This is Aaron Moynahan's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Aaron Moynahan's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Aaron Moynahan
Recent Activity
When you say that social security has a massive surplus I assume you mean a suplus based on the social security trust fund. I assume this will have to be paid from transfers from the general fund. The trust fund violated FDRs general principal of keeping social security seperate from the general, operating more like a savings plan and less like another welfare program. A highschool student might wonder why you have to go out and find money if you have a surplus. That's the position our government is going to find itself in.
1 reply
Using the term deniers seems like name calling to me.
1 reply
My point today is there is no way of knowing what would have happened had Hoover took Mellon's advice.
1 reply
It would be nice if oil prices crashed like in the mid to late 1990s. With $20 oil I could see getting down to 5 percent unemployment in 2-3 years. $20 oil certainly helped us during the time of the Clinton Administration. It’s like a tax cut where you don't lose any tax revenue. I don't think we're going anywhere with $100+ oil.
Toggle Commented Apr 3, 2011 on Are Things Improving? at Economist's View
1 reply
Sorry
1 reply
These are the numbers that i'm used to looking at: Current Current Receipts/GDP and Current Expenditures/GDP year Rec/GDP Exp/GDP 1990 18.7 21.7 1991 18.4 22.0 1992 18.1 22.9 1993 18.4 22.6 1994 18.7 21.8 1995 19.0 21.8 1996 19.5 21.4 1997 19.9 20.6 1998 20.2 19.8 1999 20.3 19.2 2000 20.7 18.8 2001 19.6 19.2 2002 17.5 19.8 2003 16.9 20.3 2004 17.0 20.2 2005 18.1 20.4 2006 18.8 20.4 2007 18.9 20.6 2008 17.4 21.7 2009 15.6 24.5 2010 16.3 25.4
1 reply
Clinton did say the age of big government was over.
1 reply
You're still not using the correct number. You need to use federal receipts and expenditures. The BEA has it. I think the 18 percent comes from this series. 18 is reasonable historically but I think the compromise would be 19 percent so I take 18 percent as an opening number in a negotiation. You don't have to agree with this number, provide your own if you want, however if you want to follow the debate its a good idea to be looking at the numbers that everyone else is looking at.
1 reply
Mellon's suggestion was an appeal to the classical economic model. We will never know if this policy would have led to a 5 percent unemployment rate by 1938. History is not a scientific experiement where you can run alternative scenarios. You only get one shot at it.
1 reply
Below are the unemployment numbers published on the BLS website. I have no idea if they did them wrong. I usually take government statisitics by the BLS as a given (a fact). If they know they're wrong then they ought to correct them or remove them from their website. However, I doubt they're materially incorrect. This data shows unemployment at 19 percent in 1938. The facts seem to correspond to Morgenthau's statment about Roosevelt's economy. http://www.bls.gov/op ub/cwc/cm20030124ar03p1.htm 1923-29 3.3 1930 8.9 1931 15.9 1932 23.6 1933 24.9 1934 21.7 1935 20.1 1936 17.0 1937 14.3 1938 19.0 1939 17.2 1940 14.6 1941 9.9 1942 4.7
1 reply
Aaron Moynahan is now following The Typepad Team
Apr 1, 2011