Comments on: The New York Times on Obama’s Economics (sorta) http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2008/08/the-new-york-times-on-obamas-economics-sorta/ Critical Thinking Mon, 06 Feb 2012 20:55:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Muttrox http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2008/08/the-new-york-times-on-obamas-economics-sorta/comment-page-1/#comment-176762 Muttrox Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:03:47 +0000 http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2008/08/31/the-new-york-times-on-obamas-economics-sorta/#comment-176762 O, you should check out <a href="http://tlrii.typepad.com/theliscioreport/2008/07/presidential-ec.html" rel="nofollow">this link</a> and <a href="http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/03/american-politi.html" rel="nofollow">this one</a>, which has a bit more depth and explanation to it. I don't know why all this happens, but it's really indisputable that it does. I agree with your point about clearly expressed and enforced rules of the marketplace. I'm also partial to the idea that fairness promotes economic growth. (To a point of course.) O, you should check out this link and this one, which has a bit more depth and explanation to it. I don’t know why all this happens, but it’s really indisputable that it does.

I agree with your point about clearly expressed and enforced rules of the marketplace. I’m also partial to the idea that fairness promotes economic growth. (To a point of course.)

]]> By: Oren http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2008/08/the-new-york-times-on-obamas-economics-sorta/comment-page-1/#comment-176575 Oren Thu, 04 Sep 2008 15:23:45 +0000 http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2008/08/31/the-new-york-times-on-obamas-economics-sorta/#comment-176575 One problem with the analysis of GNP under D vs R is that the time at the beginning of a presidential term is more reflective of the economic policies of the prior administration, due to the fact that it takes a while to pass legislation, and then those changes won't take effect for several months, at the earliest. I wonder if the analysis was done by defining the "economic term" of each president as extending from 1 year (arbitrary) after he takes office until 1 year after he leaves, if the results would be the same. Also, what's more important, who controls the White House or Congress? Still, if the conclusions are valid, one possible reason is that the underlying assumption behind Republican economic policy-- less government interference in business (in the form of regulation, taxation, etc) yields better results-- is not true, or true to a certain point. Many recent financial scandals-- S+L in the 80s, credit bust now-- have taken place under Republican control. I would argue that if business isn't regulated enough, it tends to behave irresponsibly, taking excessive risk and/or taking advantage of consumers. In the end, this leads to worse performance. One problem with the analysis of GNP under D vs R is that the time at the beginning of a presidential term is more reflective of the economic policies of the prior administration, due to the fact that it takes a while to pass legislation, and then those changes won’t take effect for several months, at the earliest. I wonder if the analysis was done by defining the “economic term” of each president as extending from 1 year (arbitrary) after he takes office until 1 year after he leaves, if the results would be the same.
Also, what’s more important, who controls the White House or Congress?
Still, if the conclusions are valid, one possible reason is that the underlying assumption behind Republican economic policy– less government interference in business (in the form of regulation, taxation, etc) yields better results– is not true, or true to a certain point. Many recent financial scandals– S+L in the 80s, credit bust now– have taken place under Republican control. I would argue that if business isn’t regulated enough, it tends to behave irresponsibly, taking excessive risk and/or taking advantage of consumers. In the end, this leads to worse performance.

]]>