368 Economists sign letter opposing Kerry (6 Nobel laureates)

[Tigers2B1]

Take this for what you think it's worth.

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_comment/release_bc04_economists.html

…368 of the nation's leading economists from 44 states have signed an economic statement denouncing John Kerry's economic proposals. The group boasts six Nobel laureates, including recent winner and Professor of Economics at Arizona State University Edward C. Prescott, …

…Entitlement reform is the most important fiscal challenge facing the country, yet Kerry's approach has been to deny that any fix is needed….

John Kerry has proposed tax increases that threaten to sap the economy's vitality and reduce long-term growth….

John Kerry boasts that his economic policies will lead to the creation of 10 million jobs in his first term as president. … In fact, we believe Kerry's proposals would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally….

John Kerry has expressed a general reluctance to reduce trade barriers….

All in all, John Kerry favors economic policies that, if implemented, would lead to bigger and more intrusive government and a lower standard of living for the American people.

The 368 signatories are shown at the linked site.

[gravenewworld]

Can you really trust a website such as nationalreview.com? 99% of the garbage that is out there on the internet is unreliable or sketchy information.

John Kerry boasts that his economic policies will lead to the creation of 10 million jobs in his first term as president. … In fact, we believe Kerry's proposals would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally….


Budget deficits inhibit capital formation and decrease productivity growth in the long run because of crowding out effects. Why doesn't that website mention that Bush's enormous budget deficits will stunt economic growth in the long run? Why doesn't that website mention the fact that budget deficits also cause trade deficits to worsen, i.e. twin deficits? Bush's fiscal policies have created enormous budget and trade deficits. If you actually go to the home page of that website, it is flaming right wing and partisan. I never trust nonpartisan information. What is Bush's solution to the problem? More tax cuts that will worsen the deficits? The fact is that Bush's tax cuts didn't even work. If you go to the Bureau of Economic Analysis' website you will see that Bush's tax cuts of 2001 didn't do anything, people simply just saved them instead of spending it. Tax cuts his, according to the economic history of the United States, have done nothing, people just save it instead of spending it (Ricardian equivalence). The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is predicting that over 10 years, Bush's fiscal policies will cost the government over 2 trillion dollars in deficits. What is Bush's solution to that? Any highschooler who has taken a basic class on economics, knows that in order to close the deficit either taxes would have to be raised or cut spending. Bush, apparently, can do neither. He has never vetoed 1 spending bill and has an addiction with cutting taxes.

You can show me 6 nobel laureates who endorse Bush, I can show you 10 NOBEL PRIZE WINNING economists who endorse Kerry:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5818277/

[russ_watters]

I'm not a Kerry fan (clearly), but this is a meaningless publicity stunt as the link gravenwworld showed. One can hand around a letter that says damn near anything and get professionals to sign it (see: The Disclosure Project).

[Gza]

Your source is extremely unreliable. The credibility of your post is undermined by your source. Try finding a non-partisan source for your news next time.

[Tigers2B1]

How does the source affect the letter? Maybe I'm missing something here --

[Tigers2B1]

Agree or disagree with the contents of the letter and the signatories ---- how does the messanger affect the contents?