RE: Lieberman on economics

[Clifford Poirot <cpoirot@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The most recent issue of The New Republic (September 25) has three fairly
interesting (by the standards of election year pablum) articles on Gore and
Bush. John Chait does a pretty good job of explaining how aside from social
issues, Bush is really far more conservative than he appears to be. Andrew
Sullivan makes a pretty credible case that Gore is more liberal than he
appears to be. Though Sullivan's piece was obviously intended to persuade
TNR readers to vote against Gore, it had the opposite effect on me.

If you analyze their positions, it is pretty clear. If either does what they
say they will do, then  neither can realistically expect to run budget
surpluses-recession or no recession. And Lieberman's response, while the
worst news I've heard for economics education in a long while, must be seen
as strictly whistling in the dark. Taxes will not be raised, and budgets
will not be cut during a recession. That is the political reality.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Dorman
To: pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 9/21/00 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: Lieberman on economics

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