(1) They all have been awarded The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, and (2) they oppose Mr. Trump’s economic agenda.
Here’s another letter, from nearly four years ago.
(1) They all have been awarded The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, and (2) they oppose Mr. Trump’s economic agenda.
Here’s another letter, from nearly four years ago.
It’s interesting to note Eric Maskin is a Republican. Wrote one of my college textbooks. It was a hard trudge through, but it was a very good textbook. Which of the others are Republican?? That could tell us something. But hats off to Maskin for taking the lesser walked path. Honestly I didn’t think Maskin had it in him. Much Respect
I ROYALLY screwed up again. I was thinking of Frederic Mishkin. I’m sorry, my apologies. Well maybe Frederic Mishkin ALSO signed/endorsed the letter. Let’s hope so. My apologies, I’m sorry. At this rate I’ll be assigned to be the MAGA newspaper executive editor.
OK, I’m gonna repeat myself here. We are now discussing actual policy, which I appreciate. However, making policy salient for swing voters – most of whom pay little attention to policy or politics until the final months of an election year – is not easy. Nobel “Peace” Prize-winning economists saying Trump’s policies are a disaster is a good thing, but hardly sufficient.
Trump’s tariff ideas will cause inflation on a massive scale, hurting everyone. His tax cut ideas will mostly help the rich.
Trump’s Supreme Court picks overturned abortion rights, and the same people now want to limit access to birth control and fertility treatments.
Trump is a criminal, found to have falsified records and to have committed rape, slander and fraud. The Trump organization has been found guilty of tax evasion.
Trump tried to overturn election results through violence.
Babies in cages – that was the low point in Trump’s approval during his presidency.
Simple, declarative sentences. Effective graphics and music. Pick whatever issues tests best with swing-state voters. Don’t mumble. Don’t use paragraphs when sentences will do.
Drive wedges without being ham-handed. Disaffected Republicans are thoughtful Republicans. Don’t insult their intelligence.
By the way, Trump is morphing from populist demagogue to corporatist shill in his policy statements. Green cards for graduates. Cryptocurrency is dandy. No immigration bill. And so on. Point out his disloyalty to “regular Americans”.
And would somebody please connect Trump’s policy proposals to the housing market? Housing is near the top of the list of voter concerns.
Easiest is to claim, with good reason, that his tax cuts would lead to higher interest rates. If that doesn’t test well with focus groups, find something that will. DO NOT rely on the instincts of “clever people” to decide what will sway voters. Clever people have already decided who to vote for.
https://calculatedrisk.substack.com/p/new-home-sales-decrease-to-619000
Thanks for what CR noted. Back to Macroduck’s “his tax cuts would lead to higher interest rates”.
Well we had the same fiscal stimulus under early Reagan and we got higher interest rates – and CR’s graphs show the damage to the housing market back then.
Supply of new homes up, sales down. That’s not due to an existing mortgage-rate anchor, since this is the new home market. That’s an affordability problem.
Also from; CR prices on new homes are down 9%. So the new homes that do sell are selling at a lower price (so the owners don’t get overwhelmed by the monthly payments). Not clear to me whether that means smaller houses or smaller prices – but you cannot sell at monthly payments that are more than people can afford.
Neither Phelps nor Sims are flaming liberals. But they are good economists.
I may have said this earlier but please – where is the recent letter penned by Stiglitz and signed by the other 15? Axios mentions it but does not link to it.
Menzie – also (3) – Trump campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt thinks they are “worthless Nobel Peace Prize winners.” https://digbysblog.net/2024/06/25/oh-what-do-they-know/ (and – yes – she said Peace Prize winners – but I’m sure they support Biden as well.)
Besides the economists – business CEOs do not support Trump https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/23/opinion/ceo-trump-republican-support.html
Besides economists, business leaders – does anyone remember when military leaders feared Trump might attempt a coup before he did? https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/u-s-military-leaders-worried-trump-might-attempt-a-coup-to-stay-in-power-new-book-claims
I have to also point out here – that – besides low-level grifters and felons (Bannon, Eastman, Navarro (hey there is a Trump-supporting economist)) – most former top Trump officials are warning against a second Trump admin – https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/03/politics/donald-trump-former-allies-what-matters/index.html
I suppose there are some transactional rich criminals and dictators that support Trump – Musk, Putin, Murdock, etc.
I noted this silly statement ala Karoline Leavitt earlier but it is good to see Digby all over this.
BTW – where did Karoline Leavitt get her degree in economics?
Karoline Leavitt majored in communications and played softball. Yep – she is as qualified in economics as Kudlow the Klown.
Anyone who could pass a basic introductory course in economics would be able to see the absurdity of Trumps populist proposals and postulates. Unfortunately there are a lot of people around Tump that either don’t understand or don’t care, as long as they can get the influence/power/fame of being in his inner circle. For the Trump voters it almost is an endorsement, when people (eggheads) who are part of “the establishment” are against something. The voters are too lazy and/or ignorant to analyze fact-based information, rationales and logic; for them its all cult and tribalism (if those people are against it then I am for it).
“Unfortunately there are a lot of people around Tump that either don’t understand or don’t care, as long as they can get the influence/power/fame of being in his inner circle.”
Exhibit A – the Three Stooges (Stephen Moore, Lawrence Kudlow, and Art Laffer).
Menzie – this is inside baseball in Wisconsin politics – but I find it interesting when any WI GOP says they are all in for Trump in 2024. Oh – are you sure? Why are you wasting your time and resources to recall the long-term WIGOP Assembly Leader Robin “Boss Vos” Vos for a seat that will only serve for three months? Why – because apparently Robin was not sufficiently butt-kissing enough when he spent more than $1 million of taxpayer dollars to find fraud in the 2020 election – Gablemann did find that some people in long-term care facilities got assistance to vote – completely legal – folks – ever since the ADA was passed in 1990.
I wonder about the state of the RNC in Wisconsin – now that Laura Trump is in charge – is any of that sweet RNC grift money going to down ballot R Candidates? Or do they have to pay a fee to Trump to put “Trump endorsed” on their signs?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/enough-signatures-collected-to-force-recall-election-for-wisconsin-gop-leader-commission-says/ar-BB1oSMy0?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=a340d71321d04da1b9b17ee8484d2180&ei=18
We now have an estimate of the drag on June vehicle sale due to the hack attack on selling software. From Thomas King, head of data and analytics at J.D. Power:
“Because of the disruption to dealer software systems, June sales will not be reflective of actual consumer demand for new vehicles…a significant number of sales that would have occurred in June are now likely to occur in July…June total sales are projected to be between 1.33 and 1.27 million units, a 2.6% to 7.2% decrease, respectively, from June 2023…a significant range of sales outcomes are possible due to the uncertainty about exactly when system outages will be resolved…”
If my math is correct, and ignoring seasonal adjustment, that looks like a m/m drop in vehecle sales of between 4.6% and 9.1%. With vehicle sales recently accounting for about 19% of retail and food service sales, JDPower’s range of estimates suggests the software problem will shave between 0.9% and 1.7% from total June sales. Over the past year, m/m changes in sales have run between -1.1% and +0.8%, so odds are, we’ll be hearing about a drop in total retail sales for June. Best to focus on sales excluding autos.
Anyone doing a serious retail sales forecast will want to check my math.
A hypothetical from the wayback machine. Imagine it is 1981 and a group of well respected economists warned us that the toxic mix of Reagan’s fiscal stimulus (tax cuts for the rich and higher defense spending) with tight money would lead to a massive trade deficit and a recession. Would no one in the press have noticed?
Oh wait – that was what happened and the press failed to notice. Now let’s go back to 2017 with Trump’s tax cut for the rich and increases in defense spending. Economists criticized this policy mix too. But did the press notice? Of course not.
And we have charlatans like Kudlow, Moore, and Laffer telling us the Reagan tax cuts boosted economic growth. They said they same thing about the 2017 tax cut. We know these were lies but you never hear this on Faux News. No some of the press actually pretend the intellectual garbage ala the Three Stooges (Kudlow, Moore, and Laffer) is settled economics.
All the crap you and Rosser gave me before pgl, this is why I LOVE you, you remember those Reagan years VERY accurately. Any sin you committed in your life can be forgiven on those grounds, You’re a “rare cat” can see America as it is, same as my Dad saw it. That last part is the highest compliment I can give you, Rosser doesn’t get that or deserve it. But you got that,
I should remember the Reagan years as I gave a short rebuttal to some supply-sider BS that ticked off a lot of people on the right but made Richard Musgrave so happy that he had to introduce himself to me. Which was a real joy as his text on Public Finance was the go to book back in the day. He was the best economist at that conference but they did not give him any air time – quite the shame.
5-star comment by you
https://archive.org/details/publicfinanceint0000rich_n6b5/mode/2up
Public Finance in Theory and Practice
by Richard Musgrave
Publication date Jul 01, 2017
Publisher Tata McGraw-Hill
I did not know there was a 5th edition. My version was the 1959 First Edition. And it is free on the internet? A true classic with a progressive twist!
Off topic – a brief for charging fossil fuel companies with homicide:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4335779
As I understand it, governments at all levels, down to individual counties, have standing to bring homicide cases in behalf of their citizens. Politics would get in the way for many jurisdictions, but not for all. Charging ExxonMobil with homicide may sound farfetched, but given the sheer number of potential plaintiffs, I’m guessing this idea has legs.
“Fossil fuel companies learned decades ago that what they produced, marketed, and sold would generate “globally catastrophic” climate change. Rather than alert the public and curtail their operations, they worked to deceive the public about these harms and prevent regulation of their lethal conduct. They funded efforts to call sound science into doubt and confuse their shareholders, consumers, and regulators. They poured money into campaigns to elect or install judges, legislators, and executive officials hostile to any litigation, regulation, or competition that might limit their profits.”
So what they are saying is that trolls like CoRev and Bruce Hall should be charged with homicide. Good idea!
Wait until Menzie gets done with his summer reading.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
HL Mencken
You’re repeating yourself, and hiding behind Mencken.
Clear, simple and wrong? Border wall. Replacing taxes with tariffs. Dealing with immigration by separating families and putting children in cages. Buddying up to Putin. Lying about science. Overturning the Iran nukes deal. Fake electors. January 6 violence at the Capitol. Falsifying records. Rape.
See? Now Mencken is my guy. And you are clearly and simply wrong.
@ Macroduck
Nailed it. Amen
I suspect Brucie boy likes Mencken because Mencken opposed FDR’s New Deal. Yea Brucie boy hearts recessions because Brucie boy wants to pay a nickel for a bottle of Coke.
And there’s Mencken opposition to the US joining the fight against Hitler. I bet Brucie boy is even cheering for Putin in his raping of Ukraine. MAGA!
That’s all you got? Brucie boy is in trouble for dumbest troll of the year even if it is down to a one person race.
Bruce Hall It sounds to me like your solution is to deny that climate change is even a problem. Talk about “clear, simple and wrong.” In any event, if you’ve ever read any serious literature on climate change (and I doubt that you have), then you’d know that the proposed solutions are anything but clear and simple. That’s one reason why the ignorant general public (that includes you) are so easily swayed by “sciencey sounding” websites from bought-and-sold crackpots with a keyboard.
“That’s one reason why the ignorant general public (that includes you) are so easily swayed by “sciencey sounding” websites from bought-and-sold crackpots with a keyboard.”
Nicely put. Our host just put up some interesting recent data on global warming. I’m taking bets as to the date of the next Bruce Hall comment that includes something from crackpot Judith Curry.
Trump Tells Atlanta Black Barbershop Why Black People Like Him
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump
Follow this story to realize what a racist clown Trump really is. First of all he can’t be bothered to be in the black barbershop. I guess he is afraid to one of those “black people” to cut his weird orange hair.
Then he brags about tax cuts for the rich? Like the barbers make $500,000 a year?
And of course “the black people” like him because he is a convict. MAGA!
The 6 conservatives on the Supreme Court just ruled government corruption is OK if one does it in a clever way!
Corruption Law Allows Gifts to State and Local Officials, Supreme Court Rules
The court, which has limited the sweep of several anti-corruption laws, distinguished after-the-fact rewards from before-the-fact bribes.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/26/us/politics/supreme-court-corruption-bribery.html
The Supreme Court limited the sweep of a federal law on Wednesday aimed at public corruption, ruling that it did not apply to gifts and payments meant to reward actions taken by state and local officials. The 6-to-3 ruling, which split along ideological lines, was the latest in a series of decisions cutting back federal anti-corruption laws. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing for a conservative majority, said that the question in the case was whether federal law makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept such gratuities after the fact. He wrote, “The answer is no.”
Federal prosecutors’ interpretation of the law created traps for public officials, leaving them to guess what gifts were allowed, he added. If they guessed wrong, the opinion continued, the officials could face up to a decade in prison. The decision reflected a sharp divide on the court, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, dissenting. While the conservative wing asserted that the ruling gave discretion to state and local governments and protected officials from having to guess whether their behavior had crossed a criminal line, the liberals said the decision represented more chipping away of a statute aimed at protecting against graft.“ Officials who use their public positions for private gain threaten the integrity of our most important institutions,” Justice Jackson wrote. “Greed makes governments — at every level — less responsive, less efficient and less trustworthy from the perspective of the communities they serve.” In what appeared to be a dig at the court’s conservative bloc, Justice Jackson added that the defendant in the case offered an “absurd and a textual reading of the statute” that “only today’s court could love.”
The decision was issued as the court faces increased scrutiny over its ethics practices. After months of revelations by ProPublica and others that Justice Clarence Thomas had failed to reveal luxury travel and gifts from the Texas billionaire and conservative donor Harlan Crow, as well as revelations about other justices, the court adopted an ethics code, the first in its history. The case before the court, Snyder v. United States, No. 23-108, concerned James Snyder, a former mayor of Portage, Ind., a city of about 38,000 people near Lake Michigan. In 2013, while Mr. Snyder was mayor, the city awarded two contracts for a garbage truck company, Great Lakes Peterbilt. Portage bought five garbage trucks for about $1.1 million. In 2014, after the process was complete, the company cut Mr. Snyder a check for $13,000 for what he later said were consulting services. The F.B.I. and federal prosecutors said the bidding process had been manipulated to ensure the company prevailed. Investigators said the money was a gratuity for the garbage truck contracts, but Mr. Snyder said it was payment for his consulting services as a contractor for Peterbilt. A jury convicted Mr. Snyder of accepting an illegal gratuity, and a federal judge sentenced him to more than a year in prison. On appeal, Mr. Snyder argued that the federal statute criminalized only bribes, not after-the-fact gratuities. A federal appeals court affirmed his conviction, and Mr. Snyder petitioned the Supreme Court to review the case. The majority explained that the law typically makes a distinction between bribes — payments made or agreed to before a government action to influence the outcome — and gratuities — payments made after a government action to reward or thank the public official.
My Dad moved here in the early 80s. The state of Oklahoma never fails to provide laughs. Sad, but still a kind of sardonic humor. Imagine working for a newspaper connected to “USA Today” and then thinking you’d make a big dollars off of a town sports paper:
https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/sold-out-the-rise-and-fall-of-americas-most-ambitious-sports-media-company/
That’s what passes for “smarts” here in Okie-ville
“…the law typically makes a distinction…” Typically? So, there are lots of instances?
Um…examples, oh wise robed ones?
pgl: “The majority explained that the law typically makes a distinction between bribes — payments made or agreed to before a government action to influence the outcome — and gratuities — payments made after a government action to reward or thank the public official.”
Employers refer to an after the fact “gratuity” as deferred compensation. There is no question that deferred compensation is awarded for services rendered in the past. In fact, the IRS regards deferred compensation as “earned income” when it is received. Highly paid employees may choose to have some of their compensation deferred to reduce current taxes but these political gratuities are deferred to avoid prosecution as bribes. Heck, the briber could just give the politician a post-dated check. “Don’t cash this check until after the deal is done.”
Deferred compensation is precisely what this bribe was! Or maybe we should see it as a commission rate. Gee 1.2% does not seem that high for services rendered I guess.
Back in my childhood days, there was a regular tag line at the end of radio ads: “90 days, same as cash”. If I promise payment before the fact, delivering payment after the fact is just business as usual. When payment is for the grant of a contract, it’s a quid pro quo. It’s the intention that matters, not the timing.
The old lawyer wisdom is when the law is on your side, bang in the law – when the facts are on your side, bang in the facts – when neither one is on your side, bang on the table. The conservatives lean on whatever they can to rule the way they want. This time, a made-up “typical” distinction, and a silly claim about timing provide the lipstick for this corrupt pig.
This is another abuse of logic, and of power, just like overturning Roe. Just like Citizens United. Just like bump stocks. This is a rich-people ruling. Sliding money back and forth in a semblance of above-board dealing is something rich people do on a massive scale. Poor people mostly don’t have the money to slide around, and no need to hide it when they do.
US Supreme Court faults SEC’s use of in-house judges in latest curbs on agency powers
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-supreme-court-faults-sec-s-use-of-in-house-judges-in-latest-curbs-on-agency-powers/ar-BB1p0q9Y?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=3fa51d3a2a304d95833b1ec8d3bdae75&ei=13
Another victory for people who get rich by screwing the average investor.
Oh gee – I forgot about that 7th Amendment:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/seventh_amendment
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
But wait, Inflation adjust this $20 and the value today would have to exceed $670.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/kudlow-why-do-people-still-believe-tax-cuts-are-always-bad-and-government-spending-is-always-good/vi-BB1oXTNl?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=5977d436d5b2473da58ceac91ff4173a&ei=5
If you want a good laugh, watch Kudlow the Klown along with Kevin DOW 36000 Hassett and Steve Flat Tax Forbes calling Nobel Prize winners in economics a bunch of socialists who never do any modeling. Like these three clowns do?
One last thing on the Kudlow the Klown show. Kudlow and Hassett tried to tell us that median real incomes rose by $5000 a year in 2018 and other $5000 a year in 2019. That would imply this weekly series was some $200 a week higher at the end of 2019 than it was at the end of 2017:
Employed full time: Median usual weekly real earnings
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q
Now maybe I’m not viewing this chart correctly but Kudlow’s claim does not seem to be even remotely close to being correct.
Now I get Faux News is a joke but come on man!
More on Kudlow, Hassett, and Forbes lying on the TV. Now Mr. Flat Tax told us that Federal tax revenues rose because of the Trump tax cuts. Well in nominal terms but duh. Yea – we covered this lie earlier when Laffer and Moore said that on Kudlow’s joke of a show. But then Mr. Flat Tax told us Federal spending is now higher than it was during COVID. Maybe Mr. Flat Tax should check with FRED before his lies again:
Federal Government: Current Expenditures
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FGEXPND
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court got another one right – the drug-dealing Sacklers are back in the hook for the hook. Turns out, going through bankruptcy court without being bankrupted isn’t in the law.
Big-time implications for other firms trying similar dodges to avoid paying for their misdeads.
Judges Rebel Against the Supreme Court
https://www.newsweek.com/2024/07/05/judges-rebel-against-supreme-court-1915747.html
There is a growing chorus of Supreme Court critics coming from within the judiciary. Judges on both sides of the ideological spectrum and across various levels have become increasingly willing to speak out, warning America about the future of democracy. Among those critics are retired Judge David S. Tatel. A Clinton appointee who served for nearly 30 years on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Tatel recently revealed in a new memoir, Vision: A Memoir of Blindness and Justice, that part of the reason he stepped down from the court in January was because he grew tired of the Supreme Court’s “low regard” for judicial principles.