Glenn Hubbard blames President Obama for not focusing enough on infrastructure to stimulate the economy. But that's just what Obama wanted to do—until Hubbard's pals stopped him.
The Blind Spot in Romney's Economic Plan
April 29, 2012
Editor's Note: Today TNR begins a series of items examining the details of Governor Mitt Romney's policy agenda. First up is the economy—specifically, how Romney proposes to boost growth and employment. Later installments will look more closely at Romney's plans to change the tax code and his ideas about organized labor, as well as other proposals including health care and energy. Will anybody pay attention to policy quesitons like these? We hope so. Substance doesn't always get the attention it should in presidential campaigns.
How Democrats Can Make Common Cause with Occupy Wall Street
October 18, 2011
William Galston lays out a program for action.
Partisanship And GOP Anti-Tax Mania
August 12, 2011
Last night at the Republican debate when every candidate declared they would oppose a deficit reduction deal consisting of over 90% spending cuts captured the party's anti-tax monomania. (It also left plenty of room for future dorm-room hypothetical scenarios: What about a 99-1 ratio? What if space aliens threatened to destroy Earth unless we raised taxes on Bill Gates by a dollar and it had to be done through a legislated tax hike rather than a voluntary donation?) Meanwhile, there are murmuring of dissent within the conservative movement.
David Thomson on Films: ‘Inside Job’
January 24, 2011
I have some reservations about the movie Inside Job (made by Charles Ferguson, a man I know a little and like), and I’ll address them. But they don’t matter. They don’t begin to alter my estimate that, if Inside Job is not among the ten nominations for Best Picture Oscar, it will be one more travesty that points to the feebleness and the lost soul of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. My reservations?
Near-Honesty From A Bush Economist
February 08, 2010
Glenn Hubbard, the former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under George W. Bush, has an op-ed on the budget in today's Wall Street Journal. The good news is that, in addition to demanding spending cuts, Hubbard sorta-hypothetically concedes that tax increases might be needed. The bad news is that, like any good movement conservative, he insists such tax hikes must be regressive: Our present income tax already relies very heavily on revenue from high earners; the top 1% pay well over one-third of federal income taxes. Mr. Obama's budget increases the reliance.
Notebook - December 17, 2001
December 17, 2001
BAIT AND SWITCH I: If the proverbial man from Mars touched down in Washington to witness the current debate over the stimulus bill, he might think that President Bush is demanding, above all else, a package of generous unemployment benefits for laid-off workers. This is the part of the stimulus that White House spinners have decided is most popular, and therefore the one with which they most want the president associated. So this Tuesday, the president visited Operation Paycheck in Orlando, a center that offers federally subsidized income support and job training.
December 03, 2001
After one of the best ten-year runs in economic history, the torrent of bad news flooding Alan Greenspan's office this January had to be jarring. The country had just seen its worst quarter of economic growth since 1995, and manufacturing activity had fallen to its lowest level since 1991. Spending by businesses on new plants and equipment had dropped for the first time in a decade. And the stock markets' decline, already nine months old, showed no signs of abating. So Greenspan lowered interest rates, over and over again.
October 29, 2001
Do economic conservatives really believe in the unadulterated free market, or do they believe in the interests of the rich? Usually it's hard to tell. Since the two imperatives often go hand in hand—unregulated capitalism naturally produces great inequality—the distinction between supporting laissez-faire and supporting the wealthy is usually invisible. But from time to time an issue comes along that pits one against the other, creating a kind of natural experiment to distinguish supporters of laissez-faire purity from supporters of the affluent.