One of the myths of this stunted political moment is that Barack Obama "tried to do too much," and that purist, ungrateful liberals are mad at him over things like the absence of a public option in his heath bill. This is dangerous nonsense, and it matters because these widespread views among the pundit class will influence what lessons the media and Obama himself draw from what is likely to be an epic partisan defeat on Tuesday.

How did we reach such a state of confusion about the solvency of Social Security? Actuaries deal in probabilities and statistics. What were the odds we'd be so confused in 2010?

The administration seems intent on shooting itself and Democrats in the foot by appointing a conservative pro-business executive rather than a proven fighter for the economic interests of the middle class.

Now that Larry Summers is leaving, the president has a decision to make that will send a signal about the next two years of economic policy. That signal can restore consumer confidence and reinvigorate the electorate, or it can lead to even more discouragement and despair. This week unnamed administration officials floated the idea of naming a corporate executive to the position. That's a trial balloon that should be punctured immediately.

It seems that just about every hundred years or so, the body politic we call America swells with fever as it fights off a democracy-destroying disease. That disease is "Special Interest Government".

The Obama Administration's Deficit Commission is at best errant in its mission and at worst a bait-and-switch ploy being run on the American people.

We call on fellow economists to reconsider their casual willingness to concede to an unfounded hysteria over supposed long-term deficits, and to concentrate instead on solving the vast problems we presently face.

Goldman Sachs has proposed 15 candidates for countries whose economies may be major players in the world economy by 2050. Here's where the issue of having quality metrics appears.

The tax burden isn't too high on the rich; it's too low. Tax fairness requires the US to increase taxes on the richest 10 percent of Americans and cut taxes for working families.