Jump to content

2010 Gubernatorial Election

Guest rider
Guest rider
in Ohio Politics

Featured Replies

What's the case to keep Strickland?

 

There isn't one.

 

What's the case to elect Kasich?

 

He's not Strickland.

 

 

Is that what you were looking for?

 

Just as shallow as Kasich's campaign platform.

  • Replies 759
  • Views 18.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

How would y'all answer these two questions:

 

What's the case to keep Strickland?

 

What's the case to elect Kasich?

 

Case for Strickland:  relatively (but not totally) scandal-free and stable administration that has guided two budget cycles; one was astonishingly harmonious (2007), the second was a couple weeks late and more contested, but still relied on bipartisan support (GOP controlled senate) and though late, was much less dramatic than the recession era budget processes in many other big states.  Strickland has recognized the need to rationalize the state's ungainly higher education system to control costs and keep tuition affordable while promoting quality over geographic parity.  He's reduced state employee headcount and takes economic development seriously.  Is interested in cutting and otherwise reforming that state's taxes to improve the business climate.  Strickland is incredibly moderate on hot button issues:  He slows down some executions but hasn't imposed a moratorium.  He's pro gun rights.  He is right down the middle on abortion rights...I don't personally appreciate all of these positions of his, but anyone who thinks he is a partisan hack or a left wind ideologue is nuts, IMHO.  Many people claim to be centrists- if you do, Strickland's your guy.  If the GOP retakes the Senate, having Strickland ensures bipartisan governance.  He's got a track record as governor.

 

Case for Kasich: He may be a charismatic energetic leader who is able to streamline some government functions better than Strickland by being more hostile towards public employee unions and bureaucracy and focusing more on spending cuts.  Seems to take economic development seriously (though strategy is mysterious and gimmicky).  Doesn't appear to be a social ideologue.

Strickland - I know what I will get.  He is the safer pick. 

 

Kasich - He's a swing for the fences.  High risk, but possible high reward.

Strickland - More of the same, 400000 lost jobs

 

Kasich - CHANGE

Strickland - More of the same, 400000 lost jobs

 

Kasich - CHANGE

 

Profound words from Scrabble again.

 

Tell me how is that the direct responsibility of the Governor? Maybe the Republican legislators should have done something about it....You know, its not like we had a major economics crisis or anything.

I watched another Kasich ad this morning and he does call for smaller more effective govt but doesn't say how he'd go about trimming the fat.  Assuming he was elected, I wonder what he could really do without full participation from the legislation? 

 

I guess what I'm asking is, what is the Governor directly affecting, in terms of government size, outside his own appointees and their staffs?

That's a complex question.  The General Assembly does control the funding after all and it is political suicide for a Governor to enter office acting like a King with unilateral authority.  As for appointments, he/she certainly does have wide discretion with the power of appointment, but not necessarily discretion in whether to appoint.  For instance, he can appoint board members for, say, the State Employment Relations Board who are sympathetic to his goals for labor relations with State employees.  However, he does not possess the power to do away with the SERB, change its composition, or re-define SERB's duties.  And if SERB does not carry out those duties, in deference to the Governor's wishes, then a court of law can order SERB to comply with the law as provided by the General Assembly.

 

Then, of course, there is the veto power.  He can use that power to place his own check on the General Assembly  I'm not sure what it takes in Ohio to override a gubernatorial veto.  Regardless, that can really only stiffle growth.  If he wants to actually reduce the size of government, and not merely keep it in check, the veto trick won't work.  I am not sure that he is differentiating between those two notions during his campaign but there certainly is a substantial difference.  Sure, he can veto every bill that crosses his desk which would expand government beyond the status quo.  He would risk alienating the legislative branch, but he could do it and take the risk that his veto won't be overridden.  But to substantially reduce the size and/or role of government, he is absolutely going to need the backing of the General Assembly.

 

So... I guess the question becomes whether Kasich, when he says he stands for less government, means that he will not approve of any further growth or whether it means that he will pro-actively seek to reduce the size of government.  If its the former, I wish him good luck.  If it is the latter, I want to hear his specific ideas (even if he can not guarantee their implementation).

 

Here is what he says on his website.  Pretty vague.

http://www.kasichforohio.com/site/c.hpIJKWOCJqG/b.6135285/k.A1D5/Ohios_Budget_Mess.htm

Fortunately, John Kasich has experience in balancing budgets. As chairman of the U.S. House Budget Committee, John led the effort to balance the federal budget for the first time since 1969. He and Lt. Governor candidate Mary Taylor, Ohio’s current Auditor of State, will draw on their fiscal experience to restore sound, responsible leadership in state government. To get Ohio’s budget in order, we must:

 

Fix - don’t just postpone - the budget problem. We can’t afford to keep using budget and accounting gimmicks to kick our problems down the road as Ted Strickland has done.

Take the politics out of budgeting. Every program and agency must go under the microscope. Special interests must stop saying how Ohio taxpayers’ money is spent.

Reduce spending so we can start reducing taxes.

Ensure that, if one-time funds are part of the budget, they are only used for one-times costs, not for recurring expenses, and certainly not to expand government.

Find the most efficient way to perform government functions, leverage valuable assets, and have the courage to eliminate programs that are obsolete or ineffective.

"Reduce spending so we can start reducing taxes"

 

That's what I would describe as 'subtle honesty'.... honesty nonetheless

 

I saw my first gubernatorial sign of the season today: Kasich/Taylor

Strickland is running commercials tying Kasich to "Free Trade" and "Wall Street".  He is trying to "define" Kasich before Kasich gets a chance to define himself.  That is what Sherrod Brown did to Mike Dewine in 2006.

 

Free trade is like herpes around here.

Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight gives Kasich a 90% chance of winning.  That seems high, but 538 has been as good as anyone in the past, so he's got a track record that gives him some credibility.

 

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Kasich was the head of the Congressional budget committee when the Congress balanced the budget.

Strickland is running commercials tying Kasich to "Free Trade" and "Wall Street".  He is trying to "define" Kasich before Kasich gets a chance to define himself.  That is what Sherrod Brown did to Mike Dewine in 2006.

 

Free trade is like herpes around here.

 

Kasich doesn't define himself. He ignores local media and lets his fellow Ohio Republicans vouch for him and make comments. His staffers aren't a very cerebral bunch considering how long it takes them to respond, if they even respond at all. That tells me he doesn't surround himself with intelligent people. He's either telling them to shut up 9 times out of 10 or they just aren't good at defending him. Or hey, maybe Kasich expects us to buy his book to learn about him. I think living it up on The Hill and being on Fox News has given him a Rock Star status that went completely to his head. I really don't think he knows much or cares, about Ohio.

 

 

Kasich was the head of the Congressional budget committee when the Congress balanced the budget.

 

We've been through this already, though. Kasich as Ohio Governor wouldn't have authority over the state budget.

Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight gives Kasich a 90% chance of winning.  That seems high, but 538 has been as good as anyone in the past, so he's got a track record that gives him some credibility.

 

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

 

It's actually usually left of center, so that really says something.  A lot of it's more subjective formula components are a reflection of the authors personal inputs, naturally.

Is it?  Even if so, it hasn't gotten in the way of his analyses, unlike some bloggers/analysts.  I never give anyone the blessing of the term "neutral," but his neutrality is pretty studiously maintained, from all I've seen.

I don't think Kasich is that likely to win but I do think he stands a good chance. I also wouldn't doubt that after redistricting and the upcoming elections, there's going to be a pretty significant Republican-oriented shift in both state and federal legislators that will have a profound impact on policy in Columbus and Washington.

90% chance of Kasich is left-wing fear mongering in order to rev up their base.  In fact, that's what all this coverage of the "polls" this week is meant to do.  The election wasn't today so it really doesn't matter.  What matters happens 8 weeks from now and 8 weeks is a veritable eternity in politics.

 

@@@

John King USA on CNN was in Columbus tonight and spent a lot of time talking about Ohio (with some mentions of COSI).  He also had interviews with Kasich and Strickland.  Strickland seemed scared.  Kasich seemed resigned.

90% chance of Kasich is left-wing fear mongering in order to rev up their base.  ...

Well, that's some creative thinking!!

90% chance of Kasich is left-wing fear mongering in order to rev up their base.  ...

Well, that's some creative thinking!!

The election is 60 days away. I believe the 90% figure was literally pulled from a hat in order to wake up Strickland supporters.  Ohio re-elected Bob Taft after all.

Is it?  Even if so, it hasn't gotten in the way of his analyses, unlike some bloggers/analysts.  I never give anyone the blessing of the term "neutral," but his neutrality is pretty studiously maintained, from all I've seen.

 

He is as close to neutral as any analyst out there. He also is up-front about his own political leanings, which I think helps contribute to a self-consciousness in his methodology, helping to reduce bias in his predictions.

Silver nailed the 2008 presidential election.... NAILED it.  And, yes, he is totally up front about the fact that he leans Left in the political spectrum.  Personally, I find fivethirtyeight to be one of the best websites for political analysis.

"You can’t raise taxes in Ohio. We are one of the highest taxed states in the country." - John Kasich

 

 

Politifact examined this claim and rated it as "Half-True".  The analysis is an interesting read if anyone is interested - http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/sep/15/john-kasich/john-kasich-says-ohio-one-most-taxed-states/

 

It seems your individual tax burden, as an Ohioan, is more dependent on your local government than the taxes over which the Governor has any control.  Taking out the local taxes, Ohio ranks 33rd on a state-by-state comparison.... not 7th as Kasich wants the voters to believe. 

 

I had not realized that State of Ohio had cut personal income taxes by 17% since the 2005 levels.

"You can’t raise taxes in Ohio. We are one of the highest taxed states in the country." - John Kasich

 

 

Politifact examined this claim and rated it as "Half-True". The analysis is an interesting read if anyone is interested - http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/sep/15/john-kasich/john-kasich-says-ohio-one-most-taxed-states/

 

It seems your individual tax burden, as an Ohioan, is more dependent on your local government than the taxes over which the Governor has any control. Taking out the local taxes, Ohio ranks 33rd on a state-by-state comparison.... not 7th as Kasich wants the voters to believe.

 

I had not realized that State of Ohio had cut personal income taxes by 17% since the 2005 levels.

 

Although the governor has no direct influence on local taxes, I still think it's important to mention such rates.  Especially here in CuyCo where we are absolutely killed on the tax front.

 

In regards to state taxes, I still think we can go lower. 

"You can’t raise taxes in Ohio. We are one of the highest taxed states in the country." - John Kasich

 

 

Politifact examined this claim and rated it as "Half-True".  The analysis is an interesting read if anyone is interested - http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/sep/15/john-kasich/john-kasich-says-ohio-one-most-taxed-states/

 

It seems your individual tax burden, as an Ohioan, is more dependent on your local government than the taxes over which the Governor has any control.  Taking out the local taxes, Ohio ranks 33rd on a state-by-state comparison.... not 7th as Kasich wants the voters to believe. 

 

I had not realized that State of Ohio had cut personal income taxes by 17% since the 2005 levels.

 

Although the governor has no direct influence on local taxes, I still think it's important to mention such rates.  Especially here in CuyCo where we are absolutely killed on the tax front.

 

In regards to state taxes, I still think we can go lower. 

 

Where does cuyahoga county rank in Ohio and compared to other large metro areas?

 

I'm interested in seeing just how bad we are compared to the rest of Ohio and to other large counties like LA, NY, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Suffolk, Fulton, Dade, Clayton, Cook, San Francisco, Multnomah or Harris.

Good question.  I know we have the highest sales tax rate in the State, but our combined sales and city/county bed tax is lower than either other two C's (that might change or at least the gap will close some I suspect in the coming months).  It's also difficult to compare because of differences in tax structure.  Tax rates can be deceiving also.  For instance, if you are looking at real estate, Euclid may be enticing because the property taxes are extremely low... yet they make up for it by digging into your income to the tune of nearly 3%.  But that's the voters' choice as they're the ones that have to approve any levy above 1% of income. 

Good question.  I know we have the highest sales tax rate in the State, but our combined sales and city/county bed tax is lower than either other two C's (that might change or at least the gap will close some I suspect in the coming months).  It's also difficult to compare because of differences in tax structure.  Tax rates can be deceiving also.  For instance, if you are looking at real estate, Euclid may be enticing because the property taxes are extremely low... yet they make up for it by digging into your income to the tune of nearly 3%.  But that's the voters' choice as they're the ones that have to approve any levy above 1% of income. 

 

Exactly, which is why I asked.  I'd like to know how someone could make a statement like that, considering you'd have to calculate several things for each county.  In addition to putting weight on the various amenities within each county.

In race for Ohio, Republican John Kasich has comfortable lead over Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland in

Published: Thursday, September 16, 2010, 10:13 AM 

Mark Naymik, The Plain Dealer

 

 

 

With less than seven weeks before Election Day, Republican John Kasich is sitting on a large lead over incumbent Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland, thanks in large part to independent voters, a new Quinnipiac University poll shows.

 

Kasich, a former congressman, Wall Street executive and Fox news personality, leads Strickland 54 percent to 37 percent, a dramatic shift from the end of June when Strickland held a slight lead.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/naymik/index.ssf/2010/09/in_race_for_ohio_republican_jo.html

 

hmm...anyone else think this needs to change?

^HELL YEAH- and soon, so we can keep the 3C Rail Project.  This project is SO critical to the future of this state it's not even funny.  Kasich is playing on the public's anger today regarding the federal government's spending at the expense of the future of the State of Ohio.  WHEN will the major news publications in this state pick up the real story?

I'm really at a loss to support either Kasich or Strickland.  I'm also at a loss to support the 3C rail project.  It seems like such a pipe dream.  I know there's a separate thread on this board to discuss it, but I definitely feel that the money could be better spent on other projects we need now.  So for Kasich saying he'd kill the 3C project isn't really a reason for me to vote against him...

We can't take the 3-C money and spend it on other projects we need now.  We either spend it on the 3-C or it goes to back to the Feds.

^Actually, in a literal sense, the 3Cs is the opposite of a pipe dream- all the state politicians have to do is say "yes" and come up with $17M and the train will start running in a couple years [thanks to the federal money and the hard work of its proponents and contractors, etc.]  And the capital funding wouldn't be spend on other projects we need now; it would be spend on projects Utah or Alaska or Florida needs now.  Doesn't make it a good project (though I support it), but I'm not willing to unilaterally disarm the federal pork spending.

 

 

buckeye1 dug up this useful description of the different components of the aggregate county-level sales tax rate.  Looks like 5.5 of the percentage points is to the state.  As others pointed out in the County Reform thread, CC's rate is higher mostly because of RTA and med mart.

 

From the info below, it looks like the whole 1.25% county sales tax goes into the general fund, but the 0.25% is earmarked for the CC/MM.

2010 Budget Plan

Cuyahoga County, Ohio

 

Sales and Use tax revenues are estimated to be $195.6 million and Other Taxes are estimated

at $28.4 million in 2010. The two sources combined constitute 15.1% of the total anticipated All

Funds revenue. (See Figure RA-7). The General Fund is anticipated to receive $195.6 million in

the form of the Sales and Use Tax. The County Engineer’s department generates motor vehicle

license taxes and gas taxes that represent 97% of the Other Taxes category. In 2007, the Board

of County Commissioners increased the sales tax by a quarter percent (0.25%) and earmarked

the increase for regional economic development projects. The Sales Tax for the General Fund

actually drops from $215.8 million in 2008 to $195.6 million in 2010. This decrease of $20 million

in the region since 2008 is a refl ection of the economic recession.

 

http://www.obm.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_obm/en-US/10BudgetPlan.pdf - Page IV-2

Revenue Analysis

IV-8

 

Other Taxes

General Overview

 

Excluding property taxes, the largest source of tax revenues come from the Sales and Use Tax

category, which is paid into the General Fund. The sales and use tax is applied to the retail sale,

lease, and rental of tangible personal property and selected services. The use tax on motor

vehicles is a tax on the storage or use in the County of motor vehicles acquired by a transaction

that is subject to the state sales tax. The purpose of the provision is to prevent the avoidance of

the tax on the purchase of a motor vehicle. This prevents a resident of a taxing county from going

to another county or state in which the sales tax is not levied or in which it is levied at a lower rate

than in the taxing county.

 

Cuyahoga County residents currently pay Sales and Use tax of 7.75%. Of this amount, the

State receives 5.5%, the Regional Transit Authority receives 1%, and Cuyahoga County receives

the remaining 1.25%. Of the County’s 1.25% tax, the Board of County Commissioners imposed

0.5% in 1969 and 0.5% in 1987. The most recent increase of 0.25% was imposed by the Board

in October 2007 and collections began in January 2008. The Board and now the County Council

have the statutory authority to adopt a resolution increasing the sales tax up to an additional

0.25% for a total of 1.5%.

 

The Sales and Use Tax is estimated at $195.6 million, which is a projected slight increase of $2.3

million or 1.2% (See Figure RA-7). The 2010 estimate is based on the 2009 second half sales

tax collection. The 2009 sales tax collections, at $193.3 million, were 10.4% lower than 2008

collections. The 2008 collections were higher because they refl ected the sales tax expansion

on telecommunications and various services that were not taxed in prior years. Additionally, the

0.25% increase in the sales tax for targeted development projects began in 2008.

 

When the reserve for development projects is removed, the balance of the Sales and Use Tax

for 2008 amounts to $179 million and drops to $155 million in 2009, which is a 10% decrease

from the 2007 actual. The adjusted sales tax revenue began to decrease in 2009 from the full

impact of the recession and the housing sector crisis and its negative impact on all sales. While

the economy is expected to improve nationally, Cuyahoga County and the State of Ohio continue

to yield sluggish sales tax collections in 2009 and 2010. The County will continue to monitor tax

receipts and the 2010 estimate will be adjusted as needed.

 

http://www.obm.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_obm/en-US/10BudgetPlan.pdf - Page IV-8

 

A program that was started under Governor Taft, a fellow Republican:

 

In discussing the Third Frontier project, Kasich has told audiences that he doesn't want university professors running the public/private research program for developing new technologies, products and jobs. University professors aren't in charge. Much university expertise plays a key role, as it must. The decision-making about deploying resources flows from rigorous competition. Business leaders, academics and entrepreneurs have applauded the effort.

 

Akron Beacon Journal editorial: http://www.ohio.com/editorial/opinions/103115884.html

Give it back to the Feds, spending must be slowed!

And how will giving it back to the Feds slow spending?

A program that was started under Governor Taft, a fellow Republican:

 

In discussing the Third Frontier project, Kasich has told audiences that he doesn't want university professors running the public/private research program for developing new technologies, products and jobs. University professors aren't in charge. Much university expertise plays a key role, as it must. The decision-making about deploying resources flows from rigorous competition. Business leaders, academics and entrepreneurs have applauded the effort.

 

Akron Beacon Journal editorial: http://www.ohio.com/editorial/opinions/103115884.html

 

What a slap in the face to the people who helped make the program so successful and helped create jobs while his policies in Congress and actions through Lehman caused people to go bankrupt, lose their jobs or face decreased wages. Kasich will stop at nothing to promote change, even if it's in areas that aren't broke and don't need to be fixed.

 

Lets look at the facts:

 

LEVEL OF INVESTMENT AND RETURN ON OHIO’S THIRD FRONTIER

What has been the return on the State’s investment in Ohio’s Third Frontier? The SRI study found

that the State’s expenditures of $681 million generated $6.6 billion of economic activity, 41,300

jobs, and $2.4 billion in employee wages and benefits as a result of the Ohio Third Frontier. This

represents a nearly $10 return on every dollar of the State’s investment.

 

For comparison, SRI also modeled a hypothetical scenario in which the State of Ohio returned this

$681 million to taxpayers. The estimated impact associated with this tax rebate is significant,

$934.6 million of economic activity, 6,400 jobs, and $214.2 million in employee wages and benefits.

However, the Ohio Third Frontier investments resulted in follow-on Federal and private sector

investments and increased R&D activity, products sales, and construction, generating more than

seven times the level of economic activity, more than six times the employment growth, and 11

times the wage growth for Ohio’s economy compared to that of a hypothetical tax refund.

 

http://www.development.ohio.gov/ohiothirdfrontier/MakingAnImpactReport.htm

 

Not to mention the extension of Third Frontier funding was overwhelmingly passed and totally bipartisan. Everyone seems to think it's doing great. Who is he impressing?

 

If Kasich screws up The Third Frontier, I'm going to be the first one in this thread going "I told you so". He doesn't even know how it functions. The reason it works so well is BECAUSE it isn't a red-taped bureaucratic mess. Government hardly has anything to do with it. All of their proposed plans go through the National Academy of Sciences and then get reviewed by a board that includes private business leaders.

 

Please tell me this guy isn't gaining momentum in the polls?  :wtf:

As governor, who'd best nurture Ohio's long-wilting economy?

Sunday, September 19, 2010  03:04 AM

By Mark Niquette

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

 

Republican gubernatorial candidate John Kasich recalls walking into a Bob Evans restaurant recently and seeing a couple writing numbers on a piece of paper.

 

The jobs of both had been downgraded, and they were cutting the family budget, trying to make it work, he said.

 

Kasich vows that if he's elected Nov. 2 he'll change what he calls a hostile business climate in Ohio by lowering taxes, reducing regulations and making other moves, such as privatizing the state's economic-development efforts and revamping the workers' compensation system, to spur job growth.

...

He starts with the state's tax climate. He has vowed to end Ohio's estate tax and phase out its personal-income tax over time as he reduces state spending. He hasn't provided details on how or when.

 

more: http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/insight/stories/2010/09/19/copy/issue-no--1-jobs.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

The more I read about Kasich, the more concerned about him I become. He reeks of off the cuff/ shoot from the hip decision making. A lack of attention to detail, if you will. I'm all for spending cuts, but there has to be a substantive cost/benefit analysis.

 

His platform seems largely driven by the idea that business owners know what's best to drive the economy. This sounds great, in concept, but the reality is I've met many business owners who know their business well enough, but don't know sh!t about larger macro-economic issues. They're (rightfully) concerned about what impacts them directly, and not necessarily about what drives larger economic growth.

 

I'd like to hear what both parties have to say about bridging the talent gap in this state. I meet with people frequently who are telling me they're hiring, but can't find the people with the skill sets they need. THAT's an issue that will both drive new jobs, and spur economic growth.

As governor, who'd best nurture Ohio's long-wilting economy?

Sunday, September 19, 2010  03:04 AM

By Mark Niquette

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

 

He starts with the state's tax climate. He has vowed to end Ohio's estate tax and phase out its personal-income tax over time as he reduces state spending. He hasn't provided details on how or when.

 

If I am elected governor, I am going to ensure that every single Ohio citizen is given a raise in income and two chocalate chip cookies before going to bed each night.  I will tell you HOW I will do this after you vote me in.

His platform seems largely driven by the idea that business owners know what's best to drive the economy. This sounds great, in concept, but the reality is I've met many business owners who know their business well enough, but don't know sh!t about larger macro-economic issues. They're (rightfully) concerned about what impacts them directly, and not necessarily about what drives larger economic growth.

 

Part of capitalist macroeconomic theory, though, is the premise that business owners don't need to know macroeconomics or even microeconomics; those academic disciplines simply describe the overall effect of businesses and individuals interacting in a free market (and in markets distorted by excessive taxation and regulation, for that matter).

 

The more accurate statement is that Kasich's position is that government does not know best how to drive the economy, at least not with any kind of specificity.  Free market capitalism is a distributed-information system.  The fact is that no one, not even the CEO of Wal-Mart, fully understands all steps in the chain of production and distribution that get a loaf of bread to the shelf of your local Supercenter.  The executive chef doesn't understand everything about how the food in his kitchen came to be there.  I think it was Carl Sagan who said "if you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe."

 

I'd like to hear what both parties have to say about bridging the talent gap in this state. I meet with people frequently who are telling me they're hiring, but can't find the people with the skill sets they need. THAT's an issue that will both drive new jobs, and spur economic growth.

 

This is one of the more disturbing trends in the American labor market.  There are a lot of job openings and there are a lot of job seekers.  The seekers don't have the skill sets for the openings.

 

The mystery to me is why more businesses aren't offering on-the-job training to prospective job applicants in exchange for a lower salary for the position (i.e., effectively withholding some of the salary as "tuition" for the new job).  There are plenty of job seekers out there right now that are at least smart, even if they don't have specific skill necessary.  This wouldn't work in all cases--a business looking for an in-house accountant obviously can't train an accountant on-site, since they probably don't have one already.  I have to believe that a lot of the positions out there are "cog in the wheel" type positions, though, which someone else in the same department or production team should be able to teach an open-minded and hard-working applicant how to do.  It might mean some temporary inefficiency and some late nights for existing managers and staff, but that's why the business could fairly be expected to offer a lower starting salary.  You'd think there would be a way to work the numbers, and the hours, to make it work for everyone.  Obviously, I'm not a business owner, but that would be my first instinct.

The more I read about Kasich, the more concerned about him I become. He reeks of off the cuff/ shoot from the hip decision making. A lack of attention to detail, if you will. I'm all for spending cuts, but there has to be a substantive cost/benefit analysis.

His record in Congress gives me some confidence in his abilities.

Part of capitalist macroeconomic theory, though, is the premise that business owners don't need to know macroeconomics or even microeconomics; those academic disciplines simply describe the overall effect of businesses and individuals interacting in a free market (and in markets distorted by excessive taxation and regulation, for that matter).

 

How many times have we gone over the fact that the ECON 101 assumptions don't ever hold in real life, though?

 

 

The more accurate statement is that Kasich's position is that government does not know best how to drive the economy, at least not with any kind of specificity. Free market capitalism is a distributed-information system. The fact is that no one, not even the CEO of Wal-Mart, fully understands all steps in the chain of production and distribution that get a loaf of bread to the shelf of your local Supercenter. The executive chef doesn't understand everything about how the food in his kitchen came to be there. I think it was Carl Sagan who said "if you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe."

 

 

Good point. To that end, I'd like to see him focus on including the input equally of gov't , business and education, rather than simply pointing to the business segment and saying "you guys fix this".

Part of capitalist macroeconomic theory, though, is the premise that business owners don't need to know macroeconomics or even microeconomics; those academic disciplines simply describe the overall effect of businesses and individuals interacting in a free market (and in markets distorted by excessive taxation and regulation, for that matter).

 

How many times have we gone over the fact that the ECON 101 assumptions don't ever hold in real life, though?

 

The question isn't whether they hold perfectly.  It's whether they hold better than the assumptions that necessarily underlie a system based around the alternative, i.e., that remote but highly educated "experts" and remote but ostensibly public-minded bureaucrats can do better than the individuals with less formal education but more skin in the game.

 

I trust the business owners more than the economists, including those business owners without formal economics training.  Why?  Because I have 25 hours of econ and I wouldn't trust myself to run a business.  I recognize my own limits.  I see what business owners like Liz Lessner do in Columbus and I freely admit that I just don't have that in me.  She doesn't have a Nobel in economics, but so what?  I'd rather have her in charge of her restaurants than Paul Krugman.

 

I would not necessarily put a business owner with no economics training on the Bureau of Economic Advisers.  (I might be more inclined to simply disband the BEA, but that's beside the point.)  However, I think what Kasich's point would be is that he doesn't trust anyone in government to know which jobs we "need."  He would be skeptical of mantras like "we need more green jobs" or "we need more manufacturing jobs" or "we need more investment bankers with bloviation platforms on Fox News."  That takes a level of prescience that is simply beyond any human being, or any institution designed and populated by human beings (e.g., the government).  Therefore, the best course of action is to make the business environment as friendly as possible and see what jobs are produced.

 

That is generally my default position.  I do have my limits, particularly when I start to think that one job or class of jobs, like an invasive species, isn't just of questionable utility, but also potentially squeezing out other jobs.  I'm fine with Wal-Mart greeters and fast food workers.  The pay is low, but it's not hurting anyone else.  (The food might, but I digress.)  I was at least largely convinced by the argument that jobs in the payday lending industry, however, existed at least in part at the expense of other jobs.

Right, but I don't get where you're going with this.  It's not an either/or proposition afterall.  Gov't inevitably has an impact on macroeconomics, and no one is suggesting that control of private businesses be given over to random economists.  Maybe there is a role for both?

Go to topic listing

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.