This page was last updated on January 11, 2010.
Double standard on fiscal matters; Jordan Sonnett; Beaver County Times; January 10, 2010.
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“When I hear the same faulty argument multiple times from multiple sources, I get upset that such a contagion is allowed to go unnoticed.
“What I’m referring to is the argument, ‘Bush and his party screwed up, so the Democrats’ policies are justified.’ This argument cropped up in Sunday’s editorial.
“The editorial argues that because Republicans allowed inflation during the Bush administration, their opposition to Democrats’ inflationary policies is ‘based on politics, not fiscal responsibility.’”
[RWC] I’m not sure why Mr. Sonnett is complaining about inflation, at least for now. The inflation rate during the Bush administration averaged 2.84%. The inflation rate during the Clinton administration averaged 2.6%, and from 1974 through 1985 it averaged 7.7% (Four of those years were in double digits, with a high of 13.58% in 1980.). While I would prefer no inflation, inflation during the Bush administration was not high compared to historical standards.
“Is it not possible that Republicans are fiscally irresponsible when it comes to war, while Democrats are more irresponsible in regard to domestic policy?”
[RWC] Other than waste, how can you be “fiscally irresponsible when it comes to war?” Is Mr. Sonnett claiming national defense expenditures during the Bush administration were unnecessary?
As for “Republicans are fiscally irresponsible when it comes to war,” Democrats were in power during the four “major” wars (WWI, WWII, Korean, Vietnam) of the 20th century.
“Of course not, the editorial argued, because the Democrats’ reckless spending was done ‘to pump the U.S economy, which was in danger of sliding from a recession into a depression.’
“Just as Bush justified inflation by appealing to fears of terrorism, Democrats are justifying inflation by appealing to fears of a depression.”
[RWC] As noted above, inflation was not high during the Bush administration.
“Never mind the fact that classical liberals provide convincing proof that government spending is incapable of ever fixing an economy.”
[RWC] I don’t know if Mr. Sonnett knows this, but classical liberalism is today’s conservativism. Late in the 19th or early in the 20th century the meanings of conservatism and liberalism flip-flopped.
“As the Sunday’s editorial shows, Democrats and the editorial board are content with obeying Obama’s economists while ridiculing the very similar economic policies that were employed by Obama’s predecessor.”
[RWC] While I’m not sure you can claim the overall economic policies of the Bush and Obama administrations are “very similar,” Mr. Sonnett is correct when he notes the hypocrisy of Times editorials on this topic, as I began writing about over a year ago.
© 2004-2010 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.