Barack Obama, whom I have come to sincerely dislike, has presided over more deportations than any previous President — and by a lot. Latinos in the USofA, who voted overwhelmingly for Our President in 2012, have started to re-evaluate their support, so Our President now is promising Executive Actions to protect, perhaps, five million of the undocumented. This is the same President, by the way, who told us he didn't think he had legal authority to do so — and not so long ago.
What can we expect of him? Based on prior experience, we can expect he'll do as little as possible, while spouting as much "inspirational" bullshit as he can. Will he insist on legal representation for the child immigrants from Central America claiming asylum but already being deported? Not likely. Not much matters to him except the "optics."
Okay, maybe now that the Democrats screwed up the midterms, he'll feel "liberated" to take some tough stances against the right wing crazies — but I'm not counting on it. He spent too much time at the University of Chicago, home of the Hayekian homeboys, and I suspect he was infected. May the ghost of John Maynard Keynes haunt him, reminding him that he was pretty much a pussy during the financial crisis, and since. (Is "pussy" politically incorrect? Sorry. My reference was to a little cat.)
.....
If the Democrats nominate Hillary in 2016, they'll be offering us just more Bill and Barack. Let's not forget who teamed with Phil Gramm to overturn Glass-Steagle — not to mention who designed the first pro-corporate "health care reform" based on "free market" principles. Some on the left are talking about nominating Robert Reich, who has a fantastic intellect. Just the same, I don't think the USofA is quite ready to be led by a dwarf. Maybe a woman. Not a dwarf.
Elizabeth Warren, are you waiting for 2020? I'm an old man, and I need somebody brilliant and articulate and inspiring and (sorry) kind of hot, NOW! (I have such a crush on Elizabeth Warren! She's my ideal woman.)
Anyway, I'm not happy — but when am I happy? I want my new granddaughter to grow up in a caring, ethical environment. I can't do much, but I'll do what I can.
Showing posts with label Keynes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Keynes. Show all posts
Monday, November 17, 2014
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
The Problem with Keynesian Economics
The problem with Keynesian economics, sad to say, is that it's incompatible with democracy. Ordinary citizens of a democracy — or of any other political system, for that matter — always like more, and never like less. Hence, only half of the Keynesian formula ever is implemented. (Well, maybe "ever" is a slight overstatement, because Bill Clinton sort of moved in the right direction during the boom years of the nineties.)
Until very recently, Keynesianism was almost an automatic response to recession: cut taxes and increase government spending to stimulate the economy. The problems always arose during the good times — the boom times. That's when, according to Keynes, we're supposed to raise taxes and cut government spending, to keep things from overheating and build up a reserve to see us through the next recession.
Unfortunately, that second part of Keynesianism is the hard part. When incomes and profits are up, and lots of tax money is flowing into government coffers, the suck-up politicians of democratic governments say, "Hey! We've got the money! Let's make the voters happy by cutting their taxes and tossing lots of bucks around! While we're at it, we can toss even more bucks at the special interests who pay for our election!"
Everybody's doing better (except for those "fixed income" suckers and the minimum wage crowd, who can't handle the inflation), so everything goes swimmingly until the next recession. It's been going on for about eighty years now.
Note, however, that during those boom times the big benefits go to the special interests — and the most special of those interests, at least since Reagan was president, have been the very rich.
Yeah, I know — if you read this blog, it's not exactly news to you.
So now we're at a point when Keynes (like most contemporary economists) would recommend stimulus. Thanks to eighty years of getting Keynes wrong, though, our national debt is a bit on the high side. The "democratically elected" pols — Republicans, especially, but plenty of Democrats as well — are righteously demanding austerity. But why, especially when we need stimulus so badly, and interest rates are so low?
The answer, of course, goes back to those extra-special interests — the people and institutions that own that debt. They can never be losers, of course, so the rest of us have to pay.
I'm too old and lazy to start a revolution and, frankly, I wouldn't know even where to begin now that revolutions seem to start on Facebook and Twitter. I have to tell you, I'm not optimistic. Any suggestions?
Until very recently, Keynesianism was almost an automatic response to recession: cut taxes and increase government spending to stimulate the economy. The problems always arose during the good times — the boom times. That's when, according to Keynes, we're supposed to raise taxes and cut government spending, to keep things from overheating and build up a reserve to see us through the next recession.
Unfortunately, that second part of Keynesianism is the hard part. When incomes and profits are up, and lots of tax money is flowing into government coffers, the suck-up politicians of democratic governments say, "Hey! We've got the money! Let's make the voters happy by cutting their taxes and tossing lots of bucks around! While we're at it, we can toss even more bucks at the special interests who pay for our election!"
Everybody's doing better (except for those "fixed income" suckers and the minimum wage crowd, who can't handle the inflation), so everything goes swimmingly until the next recession. It's been going on for about eighty years now.
Note, however, that during those boom times the big benefits go to the special interests — and the most special of those interests, at least since Reagan was president, have been the very rich.
Yeah, I know — if you read this blog, it's not exactly news to you.
So now we're at a point when Keynes (like most contemporary economists) would recommend stimulus. Thanks to eighty years of getting Keynes wrong, though, our national debt is a bit on the high side. The "democratically elected" pols — Republicans, especially, but plenty of Democrats as well — are righteously demanding austerity. But why, especially when we need stimulus so badly, and interest rates are so low?
The answer, of course, goes back to those extra-special interests — the people and institutions that own that debt. They can never be losers, of course, so the rest of us have to pay.
I'm too old and lazy to start a revolution and, frankly, I wouldn't know even where to begin now that revolutions seem to start on Facebook and Twitter. I have to tell you, I'm not optimistic. Any suggestions?
Labels:
democracy,
economic stimulus,
fiscal stimulus,
Keynes
Thursday, December 25, 2008
The Night Before Christmas
'Twas the night before Christmas, and in his cold bed
Alan Greenspan was groaning and shaking his head
For a ghost was abroad on that cold winter's night --
I was John Maynard Keynes, howling, "See" I was right!
"I was right! I was right! I was right all along!
"You believed Milton Friedman, but Friedman was wrong!"
"Enough," shouted Greenspan, "why can't you have pity?
"I admitted my fault to a Senate committee
"But old Milton Friedman died happy and smug
"Before unbounded greediness pulled out the rug.
"They had plenty of pork, but they took the whole hog, oh
"A curse be upon that damned U. of Chicago!"
So Keynes went to the Senate to try some soul saving
But Corker and Chambliss were ranting and raving,
And Bunning and Enzi and Cornyn and Thune
And Ensign and Inhofe all sang the same tune,
And Keynes said, oh Lord, I just can't take the drama,
Forget all these fools, I'll just talk to Obama.
And Obama sat silently, listening to Keynes,
Looking down at the hands that would soon hold the reins.
Keynes said, "Time to ignore what the financiers like,
"Time to get rid of Rubin and listen to Reich,
"Yes, it's time for a change, but a change that is real,
"Yes, the time has arrived for a new New Deal."
And Obama sat silently, cards to his chest,
Then said, "I'll endeavor to do what is best."
"Spend money," said Keynes, "spend a trillion! Spend two!
"They'll just call you a socialist whatever you do!"
Keynes had one more remark as he faded from sight,
"The whole world is praying that you get it right."
Alan Greenspan was groaning and shaking his head
For a ghost was abroad on that cold winter's night --
I was John Maynard Keynes, howling, "See" I was right!
"I was right! I was right! I was right all along!
"You believed Milton Friedman, but Friedman was wrong!"
"Enough," shouted Greenspan, "why can't you have pity?
"I admitted my fault to a Senate committee
"But old Milton Friedman died happy and smug
"Before unbounded greediness pulled out the rug.
"They had plenty of pork, but they took the whole hog, oh
"A curse be upon that damned U. of Chicago!"
So Keynes went to the Senate to try some soul saving
But Corker and Chambliss were ranting and raving,
And Bunning and Enzi and Cornyn and Thune
And Ensign and Inhofe all sang the same tune,
And Keynes said, oh Lord, I just can't take the drama,
Forget all these fools, I'll just talk to Obama.
And Obama sat silently, listening to Keynes,
Looking down at the hands that would soon hold the reins.
Keynes said, "Time to ignore what the financiers like,
"Time to get rid of Rubin and listen to Reich,
"Yes, it's time for a change, but a change that is real,
"Yes, the time has arrived for a new New Deal."
And Obama sat silently, cards to his chest,
Then said, "I'll endeavor to do what is best."
"Spend money," said Keynes, "spend a trillion! Spend two!
"They'll just call you a socialist whatever you do!"
Keynes had one more remark as he faded from sight,
"The whole world is praying that you get it right."
Labels:
Barack Obama,
Keynes,
Milton Friedman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)