'Putting Ideology Ahead of Reality'

[rubato]

Why aren't more people offended that the Republican party lies continually about everything?

We have tested the theory that cutting taxes on the rich spurs economic growth several times and it has failed every time. Clinton even did the opposite experiment and raised taxes on the rich (which 100% of Republicans said would cause a depression) and disproven the theory that way as well; it led to the largest and longest economic expansion in 50 years. It is a DEAD issue to anyone who cares about the facts. Only Republicans will continue to lie like this. But why are there not more Republicans who are offended to be lied to? :


______________________________-
Saturday, November 03, 2012
The Long-Run Harm of 'Putting Ideology Ahead of Reality'

Republicans attack anyone or anything that disagrees with them. The attempt to politicize the Congressional Research Service is the latest example:

Ideology Over Reality, by Andrew Rosenthal, Editorial, NY Times: In a brazen example of putting ideology ahead of reality, Senate Republicans seem to have pressured the Congressional Research Service to withdraw a report debunking conservative economic orthodoxy. Cutting tax rates at the top appears “to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie,” the report said. “However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.” So charging the rich lower tax rates doesn’t promote economic growth; it merely increases economic inequality.

The CRS is a highly respected, independent agency that prepares reports for members of Congress and routinely issues findings that disappoint or even irritate their clients, who usually just grin and bear it, or at least bear it. But Congressional Republicans seem to think that the CRS should function like Pravda. In recent months, Republicans have been on a paranoid tear. They attacked the private and equally authoritative Tax Policy Center because it bothered to analyze Mitt Romney’s tax plan and found that it’s pretty much impossible to cut taxes by 20 percent without increasing the deficit. And they claimed there was a conspiracy at the Bureau of Labor Statistics when it reported last month that the unemployment rate had dipped below 8 percent. ...

The attacks on the Fed have also been harmful, and, of course, it doesn't end there. Republicans attack academic research whenever it doesn't agree with them, e.g. the attempt to portray global warming research as manufactured to support ideological beliefs rather than the science that it is. This behavior undermines our ability to provide fact-based, independent assessments and research on important issues. All that matters to Republicans is their short-run political interests, there's little thought or concern about the longer-run harm their actions cause (their approach to global warming is a good example of this behavior, both in terms of the climate risks and the attempt to undermine academic research/researchers). There's little sense of obligation to the social good, little worry about harming important institutions, only their narrow, short-run, self-interest matters. Even when they proclaim long-run interests -- "what about the future of our children?!" -- it is really about the narrow, powerful interests in control of the party (in this case, it's an attempt to use fear about the future to get support for cuts to social programs now, which in turn support tax cuts for the wealthy, but see here on "the myth of the exploding safety net"). And of course, there are also attacks on individuals if they say the wrong thing (even children can come under attack).

Paul Krugman adds:

The Ultimate Zombie Idea: Zombie ideas — a phrase I originally saw in the context of myths about Canadian health care — are policy ideas that keep being killed by evidence, but nonetheless shamble relentlessly forward, essentially because they suit a political agenda.

The controversy over the withdrawal by the Congressional Research Service of a report showing no connection between tax cuts for the rich and economic growth is a reminder that in U.S. politics, at least, the tax cuts/growth notion is the ultimate zombie idea.

I mean, when the CRS report first came out I didn’t write about it because it was basically old news... Nobody has ever been able to find clear evidence of a link between high-end tax cuts and growth. ...

And the tax-cut faithful have delivered one forecasting debacle after another. I’m old enough to remember not just the predictions that the Bush tax cuts would unleash a huge economic boom, but the claims that Clinton’s 1993 tax hike would cause a deep depression.

Yet the tax-cut dogma remains politically intact, and it is at the core of Romney’s alleged plan for recovery.

There is, of course, no mystery here: just ask who benefits from the dogma that ever-lower taxes on the wealthy are just what we need, and you understand why there is always plenty of money for both economists and politicians who promote the dogma.

But it’s kind of sad to realize that our public discourse is so obviously, nakedly corrupt.

It's also kind of sad that political polarization and the quest for power is doing so much harm to our ability to provide fact-based, reliable, politically unbiased information to the public. People don't know who they can trust anymore, and the deliberate harm that Republicans have caused is a big part of the reason why.
__________________________________

*sigh*

The nice thing about science is that idiot like this all disappear.

yrs,
rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

Just the one?

[Timster]

LOL! Not sure what the Chemical breakdown of that formula is...However I am sure that someone some where is grinning like a mule eating briars at the absurdity of the assumption.

[Lord Jim]

Oh, there he goes quoting The Liar Krugman again....

'Putting Ideology Ahead of Reality'

Not sure exactly how that's worse than "Putting Stupidity Ahead Of Reality" which has long been your approach....

[dgs49]

No, wait...this is the same Krugman guy who said that the stimulus was going to make unemployment drop?

Then after two trillion in stimulus he said IT WAS TOO TIMID?

Oh yeah. THAT Krugman.

[Econoline]

OTOH, find me ONE reputable economist who says that slashing federal, state, and local government spending will HELP an economic recovery from a severe recession.

[dgs49]

See the article titled, "The Kindest Cuts." Detailed analysis of that very point. I have the magazine in hard copy, and I believe the on-line version will be available shortly. If not, I'll print some extracts.

http://www.city-journal.org/

[rubato]

Of the countries affected by the downturn ALL of the ones who used austerity are worse off. The only countries better off used a stimulus.


Facts.


yrs,
rubato

[Econoline]

See the article titled, "The Kindest Cuts." Detailed analysis of that very point. I have the magazine in hard copy, and I believe the on-line version will be available shortly. If not, I'll print some extracts.

http://www.city-journal.org/

Thanks; I look forward to reading it. (That particular article is not yet available online.) Does it deal specifically with the point that rubato has raised?

Of the countries affected by the downturn ALL of the ones who used austerity are worse off. The only countries better off used a stimulus.

[rubato]

I've posted this several times. The US used a stimulus and the UK used the Republican "all austerity" method.



The results for the UK/ Republican method have been a longer downturn than in the great depression.



I've also posted data from Sweden (stimulus and rapid recovery) and many other EU countries which used all austerity (all have done badly).




yrs,
rubato

[dgs49]

From the article:

"In 2011, the International Monetary Fund identified episodes from 1980 to 2005 in which 17 developed countries had aggressively reduced deficits. The IMF classified each episode as either "expenditure related" or "tax based," depending on whether the govgernment had mainly cut spending or hiked taxes. When Carlo Favero, Francesco Giavazzzi and I studied the results, it turned out that the two kinds of deficit reduction had starkly different effects: cutting spending resulted in very small, short-lived - if any - recessions, and raising taxes resulted in prolonged recessions."

Barry's "plan" - endorsed wholeheartedly by the resident dickhead, is to raise taxes, BUT ONLY ON THE ECONOMIC STRATA WHO CREATE JOBS.

He also refers to an "all austerity method," meaning presumably deficit reduction exclusively by cutting costs. This is not anticipated by anyone but dickheads.

The "dialog" in Congress over the past couple years (abetted by the MSM) is for the Dems to propose NOTHING in the way of spending cuts - indeed they come up with more ways to deficit-spend by the hour - and DEMANDING that the Republican's accept tax increases, all the while promising to show their cuts as soon as the tax increases are on the table.

This is what many refer to as a "fool's bargain." It is one that Republicans have lost in the past, when tax increases are coupled, not with spending cuts, but rather with massive spending increases, followed shortly thereafter by claims that the huge deficits that resulted were the Republicans' fault.

Regardless of whether "austerity only" plans are beneficial, it is rather absurd for the side which proposes NO austerity proposals whatsoever to be asserting that austerity only won't work. The article cited demonstrates to anyone who is not a complete dickhead that trying to bring deficits under control via tax increases is destructive folly.

[rubato]

The current situation is "what do you do in a severe recession"? The worst recession in 80 years to be exact*. Only a goddamn fool thinks that cutting spending at that moment makes sense.

Try to focus.

yrs,
rubato

* Created by Republican lack of regulation of the financial sector.

[The Hen]

I've posted this several times. The US used a stimulus and the UK used the Republican "all austerity" method.



The results for the UK/ Republican method have been a longer downturn than in the great depression.



I've also posted data from Sweden (stimulus and rapid recovery) and many other EU countries which used all austerity (all have done badly).




yrs,
rubato

Australia used a stimulus package almost two years before it was fashionable, together with a rise in taxes. We came through the GFC unscathed.

It was Rudd's finest hour.

[rubato]

Aus. did the right thing too.

yrs,
rubato

[dgs49]

So let's review here. dickhead says that the solution to the recession is to continue to borrow trillions from the Chinese to fund superfluous government employees.

I hope you are man enough to own up to it. Doesn't seem to be working so well so far, eh?