Four Ponies...

... because they'll bring the APOCALYPSE??  Horsemen/ponyboys of the apocalypse?  Oh, I missed an "H"?

Krugman presents... some phony arguments by the Republican candidates, updated version.  Summarized, despite all their chatter, the four Republican candidates' plans might result in higher budget deficits.  The shrewdness, the trickery.

Jon Stewart has more Republican trickery...



... and now, back to our feature presentation, Krugman's blog post.

The importance of this, of course, is how well the economy will fair under each plan, and Krugman says that commentators are arguing that "dynamic" tax effects are awesome.  I buy Romer's research that Krugman points to, and it makes sense in my head.  Mitt Romney isn't going to cry over paying an additional few percentage points of tax.  Further, Mitt Romney probably isn't even spending most of that money to stimulate the (American) economy - I'm skeptical that him or his NASCAR team owner buddies are supporting little mom and pop shops, let's say with six degrees of bacon.

On the other hand, most sources I've read with respect to cleaning up the whole tax ordeal says that it actually doesn't do that much.  Looks like I have to take some Public Finance classes to clear things up.  The tax policies amount to trillions of dollars, apparently, which might directly affect us 99% shmucks, not just those darn 0.01%ers.

Much to my amusement, the report includes the cost of Newt Gingrich's moon base, conservatively estimated at $140 billion worth.  I'm thinking that's a low; the International Space Station cost the US $70 some odd billion, but in total was about $150, and only supports 6 people at a time.  I can only imagine that the cost for supporting more and more people is S-shaped.  Seven to ten people, not too much more expensive; 50, 60, people, 100+ people, that'll get pricey real fast.  And then flatten out.  Like the top of the "S".