海角大神

The聽breathlessly-hyped debate between President Obama and Governor Romney left me with an empty feeling. There were many words鈥搊h,聽there were words鈥� but even the most聽casual聽observer of the campaign has heard most of them before.

Yet聽when it comes to economic policy, 聽I learned almost nothing new about how either Romney or Obama would govern over the next four years. The president broke no new ground at all.聽The governor had a few new things to say,聽but in a way that tells us less, not more, about his agenda.

There were lots of recycled charges: Obama again insisting that the average middle-class family 鈥渨ould pay鈥� $2,000 more under聽as if that were his proposal. Romney blaming Obama for last year鈥檚 increases in private insurance premiums. 聽And there was plenty of wonky wandering into the weeds of legislation.

Btw, do either of these guys think the average voter has any idea what a Dodd-Frank is?

But for all that, neither candidate told us anything we did not already know about what he鈥檇 do as president over the next four years. 聽As far as I could tell, Obama did not advance the ball on a聽.聽 He said nothing that was not in his convention acceptance speech a month ago.

By contrast, Romney did say some new things. But they served to further obfuscate, rather than clarify, his real agenda.

For example, earlier this week, Romney floated the idea of capping tax deductions at $17,000 as a way to help pay for his promised 20 percent across-the-board rate cut and his proposed repeal of the estate tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax.

That was interesting, and more specific than he has been. But no sooner had the Tax Policy Center and others tried to figure out what it might mean, Romney changed up. In the debate, he mused about capping deductions, not at $17,000, but at $25,000 or $50,000. This is no trivial difference.

A moment later聽he said he might not do this at all but, rather, target specific聽deductions. So what is Romney鈥檚 tax plan? We still have no idea.

Similarly, the governor聽repeated his vow that his tax rate cuts聽would not add to the deficit. And he said high-income households would pay the same share of taxes as they do today. And middle-income people would pay less.

So, how will he finance the rate cuts?聽The聽poor could pay more, I suppose, though that鈥檚 unlikely. The only other solution:聽The tax cuts would have to pay for themselves by generating a huge increase in economic growth. But these聽big supply-side effects are implausible at best.

On the spending side, Romney only added to his list of programs that would be exempt from budget cuts. Not only would defense spending be saved, and not only would Medicare cuts in the Affordable Care Act be reversed, but tonight Romney told us he would not cut spending for education.

For specific programs on Romney鈥檚聽chopping block, we remain left with only public broadcasting (Big Bird burgers, anyone) and the 2010 health law (which the Congressional Budget Office聽says would actually reduce the deficit, thanks in part to its tax hikes)

So how would Romney cut the deficit he says would crush future generations? I still have no idea. How would he pay for his tax cuts? I know less now than I did before the debate.

Policy wonks have been arguing for a substantive debate. Well, they got wonky details, all right. What they did not get was much useful information about how either Romney or Obama would govern. More importantly, real people learned little about what either man would do to fix the still-troubled economy.

Lots of words, to be sure. But precious little new information.