Reply #25: No, I believe that what Krugman knows is needed is actually closer to

[stopbush]

what Obama would have proposed if he thought he could get it through Congress, but Obama had to compromise to get what he could at this time.

Krugman's argument - in this and many other columns - is that Obama should have just gone for the whole thing at once. He has also stated that to do so may have totally freaked out the population, but as an economist, he's saying that the population is going to be freaked out down the road anyway when Obama has to come back and ask for the amount he knew he needed back in January but was afraid to ask for. Krugman's point is that by asking for too little, Obama's package won't do enough, will be seen as failing and will make it that much harder for him to do in two steps what he actually wanted to do in one step.

The analogy might be treating a cancer patient by removing only half the tumors in the person's body because the patient's family thinks it would be too drastic to remove all the tumors at once, even when you know from the get-go that you better remove all the tumors at once to be successful, then coming back 6-9 months down the road to remove the rest of the tumors only to find that the patient had died.