Comments back on? Who turned out the lights?

OT but important. Jim Lobe (via MofA) writes that Chris Nelson is reporting the following:

Dennis Ross will become Special Envoy for Iran
Richard Haass will be Special Envoy for Israel-Arab affairs
Richard Holbrooke will become and Special Envoy for India and Pakistan
Anne Marie Slaughter head of Policy Planning

you know what’s bothering me?

obama plans on specifically NOT funding his economic programs, he is actually talking about tax lowering as some kind of incentive

now if he means he is going to lower taxes on the middle and lower class that’s fine but he’s going to have to fund that relief

if he’s talking about lower taxes for the wealthiest who have already been given tax gifts at the expense of not only the middle class but the economy, he needs to be fought tooth and nail

he has an easy out;

“I plan on lowering taxes much further then bush lowered them, bush invested in the wealthy expecting a return on that investment, that return not only didn’t come it cost america dearly, we are going to reclaim that investment and provide tax relief where it will indeed give a positive return”

man, my kingdom for words to that affect, I will not hold my breath

The whole idea is to NOT fund it….we need even bigger deficits right now….read Keynes!

Krugman’s initial “back of the envelope” assessment of the Obama recovery plan.

Bit by bit we’re getting information on the Obama stimulus plan, enough to start making back-of-the-envelope estimates of impact. The bottom line is this: we’re probably looking at a plan that will shave less than 2 percentage points off the average unemployment rate for the next two years, and possibly quite a lot less. This raises real concerns about whether the incoming administration is lowballing its plans in an attempt to get bipartisan consensus.

Wonkish details at: Stimulus arithmetic (wonkish but important)

in an attempt to get bipartisan consensus.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRG!

keynes is wrong if he says otherwise but maybe you misunderstand what I am saying

tax reductions when done properly fund themselves with positive return

tax reductions targeted at the market we need to grow, targeted at the individuals who need releif

tax reductions for the wealthy cannot possibly give positive return unless they are getting poor from taxes, so long as the wealthy are not turned into the unwealthy through the existing taxes then giving them tax reduction cannot possibly give overall positive return

the taxes to the middle class WILL be funded with productivity and assets aquired through as dividend of their labor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y

oh, I was wrong there he is all ready. I can’t tell you how glad I am he’ll be working on the Iran thing.

Let’s face it. Bush left the economy in a clusterfuck. The banking crisis was immediate, and affected people with clout; the unravelling of production and employment takes a lot longer. At the end of 1929 it was still unclear that the economy would suffer anything more than a sharp recession. It took 18 months of continuously declining production and demand to generate the huge and qualitatively different unemployment rates that define the period. The problem Obama is facing is that the political elite have not wised up to the crisis. By the time they do, it will be too late. His economists know perfectly well what the dangers are. We elected a new president, but we did not elect a dictator. It all has to be done legislatively, and until legislators start feeling the heat from their constituents, they will continue to play the same old games. The tragedy is that the heat will come only when it’s too late to stop the decline. I’m not hopeful at this point, and I don’t think Paul Krugman is either. It would be nice if some of our legislators learned a little real economics. Oh, I forgot. They don’t even want to learn any real science.