CHUCK DIETRICK'S POLI-NOMICS: Recent Comments

Comment on "Just Give 2012 A Pass"

Chuck Dietrick — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:05:19 GMT

You're dead right regarding lowering the bar. They're trying, with the media's assistance, to convince us that our anemic recovery (resulting from their policies) is to be expected--when in fact, history shows that the bigger the recession, the bigger the recovery. History also shows that the longest downturn since before WWII was 16 months. We're well into the fourth year of an unprecedentedly weak economy. Their biggest liberal limbo, however, is trying to get us to believe that an unemployment rate in the 8% range is reason to reelect Obama. Obviously, they think we're pretty stupid. We'd be somewhere between 4% and 6% right now if it weren't for the disastrous effects of Obamanomics.

Comment on "Just Give 2012 A Pass"

Diane Leone — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:45:48 GMT

Perhaps the Republicans just have many more qualified candidates and thus are going to select the very best one! The liberals have lowered the bar on everything, and now they cannot do their own LIMBO anymore, thus the terrible administration we now have in the White House.

Comment on He Was Practiced At The Art Of Deception

bill — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:59:37 GMT

Pleased to meet you, won't you guess my citizenship..
Cuz what's puzzlin' you is this bogus certificate of live birth!

Comment on The Jobs Way

Ian — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:15:18 GMT

I am with you on this one. I am also *really* annoyed that by the time the Pa. primary rolls around, it is pretty much a done deal before the first vote is counted.... If Pa. did not keep trying to "sneak" thinks in during the primarys (or allowed independents to vote), I'd probably not be in one of the 2 "major" parties....

Comment on One Idiot At A Time

Chuck Dietrick — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:59:29 GMT

Sometimes black is black and white is white. This is such an occasion. If you prefer the raw data, feel free to goto www.taxpolicycenter.org. I just spot-checked the figures. They are correct. In fact, there are even more compelling examples that can be culled from the raw data.

Comment on One Idiot At A Time

Heather — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:13:11 GMT

This stats that you cite sound convincing, but the NCPA, from where you pull the data, is a notoriously conservative think tank, which gives me pause. If the numbers haven't been manipulated for political reasons, then it's a good argument. But that "if" looms large in my mind.

Comment on One Idiot At A Time

Chuck Dietrick — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 22:32:34 GMT

Here are the actual facts to which I referred. They are in my blog entry from 10/22/2008 titled, "Lies, Damn Lies, and Lies About the Capital Gains Tax." It can be found at: http://blog.chuckdietrick.com/2008/10/22/lies-damn-lies-and-lies-about-the-capital-gains-tax.aspx.

Comment on One Idiot At A Time

Chuck Dietrick — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 21:49:21 GMT

Thanks, Brad. Appreciate your readership.

Comment on One Idiot At A Time

Heather — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 21:33:49 GMT

I wondered about the potential bleed of capital from globalization argument when I read Buffett's op-ed arguing for raising taxes on the super wealthy. He never mentions it except to say that his rich brethren love America. But I figured that he doesn't bring it up because the effect isn't that great, yet anyhow.

Comment on One Idiot At A Time

Chuck Dietrick — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:08:30 GMT

Glad to see you're still a reader. Great question. This is an area where the data is very clear (I've cited it in previous blogs). Actually, even liberal ABC news anchor Charlie Gibson famously asked Obama during the 2008 debates why his plan called for an increase in the capital gains tax rate from 15% to 20% (he originally wanted to push it even higher) when the data shows that capital gains tax revenue increases materially when it's lowered and it decreases markedly when it's raised. Obama answered that he considers it a "fairness" issue. That's right, Obama was/is willing to reduce revenue to the Treasury (that funds his social justice agenda) in the name of getting the "rich" to pay more (remember this also has a considerable impact on pension funds and their investments). It should also be noted that with globalization capital is more and more mobile. If we don't do what's necessary to attract it, a portion of it will flow to other countries that are more proactive.