A few days ago I read this article on internet. It was written by a Clinton secretary of labor, Robert Reich. The article is amazingly stupid. I mean, at some point, this guy should take a basic class on economics.
Reich's comments reminded me of a passage from an old Russian book "12 chairs". Two crooks got on the ship cruise, pretending that they were artists. At some point they were asked to paint a drawing. One crook asks another "I've got a question for you, as one artist to another, can you paint?".
Anyway, here is a nice passage that surprised me:
..(it would increase demand for gas and cause prices to rise, eliminating any benefit to consumers while costing the Treasury more than $9 billion, and generate more pollution).
I would like to understand why would the consumers have zero benefit if the proposed tax cuts stimulate the demand? In other words, if the prices were not lowered by the tax cut, why would the demand rise? And if prices are lowered, wouldn't the consumers benefit from it?
To put it bluntly, liberal economists (nice oxymoron) would greatly increase their understanding of economy if they took time to familiarize themselves with the law of supply and demand. Mr.Reich, when are you going to take Macroeconomics 101 class? Seriously, this is embarrassing.
