Mitt Romney's halo

[RSL]

Russ, since you are the only one who is capable of interpreting economic data correctly ...

How do you explain the following two facts?

  1) The economies that are doing the worst are those that have cut back the most on fiscal spending.

  2) The forecast errors in GDP growth rates are highly correlated with the level of fiscal pullback.

As you don't like my explanation ... that the impact of fiscal spending in times of severe financial crisis is amplified and much bigger than "anti-keynesians" like yourself would have us believe ...  

Provide your own.  Please provide a sound analytical framework that explains these two FACTS.

Jeremy, if you're gong to write BS like this, how about giving me references? Last time I checked, Germany, which has been careful not to swallow the Keynsian myth was doing better than the rest of socialist Europe.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Russ, that came from the latest IMF Outlook (also, please note my bold):

"... IMF forecasts have been consistently too optimistic for countries that pursued large austerity programs. This suggests that tax hikes and spending cuts have been doing more damage to those economies than policymakers expected. (Conversely, countries that engaged in stimulus, such as Germany and Austria, did better than expected.)..."

[jeremypayne]

Russ, that came from the latest IMF Outlook (also, please note my bold):

"... IMF forecasts have been consistently too optimistic for countries that pursued large austerity programs. This suggests that tax hikes and spending cuts have been doing more damage to those economies than policymakers expected. (Conversely, countries that engaged in stimulus, such as Germany and Austria, did better than expected.)..."

Yes.  Everything you need to know can be found in these two documents:

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/02/pdf/c1.pdf

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fm/2012/01/pdf/fm1201.pdf

[jeremypayne]

if you're gong to write BS like this

Sorry ... I'm just reporting facts ... not my problem they don't mesh with your world view.

Might be time to consider that some of your long-held chestnuts of "economic truth" aren't quite as sacred as you had previously thought ... 

[jeremypayne]

Jeremy, pardon my limited comprehension of English, but it seems to me that the above sentence is meant to say there is NO political debate going on in the US about restricting voting rights? If so, how about the current legislative efforts (i.e, way past debate stage) regarding voters registration, which, in turn, effectively results in restricting voting rights?

Yes ... you are right.  There are some state efforts that have made it much harder for non-profits and other groups to engage in voter registration drives.  I believe there are still over 50 million eligible and unregistered voters. 

Good point.

[Robert Roaldi]

There are some state efforts that have made it much harder for non-profits and other groups to engage in voter registration drives.  I believe there are still over 50 million eligible and unregistered voters. 

I had only heard passing reference to this (I'm in Canada), but I find this amazing. They are trying to restrict some groups from engaging in voter registration? I would have thought that ANY effort to get more people to vote would be considered a good thing.

[Bryan Conner]

Jeremy, pardon my limited comprehension of English, but it seems to me that the above sentence is meant to say there is NO political debate going on in the US about restricting voting rights? If so, how about the current legislative efforts (i.e, way past debate stage) regarding voters registration, which, in turn, effectively results in restricting voting rights?

How does showing an ID to prove who you are in order to vote restrict voting of rights of anyone?

[jeremypayne]

How does showing an ID to prove who you are in order to vote restrict voting of rights of anyone?

That's not at all to what he's referring.

Study up.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

How does showing an ID to prove who you are in order to vote restrict voting of rights of anyone?

It's not the showing of an ID, but getting an ID that will be a hurdle to a lot of people. The new laws are going to apparently affect mostly non-republican oriented voters ...

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/1033872/gop%27s_new_voter_id_laws_could_impact_10_million_voters/#paragraph3

See for example : http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2012/07/18/wisconsin-gop-voter-obstruction-act-23-permanently-halted-by-judge/
or
http://www.aclu.org/voter-suppression-america
or
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/pennsylvanias-voter-id-law-spurs-debate/
or even more obvious
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8


Cheers,
Bart

[jeremypayne]

Here's a decent review of the voter registration topic ...

My bad for being overly focused on literacy tests.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_restrictions_on_voter_registration_drives/

[Bryan Conner]

I thought that the voter ID controversy centered around the fact that a person would have to show a photo ID at the voting place in order to vote.  The link you referenced is concerning restrictions on voter registration drives which a different topic.  An interesting topic, but a different one.

[Chairman Bill]

... socialist Europe.

Sorry, but in what universe is Europe socialist? I wish it was, but unfortunately it is not the case.

[jeremypayne]

I thought that the voter ID controversy centered around the fact that a person would have to show a photo ID at the voting place in order to vote.  The link you referenced is concerning restrictions on voter registration drives which a different topic.  An interesting topic, but a different one.

With all due respect, it was you who changed the topic.

Read what both Slobodan and I wrote.

[Bryan Conner]

It's not the showing of an ID, but getting an ID that will be a hurdle to a lot of people. The new laws are going to apparently affect mostly non-republican oriented voters ...

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/1033872/gop%27s_new_voter_id_laws_could_impact_10_million_voters/#paragraph3

See for example : http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2012/07/18/wisconsin-gop-voter-obstruction-act-23-permanently-halted-by-judge/
or
http://www.aclu.org/voter-suppression-america
or
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/pennsylvanias-voter-id-law-spurs-debate/
or even more obvious
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8


Cheers,
Bart

Voter ID is there to protect the citizens from someone voting under their name.  No, it is not a widespread, documented problem, but it is a possibility that it can happen, and it does happen.  I am originally from Mississippi.  There have been several instances of dead people voting.  Before I moved to Germany in 2010, all I had to do to vote was to walk up to the table in my voting precinct, tell the person my name, say yes when they read me the address next to my name, take my ballot and go into the booth.  So, there was nothing to stop a person from claiming to be me and voting for John McCain in the last election.  Now, if I went to vote and was told that I had already voted, then I could correct the problem after a lot of paperwork etc.  Also, if a person has died recently, a person could claim to be that person and vote as long as they new the address.  This type of information is publicly available.  If two of the people at the voting place know that the person is indeed deceased, this can be prevented.  But if no one knows, then there is nothing to stop the fraud.

Everyone that has any sort of interaction with the government must have a picture ID.  Most of the poor in America have interaction with the government for their social assistance.  All of these people already have a picture ID.  If a person has a bank account, they have a picture ID.  Unless they opened it many years ago.  Sure, some people will have to get a friend or relative to take them to the local courthouse that is in each county in order to get one, that is not a big deal to most.  The ID is free in all states to those that need one.  The only time a person is required to pay for a voter ID is if they already possess a state issued voter ID- drivers license, school ID etc.  These people do not need a new ID, they already have one.  If they want an extra ID, then they can pay for it.

I can not think of any real reason not to require a person to prove that they are 1. a citizen that has the right to vote. and 2. that they are indeed the person they say that they are.  Why would a person not want to show an ID?  The moment that they are asked to show the ID comes when they are physically standing in the voting place (everyone can see them walk in and out) and after they have already stated their name (the people in the immediate vicinity can hear this) so the person's identity is not a logical issue, therefore voter intimidation is not the issue.

So, again, why would a person not want to show a photo ID?  Why would a person not want there to be a mechanism in place to prevent someone from casting your (or your deceased family member's) vote?    

[jeremypayne]

Sorry, but in what universe is Europe socialist? I wish it was, but unfortunately it is not the case.

In the current political climate in the US, it is intended to be the "kiss of death" to tag someone or something as Socialist.  The word "Liberal" as been replaced ... Now the bad guys are all "Socialists".

It was Socialist to suggest we might have a collective interest in some kind of universal health insurance program, for instance.

As you can see from the lack of familiarity with the term "Turnover", we’re a fairly provincial culture ... sadly.

New York City, however, isn't ...

[Chairman Bill]

How does Vermont get along with a socialist senator? Surely Texas should have invaded by now.

[Bryan Conner]

With all due respect, it was you who changed the topic.

Read what both Slobodan and I wrote.

You are correct. My mistake.  It is very difficult to follow this meandering thread about Mitt Romney's halo.

[Bryan Conner]

In the current political climate in the US, it is intended to be the "kiss of death" to tag someone or something as Socialist.  The word "Liberal" as been replaced ... Now the bad guys are all "Socialists".

It was Socialist to suggest we might have a collective interest in some kind of universal health insurance program, for instance.

As you can see from the lack of familiarity with the term "Turnover", we’re a fairly provincial culture ... sadly.

New York City, however, isn't ...

When I hear other Americans saying things like "We are turning into a socialist country", or something like "The democrats are trying to turn us into something like Europe", I think that it is ridiculous.  America has had a social system for many many years.  Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, etc.  I support having a national healthcare system.  Call it socialized medicine if you want. I really like the system that we have here in Germany.  It has worked very good for me in the 2.5 years I have been here.  I have spent less money for the same care that I spent on average in the USA with private health insurance/high deductables/high co-pays etc.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

So, again, why would a person not want to show a photo ID?  Why would a person not want there to be a mechanism in place to prevent someone from casting your (or your deceased family member's) vote?    

Again, it's not about showing an ID (with or without photo), it's about creating obstacles for millions(!) of eligible voters in an attempt to prevent them from exercising their constitutional rights. What's more, it is intentional, in an attempt to have Romney elected and is primarily funded by the states that are trying to swing the vote.

It's a multi-million dollar solution to a virtually non existing problem (except for a few cases which are already punishable by existing law), with an obvious goal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

Cheers,
Bart

[Bryan Conner]

Again, it's not about showing an ID (with or without photo), it's about creating obstacles for millions(!) of eligible voters in an attempt to prevent them from exercising their constitutional rights. What's more, it is intentional, in an attempt to have Romney elected and is primarily funded by the states that are trying to swing the vote.

It's a multi-million dollar solution to a virtually non existing problem (except for a few cases which are already punishable by existing law), with an obvious goal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

Cheers,
Bart

I disagree.  I do not see how it is creating an obstacle for millions of eligible voters most of whom probably already have an ID, even a photo ID of some sort that is recognized as being accepted.  It is not an attempt to have Romney elected.  It is an issue at the local level in local elections.  http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/29/mississippi-naacp-leader-sent-to-prison-for-10-counts-of-voter-fraud/  is a link to the type of thing that goes on in many areas.  About half of the states currently either require some sort of ID, photo or non photo, or request an ID before a person can vote.  I do not see anything in the news where these people are protesting this and saying that their rights have been violated in anyway.  So, I think that the protest against voter ID is a protest against a virtually non existing problem.