Palinomics: Grade D

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:09:15 PM EST
Tags: Sarah Palin (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin campaigned in Colorado today. She addressed the Wall St. crisis:

This is an issue of real concern," Palin told thousands gathered in a rodeo ring in Golden, Colorado. But, she said, "I'm glad to see the Federal Reserve has said no to using taxpayer money for a bailout."

.... Palin accused Wall Street regulators of being "asleep at the switch" and vowed that she and McCain would "put an end to the mismanagement and abuses." "We're going to reform the way Wall Street does business and stop the golden parachutes for CEOs who betray the public trust," she said.

One line from her gubernatorial speeches she is unlikely to repeat:

Palin herself may not be the most authoritative spokesperson on such issues. In the past, when she was running for Alaska governor, she freely admitted to a reporter that she got a "D" in macroeconomics in college.

ABC notes: [More...]

What precise reforms would Palin like to make, to better protect US investors? Unfortunately there's no way of knowing for sure. The candidate is not taking questions from the press.

< The Game Changer: The Economy | Obama's Appeal to Rural Voters >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Palinomics: Grade D | 51 comments (51 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I flunked econ in college (5.00 / 3) (#2)
by Shainzona on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:16:16 PM EST

but went on to a successful in business and, then for my second career, 25 years later graduated cum laude from law school.

Yeah.... (5.00 / 5) (#12)
by kdog on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:29:13 PM EST

I wouldn't beat her up over a "D", doesn't mean a damn thing in my book.

Besides, look at what all the straight A's economists have wrought:)

[ Parent ]

Heh (5.00 / 3) (#15)
by Steve M on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:38:31 PM EST

I made it to macroeconomics class 5 times the entire semester, including the midterm and the final. I got an A-. Vote for meeeeeeeee!

[ Parent ]

I got an A in macro and micro :-) (none / 0) (#17)
by Prabhata on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:42:23 PM EST

I liked micro the best.

[ Parent ]

All I remember (none / 0) (#19)
by Steve M on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:44:05 PM EST

was that we had an assignment in micro where we had to choose a consumer product, visit various stores around town to collect data on the pricing, and then do a writeup about supply and demand or somesuch. The reason I remember this was that one of my friends chose to do her report on condoms.

[ Parent ]

: I remember doing equations (none / 0) (#24)
by Prabhata on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:50:25 PM EST

But I didn't memorize them and never used any of it. But I still remember basic principles, like the velocity of money, the cause of inflation.

[ Parent ]

I got Bs in both... (none / 0) (#43)
by kredwyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:38:08 PM EST

But we had a very patient prof.

Some of my friends failed it under another professor.

[ Parent ]

I fell asleep sitting in the front row (5.00 / 2) (#46)
by shoephone on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:46:51 PM EST

of econ class and was asked by the professor to "please nap somewhere else". For the rest of the schoolyear.

;-)

[ Parent ]

: I did that! (none / 0) (#49)
by kredwyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:58:12 PM EST

I registered for the class called "Critical Thinking" thinking it'd be a cool argument style class.
Turned out that it was an 8am logic class with a TA who read from his notes and spoke in a monotone.
Talk about your snooze fests. All the coffee in the cafeteria couldn't keep me awake for that class.

[ Parent ]
: Once upon a time (none / 0) (#57)
by Steve M on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 04:06:57 PM EST

someone dozed off in the front row of my criminal law class.
My professor, who had a bit of Robin Williams in him, immediately worked her into a hypothetical in which someone sets fire to the law school at night so class will be cancelled, but unexpectedly a student is snoozing at her desk inside and is killed in the fire. Felony murder, as I recall.

[ Parent ]

Palin has not (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by Jeralyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:57:18 PM EST

gone on to business school or law school. Her undergraduate degree, six colleges in five years, was as far as she got. So there's no reason to believe she matches your accomplishments.

[ Parent ]

Sorry - no (5.00 / 1) (#32)
by JAB on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:02:30 PM EST

From Wikipedia

In 1982, Palin enrolled at Hawaii Pacific College, but left after her first semester, transferring in 1983 to North Idaho College and then to the University of Idaho. She attended Matanuska-Susitna College in Alaska for one term, returning to the University of Idaho to complete her Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism, graduating in 1987.

That's 4 colleges (actually, 3 community colleges and a university - Hawaii Pacific, North Idaho, Matanuska-Sustina, and Univeristy of Idaho.) 2 of those were for 1 semester.

And again, so what? Lots of people take classes at community colleges and transfer the credits.

And, I've met plenty of people with business and law degrees (seeing as I have both an MBA and a JD) and they were some of the dumbest people ever.

Calling her stupid or "not well educated" has already proven to be a losing argument.

[ Parent ]

Besides, she and McCain have economic advisors (none / 0) (#38)
by BeeD on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:21:59 PM EST

just like Obama does. Does anyone know what grades Obama got in Economics? Just wondering.

[ Parent ]

Oh... (none / 0) (#48)
by kredwyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:51:03 PM EST

That's pretty standard. Some core classes can be taken at CCs during the summer to be transferred back in when the class is over.

I had several students from other universities/colleges in my class this past summer. It's cheaper than the U.

[ Parent ]

I didn't call her stupid (none / 0) (#50)
by Jeralyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:58:35 PM EST

Don't misrepresent my statements.

[ Parent ]

Students attending CCs (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by kredwyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 02:08:41 PM EST

for a semester here and there and transferring those credits into the larger university isn't at all unusual.

Every semester I get students who take my class and then transfer it in when they go back to the U. There are a number of reasons:

It's cheaper.
The teacher/student ratio is better for some of the "weed out" core classes.
You actually get faculty members teaching rather than TAs.
Class sizes are smaller.

Even after I went on to a state univ, I still went back to my CC for summer classes like EN102 and computer programming.

[ Parent ]

Some of them were CCs... (none / 0) (#44)
by kredwyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:43:39 PM EST

I'm one of those who started out at a CC and then went on for a BA, (bartended and managed a bookstore) an MA, and (taught for a bit) a PhD.

I pred near failed out my first semester...then I realized what my priority was re: college.

My BA was on the 6 year plan--CC inclusive.

But I've had students at CU-Boulder who took ages to get their act in gear after spending most of their early college years snowboarding.

[ Parent ]

I wonder (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by Steve M on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:17:45 PM EST

do the commentors who are always insisting that Obama is doomed without specifics on the economy think that the same standards apply to the GOP?

Or is it, somehow, that only the GOP has the magical ability to win votes simply by saying "we're going to reform Wall Street"?

maybe those commenters (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by TimNCGuy on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:26:07 PM EST

aren't trying to provide advice to McCain on what he needs to do to win....

[ Parent ]

Heh (none / 0) (#10)
by Steve M on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:28:46 PM EST

But they nod along with McCain's statements and act like he's setting the right tone, when out here in the real world I don't see people falling for the notion that the party of deregulation is suddenly interested in tough oversight of the markets.

[ Parent ]

: Exactly (none / 0) (#14)
by glanton on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:32:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Well, (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by frankly0 on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:26:31 PM EST

the evidence would suggest that the answer to this question is yes.

[ Parent ]

On a more serious note (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by frankly0 on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:19:04 PM EST

than my last post, the simple facts are these:

the economy clearly is sucking for most voters
Given the last 8 years of Republican rule in the WH, Republicans and their policies clearly should, in the minds of most voters, bear the major responsibility for the current state of the economy

Yet,
3. McCain and Obama are nearly neck and neck on the question of who can handle the economy better

I simply ask: who is somehow failing to get their economic message across adequately, given the overall economic and political environment?

Who needs help?

Any answer other than Obama has to be wrong, I'd think.

Whatever McCain is doing, he should keep doing, if he wants to win. Whatever Obama is doing, he'd better change, if he wants to win.

[ Parent ]

: didn't the economy (none / 0) (#41)
by TimNCGuy on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:35:57 PM EST

suck for the same set of voters in 2004? And didn't we all complain about them voting "against their own economic interests" that time too?

[ Parent ]
: Frankly O (none / 0) (#51)
by Jeralyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:59:21 PM EST

is limited to four comments a day.

[ Parent ]

heh (none / 0) (#5)
by Faust on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:20:16 PM EST

Good question. I think we both know the answer.

[ Parent ]

How do you reform a philosophy? (5.00 / 3) (#6)
by steviez314 on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:21:06 PM EST

You can reform procedures, hiring practices, buying decisions.

But when the ENTIRE philosophy of Republican economics is "let business do whatever the hell it wants", the word "reform" is meaningless.

Greenspan (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Dalton Hoffine on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:27:05 PM EST

Alan Greenspan makes me wanna wretch. Not sayin' that the Bush Administration hasn't had an adverse effect on the economy itself, in a direct manner, but I really blame a good chunk of this current crisis on Alan Greenspan. He killed the worth of our currency by constantly slashing interest rates, which meant that companies and businesses couldn't buy nearly as much of what they needed to operate. We live in a GLOBAL economy now. No one at the Fed seems to get that. What we do effects other people, sure, but the other side to that is that we import a TON from other places. Slashing interest rates and purposely deflating the currency only means that we can't import as much as we used to to help us run everything. It means we can't buy energy, science, technology, and a wide variety of other necessities. It means that American travelers who are abroad are screwed over because the currency is hardly worth the paper its printed on in most other industrialized places.

Yuck. Greenspan was a horrible Fed Chair. We need to go the way of the EU, and create a permeable regional economic system. It provides stability, more resources, cheaper importing tariffs from some of our biggest trading partners, and would allow the illegal immigration problem to go down because it would bring new economic growth to Mexico and Canada.

I wish we could see something like NAFTA+. Something where not only is free trade encouraged, but also create fixed currency exchanges, economic partnerships that stabilize the regional economy and resources, and accountability through rotating governing bodies between the member nations that would allow a balance of everyone's interests to be met. The economy goes in ups and downs. I think this step would make the downs less down, and the ups less up... it's equalization, but it's also stability. And that's good for me.

How are you going to fix (none / 0) (#16)
by robrecht on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:42:12 PM EST

exchange rates? Are you going to adjust and impose interest rates to try to achieve a certain value? What's your standard, or are you going to require (again, how) every other country to fix their exchange rates? Are you also going to set the price of toilet paper and every other item in every supermarket? Will everyone be employed by the government?

[ Parent ]

Latin American Lessons (5.00 / 0) (#21)
by Dalton Hoffine on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:46:38 PM EST

In the past, countries (especially after the Import-Substitution-Industrialization Crises of the 30s-50s in Latin America) have signed economic agreements that will fix currency relations between their countries. This was done to stabilize the regional economy, and to create stability for travelers and businesses that relied on the entire Latin American region.

It's called "currency fixing" and it can be done through a treaty or organizational partnership of some kind. If not watched closely and given detailed conditions, it can lead to severe inflation (as it did in Argentina), but it can also stabilize and revitalize a struggling economy.

[ Parent ]

Also (none / 0) (#23)
by Dalton Hoffine on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:49:21 PM EST

The euro is a form of this kind of thing. It basically gave one currency to a region of countries. It could've just as easily assigned the same value to francs, marks, lira, etc.--but it changed the name to euro for uniformity's sake. It's been very successful for Europe, and has started the industrialization process for much of Eastern Europe.

[ Parent ]

Again, what will be your standard? (none / 0) (#34)
by robrecht on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:05:44 PM EST

Do you want to peg the dollar to the Euro, as the Argentine Peso was pegged to the dollar, which previously was part of a gold standard? Will other countries no longer be allowed to buy and sell gold on the free market?

This seems to me to be a totally fanciful 'solution' that merely attempts to address a symptom while ignoring real questions of value and economics.

[ Parent ]

Standards (none / 0) (#35)
by Dalton Hoffine on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:12:52 PM EST

I would "peg" the Canadian dollar, the American dollar, and the Mexican peso (and perhaps smaller countries at a later time) into an economic partnership system. By stabilizing regional rates (for example, it could be a fixed rate of... 8:1 in peso/dollar, 1.3:1 for CAD/USD, etc.) then the trade imbalance would be much less volatile, and would create a more predictable and flourishing environment for potential investment. The EU's policy for this has been to promote small growth over the long term by increased production throughout Europe, tied to a regional currency (the euro) that provides stability in the free market.

I would want something similar for the US. Buying gold on the foreign markets has nothing to do with this. And your accusation of this having nothing to do with economics and value really... I don't even understand it. That's the whole point, actually, is to address concerns of currency volatility, regional value, and... of course... macroeconomics.

[ Parent ]

A common regional currency (none / 0) (#40)
by robrecht on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:27:34 PM EST

is not the same as a fixed exchange rate. You'll notice that the Euro does not have a fixed exchange rate with the US, China, Japan, or the rest of the world. So your less ambitious proposal would have nothing to do with our trade deficit with, eg, China or Saudi Arabia. Would you allow the regional 'fixed' rates to fluctuate over time as was necessary with the Argentine Peso?

[ Parent ]

o_O (none / 0) (#42)
by Dalton Hoffine on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:37:04 PM EST

No one, certainly not me, is talking about the currency having a fixed exchange rate with every other country in the world--as I said many times previously--the only fixed rates would be with regional partners (Mexico and Canada, for example), which in effect, would create a common regional currency.

And if for some reason production boosted in Canada or Mexico, then those changes could be allocated in a re-evaluation of the rates every... six years or so. Any changes would be miniscule, however.

I'm done arguing this.

[ Parent ]

: Sorry (none / 0) (#55)
by robrecht on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 02:08:58 PM EST

I misunterstood the scope of what you initially said about "fixed currency exchanges". Still, free market forces result in much more than your "miniscule" changes. Would it surprise you to learn that the US dollar lost over 50% of its value against the Canadian dollar in 5 years? Why would Canada want to be saddled with such a drag on their economy during this period?
I was in Europe when the common currency of the Euro was being negotiated. That made a lot more sense for a band of similar and similarly small nations to merge their markets and currency in order to better compete on a global scale. The US and Canada and Mexico have vastly more disparate economies than the social democracies of Europe.

[ Parent ]

Volker was the best (none / 0) (#18)
by Prabhata on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:43:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]

: I like Volker (none / 0) (#29)
by Dalton Hoffine on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:59:19 PM EST

He seemed to get it that sometimes you can't save everything and you have to cut your losses. Sure, he knew raising interest rates would put the nation into a temporary recession, but that it was better to jump off of the train before it runs over the cliff. If the 70's stagflation had gone on any further, I don't even want to think about what would've happened. Perhaps a repeat of Brazil in the 80s, would be my guess.

[ Parent ]

Does Palin agree with McCain (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by litigatormom on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:29:08 PM EST

that the fundamentals of the economy are still strong -- something he said this morning?

To the extent that Palin has economic experience from being Governor of Alaska, it's irrelevant, since Alaska's economy is unique.

More important is to making the Republicans "own their failure" with their policy of non-regulation, to which both McCain and she (presumably) subscribe.

Oh, and BTW John and Sarah, the Republicans love big severance pay-outs for failed corporate executives, which they see as resulting from "market forces."

Magic Palin Ball says: Ask Again Later (none / 0) (#37)
by lilburro on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:20:36 PM EST

(when we are desperate enough to get press)

[ Parent ]

: Magic litigatormom ball (none / 0) (#47)
by litigatormom on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:47:33 PM EST

"Future seems cloudy."

[ Parent ]

This post highlights (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by glanton on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:30:21 PM EST

One of thw two biggest truths of the election. Which is, on economics, there not a whiff of credibility or even competence between the two people running at the top of the GOP ticket.

Obama should keep reiminding people in economically ravaged places (many of which are the big swing states) of the simple facts of the case. Reminding them that Obama and the Dems offer relief and remedies, particularly in the way of job creation. And that by contrast, far from offering relief and remedies, McCain and Palin don't even understand the problems.

Which is to say, McCain and Palin are indeed continuation candidates. An important truth to tell.

Prabata (5.00 / 2) (#30)
by Jeralyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:59:46 PM EST

is way over limit on posts attacking Obama. Please come back another day.

Has anyone seen Pelosi or Reid? (5.00 / 2) (#31)
by Prabhata on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:00:51 PM EST

Somebody, wake them up. They were also snoring during Katrina (they were the minority leaders then). Only Schiavo got the attention from the Republicans, but nothing wakes up the Democrats.

I found it rather amusing... (none / 0) (#3)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:17:32 PM EST

...that they trotted out old Billy Bob Owens to speak today. I'll be curious to see what he was talking about--the economy? Might as well had gotten Doug Bruce up there too.

OK, she said (none / 0) (#25)
by Pieter B on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:52:37 PM EST

"We're going to reform the way Wall Street does business and stop the golden parachutes for CEOs who betray the public trust."

Did anyone ask "How?" Did anyone point out that the GOP has been running on a "regulating private business BAD!" platform for the past several decades?

no one asked (5.00 / 3) (#28)
by Jeralyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:58:38 PM EST

because she refuses to take any questions.

[ Parent ]

: when she does take questions . . . (none / 0) (#58)
by Pieter B on Tue Sep 16, 2008 at 12:27:29 AM EST

Someone should ask if that means that McCain adviser Carly Fiorina should give the $21 million back to HP.

[ Parent ]

deleted (none / 0) (#33)
by thentro on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 01:04:21 PM EST

did BTD's first comment got deleted? How ironic as of late...

BTD asked me to deleted his first comment (none / 0) (#52)
by Jeralyn on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 02:00:46 PM EST

Comments attacking BTD will be deleted. You may not insult the writers of this blog. Disagreement is fine, attacks are not.

[ Parent ]

: Right-o (none / 0) (#56)
by thentro on Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 02:15:57 PM EST

thanks for clarifying Jeralyn.

[ Parent ]