Krugman writes a nice opinion piece, but utterly fails to address the Rep concerns which is that increasing the IRS budget by xx will or will not actually result in yy dollars gained. The Dems say yy, the Reps say that is a pipe dream. Since Krugman is a Dem hack, of course, he follows the Biden economic playbook as gospel. But if he was still an Econ professor, I'd guess he'd come down somewhere between the two proposals. But if he did that, he'd have a much different OpEd piece.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Green New Deal
- Thread starter mspohr
- Start date
- Status
Krugman writes a nice opinion piece, but utterly fails to address the Rep concerns which is that increasing the IRS budget by xx will or will not actually result in yy dollars gained. The Dems say yy, the Reps say that is a pipe dream. Since Krugman is a Dem hack, of course, he follows the Biden economic playbook as gospel. But if he was still an Econ professor, I'd guess he'd come down somewhere between the two proposals. But if he did that, he'd have a much different OpEd piece.
This has been studied extensively. There is a large return on IRS enforcement.
Stop calling people names and Googleit.
The Dems claim a 4-5 to 1 return on this proposed investment. The Rep claims near 1:1, i.e,, increase IRS hiring and expenses by $80b to gain $80b to $100b in new revenue. Of course they are low-balling the estimates, just as the Dems are high balling.
Paul's cynicism on Rep reluctance maybe spot on, but why not educate his readers as to FACTS? Krugman is an economist whose claim to fame was using numbers but here he purposely chooses not to. If this was one of his college finals, it would have earned a zero, for absence of facts..
Personal attacks weaken your argument. It's an opinion piece, not an annotated research paper. Thank you for doing some research. Any return over 1:1 is a win.
Why isn’t Joe Biden doing all he can to protect American democracy? | Robert Reich
Meanwhile, as wealth supremacists have accumulated a larger share of the nation’s income and wealth than at any time in more than a century, they’ve used a portion of that wealth to bribe lawmakers not to raise their taxes. It was recently reported that several American billionaires have paid only minimal or no federal income tax at all.
In recent years these wealth supremacists, as they might be called, have quietly joined white supremacists to become a powerful anti-democracy coalition. Some have backed white supremacist’s efforts to divide poor and working-class whites from poor and working-class Black and brown people, so they don’t look upward and see where most of the economic gains have been going and don’t join together to demand a fair share of those gains.
Meanwhile, as wealth supremacists have accumulated a larger share of the nation’s income and wealth than at any time in more than a century, they’ve used a portion of that wealth to bribe lawmakers not to raise their taxes. It was recently reported that several American billionaires have paid only minimal or no federal income tax at all.
In recent years these wealth supremacists, as they might be called, have quietly joined white supremacists to become a powerful anti-democracy coalition. Some have backed white supremacist’s efforts to divide poor and working-class whites from poor and working-class Black and brown people, so they don’t look upward and see where most of the economic gains have been going and don’t join together to demand a fair share of those gains.
China vs Capitalists
www.bloomberg.com
unveiled an overhaul of its education sector which bans firms that teach school subjects from making profits, raising capital or going public.
Food-delivery giant Meituan saw its shares plunge by a record 14% as authorities in Beijing issued a notice that online food platforms must, among other things, respect the rights of delivery staff and ensure workers earn at least the local minimum income.
China Stocks in U.S. Suffer Biggest Two-Day Wipeout Since 2008
Beijing’s sweeping crackdowns of its technology and education sectors has unleashed shockwaves across global markets, erasing $769 billion in value from U.S.-listed Chinese stocks over the course of just five months.
www.bloomberg.com
unveiled an overhaul of its education sector which bans firms that teach school subjects from making profits, raising capital or going public.
Food-delivery giant Meituan saw its shares plunge by a record 14% as authorities in Beijing issued a notice that online food platforms must, among other things, respect the rights of delivery staff and ensure workers earn at least the local minimum income.
Sure, its an OpEd, but if the Reps are correct (unlikely, but possible), that the return is only 1:1, i..e, increase spending $100b to gain $100b in tax revenue for a net of zero to pay for new programs, then Krugman has no political/cynical argument to make bcos the economics --- his specialty --- over shadow his political pov. And to me, that is why he should debunk the Reps' economic argument first...hard to claim that the Reps are bailing out their friends if they are right on teh 1:1.
But to counter the Reps lowball 1:1, the Econ Nobelist would also end up debunking the Dems' argument of a [high?] 5:1 payback. (Just some critical thinking skills...)
More wealth tax debate, really? We already pay property and excise taxes so why are some wealth exempt? Let's fix it!
During the pandemic, a new variant of capitalism has emerged | Larry Elliott
Spending is up. The world has been fighting a war against Covid, and in wartime the power of the state always increases, says Larry Elliott, the Guardian’s economic editor
www.theguardian.com
Governments will borrow money to invest in infrastructure projects and to increase the budget for science. Industrial and regional policies will be back in vogue. The idea is to harness the power of the state with the dynamism of the private sector and, as was the case with Keynes, to save capitalism from itself.
Failings of the old model were exposed in the run-up to the crisis, while the benefits of a more hands-on approach have been demonstrated during the pandemic response. Unsurprisingly, there is appetite for a different way of running the economy. The reason a new variant has emerged is simple: there is a need for something stronger and more resilient than the old model.
jimm01
Member
"This status quo—in which it’s easy to build new fossil-fuel infrastructure but very difficult to build new electricity infrastructure—is lousy for the climate."
www.theatlantic.com
Unfortunately, I Care About Power Lines Now
If America wants to fight climate change—or enjoy the benefits of a modern economy—it must get much better at building electricity transmission. Yikes.
www.theatlantic.com
"This status quo—in which it’s easy to build new fossil-fuel infrastructure but very difficult to build new electricity infrastructure—is lousy for the climate."
Unfortunately, I Care About Power Lines Now
If America wants to fight climate change—or enjoy the benefits of a modern economy—it must get much better at building electricity transmission. Yikes.
Though with more local production (rooftop solar) and storage options (home battery, community battery, others) becoming available and prices dropping, we may not need to increase long distance grid capacity... something to ponder...
jimm01
Member
Microgrids are an essential part. However, to be green and affordable electricity will need to be distributed efficiently long distance. There is both utility and fairness to this and self-sufficiency must a robust and reliant national grid. Also, the issues of inequity is a real one, it is not a red herring. But there are fair solutions.
The real problem are the energy cartels. Why would they want to enable a technology that would result in a loss of power? No pun intended. In any case, the focus must be to achieve climate neutrality as soon as possible and that will require some compromise and will need to egalitarian. We’re all I this together.
"You Know, Hope Is A Mistake. If You Can't Fix What's Broken, You'll, Uhhhh...You'll Go Insane." ~ Mad Max
Tony Seba predicted that the future of energy is that production is cheap and transmission will be expensive. Cheaper to just overbuild than to invest in massive storage or massive distribution network. Home solar + battery is available to individuals so the energy cartels have little leverage. NV Energy has been reducing rates consistently over the past decade and that has been enough to keep me from buying rooftop solar. There are also proposals for solar in space and beamed down to earth receiver stations... perhaps an alternative to have this in space and beam power to community microgrids as needed.
If only there was a way to collect
“solar in space and beamed down to earth receiver stations”
Walks outside my house, looks at roof covered with 11,655 watts of PV panels that already exist, collecting photons beamed down from space by the sun, looks at the increasing number of roofs in my neighborhood covered with even larger PV arrays.
asks, why put up very expensive solar collectors in orbit, that convert, at a loss,, to beam down the same energy.
jimm01
Member
Theoretically it is possible using microwaves.
“A crisis is made by men, who enter into the crisis with their own prejudices, propensities, and predispositions. A crisis is the sum of intuition and blind spots, a blend of facts noted and facts ignored.”
~ Michael Crichton, The Andromeda Strain
in actuality it is already possible using A PV array, instead of an extremely expensive satellite at either geostationary orbit, 23,000 miles out, or low earth orbit like the ISS, whizzing past.
distributed PV arrays everywhere on the surface
juliusa
Active Member
Where will we put them when there are 9 trillion people? And all those people will need a lot of energy.
Of course there will never be 9 trillion people.
You of course have done the math and have realized how small of an area is really needed, right? You have been out west right?
The vast majority of the inhabitants of the earth don't use that much energy - so there is that little fact.
I think transmission lines are way less carbon intensive, environmentally destructive and expensive than batteries.
When electricity is free at certain times and in certain parts of the country and other parts are burning coal at night, better transmission is a no brainer.
- Status
Similar threads
