Before I get the backlash that he sited liberal mythology on globalization this is a very disproportionate lament of liberal economics. Why not focus on the much broader point of a socialist inclination to redistribute wealth and manage all aspects of a society outright? While there is smoke blown above he shares the same know-it-all inclinations.
The policy problems themselves are largely rooted in government excess all performed under the central planners claim of the "common good". As it fails the solution is only another round of more planning at greater loss of freedom and socialized expense. Behravesh is right on board with the "correct" no-spin policy to save the day?
Chris
of MA
@
Jan 26, 2009 23:03:03 PM
Partisanship dressed as moderate "no-spin"? Pleeaase!
Notice the "common myths" are all core conservative economic values. Paul Krugman would call himself a sensible "moderate" and the game goes on as usual.
All this is done for the soft fence sitter in the middle but it's twaddle pure and simple. Behravesh is a liberal operative, here is shilling for stimulus with the usual liberal "newsperson" throwing out the fear points;
Why should we be surprised? He's based in Lexington MA, selling to mainly NE liberal clients. At least he's honest in reporting his terrible predictive forcasts regarding the "crisis" itself. So as long as the "middle" is mostly liberal in power base it will all be about "no-spin" and phony moderation. People like this are cummulatively more dangerous than obvious partisan moonbats like Krugman as the soft-soap is easier to sell than what is dished out at the NYTimes.
Chris
of MA
@
Jan 26, 2009 22:47:05 PM
Why
Why does everyone always assume that spending and taxing always has to increase? They want to have sin taxes and then complain when those who were paying for it reform and no longer sin. (Smoking and drinking) The demand for fuel goes down because of the price yet everyone expects the same profit margins. Government produces nothing. It generally drives the prices up for the public sector and perpetuates the constant need for a war on something. The poor, terrorism, drugs and so forth. They wont win these wars no matter how many pie in the sky dreams we have. Its like racism. If you define a person or persons as a group instead of individuals you throw fuel to the fire. Our constitution defined our Rights as those belonging to individuals and until we realise that someone will always be looking for a handout or up in the name of group. Personal responsibility is what it going to take to solve this. It is in a lazy mans nature to get something for nothing. Look at second and now third generation welfare families. Not good!
Jeff
of WI
@
Jan 12, 2009 20:15:26 PM
Nariman Behravesh
Economists like you should get more involved in our policy debates. I tend to be more of a Republican supply sider, but have some of my favorite political and economic conversations that make sense with moderate Republicans and Dems.
Joe C.
of VA
@
Jan 09, 2009 19:43:52 PM
It's perfectly clear for those who think Clarity is missing!
Very high incomes are awarded to those who take the most risk. It's simple and clear economics. Without those high income earners, industry, entertainment, and inventions as we know them today would not exist. The reason that people come to the US is to seek the American Dream. If you channel income back to the people, you are discouraging the very economic foundation of our country! If you want the kind of distribution that you are speaking of, you are living in the wrong country. You should move to a Socialist or Communist country. Although, I suspect you wouldn't be much happier there!
anita
of NC
@
Dec 14, 2008 13:16:29 PM
The Silent Moderates
Another blog in the past few days noted that 22% of Americans are left wing, a slightly higher percentage are right wing, and a sizable 45% are moderates--yet Mr. Behravish is correct that the voice of the middle is lost in the national dialogue. Further candidates for office often speak to the middle when they are actually philosophically much more extreme, hence our government winds up lead by those who have appealed to the moderate, but govern for the extremist. Even traditionally moderate media such as US News and World Report have swung to the need to "be fair" ie promote the extremes. Where is the reality? Where are those who are not interested in promoting a party, but rather in finding out where things went wrong and how do we fix them.
I would like to see an anonymous survey of those in government positions, media, and politically active organizations and academia in economics, political science, and foreign relations, scored by outside interests, as to their philosophies, compared to the average Americans in the "real world." How would the groups compare? It would need to have samples of Americans in urban and rural areas, in the east, midwest, south, and western states,and include a balance of those who live inland with those who live along the coasts and include Alaska and Hawaii. So the research design would have to be carefully put together. Lets ask how representative our government and policy setters are.
MontanaMountainWoman
of MT
@
Dec 03, 2008 18:35:50 PM
Explain and I Might Believe
I am one of those veering to the left who fails to see the beauty of globalization; and I guess one reason is that I've never seen any real evidence of it, unless you count access to cheaper household goods at Walmart as a primary benefit.
I am college educated, but a lot of my family are not. In times past, there was always respectable work that allowed a family to live modestly and well. That is disappearing. I miss being able to buy things with familiar names that are manufactured in the good old US of A. That has become next to impossible! Recently, I couldn't even find a steam iron. All the reliable American brands have sold out and left American workers flat, but they still want us to support them by buying their sweat shop goods. Of course our government has set things up so that we really have no choice.
I do have an open mind. If someone can show me what industries are really benefitting to the point that we have a net gain as a society, I will be grateful.
phoenician lady
of AZ
@
Dec 03, 2008 11:41:33 AM
Clarity is missing here
The reason you should tax very high income very highly is not just to raise government revenue but to discourage excess in the first place. Where do you think ballplayer salaries come from? Or CEO salaries? Or hedge fund trading gains? Or Hannah Montana stuff? Or porn mogul fortunes?
If the income comes "out of the people", much of it should be channeled right back into "the people".
of
@
Dec 03, 2008 10:32:43 AM
It is a science even less accurate than weather forecasting. They all like money before our national well being, social fabric, values, and our right to control our borders. We should allow immigrants who have something to contribute, not to enhance their own life. The illegals are a drain no matter what your hidden agenda.
Chris of MA @ Jan 26, 2009 23:03:03 PM
Chris of MA @ Jan 26, 2009 22:47:05 PM
Jeff of WI @ Jan 12, 2009 20:15:26 PM
Joe C. of VA @ Jan 09, 2009 19:43:52 PM
anita of NC @ Dec 14, 2008 13:16:29 PM
MontanaMountainWoman of MT @ Dec 03, 2008 18:35:50 PM
phoenician lady of AZ @ Dec 03, 2008 11:41:33 AM
of @ Dec 03, 2008 10:32:43 AM
Robert Dion of NH @ Dec 03, 2008 09:23:01 AM
Back to article