You Cannot Win An Election With Strong Disapprovals Like This

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The lesson here... don't try to challenge Wonkish... he'll out-write you, because his knowledge-base here is without comparison... apparently.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm not being difficult - but I'm curious as someone whose career is public policy development and implementation - because you work in finance... we should sit quietly to you and just listen?

I'm sure that's not your point, but it does sound like that.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm not being difficult - but I'm curious as someone whose career is public policy development and implementation - because you work in finance... we should sit quietly to you and just listen?

I'm sure that's not your point, but it does sound like that.

Nope but to be quite honest with you since you first mentioned was your career a few days ago I've been secretely waiting for you to weigh in on something in that arena so I could start firing off questions to you. Its not right though for me to just start throwing random questions at you until you initiate something.

I guess that would be the sort of example I meant by what I said above.

I am curious what the intent of the questioning is... but you are welcome to PM me.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

You'll have to forgive me, but there was a brilliant post which argued very well that even if Obama's disapprovals are low that doesn't mean they will just vote for ANYONE the GOP puts up.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think you need to be careful to not paint all with one brush.

I'm not extremely economically left-wing, but still 'liberal' and see public private partnerships as a great thing, however, within my own recent experience on PPPs there are limits on both minimum investment levels and the nature of the investment.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I do indeed.

But I don't get to reside in that theoretical world.

What you're asking is a) better than b) - but what I'm suggesting is that sometimes b) is not the practical option - but I support it when it is.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I do indeed.

But I don't get to reside in that theoretical world.

What you're asking is a) better than b) - but what I'm suggesting is that sometimes b) is not the practical option - but I support it when it is.

Look you support it when investors are willing to but if you follow down the line of the argument and you'll find that its obvious that investors will want to because they are the ones hiring for their own company.

So play by play!
If you support 20% kicked in by a private individual when you can, if you support 50% kicked in when you can, and you support 80% when its possible than why not cut the damn corporate tax rate and issue a reasonably large worker tax credit and the businesses that are close to hiring will tip over the end and hire. And the federal government then only ends up kicking in a fraction of the cost of a job instead of the cost of the whole job.

As I said, it's a painting everything with the same brush... sure there are going to be circumstances where what you propose would be workable - but not all projects would fit within those parameters.

Many government projects would not generate revenue... nor should they all, which would be an unattractive investment. But where it's appropriate sure.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

One point to consider... for someone to consider anyway....

The BIG difference between direct stimulus and tax cuts is usually when such payments are needed.

Tax cuts, as a general rule, cannot be effective immediately and whereas where I support direct stimulus is that the state is the ONLY body that can put liquidity in the economy when the private sector is either too skittish to (which is the BIGGEST problem IMHO) or unable to.

Do they activate a long-term growth trajectory? No... but that's not the point. It's designed to stem the bleeding to allow the economy to recover.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

How is there any real argument here - there's a whole lot of 'duh' in there.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The issues around confidence, the market (ie the people behind it)

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I agree with BOTH of you, try to deal .... I think the fact that the economy still manages to survive despite the doom-sayers is testament to that...

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm not an economic ideologue - I want to know what works, not what a bunch of navel gazers think it should work.

If there's a Monetarist-backed idea that has a proven record of delivering what is required.... fine, if there's a Keynesian idea that delivers what is required... equally fine. 

Sometimes you need to spend money, sometimes you can get others to spend theirs... which is why economic theory sent me around the wall during my Undergrad and my Masters... and why my PhD will avoid theory like the plague.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I do know that... I also work with economics, and Government-related economics at that - and have also studied it at undergrad and graduate levels.

Granted not the same 'nature' of work you do...