, California State University, East Bay
• Timothy Bastian, Creighton University
• Joe Bell, Missouri State University, Springfield
• John Bethune, Barton College
• Robert Bise, Orange Coast College
• Karl Borden, University of Nebraska
• Donald Boudreaux, George Mason University
• Ivan Brick, Rutgers University
• Phil Bryson, Brigham Young University
• Richard Burkhauser, Cornell University
• Edwin Burton, Univ. of Virginia
• Jim Butkiewicz, Univ. of Delaware
• Richard Cebula, Armstrong Atlantic State University
• Don Chance, Louisiana State University
• Robert Chatfield, Univ. of Nevada, Las Vegas
• Lloyd Cohen, George Mason University
• Peter Colwell, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
• Michael Connolly, Univ. of Miami
• Jim Couch, Univ. of North Alabama
• Eleanor Craig, Univ. of Delaware
• Michael Daniels, Columbus State University
• A. Edward Day, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
• Stephen Dempsey, Univ. of Vermont
• Allan DeSerpa, Arizona State University
• William Dewald, Ohio State University
• Jeff Dorfman, Univ. of Georgia
• Lanny Ebenstein, Univ. of California, Santa Barbara
• Michael Erickson, The College of Idaho
• Jack Estill, San Jose State University
• Dorla Evans, Univ. of Alabama in Huntsville
• Frank Falero, California State University, Bakersfield
• Daniel Feenberg, National Bureau of Economic Research
• Eric Fisher, California Polytechnic State University
• Arthur Fleisher, Metropolitan State College of Denver
• William Ford, Middle Tennessee State University
• Ralph Frasca, Univ. of Dayton
• Joseph Giacalone, St. John's University
• Adam Gifford, California State Unviersity, Northridge
• Otis Gilley, Louisiana Tech University
• J. Edward Graham, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
• Richard Grant, Lipscomb University
• Gauri-Shankar Guha, Arkansas State University
• Darren Gulla, Univ. of Kentucky
• Dennis Halcoussis, California State University, Northridge
• Richard Hart, Miami University
• James Hartley, Mount Holyoke College
• Thomas Hazlett, George Mason University
• Scott Hein, Texas Tech University
• Bradley Hobbs, Florida Gulf Coast University
• John Hoehn, Michigan State University
• Daniel Houser, George Mason University
• Thomas Howard, University of Denver
• Chris Hughen, Univ. of Denver
• Marcus Ingram, Univ. of Tampa
• Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma State University
• Sherry Jarrell, Wake Forest University
• Scott Kelly, Albany State University
• Carrie Kerekes, Florida Gulf Coast University
• Robert Krol, California State University, Northridge
• James Kurre, Penn State Erie
• Tom Lehman, Indiana Wesleyan University
• W. Cris Lewis, Utah State University
• Stan Liebowitz, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
• Anthony Losasso, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
• John Lott, Jr., Univ. of Maryland
• Keith Malone, Univ. of North Alabama
• Henry Manne, George Mason University
• Richard Marcus, Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
• James Barney Marsh, University of Hawaii at Manoa
• Timothy Mathews, Kennesaw State University
• John Matsusaka, Univ. of Southern California
• Thomas Mayor, Univ. of Houston
• John McConnell, Purdue University
• W. Douglas McMillin, Louisiana State University
• Mario Miranda, The Ohio State University
• Ed Miseta, Penn State Erie
• James Moncur, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa
• Charles Moss, Univ. of Florida
• Tim Muris, George Mason University
• John Murray, Univ. of Toledo
• David Mustard, Univ. of Georgia
• Steven Myers, Univ. of Akron
• Dhananjay Nanda, University of Miami
• Stephen Parente, Univ. of Minnesota
• Allen Parkman, Univ. of New Mexico
• Douglas Patterson, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and University
• Timothy Perri, Appalachian State University
• Mark Pingle, Univ. of Nevada, Reno
• Ivan Pongracic, Hillsdale College
• Robert Prati, East Carolina University
• Richard Rawlins, Missouri Southern State University
• Thomas Rhee, California State University, Long Beach
• Christine Ries, Georgia Institute of Technology
• Nancy Roberts, Arizona State University
• Larry Ross, Univ. of Alaska Anchorage
• Timothy Roth, Univ. of Texas at El Paso
• Atulya Sarin, Santa Clara University
• Thomas Saving, Texas A&M University
• Eric Schansberg, Indiana University Southeast
• John Seater, North Carolina University
• Alan Shapiro, Univ. of Southern California
• Thomas Simmons, Greenfield Community College
• W. James Smith, University of Colorado Denver
• Frank Spreng, McKendree University
• Judith Staley Brenneke, John Carroll University
• John E. Stapleford, Eastern University
• Courtenay Stone, Ball State University
• Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, UCLA
• Scott Sumner, Bentley University
• Clifford Thies, Shenandoah University
• William Trumbull, West Virginia University
• A. Sinan Unur, Cornell University
• Randall Valentine, Georgia Southwestern State University
• Gustavo Ventura, Univ. of Iowa
• Marc Weidenmier, Claremont McKenna College
• Robert Whaples, Wake Forest University
• Gene Wunder, Washburn University
• John Zdanowicz, Florida International University
• Jerry Zimmerman, Univ. of Rochester
• Joseph Zoric, Franciscan University of Steubenville
deanhills
jmi256 wrote:
It seems that Obama has tried to spin his spend and tax plan as something that economists agree as on as a good move. The facts is that there are many, many economists, some of who are Nobel Laureates, who disagree with the plan to increase the US government's spending and therefore taxation of her citizens.

The "plan" that Obama and the Democrats have put out stimulates government spending, not the overall economy, and has long-term negative consequences. It's turning into Obama and the Democrats' common MO to use lies and distortions to further their agendas.

Source = http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf

Quote:

"There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy."
— PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBAMA, JANUARY 9 , 2009

With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true.
Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan's "lost decade" in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

• Burton Abrams, Univ. of Delaware
• Douglas Adie, Ohio University
• Ryan Amacher, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
• J.J. Arias, Georgia College & State University
• Howard Baetjer, Jr., Towson University
• Stacie Beck, Univ. of Delaware
• Don Bellante, Univ. of South Florida
• James Bennett, George Mason University
• Bruce Benson, Florida State University
• Sanjai Bhagat, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
• Mark Bils, Univ. of Rochester
• Alberto Bisin, New York University
• Walter Block, Loyola University New Orleans
• Cecil Bohanon, Ball State University
• Michele Boldrin, Washington University in St. Louis
• Donald Booth, Chapman University
• Michael Bordo, Rutgers University
• Samuel Bostaph, Univ. of Dallas
• Scott Bradford, Brigham Young University
• Genevieve Briand, Eastern Washington University
• George Brower, Moravian College
• James Buchanan, Nobel laureate
• Richard Burdekin, Claremont McKenna College
• Henry Butler, Northwestern University
• William Butos, Trinity College
• Peter Calcagno, College of Charleston
• Bryan Caplan, George Mason University
• Art Carden, Rhodes College
• James Cardon, Brigham Young University
• Dustin Chambers, Salisbury University
• Emily Chamlee-Wright, Beloit College
• V.V. Chari, Univ. of Minnesota
• Barry Chiswick, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
• Lawrence Cima, John Carroll University
• J.R. Clark, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
• Gian Luca Clementi, New York University
• R. Morris Coats, Nicholls State University
• John Cochran, Metropolitan State College
• John Cochrane, Univ. of Chicago
• John Cogan, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
• John Coleman, Duke University
• Boyd Collier, Tarleton State University
• Robert Collinge, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
• Lee Coppock, Univ. of Virginia
• Mario Crucini, Vanderbilt University
• Christopher Culp, Univ. of Chicago
• Kirby Cundiff, Northeastern State University
• Antony Davies, Duquesne University
• John Dawson, Appalachian State University
• Clarence Deitsch, Ball State University
• Arthur Diamond, Jr., Univ. of Nebraska at Omaha
• John Dobra, Univ. of Nevada, Reno
• James Dorn, Towson University
• Christopher Douglas, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
• Floyd Duncan, Virginia Military Institute
• Francis Egan, Trinity College
• John Egger, Towson University
• Kenneth Elzinga, Univ. of Virginia
• Paul Evans, Ohio State University
• Eugene Fama, Univ. of Chicago
• W. Ken Farr, Georgia College & State University
• Hartmut Fischer, Univ. of San Francisco
• Fred Foldvary, Santa Clara University
• Murray Frank, Univ. of Minnesota
• Peter Frank, Wingate University
• Timothy Fuerst, Bowling Green State University
• B. Delworth Gardner, Brigham Young University
• John Garen, Univ. of Kentucky
• Rick Geddes, Cornell University
• Aaron Gellman, Northwestern University
• William Gerdes, Clarke College
• Michael Gibbs, Univ. of Chicago
• Stephan Gohmann, Univ. of Louisville
• Rodolfo Gonzalez, San Jose State University
• Richard Gordon, Penn State University
• Peter Gordon, Univ. of Southern California
• Ernie Goss, Creighton University
• Paul Gregory, Univ. of Houston
• Earl Grinols, Baylor University
• Daniel Gropper, Auburn University
• R.W. Hafer, Southern Illinois
• University, Edwardsville
• Arthur Hall, Univ. of Kansas
• Steve Hanke, Johns Hopkins
• Stephen Happel, Arizona State University
• Frank Hefner, College of Charleston
• Ronald Heiner, George Mason University
• David Henderson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
• Robert Herren, North Dakota State University
• Gailen Hite, Columbia University
• Steven Horwitz, St. Lawrence University
• John Howe, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia
• Jeffrey Hummel, San Jose State University
• Bruce Hutchinson, Univ. of Tennessee at Chattanooga
• Brian Jacobsen, Wisconsin Lutheran College
• Jason Johnston, Univ. of Pennsylvania
• Boyan Jovanovic, New York University
• Jonathan Karpoff, Univ. of Washington
• Barry Keating, Univ. of Notre Dame
• Naveen Khanna, Michigan State University
• Nicholas Kiefer, Cornell University
• Daniel Klein, George Mason University
• Paul Koch, Univ. of Kansas
• Narayana Kocherlakota, Univ. of Minnesota
• Marek Kolar, Delta College
• Roger Koppl, Fairleigh Dickinson University
• Kishore Kulkarni, Metropolitan State College of Denver
• Deepak Lal, UCLA
• George Langelett, South Dakota State University
• James Larriviere, Spring Hill College
• Robert Lawson, Auburn University
• John Levendis, Loyola University New Orleans
• David Levine, Washington University in St. Louis
• Peter Lewin, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
• Dean Lillard, Cornell University
• Zheng Liu, Emory University
• Alan Lockard, Binghampton University
• Edward Lopez, San Jose State University
• John Lunn, Hope College
• Glenn MacDonald, Washington
• University in St. Louis
• Michael Marlow, California
• Polytechnic State University
• Deryl Martin, Tennessee Tech University
• Dale Matcheck, Northwood University
• Deirdre McCloskey, Univ. of Illinois, Chicago
• John McDermott, Univ. of South Carolina
• Joseph McGarrity, Univ. of Central Arkansas
• Roger Meiners, Univ. of Texas at Arlington
• Allan Meltzer, Carnegie Mellon University
• John Merrifield, Univ. of Texas at San Antonio
• James Miller III, George Mason University
• Jeffrey Miron, Harvard University
• Thomas Moeller, Texas Christian University
• John Moorhouse, Wake Forest University
• Andrea Moro, Vanderbilt University
• Andrew Morriss, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
• Michael Munger, Duke University
• Kevin Murphy, Univ. of Southern California
• Richard Muth, Emory University
• Charles Nelson, Univ. of Washington
• Seth Norton, Wheaton College
• Lee Ohanian, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
• Lydia Ortega, San Jose State University
• Evan Osborne, Wright State University
• Randall Parker, East Carolina University
• Donald Parsons, George Washington University
• Sam Peltzman, Univ. of Chicago
• Mark Perry, Univ. of Michigan, Flint
• Christopher Phelan, Univ. of Minnesota
• Gordon Phillips, Univ. of Maryland
• Michael Pippenger, Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks
• Tomasz Piskorski, Columbia University
• Brennan Platt, Brigham Young University
• Joseph Pomykala, Towson University
• William Poole, Univ. of Delaware
• Barry Poulson, Univ. of Colorado at Boulder
• Benjamin Powell, Suffolk University
• Edward Prescott, Nobel laureate
• Gary Quinlivan, Saint Vincent College
• Reza Ramazani, Saint Michael's College
• Adriano Rampini, Duke University
• Eric Rasmusen, Indiana University
• Mario Rizzo, New York University
• Richard Roll, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
• Robert Rossana, Wayne State University
• James Roumasset, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa
• John Rowe, Univ. of South Florida
• Charles Rowley, George Mason University
• Juan Rubio-Ramirez, Duke University
• Roy Ruffin, Univ. of Houston
• Kevin Salyer, Univ. of California, Davis
• Pavel Savor, Univ. of Pennsylvania
• Ronald Schmidt, Univ. of Rochester
• Carlos Seiglie, Rutgers University
• William Shughart II, Univ. of Mississippi
• Charles Skipton, Univ. of Tampa
• James Smith, Western Carolina University
• Vernon Smith, Nobel laureate
• Lawrence Southwick, Jr., Univ. at Buffalo
• Dean Stansel, Florida Gulf Coast University
• Houston Stokes, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
• Brian Strow, Western Kentucky University
• Shirley Svorny, California State
• University, Northridge
• John Tatom, Indiana State University
• Wade Thomas, State University of New York at Oneonta
• Henry Thompson, Auburn University
• Alex Tokarev, The King's College
• Edward Tower, Duke University
• Leo Troy, Rutgers University
• David Tuerck, Suffolk University
• Charlotte Twight, Boise State University
• Kamal Upadhyaya, Univ. of New Haven
• Charles Upton, Kent State University
• T. Norman Van Cott, Ball State University
• Richard Vedder, Ohio University
• Richard Wagner, George Mason University
• Douglas M. Walker, College of Charleston
• Douglas O. Walker, Regent University
• Christopher Westley, Jacksonville State University
• Lawrence White, Univ. of Missouri at St. Louis
• Walter Williams, George Mason University
• Doug Wills, Univ. of Washington Tacoma
• Dennis Wilson, Western Kentucky University
• Gary Wolfram, Hillsdale College
• Huizhong Zhou, Western Michigan University

Additional economists who have signed the statement
• Lee Adkins, Oklahoma State University
• William Albrecht, Univ. of Iowa
• Donald Alexander, Western Michigan University
• Geoffrey Andron, Austin Community College
• Nathan Ashby, Univ. of Texas at El Paso
• George Averitt, Purdue North Central University
• Charles Baird, California State University, East Bay
• Timothy Bastian, Creighton University
• Joe Bell, Missouri State University, Springfield
• John Bethune, Barton College
• Robert Bise, Orange Coast College
• Karl Borden, University of Nebraska
• Donald Boudreaux, George Mason University
• Ivan Brick, Rutgers University
• Phil Bryson, Brigham Young University
• Richard Burkhauser, Cornell University
• Edwin Burton, Univ. of Virginia
• Jim Butkiewicz, Univ. of Delaware
• Richard Cebula, Armstrong Atlantic State University
• Don Chance, Louisiana State University
• Robert Chatfield, Univ. of Nevada, Las Vegas
• Lloyd Cohen, George Mason University
• Peter Colwell, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
• Michael Connolly, Univ. of Miami
• Jim Couch, Univ. of North Alabama
• Eleanor Craig, Univ. of Delaware
• Michael Daniels, Columbus State University
• A. Edward Day, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
• Stephen Dempsey, Univ. of Vermont
• Allan DeSerpa, Arizona State University
• William Dewald, Ohio State University
• Jeff Dorfman, Univ. of Georgia
• Lanny Ebenstein, Univ. of California, Santa Barbara
• Michael Erickson, The College of Idaho
• Jack Estill, San Jose State University
• Dorla Evans, Univ. of Alabama in Huntsville
• Frank Falero, California State University, Bakersfield
• Daniel Feenberg, National Bureau of Economic Research
• Eric Fisher, California Polytechnic State University
• Arthur Fleisher, Metropolitan State College of Denver
• William Ford, Middle Tennessee State University
• Ralph Frasca, Univ. of Dayton
• Joseph Giacalone, St. John's University
• Adam Gifford, California State Unviersity, Northridge
• Otis Gilley, Louisiana Tech University
• J. Edward Graham, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
• Richard Grant, Lipscomb University
• Gauri-Shankar Guha, Arkansas State University
• Darren Gulla, Univ. of Kentucky
• Dennis Halcoussis, California State University, Northridge
• Richard Hart, Miami University
• James Hartley, Mount Holyoke College
• Thomas Hazlett, George Mason University
• Scott Hein, Texas Tech University
• Bradley Hobbs, Florida Gulf Coast University
• John Hoehn, Michigan State University
• Daniel Houser, George Mason University
• Thomas Howard, University of Denver
• Chris Hughen, Univ. of Denver
• Marcus Ingram, Univ. of Tampa
• Joseph Jadlow, Oklahoma State University
• Sherry Jarrell, Wake Forest University
• Scott Kelly, Albany State University
• Carrie Kerekes, Florida Gulf Coast University
• Robert Krol, California State University, Northridge
• James Kurre, Penn State Erie
• Tom Lehman, Indiana Wesleyan University
• W. Cris Lewis, Utah State University
• Stan Liebowitz, Univ. of Texas at Dallas
• Anthony Losasso, Univ. of Illinois at Chicago
• John Lott, Jr., Univ. of Maryland
• Keith Malone, Univ. of North Alabama
• Henry Manne, George Mason University
• Richard Marcus, Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
• James Barney Marsh, University of Hawaii at Manoa
• Timothy Mathews, Kennesaw State University
• John Matsusaka, Univ. of Southern California
• Thomas Mayor, Univ. of Houston
• John McConnell, Purdue University
• W. Douglas McMillin, Louisiana State University
• Mario Miranda, The Ohio State University
• Ed Miseta, Penn State Erie
• James Moncur, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa
• Charles Moss, Univ. of Florida
• Tim Muris, George Mason University
• John Murray, Univ. of Toledo
• David Mustard, Univ. of Georgia
• Steven Myers, Univ. of Akron
• Dhananjay Nanda, University of Miami
• Stephen Parente, Univ. of Minnesota
• Allen Parkman, Univ. of New Mexico
• Douglas Patterson, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and University
• Timothy Perri, Appalachian State University
• Mark Pingle, Univ. of Nevada, Reno
• Ivan Pongracic, Hillsdale College
• Robert Prati, East Carolina University
• Richard Rawlins, Missouri Southern State University
• Thomas Rhee, California State University, Long Beach
• Christine Ries, Georgia Institute of Technology
• Nancy Roberts, Arizona State University
• Larry Ross, Univ. of Alaska Anchorage
• Timothy Roth, Univ. of Texas at El Paso
• Atulya Sarin, Santa Clara University
• Thomas Saving, Texas A&M University
• Eric Schansberg, Indiana University Southeast
• John Seater, North Carolina University
• Alan Shapiro, Univ. of Southern California
• Thomas Simmons, Greenfield Community College
• W. James Smith, University of Colorado Denver
• Frank Spreng, McKendree University
• Judith Staley Brenneke, John Carroll University
• John E. Stapleford, Eastern University
• Courtenay Stone, Ball State University
• Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, UCLA
• Scott Sumner, Bentley University
• Clifford Thies, Shenandoah University
• William Trumbull, West Virginia University
• A. Sinan Unur, Cornell University
• Randall Valentine, Georgia Southwestern State University
• Gustavo Ventura, Univ. of Iowa
• Marc Weidenmier, Claremont McKenna College
• Robert Whaples, Wake Forest University
• Gene Wunder, Washburn University
• John Zdanowicz, Florida International University
• Jerry Zimmerman, Univ. of Rochester
• Joseph Zoric, Franciscan University of Steubenville


Thanks for posting this. Wow! What an eye-opener this is. How does Obama wiggle himself out of this one?
Xanatos
deanhills wrote:
Thanks for posting this. Wow! What an eye-opener this is. How does Obama wiggle himself out of this one?


Especially when you couple this with the fact that he didn't let anyone read the damn bill.
liljp617
I'm pretty sure he has just as many economists on his side. It's not like the battle over whether government should intervene and how is a new debate. People have been taking sides for decades, especially since the Great Depression.
jmi256
liljp617 wrote:
I'm pretty sure he has just as many economists on his side. It's not like the battle over whether government should intervene and how is a new debate. People have been taking sides for decades, especially since the Great Depression.


The real issue is that Obama and the Democrats have locked out any debate. It's presented as "fact" that all economist agree with his opinion and that having such an important bill reviewed, discussed and debated (or forbid, even read) is a waste of time. But in reality, this is far from the truth.
lagoon
They would object to it; it's future success will prove that they messed up the economy.
deanhills
jmi256 wrote:
liljp617 wrote:
I'm pretty sure he has just as many economists on his side. It's not like the battle over whether government should intervene and how is a new debate. People have been taking sides for decades, especially since the Great Depression.


The real issue is that Obama and the Democrats have locked out any debate. It's presented as "fact" that all economist agree with his opinion and that having such an important bill reviewed, discussed and debated (or forbid, even read) is a waste of time. But in reality, this is far from the truth.


Very good point. Politicians have now become experts at how to run the economy! Including Brown dashing across the Atlantic to add his few cents worth Rolling Eyes
LumberJack
Bah, Economists have no spines. I am an economist, and I am disgusted by my own profession. Economics can be bought, sold, packaged to say whatever they want. You cannot compare today with the Great Depression, or the Japanese lost decade. Two totally different sets of circumstances. Two totally different models. Insufficient data. The list goes on. Every model in existence today is garbage. It cannot predict squat.

If these Economists profess to have the correct answer, then they should really get off their asses and do something, no?

Right now, Economists are in a tissy because this recession will prove whether Keynes or Fisher is correct. I have a feeling Fisher is, Obama seems to be siding with Keynes. There is also von Mises vs. Friedman, but I digress Sad

I guess the point, all these Economists are anti-Keynesian. They are biased. This is more an economics debate than whether or not they do not agree with Obama, they just hate Keynes.
handfleisch
So a rightwing thinktank went to the "economists" at places like Shenandoah University and got them to sign this, "paid for by Cato Institute".

First of all, I will take one Nobel Prize winner over 200 Cato hacks.

Quote:
Krugman: Much to like about Obama's forward-thinking budget


http://www.sltrib.com/Opinion/ci_11803000

Second of all, here is a good debunking of this Cato nonsense:
Quote:

Tens of thousands of economists worldwide believe that the Keynesian-inspired notion of government stimulus is exactly what is required in the present moment in that it represents our last, best hope of heading off a devastating recession—if not something worse. What’s more, the majority of the American people believe this to be true.


Then to destroy the Cato bunk that "The way to respond to the current economic situation is to reduce taxes and “the burden of government.”

Quote:
Let’s start with “burden of government.”

Perhaps it is the “burden of government” that we have:

· Social security to fall back on when our 401ks lose a third of their value due to abuse of the free market

· Medicaid to provide health care for senior citizens

· Unemployment insurance when we are whacked from our jobs

· A military to defend our security against foreign terrorism

· A federal prison system to protect us from the acts of criminals

· A food stamp program to feed hungry people who don’t have jobs

Need we go on? We could. We could outsource public education to Halliburton. We could let people who do not have enough to eat go door to door to see if any chores could be done in exchange for a meal. We could leave it to religious institutions to provide the primary safety net, as is common in the Moslem world.

I couldn't help but notice the conflation of Hoover with Roosevelt as big government spenders of the same ilk. Right. I get it. Hoover started the ball rolling on big government and Roosevelt finished the job. Mr. Cato, who writes your history for you? Dr. Economist, meet Dr. Historian.

Oh, and then the lost decade in Japan. Somehow, while the entire commercial ruling class of the entire world agrees that Japan let its banking system fester, Mr. Cato and these 300 economists understand that Japan just needed to lower taxes and “reduce impediments to work.”


Well I am tiring of cutting and pasting now -- go to this link and read it yourself. But you probably won't because you're ineducable gulpers of the purple koolaid
http://open.salon.com/blog/steve_klingaman/2009/02/12/cato_institute_with_all_due_respecti_beg_to_differ
jmi256
handfleisch wrote:
First of all, I will take one Nobel Prize winner...


I'm glad you feel that way. Did you notice the three Nobel Laureates in the list of signators?

I understand there is some disagreement about how to proceed. But the point is Obama and the Democrats have falsely claimed that there is no disagreement or room for discussion/debate when in fact the truth is far from this claim.
handfleisch
jmi256 wrote:
I understand there is some disagreement about how to proceed. But the point is Obama and the Democrats have falsely claimed that there is no disagreement or room for discussion/debate when in fact the truth is far from this claim.


The point is that a fringetank seized upon half a sentence in order to make a hullabaloo, and that their argument has already been debunked as shown above, and that the overwhelming consensus among economists and the American people is that something like this current plan was and is necessary.
jmi256
deanhills wrote:

Politicians have now become experts at how to run the economy! Including Brown dashing across the Atlantic to add his few cents worth Rolling Eyes



Very good point. It seems to me that Obama and the Democrats have an agenda that they would like to forward and are selectively choosing which "economists" to highlight to support that agenda. They are using the struggling economy as a smokescreen. What's also striking is that they don't name the economists who suposedly agree with them (at least in what I have seen), but rather just maintain that there is no disagreement between economists that their plan is viable. Seems very backhanded to me.

To be clear, though, I don't want economists running our country.
handfleisch
jmi256 wrote:
Very good point. It seems to me that Obama and the Democrats have an agenda that they would like to forward and are selectively choosing which "economists" to highlight to support that agenda. They are using the struggling economy as a smokescreen.


Oh, yes, it's a big conspiracy by Democrats, but really run out of the Kremlin (or maybe Mecca?) But please give us your alternate plan.

More McCain/Bush-style tax cuts for the rich? Wrong.
Lower interest rates? Wrong, they are already at 0%.
This CATO Institute pseudo-plan? Sure, and get Bernie Madoff to run it.
Know-nothing/do-nothing and let the economy collapse? Please try that plan on some other planet and let us know how it goes.
jmi256
handfleisch wrote:
Oh, yes, it's a big conspiracy by Democrats, but really run out of the Kremlin (or maybe Mecca?) But please give us your alternate plan.


Take the tin foil hat off and come off the Kremlin/Mecca conspiracy theory BS.

I understand the frustration of not being able to hear an alternative plan since Obama and the Democrats locked out any possible discussion of their bill that increases taxes and spending, but the basic points would be:

• You can put more money into the economy two basic way: Spend more or tax less. If you want to stimulate an economy in to action, however, you need to start with lowering taxes for everyone, including small businesses. To signal to businesses and the market that they can rely on a lower tax burden and plan on expansion and spending beyond some measly one-time rebate/refund check, the tax cuts to everyone should be permanent.

• Limit new spending to essential projects that are legitimate governmental responsibilities. That means getting rid of nonessential pet/pork projects that only stimulate government size/spending. That lowers the overhead bureaucracy and waste the government is known for.

• Control the federal budget. While Bush had a good idea of lowering taxes, he failed at the other end of the equation, cutting spending. Balancing the budget should be a priority. From a strategic standpoint, borrowing from China to fund non-stimulating activities and programs will have long-term negative effects.

In the end the private sector is what is going to drive the economy, not government.
handfleisch
jmi256 wrote:

I understand the frustration of not being able to hear an alternative plan since Obama and the Democrats locked out any possible discussion of their bill that increases taxes and spending, but the basic points would be:

• You can put more money into the economy two basic way: Spend more or tax less. If you want to stimulate an economy in to action, however, you need to start with lowering taxes for everyone, including small businesses. To signal to businesses and the market that they can rely on a lower tax burden and plan on expansion and spending beyond some measly one-time rebate/refund check, the tax cuts to everyone should be permanent.

• Limit new spending to essential projects that are legitimate governmental responsibilities. That means getting rid of nonessential pet/pork projects that only stimulate government size/spending. That lowers the overhead bureaucracy and waste the government is known for.

• Control the federal budget. While Bush had a good idea of lowering taxes, he failed at the other end of the equation, cutting spending. Balancing the budget should be a priority. From a strategic standpoint, borrowing from China to fund non-stimulating activities and programs will have long-term negative effects.

In the end the private sector is what is going to drive the economy, not government.


Great to see you decided to discard the tinfoil hat "smokescreen" theory of the budget plan.

Of your 3 points, well, Obama's plan does cut taxes for small businesses earning less than $250,000, so I guess you are in 33% approval.

About the second point, the budget was very careful to avoid Bush-era pork like payoffs to Cheney's Halliburton and is dealing with the deteriorating infrastructure and renewable energy research, which all are legitimate, so I guess you are up to 66% agreement.

About the third and controlling the budget, Obama is cutting waste like in the Iraqi War budget debacle. Maybe if there wasn't a crisis to take care of, Obama could balance the budget the way Clinton did, and you would be 100% happy with the plan by your own definition. But since there is a crisis to take care of, we can put you down at about 80% agreement with the Obama measures. Welcome aboard!

jmi256
handfleisch wrote:

Of your 3 points, well, Obama's plan does cut taxes for small businesses earning less than $250,000, so I guess you are in 33% approval.


We've gone back and forth on this before, but you still can't seem to understand much beyond you own rhetoric. BTW, Obama has changed his number to $200,000 now, but I don't blame you for getting the numbers wrong. It seems like every time he says something it changes. But I'll to try to make it simple for you.

Obama's plan does increase taxes. I'm all for cutting the tax burden, but the huge tax increase he is forcing on businesses is not offset by any tax decreases he claims to be giving. The math just doesn't work. Like I said, we've gone back and forth on this (even in this thread), so here's an example I provided previously. If you're able to follow the numbers you'll see that the tax burden goes up, not down:

A small company owner makes $200,000 a year and is in the 40% tax bracket. This means he pays $80,000 a year in taxes.

The two individuals he employees (A and B) make $40,000 each and are in the 15% tax bracket ($6,000 in taxes apiece).

So in total the government is taking $92,000 from these three people.

Now say Employee A and B’s taxes are reduced by 15% (to a zero tax liability), and the small company owner’s taxes are increased by 15% (to a 55% tax liability). The two do not offset each other. In fact, the government is now taking more ($110,000).

So now the government has taken more liquidity out of the system, and the business owner is penalized for starting and maintaining a business. Once you factor in costs and expenses, his employees are most likely bring home more than he is, and he's the one who to the risk of starting a business.

On top of that, where do you think the business owner is going to find the extra $30,000 in taxes he now has to pay? Believe it or not most business owners are not rolling in money and work extremely hard to make thier businesses work. Most likely he'd have to let one of his employees who is making $40,000 go. So now the employee pays less taxes, but also doesn't have a job. Nice change!


handfleisch wrote:
About the second point, the budget was very careful to avoid Bush-era pork like payoffs to Cheney's Halliburton and is dealing with the deteriorating infrastructure and renewable energy research, which all are legitimate, so I guess you are up to 66% agreement.

How "careful" could the spending bill be if no one was provided a chance to read it before voting on it? And the definition of "essential" is not whatever you think is important. Essential means funding roles that the government is meant to fulfill (think defense, court systems, etc.). Things like a funding climate-change research for NASA is not essential. Spending $300 million on "green" golf carts is also not essential. There are tons of these nuggets embedded in the bill that no one was able to read.


handfleisch wrote:
About the third and controlling the budget, Obama is cutting waste like in the Iraqi War budget debacle. Maybe if there wasn't a crisis to take care of, Obama could balance the budget the way Clinton did, and you would be 100% happy with the plan by your own definition.

How can you argue that a $1.4 trillion yearly deficit is controlling the budget? It's pretty cut and dry. Either the budget is balanced or it's not.

handfleisch wrote:
Welcome aboard!

No thanks. I really don't like those hats they make you guys wear.

deanhills
Laughing The expression on the cat's face is amazing. It pretty much sums it up.
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:


Quote:
Let’s start with “burden of government.”

Perhaps it is the “burden of government” that we have:

· Social security to fall back on when our 401ks lose a third of their value due to abuse of the free market

· Medicaid to provide health care for senior citizens

· Unemployment insurance when we are whacked from our jobs

· A military to defend our security against foreign terrorism

· A federal prison system to protect us from the acts of criminals

· A food stamp program to feed hungry people who don’t have jobs

Need we go on? We could. We could outsource public education to Halliburton. We could let people who do not have enough to eat go door to door to see if any chores could be done in exchange for a meal. We could leave it to religious institutions to provide the primary safety net, as is common in the Moslem world.

The burden of government is that we have to pay for all those (extremely expensive) things, with no choice given.

My opinion:
1- keep taxes exactly the same.
2- cut all the charity programs out of government, where they don't belong
3- let each person filing taxes identify a charity from a large list of approved charities to give 50% of their tax money to, instead of giving it to the government to distribute. Declining to give is not allowed. All the charities are ones that actually directly help people: museums or political action groups, for example, would not be approved.

This means that:
- The private charities actually get more work done helping people, because they are far more efficient than the government.
- Government income goes down by 50%, but spending goes down by over 60%, improving the federal budget's status by more than 10%.
- Taxpayers have a choice about how their money will help the disadvantaged.
jmi256
ocalhoun wrote:

The burden of government is that we have to pay for all those (extremely expensive) things, with no choice given.

My opinion:
1- keep taxes exactly the same.
2- cut all the charity programs out of government, where they don't belong
3- let each person filing taxes identify a charity from a large list of approved charities to give 50% of their tax money to, instead of giving it to the government to distribute. Declining to give is not allowed. All the charities are ones that actually directly help people: museums or political action groups, for example, would not be approved.

This means that:
- The private charities actually get more work done helping people, because they are far more efficient than the government.
- Government income goes down by 50%, but spending goes down by over 60%, improving the federal budget's status by more than 10%.
- Taxpayers have a choice about how their money will help the disadvantaged.


I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I like the idea of giving citizens a say in where their money goes.
jmi256
Apparently the Nobel laureate handfleisch likes to cite as a proponent of Obama’s schemes also disagrees with Obama’s idiotic plan.


Quote:

Nobel laureate Krugman slams Geithner bailout plan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Nobel-prize winning economist Paul Krugman said in remarks published on Monday that the latest U.S. Treasury bailout program is nearly certain to fail, triggering a sense of personal despair.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Monday unveiled a plan aimed at persuading private investors to help rid banks up to $1 trillion in toxic assets that that are seen as a roadblock to economic recovery.

"This is more than disappointing," Krugman wrote in The New York Times. ""In fact it fills me with a sense of despair."

"The Geithner scheme would offer a one-way bet: if asset values go up, the investors profit, but if they go down, the investors can walk away from their debt," the Princeton University economist said, citing weekend reports outlining the plan.


"This isn't really about letting markets work. It's just an indirect, disguised way to subsidize purchases of bad assets," he added.

Krugman called it a recycled idea of former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who later abandoned the "cash for trash" proposal.

"But the real problem with this plan is that it won't work," he says, adding that bad loans may be undervalued because there is too much fear in the current climate.

"But the fact is that financial executives literally bet their banks on the belief that there was no housing bubble, and the related belief that unprecedented levels of household debt were no problem. They lost that bet. And no amount of financial hocus-pocus -- for that is what the Geithner plan amounts to -- will change that fact," Krugman wrote.

While the real economy is being hurt by the meltdown of the financial system itself, Krugman says this is not the first or the last time this has happened. And there are lots of roadmaps to get us out.

"It goes like this: the government secures confidence in the system by guaranteeing many (though not necessarily all) bank debts. At the same time, it takes temporary control of truly insolvent banks, in order to clean up their books," Krugman said.

Time is running out on the Obama administration to take control of the banks - and the crisis.

"If this plan fails - as it almost surely will - it's unlikely that he'll be able to persuade Congress to come up with more funds to do what he should have done in the first place," he wrote.

The White House strongly disagreed with Krugman's assessment, defending the administration plans on the morning talk shows.

"I think Paul's just wrong on this one," Christina Romer, head of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said on ABC's "Good Morning America" show just ahead of the plan's release.

"This is really tails both the government and the private sector win, heads both the government and the private sector lose. We both are going to have, as the saying goes, skin in the game."
deanhills
Laughing History is not going to write good things about it either. I have been thinking what our history books will say in about thirty years from now when it looks back to what decisions have been made. Am certain it will be along the lines of if the situation had been left alone, i.e. if banks that had failed would have been allowed to fail instead of bailed out, and people allowed to loose their money instead of putting them in even greater collective debt to bail out debt, the revival would have been much sooner. It may also refer to Government not qualified nor trained to get involved in the business of bail-out packages, and list the number of occurrences of bad corruption that happened and reasons why Government interference in the economy in a hands-on capacity should be avoided as much as possible.
jmi256
More Nobel Laureates come out to comment upon the effects of Obama's economic plans.

Quote:

Barack Obama accused of making 'Depression' mistakes
Barack Obama is committing the same mistakes made by policymakers during the Great Depression, according to a new study endorsed by Nobel laureate James Buchanan.


His policies even have the potential to consign the US to a similar fate as Argentina, which suffered a painful and humiliating slide from first to Third World status last century, the paper says.

There are "troubling similarities" between the US President's actions since taking office and those which in the 1930s sent the US and much of the world spiralling into the worst economic collapse in recorded history, says the new pamphlet, published by the Institute of Economic Affairs.

In particular, the authors, economists Charles Rowley of George Mason University and Nathanael Smith of the Locke Institute, claim that the White House's plans to pour hundreds of billions of dollars of cash into the economy will undermine it in the long run. They say that by employing deficit spending and increased state intervention President Obama will ultimately hamper the long-term growth potential of the US economy and may risk delaying full economic recovery by several years.

The study represents a challenge to the widely held view that Keynesian fiscal policies helped the US recover from the Depression which started in the early 1930s. The authors say: "[Franklin D Roosevelt's] interventionist policies and draconian tax increases delayed full economic recovery by several years by exacerbating a climate of pessimistic expectations that drove down private capital formation and household consumption to unprecedented lows."

Although the authors support the Federal Reserve's moves to slash interest rates to just above zero and embark on quantitative easing, pumping cash directly into the system, they warn that greater intervention could set the US back further. Rowley says: "It is also not impossible that the US will experience the kind of economic collapse from first to Third World status experienced by Argentina under the national-socialist governance of Juan Peron."

The paper, which recommends that the US return to a more laissez-faire economic system rather than intervening further in activity, has been endorsed by Nobel laureate James Buchanan, who said: "We have learned some things from comparable experiences of the 1930s' Great Depression, perhaps enough to reduce the severity of the current contraction. But we have made no progress toward putting limits on political leaders, who act out their natural proclivities without any basic understanding of what makes capitalism work."


Source = http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/6147211/Barack-Obama-accused-of-making-Depression-mistaakes.html
Bikerman
Well, Buchanon would say that of course.
He won the Nobel (1986) for his work on 'Public/Rational Choice' theory. It essentially models politicians and decision makers as 'self interested' agents and then uses game theory to predict outcomes. It was all the rage in post-war economic theory, but like many fads it didn't live up to early expectations.*
The IEE (who published this pamphlet) are founded on the basic principles that Buchanon worked on and for which he won the Nobel. It is no surprise, therefore, that he should endorse their pamphlet. There has always been a debate between Keynesians and 'Free Market' economists about this issue, and it is to be expected that Buchanon and the IEE would come out for the later.

* Amartya Sen (more recent Nobel Winner - 1998) summarises the flaws in the model quite nicely;
Sen wrote:
“Can you direct me to the railway station?” asks the stranger. “Certainly,” says the local, pointing in the opposite direction, towards the post office, “and would you post this letter for me on your way?” “Certainly,” says the stranger, resolving to open it to see if it contains anything worth stealing.

Life doesn't work like that Smile It is a shame really, because it is the sort of approach to economics that appeals to a scientifically inclined person like me. The fact is, though, that just like in science, when the observations don't fit the model then the model is wrong, and P/RC just doesn't fit with what we observe in real life.
Related topics
Money for education or war.
Plan to Strengthen the Economy
Democrats to increase tax burden over $5,000 per taxpayer
Trillion Dollar Stimulus
Obama's speech to Congress Feb 24, 2009
US Soliders' Reception of the President
Obama and Dems Hindering Recovery
Should Obama and Dems Limit Charitable Giving?
Americans want universal health care. Why can't we get it?
Another Reckless Tax/Spending Bill
Employment situation improving under Obama
Personal Income Lower Under Obama
House Dems Vote Against Obama's Tax Plan
Republicans trashing US economy for political points?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.