# 368 Economists are opposed to John Kerry **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2004, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142 "2004-10-14T01:59:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/41 "2004-10-14T05:58:28Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > Last time that **Sam** told us that our unemployment rate was far ahead of most of the other industrialized nations, we found quite a long list of those nations (Denmark, Australia, Sweden, Ireland, and several more, if I recall correctly) that actually had lower rates. > > \*\* You managed to leave out the major industrialized economies but I’ll use your example. While the US economy is improving, Denmark’s unemployment has risen to 5.1%, Austrailia to 5.6%, Sweden to 5.6 %, and Ireland to 5.1%. None of those countries were attacked on the scale suffered by the United States so they have no excuse for a failing economy. And the citizens of these countries all pay more in taxes. They are getting less for their money, not more.\*\* > > You also have to recognize that the “unemployment rate” is not a standardized concept. I believe that many countries don’t elimininate from that number those who have become too disgruntled and are no longer looking for work, as we do here in the U.S. > > \*\* I don’t see any obvious increases in the homeless but if you want to hold this argument then you forfeit the use of similar government statistics in support of your candidate \*\* > > Finally, in all of those countries, if you are out of work, you still have health care coverage and a decent safety net. And, they have higher minimum wages so that there aren’t as many people who are working but still living in poverty. **You have health care in the United States if you are destitute. That’s what Medicaid is for. Beyond Medicaid there are city hospitals that cannot refuse emergency treatment. Nationalized health care will ultimately lead to rationing. Canadians come to the United States because their need for medical attention exceeds their desire to wait. Canada socialized their system in 1984 so there is a working example of what happens in 20 just years of bureaucracy.** ---
**Author:** ![Early\_Out](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Early\_Out](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Early_Out)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/42 "2004-10-14T06:00:03Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > And to think, I just tossed out the “conservative think-tank” quip as a shot in the dark.) Never, ever confess to something like this. When you’ve hit the mark so perfectly, you should just sit back and let everyone think that your repository of detailed, arcane knowledge is truly vast. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Jervoise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d2c977/32.png) [@Jervoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jervoise)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/43 "2004-10-14T06:20:56Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > If you want to see the results of the Kerry-style economic policies, take a look at Europe. Not long ago, Europeans had about the same standard of living as Americans. Today, U.S. per-capita GDP is almost 40% higher than the EU average. Chronic high unemployment rates, huge debt, and a non-productive workforce are the hallmarks of interventionist economics and higher taxes on the productive. It’s a great cheap-shot, but your comparison doesn’t hold water. Kerry’s economic policies are in no way analagous to those of the democratic socialist nations of continental Europe. If you want even a halfway decent comparison, take the UK or Australia–and even these two countries are higher-taxing than anything Kerry would propose. Australia, I might add, displays 13 years of consistent growth, close to full employment and very low price inflation (under a conservative government true, but the Australian right-wing is to the _left_ of American liberalism in most regards.) And it has, as most measures would have it, a higher standard of living than the US. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/44 "2004-10-14T06:21:50Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You have health care in the United States if you are destitute. That’s what Medicaid is for. Beyond Medicaid there are city hospitals that cannot refuse emergency treatment. Nationalized health care will ultimately lead to rationing. Canadians come to the United States because their need for medical attention exceeds their desire to wait. Canada socialized their system in 1984 so there is a working example of what happens in 20 just years of bureaucracy. (1) The fact that hospitals can’t turn you away if you need emergency treatment is a far cry from having good medical care…especially preventative medical care that saves money over the long run. (2) It is not just an issue of the destitute not having health insurance. I had a friend here in the computer field who was far from destitute but she went without insurance for the better part of a year while she was unemployed. Fortunately, she was diagnosed with diabetes shortly after she had found another job. And, I know that I would have a heard time getting coverage outside of a job (or the COBRA extension) because of pre-existing conditions like kidney stones (and I am so far from destitute that I could take off work and live on savings for at least a few years without a problem if it weren’t for the medical insurance part). (3) Clearly, getting into a health care comparison with Canada is getting pretty far off the topic. No doubt, rising health care costs are a problem that every country is facing. But, studies show that Canada spends much less of its GDP on health care as we do. In particularly, they spend a lot less on bureaucratic overhead. And, although **Sam Stone** is one exception, most Canadians would not trade their health care system for ours. When I lived there from 1992-1996, I had no problems with the health care system and I remember one of my roommates, who was pretty much a “Republican poster-boy” in the sense that he was a small business owner who worked like crazy and was making pretty good money from it, telling me that he couldn’t understand why the U.S. didn’t adopt a single-payer health care system like Canada’s. ---
**Author:** ![Parthol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/dec6dc/32.png) [@Parthol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Parthol)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/45 "2004-10-14T06:21:53Z")
[de-lurk] **Sam** , while I have more respect for you than many posters here with whom I almost always disagree, it was not hard for me to find [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=161409&highlight=Economists) thread from about 18 months back. In the linked thread, another poster basically did exactly what **Sam** just did here – found and linked to a study where a large number of economists condemned a candidate’s economic policy. In that case, though, it was Bush’s budget they were attacking. **Sam** ’s response was to find a different link backing Bush’s budget, and offering this snarky rebuttal: > [@](#): > > "Oh, look! 110 Economists Back Bush Tax Cut. Including three Nobel prize winners. > > I guess both sides can play that game. **Sam** , perhaps you’d care to explain if (and if so, why) **Squink** ’s link below isn’t exactly as valid a response to your OP, as your quote was to the OP to which you were responding? Or why the OP back then wasn’t “startling,” “amazing,” etc. like this one is, given the similar number of economists and Nobel Laureates involved? -P [/de-lurk] ---
**Author:** ![Parthol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/dec6dc/32.png) [@Parthol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Parthol)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/46 "2004-10-14T06:24:06Z")
> [@Parthol](#): > > **Squink** ’s link below… Or above, even, given how these things work. :smack: -P ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/47 "2004-10-14T06:25:42Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > Fortunately, she was diagnosed with diabetes shortly after she had found another job. Obviously, I meant that the fortunate part was that she wasn’t diagnosed with diabetes until she had found another job. Getting diagnosed with diabetes at all is obviously not very fortunate. I should be sleeping, you know! ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/48 "2004-10-14T06:51:39Z")
I don’t get it. This is coming from the Bush campaign, so I assume they are saying we should ostensibly vote for Bush because Kerry’s economic plan is so bad. Bush - the guy who has the worst record on defecit spending EVER, and what? the second-worst jobs record ever? That’s like Charles Manson saying, “don’t vote for the other guy; he’s a murderer.” ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/49 "2004-10-14T06:53:56Z")
It is somewhat of a game, in that both sides can produce lists like this - however, the point I was making in this post was that there is a lot of unanimity among economists on the issues they specified in the letter = mucking about with special tax exemptions for businesses to ‘create jobs’ while eliminating the other guys’s special exemptions (distortionary), the value of free trade and globalization. Hell, even Paul Krugman, before he became a partisan hack, might have signed this particular letter. There are other economic issues on which you can still find plenty of disagreement. But the value of free trade and open markets are among the most settled issues in economics. And Kerry is on the wrong side of those issues. As for the ‘debunking’ the rest of these people engage in, how ridiculous. What they consider to be a tainted economist is one who has ever, in any form, said or done anything that can be seen to support Republicans or Republican issues. Hey, that guy was appointed to a board by Reagan in 1980! Stop the presses! And of course, they try to denigrate their credentials by pointing out that there are some smaller universities and colleges represented on the list - which is what you’d expect when an open letter to economists goes out. You’re going to get them from everywhere. But there are some heavy-hitters on this list, including many representatives from every Ivy League school in the nation. I also love how these economists can be completely ‘discredited’ by showing that they’ve ever had anything to do with a Republican, and yet complete partisans like Paul Krugman and Robert Reich are quoted as definitive sources. Anyway… The point is that Kerry is wrong on trade. He’s wrong to ‘re-regulate business’. He’s wrong to oppose outsourcing. He complains about the deficit, yet the gap between his own stated policies and tax increases would increase the deficit by 150 billion dollars a year, while increasing the overall tax burden. His policies will not help the economy - they will hurt it. He’ll make things worse. Perhaps a lot worse. Trade policy is one area where Presidents have a lot of leverage - more so than even their budgetary policies. The wrong trade policy can destroy vast swaths of American industry. When annual trade is in the trillions of dollars, small changes to tariffs and regulations can have huge impact. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/50 "2004-10-14T07:07:33Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > It is somewhat of a game, in that both sides can produce lists like this - however, the point I was making in this post was that there is a lot of unanimity among economists on the issues they specified in the letter = mucking about with special tax exemptions for businesses to ‘create jobs’ while eliminating the other guys’s special exemptions (distortionary), the value of free trade and globalization. Hell, even Paul Krugman, before he became a partisan hack, might have signed this particular letter. > > There are other economic issues on which you can still find plenty of disagreement. But the value of free trade and open markets are among the most settled issues in economics. And Kerry is on the wrong side of those issues. I don’t think that’s “settled” in any way, shape or form, Sam. ---
**Author:** ![Atticus\_Finch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ec9cab/32.png) [@Atticus\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atticus_Finch)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/51 "2004-10-14T07:16:02Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > He’s wrong to oppose outsourcing. He’s not opposing outsourcing, he merely favours not encouraging it with tax breaks. In his own words, just today: > [@Kerry](#): > > Outsourcing is going to happen. I’ve acknowledged that in union halls across the country. I’ve had shop stewards stand up and say, “Will you promise me you’re going to stop all this outsourcing?” And I’ve looked them in the eye and I’ve said, “No, I can’t do that.” > > What I can promise you is that I will make the playing field as fair as possible, that I will, for instance, make certain that with respect to the tax system that you as a worker in America are not subsidizing the loss of your job. > > Today, if you’re an American business, you actually get a benefit for going overseas. You get to defer your taxes. > > So if you’re looking at a competitive world, you say to yourself, “Hey, I do better overseas than I do here in America.” > > That’s not smart. I don’t want American workers subsidizing the loss of their own job. And when I’m president, we’re going to shut that loophole in a nanosecond and we’re going to use that money to lower corporate tax rates in America for all corporations, 5 percent. And we’re going to have a manufacturing jobs credit and a job hiring credit so we actually help people be able to hire here. ---
**Author:** ![Netbrian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71e660/32.png) [@Netbrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Netbrian)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/52 "2004-10-14T07:25:10Z")
> [@](#): > > And Kerry is on the wrong side of those issues. Eh? Name one thing that Kerry has proposed so far that’s been actually protectionist. He’s proposed tax breaks and benefits for companies that keep their workers here, which can’t be significantly worse than Bush’s own record. ---
**Author:** ![GSV\_Consolation\_of\_Dreams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f1d935/32.png) [@GSV\_Consolation\_of\_Dreams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GSV_Consolation_of_Dreams)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/53 "2004-10-14T08:53:26Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > And of course, they try to denigrate their credentials by pointing out that there are some smaller universities and colleges represented on the list - which is what you’d expect when an open letter to economists goes out. You’re going to get them from everywhere. But there are some heavy-hitters on this list, including many representatives from every Ivy League school in the nation. So, an open letter went out and 368 signed. How many received the letter but did not agree with it? If there are only a few hundred economists in the USA, then the letter would indeed be significant. If the letter went out to thousands, and only 368 disliked Kerry’s (and by inference, liked Bush’s) policies, then you have nothing. If the letter went out to a subset of the USA’s economics experts, we need to know how they were chosen and how many they were before we can attach any significance whatsoever to this. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/54 "2004-10-14T09:19:59Z")
**Sam Stone** , if you really care about the true picture about the proposed Kerry and Bush economic plans, you would do well to check out the October 9th issue of the Economist, arguably the most respected and influential economic magazine around. For the most part, economists do deplore Kerry’s protectionist leanings but this is far, far, outweighed by Bush’s economic mismanagement. However, they do give Bush admiration about how he refuses to capitulate on his free trade position, even when it’s costing him votes. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 9:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/55 "2004-10-14T09:35:53Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > There is a [pretty startling letter out today](http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_comment/release_bc04_economists.html), signed by 368 economists, including six nobel prize winners, criticising John Kerry’s economic policies: > > This is amazing in the sheer number of economists that have signed this. How many economists are there in the U.S.? From the American Economic Association’s website we see: “Today the membership is approximately **18,000**.” So, out of 18,000 people (or more, since some may not be members of AEA), 368 have said that Kerry’s plan is bad. How is 368 an “amazing” number, compared to the tens of thousands of economists out there? Out of a group of tens of thousands, don’t you think it’s easy to find a subgroup of around 400 that agrees on just about any topic you choose? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/56 "2004-10-14T10:08:53Z")
A noble effort, Sam. But you should have known that your OP would encounter an immediate wave of hysterical rationalization. Your sources are too few. Their claims are ambiguous. The universities they represent are insufficiently impressive. They are lap-dogs for conservative causes. They aren’t Kerry himself. And frankly, had they _been_ Kerry himself, it would have been the case that you misunderstood him. You must resign yourself to the fact that, because of the opinions you hold, you are unreasonable, belligerent, and recalcitrant. ---
**Author:** ![GSV\_Consolation\_of\_Dreams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f1d935/32.png) [@GSV\_Consolation\_of\_Dreams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GSV_Consolation_of_Dreams)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/57 "2004-10-14T10:25:29Z")
Another pointless, sanctimonious drive-by from Liberal. What a surprise. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/58 "2004-10-14T10:26:40Z")
What _use_ is a high GDP per capita if so many of those capita are so much worse off in terms of poverty indicators, health and education than their EU counterparts? That so much of the GDP is dished out to so _few_ is economic coercion as tyrannical as any tax. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/59 "2004-10-14T10:50:56Z")
> [@GSV Consolation of Dreams](#): > > Another pointless, sanctimonious drive-by from Liberal. What a surprise. :rolleyes: As opposed to your thoughtful and deliberate post, with so much meaning in every word that it is a veritable neutron star of rhetoric. ---
**Author:** ![GSV\_Consolation\_of\_Dreams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f1d935/32.png) [@GSV\_Consolation\_of\_Dreams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GSV_Consolation_of_Dreams)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142/60 "2004-10-14T11:05:55Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > As opposed to your thoughtful and deliberate post, with so much meaning in every word that it is a veritable neutron star of rhetoric. How childish of you. Do you have anything substantive to contribute to this thread or not? I posted an honest, non-hysterical reply with genuine questions, the answers to which would help us evaluate **Sam’s** side of the debate. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/368-economists-are-opposed-to-john-kerry/269142.md?page=4)