Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Krugman: Obama Liquidates Himself

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:11 AM
Original message
Krugman: Obama Liquidates Himself
A spending freeze? Thats the brilliant response of the Obama team to their first serious political setback?

Its appalling on every level.

Its bad economics, depressing demand when the economy is still suffering from mass unemployment. Jonathan Zasloff writes that Obama seems to have decided to fire Tim Geithner and replace him with the rotting corpse of Andrew Mellon (Mellon was Herbert Hoovers Treasury Secretary, who according to Hoover told him to liquidate the workers, liquidate the farmers, purge the rottenness.)

Its bad long-run fiscal policy, shifting attention away from the essential need to reform health care and focusing on small change instead.

And its a betrayal of everything Obamas supporters thought they were working for. Just like that, Obama has embraced and validated the Republican world-view and more specifically, he has embraced the policy ideas of the man he defeated in 2008. A correspondent writes, I feel like an idiot for supporting this guy.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/obama-liquidates-himself/

You're not the only one....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
1. the rotting corpse of Andrew Mellon
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 09:17 AM by Jim__
And Obama's presidency is beginning to look like the rotting corpse of Herbert Hoover. I'm getting seriously worried about the future of Social Security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. You should be, that's "next"
When these measures fail to significantly cut the deficit, SS is next in line. And Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. Well, Obama DID say Reagan was a model for him. Is this all part of the drown govt in debt plan?
You know, give $2 trillions to Wall St. then use the crushing debt as a mandate to kill social service programs (Medicare, public housing) forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #12
19. +1
Of course we're not supposed to question his actions which time and time again favor corporate interests and harm the middle class...'cause, you know, he makes really great speeches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
30. More like the rotting corpse of Milton Friedman
but perhaps Krugman would find that reference too decadent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
2. I don't feel like an idiot.
I never supported him.

Too bad no one was listening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #2
14. Seems Bush-lite is getting heavier by the day and, by so, setting up the whole
economy to implode. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. It neither tastes great, nor offers a healthier serving.
Of anything.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
18. I feel used.
I worked my ass of for him. I thought we were getting a Dean, an anti-establishment policy moderate. We got a fucking corporatist instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
25. I understand.
Even though I always recognized his center-right tendencies, I saw that most people didn't.

We were all so hungry for change. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Many of us saw through him
but we were older I fear... and a tad more experienced.

I knew he was a centrist. I was hoping just less bad than the other centrist that got the nod.

Real change the Political Elites will not let that happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. I expected nothing . I "hoped" I was wrong
beats being disappointed,just another politician.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #27
44. I'm guessing you and I are about the same age, give or take 5 years
and I fell, hook, line and sinker for his rhetoric and I while I noticed that the details were a bit skimpy, that amazing rhetoric just made me take flight, give much money and canvas, canvas, canvas. Now, I feel silly, I feel used, I definitely feel like I have a hangover the likes of which I hope never to feel again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. Thing is, I don't even think those tendencies are all that centrist.
Believe it or not I actually did use to be a moderate, before the center shifted on me. Now I am a fricken radical leftist.

And I didn't even have to study for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. Welcom to the Revolution Comrade
and you are correct on your observation.

The American right has pulled politics so far right it is unfrigging unbelievable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #36
40. Lol! Who'd a thunk it.
Still, no glory in collaboration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #31
47. I used to think I was a moderate, too.
Yet here on DU, the "premier left-wing message board," I am so far to the "fringe left" that my vote can be discounted and derided.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #31
48. "Centrist" (as used these days) means "center of inside-the-beltway"...
...or center of "the Village", and has little to do with anything in the real world.

It's mainly used so that "centrists" can portray themselves as thoughtful and reasonable, and critics as unreasonable "far left" ideologues.

Of course, by these definitions Eisenhower and JFKennedy were both "radical leftists".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
46. I was like Mulder.
I Wanted To Believe.

I should have stuck with UFO's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
3. WTF Mr President? Turkana @ Kos has a wrap up of what other economists are saying:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. On economics, the president has completely lost his way.
Top Democrats need to have an "intervention" with the president, where they all sit around and each describe the horror he is bringing to their lives with his GOP policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
5. "Just like that, Obama has embraced and validated the Republican world-view"
Same EXACT type of mistake Clinton repeatedly made. Enable and legitimize failed, right wing ideology- thereby boosting the Republican narrative, further alienating the base, and hamstringing effective public policy options.

2010 looks to be a very fulfilling year for GOP strategists.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Do you think a feeling of not belonging
or an inner sense of inadequacy for both men in their early years contribute to their need to make buddies with the rich and established?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #7
21. I wouldn't put it exactly like that
but it does seems that both have a need for everyone to like them- the rich and established perhaps more than others for advancement's sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:24 AM
Response to Original message
6. This Is The "Short Game"
I always admire what Dr. Krugman writes...and I agree with him on this as well, but we're on the sidelines, this is a pure political ploy. This administration seems to think the "message from Massetchussets" is the government IS the problem and got hammered on its spending. This appears aimed at trying to take that issue off the table in the run-up to the 2010 elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. It will have real consequences and it will fail as a political ploy
The only number that counts is the deficit level in this particular game, and Obama's plan does nothing (if anything, cutting spending will make matters worse as unemployment goes up) to dent the problem.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #9
15. It's All Perception...
The sad lesson many are learning...this Administration is sucked into the beltway games...where soundbites trump substance and can be spun into bits that are bantered around the cables and internet. The numbers are immaterial as long as they sound right to whomever ears the MOD is being aimed at.

Yes, playing defecit hawk is not only endangering any recovery for those still suffering but could pull down the few remaining in the middle who will lose funding...and not to mention the ripple that ensues as well as the ongoing deterioration of the nation's infrastructure all for political expediency.

But let's see what the details are...where the cuts are. As we've seen too many times in the last year, words may not meet actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
32. The "it's all perception, we create our own reality" ploy is what sunk the republicans in 2008
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 10:45 PM by glitch
I hope these "new democrats" don't think they can "create their own reality" better than genuine sociopaths who are professionals at it (and it alone).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #6
17. It won't work ..when you give the farm to wall street and the banks and then fuck the middle class
Edited on Tue Jan-26-10 09:38 AM by flyarm
and this will never ever take the issue off the Table Nancy keeps to nicely set and pretty ..and pristine.

Turn the tables upside down and get people jobs..it is still about the economy stupid!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
8. Krugman's right. It's too bad the president only listens to Republican economic advisers.
I knew he didn't know much about economics when I started supporting him two years ago, but I thought he would have sense enough to pick solid Democratic economic advisers. He didn't. His choice of economic advisers is simply appalling. I don't know who he thinks elected him, or which constituency he's representing. He seems to be representing Wall Street, big banks, the health care industry, and the War Party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
11. MSNBC just showed Fla polls for Obama...not good!
its upside down..and from the dems I talk to all the time here in Fla..this seems tame!!......

Obama approval 45%

Obama disapproval 49%

Obama knows he is in trouble as are incumbants in Fla..he is coming to Tampa the day after the SOTU address.

We have an 11.8 unemployment rate..and forclosures as far and wide as you can see!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
13. Millions crossed parties to vote for our President because they knew how badly the Republican Bush
Gang wrecked our economy with their massive defense spending and cutting or neglect of other government spending needs in order to finance their tax cuts for the super rich

and what does the guy from The Party of FDR do?

He goes Hoover. Had we wanted the style of Herbert Hoover, we'd have voted GOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #13
37. I know a few, and they've already turned away in disgust.
For someone who claimed he wanted to be bi-partisan, an opportunity squandered.

You can't be both corporatist and populist, and the people don't like or trust corporatist and they aren't buying spin anymore.
Seems simple, but apparently too complex for the beltway club.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
16. This is insane. Obama is looking more and more like Hoover.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. see...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
22. I was afraid this is what he would say
I've been really disappointed with Krugman's stance on HCR. I wouldn't sit next to him at Passover if he begged me and if he tries to make up by getting me a chocolate Easter bunny, I won't eat it until the next day:) He knows Economics but I know insurance.

Nonetheless, it's a spat. Mr. Krugman is brilliant (which I never was or will be) and I was waiting for him to speak out on this. I thought there was a chance that although Krugman has been writing about this for a year, perhaps I misunderstood the details & it wasn't as bad as I thought.

There's some irony here that Krugman is denouncing the same type of gimmicky political half-assed measure on the President's Economic Policy that many of us have been denouncing on the gimmicky political HCR. Still, it seems plain that this freeze will be a lot more detrimental to the welfare of the country.

I'm beginning to wonder if Rahm is a GOP double-agent. I already know all I need to about Geithner & Summers. Time to stock up on toilet paper while I've still got the funds, I guess. :cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Just looks like a double-agent because he is unprincipled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #23
50. Thanks for the excellent link & perfect explanation!
I keep forgetting about that terrific website. I've bookmarked it:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
branders seine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
24. Obama is now officially Ronald Reagan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
28. This is an austerity plan
Professor... and while Mass had a little to do with it, I still will contend that our creditors have a lot more to do with it. Don't expect any confirmation any time soon though... dollar crashing would not be pretty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
29. "the rottenness" is the "toxic assets" and imaginary "financial products." PURGE THOSE.
How could Obama be convinced to take action that clearly will demoralize the public further?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. Damn good question.
My guess is demoralizing the public is part of the plan. But then I am in the middle of The Shock Doctrine so the process of deconstructing a democratic republic political economy is still very fresh to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. And that begs the next question
"My guess is demoralizing the public is part of the plan."

If that's the case, have The Powers That Be decided to quit propping up the American economy altogether, abandoning any semblance of what's left of the middle class?

Or..?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. If someone can come up with an Or, please post it.
The suspense is killing us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. don't misunderestimate me
Or how does demoralization serve TPTB plans for the economy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 06:49 AM
Response to Reply #42
45. The demoralized do not fight back
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FourScore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-26-10 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
34. k/r nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AdHocSolver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
39. The only spending freeze that will help the US economy is military spending.
Any freeze in domestic spending will hurt the economy. Not only will spending cuts drag down the economy immediately, but fewer employed Americans means lower tax collections, so how does that help?

Obama has too many banksters, Wall Streeters, and DLCers as his advisors. FDR succeeded in saving the country because FDR ignored those people and used his own intelligence to develop solutions.

Obama seems to be following the script of the very people who got this country into trouble on health care, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and the Wall Street Ponzi schemes.

Obama seems to have abandoned the roll of political leader and adopted the persona of the triangulating politician. His actions won't help the country, they won't help the democrats, and moreover, they may well rehabilitate the Republican Party. We are so screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 02:25 AM
Response to Original message
43. Obama to fire Geithner and replace him with an even bigger asshole??

:wow:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DisgustedInMN Donating Member (956 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
49. There isn't one shitty thing..
.. this Republican Lite does that surprises me anymore.

He won't be a "mediocre term" or a "good one term" President, he's already proved himself to be a mediocre one term President.

Primary challenge, anyone? This corporatist pretender is killing our Party AND our Nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-27-10 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
51. Krugman, "from the vault":
snip

"Contrast that with Mr. Obamas recent statement, in an interview with a Nevada newspaper, that Reagan offered a sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.

Maybe Mr. Obama was, as his supporters insist, simply praising Reagans political skills. (I think he was trying to curry favor with a conservative editorial board, which did in fact endorse him.) But where in his remarks was the clear declaration that Reaganomics failed?

For it did fail. The Reagan economy was a one-hit wonder. Yes, there was a boom in the mid-1980s, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before and the poverty rate had actually risen.

When the inevitable recession arrived, people felt betrayed a sense of betrayal that Mr. Clinton was able to ride into the White House.

Given that reality, what was Mr. Obama talking about? Some good things did eventually happen to the U.S. economy but not on Reagans watch.

For example, Im not sure what dynamism means, but if it means productivity growth, there wasnt any resurgence in the Reagan years. Eventually productivity did take off but even the Bush administrations own Council of Economic Advisers dates the beginning of that takeoff to 1995.

Similarly, if a sense of entrepreneurship means having confidence in the talents of American business leaders, that didnt happen in the 1980s, when all the business books seemed to have samurai warriors on their covers. Like productivity, American business prestige didnt stage a comeback until the mid-1990s, when the U.S. began to reassert its technological and economic leadership.

I understand why conservatives want to rewrite history and pretend that these good things happened while a Republican was in office or claim, implausibly, that the 1981 Reagan tax cut somehow deserves credit for positive economic developments that didnt happen until 14 or more years had passed. (Does Richard Nixon get credit for Morning in America?)

But why would a self-proclaimed progressive say anything that lends credibility to this rewriting of history particularly right now, when Reaganomics has just failed all over again?"

snip

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/opinion/21krugman.html?_r=1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Oct 24th 2020, 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC