Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
joining me is economists richard wolf professor emeritus of economics at my
alma mater the university of massachusetts currently a visiting
professor at the new school university in new york city professor wolf we're
hearing so much talk about as we get closer and closer to the presidential
election
whose economic policies president obama's or mit romney's in so far as
they're not the same would be better for the american economy and specifically we
hear a lot about discussions of
taxes relative to jobs now
question one would be do you see any significant difference as far as
economic policy between the two candidates and if so one of those
differences
there are differences despite their relative least lol
basically they come down to the same all
all c all thaddeus
republicans tend to want to say
that by cutting taxes on business and in other ways copy to boost the
profitability of biz this this will induce companies
to hire workers produce more goods and get us out of this five-year economic
crisis
in contrast the best cracks like biopharma
repeat the age-old mantra that while they agree with the republicans
you have to balance the benefits for corporations
in posting their profits
by also helping the mass of people with
government spending on social programs on infrastructure and so on
in point of fact
well and a lot lot after him
followed programs and policies that makes those two together a little more
here unless they're
they have not worked
this was not a crisis we were supposed to have those policies whether their
children pellicano democrat
have failed to get us out of the crisis we remain intact and the prognosis for
the years ahead
is not good
and saw therefore whatever our differences they don't see
but beyond that i had to that will talk of the economic problems that becky and
literally everyday
solicit looks for the aid that first lady mentioned of lowering corporate
taxes is being uh... a job creating influence i guess just yesterday i was
listening to our friends over the tom harkin program
an individual called in and said i'm one of these people that makes over two
hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year i have this trucking company had
got about a hundred and ploys and i and going to be if if taxes were lowered on
me at my corporate tax rate was lowered
i would hire more people and he went through this kind of internal logic that
he had created and i was thinking to myself a listen hold on a second
the reason to hire more people would be that there's more demand for the good or
service that your company produces that's not going to be generated
by your corporate tax rate going down it's going to be generated by other
people who buy your product and service having the money to buy it
if you already have that demand why would you need a tax cut to hire those
people and conversely if you don't already have that demand why would you
hire people simply based on a tax cut is my logic wrong there
that's absolutely correct
it's a little game of one-sided unit
out your republican
what do you think that gene would be nice hair it billion that it had been a
prop
expert example by having a more taxes to pay
that they might hire as a more the problem is
insecure lower their taxes on business what do you want to do here you go to
raise taxes on the average price
which will oka
their ability to buy things
and it poured dot blot like whatever that that that is you gave
in a tax cut the business
it'll raise taxes on people
you low-level it does
because social program
that means laying low public employees which we've been doing reducing
government spending which we've been doing about again will papa but by the
gloomy
talking about myself back to the tax cut and forgetting to tell people what the
other side of that process is you you pretend but there's only a day
and no loss it's a terrible mistake when the democrats
eva we're not that different have the better case because if you spend more
on the part of the government
or workers of a problem
usb slot all that that's terrible
economy and release companies that says
at least bus i have more folks to be got rising batman
then what's left is the question who do you tax to pay for the government's
picture and
or or modern economics gives the same dance
the rich and the people use acts the elects the impact on the economy because
when team up in all of their spending behavior because you had a taxable
little or less that's what being rich exactly needs and so that's why you
tilted back direct fit but given the fact that the democrats who won't do
that
in a major way image is for fear of a deal
hitting the rich and corporate patrons we're gonna have gives
for but
all bomber horses romney kind of exchange butadiene means the basic same
unsuccessful policy the letter which of these gentlemen wins
okay and then to take the democratic side of this a little bit
tell us a little bit about what is the case to be made for the true short term
but also a longer term stimulative effect of government spending so-called
stimulus package is when we have the stimulus package a few years back we
heard democrats saying that this is really the way to quote grow the economy
whereas republicans although they admitted that yes the immediate
short-term impact may be their it has the url long-term positive economic
effect this so-called stimulus package look at what's the economic analysis of
that
economic girl
the republican by their implacable opposition
act a bunch of when they got from conservative democrat
maybe impossible for the president of united baked even had do you want to do
dapat it would be
big enough
to make that kind of
but the better really
and sharply reduced
the damage done bidyut economic downturn
then the republicans that this particular turner proud having made that
this new attitude smaller work without the president or the stimulative policy
that didn't work are edited they were ob servers
active participants
let me give you the start of the example of what if you look what happened b to
work
activity one up and speculate that the u_n_ america gets
butler every time we had a quite technical aptitude third
klickovic springtime delay my employment much greater shock
the difference what of movement role union movement socialist communist party
probable or together in america
and told the depth of the depression worse than that
they've got real spirit because
just to give you an idea briefings quickly
rosenthal creative totals
millions of americans that age sixty five and older suddenly the monthly
check for the rest of their own us
a stimulus program side by private the unemployment compensation system which
like tokyo security we had never had before on a federal level
of millions of important people let me get a check
every pic or year or two
at the
eight federal employment program between thirty four a forty-one wrote really
created bill twelve and a uh... million jobs
back that they do
i think maybe
not pollute the manager of america
feel and live better feels better about themselves happened operably every cop
cover their mortgages
and there were some pretty much resumes
it also was politically a dynamite result because they've gotten thorough
will be elected four times which no president before had ever done and no
one can decode republicans an total uploading it to do drugs if you wanna to
make a big big difference
whether or not a problem with the president
is another matter but you want to make a big
the people's lives
take a page from your baron book and do it again what we did last time
it's the only saying that bites make a difference on a scale that matters v
i like anything either of our current few candidates really having uh... uh...
the the fortitude to make such a proposal but it's great to get the
economic analysis we've been speaking
with professor emeritus of economics at the university of massachusetts and
current visiting professor at the new school university in new york city
congress richard wolf pleasure as always
thank you ted ok will take a break and be back with plenty more after this