tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post7506643044869167257..comments2024-03-28T08:51:18.908-04:00Comments on the daily howler: The David Brooks difference! Plus, our schools were best in the world!<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-66423691643503813212012-08-16T03:24:01.096-04:002012-08-16T03:24:01.096-04:00everything you perform is just so mystical and bea...everything you perform is just so mystical and beautiful. cherished this kind of.Diablo III itemshttp://www.vipdiablo3.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-26500517786846931812012-05-24T14:21:53.730-04:002012-05-24T14:21:53.730-04:00Ooh, a reference to my second favorite blog on my ...Ooh, a reference to my second favorite blog on my favorite one!fairlefthttp://my.firedoglake.com/fairleft/2012/05/23/sharpton-booker-romney-vs-the-rest-of-us/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-69810594088083281152012-05-09T10:05:44.837-04:002012-05-09T10:05:44.837-04:00Last night, Krugman appeared on Al Sharpton's ...Last night, Krugman appeared on Al Sharpton's Politics Nation.<br />He stated that the recession could be ended if government replaced all the teachers, policemen , and firemen that were laid off by states and municipalities to cut their budgets.<br />What stimulus the federal government had injected into the economy was OFFSET by state-by-state cuts.<br />Krugman also said that the consumer demand created by the re-hired government employees would then encourage domestic business to hire and expand the private sector.gravymeisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16075831177588700301noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-51026310730748641272012-05-08T18:49:16.959-04:002012-05-08T18:49:16.959-04:00IMHO Brooks lost this debate to Krugman by failing...IMHO Brooks lost this debate to Krugman by failing to focus on Krugman's term of art, "austerity." Check your understanding by this multiple choice question.<br /><br />Given that annual federal spending was about $2 trillion in 2000 and about $3 trillion in 2008 and is about $4 trillion today, what does Krugman mean by "austerity" going forward?<br /><br />A. Return spending to $2 trillion.<br />B. Return spending to $3 trillion.<br />C. Hold spending where it is.<br />D. Continue to increase federal spending.<br /><br />Answer: DDavid in Calnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-6181653466944334582012-05-08T14:55:03.564-04:002012-05-08T14:55:03.564-04:00This does a pretty good job of sending Brooks'...This does a pretty good job of sending Brooks' idiocy packing -- Anyone thinking "Well, Brooks does raise some good points" ought to at least consider this rebuttal:<br /><br />www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/david-brooks-parallel-universeSwannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-28629516547803907632012-05-08T11:40:00.142-04:002012-05-08T11:40:00.142-04:00On last week's Bill Maher, Lawrence Wilkerson,...On last week's Bill Maher, Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's Chief of Staff, claimed that Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell cut the higher education budget to one-fifth of what it had been.<br /><br />Arizona also made huge cuts to education in all levels, and many other states responded to the recession by cutting education budgets first.<br /><br />We will quickly lose all the gains we have made in the last 50 years.<br /><br />Brooks' other points are bogus as well. <br />Why should superstar salaries rise into the stratosphere while others stagnate? He doesn't say.<br />Engineers have always done well, but they have never made 40, 50, 350 times as mush as the worker on the assembly line, as some executives do.<br /><br />Nor does he explain that the special interest deals are a direct result of lobbying, with lobbyists being the class whose wealth has been growing the fastest.gravymeisterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16075831177588700301noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-43284767932677008582012-05-08T11:25:37.876-04:002012-05-08T11:25:37.876-04:00Interesting. I have always thought of Krugman, and...Interesting. I have always thought of Krugman, and Keynes as being anti-cyclical. There is a view of economics that holds that the economy is inherently cyclical, given to crises that happen about every 20 years or so. This was Marx's views and he saw this as a critical and insoluble problem. I have always had a sense that the Austrian school, raised as they were in an environment where Marx was an important influence, both accepted this view, and reacted against it. Yes, they said, capitalism is cyclical, but that's a good, not a bad thing. Cyclicality clears away the unproductive so the productive can replace. Keynesianism isn't a reaction to Marx and the Austrians, it's an outright rejection. It says that capitalism, with some monetary adjustments can be protected from cyclicality, the euphoric highs, the devastating lows. The problem I have with Keynesianism is more based on psychology than economics. We like the euphoric highs a bit too much to give them up too easily.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com