Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (103584)	2/9/2009 11:00:54 AM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542009

The original plan also included badly needed spending on school construction; Wow.... apparently Krugman doesn't know that enrollments are in decline across the country.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (103584)	2/9/2009 12:25:33 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 542009

Thanks for posting the Krugman, Mary. I was headed for it but had to have the cd player in my Mac fixed this morning.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (103584)	2/9/2009 7:01:16 PM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542009

I don't think it is possible to really understand what economists are basing there conclusions on without doing some economic course work--and then the light will probably only begin to shine if one has some facility with statistical equations. As lay people we have to be content with succinct summations of their positions and then draw our own conclusions. As to this very interesting piece of Krugman's you posted, I don't think of this as much as an economic piece, but as a political opinion by someone who is an economist. It is a policy argument. It goes to the heart of what one thinks the role of government is and should be. Reasonable minds can differ on that question. One of my main arguments with the Obama team is though, to me, they are acting like they have some kind of mandate to change the basic social safety net WITHOUT DEBATING IT. Its like "How dare you question us?"as they get ready to radically alter what has been. It may need altering, no question, BUT DON'T SNEAK IT BY US. Saving the banking system is one thing (and you can have a debate whether we should let it fail), but the assumption is if you don't save it then the entire economic system fails. If one buys that premise then one buys into TARP funding etc. But, for me, that is a separate question from the one of: HOW MUCH OF SOCIAL WELFARE SATE DO WE WANT TO BE? And that is one of my main sticking points with the gentlemen in charge.