US Politics: Georgia on Our Minds

[DMC]

I know this will get lost in the haze tonight, but the House is set to reintroduce HR 1.  Still has no chance as long as the filibuster remains, but definitely a good move to highlight it right now.

[IheartIheartTesla]

So from the 7% reported so far in GA< Warnock is 198k-124k ahead, while Osoff is 189k-125k ahead, so not much vote splitting.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

29 minutes ago, DMC said:

While I generally favor an aversion to religious figures running for elected office, I definitely think this should be determined on a case-by-case basis.  Only zealots, evangelicals, atheists and siths deal in absolutes.

Peace is a lie...

[The Anti-Targ]

13 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Trust me, I absolutely do NOT think that the tax base needs to cover everything in a one to one ratio.  I mean, LMAO, I live in the USA in the 21st century. Duh.  And I also think we have A LOT of room to inflate, currently (Interest rates being like functionally zero right now).  One place OGE and I really agree is that we should be inflating the pants off right now.  But there is also a limit, and there is also at base a concept that the resources to support that kind of redistribution do, in fact, have to come from somewhere.  It can come from (I) borrowing (which presumably will be paid off by a combination of refinancing (assuming our credit stays good) and inflation, (ii) just flat out inflation (which, to be clear, is redistributive between lenders/creditors on the one hand to borrowers on the other), and/or (iii) redistribution (I.e., taxation of income or consumption(proxy for current GDP) and/or wealth).  And while it is really easy to eye the defense budget (everyone mildly left of center does, and even on the right wing if they see “regulations” or “waste” rather than NEW FIGHTER JETS), my four decades on this planet suggest that a notable decrease in our defense budget as a percentage of GDP is about as likely as both the Jets and the Lions being decent football teams AT THE SAME TIME AND PLAYING AGAINST EACH OTHER IN THE SUPERB OWL (so, yeah, not so likely?).

Right?  OMG Central States!

Indeed, and the point is, inflation is grossly underutilized to the detriment of the welfare of society, it is overstated as an economic bogeyman, and it has been poorly measured in the magnitude of cause and effect since it is obvious some objects of spending are more inflationary than others. So govts default far to much to taxation, borrowing or simply not spending at all. If you are not using every tool in the right and appropriate way then you are mis-managing the economy.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

So from the 7% reported so far in GA< Warnock is 198k-124k ahead, while Osoff is 189k-125k ahead, so not much vote splitting.

MSNBC has a Kornacki Cam. 

Please let him do blow on live TV! 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

I want a Lin Wood cam for that. Right before he goes on twitter.

[Fez]

10 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

So from the 7% reported so far in GA< Warnock is 198k-124k ahead, while Osoff is 189k-125k ahead, so not much vote splitting.

Yeah, but its the same elected office from the same state; so any ticket splitting is kinda noteworthy. And since Dems need both seats to take the senate, it sure would be a kick in the balls to only get one of them. Especially if the one is Warnock, since he'll need to run again in just two years. Although getting one is still certainly better than getting none. I'd be surprised by a split though; at this point it looks like both races would need to come down to less than 2,000 votes for it to happen.

 

[OldGimletEye]

7 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Indeed, and the point is, inflation is grossly underutilized to the detriment of the welfare of society, it is overstated as an economic bogeyman, and it has been poorly measured in the magnitude of cause and effect since it is obvious some objects of spending are more inflationary than others. So govts default far to much to taxation, borrowing or simply not spending at all. If you are not using every tool in the right and appropriate way then you are mis-managing the economy.

Just to be clear about my views on inflation. I assume most people's inflation expectations are in align with the FED's target rate of 2%. When ex-post inflation falls below expected inflation, it is strong evidence that aggregate demand is weak, according monetary/fiscal policy is needed.

There is a good case the FED should raise its target rate, to say 3% or 4% because that makes more unlikely that we will hit a liquidity trap.

The Central Bank shouldn't worry about overshooting inflation, so long as it maintains its target on average.

Whatever target the Central Bank picks, it is important that it hit that target, on average, anchoring inflation expectations. When inflation expectations become unanchored and wildly fluctuate, the result isn't pretty.

[IheartIheartTesla]

4 minutes ago, Fez said:

Yeah, but its the same elected office from the same state; so any ticket splitting is kinda noteworthy. And since Dems need both seats to take the senate, it sure would be a kick in the balls to only get one of them. Especially if the one is Warnock, since he'll need to run again in just two years. Although getting one is still certainly better than getting none. I'd be surprised by a split though; at this point it looks like both races would need to come down to less than 2,000 votes for it to happen.

Yeah, looking at the updated numbers there is a small but subtle difference between the two that favors Warnock, but Ithink it is more from Republicans that didnt want to support Loeffler (maybe Collins supporters). The top line of the two Democratic candidates is roughly the same, while fewer seem to have voted for Loeffler (these numbers are changing very rapidly, so even the topline may shade Warnock a bit).

The Upshot needle is tilting ever so slightly in favor of both D candidates.

[Fragile Bird]

I’m worried that Biden won because a lot of moderate Republicans hated Trump so they voted for Joe. Trump’s not on the ticket so they’ll go back to being Republicans.

[The Anti-Targ]

6 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Just to be clear about my views on inflation. I assume most people's inflation expectations are in align with the FED's target rate of 2%. When ex-post inflation falls below expected inflation, it is strong evidence that aggregate demand is weak, according monetary/fiscal policy is needed.

There is a good case the FED should raise its target rate, to say 3% or 4% because that makes more unlikely that we will hit a liquidity trap.

The Central Bank shouldn't worry about overshooting inflation, so long as it maintains its target on average.

Whatever target the Central Bank picks, it is important that it hit that target, on average, anchoring inflation expectations. When inflation expectations become unanchored and wildly fluctuate, the result isn't pretty.

But why 3-4% why not a wider band? What would be wrong with a band spanning a 4-5% range as the long term average and not a specific % figure. The effect of spending can be short term inflationary, but long term deflationary. large spending on infrastructure will be inflationary for a while, but long term it will improve efficiency and lower costs of business and private life, thus putting downward pressure on inflation (assuming of course you don't build roads to nowhere to corruptly funnel govt money into the hands of your political friends).

For people who ideologically hate govt being significantly involved in society aside from passing and enforcing laws to protect property rights, they at least have an intellectually consistent basis for objecting to govts spending. But if you believe govt's roll is also to ensure social wellbeing, then there must be a demand for the govt to optimally use every tool at its disposal and the inflation tool is being unjustifiably hamstrung to prevent important social outcomes like decent healthcare, education, housing and sufficient income to live a minimally dignified life.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

12 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I’m worried that Biden won because a lot of moderate Republicans hated Trump so they voted for Joe. Trump’s not on the ticket so they’ll go back to being Republicans.

I'd bank on hopefully low turnout today as high turnout would favor Republicans. The last narrative of the election is an awful act of corruption by Trump, and hopefully that keeps those same types at home.

[OldGimletEye]

7 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

But why 3-4% why not a wider band? What would be wrong with a band spanning a 4-5% range as the long term average and not a specific % figure. The effect of spending can be short term inflationary, but long term deflationary. large spending on infrastructure will be inflationary for a while, but long term it will improve efficiency and lower costs of business and private life, thus putting downward pressure on inflation (assuming of course you don't build roads to nowhere to corruptly funnel govt money into the hands of your political friends).

There would be nothing wrong with an inflation target of 4-5%, versus 3-4%. Reasonable minds can disagree on which choice is better (assuming you've decided on raising the inflation target as opposed to price level or NGDP targeting).

More importantly, whatever target is picked, is to make sure that target stays anchored. In recessions, that means more aggressive fiscal/monetary policy. During good times, that means tightening fiscal/monetary policy.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

10 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Not what I’ve heard among my moderate / swing vote Republican friends. They are embarrassed about how Trump is acting. They are embarrassed that Loeffler and Perdue are playing along with the insanity.

I would, of course, on Facebook, be lambasted for having Republican friends.

IMO, they are voting, and the MAGA types are staying at home and nursing their conspiracy theories.

Precisely.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Numbers looking good so far at 40%, but there's a long ways to go.

[The Anti-Targ]

So both dems are currently up by double digit %. Is this a blue mirage, or will it hold?

[Impmk2]

Just now, The Anti-Targ said:

So both dems are currently up by double digit %. Is this a blue mirage, or will it hold?

Election day votes have largely yet to be counted. But Ossoff & Warnock are slightly outperforming the margins they need across the board so far. Looks hopeful.

[Maithanet]

3 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

So both dems are currently up by double digit %. Is this a blue mirage, or will it hold?

No chance they win by anything closer to that amount. But the Democrats have been mostly hitting their targets for each county.  It's still very early, but there is some reason for optimism.

[The Anti-Targ]

1 minute ago, Impmk2 said:

Election day votes have largely yet to be counted. But Ossoff & Warnock are slightly outperforming the margins they need across the board so far. Looks hopeful.

Stop the count, stop the count!

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Numbers looking good so far at 40%, but there's a long ways to go.

Get off Booger McFarland's lawn.