Lawrence Kudlow: Insanity Once More -- Hillary Clinton's Economic Plan

Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, when in fact the results never change, is one definition of insanity. That goes for economics, too.

Over the past seven and a half years, President Obama has maintained a steady course of burdensome new regulations, significant tax increases and massive federal spending on so-called infrastructure. He has unconstitutionally ordered executive actions, favored labor over business, attacked banks, insulted successful corporate leaders and backed federal government mandates on business.

And with all this, strong economic recovery from a deep recession -- which has been an American tradition -- never came to pass.

A recent Wall Street Journal news headline read, "The Worst Expansion Since World War II Was Even Weaker." The story proclaimed that this lackluster economic expansion is actually getting weaker.

Another recent Journal column titled "Productivity Slump Threatens Economy's Long-Term Growth" asserted that output per hour is experiencing the longest losing streak since 1979. The U-6 unemployment rate stands twice as high as the traditional unemployment rate, the U-3.
Get instant access to exclusive stock lists and powerful tools on Investors.com. Try us free for 4 weeks.

Yet Obama has continued to do the same thing over and over again.

And now comes Hillary Clinton's economic plan, which will deliver more stagnant growth, falling wages, dropping productivity and depressed investment.

http://www.investors.com/politics/columnists/lawrence-kudlow-insanity-once-more-hillary-clintons-economic-plan/

Did anyone expect anything different from Hillary?

Anyone make note that the Republican repetition of lowering taxes on the wealthy while increasing costs on the middle and lower classes has been inevitably even MORE destructive?

And yet THEY continue to chant that we need to do that even more?

Sounds like we have to choose between one act of "insanity" and another, according to that oft repeated, and ironically false dictum.

Just which Republican lowered taxes on the wealthy and raised costs on the middle and lower class?

All of them since 1976.

This doesn't really apply.

Government wants to control economies, markets.

Economies/markets always change to price in control.
Economies/markets naturally shift away from control.
e.g. drugs, small farm community co-ops, prostitution, slavery, garage sales.

Government can't control the economy, all markets, as they adapt around control, government can only add layers of inefficiency which manipulates who benefits the most in some areas of attempted control.
i.e. spend $100 to make sure $10 goes to the "right" people.

So it's never doing the same thing over and over and over again expecting different results so much as doing the same thing over and over and over again in changing economies and markets, getting the desired result for some, while different results for others.
And then control the narrative to be what you want it to be.


IME/IMO using corporate news agencies, outsider, perspectives generally lead to battles of "well my news source is better than your news source, this is from the economist! This is from Huffpo! Well Huffpo is liberal! Well economist is retarded! Repukes stupid! Demoblowmecraps stupid!"

If you read reports put out by the banks that make up the fed (where the government gets its information on the economy) they generally can't be argued with that way.

When the kansas city fed, dallas fed, clevelend fed, etc. periodically post reports that show the numbers used by the Obama administration as untrue, false, complete lies, statistical manipulation, and just plain BS, it's better to pay attention to the numbers the government use for their own reports than anything in the WSJ. IMO.

When the BLS reports come out with double seasonal adjustments it's better to use the BLS reports against what the government is saying the BLS reports mean, than anything in the WSJ, or whatever. IMO.

IMO when I read crap like "A recent Wall Street Journal news headline read" all it means is "one guy may have read the relevant data and done a story, and another guy read that story and wrote a story about that other guys work" all the way to the article you're reading. It's ultimately just opinion telephone.

It leads to a lot of disinformation and miscommunication, and IMO takes away from the articles credibility.


What do you expect?
There's nothing in the cliche of "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results...and expecting different results" that compensates for "while being told and shown cherry picked examples of actual different results."

Yeah just throw out a false blanket statement of ignorance like that
I can make things up too...lets see...The Democrats were responsible for every war in the world

I'm not the one making things up. Reagan started the "lower taxes on the rich, and everything will magically get better" nonsense, and the GOP is still pushing it.

It's NEVER resulted in an improved economy as promised.

And once the Republicans added "make cuts to keep it revenue neutral" to the mix, cutting rich guys taxes has HAD to mean raising everyone elses' by the fundamental rules of arithmetic.

You can keep pretending that you can't read, and haven't lived in or near the United States for the last thirty years if you want, but it wont change the facts.

Supply Side economics is nonsense, and it's destructive, but the GOP keeps repeating it again and again.