Conservative Minority = Bye Bye Harper

[Big Wooly Mammoth]

dude - being a PM does not make you an economist. An economist does research using economic methods, either applied/empirical or theoretical. He may have read about and applied economic policies, but that is not economics - that is politics. There is also a distinction b/w academic research and policy research (although some of that is the diff b/w applied and theoretical economics). Paul Krugman, who just won the Nobel Prize in Economics this week, explains the difference b/w academic research and policy rather well here: http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/incidents.html. (if you get through it all - I actually found it very interesting.)

An aside: Krugman writes a column twice a week for the NY Times. He's an ardent Bush critic. And his columns are very well written. I'd highly recommend checking out his work. (I knew he was an academic as well, but had no idea of how influential his theoretical work was until a couple of days ago. If you can't tell, I'm an economist - but I specialize in health economics which is basically applied microeconomics. The work that won him the Nobel was in the field of international trade, something that I don't know that much about.)

So, you can stop defending him.

Edited October 16, 2008 by Guest

[AD]

sweet, off the hook. thanks

[Birdy]

I think the most common definition of the word economist is he/she who is an expert in the study of economics. He's no nobel peace prize winner, but he is an economist.

If the voters go further and eject Mr Harper, that, sadly, will not be because they have been convinced by the cerebral Mr Dion’s worthy carbon tax. It will be because the opposition—a gang of four, comprising the socialist New Democrats, the separatist Bloc Québécois and the rising Green Party as well as the Liberals—has succeeded in panicking the voters on the economy (see article). And yet, in a sinking world, Canada is something of a cork. Its well-regulated banks are solid. Growth has slowed but not stopped. The big worry is the fear that an American recession will drag Canada down with it.

Mr Harper says, rightly enough, that his government has taken prudent measures to help Canada weather a storm it cannot duck: he has offered tax cuts and selective aid to help vulnerable manufacturing towns. But it is his seeming non-reaction to what is so far a non-crisis that looks likely to deny him the majority he was seeking, and could even let in the opposition. In what is the first credit-crunch election in a big Western country, Mr Harper’s ejection would set a dispiriting precedent that panic plays better politically than prudence.

[Big Wooly Mammoth]

I think the most common definition of the word economist is he/she who is an expert in the study of economics. He's no [color:red]nobel peace prize winner, but he is an economist.

If the voters go further and eject Mr Harper, that, sadly, will not be because they have been convinced by the cerebral Mr Dion’s worthy carbon tax. It will be because the opposition—a gang of four, comprising the socialist New Democrats, the separatist Bloc Québécois and the rising Green Party as well as the Liberals—has succeeded in panicking the voters on the economy (see article). And yet, in a sinking world, Canada is something of a cork. Its well-regulated banks are solid. Growth has slowed but not stopped. The big worry is the fear that an American recession will drag Canada down with it.

Mr Harper says, rightly enough, that his government has taken prudent measures to help Canada weather a storm it cannot duck: he has offered tax cuts and selective aid to help vulnerable manufacturing towns. But it is his seeming non-reaction to what is so far a non-crisis that looks likely to deny him the majority he was seeking, and could even let in the opposition. In what is the first credit-crunch election in a big Western country, Mr Harper’s ejection would set a dispiriting precedent that panic plays better politically than prudence.

Nor is he a Nobel [color:red]Economics Prize winner

don't want to beat a dead horse much longer, but....

A person with a law degree is not a lawyer. They may be an expert in the field, but that's not the same thing. And I would contend the claim that he is an expert in the field of economics. His actions surely do not demonstrate that. As many of his policies (GST cut, opposing carbon taxes) fly in the face of all economic theory and empirical evidence. If he is an "expert" in the field, he is much more of an expert in politics and winning votes, because the latter seems to take precedence for him. At best, he would be on the fringe of the profession given his bizarre views and actions which the vast majority of economists would disagree with. And finally, even if he is an "expert" in the field, he is most definitely not a practicing economist, nor has he ever been one.

One final point - without a sound environment, there will be no economy to speak of.

[AD]

Dion, Harper and Layton are flying on the Executive Airbus to a gathering in British Columbia when Dion turns to Harper and says, chuckling, 'You know, I could throw a $1000 bill out the window right now and make someone very happy.'

Harper shrugs and replies, 'Well, I could throw ten $100 bills out the window and make ten people happy.'

Not to be outdone, Layton says, 'Well I could throw a hundred $10 bills out the window and make a hundred people happy.'

The pilot rolls his eyes and says to his co-pilot, 'Such arrogant asses back there. I could throw all three of them out the window and make 32 million people happy.'