Jason Scott, the owner and primary blogger on the Delaware Liberal, posted:
I’ve still got $50.00 that says Republican economics are full of shit… any takers?
Filed in National by jason330 on October 31, 2014 • 30 Comments
With all the recent talk about how the Republicans want to “fix” the economy by cutting taxes, I feel the need to reintroduce everyone with my standing bet.
Granted, the line between “Republican economics” and “generally accepted economics” has been blurred by crappy Democrats like Tom Carper and John Carney. Never-the-less, the GOP continues to associate itself with utterly failed policies of tax cuts for the wealthiest and service cuts for everyone else. Furthermore, they continue to claim that this combination can “fix” the economy. If by “fix” they mean to “destroy” I guess they have a point.
This is what I wrote about this a year or so ago.
I’m pretty sick of Republicans spouting economic bullshit and being taken seriously. Again today, the clownish head of the DE GOP, for example, said the path to economic growth is, “…keeping regulation and taxes low.” Really? When has that actually worked?
He also brazenly asserts that the utterly failed trickle down policies “of small government and low regulation” are “tried and true” ways to grow the economy. To that I say – enough already with the bullshit. Where is the evidence?
The fact is – Republicans like Sigler and Laffer are full of shit. The GOP’s economic policies are entirely faith-based, and I am at zero risk of losing my $50.00. But here is the official bet in case any wingnut wants to try and man up:
If anyone can present any evidence that the “tried and true policies of small government and low regulation” actually created any broad based, long term, durable economic growth …ever – I will give the person providing the evidence a crisp new $50.00 bill.
This bet is open to any GOPer who believes the nonsense at the heart of your philosophy, and any Democratic officer holder who has succumbed to the siren song of this absolute, totally discredited bullshit.
That is the entire post. I have slightly changed the formatting — basically, the positioning of the $50 bill image — but have made no changes to the text.
I ignored this post the first time I saw it, but had some spare time earlier this afternoon, and I posted three comments:
November 2, 2014 at 2:51 pm
California and Texas, our first and second largest states by population, and third and second by land area, both with long coastlines, and both with significant minority populations, primarily Hispanic. Both have significant, though dissimilar, natural resources. One is one of our “bluest” states, completely controlled by the Democrats, with a slight pause for a moderate Republican governor, while the other has been run by conservative Republicans, with some influence by conservative Democrats in the state legislature, for twenty years.
California has, by far, the nation’s highest level of poverty under an alternative method devised by the Census Bureau that takes into account both broader measures of income and the cost of living.
When it comes to taxes, WalletHub ranked the fifty states and the District of Columbia, and the Pyrite State, with an average annual state and local tax burden of $9,509, 36% above the national average, was number 50, with only New York’s $9,718 rate being worse. Major companies are fleeing California, with not a few of them winding up in Texas, taking good jobs with them.
I’ll do this in three comments, because of the large number of hyperlinks.
The second comment:
November 2, 2014 at 2:53 pm
Texas, home to the former President that the left blame for everything, and home to a conservative economic approach of lower taxes and fewer regulations, has not only been leading the nation in job growth, but the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas reported that the Lone Star State has been leading the nation in job creation at all pay levels.
And the third:
November 2, 2014 at 2:59 pm
As for “liberal” economics, states that emphasize redistribution above growth have a wider gap between lower and higher incomes.
Of course, both Texas and California are under the federal government, and both are impacted by the economic policies of the Obama Administration, but at least as far as they are able to have different economic rules, they have had rather different economic results. At least as far as Texas is concerned, it appears that what the Republican economics are full of is prosperity.
Texas isn’t perfect, by any means; no place is. But unless you wish to argue that government policies have no impact at all on economic results, then you would have to concede that Texas’ Republican economic policies have had better results for their people than California’s Democratic ones.
Mr Scott then replied:
November 2, 2014 at 4:31 pm
Do you know who owns the Wall Street Journal? Probably not. You are an idiot. I’ll probably ban your ass for stupidity again pretty soon.
Enjoy talking to yoursf here in the meantime.
So I left the following:
November 2, 2014 at 6:41 pm
The links I provided were to the Dallas News, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the Sacramento Bee, Wallet Hub, and The Wall Street Journal. Rather than discuss statistics which dispute your belief, you attack the ownership of one (very well-respected) source, and threaten to ban me (again.)
How, I wonder, is your $50 bet supposed to be taken seriously if you won’t discuss the actual numbers?
I figured that I’d better save the comments now, because they are likely to disappear; as the site owner, Mr Scott certainly has the right to decline to publish any comment he chooses.
But it indicates the honesty of liberals, or at least one liberal in particular, who, upon making an open challenge to “any GOPer,” to “any wingnut wants to try and man up,” won’t discuss the actual statistics, and states that he’ll “probably ban” the “GOPer,” the “wingnut” who actually took up his challenge, with actual numbers.
Admittedly, this didn’t take a lot of new research on my part; I had published it before, on the 19th of October.