Jimmy Carter's former treasury secretary urges Biden to axe his economic agenda and

[In It to Win It]

Business Insider via Yahoo News

A Carter administration official is offering President Joe Biden a piece of advice to combat inflation: He should abandon what's left of his economic agenda and focus on reining in the national debt instead to bring down rising prices.

"Inflation fighting comes first," W. Michael Blumenthal, a former treasury secretary for President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s, told The New York Times in an interview published Tuesday. "He has to show the recognition to the public that inflation has lasting deleterious effects on the economy and that by trying to take half measures now, you merely prolong the pain of these effects."

"President Biden faces this dilemma, and it's certainly my hope that he will choose clearly, choose decisively and be very clear not only about the fact that he recognizes that inflation has to be dealt with, but that he is really willing to support painful steps to do that," Blumenthal said.

It comes as Democrats struggle to combat inflation, now at its highest level in four decades. Carter's term — which lasted from 1976 to 1980 — was marked by a similar spike in gas prices stemming from the Arab oil embargo and the Iranian revolution.

Today's surge in energy prices are the result of Western sanctions knocking out Russian oil from global markets, coupled with huge demand outstripping the available supply of oil. Biden and Democrats are blaming Russian President Vladimir Putin for driving up inflation, along with oil companies that are currently restraining domestic production.

[snowybirdie]

1. The economy pretty much

tanked when Carter was president. The first two years of Reagan were bad too. This guy is 40 years older, so.........

[Layzeebeaver]

2. I kind of disagree

Tax the rich instead.

Large amounts of disposable income drive up prices as well.

Focusing on inflation reduction hurts growth. Except that growth seems to now be characterised by the rich having more disposable income.

It doesn’t matter what shit costs when you can’t afford it anyway. What’s the result when Eggs and petrol have just doubled in price while you don’t have a decent paying job in the first place?

Ok, you may not agree with my logic, but there is some sense to it.

[riversedge]

8. Does it take 51 votes to take the rich??

[Layzeebeaver]

9. Of course it does.

Assume you meant “tax”.

Now… GOTV!

[riversedge]

13. sorry, I did not finish. I meant to ask if the Dems needed to bypass the filibuster or can

increase taxes with only 51 votes.

[brooklynite]

17. The answer is: yes and no

Financial items, including taxation, can be done under Reconciliation; however, there's a limit to the number of Reconciliation Bills in each Congress.

[Mr.Bill]

21. If we were only allowed one recinciliation bill

for the next 100 years, we should use it to tax the rich.

[Layzeebeaver]

22. Fair enough

I assume a simple majority

[Beartracks]

26. I'm sure that riversedge meant "take the rich...

... behind the woodshed!"

===========

[Layzeebeaver]

28. now that makes even MORE sense!

[onecaliberal]

3. #TaxTheRich /end

[JT45242]

4. Stfu you old moron

The federal deficit is not causing this.

Corporate greed and global supply chain issues are. But mostly greed.

Exxon posted the largest ever profit by dollars and percentage profits. High gas prices drive up transportation costs which drive up all other costs.

[barbaraann]

5. Sounds like he's advising "austerity" to me, which is TERRIBLE advice. n/t

[Layzeebeaver]

10. That's exactly what he's saying.

IMO

[Hortensis]

6. Remembering that Carter from Georgia was a small government conservative

economically. And that he spent his single presidential term fighting the progressive Democratic house and senate majorities. His ideology was incompatible with their dreams of the significant progressive advances the Democratic trifecta voters elected made possible.

I'm not interested in what HIS treasury sec says because I'm still angry at the pathetic whimper they ended the great New Deal era with.

[Layzeebeaver]

12. Strange how we forget history

We tend project his current works onto his last presidency.

He is a decent and honourable person. And has become more so as he has matured.

But he wasn’t the most effective president and did not have a progressive agenda. Solving down traffic, having a chilly house, and turning off the lights was not progressive but rather was recessive at the time. It’s not hard to understand why people left him him to vote for Bonzo.

[Hortensis]

14. Well, the nation was getting ready for "change," that often mindless swing,

and would have gotten it anyway, but it should have had to come under a Republican president AFTER one more Democratic administration of history-making advances. Might really have helped a lot of people get through what was coming.

Agree that Carter really has been an admirable trail-breaking model for ex-presidents, even if only Democratic ex-es have taken and run with it so far. He also set an example for having VPs serve the nation meaningfully instead of just sending them to sub for the president at funerals and earthquakes.

[Layzeebeaver]

23. Absolutely

Agree completely.

[Ritabert]

7. First step is to rescind the $1.8 trillion tax break

......to billionaires. Next step is to make an alternative minimum tax that corporations and billionaires have to pay regardless of phony tax loopholes. Then stop the buying up of housing by hedge funds. Rent increases are one of the biggest causes of inflation.

[leftstreet]

29. +1

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. US federal debt to GDP ratio was flat in the 1970s, and took off in the 1980s

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp (click "50Y" button)

I don't see how "reining in the national debt" is the way to fight inflation.

[KY_EnviroGuy]

15. Not unless Rethugs agree to dismantle tRump's disastrous tax package.

Republicans know this game of alternately cutting taxes and cutting public programs yet spending like mad, leaving Dems with a train wreck every time. Then, Dems try like mad to bring programs back to parity but never seem to re-equalize the tax schedules to pay the bills and Rethugs yell "deficit out of control".

I strongly suspect that corporate boardrooms are players in this "two Santa Clause" game and raise prices intentionally during Democratic administrations. What better way to make up for lost profits during the pandemic than to wait for the next Dem president and then jack up prices so we get blamed for inflation and they get kudos from their stockholders?

I believe the President and his Cabinet can cool our economy while giving low-income families tax relief but force the wealthy to pay more taxes and spend less at the yacht, private aircraft and Rolex stores.


KY rant done......

[Yavin4]

16. And if Biden did attack the deficit as Blumenthal suggests, the Dems would be crushed in elections.

The Republicans would win in landslides, and guess what the first thing they will do when in power. Go on guess. Yep. You know it....THEY WILL CUT TAXES ON THE RICH which will do what?....you got it...THROW US BACK INTO DEFICITS!!!!

We've seen this movie before. In 1993, Clinton and the Dems passed budget cuts along with modest tax increases. Congressional Dems got crushed in the midterms, but by the time Clinton is out of office in 2000, the country was experiencing budget surpluses. Gore wanted to use the surpluses to shore up Social Security, and he was mocked for it. Enter Bush II who cut taxes and threw us back into deficits.

So, kindly, fuck off Mr. Blumenthal.

[pansypoo53219]

18. i am reading a 1989 grieder book on economics + just read how 70's inflation hurt carter.

he also talked about what could happen if bankers got gready, + that's what happened in 2006.

[progree]

19. GDPNow Model expects annualized MINUS 2.1% GDP growth in Q2. Doesn't seem like the time to raise

Last edited Fri Jul 8, 2022, 09:31 AM - Edit history (1)

interest rates to further cool the economy. Isn't TWO back-to-back quarters of negative economic growth cooled enough?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-market-news-live-updates-july-7-2022-113453990.html

The Atlanta Federal Reserve’s GDPNow model now estimates real GDP growth in the second quarter of 2022 at -2.1%, which would meet the unofficial threshold for a recession when matched with the 1.6% decline in Q1. The official read on second quarter GDP is due July 28.

The numbers above are annualized.

July 28 is the first estimate of Q2 GDP. There's another estimate in late August, and a final estimate in late September.

The Atlanta Federal Reserve’s GDPNow: https://www.atlantafed.org/cqer/research/gdpnow

[gldstwmn]

20. Joe was able to help get the economy back on track after the crash of '08

as VP to President Obama. Granted, that was a different set of problems. I think he knows what he is doing.

[Samrob]

24. Russian sanctions would not have that much affect here if companies would pump more. But they love

the excuse for windfall profits which they are still making. It is shameful. In a national emergency, is there any such thing as nationalizing some industries temporarily?

[Voltaire2]

25. Oh Blumenthal. That idiot has been pushing neoliberal crap

for 50 years.

[edhopper]

27. Austerity is always a bad idea.

Our debt is not causing inflation, it is global problems like mercenary energy prices and supply chain problems.