A Science-Based Look At Economics

Economics is known as "The Dismal Science" for many reasons. It is a social science and, thus, there is less consensus of opinion among its experts than in the "Hard" sciences of physics, chemistry, geology, paleontology, archeology, et al (link). While there are many opinions on the economic spectrum, the two philosophies most visible in US economics presently are called Keynesian and Austrian (link):

• Keynesian: more government involvement (favored by the Democrats)
• Austrian: less government involvement (favored by the Republicans)

Please note: both of these views do not include extreme right-wing laissez faire capitalism (no limits on private enterprise) or left-wing socialism/communism (total control by the government of the means of production).

Now, which of these simple, basic binary views has been the most successful? I offer the following links that, on balance, seem to be more in support of the Keynesian view. If you disagree, please respond with evidence. Thanks.

The Keynesian/Austrian Debate

Five Positive Results of Keynesian Economics

Modern Monetary Theory (Keynesian) Defended

The Economy Under Democratic vs Republican Presidents

Democrats vs. Republicans: Which Is Better For the Economy?

FDR's "New Deal" And The End Of The "Great Depression

Why Conservatives hate fiscal policy

Inflation:

The Inflation Myth

Another round of Right-Wing Inflation Fear-Mongering

The idea that conservatives are better economic managers simply does not stand up

Republicans are inflation fear-mongering

More Evidence That The Democrats Are Tone-Deaf

Following are several articles exposing the failure of the Democrats to appropriately respond to their defeat in 2016:

The Democratic Party in Crisis

Can Democrats Fix the Party?

Resolving the Democrats’ False Choice

Democrats’ abandonment of their traditional blue-collar constituency is bad for their party — and for the country. 

What Killed the Democratic Party?

Successful Politics Includes Compromise

I am a solid progressive on the political scale but I realize that politics is not a game of pure ideology. Any political party that nominates someone from the far ends of the political spectrum is doomed to fail. Also, politics is not a "hard" science and there are things to learn from both sides of the political spectrum.  This article should be a fair warning to the Democrats presently.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/latest-news/article210279914.html#emlnl=Afternoon_Newsletter

The Anti-Science Side Of The Clinton Campaign

"Other emails show members of Clinton's campaign team collaborating with groups that have a financial interest in promoting pseudoscience. In one email, Gary Hirshberg, who co-founded a company that peddles organic, GMO-free yogurt, is providing the Clinton campaign with science policy advice."

WikiLeaks Reveals Hillary Clinton Campaign Manager John Podesta Believes GMOs Cause Migraines

A Perspective Regarding The Treatment Of Bill's Accusers By Hillary Clinton

"Without endorsing any of Hillary Clinton's behavior, or minimizing any unfairness experienced by her husband's sex partners or alleged victims, it seems to me that asking a man or woman to react rationally and sympathetically to a person just as they're revealed to be having an affair with their spouse, or accusing their spouse of a crime, is to demand superhuman self-control and circumspection. Few could do it. In the first case, who wouldn't deeply resent a spouse's cheating partner, and be inclined to see them in the most unfavorable light? In the latter case, who wouldn't believe that their spouse was being wrongly accused, especially if the spouse really did have powerful enemies trying to destroy him?"

Yes, she behaved badly. But under the circumstances, how many people would've managed better? And how is it relevant to the job she may seek?

This Must Be Condemned By Democrats

"The temptation to embrace or tolerate irresponsible attacks is a constant for all political parties. And, contrary to what many liberals believe, there’s nothing about conservatives that makes them uniquely susceptible to conspiracy-mongering. Go back a decade or so, and you’ll find plenty of liberals and leftists who trafficked in conspiracy theories about voting machines, just to cite one example."

Democrats must reject Dean’s absurd claim

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article104985306.html#storylink=cpy

If You Don't Vote, None Of This Matters

"The secularizing trend seems unstoppable. It gradually bolsters progressive values of the Democratic Party. White evangelicals remain the heart of the GOP - but they're losing ground as "nones" slowly outnumber them."

Religion decline helps the Democratic Party

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/living/religion/article99472482.html#storylink=cpy

A Look At The Question Of Media Bias

Yes, yes and yes:  the US media IS biased toward liberalism.  Now, what does that mean and why?  First of all, lets look at the two major US political parties:  one (the Republican Party) is clearly more anti-science than the other.   Reality is clearly best evaluated by science.  Reality DOES have a liberal bias.  Case made.  Any challengers?

Another Example Of The Importance Of Voting Practically Instead Of Ideally

"If you don’t like, if you mistrust, if you’re disgusted by, the thought of Hillary Clinton as president, if you still feel like Hillary is a crook ... folks, 'Vote for the crook. It’s important.'”

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article94885472.html#storylink=cpy

The Religious Bind The Democrats Are In

"Another challenge for Democratic believers is the cold political reality that there are more religiously unaffiliated voters than ever — at 21 percent of the electorate, the so-called nones now constitute a larger voting bloc than any single religious group. And those voters are increasingly leaning Democratic, which means the party can’t afford to ignore or offend them.

"Despite these factors, the 'God-talk' quotient did seem to grow as the convention went on, - - - "

The divided soul of the Democratic Party

A Sermon Even Atheists Can Get Behind

The irony. I had been looking for someone at the DNC (of course, the RNC would never have done it) to explicitly make a statement to include atheists in the process of our democracy. Thank you, Rev William Barber, from NC, for doing so.  Regardless of your religious views, imagine a world where THIS was the face of religion.

Rev. Dr. William J. Barber, II, President of the North Carolina chapter of the NAACP, gave a sermon tonight that brought down the house at the Democratic National Convention.

Progressives Can Also Have Blind Spots

" - - - Are these people unaware that the Democratic Party just ran a black candidate for President twice in a row, and brought him to victory? Are they unaware that now we’re doing it with the first woman Presidential candidate from either major party, and one who will likely win? No, that’s not enough: they have to start an #ElectionsSoWhite campaign."

 Why I hate the PuffHo

Anti-Science: It's Not Just A Republican Problem

"It's popular to portray the GOP as the anti-science party and Democrats as the sane, 'party of science' alternative.  And only 6 percent of scientists identified as Republicans, according to a 2009 Pew Research poll, which seems to be the most recent one on the topic. But the truth is that when science and politics meet, the result often isn't pretty, regardless of partisan affiliation."

Don't be too smug, Democrats.

Another Example Of An Atheist Denying Evidence If It Attacks His Identity

For many years, I watched Cenk (pronounced “Jenk”) Uygur on MSNBC, then later on YouTube when he left that media outlet.  I either saw his true colors, or his morphing into what is known as the "Regressive Left."  In any event, I haven't watch him in a few years.  I have not heard this denial story before, but I also now see about as much denial of evidence from the left as I have seen for decades from the right.  It is shameful from anyone.  C'mon, science-based thinking everyone.

After years of denying the Armenian genocide, Cenk Uygur now says he doesn’t know enough about it to say anything

Liberals Aren't Pure When It Comes To Science

In addition to the anti-GMO movement, liberals are also in the vanguard of challenging nuclear power.

Liberal Biases, Too, May Block Progress on Climate Change

Jerry Coyne Has It Correct

"This is a rough season for Democratic voters like me. Most of us feel that the time is past due for a woman President, but Hillary has her own problems, including an unconscionable love of money and a record of osculating Wall Street banks, a lack of transparency, a discomfiting tendency to change her mind based not on principle but on political expediency, a disturbingly hawkish side, and so on. Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is at least honest, doesn’t take big money, but has little experience."

The problems of Hillary Clinton

- - - - - -