February 11, 2003

Andrew Sullivan Admits Paul Krugman Was Right All Along

If Paul Krugman had written this, I would have said that it is a little harsh and over-the-top. But it's from Andrew Sullivan, who has finally woken up to the fact that Paul Krugman has been right all the time in his harsh judgments of Bush Administration economic policy:


www.AndrewSullivan.com - Daily Dish: ...BUSH'S ACHILLES HEEL: It's the economy, smarty-pants... the explosive rate of current government spending... the president's utter insouciance about how to pay for it... his latest budget removes any [excuse for giving him the benefit of the doubt]... worse than Reagan... ratcheting up discretionary spending... no signs whatever of adjusting to meet the hole he and the Republican Congress are putting in the national debt... illiterate flimflam.... But as the tables in the budget also showed, the tax cuts have also contributed significantly to the deficit - and they've barely taken effect yet... staggered that the budget does not contain any mention of the looming war. I guess you could make a semantic point about its not being inevitable - but not even as a possible contingency? Is that how an ordinary citizen plans his own budget?... an awful legacy in the making. In the first three years of Bush's presidency, Chapman notes, non-defense discretionary government spending will have gone up an inflation-adjusted 18 percent.... But what really bugs me is that the president doesn't seem to give a damn... he told us last year that deficits would be temporary... this year... well he didn't say anything... Even after the last two years of budget-busting recklessness, he's still proposing spending increases far higher than the rate of inflation.... DEBT BE DAMNED: Then again, he might say: I'm deliberately creating new deficits because they're the only long-term way to keep domestic spending under control. But what this amounts to is saying I'm going to spend your hard-earned money now in order to persuade other people to stop spending your hard-earned money later. What other people? You're the government, Mr President. And your party controls all of Congress. There's no way you can pass the buck for plunging the next generation into debt... while blaming someone else... So why the flim-flam?...

Posted by DeLong at February 11, 2003 03:14 PM | TrackBack
Comments

Well, this is exactly why most people tune out... There is more concern about "Nah-nah, he's wrong" or "Ha ha, I'm right," than actually getting sound policies to run the country.

How is Krugman right? Didn't he support the Fed cutting interest rates to their current lows, to prevent Japanese-stype deflation? Where has that led us, but to a housing bubble - and isn't that probably the single biggest problem we have with the economy? OK, so he supports (I guess) a balanced budget. Great, so do I. Does that mean Andrew Sullivan admits that Andrew Boucher was right all along?

Posted by: Andrew Boucher on February 12, 2003 02:55 AM

Brad, any way to move the previous comments on Mrs. Sullivan, Greenspan, and Machiavelli over to the new postings, or do we have to shift back and forth?

Posted by: andres on February 12, 2003 08:34 AM

I guess a dash more of unemployement, especially in the areas with the highest housing costs will be a tonic for the housing bubble.

That said, it is possible that Andrew Boucher was right all along. But what did he propose?

Posted by: Piotr Berman on February 12, 2003 10:53 AM

I totally agree with Mr. Boucher, there is entirely too much name calling and finger pointing among the "top economists." They are too concerned with pointing out who made a mistake, who is contradicting themselves, and how much smarter they are than their counterparts. They continually use their portals of media to discredit others. I am not an economics expert, nor do I claim to be, but I do have this advice for those who do. You discredit yourself when you continue to act as children and only discuss the mistakes of others. You have all been right at times and you have all been wrong at times; however, our economy is in a state of despair, and the only people that can claim to be of help are those people who propose or even attempt to propose ideas that will help. Until you have something worthwhile to offer, keep your snide remarks/opinions to yourself for they do not help matters at all. If you simply need reassurance, do it on your own time, but don't belittle us by pretending your making a difference when all you have to offer is no more than a biased opinion. We want results, which true experts can give.

Posted by: Jennifer on February 20, 2003 09:07 AM

I totally agree with Mr. Boucher, there is entirely too much name calling and finger pointing among the "top economists." They are too concerned with pointing out who made a mistake, who is contradicting themselves, and how much smarter they are than their counterparts. They continually use their portals of media to discredit others. I am not an economics expert, nor do I claim to be, but I do have this advice for those who do. You discredit yourself when you continue to act as children and only discuss the mistakes of others. You have all been right at times and you have all been wrong at times; however, our economy is in a state of despair, and the only people that can claim to be of help are those people who propose or even attempt to propose ideas that will help. Until you have something worthwhile to offer, keep your snide remarks/opinions to yourself for they do not help matters at all. If you simply need reassurance, do it on your own time, but don't belittle us by pretending your making a difference when all you have to offer is no more than a biased opinion. We want results, which true experts can give.

Posted by: Jennifer on February 20, 2003 09:08 AM
Post a comment