5 Good Things About Obamanomics

All of what you have stated is purely contradictory. You can't do all of those things above without having tradeoffs. You have to pick and choose. Simply because government does it does not mean it will not be faced with the same economic realities that regular joes will have to face when it comes to determining what to spend its money on.

Chris of AZ 3:38PM August 27, 2008

Here is why there is such confusion and disbeleif about Obama:

1)Obama cuts taxes for the middle-class.

Who doesn't say this while trying to get elected?

2)Obama thinks growing the economy is an imperative.

Who doesn't beleive this?

3)Obama thinks protectionism is bad.

Remember Nafta/Cafta? Obama proclaiming the evil of them and Goolsbee on the QT telling the canadians "we don't really mean it!" This sort of activity puts the veracity of all five points in doubt.

4)Obama hasn't bought into the theory that investment income should be taxed at the same high level as labor.

But he he has proposed taxing it at a substantially higher rate than today, and if he really listened to those Chicago economists (or any other economists worth their salt) he would know that even today's rate is too high. If Obama really hungers and thirsts for (2) above, then the optimal cap gain rate is zero.

5)Obama seems willing to consider a corporate tax reduction if subsidies and tax exemptions also were eliminated.

This statement does not match his rhetoric, and I suspect it more properly reflects Goolsbee rather than Obama.

Here is my one good thing about Obama's Economic plan: He has Goolsbee as an advisor. When looking at a candidate for a complex office like the president, you should really be evaluating his advisors and the extent to which he pays attentions to what they say. Contrast Reagan, who hired and listened to the super "A" team, with Bush who hired the worst combo: macho dominant people who were nonetheless "B" squade intellectually. Let's hope that if Obama is elected that he retains Goolsbee,follows his advise, and is able to convince congress to do the same (may the blue dogs really be blue!). Unfortunately, hoping for all the above may require to much audacity.

Kirk of NM 10:19AM August 27, 2008

Most liberals are quick to call the state of the U.S. economy a crisis. Major crisis. The idea is to pin the blame on Bush and to give voters something really warm and fussy to connect with (i.e. if you feel less well-off than you did last year its Bush's fault). The truth is that the president doesn't "manage" the economy and he doesn't "create jobs." If anything he is more likely to make the economy much worse. Don't forget, the U.S. went through an actual crisis in the 1930s. At its lowest point, the economy had contracted by 29% (our economy is flat), unemployment reached 25% (currently 6%), the Dow Jones fell 85% (down 12.5% this year), and 40% of the banks in the U.S. disappeared (not even close today). What was the cause of the Great Depression? Anyone? Beuller? It mostly had to do with the government's reaction to the initial economic down-cycle. The Obamas of the day tried to fix what wasn't broken. They raised taxes and imposed trade tariifs in an attempt to shore up the Federal piggy bank. Misery ensued. I encourage everyone to listen to Obama speeches for how many times he blames Bush for the economy and be very afraid of what he might do about it if he gets elected.

History of CT 6:14PM August 26, 2008