links for 2008-01-19

• Return of the tax families - Paul Krugman Blog
• Publishing FOMC Economic Forecasts - FRBSF Economic Letter
• Seeking Ways to Help the Worlds Poorest - Dot Earth - NYT Blog
• Job Data Passes Threshold Where Recessions Dwell - New York Times
• Additional thoughts on stimulus - William J. Polley
• Surge to Nowhere - washingtonpost.com
• Emergency Room Delays - NY Times

Comments

[anne]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/19/entrepreneurship/

January 19, 2008

Entrepreneurship
By Paul Krugman

One thing that struck me about Obama's apparent assertion that Reaganism represented a justified reaction against the excesses of liberalism. * Obama said that Reagan offered

"a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing"

So here's my question: did Reaganism bring a return to a sense of entrepreneurship? Not that I remember. I think Obama is confusing the 80s with the 90s, the Reagan expansion with the Clinton expansion.

The point is that the quintessential business figures of the 80s weren't creative entrepreneurs. They were big-corporation executives (Lee Iacocca) and takeover artists (Michael Milken, Ivan Boesky). The gazillionaires who started in garages came later.

A less subjective measure of entrepreneurship and dynamism is productivity growth. And that didn't take off in the Reagan years. Here's multifactor productivity (a measure that tries to capture technological progress), from the Bureau of Labor Statistics: **

[Chart]

The message of this chart — and one that comes through in just about every other comparison — is that the long stagnation of productivity that began in the 70s continued through the Reagan years and into the 90s. In fact, in the early 90s people were very depressed about America's economy; remember the line, "The Cold War is over. Japan won"?

The takeoff, both in productivity and in optimism, came only around 1995. I'm not giving Clinton credit for that takeoff; the truth is that we don't know why it happened. But it definitely didn't happen on Reagan's watch.

I understand why conservatives want to backdate the good things that happened in the 90s, and pretend they happened in the Reagan years. But why is Obama playing along?

* In my next life I want to have legions of devoted followers who will fiercely declare that I didn't really mean what I seem to have said, and that anyone who thinks I did must be a paid shill.

** http://www.bls.gov/mfp/prodybar.htm

[tony]

Mr. Krugman's suggestion that the 90's expansion was "the Clinton expansion" is foolishness. The expression of such partisan blather costs Mr. Krugman credibility. Mr. Clinton was not responsible for the expansion of the 90's. The broad adoption and expanding utility of the personal computer and internet during that period were the cause.

He is wrong again in characterizing that the "quintessential business figures of the 80's were the big corporations. Microsoft, Apple and many other ground breaking technology business's were birthed in garages in the EARLY 80's. They were the FOUNDATION of the 90's + expansion. They were the ONLY reason it happened.

Mr. Obama's comment about Reagan is a very transparent attempt to reach into the political middle. Weak sauce, but transparent.

This kind of partisan rhetoric (Mr. Krugman's) is one of the key problems we face in America. Tell the truth and lets all work together. The power would be enormous. Unfortunately, people like Mr. Krugman make their $jack by lining up on one side or the other and pounding away, confusing people and distracting them from the truth and from action. IT's SICKENING.

[anne]

The strange, strange voice of togetherness:

"This kind of partisan rhetoric (Mr. Krugman's) is one of the key problems we face in America. Tell the truth and lets all work together. The power would be enormous. Unfortunately, people like Mr. Krugman make their $jack by lining up on one side or the other and pounding away, confusing people and distracting them from the truth and from action. IT's SICKENING."

Me, I am so glad to be separate and apart and pound away lining up one side and the other to pound the better. Glory to me.

[anne]

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/17/headlines

January 17, 2008

Obama Appears to Laud Reagan for Confronting 1960-70s "Excesses"
By Amy Goodman

In campaign news, Senator Barack Obama is coming under criticism for appearing to slight the civil rights and feminist movements while expressing admiration for former President Ronald Reagan. In an interview with the editorial board of the Reno Gazette, Obama lauded Reagan's challenge to what Obama called the "excesses" of the 1960s and 1970s.

Senator Barack Obama: "I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path, because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown, but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people—he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."

Obama did not specify what he believes those "excesses" were. But Reagan is widely credited with leading a rightwing backlash against the gains of the civil rights and feminist movements that preceded his 1980 election.

[anne]

Me, I am far to used to be cooked for by men to return to friendly women-in-the-kitchen years of the Reagan-eers. So, count me as a separate-eer. Reason together without me, unless you intend to do the cooking and turst me I am used to the best.

Say hey, "Jack."
That is "Jack" the uniter. Say hey.

[anne]

Paul Krugman:

"In my next life I want to have legions of devoted followers who will fiercely declare that I didn't really mean what I seem to have said, and that anyone who thinks I did must be a paid shill."

This was the line of attack from the mention of Barack Obama, who was at the time attacking Social Security. Me, I found myself wondering who are these folks anyway?

Got to get some bashing and slashing "jack," because I do like slashing and bashing the uniter by force folks. Resistance is futile, "Jack."

[anne]

Beware, the uniters are here to gobble me up and me forever wanting to be divided. Unite me not, "Jack."

[The Baron]

anne says...

Paul Krugman:

"In my next life I want to have legions of devoted followers who will fiercely declare that I didn't really mean what I seem to have said, and that anyone who thinks I did must be a paid shill."

Why should Paul wiat till the next life, when he has anne in this one?