A propos David Kaiser's current topic, a few remarks re what I would call an idelogical cul de sac into which American politics has now pulled.
We have finally come to a point, I believe, where even some of the most devout market capitalist and/or conservative ideologues, thinkers not pundits, although they would still give different explanations depending on party (eg socialist sabotage, Republican sabotage, etc.),
may be beginning to see the 'end of history', to which their free market and weak government programs, both parties, have now lead (the Democrats have long been on the free market train, by the way, longer than the Republicans):
How much smaller can government get, under the status quo system? (Certainly can't get that much weaker, in spite of their views.)
Krugman talks in an editorial today about a political trap, and he has compared this I believe, with an economic analysis of an 'economic' trap. Sort of gives one a sense of a cul de sac, too.
I sympathize with his side of the issue, the need for greater job stimulus, as far as that paltry topic goes.
As Reich described the economic slide, the other day in a NYT editorial, I am afraid that such a mere WPA type job stimulus (eg mickey mouse census worker 'jobs'!) won't really help Americans recover what has been lost in that slide, Reich says lasting 30 years, I say 50 or so.
As I said in a prior post, don't we need a New Deal? Who's kidding who?
The political cul de sac reminds me of the old remedy of bleeding the sick patient. Here are the tools which have always been at the electorate's disposal:
Turn the incumbents out; tax, or spend, or tax, or spend, or tax, or spend, or tax, or spend, and so on,.................................. to infinity.
More free trade, more open markets, less regulation, more free trade, less regulation, more free trade.............................................to infinity.
If he doesn't get better, better bleed him some more with both, tax or spend, more free trade, less regulation.
Market capitalism as a more or less one trick Maverick pony.
If we aren't prospering, markets must not yet be open enough, or we haven't taxed or spent enough.
On another topic:
Note that China recently expanded its public sector in response to flagging world demand. Maybe that is a big mistake, but I believe others long needed to smell the coffee.
Another natural resource topic, besides the end of cheap oil, has been the tremendous large long term contracts some developing governments have made for essential resources.
Weak laissez faire lazy fare, mere tax or spend, regimes haven't been able to follow suit.
If the resource source nations, for these huge deals renig, guess what?
No comments:
Post a Comment