Re: Lieberman on economics

[Peter Dorman <dormanp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

No -- the most qualified candidate since Bob LaFollette.

Peter

"William F. Hummel" wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:36:27 +0200, you wrote:
>
> >Peter Dorman wrote:
> >>
> >> I noticed a short piece in the NY Times today in which Joe Lieberman
> >> denounced Bush for his lack of understanding of economics.  Bush's
> >> failure, in JL's view, was his statement that he (Bush) would be
> >> willing to cut taxes and raise fiscal deficits during a recession.
> >> According to JL, this reveals ignorance.  Rather, during a recession,
> >> the most important thing is to balance the budget at all costs, so
> >> that interest rates don't rise!
> >
> >I've been warning for this. Time to take the threat of federal fiscal
> >prudence under a Gore administration seriously, right?
> >
> >> Now, I realize that mainstream economists have been drifting steadily
> >> toward the Treasury View over the last few decades, but I doubt
> >> they've gone that far.  Even if you slept through Econ 101 you would
> >> probably know that Lieberman is talking nonsense.
> >
> >You want trouble in the next recession? Vote Gore. With him in the White
> >house, once the US economy hits the next recession you'll see your
> >government ad insult to injury with spending cuts and tax hikes because
> >IT WILL BE SEEN AS A VIRTUE to do precisely that. Voters are going to
> >like it if they know of nothing else. And who's gonna tell'em...?
> >
> >Darn Keynesian,
> >
> I agree with your concerns, but who would you vote for instead?
> Surely not the least qualified candidate since Alf Landon!
>
> William F Hummel