“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?" -- Ronald Reagan.
Politicians HAVE advocated for it in the past. I will freely concede that Reagan did not shrink government as he wished, but he won two elections on its advocacy. And to the end of his Presidency he championed this idea:
``We the People'' tell the government what to do; it doesn't tell us. ``We the People'' are the driver; the government is the car. And we decide where it should go, and by what route, and how fast. Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which ``We the People'' tell the government what it is allowed to do. ``We the People'' are free.
As for housing prices stabilizing, the data shows that they are stabilzing. This is not a "Moon shot" but a recognition of a simple reality: all things tend towards equilibrium.
Inflation abates. Inflation has abated. We need not carry the analysis further to understand that Harris ideas are counterproductive.
Food prices have risen more than wages. Housing prices have risen more than wages. Prices in general have risen more than wages. Price controls do nothing to remedy this.
Even as real incomes are shrinking, more people are out of work. By definition that is a sign of a weakening economy. It's trouble now for the people out of work, a sign of trouble yet to come for everyone else.
My hope is that people will see the lunacy of her ideas and reject both them and her.
Why do we take politics seriously? Because with government, there is no other option. We ignore it at our peril.
Great data and reasoning, Peter! You’re right, her policies are stupid AND insane.
If I were in charge of Trump’s campaign, I would put my focus on ridiculing her. Satire, wit, cleverness - make the kind of hilarious commercials that people actually watch, re-tweet, and laugh about at the office. Hire the Babylon Bee and J.P. Sears and other comedians. There’s so much material to work with! You’ve just provided irrefutable data on several topics - thanks!
Will it get her elected? I'm not so sure. If inflation were on the rise instead of on the decline, her ideas would resonate strongly with the voters. But inflation is not rising, certainly not in the official data (and even the private metrics show inflation has largely stabilized). Price controls sell when there's rampant inflation.
The first-time home buyer tax credit will go over well with the voters, but that's about the only idea she had on Friday that is likely to have much traction with the voters.
What's going to hurt her is that she's doing nothing about wages. It doesn't take a PhD in economics to recognize that wages need to come up significantl in this country, and Kamala's offered nothing for that.
The ideology demands what the ideology demands. Fitting it to the problems the moment is a job for the speechwriters.
And the new jobs number keeps getting adjusted lower…but the splash is about new jobs and yet it’s almost propaganda
[the inflation data is where a Presidential hopeful wants it to be.]
The indices are so distorted. Perhaps it's all we have to go on. But isn't shadowstats still online?
[getting government out of the way.]
NOBODY is going to advocate for that. Besides, how can government get out of the way when its defining feature is inexorable growth?
Regardless of who "wins" the election, the electorate loses:
Government will grow.
The budgets will increase.
Its continued impingement on personal privacy and liberty will accelerate and expand.
I hope both candidates are working on their kicking game, because all these cans need a boot!
[every inflation metric, housing prices are well on their way towards stabilizing.]
Stabilizing? Is that this generation's Moon Shot?
[What matters is that food prices are up 6.2% more than the wages used to buy food. With only a 14.8% rise in overall wages]
US households supposedly earn just under 75k, while spending 9% [6,750] on food.
Wages: 75k x 1.148 = 86,100
Food: 75k x 0.09 x 1.21 = 8,167.50
Old: 75,000 - 6,750 = 68,250
New: 86,100 - 8167.50 = 77,932.50
Is my math wrong here? Is there something I haven't considered? Did I forget to carry the one somewhere along the way?
The problem- for now- isn't food prices, or its relative rate of growth.
What IS the problem- the sheer size of three average Americans' largest budget line items- is.
And as you said, that will be made worse with her genius plan.
Why does anyone take politics seriously?
"[getting government out of the way.]
NOBODY is going to advocate for that."
“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?" -- Ronald Reagan.
Politicians HAVE advocated for it in the past. I will freely concede that Reagan did not shrink government as he wished, but he won two elections on its advocacy. And to the end of his Presidency he championed this idea:
``We the People'' tell the government what to do; it doesn't tell us. ``We the People'' are the driver; the government is the car. And we decide where it should go, and by what route, and how fast. Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which ``We the People'' tell the government what it is allowed to do. ``We the People'' are free.
https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/farewell-address-nation
As for housing prices stabilizing, the data shows that they are stabilzing. This is not a "Moon shot" but a recognition of a simple reality: all things tend towards equilibrium.
Inflation abates. Inflation has abated. We need not carry the analysis further to understand that Harris ideas are counterproductive.
Food prices have risen more than wages. Housing prices have risen more than wages. Prices in general have risen more than wages. Price controls do nothing to remedy this.
Even as real incomes are shrinking, more people are out of work. By definition that is a sign of a weakening economy. It's trouble now for the people out of work, a sign of trouble yet to come for everyone else.
My hope is that people will see the lunacy of her ideas and reject both them and her.
Why do we take politics seriously? Because with government, there is no other option. We ignore it at our peril.
He advocated for it, but as Chief Executive, he didn't execute on it.
The federal deficit "roughly doubled and topped $200 billion several times during his eight years in office," according to one source.
Is there any contrary evidence?
I already said he didn't.
However that didn't stop him from getting elected twice advocating for the very thing you said politicians would never advocate.
Great data and reasoning, Peter! You’re right, her policies are stupid AND insane.
If I were in charge of Trump’s campaign, I would put my focus on ridiculing her. Satire, wit, cleverness - make the kind of hilarious commercials that people actually watch, re-tweet, and laugh about at the office. Hire the Babylon Bee and J.P. Sears and other comedians. There’s so much material to work with! You’ve just provided irrefutable data on several topics - thanks!
And it will get her elected.
Wasn't Papa Harris a Marxist economist? There's your problem right there.
Yes, her father is a Marxist economist.
Will it get her elected? I'm not so sure. If inflation were on the rise instead of on the decline, her ideas would resonate strongly with the voters. But inflation is not rising, certainly not in the official data (and even the private metrics show inflation has largely stabilized). Price controls sell when there's rampant inflation.
The first-time home buyer tax credit will go over well with the voters, but that's about the only idea she had on Friday that is likely to have much traction with the voters.
What's going to hurt her is that she's doing nothing about wages. It doesn't take a PhD in economics to recognize that wages need to come up significantl in this country, and Kamala's offered nothing for that.
She offered nothing because she's a dingbat.
To be perfectly blunt.