Author: tompepinsky

  • Take 2

    We got to watch the first hour of the second debate, although we were watching on BBC World, which went down every minute or so and prevented us from actually hearing some of the comments. We believe that Georgie did much better this time than the time before. He just has a way of connecting with the people that John Kerry doesn’t have. That being said, we both think that Kerry did do better than we expected. We liked his taking the offensive on issues.

    One thing that I would like to clear up (this is tp talking now). When we talk about tax cuts as a demand stimulus, it’s important to think about how we make these tax cuts work. I take the principle of decreasing marginal utility of money as a given: rich people value a dollar far less than poor people because a dollar makes more of a difference for a poor person. It follows that poor people will change spending patterns more readily, and drastically, when given money than will wealthy people. The probability of tax break money being actually spent is higher for them. Increase consumption means increased demand, which leads to higher production, which strengthens the economy, which is the goal of the tax breaks. The increase in money in the economy does lead to inflation, but in aggregate, real earnings still increase for those people. Tax breaks for wealthy people are more difficult to understand. Increasing the supply of money for rich people may lead to increased investments in productive capacity, but it is less likely to do so because it has less influence on their spending patterns, and does nothing for the ability of regular folks to consume the things produced. If anything, it reduces the real value of their wages, since the supply of money in the economy is greater. This is, yes, stagflation. If Bush is committed to jumpstarting the economy through tax breaks, he should be directing them towards the people who are more likely to consume. Oh yeah, and he shouldn’t increase non-defense discretionary spending.

    You will notice that nothing that I said here is “democratic” or “republican.” That is all.

    (JM) Whew, I’ll say. Don’t worry if you didn’t understand parts (or all) of that. I get running commentary and have a personal tutor and I still get confused sometimes! That being said, this stuff really is interesting if you take a moment to try and work it out. More on our real life adventures tomorrow….

  • Weekend's Here

    Well another week is gone! (for us at least) I think we’re going to hang around here this weekend, go to a museum or two and explore Jakarta some more. Hopefully we will be able to take some more pictures to be posted on Monday.
    The people at the Freedom Institute found some work for me to do today so I’ve been entering Journal titles and authors into the computer for a few hours. It’s nice to be useful. And I’ve now told Tom that he’s not ever allowed to use the word “toward” in a title (as in “Toward a Better Transatlantic Relationship”). Ever. Everyone uses it and it just ends up sounding cheesy (in my opinion).
    A quick anecdote. I left on my own yesterday and was not having luck flagging down a taxi. A man passed me on the street and said hi, and had noticed my failed attempts. He walked up a little further, and just as I successfully caught a driver’s eye, he, not noticing, started waving at the taxi and pointing to me. I thought it was very nice of him to help me. Conclusion- all Indonesian men are not lecherous and rude. Yeah! (jm)

    I, on the other hand, am brain-dead from too much thinking about political economy. Mundell-Fleming Conditions. Stolper-Samuelsson Theorem. Fixed exchange rates, floating exchange rates, pegged exchange rates, currency boards. M0, M1, M2. Liquidity. Liquidity squeezes. Interest rates. Exchange rates. Real exchange rates. Real effective exchange rates (what?).

    On the other hand, go Sox. For your internet viewing pleasure, I give you the Boston Sports Guy. If you’re an Angels fan, my condolensces, and don’t bother. (tp)