Greg left a comment in my previous post about income support. I agree with him that a JG is preferable to a wage subsidy though I think the two policies could be complementary and at the least as long as we don't have a JG for now a WS is still a decent second or third best policy.
However, something in his comment got me thinking about Chris Christy.
"The whole drug testing of UI recipients is pure nastiness. It saves nothing and its simply a way to socially stigmatize a group of people who are very hard on their luck, which unfortunately describes much of the modern American conservative movement today, petty assholes."
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/01/some-thoughts-on-negative-income-tax.html?showComment=1390074739458#c3049577160500893458
It's kind of off topic but speaking of petty assholes, listen to the kinds of arguments that is Republican friends are trying to make on his behalf.
"“This guy is the most charismatic leader that I have ever seen,” said fellow Republican Bramnick. “He’s a success story. This is a guy who would lie in a press conference for more than an hour?”"
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/20-subpoenas-issued-response-bridgegate-article-1.1582275#ixzz2qmbSeWJs
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/20-subpoenas-issued-response-bridgegate-article-1.1582275#ixzz2qmdbuOHr
However, something in his comment got me thinking about Chris Christy.
"The whole drug testing of UI recipients is pure nastiness. It saves nothing and its simply a way to socially stigmatize a group of people who are very hard on their luck, which unfortunately describes much of the modern American conservative movement today, petty assholes."
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/01/some-thoughts-on-negative-income-tax.html?showComment=1390074739458#c3049577160500893458
It's kind of off topic but speaking of petty assholes, listen to the kinds of arguments that is Republican friends are trying to make on his behalf.
"“This guy is the most charismatic leader that I have ever seen,” said fellow Republican Bramnick. “He’s a success story. This is a guy who would lie in a press conference for more than an hour?”"
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/20-subpoenas-issued-response-bridgegate-article-1.1582275#ixzz2qmbSeWJs
I don't get it-being a 'charismatic leader' makes you honest? It sounds more like he's describing a cult leader than the Governor of a major Northeastern state. I think Jim Jones was charismatic as was David Koresh-at least for those cult members who followed both nutjobs to their deaths.
The weakness of the GOP defense of Christy augurs poorly for him. I mean what argument do they have? One is to try to deflect: 'this is just a distraction from Obamacare!' No, Obamacare is being used as a deflection from Chris Christy. Any defense of Christy that has the word Obama in it you can be sure is just pure deflection and casuistry. The analogy doesn't work at all as there is nothing that Obama has done that was nakedly about malevolently settling political scores. Yes there was the IRS furor but that never turned up anything meaningful. So the comparison doesn't work, but even if it did that'd be besides the point.
I still think former NYC Mayor Gulliani had the best Christy defense-'surely he would not have mocked reproters' questions about the GWB if he knew his office really was guilty of the charges!'
Yes, he's innocent by reason of arrogance.
No wonder Christy has hired Giulliani's friend to lead his legal team.
"Randy Mastro, a former assistant U.S. attorney and deputy mayor in the Giuliani administration, will help Christie’s office deal with the ongoing investigations."
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/20-subpoenas-issued-response-bridgegate-article-1.1582275#ixzz2qmdbuOHr
I guess had he not been rude and consdecending, Giullani wouldn't be so sure of his innocence. The obvious answer to Giullani's claim is that Christy is incredibly arrogant and figured he's untouchable. Which id kind of how bullies think, whichi is kind of what Christy's critics have been trying to point out for years.
I too think some WS should be in place even with a JG. The JG is intended to solve the involuntary unemployment problem, the WS is intended to help the income distribution and AD problem while possibly also incentivizing the private sector and keeping the JG pool as small as possible.
ReplyDeleteI think what you want it is for people to get better paying jobs in the private sector over time. A JG acts as a defacto min wage, one can always go earn the JG wage if desired so private sector guys must pay at least that wage with better bennies or lose employees to the JG. WS will make sure that if a certain sector of the economy loses market share, say coal companies, then the falling wages in those sectors will be supported for a while and those workers can transition to something else.
I don't see it as either JG or WS
Yes a JG and WS have somewhat different functions. The JG is among other things a de facto minimum wage. It ideally cures the unemployment problem altogether. Basically no one ever need be involuntarily unemployed again.I see that Yglesias has a post up where he comes out thumbs down for the JG. I thnk the trouble is he doesn't get what the point of the JG is.
ReplyDeleteYes, that seems to be a chronic condition amongst many who criticize the JG, at least as its theorized amongst people like Kelton, Wray, Mosler, Tcherneva etc. To call it simply a "govt make-work program" shows no interest in reading how it might actually be implemented. Of course the govt would fund it but they would not be deciding what work gets done. Yglesias comes across to me as a very shallow thinker.
DeleteI don't kno if he is in every way. I think the important point about the JG is that not all jobs would be through the govt-there would also be nonprofit sector as well as private sector jobs.
DeleteThe govt would make sure everyone had a job. Not every job would be with the govt.
I think its important to add the qualifier- everyone who WANTS a job could have one- no one would me made to participate in the JG pool.
DeleteAnd yes, not every job would be with the govt.
Right people could choose not to participate. The money is that most would. That's what this experiment they had with this in Argentina seems to show. this is the case in their Jefe program they had 10 to 15 years ago.
Deletehttp://neweconomicperspectives.org/2014/01/growing-recognition-need-job-guarantee.html
Agree. Most people that are currently receiving UI would go for the work I think, plus many who aren't receiving UI and haven't worked in a while and gave up searching. I think conservatives have a jaundiced view of folks not working, most really would like to do something.
DeleteThis gets back to my earlier comment about how conservatives' desire to punish free riders leads them into supporting overall destructive policies. They are so afraid that someone will get 400$ week they didn't earn they end up denying the benefits to people who really need it. Pathetic
Yes I agree they're much too worried about someone getting something they didn't earn that everyone must be punished to avoid this
Delete