You have two problems, if not more - one, while some prominent economists agreed on a number, a larger number probably did not at the time, given the nature of the profession. Two, the number can't be proved unless you applied it all then measured the results. And three, absent that proof that can only happen with implementation, you will never get a political consensus to pass it and get it done.
Then you end up with that sad lament which mirrors many others; if only people would stop fighting, we would have world peace. If only people fed the hungry, we would wipe out famines. If only perfection reigned, then the world would be perfect.
Whatever the lessons from this crisis, the odds of western governments ever reacting with Pure High Keynesisms to all problems in life are slim and slimmer. We all know that.
So it's just a preachy position in the hypothetical alternative, which happens to be where Krugman and Galbraith chose to reside and make their careers. They don't seem to mention how or why they weren't at the table with Obama at the crucial moment. In my experience, most academics don't, though they reserve the right to sit in the bleachers and pass judgment on others' play down on the field. |
