In his column "The Price Is Wrong," Prof. Krugman argues with the free market proponents on how to address our unemployment. I would take a second look at this option.
David Stockman's New York Times 'rant' glorifies the gold standard and denigrates government for standing in the way of putting "free markets and genuine wealth creation back into capitalism." In fact, Stockman would return us to an earlier era of crony capitalism.
Has the New York Times ever had Krugman spend two hours educating its financial reporters about austerity and the euro's design defects? That would be one of the best investments it could ever make in raising the quality of its reportage on these issues.
The Long Depression isn't hitting us all at once. It's taking pieces out of us over the course of years. That's allowed people to define previously unacceptable economic conditions as "The New Normal."
It is the GOP's extreme vision of what they think our country should be -- with a weak government and a free ride to corporations and the rich at the expense of the rest of us -- that has put them at odds with the electorate, which is made up of primarily hard-working and struggling Americans.
It is very harmful to the nation that MSNBC has led people to believe that there is only one, presumably hopelessly weird, economist in the world who opposes austerity as a response to the Great Recession.
The American people don't serve Paul Ryan. They're not "The Help." He's "The Help." And right now, by demanding austerity that Americans already rejected, Paul Ryan is back-talking the boss. It's insolent, insubordinate and disrespectful.
It is a vicious circle that those who still espouse 19th-century free market economics do not want to recognize. What applied to a rural America where 70 percent still lived on farms cannot apply today to an urbanized U.S.
Spending is not spending. The U.S. needs productive public investments, not wasteful spending. We need to modernize our infrastructure, retool our energy system, make our cities more resilient, and help to train a new productive labor force.
Overall, he does a fine job explaining things, which is what you would expect. He adopts a tone like the most sociable guy at a cocktail party (meaning, he's not Krugman, who's the argumentative one in the corner), trying to explain, but doing so in an easygoing way that won't scare anyone off.
Some pundits assert that in doing so he was taking his eye off the ball. We would argue quite the contrary. Putting jobs and wages in the direct line of sight is exactly what needs to be done to move the economy forward in a manner that benefits the middle class and average Americans.
Due to the number of baby boomers qualifying for Social Security and Medicare, spending will increase in coming decades as more members of the baby-boom generation become eligible for benefits and the health care cost for each enrollee increases.
It shouldn't be a secret by now: Consumers are unhappy. And it's not because we are too busy paying down our debts. It's really because no one in Washington has been focusing on job creation.
Seemingly, President Obama has moved off the deficit-hawk kick that marked his posture in 2010 when he appointed the Bowles-Simpson Commission, and 2011 when he agreed to a budget deal with massive cuts and automatic triggers adding up to about $4 trillion in deficit cuts over a decade. Seemingly, too, the corporate-led "Fix the Debt Campaign" -- millionaires and billionaires telling the rest of America to tighten its belt for the greater good -- isn't getting a great deal of traction. But despite the sheer unreality of their claims, the austerity lobby keeps winning by defining the terms of debate. Nearly everyone, right, center and left, is arguing about the economic recovery in terms of what the debt-to-GDP ratio should be in 2023. That is the wrong question. The right question is: how do we get a stronger recovery going now?
What Scarborough fails to note in this follow-up is that none of the people he mentions above are economists, much less economists even close to Krugman's stature.