Prof. Mayer has responded to my critique of his USA Today Editorial. I was hardly restrained or respectful, but his rebuttal is measured, spirited, and appreciated. How I wish more objects of criticism here would join in the discussion.
This was diabolical of the professor, because now I can’t help liking him.
He concludes by saying “Let the roasting begin!” Don’t let him down, now.
And remember, the topic is ethics.
Ethics Alarms 
Standard issue Biden administration talking points regarding the wonderfulness of the Biden administration. Spending trillions of inflationary dollars has been an accomplishment? A record high stock market that, if you’re paying attention, is just now getting back to where it was during the Trump days? Where should the market have been by now if Biden hadn’t tried to kill the economy? I think the place of Jews in the Democratic party coalition has been changed forever following October 7. The party has sold its soul to Islamists in order to win Michigan. Bad hat.
Nice try, OB.
All three major indexes set new record highs on the day Biden was inaugurated. The Dow, NASDAQ, and S&P500 are up roughly 25, 26, and 38 per cent, respectively, since then. Those aren’t great numbers, but they’re certainly better than “getting back to… the Trump days,” even after figuring in inflation, which totals about 16%. The “misery index” did go up in the early days of Biden’s presidency, but it’s been lower than the one he inherited for over a year. The national debt increased by about 37% under Trump; it projects to increase by about 31% by Inauguration Day under Biden. Not good, certainly, but better than his predecessor.
If Biden really “tried to kill the economy,” then he’s been really, really, bad at it.
Federal debt in 2020: 27 Trillion. Federal debt in 2024: 34 Trillion. This after the debt in 2020 was sent soaring as a result of the stupid “response” to Covid pushed by the public health “experts” and St. Anthony of Fauci who apparently funded and authorized the crack Chinese “scientists” who created the virus. So, instead of trying to exercise some restraint, Biden spent more and more money when it wasn’t even necessary.
Okay, what would the markets have been able to do if businesses hadn’t been aggressively hamstrung by the lunatic Biden era federal regulators?
Strategic Petroleum Reserve January 2020: 634,000 barrels. February 2024: 360,000 barrels.
National average gas price January 2020: $2.51 per gallon. Current national average gas price: $3.71 per gallon, despite Biden halving the SPR to get re-elected, like he’s doing with “forgiving,” i.e. transferring to the taxpayers, student debt.
Annual US oil imports, trillion barrels:
2018 3.629
2019 3.336
2020 2.887
2021 3.092
2022 3.040
2023 3.107
And remember, the SEC is supposed to be frustrating lenders’ making loans to oil and gas companies. Brilliant. You really want more of these moronic trends? If Biden wins, it will be declared a mandate to go even more idiotic.
And aren’t stocks an inflation hedge? Companies report earnings in inflated dollars. How much of the index values are inflation?
You know, Curmie, I’m just an “a rising tide lifts all boats,” “the business of America is business,” kind of guy. I don’t see any good coming from an administration that is intent upon making life difficult for businesses. Or piling up huge amounts of debt to give money to computer chip manufacturers and call the CHIPS legislation a huge accomplishment. Intel needs government funding? Republicans aren’t totally great, but they’re the only alternative available other than socialists. I’d say any positives you can point to are accidental and unintended.
The percentage increase in debt under Trump from Qtr1 2017 through Qtr1 2020 was 17.08% National Debt 2017 $19.84T Qtr1 2020 $23.23T. average annual increase 5.7%.
Qt2 2020 beginning of Covid response debt = 26.47T or a 14% increase by Qtr 1 2021 the debt rose to 28.14T or a 21% year over year increase.
In comparison, if debt grows by 31% under Biden that will be an annualized growth rate of 7.75% or about 36% higher than Trump if we exclude the Covid response costs under Trump on an average annual. Had Covid not occurred and we add the average annual increase in debt under Trump for his first 3 years the growth in debt would have been 22.9% total increase in debt.
GDP in Qtr1 2017 was 19.280T and by Qtr 4 2019 had risen to 21.902T or a 13.6% increase. By the second quarter of 2020 GDP was19.913T or a 9.1% drop in economic output. That loss in output directly resulted from Covid and should be subtracted from any assignment of debt increase from Trump. Such spending supplanted private income generation. I will also point out that by the end of quarter1 2021 GDP had surpassed the Quarter 4 2019 high reaching $22.6T despite so many states remaining locked down throughout the entire year. That increase could be directly resultant from Republican governors relaxing Covid restrictions earlier than their Democrat counterparts.
Sources St Louis Fed Reserve Federal Debt: Total Public Debt (GFDEBTN) | FRED | St. Louis Fed (stlouisfed.org)
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) | FRED | St. Louis Fed (stlouisfed.org)
More to the point. Every time we reach the debt limit the Democrats in Congress blame Republicans for shutting down the government. Presidents only spend that which Congress allocates unless you are a president that ignores the Supreme Court when it comes to spending.
The misery index which simply adds the inflation rate to the unemployment rate cannot be used here when government closes down economic activity.
Unemployment rates varied by state depending on who was governor at the time. For example unemployment rates stayed elevated where governors made it easy to remain at home or by keeping businesses shuttered. Those where state by state decisions so using the misery index as a proxy for presidential efficacy is wrong.
Had governors in Michigan, New York and California relaxed restrictions as did those in Ohio, Texas and Florida, the misery index would have been far lower, GDP higher and economic recovery faster.
Thanks Chris. Nice having an economist on board.
Prof. Mayer wrote:
So why isn’t Biden best now? Because of our polarized political environment, the hatred against him is epic. He’s accused of everything under the sun, from corruption to (in these very comments) “hating America.”
I think “hating America” is almost certainly overwrought. Yes, he appears to have “evolved” to positions that are radical departures from most of his historical positions, but we’ve seen plenty of that on both sides. Supporting perspectives in common with people who legitimately have come to hate what America stands for does not necessarily infect him with that mind-virus.
But corruption is another matter. The available evidence may not make that a slam dunk, but it’s well past “preponderance of the evidence.” Unfortunately, helping your son sell your influence is not readily defined as criminal conduct. But in my view, it is clearly corrupt.
The old rules are dead. Yes, an unknown dark horse with zero national name recognition would be a disastrous convention pick…in 1988. Today, it would be riveting.
“Riveting?” I don’t know. Josh Shapiro is very much a conventional politician, and a fairly ordinary one at that. Perhaps you are suggesting the threshold for excitement is pretty low for Democrats these days. Insiders like Shapiro, in my view, aren’t terribly exciting.
Also, as shown by Schumer’s hard speech on Bibi–a Jewish D can actually say things that non-Jews can’t get away with.
And this is a good thing? I doubt most Jews would agree. Also, please note that black people, more so than most other ethnic groups not predominantly Muslim or terminally “woke,” are very suspicious of Jews to say the least. You don’t think that Shapiro would drive even more blacks out of the election or toward Trump?
Successful presidency? Passing infrastructure, stimulus, the chip bill, through a deeply polarized Congress? Incredibly low unemployment? Record high stock market? The international alliance he has assembled in defense of Ukraine, including South Korea and Japan? It’s amazing, and will be studied for years.
You forgot inflation. Whether or not he is directly responsible (and I am quite sure his money-printing and profligate spending you noted above is driving it), he will get the blame for it in any honest history. Whatever Jimmy Carter’s meager accomplishments (which were similar to Biden’s at the time), he will be remembered for inflation and possibly stagflation if it continues to get worse. People considering fast food a luxury just underscores how significant inflation is to the zeitgeist.
In sum, I doubt the Democrats will be able to disentangle themselves from Biden and his policies enough to actually replace him, your argument notwithstanding.
Here is something I just found out about this wonderful Infrastructure bill. The Affordable Connectivity Program will subside low income households which a 30 dollar per month subsidy to buy broadband. Households under 200% of federal poverty limits or received a Pell grant that year qualifies.
Let’s first define infrastructure. Infrastructure is the foundation upon which an activity can take place. It is not the activity itself. When government provides infrastructure it provides a public good meaning anyone can use it. Some goods are pure public goods like police, fire and military. Some public goods are not pure because they impose user fees which can deny access to those unwilling to pay. National parks and airports come to mind.
Broadband access is a private good which means that access is denied for those unwilling or unable to pay.
According to census data about 1 out of every 4 Americans is under these limits. Assuming an average family of 4 that means 20 million households are eligible for this subsidy. This is an expansion of our entitlement programs that can cost 600 million dollars a month or around 7.2 billon dollars annually. Let me put some perspective on such a subsidy. Rural areas are plagued by last mile issues which forces them into poor satellite services or if luck 5g cell coverage. Spending 600 million a month on usage subsidies for urban residents could be better spent on last mile issues. why are we subsidizing Internet for those who will spend 10 bucks a pack for cigarettes or a dollar a day and more for lotto tickets.. Open WIFI in urban environments could benefit all at a lot lower cost.
What troubles me is that the subsidy does not just give basic access it buys down the cost of any plan. One of our providers is pushing this and explains how higher bandwidth plans allow more people to stream content.
Why are we subsidizing entertainment for individual which is a private good instead of building better communications infrastructure for all?
Chris, the ACP’s last benefit is June of 2024. It was a subsidy to internet service providers in disguise.
It’s been years since I paid attention, but I would be a fan of the type of broadband that was rolling out in several African countries; they skipped wired connections altogether in favor of cellular networks.