I'm wondering if the Kerry campaign is aware of an open letter to Bush contained in this thread from TacticalPeak:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x989094The letter charges that the economy has taken "a dangerous turn" under Bush, and it is from a large number of business school professors, including many from Harvard Business School and other top business schools. I understand that among the HBS names on the list are some of the most distinguished professors at the school. Especially given that Bush is a business school graduate, from HBS, it might be useful for people to know what these experts think about his economic policies and their effects. Here is the beginning of the letter (names of all who signed, and their academic positions, follow the letter, all of which can be read at the link above, to TacticalPeak's post):
Open Letter to President George W. Bush
October 4, 2004
Dear Mr. President:
As professors of economics and business, we are concerned that U.S. economic policy has taken a dangerous turn under your stewardship. Nearly every major economic indicator has deteriorated since you took office in January 2001. Real GDP growth during your term is the lowest of any presidential term in recent memory. Total non-farm employment has contracted and the unemployment rate has increased. Bankruptcies are up sharply, as is our dependence on foreign capital to finance an exploding current account deficit. All three major stock indexes are lower now than at the time of your inauguration. The percentage of Americans in poverty has increased, real median income has declined, and income inequality has grown.
The data make clear that your policy of slashing taxes primarily for those at the upper reaches of the income distribution has not worked. The fiscal reversal that has taken place under your leadership is so extreme that it would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. The federal budget surplus of over $200 billion that we enjoyed in the year 2000 has disappeared, and we are now facing a massive annual deficit of over $400 billion. In fact, if transfers from the Social Security trust fund are excluded, the federal deficit is even worse -- well in excess of a half a trillion dollars this year alone. Although some members of your administration have suggested that the mountain of new debt accumulated on your watch is mainly the consequence of 9-11 and the war on terror, budget experts know that this is simply false. Your economic policies have played a significant role in driving this fiscal collapse. And the economic proposals you have suggested for a potential second term, from diverting Social Security contributions into private accounts to making the recent tax cuts permanent, only promise to exacerbate the crisis by further narrowing the federal revenue base.
These sorts of deficits crowd out private investment and are politically addictive. They also place a heavy burden on monetary policy and create additional pressure for higher interest rates by stoking inflationary expectations. If your economic advisers are telling you that these deficits can be defeated through further reductions in tax rates, then you need new advisers. More robust economic growth could certainly help, but nearly every one of your administration's economic forecasts, both before and after 9-11, has proved overly optimistic. Expenditure cuts could be part of the answer, but your record so far has been one of increasing expenditures, not reducing them.
What is called for, we believe, is a dramatic reorientation of fiscal policy, including substantial reversals of your tax policy. Running a budget deficit in response to a short bout of recession is one thing. But running large structural deficits over a long period is something else entirely. We therefore urge you to consider the fiscal realities we now face and the substantial burden they are placing on our economy.
We also urge you to consider the distributional consequences of your policies. Under your administration, the income gap between the most affluent Americans and everyone else has widened. Although the latest data reveal that real household incomes have dropped across the board since you took office, low and middle income households have experienced steeper declines than upper income households. To be sure, the general phenomenon of mounting inequality preceded your administration, but it has continued (and, by some accounts, intensified) over the past three and a half years....
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
