-
Bonds | Economy | ETFs | Market Update | Mutual Funds | Pundit Watch | Short Term Investing | Stocks
-
College Planning | Debt | Elder Care | Employment | Estate Planning | Health Care | Insurance | Marriage & Divorce | Real Estate | Retirement | Taxes
SmartMoney Magazine by Roger Lowenstein (Author Archive)
Obama and McCain Differ Sharply on Economic Policy
THE ELECTION IS shaping up as a contest between two sharply different economic approaches. More than in Clinton-Bush or Clinton-Dole — more even than in Bush-Kerry — this election will offer a stark choice. Do you favor a continuation of low-taxation policies and a limited role for the government? Or do you think Washington should actively try to rebuild infrastructure, develop alternative-energy supplies and lessen wage inequality? On these economic issues and more, John McCain and Barack Obama are miles apart.
Commentary in the press has focused on the extent to which either candidate would reverse the Bush tax cuts. But while McCain and Obama differ on taxes, something far more fundamental is at stake: not just the policies that have held sway over the past eight years but those of an entire generation. Ever since the Reagan era, both parties have drifted rightward. Bill Clinton articulated this truth with his famous dictum, "The era of big government is over."
While Republicans have pushed tax cuts, Democrats have played defense: Try to balance the budget; create a market incentive here, a social policy there. Neither party has challenged the basic primacy of markets. McCain would continue this noninterventionist approach. He has little truck with public-sector economic initiatives, although his proposal to cap and trade carbon dioxide emissions is an exception. In general, the Arizonan clearly wants to restrain government spending.
Last month's column warned against trying to read too much from campaign tea leaves. Presidents often fail to live up to their platforms; Obama or McCain could surprise us. Moreover, presidents are always more than the sum of their platforms; character also counts. Still, there is good reason to think that Obama, backed by a Democratic Congress, would enact much of what he is promising. Democrats were afraid to challenge the laissez-faire approach when it was delivering results. But they aren't afraid now. Thanks to Hurricane Katrina, $140-a-barrel oil and the mortgage collapse, the notion that markets can solve every economic problem is no longer tenable. And the country's growth has been grossly uneven. For all the magic that markets work, they have not been able to get lower- and middle-income wages moving again.
So what is Obama proposing? Start with $60 billion in "infrastructure" development. This would include high-speed rail and rebuilding the energy grid. Tack on $15 billion a year for energy technology. He would also double spending on basic research, subsidize high-speed Internet hookups and make more funds available for education and a new health care regime. The gangly Illinoisan's guiding premise: Government should be more than a cop keeping markets efficient and fair; it should also be a force for "good." Like it or not, this is a radical departure.
Single Page
rlthur says 'So the problem is just the 50% who are Republicans?? While the Democrats are all good men (and women)?'
Rlthur, as I said earlier in the thread, The reason we are in the mess we are in as a country is not so much because of political ideology, but because there is such carelessness about the truth.'
Your post is an illustration of that kind of carelessness.
I have never said that all Democrats are good. (And, by the way, Republicans are more like 30% of the voting age population).
Republicans were in power in the Congress for 12 years, and in the presidency for 20 of the last 28. Their power extends further, through the courts (where they hold more than a 2:1 advantage and where many Republican appointees are truly activist judges), through the right-wing media empire of talk radio, Sinclair, and FOX, through a series of 'think tanks' established for the purpose not of discovering the truth but of presenting a point of view, through...(Read more of this comment)
Swad(esh) a pile of crap.To say that the Republican party is failed, corrupt, incompetent, despicable, and totally morally bankrupt is unbelievable. So the problem is just the 50% who are Republicans?? While the Democrats are all good men (and women)? You are a bigot. And simplistic. Oh, and you use the great debate technique of name calling.
BTW, FDR did not help reduce unemployment as you asserted. He was reducing the unemployment by 10% in 10 years. That's 1% a year - that stinks and so did he. WWII was what cut unemployment. You had the stat right, you just didn't know what it meant. You have proven that you are qualified to be a Democrat.
So it was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 caused the recent crisis. That was 31 years ago could anything be more absurd! Now it is the 'sucessful' should not be taxed. It seems to me that these great people looted the corporations they ran managing them to their advantage. In a better world they would be jailed. During WW2 forgers, counterfitters and just plain thugs were let out of jail to help defeat the Axis. Maybe we need their talents right now, but for goodness sake keep an eye on them.
I wish I felt like celebrating, Michman. The sad fact is that the financial crisis can't be properly resolved until blame is fairly apportioned. And how it should be apportioned is blindingly obvious to anyone who understands the basic concepts of 'regulation,' 'banking,' 'Executive Branch,' and 'Congress.'
Anyway, here's what Republicans defending their mismanagement of Washington look like to me:
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/funny-pictures-cat-did-not-sample-your-lasagna-and-you-have-no-proof.jpg
About Our Ads | Corrections | Custom Publishing | License Our Content | Media Kit | Press Room | Events | Site Map | Labs |
You Are Viewing: SmartMoney.com — Investing, Saving and Personal Finance.
Once upon a time there were some Southern Democrat Senators who voted with the GOP. The names Bilbo, Eastland, Tallmadge and Klaghorn come to mind.