Market Currents
"We seem to be overrun with Austerians, newly minted deficit chicken-hawks who recently have...
-
Tuesday, July 13, 2010, 4:43 PM ET"We seem to be overrun with Austerians, newly minted deficit chicken-hawks who recently have discovered the evils of deficit spending," Barry Ritholtz says. "Their past actions speak far louder than anything they might say today," and the motivation, he believes, is just partisan politics.
Other date
Latest Articles
This news story has 23 comments:
seekingalpha.com/insta...
He is making a power grab on behalf of the Left. But who is to say that
this won't be used by the Right?
And Schleicher's fate? Gunned down in cold blood on the "Night of the Long Knives" by the Storm Troopers of the very man he empowered.
But presumably Ritholtz is speaking of some world leaders who have, indeed, been flipping and flopping around. That's the problem nowadays, trying to find a politician that will stay bought.
They are truely the Sons of Hypocrisy.
We were going from a Volcker 17% cramdown on money to a now 0% ramp up on the cost of money. You can't go lower than that. At least Ronnie's growth was predicated on future price stability and interest rates having the ability to at least come down. Not so today. Not so at all.
Deficits are the number one problem threatening global GDPs, and besides Japan, the United States is the worst offender. The G20 world leaders were absolutely right in being flabbergasted at Obama's ignorant Krugmanisms. In the end, they will be proven correct and the euro will surprise many on the upside as the dollar's run higher is over for now(which is why we've seen the stock market run lately).
Riholtz sounds partisan, that which he accuses others of being, he is himself... very much here in this soundbite.
Also, Ronald Reagan did not create a 1trillion dollar entitlement system (universal healthcare) and then force it on america under the guise of it "cutting the deficit". Anyone with a brain knows company's have partially, and i did say partially, chosen not to hire because of this new expense. This president is so partisan and so concerned with his image, that he sacrificed all his political will and personal energy into shoveling his socialized medicine on us. Now he seemingly has no juice left to be a strong president, including in the face of a Russian spy ring in which his reaction was to trade spies for spies. Its just pathetic of this point, and honestly not worth any of the partisan rhetoric he still gets.
Barry is an intelligent guy, but he is ultimately nothing but an apologist in disguise. I expect more of his types coming out of the woodwork as they begin to realize that this president could spell the death of modern economic liberalism as a marketable ideology.
Each approached worked.
Pull your head out of the sand ...
Reagan's Tax Increases
www.ritholtz.com/blog/.../
Let's see if Congressional Republicans are willing to willing to raise the retirement age to 70 and remove the income cap on the FICA tax. Let's see if Congressional Republicans are willing to peg the age of Medicare eligibility to the retirement age. Let's see if Congressional Republicans are willing to cut down on wasteful defense spending. While we're at it, let's see if Congressional Republicans are willing to impose a moratorium on earmarks.
Wait a minute, I don't see any takers. I guess Congressional Republicans do not want to look like they hate the elderly or like they are weak on defense. Furthermore, Congressional Republicans pontificate on cutting spending unless it affects their states/districts, when suddenly, it's all about jobs.
Democrats are far from blameless, but the levels of Republican hypocrisy and illogic are reaching bizarro-world proportions. Stay away from that tea--there's something funky in it.
What is your problem? Are you unpatriotic, homosexual, leftwing scum?
In 1937 US conservatives, who had advocated austerity and ‘creative destruction’ throughout the years since 1929, were joined by many in the centre of the US political spectrum on economic matters in advocating a return to balanced national budgets. These centrist advocates saw a return to balanced budgets by 1937 as a
(a) a vote of confidence in the strength of the recovery to date, and
(b) a prudent response to the unprecedented accumulation during peace-time in the national debt since 1929.
Unfortunately these centrist advocates misjudged the strength and foundation of the recovery and the strong attempt in 1937 to balance the US national budget tipped the US back into a depression from which full recovery was not achieved until the years of WW II. In retrospect the recovery of 1932 – 7 had not become sufficiently established within the private sector to be sustained by that sector if public sector stimulus was, as it turned out, prematurely ended. Interestingly, it was only during the late 1930s, in response to the ‘double dip’ just described, that the analysis of Keynes as interpreted and applied in the US context by Hansen and his supporter economists became a foundation of US government policy. Arguable this adoption and adaption of Keynesian analysis provided the policy foundation for the war effort and the 30 years of post WW II prosperity.
Arguably there is a danger today that the global economy will replicate the US domestic experience of 1937. The economically strong EU nations are adopting austerity measures along with the weaker members, Japan is retrenching because it is tapped out, China is pausing to digest the growth and stimulus of the past few years and now the US public appears to be shifting strongly in favour of fiscal retrenchment for a range of overlapping reasons. There is a danger, in short, that this shift towards fiscal austerity could not only weaken and drag out the progress of the recovery but even cause a ‘double dip’.
The forgoing is not an argument in favour of irresponsible (in terms of either the amounts spent or what these expenditures are for) public spending, only an argument in favour of clear thinking about the nature and stage of the current recovery and the proper role of public spending until the recovery matures further.
Remember 1/3 of the stimulus was the Republican tax cuts, that I believe were mostly saved and did not stimulate. 1/3 was social help for states and local service programs and less than 1/3 was actually used for infrastructure.
I also believe the extension of the unemployment is also not a bad way, as almost all is immediately sent into the economy. I do believe we need a gradually reducing amount as time goes on.