Can we stop with the Paul Krugman posts already?

[DLnyc]

34. We didn't really try very hard.

What is needed are large scale jobs programs directly providing employment, as Roosevelt did. What we actually did this time were programs limiting the amount of job losses due to state governments cutting back and then some tax cuts. Now the focus is on deficit reduction. As Krugman repeatedly points out, and as any first-year economics student understands, cutting spending in a recession is a REALLY DUMB IDEA. Also, it is not hard to understand, or demonstrate, that cutting taxes on the super-wealthy has very little effect on overall demand. Clever wording and rhetorical gymnastics don't change these simple realities. Emotional boost sounds wonderful, but without enough stimulus to increase demand, it is just a phrase.

As far as I've been able to follow it, the case for stimulus is straight forward and supported by real evidence while the case for austerity, like most of this thread, is based on a lot of scolding, scary sounding phrases and trumped-up calculations.

With all due respect, I will go with stimulus, which actually works in the real world, and not with austerity, which actually does terrible damage in the real world.

We will probably get an emotional boost once we have much less unemployment and, consequently, much greater demand.