Comparing economic policies

While watching McCain's acceptance speech on Thursday I heard no real numbers mentioned regarding his economic policies.  A lot of the claims were misleading, such as the charge that Obama would raise taxes where McCain would lower them.  While Obama would raise them, he's only raising them for the top 5% of wage earners and lowering them for the other 95%.  The statements were misleading mostly because they were vague half-truths.

I would have liked to hear promises of some kind, any kind.  I wouldn't have cared if they fit into a liberal or conservative or libertarian or authoritarian box but I would have liked to hear something substantive so that the debate could get under way.  Both candidates have platforms that are definitely in line with the philosophies of their end in the the left-right spectrum (and therein lies a flaw in American politics, that it's subject to such a dichotomy that countries with more than two competitive political parties are not), but it seems that Obama is interested in convincing the other side why he thinks his ideas make sense by looking at them from that side's point of view.  One example in his book is that he had an idea to have interrogations and executions videotaped.  It allowed the death penalty to stand, but it also worked towards making those punishments follow more criterions of justice. 

Further analysis of the competing tax plans is available here at the Tax Policy Center.  Personal taxes would be lower for the majority of Americans under Obama, while corporate taxes would be higher.  The gist being, as I undestand it, that if one makes under $200,000 a year (or if a family makes under $250,000 a year), then you would recieve a bigger tax cut under Obama's plan than McCain's.  Conservative economic policy is based largely on the faith of trickle-down economics, that corporations and the rich would patronize smaller businesses and the underdog, correct?

That puts the ball in their court, which doesn't seem quite as fair.  Obama's plan seems to be an attempt to level the playing field for people who choose to take responsibility and work hard, and who happen to be starting with a number of disadvantages out of the gate.  The argument being that hard work isn't always enough where the positives and negatives of human nature hold true, especially when a lot of social policy is legislated through financial law on both sides of the aisle (tax breaks for environmentalism and health care and reinforcing job security from left-leaning social policy, to laws that apply only to married couples, barring those who choose, or cannot legally, get married from rights usually granted their married counterparts).  Navigating an unfair world does require intelligence and vigilance, creating almost intellectual classes in addition to economic ones.

But part of the reason I do like Obama is because he advocates the idea that things like government can only do so much to help people out, that they must do their part to find personal and financial success, as I've said here before, it's the old "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" point of view.

After seeing "A Beautiful Mind" and hearing about books like Blink and Freakonomics, I've found economics an intellectual curiousity for its sociological and psychological implications.  Another book that's fascinating in this regard is Money Without Matrimony.  It talks a lot about the vigilance required for couples that choose not to, or who can't legally, get married.  It's a response to the social legislation through financial law described above.

Comparing Economic Policies II: The Wrath of the 99 Cent Only Stores

The Los Angeles Times reports here that LA icon, the 99 Cent Only Stores will be raising their prices due to the tough economy of late but that the store will still be able to keep its name truthfully.

In the article it's reported that the price hike will be to the mind-bogglingly drastic 99.99 cents (all items below 99 cents will also add .99 cents to their pricetag).  That extra fraction of a penny would increase revenue by roughly $12 million a year, and be a quirky marketing gimmick to boot.