Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Karl Henning]

You could probably extend that to include American culture in general, as well.

This is nothing but boosterism. Pfui.

[Florestan]

Yes.  Specific areas of micro theory are intrinsically apolitical, and both experimental economics and behavioral economics rely on concrete testing, though the value of such testing can be disputed as normal. 

Your conception of economics is clearly fixed on macroeconomics, which used to be called Political Economy, and that cannot be separated from politics.  The field is much bigger and richer than your question implies.

Okay, let me put it in a different way: is there any way to implement an economic policy other than by either making a law or repealling one? And is not a reality that making / repealling laws is a heavily politicized business?

[(poco) Sforzando]

This is nothing but boosterism. Pfui.

Pure applesauce. (And why all the animus towards applesauce?)

[Todd]

Okay, let me put it in a different way: is there any way to implement an economic policy other than by either making a law or repealling one? And is not a reality that making / repealling laws is a heavily politicized business?

Now you're asking entirely different questions than before.  Of course having a government implement any policy, economic or otherwise, necessarily involves politics, but that is fundamentally different than theorizing, testing, and studying specific areas of economics.  This does not change the answer to your prior question.

[Florestan]

Now you're asking entirely different questions than before.  Of course having a government implement any policy, economic or otherwise, necessarily involves politics, but that is fundamentally different than theorizing, testing, and studying specific areas of economics.  This does not change the answer to your prior question.

Oh, my! I forgot how nitpicking and hairsplitting you were. My bad. 

[Todd]

Oh, my! I forgot how nitpicking and hairsplitting you were. My bad. 

In this case, it is nothing of the sort.  You changed the fundamental nature of the question you asked because you did not get the answer you wanted to your hastily crafted prior inquiry.  Your original question had to do with whether economics and politics can be separated.  The answer is very obviously yes.  If you meant can they be separated when it comes to implementing policy, then you should have asked that initially.  The word policy literally makes all the difference.

[Florestan]

In this case, it is nothing of the sort.  You changed the fundamental nature of the question you asked because you did not get the answer you wanted to your hastily crafted prior inquiry.  Your original question had to do with whether economics and politics can be separated.  The answer is very obviously yes.  If you meant can they be separated when it comes to implementing policy, then you should have asked that initially.  The word policy literally makes all the difference.

Okay, okay, okay, for God´s sake!... In Romanian there is one single word for both politics and policy, hence my apparently (to you) changing the nature of the question. Can I please be excused for thinking in my native language while writing in yours? 

[Ken B]

In Romanian there is one single word for both politics and policy

English too. "Graft".

[Ken B]

A little perspective.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-off-stage-horror-amid-the-euphoria-1435355279

I am also seeing some predictable over-reactions and foolishness. I understand that a core of the religious, whose "holy book" condemns gays explicitly, will never be reconciled. But am I the only one to think that this really is a win for "conservative values", like the importance of family and self-reliance. Two guys want to be a family and take care of each other as they age. And a self-described conservative says, "No, I don't think so."??

[Ken B]

     The opponents have no trouble differentiating between an oversight and an intention for the purpose of opposing the act, but only from the perverse standpoint of becoming unaware of the same facts to read the oversight as the intention. It didn't work and Scalia is pissed because he thinks it should. Me, I had the idea that if the act was constitutional, and that wasn't challenged, the intention would have to be honored and the oversight treated as such.

As I pointed out, this is wrong. The law was drafted to give the states an incentive to set up exchanges. I'll let Gruber explain it. http://youtu.be/34rttqLh12U

[Todd]

And another . . .

(Maybe he's angling to be Secretary of Transportation?)

[Karl Henning]

What's the count up to? 

[Todd]

What's the count up to? 

I ran out of fingers, and so need to start using my toes.  Give me a minute.

[Ken B]

A discussion of Scalia by the liberal legal scholar Cass Sunstein.
http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/how-to-understand-the-world-through-antonin-scalia-s-eyes-cass-r-sunstein-1.5612624

[Karl Henning]

A discussion of Scalia by the liberal legal scholar Cass Sunstein.
http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/how-to-understand-the-world-through-antonin-scalia-s-eyes-cass-r-sunstein-1.5612624

An interesting read, thanks.

[Karl Henning]

While everyone has treated the Trump story as an amusing sideshow to the campaign (which it certainly is), there's a genuine danger for the GOP in his presence that goes beyond the simple fact that he makes the party look silly (which he certainly does). More than any other candidate, Trump is telling Latinos that the Republican Party doesn't like them.

Donald Trump is on the rise — and that's very bad news for the GOP

RTWT here.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Donald Trump is on the rise — and that's very bad news for the GOP

RTWT here.

Compare and contrast. On the one hand, we have this worthless ass. On the other:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Winton

[Ken B]

Donald Trump is on the rise — and that's very bad news for the GOP

RTWT here.

Meh. Trump has the best name recognition is all. He's not electable even to city council. Pretty soon he'll flamboyantly quit with an "I gave them the best and they were to blind to see" air.

[Todd]

And the Democratic frontrunner is . . .

[Karl Henning]

And the Democratic frontrunner is . . .

Well, there's not been much doubt that this is a machine, and not a process.  Many would be happier if there were 16 aspirants, rather than "whom can we have, other than Hillary?"