Krugman: The Unwisdom of Elites

[Warpy]

The past three years have been a disaster for most Western economies. The United States has mass long-term unemployment for the first time since the 1930s. Meanwhile, Europe’s single currency is coming apart at the seams. How did it all go so wrong?

Well, what I’ve been hearing with growing frequency from members of the policy elite — self-appointed wise men, officials, and pundits in good standing — is the claim that it’s mostly the public’s fault. The idea is that we got into this mess because voters wanted something for nothing, and weak-minded politicians catered to the electorate’s foolishness.
-------
These days Americans get constant lectures about the need to reduce the budget deficit. That focus in itself represents distorted priorities, since our immediate concern should be job creation. But suppose we restrict ourselves to talking about the deficit, and ask: What happened to the budget surplus the federal government had in 2000?

The answer is, three main things. First, there were the Bush tax cuts, which added roughly $2 trillion to the national debt over the last decade. Second, there were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which added an additional $1.1 trillion or so. And third was the Great Recession, which led both to a collapse in revenue and to a sharp rise in spending on unemployment insurance and other safety-net programs.

MUCH more at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/09/opinion/09krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&nl=opinion&emc=tyb1

[Demeter]

1. Please don't confuse the masses with the facts

Besides, they know all this already.

[MichiganVote]

2. Until they tax the wealthy nothing any of them say in DC makes a tinkers damn.

Does it solve everything? Hardly. But since the wealthy feel pretty damn good these days, I won't feel equal until my neighbors and I have the same. And I don't care if they're republican or dem. I only care that we have equality. And we don't.

So we are unequal. Again.

[orangeapple]

3. are you expecting

equality of outcomes?

I'm just not clear what you mean when you write, "I won't feel equal until my neighbors and I have the same."

The American Constitution was created to provide equality of rights, but there was no expectation that there would or could be equality of outcomes.

"...it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions." - Federalist #10

[MichiganVote]

4. Whatever or wherever you read the word "outcomes" in my post-beats me.

Nor did I use the word Constitution

Nor did I use the word rights