This AIG thing would be funny, if it weren’t actually happening.  After eight years of conservatives getting everything they’ve ever wanted, in terms of business and financial regulation policy, we’ve ended up with massive public bailouts of our largest private financial institutions. Maybe I misunderstood that whole “ownership society” mantra. Who knew Bush was talking about socialism?
silence dogood
Think this will put the final nail in the coffin of the myth that Conservatives are capitalists and Democrats want to socialize everything?
Yeah, I don’t think so, either. Sigh.
MB
Can’t reason with faith, I’m afraid.
But if you could, this would be interesting.
unacoder
the idea that such a thing [presidents being better for the economy by party] could be measured empirically is absurd. the national economy depends on so many variables and elements not under even the remotest influence of the president. the economy also does not begin anew under each successive administration, necessarily being influenced by previous administrations (by your assertion) and externalities. i would probably argue that *any* president screws up the economy.
MB
Well, it just was measured empirically right there, wasn’t it? Whether those are useful measures is another issue entirely.
~
Not under the remotest influence of the President? Really? So this whole regulatory environment that seems to have such a big impact on business investment decision around the world doesn’t make a difference in the economy? Providing (along with Congress) a predictable tax structure doesn’t? Setting forth clear enforcement standards doesn’t?
Absurd, indeed.
unacoder
i never claimed the president didn’t influence the economy (people are sheep after all). i claim that attempting to prove that one president or another is better for the economy (at least according to these metrics) is farcical. this is party chat material at best, far from scientifically relevant.
as usual, munger explains better than i:
http://mungowitzend.blogspot.com/2008/09/michael-kinsley-almost-as-dumb-as.html
i would agree that a predictable tax structure would do wonders for the economy. when was the last time we had that?
unacoder
sorry, that link was from angus
CG
Is a free market suppose to work like an unvaccinated population?
That is, every once in awhile you get a pandemic (correction), and then everyone (who survives) is fine again?
If so, I’m not really in favor of that.
MB
That’s because you’re a commie, CG. Any true American is in favor of a pruning of the herd. Only the strong will survive! Well, that and deserving weaklings like Bear Stearns, Fannie/Freddie, etc.
If we’re talking about actual human beings, though, forget the weaklings part.
~
I can’t say that I read the Kinsley piece as an attempt at proving causation, but rather a somewhat tongue-in-cheek illustration of correlation. But if you do want to touch on the matter of causation, I think that elected Democratic presidents have generally been better at managing (their piece of) the economy than Republicans. Especially since they mostly have to clean up the messes that the Republicans before them left.
unacoder
i don’t think it’s worthwhile trying to save companies that take on so much risk using public funds. it’s a recipe for future disasters. public aid only served to delay the demise of the Big Three. and they want more money again. why are they worth saving? honda and toyota make better cars here in america.
i can’t say i’m all that sympathetic to people who tried to get into a home by overextending. fraud is a different issue.
i will also never argue that republican presidents are any good. at anything i value anyway.