Amazing New Feats in Shameless Hackery Noah Rothman
We’ve reached the point in the electoral calendar when the “experts” join forces to provide Joe Biden with a dubious talking point timed for maximum political effect.
Last time around, the “experts” were some of the nation’s most distinguished intelligence officials who assured the voting public that Hunter Biden’s laptop was a fabrication cooked up as part of an unusually sophisticated Russian disinformation operation. Today, the “experts” are economists — indeed, Nobel Prize winners — all of whom insist that Donald Trump’s proposed economic policies risk exacerbating inflation. That wouldn’t be such a galling assertion if this brain trust hadn’t also assured Americans that Joe Biden’s economic-policy preferences are entirely unimpeachable.
It’s unclear what “irresponsible budgets” the authors are describing. If they’re referring to the statements of principle that presidents send to Congress under the guise that they are budgetary proposals, these economic mavens need not worry so much. Presidential budgets are political documents, not economic blueprints, and Congress tends to regard them as such.
If, however, these economists were referring implicitly to Trump’s reliance on tariffs as the answer to any and every economic challenge, these economists would be on surer footing. Some forecasters have gamed out the effect of Trump’s sweeping tariff proposals, and they anticipate that the higher cost of imports and the prospect of Chinese retaliation would boost consumer prices.
But we shouldn’t take these experts any more seriously than they take themselves. They are vague about the policies they oppose but exceedingly specific about the policies they support: Joe Biden’s policies, which are not only vital to the national interest but anti-inflationary.
“In his first four years as President, Joe Biden signed into law major investments in the U.S. economy, including in infrastructure, domestic manufacturing, and climate,” the letter continues. “Together, these investments are likely to increase productivity and economic growth while lowering long-term inflationary pressures and facilitating the clean energy transition.”
So, let’s get this straight. Artificially increasing the cost of imports — costs which will be passed on to individual consumers — is inflationary, but dumping unprecedented sums of taxpayer dollars into the private economy at a time when too much money was already chasing after too few goods was not? This is the “expert” consensus?
The authors heap praise on Biden’s “pandemic stimulus,” which a Federal Reserve study found boosted inflation by more than 2.5 percent. They have the unmitigated gall to allude to the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act,” which was so named because the political will to pass a massive green-energy spending binge at a time of high inflation would not otherwise exist. They dare to insist the multiplier effects of this government spending will eventually tame inflation even though their colleagues elsewhere in the dismal science concluded (intuitively enough) that pumping money into an overheated economy will only contribute to its febrility.
Joe Biden himself long ago admitted that the “Inflation Reduction Act” had “less to do with inflation than it does providing alternatives to economic growth.” He was right about that, but you can’t blame Biden’s allies for trying to clean up after the president’s act of radical candor.
Actually, maybe you can. After all, these experts further maintain that inflation shouldn’t even persist as a going concern for most voters. They make note of voters’ apprehension with rising prices, but they note that inflation “has come down remarkably fast.” Your definition of “down” may conflict with theirs, which translates into English as “rising at a slower pace than in previous years.”
These authors rely on their credentials and that of the institutions they populate to do the heavy lifting to which a cogent argument would otherwise contribute. That reckless, self-indulgent impulse is why American institutions across the board are suffering from a credibility crisis. It would be one thing if these “experts” issued a note of due caution about Trump’s questionable economic instincts. It’s entirely another when that warning is used to launder into the national conversation the intellectually bankrupt claim that excess public spending at a time of high inflation does not, in fact, boost inflation.
The facts marshaled by these authors are easily disputed, but the point of the letter is not to inform the public. It is to provide Biden and his fellow Democrats with a superficially authoritative point of contention just durable enough to get him through Election Day. Win or lose, the letter’s signatories will likely conclude that this gambit was worth it. After all, no matter what happens on November 5, they’ll retain their credentials, for whatever they’re worth.
Comments are closed.
