A supply-sider is a progressive who’s been elected governor
People used to say that a conservative is a liberal who’s been mugged. I wonder if the same sort of principle applies to progressives who have been elected governor, and assume responsibility for the health of their state’s economy:
Here’s New York Governor Andrew Cuomo:
New York will be destroyed if the deductibility of state and local taxes is included in any final plan that passes the House.
His next door neighbor Connecticut is a perfect example of a state economy wrecked by “progressive” high tax policies.
PS. In a previous post I wrongly claimed that 53 Alabama pastors had signed a letter in support of Roy Moore after the recent scandal. That was not accurate; the letter was written several months ago. But this Boston Globe story suggests that not much has changed:
Over the last week, the Globe called dozens of evangelical pastors in Alabama and elsewhere who had supported Moore before the allegations emerged, gleaning from a list of names posted to the Facebook account of the candidate’s wife.
None of the nearly 10 pastors reached by phone said the allegations of sexual misconduct changed their views about Moore. Several said the allegations made them more proud to vote for the former judge.
Repeatedly, the pastors attempted to discredit Moore’s accusers in personal terms, with some dismissing their emotional stories as “crocodile tears” and “fake news.”
“I don’t know how much these women are getting paid, but I can only believe they’re getting a healthy sum,” said pastor Earl Wise, a Moore supporter from Millbrook, Ala.
Wise said he would support Moore even if the allegations were true and the candidate was proved to have sexually molested teenage girls and women.
“There ought to be a statute of limitations on this stuff,” Wise said. “How these gals came up with this, I don’t know. They must have had some sweet dreams somewhere down the line.
“Plus,” he added, “there are some 14-year-olds, who, the way they look, could pass for 20.” . . . “You’re asking me to believe them,’’ Raddish said, “when their own mother didn’t have enough red blood in her to . . . go and report this? Come on.”
And here’s how Jim Geraghty of the National Review responded to the pastors:
Yeah, why didn’t those mothers go down to the local district attorney and report that their daughters were being inappropriately sexually pursued by . . . the local assistant district attorney?
Meanwhile . . .
Donald Trump’s national security adviser reportedly mocked the US president and called him a “kindergartner” during a private dinner. . . .
During the meeting General McMaster mocked Mr Trump calling him an “idiot” and a dope, adding he had the intelligence of a “kindergartner”, five sources told BuzzFeed News. . . .
Last month it was claimed secretary of state Rex Tillerson referred to Mr Trump as a “moron” during a meeting at the Pentagon.
When the reports emerged, Mr Tillerson repeatedly refused to answer when asked whether he had made the comments.
Meanwhile Republican senator Bob Corker has previously likened the White House to “adult daycare”.
I’ve decided to stop insulting Trump. From now on I’ll just report the views of his staff.
Tags:
21. November 2017 at 09:23
From now on I’ll just report the views of his staff.
You are not reporting the views of his staff. You’re just spreading gossip.
The credibility crisis of the press is not surprising, there’s too little reporting and too much gossiping in general.
21. November 2017 at 10:15
Cuomo is not a progressive and never has been. He has a status roughly on par with Joe Lieberman:
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2017/07/cuomo-2020.html
FYI, that’s generally a good site to monitor for the attitudes of (the white part of) the actual democratic base in nice concise if sometimes coarse terms. Somewhere between the Marxists and the Blue Dogs.
21. November 2017 at 12:47
Christian, You said:
“The credibility crisis of the press”
I don’t tend to rely on Fox News or Breitbart, where the biggest credibility problem is.
Jason, You said:
“Cuomo is not a progressive and never has been”
You are half right.
21. November 2017 at 23:06
Because BuzzFeed News gossip is soooooooo much more reliable than Fox News and Breitbart. Take your meds, Sumner. The credibility crisis is greatest in the most established papers -the NYT and WaPo- for reasons too obvious to mention. McMaster isn’t a dolt, and this has all the characteristics of a planted Fake News story.
Cuomo was never a progressive, and he’s not about to start being one now.
Moore for Senate; the allegations he abused women are bogus.
22. November 2017 at 05:07
Criticism toward Scott from Trump supporters is rich. You all elected a mentally ill moron as president and then want to argue little points over whom in his administration have acknowledged his idiocy.
You have no credibility on anything. You have no moral standing. All of your input on these matters is trivial, when not outright incorrect. You’re just noise in his comment section.
22. November 2017 at 13:48
It’s fun to pick on Trump and Moore and so on, but I think it’s time to start picking on the guy who wrote this:
“Westbrook should be the MVP. He won 47 games with the rest of his team being worthless. He outplayed Harden when both were on the floor in the playoffs, despite Harden’s supporting cast being far, far better. He only lost because the Thunder were complete garbage in the 5 minutes he wasn’t on the floor each game.”
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=32435
Bill Simmons:
“When last spring’s “Russ is doing this without any help!” argument belatedly contracted hot-take salmonella in October as Victor Oladipo, Domantas Sabonis, Enes Kanter and even Dougie McBuckets (?!?!?!) thrived on their new NBA teams, did I secretly enjoy it?
“I mean … secretly? What about openly? I loved it! Where can I buy an “OFFICIAL HARDEN 2017 MVP VOTER” T-shirt? Would it be over the top if I added the words “THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY” on the back?”
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2017/11/17/16669644/nba-winners-joel-embiid-ben-simmons-jayson-tatum-celtics-sixers
22. November 2017 at 21:37
It’d be nice if the end of SALT induces progressive states to cut taxes, but I doubt it will. Progressives from NY, Cal, etc. have been complaining for many years that they pay more in taxes than they get back, and they’re right, and it’s their own fault. Their governments (and voters) drove up the cost of living so much with regulations that their citizens end up in higher tax brackets than reflect their material living standards. And yet, this hasn’t led California or NY or Massachusetts to deregulate housing or licensing or what have you to solve this problem.
So why would ending SALT induce a change in state policy? I wish making federal taxes more punishing of bad state policies would convince states to change their policies, but alas, it seems progressives in deep blue states are gluttons for punishment. Hard for me to feel sorry if they end up paying ‘more than their fair share.’
23. November 2017 at 07:42
anon/portly, That would be the Westbrook that last night went back to his “selfish style” of play from last year, and stopped trying to defer to his new teammates? The one that had 34/10/9 and led his team to a 17 point destruction of Golden State? Yeah, I’d say he’s pretty good.
And did you see Harden’s final playoff game last spring? Westbrook has never played that poorly in his entire life.
Mark, You asked:
“So why would ending SALT induce a change in state policy?”
Um, because of the laws of economics? Why don’t you think states have 50% income tax rates? I mean seriously, How can you even ask that question?
23. November 2017 at 08:44
You think state governments can be reliably expected to care about the laws of economics? Many states have already begun to experience the negative effects of high taxes – including migration to low tax states – and not lifted a finger to lower tax rates. There are some states that just aren’t that responsive to the adverse effects.
Are you on record here predicting California and New York will lower their rates in the near future if the SALT deduction goes away?
23. November 2017 at 10:30
Mark, I asked you this question:
“Why don’t you think states have 50% income tax rates?”
When you answer that question, you’ll also have the answer to this question:
“You think state governments can be reliably expected to care about the laws of economics?”
It’s not a question of whether they care about laws, it’s a question of whether people respond to incentives. And yes, people respond to incentives at all levels of society, public and private sector alike. States don’t have high personal income tax rates because they fear losing residents and businesses.
If the SALT is repealed, I predict the average top SALT income tax rate will be lower in 2027 than today.
23. November 2017 at 15:58
Just because 50% is too high for, say, Californians to countenance doesn’t mean 17 or 18% is as well. Removing the deduction will raise tax total rates by at most a few percentage points. For at least a few states, imo, that’s not going to be enough to convince governments (and likely even voters) of the need to lower state taxes.
You’re probably right that the average top rate will decline, but I doubt it’ll decline by near enough to offset increase incurred by the loss of the deduction.
23. November 2017 at 17:17
Mark, You said:
“You’re probably right that the average top rate will decline, but I doubt it’ll decline by near enough to offset increase incurred by the loss of the deduction.”
Of course, both this claim and my claim flow from simply logic. It’s like when you expand a highway. More cars enter the expanded freeway, but not so many more that traffic gets just as bad as before.
23. November 2017 at 17:32
Well, if we’re going to be quantitative, if we expand the number of lanes in a freeway, the increase in traffic as a percentage of the original traffic divided by the increase in number of lanes as a percentage can be assumed to be between 0 and 1, with 0 being no increase and 1 being traffic stays just as dense post expansion. I expect the number will likely be closer to 0 than 1. You seem to think it will be closer to 1 than 0?
23. November 2017 at 17:35
I should clarify I was talking about expanding the freeway as an analogy to eliminating the deduction; I don’t actually have any opinion on the effect of expanding freeways on traffic density.
25. November 2017 at 07:55
Mark, You said:
“You seem to think it will be closer to 1 than 0?”
Where did I express that view?
29. November 2017 at 11:36
“That would be the Westbrook that last night went back to his “selfish style” of play from last year, and stopped trying to defer to his new teammates? The one that had 34/10/9 and led his team to a 17 point destruction of Golden State? Yeah, I’d say he’s pretty good.
“And did you see Harden’s final playoff game last spring? Westbrook has never played that poorly in his entire life.”
Actually, I just thought the Simmons quote was pretty funny. Still, I think you whiffed a bit with the “Harden’s supporting cast being far, far better” claim. In one sense, this claim is just a truism – Harden’s team won 55 games with a +5.8 (adjusted) PD, while Westbrook’s team won 47 with a +1.4 (a) PD. And obviously both are great players.
But in another sense, this claim omits the bigger picture, which is that when last season started, the perception of Harden’s supporting cast was very, very different. Unlike with Fed policy, we have nicely functioning (I think, anyway – am I wrong?) prediction markets with NBA teams.
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/vegas-releases-2016-17-nba-season-overunder-win-totals-for-every-team/
According to this, the over/under for Houston was 41.5 (and OKC 45.5). Houston beat this by 13.5. And Houston was a veteran team, with Ariza, Gordon, Anderson, Beverley and Nene being almost the dictionary definition of “known quantities.” (OKC on the other hand was a much younger team).
Obviously these players didn’t magically become better, either they were better (more talented) than we thought, or healthier, or else some of the explanation for that 13.5 difference must go to things like “system” and “coaching” and how the players fit together.
It is my belief (okay, guess) that the over/unders adduced above tell the true story, and that Harden and Westbrook had supporting casts that were roughly equal, talent-wise, or if you looked at the impact these players would have if you were to spread them randomly among NBA teams, Monte Carlo simulation style, as it were.
Anyway, if that is actually a point, it is my point, and my interpretation of Simmons’ point.
Anyway this year….
https://www.si.com/nba/2017/08/30/nba-over-under-win-totals-all-30-teams-2017-2018-season
This has Houston at 55.5 and OKC at 51.5. Houston so far is 16-4 and +10.3, with pretty much the same roster as last year. OKC is 8-11 and +3.9 with obviously a very different roster.
From the citation of OKC’s good game against Golden State, I would infer the official TMI position to be that OKC is going to be pretty good. I wouldn’t disagree with that (and their PD at least is pretty good already). You’ve got to think they’re going to eventually make a trade or two, given that with Westbrook or George, it would be hard not to be pretty good if you could just find halfway the right complimentary players…. Or maybe a better coach? There has to be a way to turn Westbrook into an all-asset guy, instead of the mixture of assets and liabilities (if you assign him at least some responsibility for the bad shots he takes) he is now.