GOP’s Debate Tonight

[KeithE]

As a primer for tonight’s GOP debate (supposedly to be centered on economy), take a look at the latest Summary of Revenues/Outlays/Surpluses&Deficits (available ). Recognize that the 2015 fiscal year deficit came in as (much smaller than the “estimated" $582B due to better revenues than expected - the 2009-2012 stimulus spending is still working!). Tax cuts do provide a small stimulus but not as much as employment gains we have seen due to stimulus spending. Also money made available to the poor is more likely spent (boosting the economy) than squirreled away.

Note also Bush was on the right track in the 2005-2007 timeframe in terms of deficit reduction but went badly off course in fiscal year 2008 before the announcement of the “great recession” in Sept 2008 (caused by deregulation) requiring $800B bailout of the the too-big-to-fail financial behemoths causing the huge spending increases in 2009 (up nearly $1T - Obama added $195B in well spent stimulus money on top of the Bush 2009 budget). No meaningful controls on the big banks have been enacted since and they were the biggest winners of all.

Also note in the Tables linked above which party reduces the deficit and which increase it, remembering that the outgoing President is mostly responsible for Inaugural year budget and outcomes. (e.g. Carter responsible for 1981 financial performance not Reagan, Reagan responsible for 1982 though 1989). Clinton (with Gore’s assistance in the “reinventing government” program) comes out looking good. Keynesians economists know that the .

There is a time when budgets should be balanced but not until we are at full employment (~4% unemployment with close to 0% underemployment).


Updating the chart to include 2015, the official unemployment rate is

We will see if any meaningful discussion of all these facts occurs in the debate tonight. I predict it will be mostly Obama bashing (when a measured praise is more appropriate) and who can say they will cut taxes/spending the most (playing to the audience’s pocketbook).

[Sandy]

The tax cut proposals are interesting, since no one is really proposing anything that will change more than a few dollars here and there from the current structure, and a couple of Republicans are characteristically proposing to increase taxes at the lower end, while reducing them at the upper end.

There are still too many candidates, and a couple of them are really getting frustrated because their poll numbers are tanking. This is do or die for Jeb and Rand. If they can't pull up and out, they're done, Rand because he has to decide whether he's going to defend his senate seat because Kentucky won't let him run for both, and he has to file by the end of the year, Jeb because it is looking like the only voters he will attract are members of the Bush family, and not all of them are on board.

[William Thornton]

likely much more substance tonight because the moderators are not CNBC clowns

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

[Tim Bonney]

[William Thornton]

The CNBC fiasco was panned, bipartisan agreement, and will be textbook case for shoddy moderating.

Watched some of the undercard....focus wasn't on the celeb moderators.

[Sandy]

Oh my. Whining about the moderators at CNBC. Yeah, saw Cruz this week trying to dictate the terms and content for future debate moderators. Of course, the GOP candidates don't want real questions from moderators, because they have no plans, no answers, and no solutions to resolve problems they allege exist. It started with Trump's caustic attack on Megyn Kelly, of Fox News, early on. No wonder the RNC keeps sounding desperate and defensive. They're losing this, badly.

[Sandy]

In spite of questions that were mostly slow pitched softballs, and nothing of substance, there were still a few flubs, and a lot of asserted falsehoods.

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-fact-check-rep ... 54138.html

[ET]

[KeithE]

I couldn’t watch the debate last night - see prayer request.

But from the popularity of the tweets, : Sanders and Clinton.

[KeithE]

[Sandy]

[Dave Roberts]

I keep looking for someone who might be electable to break from the pack. Frankly, Trump and Carson feed the GOP base, but neither would do well in a general election. Trump keeps suffering from terminal "hoof-in-mouth" disease, and Carson keeps giving the same speeches without reference to how they will "play in Peoria." I don't see much change from this last "debate" if one can really call it that.

[Neil Heath]

Until we get within a few months of the election, I see little need to waste my time paying attention to any of the candidates in a serious way. I consider current political news to be mostly "sound and fury, signifying nothing".