bankers against Biden's fiscal plan could really do with some proper fact-checking before sending their op-ed to the FT.

We all understand 'it's ideology, stupid!', but no excuse for lazy arguments.

apparently, the Gospel according to Morgan Stanley is that we havent had enough neoliberalism for the past 4 decades
if you click on BIS link, it tells you monetary policy, not higher deficits, are associated with wealth inequality.

Incidentally, unconventional monetary policy through which central banks basically rescued banks after they nearly destroyed the global financial system in 2008
speaking of government spending, who else but Morgan Stanley got $10 billion in equity investments from US Treasury in 2008?

I cant think of a more productivity-enhancing outlay for 10bn of public funds.
the OECD 'evidence' that 'four straight decades of growing government intervention in the economy have led to slowing productivity growth' is also, excuse my language, a lot of bullshit.
if anything, there is stronger evidence that monetary policy is more important for explaining some of the productivity puzzle.

to blame government spending, instead of the Morgan Stanleys of this world, for monetary policy is, let's say, a bit rich
I really like that someone high-up in Morgan Stanley can write about the 'low interest rate elite'

it's on par with Erdogan's 'high-interest rate cabal'
the OECD 'evidence' again, two paragraphs lower!
'my team cannot prove causality, and I wont even link to the study proving correlation, but it must be true because I am a serious person making substantive arguments backed by strong evidence'
the average person understands that some bankers do get a free lunch, and munch on it while penning underwhelming op-eds.

I for one am all for Biden taking it away. Or better, redistribute it to some migrant workers breaking their back for $10 an hour.

More from Biden

"Ban" is a verb meaning to "officially or legally prohibit" something. If the Biden administration is not approving new fracking permits, how is that not "officially or legally prohibiting" new fracking permits?


The economy is bleeding, and the Biden administration's response is to cripple one of the few industries that has been consistently employing people throughout this crisis.

But, his allies in the media don't want him to take that PR hit, so they run cover and play word games. Biden's exact words were "We are not going to ban fracking. Period." The "Period." there would imply that ANY ban is off the table.

If you are going to prohibit via executive order - which is nothing more than a law passed outside of the normal legislative process - anything, you are "legally" prohibiting it. There are legal consequences to violating that regulation.

So yes, definitionally, Biden has "legally prohibited" fracking in some way, shape, or form, which is the opposite of his campaign statements.

In other words, he lied.
U.S. president-elect Joe Biden has indicated plans to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline permit via executive action on his first day in office, sources tell CBC News.

This weekend stakeholders have seen a longer list of Biden’s planned executive actions than what was publicly reported in a memo from incoming chief of staff Ron Klain.

That purported list includes a reference to cancelling Keystone XL on Day 1 — Wednesday.

Here is what the Biden transition team has publicly reported so far. From a memo by his Chief of Staff Ron Klain — that dozens of executive orders are planned in the first few days.
https://t.co/gEi3qHJnD1

The Biden team has publicly /

/ publicly announced its intention to sign climate orders on Day 1 including rejoining the Paris accord

What hasn’t been publicly reported, and it’s apparently something the transition team has indicated in stakeholder briefings, is that an order to kill KXL is coming on Day 1

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney raises the prospect of legal action if Biden cancels KXL.

You May Also Like