« "Top Ten Tax Charts" | Main | "Martin Wolf: Doha is weakening the WTO" »

Friday, April 15, 2011

Paul Krugman: Who’s Serious Now?

The battle of the budget plans has one serious entry, and one combination of mean-spiritedness and fantasy:

Who’s Serious Now?, by Paul Krugman, Commentary, NY Times: Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, ... unveiled his budget proposal, and the initial reaction of much of the punditocracy was best summed up (sarcastically) by the blogger John Cole: “The plan is bold! It is serious! It took courage! It re-frames the debate! The ball is in Obama’s court! Very wonky! It is a game-changer! Did I mention it is serious?”
Then people who actually understand budget numbers went to work, and it became clear that the proposal wasn’t serious at all. In fact, it was a sick joke. The only real things in it were savage cuts in aid to the needy and the uninsured, huge tax cuts for corporations and the rich, and Medicare privatization. All the alleged cost savings were pure fantasy. ...
On Wednesday, as I said, the president called Mr. Ryan’s bluff: after offering a spirited (and reassuring) defense of social insurance, he declared, “There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. And I don’t think there’s anything courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill.” Actually, the Ryan plan calls for $2.9 trillion in tax cuts...
And then Mr. Obama laid out a budget plan that really is serious. The president’s proposal isn’t perfect, by a long shot. ... But the vision was right, and the numbers were far more credible than anything in the Ryan sales pitch. ...
But ... the president’s ... plan isn’t about to become law; neither is Mr. Ryan’s. And given the hysterical Republican reaction, it doesn’t look likely that we’ll see negotiations trying to narrow the difference. That’s a good thing because Mr. Obama’s plan already relies more on spending cuts than it should, and moving it significantly in the G.O.P.’s direction would produce something unworkable and unacceptable.
What happened over the past two weeks, then, was more about staking out positions than about enacting policies. On one side you had a combination of mean-spiritedness and fantasy; on the other you had a reaffirmation of American compassion and community, coupled with fairly realistic numbers. Which would you choose?

    Posted by on Friday, April 15, 2011 at 12:33 AM in Budget Deficit, Economics, Politics | Permalink  Comments (173)


    Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.