October 07, 2010 1:38 pm ET
Fox News hosts and contributors have recently dismissed estimates of food stamp programs' stimulative effect on the economy as "some strange multiplier effect study," "liberal math" and a "complicated economic multiplier theory." In fact, economists agree that food stamps are one of "the most effective ways to prime the economy's pump."
Malkin, Gingrich and Varney all dismiss economic theory to continue attacking food stamps
Malkin falsely claims "the only thing that these programs stimulate, of course, is a bigger government." On the October 7 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy stated that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said of food stamps: "It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance."
Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin replied by saying she would "like to know which economist [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi] is talking to. Of course, she's promoting some strange multiplier effect study to argue this." Malkin concluded by falsely claiming "the only thing that these programs stimulate, of course, is bigger government."
Varney dismisses economic consensus regarding stimulative nature of food stamps as a "complicated economic multiplier theory." Earlier on Fox & Friends, Fox Business Network anchor Stuart Varney dismissed Pelosi's statement as "the complicated economic multiplier theory that they're bringing in here."
Varney claimed "the evidence that's before us" showing that a high proportion of the unemployed are on food stamps and unemployment is still high shows "it would seem you don't get bigger bang for the buck."
Varney hosts Santorum to attack food stamps and claim that "the numbers are phony." On the October 7 edition of Fox Business Network's Varney & Company, contributor Tracy Byrnes attributed Pelosi's claim to "the health care calculator that they use...the keys are not working correctly if she's thinking this is the best bang for our buck."
Fox News contributor Rick Santorum then stated of Pelosi's claim: "So if that's the case, why don't we turn the whole economy over to the government have them pay out all of this money and have a great multiplier effect.
It doesn't work and in fact there have been studies done show just the opposite." Santorum further claimed "I don't know where she's getting the funny numbers, the calculator is not working as Tracy said, but the numbers are phony."
Gingrich: "I don't understand how liberal math turns one dollar into $1.79." On the October 6 edition of Fox News' On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich said:
I carry around a bumper sticker that says two plus two equals four, so I'd be very curious how a dollar given to somebody becomes $1.79. And I think if we could get that to work at the U.S. Treasury, so if people gave the treasury $1,000, it became $1,790, we could pay off the federal debt and never worry about spending or anything. Somehow, I don't understand how liberal math turns one dollar into $1.79.
Economists widely acknowledge stimulative nature of food stamps
Elmendorf: "Nutrition assistance" would "have a significant impact on GDP." In January 27, 2009, written testimony before the House Budget Committee, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf stated that "[t]ransfers to persons (for example, unemployment insurance and nutrition assistance) would ... have a significant impact on GDP." He added: "Because a large amount of such spending can occur quickly, transfers would have a significant impact on GDP by early 2010. Transfers also include refundable tax credits, which have an impact similar to that of a temporary tax cut."
Zandi: "[E]xtending food stamps are the most effective ways to prime the economy's pump." In his July 24, 2008, written testimony before the House Committee on Small Business, economist Mark Zandi, who advised John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, stated that "extending food stamps are [sic] the most effective ways to prime the economy's pump." Zandi further explained: "People who receive these benefits are very hard-pressed and will spend any financial aid they receive within a few weeks.
Of course, it is easy to express opinions about the Democratic stimulus even though this research came out of Moody's Economy.com rather than the federal government. This is nothing liberal about the study that Moody's did and this information was available ong before the Democrats modestly increased food stamp payments and extended unemployment benefits.
The Moody's study has nothing to do with health care as Fox News is claiming.
George H.W. Bush referred to Arthur Laffer'ss supply side economic as voodoo economic when he was running against Ronald Reagan. There are few mainstream economists who are in this "school of economics." Many Democrats consdier supply side to be a Trojan Horse for giving tax cuts to the most affluent Americans.
Rightaradia wonders what evidence the GOP has that supply side economics works outside of partisan reports from the CATO Institute, the American Enterprise Institute or the Heritage Foundation. National economic policy should be based on facts, not political ideology or what one party believes to be true.
This country should not make economic policy based on faith-based economics!
Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu
Netcraft rank: 8377
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment