So the candidates for President, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, offered their much-anticipated proposals on the economy this week, and I was underwhelmed.
The problem is that both sides start with a set of flawed assumptions. One is that the U.S, economy is an independent entity; another is that the President has significant control over how it performs.
You could also call these useful political myths.
An emphasis on economic conditions in political campaigns is nothing new. As Democratic consultant James Carville famously instructed Bill Clinton during his initial drive to power, “It’s the economy, stupid.”
Had he been completely honest with his client, he would have added, “And there’s almost nothing you can do about the economy, stupid.” Except, perhaps talk a better game than your opponent.
In fact, the national economy, at $27 trillion, is more like that of a large state inside a much larger ($100 trillion+) unit — the global economy — over which the U.S. President has influence but not control. Global supply chains keep the whole thing afloat, and they can be disrupted by factors way beyond any leader’s control. Weather, war, pandemics, and climate change are just a few of those factors, but the human element also matters and Americans influence varies as conditions elsewhere change.
Furthermore, at the root of many of the most intransigent economic problems of our time, like the high cost of living and the growing disparities in the distribution of resources and wealth, intractable poverty and a growing sense of powerlessness is capitalism.
No serious candidate can run against capitalism, although Bernie Sanders gave it a pretty good try.
In this context, the proposals by Harris and Trump are almost laughable. No taxes on tips? Crackdown on price gouging? These may sound good but they won’t make any real impact on what is needed — a radical redistribution of wealth.
But no one is talking about that. The one area where there is a substantive difference between Harris and Trump — on tax policy — re-litigates the failed philosophy of “trickle-down economics.” And the thing we should have learned about that myth is that the only thing that trickles down in capitalism is the opportunity to join the ever-growing class of those on this planet who no longer can keep up.
And since Trump would bring even more of that kind of trickle-down pain, Harris is by far the better choice on economic grounds.
HEADLINES:
Rising stars have the chance to shine at Democratic convention (Guardian)
Democrats buoyed by Harris, sense of optimism as they prepare for convention (WP)
Georgia Republicans lay groundwork to oppose certifying presidential election (AJC)
On a Scrambled 2024 Map, North Carolina Democrats Say Harris Has a Shot (NYT)
Is the US actually prepared for the next pandemic? (Reveal)
Israeli attack on Gaza shelter kills 15 members of one Palestinian family (Al Jazeera)
How Russia looked the wrong way (Reuters)
Ukraine’s offensive derails secret efforts for partial cease-fire with Russia, officials say (WP)
Kremlin Is Treating Ukraine’s Incursion Like a Natural Disaster (Bloomberg)
X says it is closing operations in Brazil due to judge's content orders (Reuters)
This Is the Most Detailed Map of Brain Connections Ever Made (Wired)
Revealed: Shell oil non-profit donated to anti-climate groups behind Project 2025 (Guardian)
Why Indonesia moved its capital to a jungle hundreds of miles away (WP)
MIT engineers design tiny batteries for powering cell-sized robots (MIT)
How AI’s booms and busts are a distraction (Vox)
OpenAI Says It Disrupted an Iranian Misinformation Campaign (NYT)
Screaming Man Lying On The Ground Supposed To Be There Probably (The Onion)
No comments:
Post a Comment