Do Americans realize that under a Ryan economic regime, tens of millions of our poor neighbors would be dropped categorically and coldly to the curb, with no support whatsoever from the very system that our forefathers and mothers set up to ensure that America would prosper?
Why do those at the very bottom rungs of society often oppose, again in the most violent terms, government health care? Because, if one accepts such aid, then one finally has to admit that one is indeed at the very bottom. And that is far too painful to do. Irrational? Perhaps.
President Obama can make the moral case for America's homeowners in a clear, strong voice. So far he hasn't done that -- partly because some key members of his team buy into the unfair notion that underwater homeowners, unlike Wall Street bankers, don't deserve to be helped.
I did some checking and yes, the federal government under Barack Obama's watch has spent a whole bunch of money. That much I'll concede. What I won't concede is that it has spent too much.
Whew, Mitt Romney needs a haircut, or something. To show up in London and tell the Britons they don't have their act together (not properly prepared) for the Olympics is, well, astonishing.
It's easy for Congress to show it cares about American security, the American economy and American manufacturing. All it takes is a vote to secure and upgrade a dam. And, you know, the rest of the nation's infrastructure.
A new narrative is needed that is more firmly anchored to reality and that allows reasonable people to use their own intelligence to decide how to act. The way to begin crafting a new narrative is by asking how the word "regulation" is used in biology.
The question before us is plain: Why should I pick up the phone and give Barack Obama money this year?
The continual gatherings of heads of state, such as the one just concluded in Rome of Germany, France, Greece and Italy, reassure us that the euro will be saved. But the means to do so seem to be as elusive as ever.
The Krugman-Estonia kerfuffle raises an interesting question: Has Krugman ever sided with free market economists against government activism in his Times forum?
If there's one simple lesson that most of the world -- if not the European authorities -- seems to be learning from the prolonged crisis in Europe, it's that fiscal tightening is not the proper response to a recession.
Last week at Netroots Nation we talked about the problem of Apple (and all the others) manufacturing in China, costing our country jobs and dollars. N...
Historically, American democracy is premised on the moral principle that citizens care about each other and that a robust Public is the way to act on that care. Who is the market economy for? All of us. Equally.
I would argue that Heartland's billboard was more than just a matter of living in a bubble: climate deniers are at a turning point. The oil industry and petroleum supporters are backed into a corner on the issue of climate change.
Ray Bradbury saw the science-fiction aspects of our world. The implications of that are profound. It reminds us that our society, our economy, our world, is a product of human action.
Invest in duct tape, night vision goggles and stores of non-perishable foodstuffs. Instruct your children in the science of zombie slaying (it takes a head shot). Distrust your neighbors. Hoard firearms. Get with the times or the times will get you.