RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-cost-of-bidenomics-11603055037?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

Joe Biden has shrewdly kept the campaign focus on Covid-19 and President Trump, which has helped him avoid having to talk much about his own policies. That’s especially true of his economic proposals, which a new study out Sunday from the Hoover Institution shows will have a damaging impact on growth, job creation and household income.

Mr. Biden often cites Moody’s, the credit-rating service, for saying his economic plan will yield faster growth and more jobs. “Wall Street,” he likes to say when he mentions Moody’s, as if that’s a conservative stamp of approval, even as he claims Mr. Trump is a captive of Wall Street.

But everyone knows most economists at today’s big financial institutions have a Keynesian bias that posits consumer demand and government spending as the main drivers of growth. That’s certainly true at Moody’s, whose chief economist is Mark Zandi, who in our view underestimates the impact of higher tax rates and regulation in his economic calculations. This isn’t a personal criticism, but a factual statement about his economic model.

We are also not predicting a “depression,” as Mr. Trump does, if Mr. Biden wins the election. On dire economic predictions, Mr. Trump is the mirror image of Paul Krugman on the left. The data show that the U.S. economy is recovering from the pandemic shutdowns faster than most economists predicted. Democrats may attempt to portray the economy as a disaster that requires trillions of dollars in new spending, but Mr. Biden would inherit an economy with strong growth momentum.

https://issuesinsights.com/2020/10/19/5-other-things-well-learn-about-biden-after-the-election/

For weeks, Joe Biden has played coy about whether he’d pack the Supreme Court with liberals should he win the White House and Democrats take control of the Senate. The media has largely ignored the issue, as they have anything that might harm Biden’s chances.

So what else isn’t Biden, or the press, telling us? What else will voters learn after they’ve cast their ballots? We can think of five things that, had voters known about them before Nov. 3, would have no doubt sapped support for Biden.

1. Biden is a far-left liberal with a big agenda. In his one debate with President Donald Trump, Biden seemed to distance himself from his party’s far left. He said he wasn’t in favor of the Green New Deal, and didn’t support Medicare for All. His entire campaign is built around saying nothing about what he’d do as president, other than be a nice guy.

Biden’s succeeded because on the few occasions where he’s answered questions from the media, they lob him softballs. But make no mistake, Biden is fully on board with his party’s far-left agenda, something we’ve been pointing out in these pages for months.

The Green New Deal that Biden says he opposes, for example, is contradicted by his own campaign website: “Biden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.”

Biden wants to eliminate carbon emissions from power plants by 2035, which is only five years later than the socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal. He plans to reach net-zero carbon emissions for the entire country by 2050, which is the same deadline as the GND.

On Medicare for All, Biden has simply sidestepped the issue with his proposal to create a “public option” for everyone. Moderate Democrats rejected the public option in 2010 because they knew that it would quickly lead to the elimination of private insurance. Biden’s plan will reach the same destination as socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders’ Medicare for All.

Biden’s tax-and-spend plans are just as ambitious, and on social issues, Biden is as leftist as they get.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/china-using-companies-twitter-interfere-election-daniel-greenfield/

Last year, Amazon was forced to shut down its marketplace business in the People’s Republic of China. Amazon’s defeat followed that of a long line of Big Tech players who had tried to make a go of it in China and failed miserably. China’s economy is built to boost domestic businesses and foreign exports, with some needed imports, by companies linked to the Communist Party.

And no matter how politically correct Amazon may try to be, it can never join that club.

But Amazon’s business in China isn’t done. To a large degree, Amazon’s business is China. Behind the smiling logo, the massive array of businesses covering everything from running the CIA’s cloud to spending $500 million to make a Lord of the Rings streaming series, are a bunch of grim offices, apartments, and warehouses in Chinese cities that make up its real business.

Three years ago, third-party sellers topped Amazon’s own sales. They now make up 58%. Who are they? If, like most Americans, you shop at the giant dot com retail monopoly, you’ve already waded through a stream of random shop names, fake misspelled reviews, and counterfeit products while searching for just about anything. What happened? China happened.

Between 40% to 48% of top third-party sellers on Amazon are operating out of China. The massive growth in Chinese third-party sellers has been fairly recent and transformative.

Supreme Court nomination hearings have gone from serene to savage, thanks largely to Joe Biden.

As head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he presided over the infamous Robert Bork hearings. His smearing of Bork for his original-intent judicial philosophy transformed hearings for Supreme Court nominees into bloody ideological battles. Henceforth, all conservative nominees were subjected to “Borking.”

Brutal to Bork from the start, Biden treated him not as a serious judge but as a stooge for what Biden called the “Reagan-Meese” agenda. Biden’s transparently unfair treatment of Bork was so bad even The Washington Post editorialized against Biden at the time:

While claiming that Judge Bork will have a full and fair hearing, Senator Joseph Biden this week has pledged to civil rights groups that he will lead the opposition to the confirmation. As the Queen of Hearts said to Alice, “Sentence first—Verdict Afterward.”

How can he possibly get a fair hearing from Biden, who has already cast himself as the role of prosecutor instead of a juror in the Judiciary Committee? If there is a strong, serious case to be argued against Judge Bork, why do so many Democrats seem unwilling to make it and afraid to listen to the other side?

In a forecast of what his own judiciary would look like, Biden opposed Bork not because he lacked the legal credentials to be on the court – Bork was considered one of the leading legal scholars in the country – but because Bork didn’t conform to Biden’s view of a good judge as a leftwing legislator from the bench.

Biden lectured Bork: “Will we retreat from our tradition of progress or will we move forward, continuing to expand and envelop the rights of individuals in a changing world which is bound to have an impact upon those individuals’ sense of who they are and what they can do?…In passing on this nomination to the Supreme Court, we must also pass judgment on whether or not your particular philosophy is an appropriate one at this time in history.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/what-trump-has-done-to-change-the-health-care-system-and-how-that-has-helped-battle-covid-19/

Deregulation and market forces are making care more available at lower cost.

Our health-care system is experiencing rapid, powerful change, far more consequential than is generally recognized. Although these changes are welcomed by many in the health-policy community (see our assessment a year ago), even those who applaud them have been surprised at their speed and impact.

What follows is a brief overview of what the Trump administration has done to reform the health-care system — in some cases, with the compliant help of Congress. The vision behind the Trump reforms can be found in Reforming America’s Healthcare System Through Choice and Competition. This 124-page Health and Human Services document from 2018 argues that the most serious problems in health care arise because of government failure, not market failure.In pursuing its vision, the administration has aggressively pursued its options under current law. We now need Congress to make the revolution complete.

Virtual Medicine. The ability to deliver medical care remotely is growing by leaps and bounds. It promises to lower medical costs, increase quality, and reduce the time and travel cost of patient care. For example, most people in hospital emergency rooms don’t really need to be there. With a phone or a computer and an app or two, many of them could be examined and triaged in their own homes.

The benefits of telehealth have been known for a long time. Yet as we entered 2020, it was illegal (by act of Congress) for Medicare doctors to consult with their patients by phone or email, except in rare circumstances. Even non-Medicare patients were constrained. For example, it wasn’t clear if visual communication by Zoom or FaceTime satisfied the federal government’s privacy regulations. While some state governments were clearing away barriers, progress was incremental and uneven.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/16/aoc-house-progressives-pen-warning-to-biden-ove

WASHINGTON — Progressive House Democratic lawmakers fired a warning shot at a potential Joe Biden administration this week, signing a letter calling for corporate lobbyists and C-suite executives to be shut-out of his cabinet.

Thirty-nine members, including “Squad” members Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley and incoming Bronx congressman Jamaal Bowman signed the letter which was delivered to Senate leaders Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell on Friday morning and obtained by Politico.

The letter calls on both parties to ban C-suite level corporate executives and corporate lobbyists from holding Senate-confirmed positions such as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development or Secretary of Defense.

However, one signee, Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), said the letter was meant to serve as a warning to Democratic nominee Joe Biden as he considers potential candidates with the presidential election just 19 days away.

It comes as the septuagenarian candidate faces pressure from inside his own party to move further left.

“It’s not addressed to Biden, but there’s an understanding that he’d be in charge and be the person making nominations,” Grijalva told the publication.

The letter calls on party leaders to shun President Trump’s decision to install former executives into some of the top posts of his administration.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/17/joe-bidens-polling-lead-slips-in-wake-of-post-report

Joe Biden’s polling edge over President Trump eroded this week amid The Post’s scandalous revelations about his son Hunter’s foreign dealings — but the Democratic candidate still maintains a substantial lead.

The IBD/TIPP national tracking poll, released Saturday, puts Biden at 50 percent in the head-to head matchup, with Trump at 43 percent. The 7-point advantage is well outside the survey’s 3 percent margin of error.

But the poll of 1,009 likely voters saw Biden’s support slip by just over 2 percentage points since Monday — and found an increase of just under 1 percent for the incumbent.

The IBD/TIPP survey found strength for Biden among independent voters, who split their support between Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016, but now back the challenger by a 9-percent margin.

The results also hinted at the possibility of a substantial number of “shy Trump” voters in the electorate: while 47 percent of respondents said they believe that their neighbors are Trump voters, only 36 of them say they are surrounded by Biden backers.