McCain on the economy — incoherent, deceptive, and more of the same

The NYT noted today, “Not since at least 1980, when the United States was reeling from the oil shocks, inflation and slow growth of the previous decade, has the economy been in worse shape heading into the heart of a presidential campaign. The crush of bad economic news — six consecutive months of job losses, rising rates of home foreclosures, gasoline prices seemingly headed toward $5 a gallon — is increasingly setting the contours of the race between Senators Barack Obama and John McCain.”

That sounds about right. It’s against this backdrop that both candidates are focusing almost exclusively this week on their economic agendas. For McCain, that’s daunting — he’s not only embraced the Bush economic model as his own, he’s also repeatedly acknowledged that he doesn’t know or understand economics “as well as I should.”

In a high-profile speech in Denver today, McCain will help prove just how confused he really is, and then take his incoherent show on the road, hitting Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) plans to promise on Monday that he will balance the federal budget by the end of his first term by curbing wasteful spending and overhauling entitlement programs, including Social Security, his advisers told Politico.

The vow to take on Social Security puts McCain in a political danger zone that thwarted President Bush after he named it the top domestic priority of his second term.

McCain is making the pledge at the beginning of a week when both presidential candidates plan to devote their events to the economy, the top issue in poll after poll as voters struggle to keep their jobs and fill their gas tanks.

“In the long-term, the only way to keep the budget balanced is successful reform of the large spending pressures in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid,” the McCain campaign says in a policy paper to be released Monday.

“The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit. Since all their costs were financed with deficit spending, all their savings must go to deficit reduction.”

I sometimes get the sense someone dared John McCain to run for president while spouting nothing but nonsense, just to see what he could get away with. Today is just such an occasion.

First, it’s worth noting from the outset that McCain’s new vow to balance the budget — in other words, eliminate a $400 billion deficit in four years while cutting taxes — is itself a reversal. McCain initially promised to balance the budget by 2013, then he decided he didn’t like that promise anymore and withdrew it. Now, he’s changed his mind again, and brought the promise back.

Second, committing the “savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan” to deficit reduction is a new one. Before, McCain said he could eliminate a $400 billion deficit with $18 billion in earmark reductions. Applying some kind of “peace dividend” is yet another way to justify the unjustifiable.

This isn’t complicated. McCain can’t claim “savings from victory” in Iraq if he plans to keep U.S. forces in the country for another 100 years. He also can’t claim “savings from victory” in these conflicts when we haven’t actually won the wars (unless McCain is now prepared to set a deadline, which he’s said he’d never do). He also can’t claim “savings from victory” in Afghanistan when conditions on the ground there are getting worse, not better. He also can’t claim “savings from victory” when he wants to spend more money to expand the size of the military.

It’s hard to imagine even gullible conservatives falling for such a transparently ridiculous pitch. McCain thinks he can make permanent Bush’s tax cuts, and add some new tax cuts of his own, and eliminate the AMT, and keep the wars going indefinitely, and increase the Pentagon’s budget, and eliminate a $410 billion deficit in four years. It’s pure fantasy.

Meet John McCain, the candidate who bases his policies on magic ponies, and his rhetoric on the hopes that voters are idiots.

Stung by charges of being a flip-flopper, and sensitive to having been caught lying again and again, McCain sets out to prove, once and for all, that he really DOESN’T know anything about economics.

  • Is this an actual plan, or just another piece of rhetoric? It seems Hon. Sen. McCain has been rewarded in the press for not actually presenting anything like a detailed plan, whereas he can point to specifics in his opponents’ plans because they took the time to produce them.

  • Supply Side Math Teaches us that you can spend:

    50% on Defense
    40% on Social Security and Medicare
    20% on War in Iraq and Afghanistan
    10% on Homeland Security, Infrastructure and Transportation
    10% on Education and other programs
    10% on Interest on the National Debt
    2% on Foriegn Aid

    142% Hmm. But you can still balance the Budget! How, by adding Taxcuts course in the amount 42%. That gets the budget balance. QED. Rudy Guliani taught me this.

  • Meet John McCain, the candidate who bases his policies on magic ponies, and his rhetoric on the hopes that voters are idiots.

    How dare you insult John McCain’s service in Vietnam!?!
    –Andrea Mitchell

  • I can see the headline from the A.P. now:

    “McCain solves budgetary dilemma and wins two wars to boot! Meanwhile Barack Obama is busy trying to end those pesky wars via retreat!”

    Give them time, possibly as early as tomorrows newspapers…

  • Since when does not funneling money down a rat hole constitute savings?
    If McCain was a real maverick he’d propose reducing the tax rate to zero. If reducing taxes means more money in the gov’s coffers then reducing taxes to zero would mean that the gov would have infinite funds.

  • “The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit. Since all their costs were financed with deficit spending, all their savings must go to deficit reduction.”

    So by not borrowing money for Iraq and Afghanistan, the money we are not borrowing can be used to pay off the deficits already occurred?

    Perhaps I’ll offer to pay this month’s mortgage payment to the bank in the form of not taking out an additional loan.

  • Wait, I am confused here. We are paying for the wars by borrowing money, right? But the money we save from not being at war will be used to pay down the debt. How does that work exactly? I mean, we were borrowing in the first place, so surely if we stop borrowing the principle will not grow. Interest will keep accumulating, sure, but not the principle. Were does the money come from to pay down the money we owe? There are no savings, we are simply not expending more. Any payment would have to come from some other part of the budget. Madness.

  • According to one newspaper report I saw – someone more clued up and numerate than me might check this out – McCain plans to save €35b a year by cutting pork barrel spending/earmarks. The same newspaper also puts total earmarks each year at €15b.

    Perhaps an enterprising young journalist might care to ask Senator McCain at his next press conference how he proposes to save €35b by cutting €15b?

  • There is no such thing as “savings from Victory”. That phrase is laughable. Not even its creators could actually buy into such crap. Why is it the first thing these conservatives want to cut are the social programs when they comprise such a small percentage of what America spends on defense and weapons. They would dismantle the very thing that has saved this country’s people since the great depression. Stop the rampant profiteering on Americans by the major corporations if you really want to make life here affordable.

    btw…if you haven’t read Glenn Greenwald’s piece this am it gets rid of this idea of “the center” and what the GOP pundits call the radical left(which is actually what they call the opinions of the majority of Americans as proven by the polls he lists).

    McCain doesn’t have a clue tot he economy and neither do his handlers…”victory savings”???? what a joke.

  • McCain isn’t just silly any more; he’s downright nonsensical, so let’s just call him for what he is—JABBERWOCKY JOHN….

  • “The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit.”

    Wait, what?

  • Here is some straight talk: end Bush’s tax cuts to fund the war expenses that we have been funding with borrowed money.

    Can we now officially begin calling NoMo McMaverick’s economic policies “voodoo economics”?

  • I sometimes get the sense someone dared John McCain to run for president while spouting nothing but nonsense, just to see what he could get away with. Today is just such an occasion.

    LOL He’s the Monty Python Manchurian Candidate

  • McCain, incoherent? No, really?

    Confused, ignorant, and not concerned enough to learn more. Be it Shi’a, Sunni, the economy or even The Cables (yes, he really said that – see the video at the link below).

    And speaking of ignorant, here’s a question for ya. John McCain has said that he’s computer illiterate. He knows what the internet is, which I suppose is a start, but do we really want someone shaping American policy who has no knowledge of the things that shape American society?

    http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2008/07/07/should-the-potus-be-computer-literate/

  • Wow!

    I always thought that McC*n’t and Joe LIEberman were conspiring to end the War in Iraq on their terms (claiming victory because only they can). Now JSMcC*n’t has gone and said it. He’s going to WIN and in doing so, reduce our commitment and spending so much he’s going to cut the deficit (not the debt, just the deficit).

    Of course, he also has to cut Entitlements. There is just one important point about that. Entitlements are funded by FICA, not the Income Tax. And they are not in Deficit, the descresinary (sp) budget is. So what JSMcC*n’t is saying is that he’s going to steal money from the lower and middle class (FICA cuts off at about $100,000 of income) and reduce the Entitlements funded by them rather than raise Income Taxes (or rather, let them rise as BGII promised) on the upper class.

    Yep, stealing from the poor again to pay for war profiteers and Darth Cheney.

  • McCain’s plan reminds me of the character of Richard in Charles Dickens’ Bleak House. In Chapter IX, Signs and Tokens, we get a glimpse into his rather odd financial logic. After Richard receives a loan repayment of ten pounds from a debtor, the narrator describes how he accounted for it and some expenditures later in the day:

    The number of little acts of thoughtless expenditure which Richard justified by the recovery of his ten pounds, and the number of times he talked to me as if he had saved or realized that amount, would form a sum in simple addition.

    “My prudent Mother Hubbard, why not?” he said to me when he wanted, without the least consideration, to bestow five pounds on the brickmaker. “I made ten pounds, clear, out of Coavinses’ business.”

    “How was that?” said I.

    “Why, I got rid of ten pounds which I was quite content to get rid of and never expected to see any more. You don’t deny that?”

    “No,” said I.

    “Very well! Then I came into possession of ten pounds—”

    “The same ten pounds,” I hinted.

    “That has nothing to do with it!” returned Richard. “I have got ten pounds more than I expected to have, and consequently I can afford to spend it without being particular.”

    In exactly the same way, when he was persuaded out of the sacrifice of these five pounds by being convinced that it would do no good, he carried that sum to his credit and drew upon it.

    “Let me see!” he would say. “I saved five pounds out of the brickmaker’s affair, so if I have a good rattle to London and back in a post-chaise and put that down at four pounds, I shall have saved one. And it’s a very good thing to save one, let me tell you: a penny saved is a penny got!”

    (text from Project Gutenberg)

    In other words, Richard made the loan never expecting to see the money again, and so when it reappears, he “earned” ten pounds. And then when he decided against donating five pounds to a poor brickmaker, he “earned” another five pounds. And by taking the five pounds earned from the non-donation and using it to go on a four-pound excursion to London, he’ll save another pounds. So from that origial ten pound loan, his income was 16 pounds!

  • a solid FIFTY-FOUR PERCENT (54%) of the total federal budget is spent on MILITARY and the remaining FORTY-SIX PERCENT (46%) is shared among the rest.

    and note that “homeland security” (i cringe every time i hear those words) is NOT included in “military spending” but is part of the non-military budget.

    THIRTY PERCENT (30%) of the federal budget is allocated to “Human Resources” which include:
    • Health/Human Services
    • Social Security Administration
    • Education Dept.
    • Food/Nutrition programs
    • Housing & Urban Dev.
    • Labor Dept.
    • other human resources

    so how is it that “social security” is THE major problem — or even A major problem — with the budget?

    every time a republican brings up social security he/she should be bitch-slapped and have pointed out to them that waging “preemptive” war is not just a “temporary” drain on the budget but explodes costs far out into the future.

    both social security and veterans’ benefits are small potatoes when compared to the cost of the freaking INTEREST from debt incurred through military spending — $390 BILLION.

    http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

    these people are seriously making me ill.

  • Obviously, it is therefore important to INCREASE spending in Iraq and Afghanistan radically over the next 6 months. That way, when elected, President McSame can cut even more, and thus bring the budget into balance more quickly. In fact, if he can persuade Bush to spend $10 trillion over the next six months, McSame could then not only balance the budget, but also eliminate the entire deficit, simply by returning expenditures to the July 2008 rate.

    The man’s a GENIUS, I tell you!

  • McCain economic plan does not make any sense to me. He leaves the country to talk about free trade. All these big companies are going to do is move toward these foreign countries to get cheap labor. Columbia, Mexico will flourish under Sen. McCain plan but the American middle Class will not because they will be out of more jobs. Also, the working middle class people cannot live off of a paycheck of 2 -3 dollars an hour in this country. We do need laws instituting minimum wages. Sen. McCain said that big business should have the freedom to pay per hour whatever they want to their employees. If an employee is not satisfy with the pay the employee could resign. These ideas is insensitive to the working middle class people because big companies would give cheap labor to foreigners who come to this countrry on limited visa’s just like the Nielson company been doing and they don’t have to answer to the American government. I do believe Sen. McCain economic plan will leave many working middle class people without jobs and will benefit the big companies. As far as nuclear power, I would like to know where he would dispose the nuclear waste? As far as his health plan, he said we would choose our insurrance company. The problem with his health plan is that it does not take into consideration people with pre-existing illnesses. Insurrance companies most likely will not accept patients with pre-existing conditions, therefore, leaving a segment of the population without insurrance. The oil companies has lots of land that they could drill in at present under t leases. I don’t understand why Sen. McCain wants to drill off the coast of Florida, California and in the wildlife conservation of Alaska. I have heard Sen. Obama econmic plan which would definitely benefit the middle working-class people more than Sen. McCain’s plan. Under Sen. Obama’s plan, earmarks are needed to improve our educational system and communities nationwide. Under Sen. Obama’s plan everybody will prosper and small businesses will not have to pay higher taxes untill they exceed a salary of 250,000 dollars. Small businesses will have a chance to prosper as well under Sen. Obama’s plan. Sen. McCain does not want any Earmarks. It seems to me that he supports what is in the best interest of the companies as oppose to the best interest of the working middle-class people. Sen. McCain wants to put the controll of social security in the hands of these companies without mapping out government regulation. I think this is a bad idea because the companies will have more controll to do what they want and don’t have to answer to the government. I believe Sen. Obama economic plan overall is more superior. Sen. McCain said that the middle-class people have investments in companies. This is true; but, the problem is that when the companies make hugh profits , the middle-class people with investments in these companies are not enjoying the profits. The companies’s profits are not trickling down to the middle-class people who have investments with their companies. Overall, I support Sen. Obama economic plan over Sen. McCain’ plan because Sen. Obama’s plan covers all racial backgrounds, religious background, cultural background , economic background (Middle-Class working people, small business owners, and the poor) by encompassing earmarks for education, community based programs, tax cuts, and making services availble for small businesses so that everyone can prosper . In conclusion, all Americans need to be engage in the communities and the economy for America to prosper. I believe Sen. Obama’s economic plan best take into account all the American public.

  • So I guess 9 or 10 multi million dollar homes McCain will cut social security, medicaid and medicare, while giving more tax cuts to the billionaires, the corporations, and of course still accepting his 60,000.00 dollar a year disability from the military. Nice work if you can get it!

  • Old School #8.
    THANK YOU.

    CB, how could you have missed that McCain stuck the most idiotic piece right in the middle of his idiocy.

    You’re slipping, friend.

    Perhaps it’s like Sherlock Holmes’ purloined letter?

  • Comments are closed.