Crash-Test Dummies as Republican Candidates for President

Jackie22

Well-known Member
Location
Northeast Texas
Crash-Test Dummies as Republican Candidates for President
AUG. 28, 2015
Paul Krugman


Will China’s stock crash trigger another global financial crisis? Probably not. Still, the big market swings of the past week have been a reminder that the next president may well have to deal with some of the same problems that faced George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Financial instability abides.


So this is a test: How would the men and women who would be president respond if crisis struck on their watch?


And the answer, on the Republican side at least, seems to be: with bluster and China-bashing. Nowhere is there a hint that any of the G.O.P. candidates understand the problem, or the steps that might be needed if the world economy hits another pothole.


Take, for example, Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin. Mr. Walker was supposed to be a formidable contender, part of his party’s “deep bench” of current or former governors who know how to get things done. So what was his suggestion to President Obama? Why, cancel the planned visit to America by Xi Jinping, China’s leader. That would fix things!


Then there’s Donald Trump, who likes to take an occasional break from his anti-immigrant diatribes to complain that China is taking advantage of America’s weak leadership. You might think that a swooning Chinese economy would fit awkwardly into that worldview. But no, he simply declared that U.S. markets seem troubled because Mr. Obama has let China “dictate the agenda.” What does that mean? I haven’t a clue — but neither does he.


By the way, five years ago there were real reasons to complain about China’s undervalued currency. But Chinese inflation and the rise of new competitors have largely eliminated that problem.


Back to the deep bench: Chris Christie, another governor who not long ago was touted as the next big thing, was more comprehensible. According to Mr. Christie, the reason U.S. markets were roiled by events in China was U.S. budget deficits, which he claims have put us in debt to the Chinese and hence made us vulnerable to their troubles. That almost rises to the level of a coherent economic story.


Did the U.S. market plunge because Chinese investors were cutting off credit? Well, no. If our debt to China were the problem, we would have seen U.S. interest rates spiking as China crashed. Instead, interest rates fell.


But there’s a slight excuse for Mr. Christie’s embrace of this particular fantasy: scare stories involving Chinese ownership of U.S. debt have been a Republican staple for years. They were, in particular, a favorite of Mitt Romney’s campaign in 2012.


And you can see why. “Obama is endangering America by borrowing from China” is a perfect political line, playing into deficit fetishism, xenophobia and the perennial claim that Democrats don’t stand up for America! America! America! It’s also complete nonsense, but that doesn’t seem to matter.


In fact, talking nonsense about economic crises is essentially a job requirement for anyone hoping to get the Republican presidential nomination.


"But the G.O.P. never acknowledged, after six full years of being wrong about everything, that the bad things it predicted failed to take...
The GOP call for a balanced budget amendment is purely to eliminate social safety net spending. They have already proven they can sidestep...


To understand why, you need to go back to the politics of 2009, when the new Obama administration was trying to cope with the most terrifying crisis since the 1930s. The outgoing Bush administration had already engineered a bank bailout, but the Obama team reinforced this effort with a temporary program of deficit spending, while the Federal Reserve sought to bolster the economy by buying lots of assets.


And Republicans, across the board, predicted disaster. Deficit spending, they insisted, would cause soaring interest rates and bankruptcy; the Fed’s efforts would “debase the dollar” and produce runaway inflation.


None of it happened. Interest rates stayed very low, as did inflation. But the G.O.P. never acknowledged, after six full years of being wrong about everything, that the bad things it predicted failed to take place, or showed any willingness to rethink the doctrines that led to those bad predictions. Instead, the party’s leading figures kept talking, year after year, as if the disasters they had predicted were actually happening.


Now we’ve had a reminder that something like that last crisis could happen again — which means that we might need a repeat of the policies that helped limit the damage last time. But no Republican dares suggest such a thing.


Instead, even the supposedly sensible candidates call for destructive policies. Thus John Kasich is being portrayed as a different kind of Republican because as governor he approved Medicaid expansion in Ohio, but his signature initiative is a call for a balanced-budget amendment, which would cripple policy in a crisis.


The point is that one side of the political aisle has been utterly determined to learn nothing from the economic experiences of recent years. If one of these candidates ends up in the hot seat the next time crisis strikes, we should be very, very afraid.
 

One thing overlooked in this long and incorrect post is our massive and ever growing debt. As long as our government has to make payments on this massive and growing debt there is less available to support these wanted and needed helps for the public supports and health care. Therefore more debt is created and not much gets done. Pay down these debts and have money available to do these nice things that have been planned but not budgeted for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lon
Crash-Test Dummies as Republican Candidates for President
AUG. 28, 2015
Paul Krugman


Will China’s stock crash trigger another global financial crisis? Probably not. Still, the big market swings of the past week have been a reminder that the next president may well have to deal with some of the same problems that faced George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Financial instability abides.


So this is a test: How would the men and women who would be president respond if crisis struck on their watch?


And the answer, on the Republican side at least, seems to be: with bluster and China-bashing. Nowhere is there a hint that any of the G.O.P. candidates understand the problem, or the steps that might be needed if the world economy hits another pothole.


Take, for example, Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin. Mr. Walker was supposed to be a formidable contender, part of his party’s “deep bench” of current or former governors who know how to get things done. So what was his suggestion to President Obama? Why, cancel the planned visit to America by Xi Jinping, China’s leader. That would fix things!


Then there’s Donald Trump, who likes to take an occasional break from his anti-immigrant diatribes to complain that China is taking advantage of America’s weak leadership. You might think that a swooning Chinese economy would fit awkwardly into that worldview. But no, he simply declared that U.S. markets seem troubled because Mr. Obama has let China “dictate the agenda.” What does that mean? I haven’t a clue — but neither does he.


By the way, five years ago there were real reasons to complain about China’s undervalued currency. But Chinese inflation and the rise of new competitors have largely eliminated that problem.


Back to the deep bench: Chris Christie, another governor who not long ago was touted as the next big thing, was more comprehensible. According to Mr. Christie, the reason U.S. markets were roiled by events in China was U.S. budget deficits, which he claims have put us in debt to the Chinese and hence made us vulnerable to their troubles. That almost rises to the level of a coherent economic story.


Did the U.S. market plunge because Chinese investors were cutting off credit? Well, no. If our debt to China were the problem, we would have seen U.S. interest rates spiking as China crashed. Instead, interest rates fell.


But there’s a slight excuse for Mr. Christie’s embrace of this particular fantasy: scare stories involving Chinese ownership of U.S. debt have been a Republican staple for years. They were, in particular, a favorite of Mitt Romney’s campaign in 2012.


And you can see why. “Obama is endangering America by borrowing from China” is a perfect political line, playing into deficit fetishism, xenophobia and the perennial claim that Democrats don’t stand up for America! America! America! It’s also complete nonsense, but that doesn’t seem to matter.


In fact, talking nonsense about economic crises is essentially a job requirement for anyone hoping to get the Republican presidential nomination.


"But the G.O.P. never acknowledged, after six full years of being wrong about everything, that the bad things it predicted failed to take...
The GOP call for a balanced budget amendment is purely to eliminate social safety net spending. They have already proven they can sidestep...


To understand why, you need to go back to the politics of 2009, when the new Obama administration was trying to cope with the most terrifying crisis since the 1930s. The outgoing Bush administration had already engineered a bank bailout, but the Obama team reinforced this effort with a temporary program of deficit spending, while the Federal Reserve sought to bolster the economy by buying lots of assets.


And Republicans, across the board, predicted disaster. Deficit spending, they insisted, would cause soaring interest rates and bankruptcy; the Fed’s efforts would “debase the dollar” and produce runaway inflation.


None of it happened. Interest rates stayed very low, as did inflation. But the G.O.P. never acknowledged, after six full years of being wrong about everything, that the bad things it predicted failed to take place, or showed any willingness to rethink the doctrines that led to those bad predictions. Instead, the party’s leading figures kept talking, year after year, as if the disasters they had predicted were actually happening.


Now we’ve had a reminder that something like that last crisis could happen again — which means that we might need a repeat of the policies that helped limit the damage last time. But no Republican dares suggest such a thing.


Instead, even the supposedly sensible candidates call for destructive policies. Thus John Kasich is being portrayed as a different kind of Republican because as governor he approved Medicaid expansion in Ohio, but his signature initiative is a call for a balanced-budget amendment, which would cripple policy in a crisis.


The point is that one side of the political aisle has been utterly determined to learn nothing from the economic experiences of recent years. If one of these candidates ends up in the hot seat the next time crisis strikes, we should be very, very afraid.
Excellent post jackie22 and it makes sense.
 

Well Jim. How do you propose we pay down this unneeded and stupid debt that keeps growing? Higher taxes might do the job. Better decisions on where we spend money might help. It is something that must happen in our Presidents office or Congress if we are serious about helping so many folks with our poor supports and medical plans. Or we could just wait and end up like Greece and hope Germany or other European country can help us out.

Being bankrupt is not a good place to be and we are heading there right now. No matter which party is in charge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lon
Strange... I see no mention of how the men and women who would be president on the democratic side would handle this crisis.

Well, Amigo, for one thing we wouldn't spend billions on wars that we didn't need. Especially when they were based upon lies. We wouldn't have cut taxes on the huge corporations and at the same time spend billions on "defense". We wouldn't have had to spend all that money for bailouts had we not coddled Wall Street and Corporations who profited at the expense of Joe average who took a major hit as a result of the above. Bush cost this country a fortune and he was and is being aided by the republican party. We shouldn't have gone for the Reagan "trickle down" scheme and we shouldn't have exported all our jobs.
 
Well, Amigo, for one thing we wouldn't spend billions on wars that we didn't need. Especially when they were based upon lies. We wouldn't have cut taxes on the huge corporations and at the same time spend billions on "defense". We wouldn't have had to spend all that money for bailouts had we not coddled Wall Street and Corporations who profited at the expense of Joe average who took a major hit as a result of the above. Bush cost this country a fortune and he was and is being aided by the republican party. We shouldn't have gone for the Reagan "trickle down" scheme and we shouldn't have exported all our jobs.

Understand all that. But, it still doesn't tell me how a democrat would handle this scenario. I have long said that nobody should have a D or R behind their names, when a $ would be more appropriate. Having been a registered Independent for over 2 decade's a one sided article makes it kinda difficult to make an informed decision, wouldn't you agree?
 
Understand all that. But, it still doesn't tell me how a democrat would handle this scenario. I have long said that nobody should have a D or R behind their names, when a $ would be more appropriate. Having been a registered Independent for over 2 decade's a one sided article makes it kinda difficult to make an informed decision, wouldn't you agree?
Having seen what we wrought under a Republican administration time and time again and having observed the philosophy of the republicans, no it's easy for me to dismiss a party that have rolled over to big business and abandoned the middle class of America. I have been voting since the Eisenhower era and I voted Republican until the second term of Reagan and then I started seeing the writing on the wall. I now vote Democrat for more reasons than I want to spend the time to innumerate but suffice to say, I believe we should be concerned with our own and their welfare, not the worlds and not big corporations.
 
Jim, you have some good points, but pointing to some poor examples. Our national debt has been rising since the 1970's with and without wars. It has been in the 7 trillion level when Clinton was President, it rose a bit under Bush, and then the Dems took over Congress in Bush's last two years and it jumped to 11 trillion. After Obama took over it started rising and is still rising and Obama has not created any wars but he has spent the limits the Congress allowed and still insists on spending which the Congress tried to slow down and Obama responded with a shut down government. To protect the people the Congress has had to keep on spending and we are now near 18 trillion and still rising. Not much hope for this country as long a the President does not listen to the Congress. We have near a year and a half yet till free from the current mess we have. Whether we have another Democrat or independent or Republican, I can't conceive of any being as arrogant as what we have now. Blame as you did but the current government has done nothing to end our debt or try to get it back under control.

Those debts need paid off regardless of who created them. This country can not go on in such debt as it is destroying our economy and bankruptcy will be the end of our once great country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lon
Wake up, America and vote for someone who cares about and knows about fiscal responsibility and management. We're running out of time.


.
 
Last edited:
If I recall correctly, Bush's wars were not even put on the books until President Obama took office...

images
 
I think that is just a claim some lefties like to say. Show me that in some government print. I don't think that would be possible as the Congress just can not give the money to do wars and not record it. That is what the Democrats say when some say he is spending well beyond his authorizations. So the money must be considered and recorded or the President gets none, or we have no controls to hold the Presidents back from wild spending. If you read my post above I mentioned that Congress tried to hold back money from Obama but Obama just shut down the government till he got what he wanted. So the controls are there but there are ways to overcome them apparently.

It was nice to post what Bernie Sanders is saying. He is right. But for one thing that is not in that quote. There were two Democrat's involved with monitoring and watching over the financial organizations the government is paying for and supporting. They should have reported the problems more honestly but did not. Interesting that both decided to retire as the market crashed. I suppose they were suspect where the finger might point if they stayed around. I won't post their names but if some insist I can look their names up and post them. That problem should have been publicly known, not waiting for the crash to come and surprise the banks, builders, lenders, industries, and so forth. It became a pretty big problem for the government and the people too.
 
Ummm. Question for those on the board with a knowledge of Economics. With it's present credit ratings, just why and how is it possible in the immediate future for America, (largest economy in the world,) to run aground unless, " fiscal responsibility and good management" come to the rescue? Those terms strike fear into the hearts of Canadians--being associated with severe cuts to social programs, and the attendant costs to the poor. Is it any different for Americans?
 
What do you call a government that ignores our debts, blames others for their debt, and continues to keep adding more debt to that already on the books. Arrogant sure seems to fit that way of operating. Like it or not.
 
And the point mentioned above, #7, is still true. Why are there no Democrats wanting to do something about this ongoing and increasing debt to the nation? I see that as a very good question. That some refuse to respond to those questions and call other posts to be extreme so they won't respond to them, just makes no sense either.
 


Back
Top