Finally, an agreement

How’s yer 401(k) doin’?

On Wednesday, the Dow Jones industrial average tumbled 943 points or about 3.4 percent. That followed a smaller dip on Tuesday. On Monday, the Dow fell by about 650 points Monday, an approximately 2.3 percent drop.



I personally think that 401(k)’s were just another “trickle up” scam.

Darling Nikki’s at it again

Funny, how they always get the austerity bug after they give trillions in tax cuts for the uber rich:

Blue state bailout?

Kiss my ass, Andrew Cuomo tells Mitch McConnell:

Pete Peterson meets St. Peter

DealBook Briefing: Remembering Pete Peterson and His Long and Winding Career

The man who’s done so much to attack Social Security and Medicare is gone. Via the American Prospect:

Name, please?

Peter G. Peterson.

And what makes you think you deserve admission to the Pearly Gates?

I’ve led a virtuous life, made billions, and gave most of it to charity.

What sort of charity?

Well, I gave over $1 billion to create the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, to warn Americans about the dangers of deficits and debts, and the excesses of Social Security and Medicare.

Yes? And where’s the charity part?

Too much spending will bankrupt America, especially the dreams of the young.

I’m just a saint, not an economist. But are you saying that it’s Social Security and Medicare that are destroying the life chances of the young, rather than—oh, I don’t know—college debt, insecure jobs, unaffordable housing, the very rich taking more than their share?

My one regret on Earth was that the young people just wouldn’t listen to what I was telling them.

And where did you say you made your money?

That would be private equity.

We have a saying around here: It’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than—

I know … than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

You’ve heard that one.

Yes, and I thought that if I just warned people against the perils of Social Security and Medicare, the Almighty would appreciate my virtue.

It’s kind of a stretch, Pete.

Well, do you mind if I ask you a few questions?

Sure, fire away.

It looks pretty fine up here. Who pays for all of this?

The Almighty forgives us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

Don’t you think that’s kind of profligate?

Well, we do have other, more austere quarters that might suit you a lot better.

The deficit game

Bruce Bartlett

Bruce Bartlett, former Reagan and Bush I economic adviser:

I think many Democrats and independent political observers are puzzled by the intensity with which Republicans are pursuing their tax cut. It’s not politically popular and may well lead to the party’s defeat in next year’s congressional elections. So why do it?

The answer is that Republicans are pushing the tax cut at breakneck speed precisely because they know they are probably going to lose next year and in 2020 as well. The tax cut, once enacted, however, will bind the hands of Democrats for years to come, forcing them to essentially follow a Republican agenda of deficit reduction and prevent any action on a positive Democratic program. The result will be a steady erosion of support for Democrats that will put Republicans back in power within a few election cycles.

The theory was laid out almost 30 years ago by two Swedish economists, Torsten Persson and Lars EO Svensson. In a densely written article for the Quarterly Journal of Economics in 1989, they explained why a stubborn conservative legislator would intentionally run a big budget deficit.

House Republicans pass major tax cut bill after Trump’s closed-door speech
Read more
It has to do with what economists call time inconsistency – the consequences of actions taken today may not appear until the future, when a different political party will be in power. Thus the credit or blame will accrue to that party rather than the one that implemented the policy, because voters tend to attribute whatever is happening today to the party in power today even if that party had nothing to do with it.

Thus Barack Obama got blamed for a recession and resulting budget deficits he had nothing to do with originating. No matter how many times the Congressional Budget Office showed that the vast bulk of the budget deficits in his administration were baked in the cake the day he took office, Republicans nevertheless blamed him and his policies exclusively for those deficits.