I know what you are thinking: "Who cares?" Well, try to keep reading, because this does have implications beyond the sprawling soybean farms in the Argentine province of Cordoba. What does it mean to have a "commodities boom," or growth driven by the export of commodities?
Remember that unemployment problem we used to have? The one that politicians, pundits and policymakers used to talk about on a regular basis, debating how we might fix it? Well, forget about all that, because the problem is structural, meaning nothing can be done. So sayeth a loud slice of the econo-pundit class.
If you have any familiarity with the world, in short, you know that involuntary unemployment is very real. And it's currently a very big deal. How bad is the problem of involuntary unemployment, and how much worse has it become?
OWS takes the traditional Marxist notion of class, simplifies it and inflates it into two cartoons -- the 99 percent and the 1 percent. In the process, it manages to ignore about 150 years of Marxist discussion and debate.
Just like central banking, economics wants to speak politically, but doesn't necessarily welcome a response. In Krugman, it sometimes comes across as condescension. At the Fed, it can appear more sinister.
In arguing the case for the primacy of economic action, Krugman blithely ignores the difficult situation of central banking in the modern world.
What was the situation in Spain? The construction bubble was widely recognized, discussed, worried over and even acted upon in the years before the bust.
This year, if you say "Tax Day" and "social movement," the Tea Party isn't necessarily the first thing that comes to mind. And if you go looking for a protest, you'll likely find folks protesting against the tax evaders of the top 1 percent.
A year ago I wrote about the odd love being shown for Rep. Paul Ryan and his shockingly regressive, budget-busting tax and spending plans. Some of them apparently learned their lesson and have kept quiet this time. But not many.
I was struck by the juxtaposition of this unfortunate analysis of Rep. Paul Ryan's budget by New York Times columnist James Stewart and Paul Krugman's op-ed today.
It's neither an accident nor a surprise that the National Rifle Association and ALEC have been close allies all along." It has become a symbol of opposition to government, in other words, as an argument for fewer laws and regulations.
Matalin and Kuby clash over health and race. If five Republican justices again rule along party lines, who are the judicial activists? What about Fox's complaint about a rush-to-judgment in Trayvon -- i.e., the Sherrod-Wright cable network? Then: Gaffe-Gate!
The "good old days" weren't. The health of Americans and access to care was much worse before Medicare and Medicaid were instituted in the 1960s, and don't let any (affluent) historical revisionists tell you otherwise.
Greg Smith's unveiling of Goldman Sachs' "culture" of profits ahead of clients' interests was nothing new. But there is little mention of the behavior that caused our economic decline into the Great Recession.
Tom Friedman's column today calls for re-thinking American capitalism by striking a series of "grand bargains," and as usual his analysis of what stands in the way of such grand bargains bears no relationship to the realities of American politics.
The flight of advertisers from Limbaugh will be defended by many as the market mechanism through which the public's views are expressed. To me, it's just cowardice.