Let’s hope that Obama knows better than to give these people any credence
Deficit Hawks Down — Please
Paul Krugman, NYT
One big question looking forward is whether Obama will once again turn to the Beltway-insider deficit hawks for alleged wisdom. Let’s hope not.
For one thing, the election offered confirmation of something that was actually pretty obvious: some of the most self-righteous deficit hawks are actually much more concerned with using deficits as an excuse to dismantle the social safety net than with, you know, reducing deficits. Notably, David Walker decided, a week before the election, to endorse Mitt Romney — even though Romney had proposed a $5 trillion tax cut to be offset by loophole closing he declined to specify, not to mention an increase in defense spending the Pentagon said it didn’t need.
As an aside, Walker’s timing was interesting. If you were following the election quants, you already knew that Obama was a clear favorite to win — 3 to 1 according to Nate Silver, much more than that according to Sam Wang. So why would Walker — whose popular following might include some but not all of his immediate family — throw his support to the likely loser? Probably because he was listening to the wrong people, and actually believed the stuff about Romneymentum.
(More here.)
Paul Krugman, NYT
One big question looking forward is whether Obama will once again turn to the Beltway-insider deficit hawks for alleged wisdom. Let’s hope not.
For one thing, the election offered confirmation of something that was actually pretty obvious: some of the most self-righteous deficit hawks are actually much more concerned with using deficits as an excuse to dismantle the social safety net than with, you know, reducing deficits. Notably, David Walker decided, a week before the election, to endorse Mitt Romney — even though Romney had proposed a $5 trillion tax cut to be offset by loophole closing he declined to specify, not to mention an increase in defense spending the Pentagon said it didn’t need.
As an aside, Walker’s timing was interesting. If you were following the election quants, you already knew that Obama was a clear favorite to win — 3 to 1 according to Nate Silver, much more than that according to Sam Wang. So why would Walker — whose popular following might include some but not all of his immediate family — throw his support to the likely loser? Probably because he was listening to the wrong people, and actually believed the stuff about Romneymentum.
(More here.)
1 Comments:
...It is as though Krugman gets his financial advice from Greece...
Post a Comment
<< Home