Krugman: White House Excluding "Progressive-Economist Wing"

Newsweek's Michael Hirsch profiled Joseph Stiglitz for next week's magazine, asking why a world-renowned economist who predicted the financial crisis has been left out of the administration.

[W]hile he may be a Nobel laureate, in Washington he's seen as just another economic critic--and not always a welcome one. Few Americans recognize his name, and fewer still would recognize the man, who is short and stocky and bears a faint resemblance to Mel Brooks. Yet Stiglitz's work is cited by more economists than anyone else's in the world, according to data compiled by the University of Connecticut. And when he goes abroad--to Europe, Asia, and Latin America--he is received like a superstar, a modern-day oracle. [...]

While he had no great desire to go back into government, friends say he was deeply disappointed when an offer didn't come from Obama last fall. Not surprisingly, Stiglitz believes his old rival was behind it, though Summers denies this.

In a blog post Sunday morning, Paul Krugman said Hirsch "somewhat misses the point." It's not that Stiglitz is being excluded because of his criticism and his tendentious relationship with some Obama officials, Krugman says. Rather, an entire economic perspective is lacking in the White House.

[T]he larger story is the absence of a progressive-economist wing. A lot of people supported Obama over Clinton in the primaries because they thought Clinton would bring back the Rubin team; and what Obama has done is ... bring back the Rubin team. [...]

I think the real story is more about excluded points of view than excluded people.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[hotwire]

Looks like someones going to put the strong arm on pauly, again. Get him to toe the party line. He just doesn't seem to know whose in charge here.

[mozara]

Goldman Sachs?

[pragmaticdallasite]

We had the Audacity to Hope........ now we're Hoping for more Audacity.

[OhComeOnNow]

Good one!

[scoops2]

pragmaticdallasite I'm a Fan of pragmaticdallasite I'm a fan of this user permalink
So have we never had prosperous times in this country while the Fed has been around?


no, all prosperous times can be connected to massive individual debt. WE live in debt. Our wealth is based on value, It is not real.

[pragmaticdallasite]

My point is that existence of the Fed and broadly shared economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive

[scoops2]

There is no need for the fed, gov'ts only need a treasury.

[pragmaticdallasite]

I agree the Fed is a problem, but it's not the magic solution.

[madatnewsmedia]

Well, since you don't think there's a place for government, what would you suggest to bring us out of this recession? Bush didn't give a damn about the little man; he only cared for people like himself! the government isn't a magic bullet, but it's all we have right now! Nothing else has worked and the folks who were supposed to keep this country moving, only kept draining this country of all its assets!

[flossophy]

Well, look at the massive growth in prosperity when we didn't have the Fed...

After we established the Fed (in 1913) things hummed along nicely through the 20's. But it only took about 4 years (from 1926 when Benjamin Strong d|ed) for it to cause the mar`ket cr`ash of 29... It was a completely avoidable cr`ash.

Think of all the misery that ensued after it.

The Fed has the worst track record of any institution on the planet.

[hotwire]

Bingo!

[Dr. Sam]

FINAL CORRECTIONS, please, please, please--bear with me:

Summers and Geithner are so closely tied to Wall Street that in another circumstance, their involvement in major decisions about the economy—banking, financial institutions, regulation of wall Street, bail out of Wall Street, and more—would be called out because of conflict of interest! Their advice to the President is ultimately tented and perhaps likely self-serving. Indeed they might be taking advantage of a President who is a novice in complecated financial dealings and discourses, as such subject to manipulation. In such a circusmstance, it is not unthinkable that they would try to use the President to further their goals and to enrich their friends in Wall Street. Summers is hoping as well to be eventually appointed chairman of the Federal Researve Bank. Paul Krugman, on the other hand, has no axe to grind. He says it like it is. He is much more intellectually honest and much less of an empire builder. He is indeed a true friend of humanity--and not consumed in anyway by the curse of selfish individualism. President Obama will continue to ignore him to his ultimate detriment.

[ChristianEcon.com]

scoops2 "We have never had a free market in america."
===

But the more we have, the worse things get. Unless you're superrich, and even then it's an unsustainable system. It doesn't have to be an absolute to measure its destructiveness.

[scoops2]

It is sustainable if there is FAILURE. The ultimate regulator. Big corporations cannot sustain themselves in a true free market.

[ChristianEcon.com]

Neither can the people doing all the work, is the problem.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=69

[scoops2]

TJCole I'm a Fan of TJCole I'm a fan of this user permalink
Leftists founded America...!


WRONG

Libertarians founded america. They were all against big gov't beauracracy's.

[jozzie]

Actually, you're closer to the facts. But there was no "left" back then as we know it now. There were no "progressives" as we know them now. This country was founded during a certain era and age. You can't define then with now.

[scoops2]

good point. But libertarians have been consistant about keeping gov't as small as possible.

[TJCole]

There were no human beings more "Left" than those who started and fought our Revolution at the time...until the French Revolution of course...

They were the most radical individuals on earth at that time...

The entire concept of people governing themselves was a radical leftist concept, but not leftist in our definition today...

They were anti-authoritarian which can never be claimed by the right, who were the Tories...as they are today represented by Antoni Scalia most of all...

[flossophy]

True... but do you think the founding fathers saw s0cialism on the horizon? So they designed a system to be a buffer against it?

[kotexbarbie]

Doesn't the term "left" come from the French Revolution? Those politicians against the monarchy and for the people sat on the left of the King, while his loyalists sat on the right. (Left and right break down the same today -- left for the people. right for an aristocracy.) And Isn't the French Revolution and the Enlightenment the inspiration/foundation for our own Declaration and Constitution? Can't find anything more "left" than that.

[hotwire]

Sure we had a left back then, they were the Loyalists. They were in favor of high taxes, loyalty to the Crown and servitude of the people.

[HisPetGoat]

The founding principles were taken from humanism and social contract theory.

Locke, Hume, & Rousseau...

[GOBsaysCOMEON]

Although even Rousseau didn't intend social contract to extend this far. He meant in a smallish community where people know each other. Rousseau is constantly taken out of context. Social contract in general is.

[TJCole]

I love this, this is how I taught this stuff, getting others to think and consider these things...

[Dr. Sam]

CORRECTIONS, please:

Summers and Geithner are so closely tied to Wall Street that in another circumstance, their involvement in major decisions about the economy—banking, financial institutions, regulation of wall Street, bail out of Wall Street, and more—would be called out because of conflict of interest! Their advice to the President is ultimately tented and perhaps likely self-serving. Indeed they might be taking advantage of a President who is a novice in complecated financial dealings and discourses, as such subject to manipulatin. In such a circusmstance, it is not unthinkable that they would try to use the President to further their goals and to enrich their friends in Wall Street. Summers is hoping as well to be eventually appointed chairman of the Federal Researve Bank. Paul Krugman, on the other hand, has no axe to grind. He says it like it is. He is much more intellectually honest and much less of an empire builder. He is indeed a true friend of humanity--and not consumed in anyway by the curse of selfish individualism. President Obama will continue to ignore him to his ultimate detriment.

[jozzie]

More accurate: supplant the words Wall Street for Goldman Sachs.

[FatherKindly]

Correct. Let us not mince words.

[kotexbarbie]

At this point, is there a difference?

[scoops2]

all of these economists try to push their theory's on us. They all are theory's that are inside a FIXED ECONOMY. There is no gain for the people until the federal reserve is dismantled.

Think outside of the box.

[pragmaticdallasite]

So since the Fed has been around our economy has been a complete disaster?

[jekyll]

Only the Austrian economists advocate for the abolishment of the FED. What also is interesting is that it is the same economists who predicted the Great Depression and the current one. People need to start listening more closely to their ideology.

[ChristianEcon.com]

Austrian economists are just more free-market welfare-for-the-rich propagandists. The ultrarich are doing just fine, thank you. There are real problems to be solved.

[pragmaticdallasite]

And many progressive economists predicted it as well

[FatherKindly]

The Fed is not merely government in action, it is largely private and always has been with members coming from the banking community.

[Dr. Sam]

Summers and Geithner are so closely tied to Wall Street that in another circumstance, their involvement in major decisions about the economy—banking, financial institutions, regulation of wall Street, bail out of Wall Street, and more—would be called out because of conflict of interest! Their advice to the President is ultimately tented and perhaps likely self-serving. Indeed they might be taking advantage of a President who is a novice in complecated financial dealings and discourses, as such subject to manipulatin. In such a circusmstance, it is not unthinkable that they would try to use the President to further their goals and to enrich their friends in Wall Street. Summers is hoping as well to be eventually appointed chairman of the Federal Researve Bank. Paul Krugman, on the other hand, has no axe to grind. He says it like it is. He is much more intellectually honest and much less of an empire builder. He is indeed a true friend of humanity--and not consumed in anyway by the curse of selfish individualism. President Obama will continue to ignore him to his ultimate driment.

[ProfessorDuh]

We have plenty of money for domestic policy. Just take it from the trillions wasted on the Pentagon. I'm sure we can get along quite well without bombing and invading some brown people every couple of years.

[PhilipTaylor]

Harvard Magazine estimates the REAL COSTS of 1RAQ at $3 Trillion!

[tuffwr]

And they wouldn't be cheering for barry would they.It's an op-ed piece !

[tuffwr]

you may think we don't have enem ies but we do and they are very dangerous!

[PhilipTaylor]

So why waste money on obsolete WE@P0NS Systems that fund Southern States but provide ZERO Protection?

That is right the GREED MACHINE buying Favors!

[jozzie]

Defense waste is legendary. And is thoroughly entrenched in almost every district in the country. The ultimate interest group: the Congress people and Senators of this fair land.

[pragmaticdallasite]

Don't confuse defending the country and a bloated military-industrial complex as the same thing.........

[Lemeritus]

Let's invade EVERYONE then! That should do it! Eternal war! What's to worry? It's worked so well so far.

Of course there are dangers in the world... but spending $65 billion dollars on, for example, the F22 program is an f'ing waste of money that does not protect us and could be used for the common good.

[ProfessorDuh]

The US spends more on its military than the rest of the nations in the world COMBINED. If you think that's for "defense," you're not thinking at all. Your zillion-dollar Pentagon couldn't even stop a handful of Saudis armed with box cutters.

[scoops2]

We have never had a free market in america. We have had bankruptcy laws for buisiness (protects rich people), slavery (unpaid work), and in 1791 Alexander hamilton helped the bankers form the first national bank. (gov'ts need a treasury, thats it.). And throughout the lifespan of this once great country we have had regulation, then de regulation, regulation again, It is all controlled now by the FEDERAL RESERVE. Foriegn and domestic tycoon banks control the gov'ts of America. We are all in debt to them.

support HR 1207 call your reps.

[PhilipTaylor]

It never got any freer in HISTORY ANYWHERE than in 1929 and 2007-8!

[flossophy]

You mean when the Pr0gressives confiscated the wealth from the middle class and producers in society to help fund their altruistic social engineering projects?

You're talking about that 'freedom'?

[jekyll]

We need another Andrew Jackson who put an end to the second central bank in 1837.

"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, will rout you out."

[PhilipTaylor]

He like every President did not do everything RIGHT but he stopped the Banksters and lived to 78!

No one since him has been that successful or lived trying to do it!

A tough BIRD that we need NOW!

Perhaps the Pecora Commission will help but staffed with many Wall Street Funkies

Jan 1933, Ferdinand Pecora, an assistant district attorney for New York County was hired
Feb 1933 Pecora exposed National City Bank (now Citibank) and caused bank's president to resign.
Final Glass-Steagall Act, passed on June 16, 1933

He did more in ONE MONTH than Obama has done in SIX!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecora_Commission

[Bernique]

Thanks, jekyll, for your contribution.

[pragmaticdallasite]

So have we never had prosperous times in this country while the Fed has been around?

[tuffwr]

Blame the brits they were the ones to get rid of the gold standard!

[jekyll]

The middle-class was much larger before the FED. Also...the value of the dollar stayed the same between 1837-1912. Since 1913, the value has decreased 96%. Even Bernanke has just recently agreed that the depreciation of the dolllar through inflation is a hidden tax. And that hidden tax hurts the poor/middle-class the most.

[ChristianEcon.com]

Seemed to do fine when it wasn't staffed with Libertarian free-market kooks.

[Bernique]

The Fed lets us have a few crumbs once in a while ...

[PhilipTaylor]

V1CTIMS OF L1ES!

There are 60 Million of us as we believed his promises!

1. Complete Failure on Foreclosures

2. No Caps Credit Card Bill that Does Not activate for 9 Months

3. $306 to Wall Street for Every $1 to Main Street

4. No funding for Manufacturing other than forcing GM and Chrysler into Bankruptcy!

5. Where is Bottom UP instead of TRICKLE-DOWN? TRICKLE-DOWN is DE_AD!

6. Healthcare will be the final NA1L!

[rinpochet]

Noam Chomsky, another who is hailed overseas as a brilliant mind and actively sought for speeches but who here, apart from real progressives have heard of him? You will NEVER hear him on political discussion shows. Not safe enough!

[PhilipTaylor]

Yes very SAD!

[HisPetGoat]

I only see him on Democracy Now.

[pragmaticdallasite]

yep

[flossophy]

Because he's completely irrelevant... he's been irrelevant since the 80's. His predictions / projections since the early 70's have been completely wrong. That's why most of his audience is under the age of 25... they simply aren't old enough to remember his early prognostications.

He's simply expl0iting you budding pr0gressives to sell books.

I actually wish he were on political discussion shows... he'd be like a living relic from an early political period.

[HisPetGoat]

What was he completely wrong about?

[Bernique]

no, flossophy, Noam Chomsky is considered a dangerous mind by the retrograde class that took over with Reagan & his acolytes. That's why his voice is restricted to Democracy Now and Pacifica stations.

[GOBsaysCOMEON]

Chomsky is a smart guy. He makes way more sense than what typically is called "progressive".

[lthuedk 1]

http://www.light-to-dark.com/lenin_trotsky_strauss_and_kristol.html

But safe enough for Neo Con totalitarianism.

[MiddleRoadLiberal]

The article didn't "miss the point." It mentioned that not only is Stiglitz being ignored by the administration, but the entire progressive side is. The article states that. It's great that Krugman is reinforcing that point, but the article stated it as well.

[ddanimal]

Nothing will be done until the system collapses. The government will keep borrowing, hiding bank losses and bailing out Wall Street. These criminals have no intention of doing the right thing. We"re screwed Prepare accordingly.

The government will continue to borrow to support the banks until it can no longer borrow. At that point, interest rates will increase rapidly to 6-7-8-9-10%. The fed does not set interest rates; the market does. Interest rates and risk premia have been artificially suppressed for many years. When proper risk pricing returns, money will be in short supply and deflation will rage. This is when the depression will start, just it did in 1931.

[wizedollars]

yes, this is being done by design so that the powerful could buy up assets and property for pennies on the dollar. End the Federal Reserve.