Krugman refers to progressive economists: do not ask governments to even try to do very much, baby!
Does that sound a little familiar?
Oh, that is what Friedman said re why civic coalitions are stepping in to do grass roots programs which governments have failed, at the local, state, and or federal levels, to do....
Krugman: There are better ways to get to a jobs guarantee than a jobs guarantee.
Maybe he is referring to Friedman's grass roots civic coalitions?
Why is a healthcare guarantee a no brainer for an advanced economy, but a job guarantee an apparent economists' impossibility for that same economy?
Why is a healthcare guarantee an economists' no brainer, but a balanced budget a really bad idea for almost all economists, for the same economy?
Let's put it a little differently, for the idea challenged:
If our government, according to Krugman and Bivens, is guaranteed to queer a jobs guarantee, why then wouldn't it be guaranteed to queer a healthcare guarantee?
Or:
If we are guaranteed to queer a jobs guarantee based on costs overruns, as they admit, then why is a balanced budget a really bad idea?
Have we caught Krugman (and Bivens) in a Morton's Fork? You tell me.
No comments:
Post a Comment