The economic arguments: what are American socialists saying about them ?

[Jurriaan Bendien <bendien@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

1. Tax cuts are responsible for economic growth, says Bush
``The tax relief we passed is working,'' Mr. Bush claimed in Columbus, Ohio
on October 30 to whoops of approval from "several hundred workers" during a
speech at an aluminium processing plant here (NYT, Oct. 31). The news that
real GDP had expanded in the third quarter at a 7.2 percent annual rate -
the highest increase since 1984 - seemed to support claims by Mr. Bush and
the Republican Party that they are responsible for putting the nation back
on the road to prosperity, a year before Election Day. Mr. Bush vowed to
bring down the unemployment rate down further (makes you think of Michael
Kalecki on the "electoral business cycle", doesn't it)
2. Tax cuts don't solve the problem, says Lieberman
Democrat critics claimed the economic upturn had not created new jobs
offsetting those lost since Bush took office. The US economy has shed 2.6
million to more than 3 million jobs since January 2001, and the net output
surge was attributed to an unsustainable tax-cutting binge that mostly
benefited the wealthy and drove the government budget deficit to levels that
will burden the USA for decades to come. Persistent large deficits,
Democrats claimed, could undermine economic growth down the road. ``We've
lost more than three million jobs, three million people have fallen into
poverty, the budget deficit and national debt are growing, health care and
college tuition costs are escalating,'' Lieberman said. ``And this president
still has no real plan to sustain this growth, translate it into jobs and
rebuild a strong middle class.'' (in other words, the working class books
more unemployment, but we need to build a middle class anyhow ?!).

3. Iraq needs a financial break, says Wolfensohn

At least two-thirds of Iraq's estimated $120 billion foreign debt needs to
be written off if the country is to be properly rebuilt, James Wolfensohn,
the World Bank president, argues. $40 billion of the debt was owed to the
Paris Club and at least $80 billion more to other countries. The former
Yugoslavia had previously been given a two-third debt write-off after
Slobodan Milosevic was ousted and Iraq would need at least the same,
Wolfensohn said. Last month the Group of Seven wealthy nations said they
wanted to reach a deal by the end of 2004 on Iraq's debt. He said Iraqi aid
should be given in grants instead of loans, to avoid burdening Iraq with
more debt. It is already the world's most heavily indebted country in terms
of per capita gross domestic product. (So who will pay for this write-off ?)

4. We know where we stand, says the US Government

Ignoring rising anti-occupation sentiment among voters, the US House of
Representatives endorsed a $87.5 billion package to sustain US  military
forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Congress stood with the president and our
soldiers tonight, sending them the support they need to defend our nation
and all those working to advance freedom abroad," said Republican
Representative Roy Blunt. The package, approved with 298 votes against 121
votes, includes $64.7 billion for military personnel and operations in Iraq
and Afghanistan, below the $65.1 billion Bush wanted, and an additional
$18.6 billion for reconstruction efforts in Iraq, less than the $20.3
billion Bush wanted. The bill provided $1.2 billion for Afghanistan,
compared with $800 million sought by Bush. The Senate is expected to follow
suit quickly, sending President Bush a package that closely mirrors his
original request. While acknowledging US troops must be given full financial
backing, David Obey, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, said
"We are going to be held accountable for this vote for a long time".
Constituents "are going to be asking us about the loans, they are going to
be asking us whether or not there is adequate protection for taxpayer
money." The House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, on Thursday said that
dropping the loans shows a "tin ear to what the American people are saying."
(So where does the accountability start ? Who voted against the
Appropriation ?)



What do American socialists have to say about all this, or do they just mope
and whinge ?



J.