Essential Economics for Politicians

Elizabeth Warren Introduces Legislation to Create a Government-Run Pharmaceutical Manufacturer
Warren said adding the agency would increase competition.
Thursday, December 20, 2018

Maybe an experimental policy for Venezuela?
 
DECEMBER 25, 2018
China cuts tariffs on 700 more items
By Thomas Lifson
In its third round of tariff cuts this year, China announced that 700 more goods will have tariffs cut. Bloomberg reports:

China announced another round of tariff cuts, lowering import taxes on more than 700 goods from Jan. 1 as part of its efforts to open up the economy and lower costs for domestic consumers.

No doubt, that’s what they say. And it is true that domestic consumers will benefit from lower cost access to foreign goods. But, is President Trump’s pressure on China not a factor? I am sorry, but I can’t accept the notion that Trump is irrelevant to the decision.

211130_5_.jpg


Part of the Port of Shanghai

Note that thee rate cuts are temporary and can be changed at any time. To me, this is further evidence that they are a bargaining chip in the confrontation over trade that President Trump started.

The underlying reality – that President Trump recognized unlike his predecessors – is that because of its trade surplus, China has far more to lose than the US from a trade war. The comparatively simple reality should have fortified the US in taking a harder line toward China, and yet it never did until Trump. Instead, the US has allowed itself to de-industrialize on a massive scale.

There’s a new sheriff in town the last 2 years. A lot of people were doing very well under the old sheriffs, even though America as a whole did not.

Something to think about over the next 2 years.
 
I would have put this one in the "ponderable" thread... but I think all know why, so there isn't much to ponder.


Why are Trump and Congress still getting paid amid a partial government shutdown?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...wn-congressional-presidential-pay/2421657002/

WASHINGTON – As the federal government faces a partial shutdown, critics have noted that President Donald Trump and the lawmakers on Capitol Hill who helped get the country in this predicament are still collecting paychecks.

So why are Congress and the president getting paid when so many other federal workers are being asked to go without?

Incoming freshman congresswoman and self-described Democratic-socialist Alexandria Ocasio Cortez – who has already become an outspoken critic of congressional pay – said in a tweet last week that the next time the government shuts down, "Congressional salaries should be furloughed as well."

"It’s completely unacceptable that members of Congress can force a government shutdown on partisan lines & then have Congressional salaries exempt from that decision," she tweeted. "Have some integrity."

Next time we have a gov shutdown, Congressional salaries should be furloughed as well.

It’s completely unacceptable that members of Congress can force a government shutdown on partisan lines & then have Congressional salaries exempt from that decision.

Have some integrity. https://t.co/BgueNNjf0f

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Ocasio2018) December 22, 2018
Putting her proposal into practice, though, would require clearing some major hurdles, including congressional gridlock the U.S. Constitution.

According to the Constitution, Congress is required to set its own salaries to be paid by the Treasury. Those salaries are outlined in a law separate from the appropriations legislation. So, even though the shutdown is caused by the failure to cut a deal on the unfunded appropriations, Congress continues to be paid under an entirely different bill.

And the 27th Amendment says Congress can't pass any law affecting its pay for the current term. Since it seems highly unlikely the current Congress would pass such a law before Jan.3, it would be up to the new crop of lawmakers who will be sworn in next week to change the rules. And even that wouldn't be able to take effect until 2020 at the earliest.

Similarly, Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution says Congress can't change the president's compensation during his or her term of office. "Thus effectively guaranteeing the President of compensation regardless of any shutdown action," summarized a Congressional Research Service report.

While Congress members get paid during a shutdown, the same is not necessarily true of their staff, according to CRS. But in this shutdown that won't be a concern because the appropriations for the legislative branch were already approved in the 2019 spending bill.

Lawmakers have repeatedly tried to pass legislation that would freeze Congressional pay in the event of a shutdown, but such a bill has yet to pass both chambers of Congress. For example, Rep. Tom O'Halleran, D-Ariz., introduced the Government Shutdown Accountability and Economic Report Act in April 2017, but the bill has gone nowhere since then. O'Halleran has vowed to forgo his pay during the shutdown.

The Senate passed a bill in 2011 to freeze congressional pay, and the pay for the president, during a shutdown but that bill died in the House.

Since they can't freeze their pay, many members of Congress have tried to escape the optics of getting paid while other federal workers struggle by donating their salaries to charity or refusing to take the pay. A total of 248 lawmakers from both parties did so during the 2013 shutdown, according to a list compiled by The Washington Post.
Click to expand...
 
tenacious said:
I would have put this one in the "ponderable" thread... but I think all know why, so there isn't much to ponder.
Click to expand...

Hey ...Dumb as a Rock, ponder this.
The President doesn't get paid....Now what.
The Congress should NOT be paid during these shutdowns....Not a penny !
 
Sheriff Joe said:
Obama built that.
I must be wrong, but I thought we gained seats in the Senate.
Click to expand...

We did.....
It should be listed as :
52 Republicans
46 Democrats
2 Independants

But the Democrats STOLE a seat in Arizona, Kyrsten Sinema.
The first Senator to admit to munching Carpet and Hot Dogs among other
Progressive/Communist disgusting habits......
 
Bruddah IZ said:
Mortgage paid?
Click to expand...

Bub's I'm really trying to follow your POV on the whole housing/mortgage debate/non-debate you are having with messy. The thing is while I understand messy's perspective I'm really struggling to understand what your side of the debate/non-debate is? It's like just a bunch of cut and pastes from different economists making different arguments and simplistic one-liners all mashed together.

Anyway that in your own words, you could write up a quick paragraph or two explaining what your personal perspective is?
 
tenacious said:
Bub's I'm really trying to follow your POV on the whole housing/mortgage debate/non-debate you are having with messy. The thing is while I understand messy's perspective I'm really struggling to understand what your side of the debate/non-debate is? It's like just a bunch of cut and pastes from different economists making different arguments and simplistic one-liners all mashed together.

Anyway that in your own words, you could write up a quick paragraph or two explaining what your personal perspective is?
Click to expand...

Two paragraphs? Sure, first of all we weren’t talking economics. Messy thinks we were. So much for really trying to follow along.

My personal perspective is that if you say you were really trying to follow along, make sure you’re doing just that. You weren’t. Whew! 2 paragraphs.
 
Bruddah IZ said:
Two paragraphs? Sure, first of all we weren’t talking economics. Messy thinks we were. So much for really trying to follow along.

My personal perspective is that if you say you were really trying to follow along, make sure you’re doing just that. You weren’t. Whew! 2 paragraphs.
Click to expand...

So you can't even really sum up your argument? lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top