Stop making sense!

Nick Confessore's right, this is the funniest article on economic policy to be found in print this year!

Throughout a two-day conference on the economy, President Bush and his allies extolled the virtues of his tax cuts and "pro-growth" policies, which they said have lifted the nation from recession and propelled it well above its international economic competitors. If Washington adheres to the path of fiscal restraint while following the president's tax prescriptions, it was suggested, policymakers could secure powerful economic growth far into the future.

Yet when the subject turned to the nation's legal or Social Security systems, the picture grew suddenly dark. Frivolous lawsuits have hobbled America's businesses and have put them at the mercy of their enlightened overseas competition, administration officials said. As for federal entitlements, a rising tide of retiring baby boomers will inevitably slow economic growth and bankrupt Social Security.

"The crisis is now," Bush warned in his closing speech.

Such contradictions emerged repeatedly, pointing up the delicate balancing act that Bush faces as he tries to sell his economic proposals. On tax changes, the president must convince constituents that four years of tax cutting has worked so well in promoting economic growth that his tax policies should be not just continued but enhanced. The cuts of his first term should be made permanent, the president says, while the broader tax code must be changed further to cut taxes on savings and investment.

But Bush must also convince lawmakers that no matter what they do to spur growth through tax changes, the future will remain dire for the U.S. legal and Social Security systems.

"I'm frankly somewhat skeptical of this vision that we all have" of an aging work force cutting economic growth, James Glassman, J.P. Morgan Chase's senior U.S. economist, told the president in one of the few discordant notes of the conference. "If you think about it, we've been growing 3.5 percent to 4 percent per year since the Civil War. If we can match that performance in the next 50 years -- and I don't see why that's so hard to do -- then I think the fiscal challenge that we see in our mind's eye will be a lot less daunting than is commonly understood."

Here's my favorite.

"The economy is in good shape. Employment is rising. Inflation is low. Our growth rate is nearly 4 percent, twice the rates of Europe and Japan," Harvard University economist Martin Feldstein said to open the conference Wednesday.

"The cost of litigation in America makes it more difficult for us to compete with nations in Europe," Bush said four hours later.

What a clown show. The whole article is worth reading.

Look, I have no trouble with debating the merits of a program created in the 1930s -- whether to leave it alone, make minor changes, or overhaul it completely. But how can we even have that debate if 1.) opponents of Social Security refuse to admit they want to do away with it, and 2.) refuse to admit to an honest appraisal of the program's health, 3.) refuse to say how they'll pay for benefits when $2 trillion is sucked out of the program to create private accounts, and 4.) refuse to say what they're plan even is?

I know, I know, it's asking a lot for Bush and his Ekonomik Klown Posse to engage in honest debate, but until they do, we don't have any choice but to match Bush's threats of "Crisis" with equally vivid portrayals of seniors trying to survive when they're forced to retire in the midst of a bear market.