Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Wednesday round up.

From earlier this year, David Goldman explains how to get China to save less and buy more imports.

Peter Schiff sees a stronger yuan as bad for America.

Newt Gingrich offers good pro-growth ideas but leaves out stabilizing the dollar.

Larry Kudlow predicts a soft economy, not a double dip recession.

Scott Sumner discusses growth since the 1980s.

From 2009, Judy Shelton explains her policy views on C-SPAN.

Don Boudreaux responds to the claim that “Americans don’t make things anymore.”

England's conservative government is cutting spending and raising taxes.

Germany's conservative government advocates austerity.

Progressive Kevin Drum worries about austerity.

From 1999, Jack Kemp rejects austerity in favor of growth.

The House Majority Leader attacks supply-side economics, citing National Review's Kevin D. Williamson.
“The second political factor we have to struggle with is the legacy of the supply-side dogma. Conservative economics used to be in touch with fiscal reality—remember that even President Reagan raised taxes in 1982, 1983, and 1984. Today, Ronald Reagan would be kicked out of the Republican party. Conservatives abandoned the first President Bush after the successful 1990 budget agreement. For the same reason, anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist said this about the possibility of a budget compromise today: ‘At some point conversations about unicorns are tedious, because they don’t exist in the real world. Budget deals where they actually restrain spending and raise taxes are unicorns.’

“I’ll only say that a budget agreement is entirely possible between two parties that look at reality as it is, not through the prism of 30-year-old ideologies that lead to defeatist falsehoods like ‘budget deals don’t exist.’

“The good news is that, after three decades, some on the right are realizing what supply-side has accomplished in reality. The administrations most committed to regressive tax cuts—Reagan and Bush II—left conservatives with bigger government, and left all of us deeper in red ink. As Kevin D. Williamson wrote in an influential April article in National Review, ‘Tax cuts don’t get us out of the spending pickle, and growth isn’t going to make the debt irrelevant…You can’t starve the beast if the Chinese and the bond markets keep lending him bon-bons by the ton.’ Even Alan Greenspan—who during the Bush Administration advocated for huge tax cuts to avoid the supposed danger of paying down the debt too quickly—acknowledged in the Wall Street Journal this month that that policy helped wipe out the surplus and led to higher interest rates.

“That’s the kind of honesty we all need to show if we want to head off a crisis. And slowly but surely, that honesty is spreading to Congress. This month, Senator George Voinovich candidly said that Republicans can’t sign Norquist’s anti-tax pledge and take on the debt at the same time: ‘What [my colleagues] have to understand is that that pledge is inconsistent with the oath of office that they took when they became members of the United States Senate.’"

No comments:

Post a Comment