Anonymous wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/opinion/krugman-the-iphone-stimulus.html
The best analysis of why Romney's economic austarity plan will fail and Keynesian Econonics (government spending) will succeed in turning our economy around.
Conservatives please point out the flaws in Krugman's presentation
Ok I'll bite because I have some extra time this morning. But this is really the last time I'll try this...if those of you who worship at the alter of Klugman/Friedman and all things NYT really want some differing views they're readily available. If you want regular spoon-feeding, go to the parenting forum. But please, do not make the mistake of thinking dcum and RR ads in any way exemplify thoughtful and differing approaches to economic issues. I read the Times...and the WSJ and the Economist. What do you read beside the Post and NYT (and dcum!)
I don't deny a quarter of 2 of iphone sales will be good for the economy. It's the free market that's working here, not a simple demand push from ill-conceived programs like cash for clunkers (which only shift demand forward for a temporary sugar high with zero long term gain and higher deficits.) But to use a hot product as evidence that "demand, not supply, is holding the economy back" ignores:
--continued aggregate consumer debt as % of household net worth which inhibit spending as consumers continue a multi-year exercise in balance sheet repair
--if you look at the aggregate increase in consumer spending since crisis lows, indeed we've seen a rebound. But most of the increase has come from higher prices (inflation) not increased unit sales. A stressed consumer is spending to maintain standard of living
--yes businesses are sitting on cash. Can't we at least consider that regulatory uncertainty is an element in their reluctance to make investments? One example: cheap NatGas should incent mfg companies who use gas as a feedstock to be building new factories here. But we can't figure out if we'll embrace this new source or regulate it away.
--his quoting Keynes was really an embrace of Shrumpeter's creative destruction. We free-marketers are all for it. But not selectively (hurrah for Apple, boo to Walmart)
--"why not have govt spend on education and infrastructure" ok to infrastructure, but we blew through most of the stimulus $ on transfer payments and we fiscal conservatives believe in stubborn facts and numbers---we misallocated much of the stimulus money and there ain't much left. re: education spending, please let's see the data on efficacy of increased spending here before writing the checks...remembering the money we spend on our kids will need to be repaid by them too.
---"govt employment has plunged" can we ask why? Maybe it got way ahead of itself? Prior to the crisis, over the previous decade we had seen no net gain in pvt sector jobs; all employment growth had come from the public sector. Was that due to genuine need..or maybe just a sector run amok? I'm asking the question and searching for the data...how about you?
Finally, I'm not gonna engage in a long debate here with a Nobel economist. But there are plenty of equally-trained economist who will..they're out there, look for yourself.