August 23rd, 2015
(written by lawrence krubner, however indented passages are often quotes). You can contact lawrence at: firstname.lastname@example.org
The USA has been in debt since 1835. Rand Paul can ask for a world in which governments run debts, but isn’t that a bit of fantasy? If your hopes for the world run so far from what is real, at what point should the public treat you as a novelist? Much of what Stephen King writes is close to reality than what Rand Paul talks about, so should we think of Stephen King as qualified to prescribe economic policies?
Consider a couple of recent entries. Jeb Bush, the supposedly sensible candidate, has been pushing the utterly ludicrous claim that he can deliver 4 percent growth; so now Mike Huckabee is trying to one-up the debate by promising 6 percent. Well, I can beat any of them — whatever they’re promising, I promise the same, and a pony.
Meanwhile, Rand Paul is decrying the irresponsibility of U.S. fiscal management; why, we haven’t been debt-free since 1835. Clearly, disaster looms, and has been looming for 180 years. But that’s nothing: Britain hasn’t been debt-free since at least 1692:
More than three centuries, spanning the Industrial Revolution and much more, of crippling irresponsibility. Just you wait!
Should Rand and Jeb! and Huckabee be treated with respect here? Are they outliers, and in that case which GOP contenders do deserve respect?