RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceStudents interested in becoming economics professors might want to consider Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) as a pupil, at least according to the premise of a skit titled “I Could Be McCain’s Econ 101 Teacher” that is being staged in ...(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
John McCain's economic plan has been endorsed by the man who actually teaches introductory economics at Princeton, Prof. Harvey Rosen.
http://www.johnmccain.com/Issues/jobsforamerica/
"We mean no disrespect." Really? And this is supposed to foster intelligent, informed debate between campus Democrats and Republicans? It's true - stating that a candidate is uninformed and idiotic is a great way to start a rational, intelligent debate!
When is James going to teach economics to Obama? I learned from Bogan that free trade is always good for a country, but I guess Obama never got this lecture at Harvard-- he's called for repealing NAFTA. Scary...
Not only Nafta, but perhaps James could spend his valuable time showing Barack Obama how supporting ethanol subsidies is not sound economic policy. But of course Barack is banking on winning Iowa and I'm sure he will after 20 months of pandering to Iowans. Classic case of collective action, let's screw a lot of people a little bit (who won't know because the media is negligent) and help a few people a lot. I guess that's new politics.
In response to Andrew Malcolm –
Of course McCain has dealt with economic issues in the Senate. Our message is that it is troubling that McCain has given no indication he has deeply thought about the conservative principles that underlie the decisions he made. Simply being exposed to economic issues does not make one knowledgeable and confident about economics.
Also, it is no surprise that McCain's plan has been endorsed by Prof. Harvey Rosen, who has worked in both Bush Administrations. As is noted in the article, we are concerned about McCain's lack of economic knowledge because we do not understand how McCain would make well-reasoned decisions should his economic advisers ever disagree with how to deal with all the problems the economy is bound to face in the next few years. Prof. Rosen endorsed a static plan, not McCain's judgment in the face of economic uncertainty. The twists and turns of the credit crunch and now bailout are some examples of these uncertainties that require a leader who has thought about times when government must play a significant role in the economy.
Bryan Bunch is better prepared to handle economic issues than Barack Obama, evidently
This is the most clever and amusing political action I've seen on campus. Props to James!
In 2005 liberals criticized Bush for supporting ethanol subsidies. Ethanol subsidies have proven to be ineffective and contribute to rising food prices. Obama's position is indefensible but of course since he is the liberal wonder-boy he can do no wrong.
Even Krugman agrees on this issue. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/07/opinion/07kru...
And then read this.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/us/politics/2...
"Obama Camp Closely Linked With Ethanol"
“We made a series of mistakes by not adopting a sustainable energy policy, one of which is the subsidies for corn ethanol, which I warned in Iowa were going to destroy the market” and contribute to inflation, Mr. McCain said this month in an interview with a Brazilian newspaper, O Estado de São Paulo. “Besides, it is wrong,” he added, to tax Brazilian-made sugar cane ethanol, “which is much more efficient than corn ethanol.”
Mr. Obama, in contrast, favors the subsidies, some of which end up in the hands of the same oil companies he says should be subjected to a windfall profits tax. In the name of helping the United States build “energy independence,” he also supports the tariff, which some economists say may well be illegal under the World Trade Organization’s rules but which his advisers say is not.
Clear choice here and Obama is on the wrong end of this argument.
Okay, this coming from a group that supports the candidate who wanted to raise the capital gains tax to make it "more fair"...despite acknowledging the fact that it would decrease government tax revenue by doing so. So he wants to make people worse off while still not doing any good even for his own goals...great.
--ABC Democratic Primary Debate
To Kimmie: "You don't want a black President, that's the issue." Really? I guess change we can believe in really means ridiculing and denigrating Republicans for sensible plans to keep taxes low while screaming that any justified criticism on Obama's ridiculous plan to raise taxes during a recession is somehow racist. Hoover raised taxes during a recession also and look where that got us. But this just shows how Obama supporters offer more of the same old tired partisan screeds of class warfare and race-baiting. I oppose Obama since he will ruin this economy even more than the partisan gridlock already has, and my opposition has zero to do with the color of his skin.
And he will be President? A bit presumptuous don't you think? Of course I guess you are just taking after your candidate who already has his own presidential seal...