MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters 
Thursday, July 24, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 67.0° F  A Few Clouds
Collapse Photo Bar

"The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

What books, zines or other pulp are you reading? What aren't you reading? What should everyone else read?

"The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Stu Levitan » Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:24 pm

Prepping interview with Michael Grunwald, author of The New, New Deal: The Hidden Story of Change in the Obama Era, which posits the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was a significant progressive accomplishment which on many metrics surpassed the New Deal.

Questions?
Stu Levitan
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3211
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 8:40 pm
Location: Studio B of the historic Abernathy Building

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Mad Howler » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:35 am

Aside of Wisconsin pushing the boat away on rail and broad internet connectivity, I am curious about his insight into all the detraction and subterfuge that seems to have defined these noble efforts in a negative light. There is no doubt that efforts at this scale will leave a trail of missteps that can be seized upon negatively. Last month I made it through Neil Barofsky's book Bailout, things do not always get done perfectly or seemingly rational at this scale. How do we close the gap between our local concerns and the United level? Perhaps working out of the gate in this interview around a local frame would be interesting, i.e. this local project is better (or worse) because ARRA did (or didn't) get behind it.
Mad Howler
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Meade » Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:17 am

Stu Levitan wrote:Questions?

1) Why is it wrong for Governor Romney to refer to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as "trickle-down government"?

2) Is this graph inaccurate? :
Image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ARRA_ ... 011-05.jpg
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby cloudy » Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:47 am

That graph is NOT accurate and you know it. The depth of the recession was incorrectly estimated at the time of that projection. I'm sure you know that, too, but don't care. There is no plausible argument to support the suggestion that the recovery act failed to reduce unemployment.
cloudy
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Meade » Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:37 pm

cloudy wrote:That graph is NOT accurate and you know it. The depth of the recession was incorrectly estimated at the time of that projection.

Incorrectly estimated by who?
OK, Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein have put out the official (?) Obama estimates of what the American Association of Retired Persons American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan would accomplish. The figure above summarizes the key result.

Kudos, by the way, to the administration-in-waiting for providing this — it will be a joy to argue policy with an administration that provides comprehensible, honest reports, not case studies in how to lie with statistics.

That said, the report is written in such a way as to make it hard to figure out exactly what’s in the plan. This also makes it hard to evaluate the reasonableness of the assumed multipliers. But here’s the thing: the estimates appear to be very close to what I’ve been getting.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0 ... -stimulus/

http://otrans.3cdn.net/45593e8ecbd339d074_l3m6bt1te.pdf
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby ilikebeans » Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:52 pm

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/stat ... -keep-une/

But contrary to Cantor’s claim, the Romer-Bernstein report did not make promises about the unemployment rate. It made qualified projections.

Page 2 of the report states, "It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error. There is the obvious uncertainty that comes from modeling a hypothetical package rather than the final legislation passed by the Congress. But, there is the more fundamental uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program.

"Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity."

But yes, oh Moderate Meade, the projections were too rosy:

The Obama administration has acknowledged the Romer-Bernstein report underestimated the severity of the recession. "The truth is, we and everyone else misread the economy," Vice-President Joe Biden told ABC in July 2009.

In other words, the heaping pile of economic shit that the Bush administration left Obama was a whole hell of a lot taller than they thought.

But hey, maybe we should look at the actual results of the stimulus package?

The council’s report cited independent studies by the Congressional Budget Office and three private economic analysis companies. Here’s what the groups found:

• CBO: Between 500,000 and 2.9 million jobs saved or created.

• IHS/Global Insight: 2.4 million jobs saved or created.

• Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.6 million jobs saved or created.

• Moody’s Economy.com: 2.1 million jobs saved or created.
ilikebeans
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2792
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:23 am

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Meade » Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:59 pm

ilikebeans wrote:
The council’s report cited independent studies by the Congressional Budget Office and three private economic analysis companies. Here’s what the groups found:

• CBO: Between 500,000 and 2.9 million jobs saved or created.

• IHS/Global Insight: 2.4 million jobs saved or created.

• Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.6 million jobs saved or created.

• Moody’s Economy.com: 2.1 million jobs saved or created.

"The council’s report cited[...]"
What "council's report"? Obama's council of economic advisers report? Isn't that a little like getting one tailor who specializes in invisible thread to give you an opinion on the beauty of your suit made by the other tailor who specializes in invisible thread?
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby ilikebeans » Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:45 pm

If you want to present proof that Council of Economic Advisers outright lied about the conclusions of CBO, IHS/Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers, and Moody’s Economy.com, be my guest.
ilikebeans
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2792
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:23 am

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby wack wack » Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:03 pm

Meade wrote:"The council’s report cited[...]"
What "council's report"? Obama's council of economic advisers report? Isn't that a little like getting one tailor who specializes in invisible thread to give you an opinion on the beauty of your suit made by the other tailor who specializes in invisible thread?


Nope. Not like that at all. Not even close.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3080
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Meade » Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:31 pm

I don't have evidence that they outright lied, ilikebeans. I'm suggesting that you consider the bias of the source.

Here is an outright lie for you, and it comes straight from the horse's mouth: In last week's debate, Obama said, “I put forward a specific $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan. It’s on a website. You can look at all the numbers. What cuts we make and what revenue we raise.”

Here is pdf from the website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default ... budget.pdf
Go to page 206, Table S-2. Take the ten-year total from the top line, "Projected deficits in the adjusted baseline" : 8,663. That's 8 trillion 663 billion. Now subtract from that the ten-year total the bottom line total, "Resulting deficits in 2013 Budget": 6,684. What remains is 1 trillion 979 billion - not even half of the 4 trillion Obama claimed his deficit-reduction plan would save.

Maybe he wasn't lying. Maybe he just got his arithmetic wrong. By a lot.
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Stebben84 » Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:42 pm

Meade wrote:I'm suggesting that you consider the bias of the source.


Are you saying that the CBO, IHS/Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers, and Moody’s Economy.com are biased?
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4745
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby ilikebeans » Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:52 pm

Meade wrote:I don't have evidence that they outright lied, ilikebeans. I'm suggesting that you consider the bias of the source.

Image

Despite knowing that it's wasted effort, I'm going to spell it out for you, because it slightly beats the toilet-cleaning job staring at me.

The President’s Council of Economic Advisers cited independent studies on the number of jobs saved or created by the stimulus package, done by four other agencies, which they mentioned by name. I quoted it in my original post, which should save you about five seconds.

Now, all YOU have to do, Mr. Lots-o-Spare-Time Meade, since you're the one challenging these numbers, is to look up the fucking conclusions by each agency yourself.

Good luck, Swifty.
ilikebeans
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2792
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:23 am

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Meade » Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:58 pm

ilikebeans wrote:The President’s Council of Economic Advisers

Can you guess how that entity just might be biased in favor of presenting favorable studies to The President?

Think about it, ms. beans.
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Meade » Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:23 pm

But let's work with those numbers - the number of jobs saved or created by the stimulus package. In fact, let's take the highest number - 2.9 million jobs - and round up to 3 million. What do you get when you divide 3 million into $831 billion - the final total cost of Obama's stimulus package?

Give me enough billions and I can be "job creator/saver", to the tune of 3 million jobs, too. Anyone can. Question is: Is it worth borrowing more money from China to do it? Over a quarter of a million borrowed dollars per job?

Oh well. Maybe you're like Stu - you don't have any children and you'll never have grandchildren who will be saddled with that debt.

So I can understand. What's it to you, right?
Meade
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3341
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:26 pm

Re: "The New, New Deal," Michael Grunwald

Postby Mad Howler » Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:22 pm

Stu,
Has your original thread been jacked? I will reposit my response to your original question with the hope that...

Mad Howler wrote:Aside of Wisconsin pushing the boat away on rail and broad internet connectivity, I am curious about his insight into all the detraction and subterfuge that seems to have defined these noble efforts in a negative light. There is no doubt that efforts at this scale will leave a trail of missteps that can be seized upon negatively. Last month I made it through Neil Barofsky's book Bailout, things do not always get done perfectly or seemingly rational at this scale. How do we close the gap between our local concerns and the United level? Perhaps working out of the gate in this interview around a local frame would be interesting, i.e. this local project is better (or worse) because ARRA did (or didn't) get behind it.
Mad Howler
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:36 pm


Return to Books

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar