Democrats (rightly) get the label of 'tax and spend'. Somehow Republicans have claimed the mantra of fiscal conservatism, but the only time they displayed anything other than 'spend and spend w/o any taxes' was Bush1. He even tried the 'read my lips, no new taxes' thing, but in the end his true conservatism made him raised taxes. And his base abandoned him for it. The rest of the conference seems to have taken the learning to heart.
Exactly. The debt ceiling commentary from the right under Obama was "Cut the deficit!!!"... then Trump came in and gave away money under the "Field of Dreams", "trickle-down" promises of the greatest economy in the history of humans... and the focus turned to "reduce spending".
Appreciating the hypocrisy, conservatives often now just ignore the conversation. They want as much as possible for themselves, without any sense of responsibility for the system that allowed them to create their wealth. It's not personal brilliance, as much as a system that supports trying (and often failing). Now, the boomers want to grab every nickel they can before they die, instead of fixing the very things that made them feel so good about themselves.
I'd agree that the inflation spike was exogenous and caused by Putin's invasion of Ukraine and the western response to it (sanctions). I also agree that the biggest factor in it falling in the meantime is the global resolution of gas & oil supplies by other means and not the Inflation Act.
But you'd be hard pressed to convince me that the Inflation Act was a bad thing. It has stimulated a huge wave of public spending on the very things that have been neglected for too long in the States (ie. public infrastructure). Ok, this was done by borrowing. But that is a pretty common Democratic strategy. Spend big in the first term to create jobs and get the economy up and running then rein in the deficit over the second term. Of all the Democrat presidents since WWII the only president to fail at closing his term as president with a lower deficit than when he started was Obama IIRC.
If you look at the rest of the economic data, Biden has done a fantastic job. True, it was deficit spending in real Keynesian fashion. But when Republicans (not you) start moaning about the deficit I can't help but smile wryly at the charge, for it is Republican presidents who display the most reckless fiscal policies as a rule, usually by cutting taxes when the government can't afford it.
Democrats (rightly) get the label of 'tax and spend'. Somehow Republicans have claimed the mantra of fiscal conservatism, but the only time they displayed anything other than 'spend and spend w/o any taxes' was Bush1. He even tried the 'read my lips, no new taxes' thing, but in the end his true conservatism made him raised taxes. And his base abandoned him for it. The rest of the conference seems to have taken the learning to heart.
Most of what he did in office was borrow and spend money, building on the beyond-reckless spending of the Trump administration.
a point seemingly ignored by most on the right.
I'd agree that the inflation spike was exogenous and caused by Putin's invasion of Ukraine and the western response to it (sanctions). I also agree that the biggest factor in it falling in the meantime is the global resolution of gas & oil supplies by other means and not the Inflation Act.
But you'd be hard pressed to convince me that the Inflation Act was a bad thing. It has stimulated a huge wave of public spending on the very things that have been neglected for too long in the States (ie. public infrastructure). Ok, this was done by borrowing. But that is a pretty common Democratic strategy. Spend big in the first term to create jobs and get the economy up and running then rein in the deficit over the second term. Of all the Democrat presidents since WWII the only president to fail at closing his term as president with a lower deficit than when he started was Obama IIRC.
If you look at the rest of the economic data, Biden has done a fantastic job. True, it was deficit spending in real Keynesian fashion. But when Republicans (not you) start moaning about the deficit I can't help but smile wryly at the charge, for it is Republican presidents who display the most reckless fiscal policies as a rule, usually by cutting taxes when the government can't afford it.
Biden's signature piece of legislation (the Orwellianly-named Inflation Reduction Act of 2022) took effect in August of 2022â2 months after the inflation spike caused by the orgy of pandemic spending had peaked. Granted there is a significant lag associated between government actions and measurable impact on the economy, but inflation is still 3X higher than when he took office.
The unemployment rate shows a reversion to the mean after an enormous spike in 2020. It has been on a slow rise since January of 2023, where it briefly hit 3.4%âa touch better than the previous low in February of 2020 of 3.5%. You can see it all in great detail in a graphic I can't embed here https://www.bls.gov/charts/emp...
Biden did not save the US economy. Most of what he did in office was borrow and spend money, building on the beyond-reckless spending of the Trump administration. Our grandchildren will be paying for this amphetamine rush for their whole lives even if spending were to level off. National debt of the United StatesIntragovernmental holdings Debt held by the public
And I bet when it's the eleventh time you'll have to take off your shoes to keep count and when it is the 21st time you'll have to lower your zipper ...
OBTW ... the flu kills many more than does pancreatic cancer. They are both deadly.
It's surprising how analytical you can be... to avoid discussing Project 2025. You just keep dodging that one...
Yeah, well your side's plan for us is the Green New Deal, most recently disguised as the (cough) Inflation Reduction Act. How's that working out ?
This is the second time you've compared the Green New Deal and Project 2025. It's like comparing Pancreatic cancer and the flu.
And I bet when it's the eleventh time you'll have to take off your shoes to keep count and when it is the 21st time you'll have to lower your zipper ...
OBTW ... the flu kills many more than does pancreatic cancer. They are both deadly.
So within its own article it says that predictions are a waste of time:
FTA âIn 2016 most pundits found it unfathomable that a manifestly unqualified candidate like Mr Trump could win the presidency. This bias was reinforced by polls that consistently put Hillary Clinton in the lead. Now, after a presidency that yielded two impeachments and a riot at the Capitol, the prospect that voters might willingly return to office a man recently convicted of 34 felonies seems nearly as outlandish. Yet surveys suggest it is more likely than not.â
Your TL;DR cherry-picked takeaway. Obviously pundits as well as models have limitations (as further elaborated).
Yet surveys suggest it is more likely than not.The Economistâs statistical model
of the electionâwhich relies solely on polls, past results and economic
data, and knows nothing of Mr Trumpâs record in office or in the
courtsâgives Mr Biden a one-in-three chance of re-election. That means a
victory for Mr Biden would count as only a mild surprise, somewhat more
likely than the 30% share of days on which it rains in London. Four
years ago this week this model gave Mr Biden an 83% chance.
So within its own article it says that predictions are a waste of time:
FTA âIn 2016 most pundits found it unfathomable that a manifestly unqualified candidate like Mr Trump could win the presidency. This bias was reinforced by polls that consistently put Hillary Clinton in the lead. Now, after a presidency that yielded two impeachments and a riot at the Capitol, the prospect that voters might willingly return to office a man recently convicted of 34 felonies seems nearly as outlandish. Yet surveys suggest it is more likely than not.â
