No Christie, No Bargain (NY Time's Tom Friedman Laments Gov. Christie's Decision Not to Run)

New York Slimes ^ | 10/05/2011 | Thomas Friedman

[SeekAndFind]

Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey isn’t going to run. That’s too bad. He had a chance to rescue the Republican Party from its dash to the cliff and make President Obama a better leader, too.

Here’s why: When the G.O.P. presidential candidates were asked during their debate on Aug. 11 whether any of them would accept a budget deal that involved $10 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases — and they all said no — the Republican Party officially became a danger to itself and to the country.

The G.O.P. became a danger to the country because it announced, in effect, that it would not be a partner for the kind of Grand Bargain that many economists believe we need — something that provides more near-term investment in the economy that spurs job growth, combined with a credible long-term plan to increase tax revenues and trim entitlements so the country’s debt-to-G.D.P. ratio stays in a safe range. Such a Grand Bargain would simultaneously boost the economy and optimism by its economic logic and the mere fact of the two parties working together.

The G.O.P. became a danger to itself because, as Tyler Cowen, an economics professor at George Mason University, pointed out in this newspaper on Sunday: “Cutting $10 in spending for every $1 in tax increases would result in $9 in net tax reduction. That’s because lower spending today means lower taxes tomorrow, and limiting the future path of government spending does limit future taxes, as Milton Friedman, the late Nobel laureate and conservative icon, so clearly explained. Promising never to raise taxes, without reaching a deal on spending, really means a high and rising commitment to future taxes.”

[NeilGus]

That would be a negative endorsement to me.

If Friedman likes him.....

[silverleaf]

Well damn, we just lost Tom Friedman’s vote

sarc

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Thank you Tommy Friedman. Assclown.

[Savage Beast]

Oh the Lefties would love to see the Republicans nominate Christie, Perry, or Romney. What makes them recoil in horror is Herman Cain!

Note tagline!

[glorgau]

OK, not raising taxes means you have to raise taxes.

[throwback]

Cuts are hypothetical, tax increases aren’t. History demonstrates only fools agree to tax increases. I agree to pay Friedman $9 for every one he gives me, someday. We have a government of liars and thieves supported by a media of liars and thieves.

[PALIN SMITH]

Friedman is out of touch with reality!!

[Texas Eagle]

He had a chance to rescue the Republican Party from its dash to the cliff and make President Obama a better leader, too.

Awwwwww. It's so sweet how much concern Thomas Friedman has for The Republican Party. Who knew?

[Bringbackthedraft]

and make President Obama a better leader, too. ................................... Hmmmmmmm, no wonder.

[newzjunkey]

something that provides more near-term investment in the economy that spurs job growth

That's worked so well up until now...

[newzjunkey]

as Tyler Cowen, an economics professor at George Mason University, pointed out in this newspaper on Sunday: “Cutting $10 in spending for every $1 in tax increases would result in $9 in net tax reduction.

Cowen and Friedman ignore history.

10-to-1 would never happen. Other deals didn't happen when 3-to-1 for Reagan. It didn't happen at 2-to-1 for Bush41. Taxes came, cuts did not.

You cannot commit future congresses to the "cuts" in such a deal. I don't see either taking aim at baseline budgeting. It's a fundamental problem and ensures obscene rates of automatic increase.

Is it coincidental debt has risen exponentially since the move to baseline budgeting in the mid-70s?

[sarge83]

I would have thought Red Tom would want to keep the Dear Leader in office the way he tends to love and want to emulate the communist utopia of red China.