Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
follow
1,000 Followers
follow
0 Followers
follow
People's Pundit Locals Community
Wednesday, February 12, 2025
SECTIONS
logo
mobile-logo
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 522)
Policy

Venezuela-President-Nicolás-Maduro-EPA

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro took over after leftwing dictator and former President Hugo Chavez died. (Photo: EPA)

Maybe it’s just because I’m a wonk, but it seems that comparing long-run growth rates in various nation sets up a slam-dunk argument for the superiority of free markets and small government.

Whether it’s North Korea vs. South Korea, Cuba vs. Chile, or Ukraine vs. Poland, nations with bigger governments and more intervention inevitably decline compared to market-oriented alternatives.

That’s very compelling evidence, in my humble opinion, but I wonder whether it’s not overly persuasive because it’s too dry and analytical.

Maybe I should focus more on the human cost of statism. And not just by sharing data about low levels of per-capita GDP. Perhaps it would help to explain what that means for the lives of ordinary people.

Venezuela certainly would be a perfect (in a bad way) example.

The Associated Press explains that big government and statism aren’t working very well, particularly for the most vulnerable members of Venezuelan society.

Tens of thousands of Venezuelans poured into neighboring Colombia to buy food and medicine on Saturday after authorities briefly opened the border that has been closed for almost a year. A similar measure last week led to dramatic scenes of the elderly and mothers storming Colombian supermarkets and highlighted how daily life has deteriorated for millions in Venezuela, where the economy has been in a freefall.

That certainly sounds grim, but that story doesn’t fully capture how bad life has become for ordinary people.

Here are some excerpts from a BBC report on the government-created misery in Venezuela.

Travelling through the country this month I saw endless queues of people trying to buy food – any food – at supermarkets and other government-run shops. I was stopped at a roadblock in the middle of the countryside by people who said they had eaten nothing but mangoes for three days. I saw the hopeless expression of a mother, who had been eating so little that she was no longer able to breastfeed her baby.

What a miserable tragedy.

The reporter shares information on his own family and other people he met.

…it was my family who really brought it home to me. My brother told me all his trousers were now too big. My father – never one to grumble – let slip that things were “really tough”. My mother, meanwhile, confessed that sometimes she only eats once a day. They all live in different parts of Venezuela, but none of them is getting enough to eat. It’s a nationwide problem. …a young mother, Liliana, …admitted to going to bed in tears on days when she had been unable to give her two children any dinner. In western Venezuela, in the oil-rich province of Zulia, I visited several small towns where people didn’t know what they would eat the following day.

What a horrifying life.

Imagine if you were a parent in Venezuela and you couldn’t find food for your children? That shouldn’t be happening in the 21st century.

Unsurprisingly, deprivation and economic chaos are now the norm.

A study by three of the country’s main universities indicates…that “extreme poverty” has jumped by 53% since 2014. …The country’s official inflation rate was 180% in December, the last time a figure was made public, but the IMF estimates it will be above 700% by the end of the year.

Considering that Venezuela is in last place for Economic Freedom of the World, none of this should be surprising.

But remember that we want to focus today on the human cost of statism, not just broad measures of economic mismanagement.

And this chart from the BBC on food riots certainly is a persuasive piece of evidence.

Here’s the part that shows the mess was created by bad government policies, with price controls being a major culprit.

…the government years ago fixed the price of many basic goods, such as flour, chicken, or bread. But Venezuelans can only buy the goods at these fixed prices once a week, depending on the final digit of the number on their national identity card. …Because there is a risk of the goods running out, people often arrive at supermarkets in the early hours of the morning, or even earlier. At 6am one morning in Caracas, I met a man who had already been in the queue for three hours. …”I’m hoping to get rice, but sometimes I’ve queued and then been unable to buy anything because the rice runs out before I get in,” he said.

In a sad example of Mitchell’s Law as the failure of one bad policy leads to the imposition of another bad policy.

President Nicolas Maduro[‘s]…latest step has been to create Local Committees of Supplies and Production, better known by the Spanish acronym, CLAP. The CLAPs essentially mean that the government will stop sending imported food to supermarkets and start handing it over to local community councils. …The ultimate aim of the CLAPs is to create self-sustaining communities, where people grow their own food. …a member of a colectivo – a group of hardcore government supporters, often armed, …agreed in the end to show me what the CLAP was aiming to achieve. I was taken to see a barren field – “which we aim to have ready for crops in eight months” – and several chili plants waiting to be planted. It was, to say the least, disheartening.

In other words, Venezuela apparently is creating a sure-to-fail mixture of autarky and collective agriculture.

Even Ayn Rand didn’t think to include something that crazy in her dystopian novel, Atlas Shrugged.

Let’s wrap up with a CNN story about a new “jobs” program from the thugs in Caracas.

In a vaguely-worded decree, Venezuelan officials indicated that public and private sector employees could be forced to work in the country’s fields for at least 60-day periods, which may be extended “if circumstances merit.” …President Nicolas Maduro is using his executive powers to declare a state of economic emergency. …According to the decree from July 22, workers would still be paid their normal salary by the government and they can’t be fired from their actual job. …Venezuela…is grappling with the lack of basic food items like milk, eggs and bread. People wait hours in lines outsides supermarkets to buy groceries and often only see empty shelves. …Venezuela is the world’s worst economy, according to the IMF. It’s expected to shrink 10% this year and inflation is projected to rise over 700%. Beyond food shortages, hospitals are low on supplies, causing many patients to go untreated and some to die.

Wow, I’m not even sure where to start. The fact that people are dying because of horribly sub-standard care? The fact that the government is engaging in a form of quasi-slavery by forcing people to work on farms? Or the fact that bad government policy is the reason for the disaster?

As I contemplated these questions, it got me thinking about the varying degrees of statism and the harmful impact on ordinary people.

So, with apologies to fans of Dante’s Inferno, I put together the Five Circles of Statist Hell. The first layer is relatively benign, featuring nations such as Francethat sap an economy’s vitality with lots of feel-good programs. Then you get countries that belong in the second layer, which is characterized by economies that are actually declining rather than merely stagnating.

And the next layer is where Venezuela is today, with systemic misery and poverty. In other words, the nations in this layer already have declined and have lots of suffering.

But it’s always possible to decline even further. If Venezuela doesn’t reverse some of the awful policies that are causing chaos today, it’s just a matter of time before the country joins North Korea is a state of pervasive deprivation and even starvation.

And the only thing worse than that is the final layer of statist hell, which features countries that actually butcher their own citizens.

By the way, let’s not forget the “useful idiots” who have justified and/or praised Venezuela’s brutal government. I’ve previously cited the misguided words of Joseph Stiglitz.

Well, Joe Kennedy also deserves our scorn and disdain. The former politician actually mourned the death of the evil slug who is most responsible for the mess in Venezuela.

Former congressman Joe Kennedy (D-Mass.) is mourning the death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez today, praising Chavez as someone who made a difference for poor people. …Kennedy also said that “some of the wealthiest people on our planet have more money than they can ever reasonably expect to spend.” Kennedy joins Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.) among the few American politicians to praise Chavez after his death Tuesday.

How disgusting and unseemly. Makes the Che sycophants seems like moral giants.

[mybooktable book=”global-tax-revolution-the-rise-of-tax-competition-and-the-battle-to-defend-it” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

The Local Committees of Supplies and Production

Policy

Bernie-Sanders-NH-Victory-Speech

Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders gives his victory speech in New Hampshire on Feb. 9, 2016. Photo: AP/J. David Ake)

I’m still in China, as part of a week-long teaching assignment about markets, entrepreneurship, economics, and fiscal policy at Northeastern University in Shenyang.

One point that I’ve tried to get across to the students is that China should not copy the United States. Or France, Japan, or Sweden. To be more specific, I warn them that China won’t become rich if it copies the economic policies that those nations have today.

Instead, I tell them that China should copy the economic policies – very small government, trivial or nonexistent income taxes, very modest regulation – that existed in those nations back in the 1800s and early 1900s. That’s when America and other western countries made the transition from agricultural poverty to industrial prosperity.

In other words, pay attention to the polices that actually produced prosperity, not the policies that happen to be in place in 2016. With this in mind, I’m delighted to share a new National Review column about the ostensibly wonderful Nordic Model from Nima Sanandaji. He starts by noting that statists are big fans of nations such as Sweden and Denmark.

Ezra Klein, the editor of the liberal news website Vox, wrote last fall that “Clinton and Sanders both want to make America look a lot more like Denmark — they both want to…strengthen the social safety net.” … Bill Clinton argues that Finland, Sweden, and Norway offer greater opportunities for individuals… Barack Obama recently…explain[ed] that “in a world of growing economic disparities, Nordic countries have some of the least income inequality in the world.”

Sounds nice, but there’s one itsy-bitsy problem with the left’s hypothesis.

Simply stated, everything good about Nordic nations was already in place before the era of big government.

…the social success of Nordic countries pre-dates progressive welfare-state policies. …their economic and social success had already materialized during a period when these countries combined a small public sector with free-market policies. The welfare state was introduced afterward.

Here are some of the key factoids about fiscal policy.

…in 1960, the tax rate in [Denmark] was merely 25 percent of GDP, lower than the 27 percent rate in the U.S. at the time. In Sweden, the rate was 29 percent, only slightly higher than in the U.S. In fact, much of Nordic prosperity evolved between the time that a capitalist model was introduced in this part of the world during the late 19th century and the mid 20th century – during the free-market era.

And here’s the data about equality (though I think it’s far more important to worry about the degree of upward mobility rather than whether everyone has a similar amount of income).

…high levels of income equality evolved during the same period. Swedish economists Jesper Roine and Daniel Waldenström, for example, explain that “most of the decrease [in income inequality in Sweden] takes place before the expansion of the welfare state and by 1950 Swedish top income shares were already lower than in other countries.” A recent paper by economists Anthony Barnes Atkinson and Jakob Egholt Søgaard reaches a similar conclusion for Denmark and Norway.

Our friends on the left think that government-run healthcare deserves the credit for longer lifespans in the Nordic world.

Nima explains that the evidence points in the other direction.

In 1960, well before large welfare states had been created in Nordic countries, Swedes lived 3.2 years longer than Americans, while Norwegians lived 3.8 years longer and Danes 2.4 years longer. Today, after the Nordic countries have introduced universal health care, the difference has shrunk to 2.9 years in Sweden, 2.6 years in Norway, and 1.5 years in Denmark. The differences in life span have actually shrunk as Nordic countries moved from a small public sector to a democratic-socialist model with universal health coverage.

Not to mention that there are some surreal horror stories in those nations about the consequences of putting government in charge of health care.

Here’s the evidence that I find most persuasive (some of which I already shared because of an excellent article Nima wrote for Cayman Financial Review).

Danish Americans today have fully 55 percent higher living standard than Danes. Similarly, Swedish Americans have a 53 percent higher living standard than Swedes. The gap is even greater, 59 percent, between Finnish Americans and Finns. Even though Norwegian Americans lack the oil wealth of Norway, they have a 3 percent higher living standard than their cousins overseas. …Nordic Americans are more socially successful than their cousins in Scandinavia. They have much lower high-school-dropout rates, much lower unemployment rates, and even slightly lower poverty rates.

Nima concludes his article by noting the great irony of Nordic nations trying to reduce their welfare states at the same time American leftists are trying to move in the other direction.

Nordic-style democratic socialism is all the rage among Democrat activists as well as with liberal intellectuals and journalists. But in the Nordic countries themselves, this ideal has gradually lost its appeal. …During the past few decades, the Nordic countries have gradually been reforming their social systems. Taxes have been cut to stimulate work, public benefits have been limited in order to reduce welfare dependency, pension savings have been partially privatized, for-profit forces have been allowed in the welfare sector, and state monopolies have been opened up to the market. In short, the universal-welfare-state model is being liberalized. Even the social-democratic parties themselves realize the need for change.

The net result of these reforms is that the Nordic nations are a strange combination of many policies that are very good(very little regulation, very strong property rights, very open trade, and stable money) and a couple of policies that are very bad (an onerous tax burden and a bloated welfare state).

I’ve previously shared (many times) observations about the good features of the Nordic nations, so let’s take a closer look at the bad fiscal policies.

Sven Larson authored a study about the Swedish tax system for the Center for Freedom and Prosperity. The study is about 10 years old, but it remains the best explanation I’ve seen if you want to understand the ins and outs of taxation in Sweden.

Here’s some of what he wrote, starting with the observation that the fiscal burden used to be considerably smaller than it is in America today.

Sweden was not always a high-tax nation. …the aggregate tax burden after World War II was modest.

But then things began to deteriorate.

…over the next four decades, there was a relentless increase in taxation. The tax burden first reached 50 percent of economic output in 1986 and has generally stayed above that level for the past 20 years.

Though Sven points out that Swedish politicians, if nothing else, at least figured out that it’s not a good idea to be on the wrong side of the Laffer Curve (i.e., they figured out the government was getting less revenue because tax rates were confiscatory).

A major tax reform in 1991 significantly lowered the top marginal tax rate to encourage growth. The top rate had peaked at 87 percent in 1979 and then gradually dropped to 65 percent in 1990 before being cut to 51 percent in 1991. Subsequent tax increases have since pushed the rate to about 57 percent.

In the interest of fairness, let’s acknowledge that there are a few decent features of the Swedish tax system, including the absence of a death tax or wealth tax, along with a modest tax burden on corporations.

But the bottom line is that Sweden’s overall tax system (and the same can be said of Denmark and other Nordic nations) is oppressive. And the system is oppressive because governments spend too much. Indeed, the welfare state in Sweden and Denmark is as large as the infamous French public sector.

To be sure, the Swedes and Danes partially offset the damage of their big welfare states by having hyper-free market policies in other areas. That’s why they rank much higher than France in Economic Freedom of the World even though all three nations get horrible scores for fiscal policy.

Let’s close by circling back to the main premise of this column. Nima explained that good things happened in the Nordic nations before the welfare state exploded in size.

So I decided to see if we could ratify his hypothesis by checking the growth numbers from the impressive Angus Maddison database. Here’s a chart showing the average growth of per-capita GDP in Denmark and Sweden in the 45 years before 1965 (the year used as an unofficial date for when the welfare state began to metastasize) compared to the average growth of per-capita GDP during the 45 years since 1965.

Unsurprisingly, we find that the economy grew faster and generated more prosperity when government was smaller.

Gee, it’s almost as if there’s a negative relationship between the size of government and the health of the economy? What a novel concept!

P.S. All of which means that there’s still no acceptable response for my two-question challenge to the left.

P.P.S. Both Sweden and Denmark have been good examples for my Golden Rule, albeit only for limited periods.

[mybooktable book=”global-tax-revolution-the-rise-of-tax-competition-and-the-battle-to-defend-it” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

Bernie Sanders, Bill Clinton and many more

Policy

Donald Trump speaks to the Republican National Convention at the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio.

Donald Trump speaks to the Republican National Convention at the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio.

Previously, I shared some of the highlights (and lowlights) of the Democratic Party platform. It wasn’t a fun task. The Democrats put together a rat’s nest of taxes, spending, cronyism, and red tape, so my blood pressure probably went crazy as I read the document.

Crazy Bernie Sanders may have lost the war for the nomination, but it seems that he mostly won the battle over the platform.

The plank about letting states be in charge of marijuana policy was the only part of the platform that I actually liked (even though I personally disapprove of drug use). Though it mostly doesn’t matter what’s in party platforms. As I pointed out yesterday, platforms tend to be ideological statements to please party activists. Politicians generally don’t care about their respective party platforms, and they definitely don’t allow their behavior to be constrained by platform language.

With that important caveat in mind, let’s now review the GOP platform. And I’ll use the same approach that I used when looking at the Democrat’s document. I’ll provide a short excerpt and then give my two cents.

Here are some of the main economic issues addressed (or bungled) by Republicans.

We believe the Constitution was written not as a flexible document, but as our enduring covenant.

That’s true, but why aren’t GOPers defunding most of the federal government if that’s what they really believe?

Because of the vital role of religious organizations, charities, and fraternal benevolent societies in fostering generosity and patriotism, they should not be subject to taxation and donations to them should remain deductible.

Endorsing the deduction for charitable contributions isn’t an optimistic sign for those of us who support fundamental tax reform.

To guard against hypertaxation of the American people in any restructuring of the federal tax system, any value added tax or national sales tax must be tied to the simultaneous repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment, which established the federal income tax.

This may be my favorite part of the GOP platform. Hopefully it will discourage Rand Paul and Ted Cruz from including a VAT if they run for president again and put forth tax reform plans.

We propose to level the international playing field by lowering the corporate tax rate to be on a par with, or below, the rates of other industrial nations.

Hard to argue with that plank, though it raises the question of why Republicans haven’t enacted this change already.

We endorse the recommendation of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, as well as the current Administration’s Export Council, to switch to a territorial system of taxation so that profits earned and taxed abroad may be repatriated for job-creating investment here at home.

Territorial taxation is good policy, so amen.

Republicans believe that no financial institution is too big to fail. We support legislation to ensure that the problems of any financial institution can be resolved through the Bankruptcy Code.

This is the right policy. Too bad many GOPers ignored this bit of wisdom and voted for TARP.

We propose to phase out the federal transit program.

They should phase out the entire Department of Transportation, but this would be a good start.

…we oppose a further increase in the federal gas tax.

That’s good, though repealing the tax would be even better.

Amtrak is an extremely expensive railroad for the American taxpayers, who must subsidize every ticket. The federal government should allow private ventures to provide passenger service in the northeast corridor.

All this sounds good, but it’s a bit vacuous. There should be an explicit commitment toend Amtrak subsidies.

We reaffirm our intention to end federal support for boondoggles like California’s high-speed train to nowhere.

A welcome commitment, though it should be extended to all transportation projects.

We should reduce the occupational licensing laws that shut untold millions of potential workers out of entrepreneurial careers.

This is largely a problem caused by state and local governments, but it’s nonetheless nice to see a statement of support for much-needed change.

We must overturn the regulatory nightmare, created by the Dodd-Frank law, for the community banks and savings and loans that provide nearly half of all small-business loans and over three-quarters of all agricultural loans.

Maybe I’m being paranoid, but where’s the language explicitly calling for repeal of the Dodd-Frank bailout bill?

The taxpayers spend an average of $35,000 a year per employee on non-cash benefits, triple the average non-cash compensation of the average worker in the private sector. Federal employees receive extraordinary pension benefits and vacation time wildly out of line with those of the private sector. We urge Congress to bring federal compensation and benefits in line with the standards of most American employees.

Federal bureaucrats are overcompensated, so it goes without saying (though I’m still glad they said it) that costs should be contained.

We must impose firm caps on future debt… A strong economy is one key to debt reduction, but spending restraint is a necessary component that must be vigorously pursued.

Capping debt is fine. Capping spending would be far better.

The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and the Foreign Bank and Asset Reporting Requirements result in government’s warrantless seizure of personal financial information without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. …FATCA not only allows “unreasonable search and seizures” but also threatens the ability of overseas Americans to lead normal lives. We call for its repeal and for a change to residency-based taxation for U.S. citizens overseas.

Unambiguous opposition to FATCA is great, but it’s also big news that the GOP wants territorial taxation for labor income.

We call on Congress and state legislatures to enact reforms to protect law-abiding citizens against abusive asset forfeiture tactics.

Civil asset forfeiture is abusive by definition. Repeal the laws entirely.

The Constitution gives the federal government very few powers, and they are specifically enumerated… In obedience to that principle, we condemn the current Administration’s unconstitutional expansion into areas beyond those specifically enumerated.

This is true, but it’s too bad Republicans aren’t serious about this plank.

We oppose any carbon tax.

Good. It’s never a good idea to give politicians a new source of tax revenue.

The Republican path to fiscal sanity and economic expansion begins with a constitutional requirement for a federal balanced budget.

At the risk of being repetitive, spending caps are better.

We support the following test: Is a particular expenditure within the constitutional scope of the federal government? If not, stop it. Has it been effective in the past and is it still absolutely necessary? If not, end it. Is it so important as to justify borrowing, especially foreign borrowing, to fund it? If not, kill it.

If GOPers were serious about this part of the platform, this would put them on record to abolish 90 percent of the federal government.

Impose no changes for persons 55 or older. Give others the option of traditional Medicare or transition to a premium-support model designed to strengthen patient choice, promote cost-saving competition among providers, and better guard against the fraud and abuse that now diverts billions of dollars every year away from patient care.

To their credit (and notwithstanding Trump’s unserious approach to the issue), Republicans still embrace the right type of Medicare reform.

We applaud the Republican governors and state legislators who have undertaken the hard work of modernizing Medicaid. We will give them a free hand to do so by block-granting the program without strings.

It’s also good to see support for the right kind of Medicaid reform.

…all options should be considered to preserve Social Security. As Republicans, we oppose tax increases and believe in the power of markets to create wealth and to help secure the future of our Social Security system.

This is vacuous language, though at least it provides an indirect endorsement of personal retirement accounts. Though I don’t want “all options” on the table since that could be construed to include tax hikes.

We support reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 which prohibits commercial banks from engaging in high-risk investment.

What?!? This is the most disappointing and economically illiterate part of the GOP platform.

…the Constitution gives [the federal government] no role in education.

True, so why don’t Republicans explicitly call for abolishing the Department of Education?

We agree with the four dissenting judges of the Supreme Court: “In our view, the entire Act before us is invalid in its entirety.” It must be removed and replaced with an approach based on genuine competition, patient choice, excellent care, wellness, and timely access to treatment.

Nice, though remember that repealing Obamacare is just the first step if you want a genuine market-based healthcare sector.

We propose to end tax discrimination against the individual purchase of insurance and allow consumers to buy insurance across state lines.

I like the latter part about breaking down the government-imposed barriers to interstate commerce, but I worry the part about tax discrimination is so vague it could be used to expand tax preferences when the real goal should be to get rid of the healthcare exclusion.

The FDA has slowly but relentlessly changed into an agency that more and more puts the public health at risk by delaying, chilling, and killing the development of new devices, drugs and biologics that can promote our lives and our health.

This is correct, but it would be nice to see specific reforms.

We commend those states that have passed Right to Try legislation, allowing terminally ill patients the right to try investigational medicines not yet approved by the FDA. We urge Congress to pass federal legislation to give all Americans with terminal illnesses the right to try.

This is a very good idea. If I ever have a deadly illness, I’ll want the freedom to roll the dice in hopes a new medicine or procedure will work.

Two grave problems undermine the rule of law on the federal level: Over-criminalization and over-federalization. In the first case, Congress and federal agencies have increased the number of criminal offenses in the U.S. Code from 3,000 in the early 1980s to more than 4,500 today. That does not include an estimated 300,000 regulations containing criminal penalties. …We urge Congress to codify the Common Law’s Rule of Lenity, which requires courts to interpret unclear statutes in favor of a defendant.

If bigwigs like Hillary Clinton can get away with violating very clear-cut national security laws because she didn’t intend to do damage to the nation, then ordinary people surely should get the benefit of the doubt as well when they inadvertently violate some complicated law or regulation.

…we oppose any form of Global Tax.

Amen. Now let’s see if Republicans put our money where their mouths are and defund pro-tax international bureaucracies such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Let’s wrap this up. There are more policies that could be addressed, but this column already is too long.

The bottom line is that the platform has many good policies. Heck, if I though GOP politicians actually planned to pursue the agenda outlined in the document, I might consider becoming a Republican.

But does anybody think the average Republican politician even knows what is in the GOP platform? More importantly, does anyone think that Donald Trump has any commitment to the policies in the platform?

So now perhaps you can understand why advocates of small government sympathize with Uncle Sam in this cartoon.

Is it Tweedledee and Tweedledum, or the other way around?

Last time, CATO economist Dan Mitchell reviewed

Elections

Democratic President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, left, and a supporter of Bernie Sanders, right, at the Democratic National Convention at the Wells Fargo Arena in Philadelphia. (Photos: AP)

Democratic President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, left, and a supporter of Bernie Sanders, right, at the Democratic National Convention at the Wells Fargo Arena in Philadelphia. (Photos: AP)

Some two dozen former Bernie Sanders campaign staffers wrote an open letter asking him to reconsider joining a united Green Party ticket with Jill Stein. In a letter signed by 23 of regional field directors, voter outreach and field organizers who previously supported Sen. Sanders, the staffers

“Polls show that Hillary Clinton, the official Democratic nominee, is an incredibly weak candidate in the general election,” the staffers wrote. “Even after spending $57 million in ads (vs. $4 million by Trump) she is trailing slightly, and Trump is actually leading in several important swing states. Frankly, Hillary Clinton does not have the credibility to take on the dangerous appeal of Donald Trump.”

The open letter comes only a few short days after Mrs. Clinton accepted the Democratic nomination for president. While her supporters were drowning out the remaining anti-Hillary delegates who didn’t have their credential revoked by the DNC with chants of “Hillary,” the first woman ever to secure a major party’s nomination for president still hasn’t won over a large wing of her party amid an embarrassing scandal that caused a political uproar ahead of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.

Sen. Sanders was booed twice for mentioning the former secretary of state’s name at the convention and did his best to unify a fractured party, even passing out notes to his delegates asking them not to boo or stage a walk out. Mrs. Clinton even tried to thank Sen. Bernie Sanders and call for unity from his supporters.

“Bernie, your campaign inspired millions of Americans, particularly the young people who threw their hearts and souls into our primary. You’ve put economic and social justice issues front and center, where they belong,” she said. “And to all of your supporters here and around the country: I want you to know, I’ve heard you. Your cause is our cause.”

However, it was those very supporters who were mocked and criticized by top officials in emails leaked by the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks. The roughly 20,000 emails revealed both anti-Sanders bias at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and collusion between the DNC and so-called “mainstream” media new outlets, such as The Washington Post, Politico and even NBC News.

The scandalous leaks resulted in the ouster of DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was replaced by Donna Brazile, a longtime ally of the Clintons who served as interim chair when Tim Kaine (VP nominee) decided to run for the U.S. Senate in Virginia. However, in what many saw to be a tone deaf move for someone trying to reach out to Sanders’ voters, Mrs. Clinton hired Schultz to be her campaign’s 50-state chair.

Further, in the WikiLeaks DNC emails, Brazile called Sen. Sanders “stupid” for endorsing Wasserman Schultz’s primary opponent.

“For a variety of reasons, many justified and some not, people don’t trust her. We are now faced with two of the most disliked presidential candidates in the history of the country,” the letter reads. “Unfortunately, too many people are disillusioned with politics and the lack of inspiring viable candidates will only hurt voter turnout. If there was ever an opportunity to break the corporate two party duopoly, this is it. So, we respectfully ask you to consider Jill Stein’s offer of a united Green Party ticket.”

The staffers aren’t the only former Sanders supporters turning to Dr. Stein in the wake of Mrs. Clinton’s nomination. According to the People’s Pundit Daily U.S. Presidential Election Daily Tracking Poll, a significant number of the Vermont socialist’s supporters say they will now back Dr. Stein in November. She has reached her highest level of support in the poll to date and Mr. Trump maintains a roughly 5 point lead.

Some two dozen former Bernie Sanders campaign

Polls

U.S. Presidential Election Daily Tracking Poll results for July 29, 2016.

Donald Trump holds a roughly 5-point lead over Hillary Clinton two days after the Democratic National Convention. The People’s Pundit Daily Presidential Election Daily Tracking Poll finds Mr. Trump at 47.6% to 42.1% for Mrs. Clinton, a lead that is largely fueled by a greater consolidation of the Republican base and a lead among independent voters.

Perhaps the biggest story regarding the post convention polling data is the shift toward Green Party candidate Dr. Jill Stein and the collapse of Libertarian Party candidate, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson.

On July 19, the first day of the Republican convention, Gov. Johnson enjoyed roughly 9% support in the 4-way matchup, and Dr. Stein was polling at an usually high 3% (her support has ranged from 1% to 3%). Now, no doubt a result of the embarrassing WikiLeak release of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee, Dr. Stein has increased to her highest level of support to date (4.3%).

Meanwhile, the decline of Mrs. Clinton’s support began even before the conventions began, with voters turning markedly more negative in their views toward the former secretary of state in light of the statements made by FBI Director James Comey. She has struggled to recover ever since and would likely be far higher if a significant number of her own party wasn’t opting for Dr. Stein, Gov. Johnson and even Mr. Trump.

Mr. Trump is drawing more Democrats (17%) than Mrs. Clinton is drawing from Republicans (9%).

Also worth noting, Mr. Trump was fairly successful at rehabilitating his image among a large number of voters who previously held a less favorable view of him, while views of Mrs. Clinton changed almost immeasurably after the convention.

One of the most praised speeches at the DNC was given by President Barack Obama, who has enjoyed historically high approval ratings in his final year. This week, the numbers got slightly negative with 46% approving and 48% disapproving. As we’ve repeatedly found, the intensity as measured by the percentage of those who say they disapprove or approve “a great deal,” is disproportionately against the president.

Only 16.7% say they approve of the president “a great deal,” while 38.2% say they disapprove with the same intensity.

Much has been made about the contrasting views of the state of the union and level of trust in government coming out of the two parties’ conventions. Overall, most Americans believe that Mr. Trump is telling the truth about corruption and the government being broken, though his supporters are more likely to hold more negative views than Mrs. Clinton’s voters.

When asked, “How much does the national government care about what people like you think?” 47.6% say “Once in a while” and 38.1% say “Never.” Still, even half of Mrs. Clinton’s voters agree with one of those assessments, while the other half says “Most of the time” (20%) or “About half the time” (30%).

When asked, “How often does the federal government do what most Americans want it to do?” 34.8% of Trump voters say “Never” and 47.8% say “Once in a while.” That compares to only 8.3% of Clinton voters who say “Never,” though a significant number (41.7%) say “Once in a while.”

The Electorate

Gauging the likelihood of voting and past voting behavior, we have estimated the current electorate to be 46.15% men and 53.85% women, which one would expect to bode well for Mrs. Clinton. However, Rust Belt and New England suburban women have begun to warm up to Mr. Trump, despite what I personally believed to be a decent job by Democrats at their convention to reach out to them.

In terms of enthusiasm, Trump voters are measurably more excited heading into November than Clinton voters. Roughly 59% of Trump voters say they are “extremely enthusiastic” and 27% say they are “very enthusiastic,” juxtaposed to just 50% and 20%, respectively, saying the same about the Democratic nominee. Voters 18 to 29 years old are the least enthusiastic about the November election, while

The decrease in Mr. Trump’s margin is also somewhat reflective of the increased number of respondents who identify as Democrats. More voters than ever before self-identify as independent (32.8%), while 29.9% identify as Democrat and 27.9% as Republican.

The People’s Pundit Daily U.S. Presidential Election Daily Tracking Poll results are based on 3,056 interviews from 7/22/2016 to 7/29/16 (95% confidence interval), are weighted based on demographics from the U.S. Census Current Population Survey and based on a likely voter model.

Donald Trump holds a 5-point lead over

Politics

Donald J. Trump, right, addresses the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, while Hillary Clinton, left, addresses the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. (Photos: AP/Reuters)

Donald J. Trump, right, addresses the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, while Hillary Clinton, left, addresses the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. (Photos: AP/Reuters)

The media made a big deal about viewership of the Democratic National Convention edging out the Republican National Convention in the first few days. But in the end, more Americans watched Donald Trump deliver his speech to the Republican National Convention than Hillary Clinton deliver hers at the Democratic National Convention.

Nielsen said in their report an estimated 30 million people tuned in to watch the final night of the 2016 Democratic National Convention on Thursday, July 28. Day four of the convention featured Mrs. Clinton formally accepting her nomination as the 2016 Democratic Presidential Candidate.

Sum of Networks Live + Same Day
Day 1-July 25, 2016 Day 2-July 26, 2016 Day 3-July 27, 2016 Day 4-July 28, 2016
Rating Number of Viewers Rating Number of Viewers Rating Number of Viewers Rating Number of Viewers
All Households 16.6 19,379,000 16.2 18,759,000 15.8 18,261,000 18.7 21,650,000
Persons 2+ 8.7 25,952,000 8.4 24,708,000 8.3 24,431,000 10.0 29,803,000
Persons 18-34 3.5 2,418,000 3.1 2,017,000 3.1 2,166,000 4.6 3,197,000
Persons 35-54 8.8 7,032,000 8.0 6,369,000 8.3 6,540,000 10.1 8,143,000
Persons 55+

“In terms of the social nature of the convention, 2.8 million Tweets were sent by 583,000 people in the U.S. about the fourth night of the Democratic National Convention,” according to Nielsen Social. “Twitter activity spiked at 11:18 p.m. ET, when 23,400 Tweets were sent in one minute during Hillary Clinton’s acceptance speech.”

However, Neilson estimated 32.2 million people tuned in to watch the final night of the 2016 Republican National Convention on Thursday, July 21, topping Mrs. Clinton’s viewership by more than 2 million. Day four of the convention featured Donald Trump formally accepting his nomination as the 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate. Worth noting, the Trump Convention also topped the Romney Convention by more than 2 million on both the third and fourth days.

Sum of Networks Live + Same Day
Day 1-July 18, 2016 Day 2-July 19, 2016 Day 3-July 20, 2016 Day 4-July 21, 2016
Rating Number of Viewers Rating Number of Viewers Rating Number of Viewers Rating Number of Viewers
All Households 14.8 17,243,000 12.7 14,841,000 15.0 17,494,000 20.2 23,488,000
Persons 2+ 7.8 23,019,000 6.7 19,754,000 7.9 23,371,000 10.8 32,202,000
Persons 18-34 2.8 1,924,000 2.1 1,460,000 2.5 1,693,000 4.0 2,785,000
Persons 35-54 7.4 5,915,000 5.9 4,731,000 7.1 5,644,000 10.7 8,515,000
Persons 55+ 16.

“In terms of the social nature of the convention, 2.0 million Tweets were sent by 470,000 people in the U.S. about the fourth night of the “Republican National Convention,” according to Nielsen Social. “Twitter activity spiked at 10:48 p.m. ET, when 16,100 Tweets were sent in one minute during Donald Trump’s acceptance speech.”

More Americans watched Donald Trump at the

Video

[brid video=”56171″ player=”2077″ title=”Ghetto Thugs Threaten to Kill Trump Wage War for Food Stamps”]

WARNING, EXPLICIT LANGUAGE: Hillary Clinton said during her acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia that she doesn’t “want to take your guns away,” she only wants to make sure you don’t get shot by someone who “had no business having a gun in the first place.” She said the U.S. needs to pass “common sense” gun reform because the police are “outgunned” in the streets of U.S. cities.

But, as we’ve repeatedly reported, those who “outgun” the police are not purchasing illegal or legal firearms through the straw man in another pro-gun state. And no amount of gun control laws are going to curb gun violence. The reality is far, far less comfortable to talk about. So, cowardly politicians blame someone or something else.

Wearing gold chains around their necks and carrying expensive illegal weapons, ghetto thugs threaten to kill Donald Trump if he tries to take away their food stamps.

Wearing gold chains around their necks and

US

San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman speaks to reporters amid the shooting of two police officers at a traffic stop. (Photo: Courtesy of the San Diego Police Department via Twitter)

San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman speaks to reporters amid the shooting of two police officers at a traffic stop. (Photo: Courtesy of the San Diego Police Department via Twitter)

Two San Diego police officers were shot after a driver they stopped Thursday night opened fire, killing one and severely wounding the other. The officer was taken into surgery and the police department said in a statement he is expected to survive.

“Chief Shelley Zimmerman just left the hospital where our second Officer has just come out of surgery,” the San Diego Police Department said in a statement on social media. “He is expected to survive!”

Officials said the shooter was arrested and they were not pursuing any other suspects. Neither the police officers’ names or the alleged gunman’s identity were immediately released.

The shooting comes as law officers around the country are on alert following the targeted killing of numerous officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this month. Five Dallas police officers were targeted and killed on July 7 by an alleged New Black Panther Party member during a Black Lives Matter protest, and three Baton Rouge law enforcement officers were targeted and killed by a gunman on July 16.

Statistics show the number of police officers killed in the line of duty had been on a downward trajectory since 1970. But this year, cop deaths are up more than 50 percent, and the victims in Dallas, Baton Rouge and other cases were targeted for assassination rather than killed in the process of confronting dangerous criminals.

According to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, the number of officers fatally shot is already up 56 percent compared with last year.

Two San Diego police officers were shot

US

Gov-Rick-Scott-JAX-Chamber-Luncheon-6-5-2015

Gov. Rick Scott attends the JAXUSA luncheon at the Jacksonville Chamber of Commerce on June 5, 2015. (Photo: Carolyn Allen)

Florida Gov. Rick Scott has confirmed the first case of the Zika virus has been found to be transmitted via infected mosquitoes within the state of Florida, marking the first in the U.S. The outbreak has infected at least four people through local transmission, Florida officials said Friday.

“We learned today that four people in our state likely have the Zika virus as a result of a mosquito bite,” Gov. Scott said in a statement. “All four of these people live in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties and the Florida Department of Health believes that active transmissions of this virus could be occurring in one small area in Miami.”

The exact location is within the boundaries of the following area: NW 5th Avenue to the west, US 1 to the east, NW/NE 38th Street to the north and NW/NE 20th Street to the south. This area is about 1 square mile.

“This means Florida has become the first state in our nation to have local transmission of the Zika virus,” he added Friday.

Until now, there were zero locally acquired mosquito-borne cases reported within the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Travel-associated cases accounted for 1,657 of the 1,658 total reported, including 15 being sexually transmitted, with the other being laboratory acquired (1) and the result of Guillain-Barré syndrome (5). Locally acquired cases reported in U.S. territories outside the Continental United States (CONUS) have now reached 4,750.

In June, the Florida Department of Health confirmed a Haitian national who immigrated solely to give birth did so to the first baby born with Zika-related microcephaly in the state. The mother was infected with the Zika virus in Haiti before she was allowed to travel to the United States, specifically the state of Florida.

Microcephaly is a neurological condition where a baby’s head is much smaller than expected and can occur because a baby’s brain has not developed properly during pregnancy or has stopped growing after birth, which results in a smaller head size. As a lifelong condition, there is no known cure or standard treatment for microcephaly.

Babies born with the disease have a series of lifelong problems, including developmental delay, intellectual disability, problems with movement and balance, hearing loss and vision problems. All of the problems require significant treatments as it relates to the cost of health care, which the U.S. taxpayer will have to pick up.

Gov. Scott directed the Florida DOH to activate the Joint Information Center (JIC) within the State Emergency Operations Center to ensure impacted areas have coordinated access to information and resources. As part of this effort, the governor directed DOH to contract with commercial pest control companies to enhance and expand mosquito mitigation and abatement, including increased spraying, in the impacted areas.

“We know this virus is most detrimental to expecting mothers. If you are pregnant or thinking of becoming pregnant and live in the impacted area, I urge you to contact your OB/GYN for guidance and to receive a Zika Prevention kit,” Gov. Scott said. “I also ask every Floridian to take proper precautions by eliminating any standing water and wearing insect repellent.”

The Zika virus typically causes a mild rash, fever and joint pain. While only one in five people infected with the virus are symptomatic, the virus can cause serious problems for pregnant women.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott has confirmed the

Economy

consumer sentiment men shopping

Shoppers at Third Street Promenade outdoor shopping mall on August 17, 2012 in Santa Monica, California. (Photo: Reuters)

The Surveys of Consumers, a closely-watched gauge of consumer sentiment from the University of Michigan, fell more than the median forecast in July to 90.0. The survey declined from June’s reading of 93.5 and the median economic forecast called for a reading of 90.5 for the month.

“Although confidence strengthened in late July, for the month as a whole the Sentiment Index was still below last month’s level mainly due to increased concerns about economic prospects among upper income households,” Surveys of Consumers chief economist, Richard Curtin said. “The Brexit vote was spontaneously mentioned by record numbers of households with incomes in the top third (23%), more than twice as frequently as among households with incomes in the bottom two-thirds (11%).”

The many “experts” had fear-mongered ahead of the Brexit vote, which now is widely seen as having a mild short-term impact.

“Given the prompt rebound in stock prices as well as the tiny direct impact on U.S. trade, it is surprising that concerns about Brexit remained nearly as high in late July as immediately following the Brexit vote,” Curtain added. “While concerns about Brexit are likely to quickly recede, weaker prospects for the economy are likely to remain. Uncertainties surrounding global economic prospects and the presidential election will keep consumers more cautious in their expectations for future economic growth. Based on the strength in personal finances and low interest rates, real consumer spending is now expected to rise by 2.6% through mid 2017.”

Final Survey of Consumers Results for Consumer Sentiment in July 2016

Jul Jun Jul M-M Y-Y
2016 2016 2015 Change Change
Index of Consumer Sentiment 90.0 93.5 93.1 -3.7% -3.3%
Current Economic Conditions 109.0 110.8 107.2 -1.6% +1.7%
Index of Consumer Expectations 77.8 82.4 84.1 -5.6% -7.5%

The Surveys of Consumers, a closely-watched gauge

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial

Subscribe