One the candidates said he would "jump start the economy." I can't remember which one, because I switched to Pro Wrestling for a dose of reality. The image the candidates offer is that of a skilled operator maneuvering the levers of the economy from the oval office. Kind of like someone operating a backhoe, but without the hard hat.
Robert J. Samuelson's recent column in the Washington Post exposes this fallacy quite nicely:
We have a $14 trillion economy. The idea that presidents can control it lies between an exaggeration and an illusion. Our presidential preferences ought to reflect judgments about candidates' character, values, competence and their views on issues where what they think counts: foreign policy; long-term economic and social policy -- how they would tax and spend; health care; immigration. Forget the business cycle.
Bill, Do you believe the business cycle is intact, with the implication that recessions are healthy (creative destruction) and inevitable? If so, how meaningful would a shallow recession be in 2008. In other words, would a deeper recession be better (it's been a long time)?
Posted by: Laurence Hunt | February 09, 2008 at 12:55 AM
President plays an important role in the game "Who gets what?". Almost for everybody this is the essence of economy, not $14 trillion.
Posted by: kio | February 12, 2008 at 02:18 AM
Laurence, good question. Reply in my blog soon.
Bill
Posted by: Bill Conerly | February 15, 2008 at 10:42 AM