|
Media Infiltrations: Republicans and the Populist Temptation  Wall Street Journal February 9, 2010 Why Taxing Stock Trades Is a Really Bad Idea Wall Street Journal January 6, 2010
"What has been your worst blogging experience? "That's a guy who actually stalks me on the Web and once stalked me personally." "I'm saying this...guy's a jerk."
 The Happy Body Aniela and Jerzy Gregorek What I'm listening to:  Langley Schools Music Project What I'm watching:  Star Trek What I'm playing:  Speed Racer Order these from Amazon.com at Amazon's normal low prices... and a fraction of your order goes to help support this site. Thanks!
Thanks to Irwin Chusid, public editor.
|
The Conspiracy Letters
Join the fray! Email us at letters@poorandstupid.com. We reserve the right to publish all letters with authors' names, unless specified as not for publication or for publication anonymously. Letters may be edited for clarity and brevity.
Friday, June 20, 2003
THE TIMES THEY ARE NOT A'CHANGING Re: "Krugman's Bore Market" (6/20/2003). The other problem with this wretched little man is that if the market tanks one month, six months or two years (assuming Bush is re-elected) from now, he can write a "See I Told You So" column. But if the market moves onward and upward, he will write nothing. By the way, did he predict a market crash in the spring of 2000, or was he writing about a goldilocks economy?The firing of Howell Raines is meaningless. Instead of the New York Times being put together by a bunch of unhappy pissed off leftists, it is put together by a bunch of happy smiling leftists. Today's global warming editorial and map editorial, which implicitly faults Bush for the financial "crisis" at our public libraries, are proof positive that nothing has changed.
Eric Kessin
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:57 AM |
link 
Tuesday, June 17, 2003
IF NOT HARVARD, PRINCETON Perhaps your work on Paul Krugman needs to expand its reach to the rest of the New York Times op-ed page. Two examples:"Deficits and Dysfunction" Plot: Self-hating "Republican" Peter G. Peterson whines that we can't afford the tax cuts.
"There Goes the Neighborhood" Plot: William Julius Wilson, professor at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government and department of African and African-American studies declares "If, as many economists predict, the [tax] cuts...weaken a faltering economy, we may again see the depressingly high levels of concentrated poverty recorded in 1990."
Tax cuts weakening an economy? If Harvard doesn't work out, perhaps Mr. Wilson can get a job as a professor of economics at Princeton!
Kevin Stone
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 11:50 PM |
link
SUBCOMMITTEE FACTS A few points about "Paradigm Crimes" (National Review Online, 6/17/2003).
Paul Krugman says that the Homeland Security subcommittee met to "finalize" spending. The subcommittee meeting or "mark up" is where the Chairman of the subcommittee introduces the bill, and is the first of what are typically five stages in the appropriations process, proceeding from subcommittee to full committee mark up, then to the House floor, then to conference with the Senate (which also goes through a parallel process), then to the President's approval or veto. Spending is not "finalized" until the President signs a bill. Krugman obviously doesn't understand how Congress works.
(2) Although David Obey is not listed as a member of the subcommittee, both Chairman Bill Young and Mr. Obey are considered ex officio members of each subcommittee and always have a seat at the table during any subcommittee hearing or markup. Both are usually present for subcommittee markups. That's your mistake, but it wouldn't be apparent to anyone who didn't work on the Hill.
(3) You're right that any amendment seeking to increase spending by "offsetting" it with revenue increases would be a purely symbolic or "experimental" affair. Number one, it violates jurisdictional boundaries, since tax matters are handled by Ways and Means and the provision could therefore be struck on the floor with a point of order. Second, all subcommittees are bound by ceilings called "302(b) allocations" that would not be affected by changing income tax rates. Spending and taxation proceed on separate tracks in the Congressional budget process. Obviously Krugman doesn't know this. I've read columns by him on the federal budget before and he doesn't know jack about it.
(4) The staff director who now runs the Homeland Security subcommittee tells me that the subcommittee had previously decided to close their markups as a matter of standard practice. The decision was not prompted by Obey's amendment. Committee rules give the subcommittee the prerogative to to close a hearing to the public by majority vote. Chairman Rogers wouldn't even need to justify the move based on "national security."
Krugman needs a researcher, or a better one. Krugman should stick to economics. Keep up the onslaught!
Anonymous
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 2:03 PM |
link
A VIGILANT CITIZENRY I've started my own humble version of your Krugman watch, called the "Pimental Patrol." Mr. Pimental is a liberal columnist for the local rag, the Arizona Republic, and I've decided to include criticism and commentary of his columns in my own work. You can check out the current "Patrol item" here. The next one will be out today or tomorrow.
Eric Christ
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 2:00 PM |
link