http://theatlantic.disqus.com/The Atlantic WebsiteenWed, 09 Jul 2008 03:15:41 -0000http://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2008/08/buchanan-fights-for-the-common-man/5020#comment-36537140<p></p><p>Good God, that's a line up that deserves a Bolshevik style group picture.</p><p></p>DonkeyKongWed, 09 Jul 2008 03:15:41 -0000http://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2008/08/buchanan-fights-for-the-common-man/5020#comment-36537138<p></p><p>Wow. I never thought the day would come when I would find myself siding with Pat Buchanan against a more loud, abrasive, blowhard of a douchebag than him. The world is an ever-changing and scary place...</p><p></p>DJ ImagoDeiFri, 04 Jul 2008 17:05:04 -0000http://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2008/08/buchanan-fights-for-the-common-man/5020#comment-36537137<p></p><p>Wow, Barnicle, Buchanan, Kudlow, and Jack Welsh. There's a braintrust. Kudlow seems to not understand who was technically President on 9/11 (and 8/6/01 for that matter). What a horrible group of people. </p><p></p>edWed, 02 Jul 2008 18:44:14 -0000http://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2008/08/buchanan-fights-for-the-common-man/5020#comment-36537135<p></p><p>Wow. What a tool. </p><p></p>RoptyWed, 02 Jul 2008 15:52:19 -0000http://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2008/08/buchanan-fights-for-the-common-man/5020#comment-36537134<p></p><p>My moment of Zen: Pat Buchanan looking positively BAFFLED by the New York Times paper. Smiles:)</p><p></p>soniaWed, 02 Jul 2008 15:26:57 -0000http://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2008/08/buchanan-fights-for-the-common-man/5020#comment-36537132<p></p><p>My brief thoughts on the various issues:</p><p></p> <p></p><p>1. Grasso/Spitzer/NYSE: Spitzer was a pretty awful AG, I think, and this case hardly seems unique in Spitzer's overzealousness. That said, I certainly don't agree that Grasso is "an American hero," or whatever that nonsense was, and his pay package probably was overly generous (and some of the issues about the composition of the NYSE's board are squicky). But I tend to think that the light of day often does more good than specific regulations, which are dodged, evaded, etc. </p><p></p> <p></p><p>2. The levels of U.S. CEO pay do make me somewhat uncomfortable as an American, although not really as an economist, because eventually the chickens come home to roost, and if you've been overpaying your CEO your share price will suffer. As to my feelings "as an American," though, I don't get too worked up about it because CEOs are such a tiny fraction of Americans (and for that matter make far less money than either entrepreneurs or finance types). My perception is that most Americans (and I'll grant that I could be superimposing my own values) don't really care if there are a few really freaking rich folks out there as long as they feel like they have a chance to be one themselves (or, more likely, to be "working" rich and making say $100k). It bothers me when arguments are framed as "these guys are making way the hell too much money" rather than as "we absolutely must improve our urban schools, and this is going to cost X dollars, and that money has to come from somewhere." I absolutely am concerned about the access to opportunity for say the bottom third of the socioeconomic distribution, but I don't think it's appropriate to conflate this issue with the fact that there are more freakishly rich people than there were previously.</p><p></p> <p></p><p>3. The point (I forget who said it) about interest-rate cuts taking a while to pass through is a good one, and one I haven't seen much in the papers. But it definitely was something we talked about when I worked at the Fed, and some of the economists in our department were opposed to more rate cuts because they thought the initial cuts hadn't been given enough time. So I generally agree that the economy will be below-average-but-not-awful(slow growth in the 1% real range) the rest of this year. Beyond that, who the hell knows (anyone who says they do is overstating his case IMO). </p><p></p> <p></p><p>4. Offshore drilling (full disclosure: I now work in the energy industry) should be allowed. Of course there are environmental consequences, and drillers should pay to compensate for these. If the price is too high for drilling to be profitable, then so be it. But I'm too much of an economist for the argument that "there is no price that would make drilling here worth it." There's a price for everything. For that matter, drillers probably should pay considerably more for the environmental damage they inflict right now, but the inconsistency of the current treatment--offshore Louisiana vs. offshore Florida, ANWR vs. Rocky Mountain National Park, etc.--makes no sense. More domestic drilling isn't going to halve prices overnight, but expectations matter (especially in a world where the biggest supply sources are rather insecure--Nigerian production is way, way down this year due to militias stealing crude), and marginal impacts matter, too. </p><p></p> <p></p><p>More later if I think of anything...</p><p></p>bottomofthe9thWed, 02 Jul 2008 14:41:13 -0000