Potpourri Lite
In the next few weeks, I am going to be posting very sparsely because of the online class on private law & defense. (I owe my online arguing time to paying customers, not to you freeloaders.) So only two quick links for ya:
* Steve Horwitz aptly evaluates Paul Krugman’s approach to macro: “It’s a model with no price level, no time, and no capital. It’s the worst of Keynesianism in one picture.”
* Andrew Leonard at Salon favorably quotes to Martin Wolf who said this about proposals to default on the federal government’s debt (and thereby limit Leviathan):
This is extraordinarily dangerous. The danger does not arise from the fiscal deficits of today, but the attitudes to fiscal policy, over the long run, of one of the two main parties. Those radical conservatives (a small minority, I hope) who want to destroy the credit of the U.S. federal government may succeed. If so, that would be the end of the U.S. era of global dominance. The destruction of fiscal credibility could be the outcome of the policies of the party that considers itself the most patriotic. In sum, a great deal of trouble lies ahead, for the U.S. and the world.
Who would have thought that the “liberals” at Salon would shudder at the thought of ending the “U.S. era of global dominance”?
Robert,
It is interesting that Bill Woolsey, the guy you responded to when you wrote that article against MET, is claiming in the comment section, that Krugman can be correct if the “natural rate of interest” is really negative. yes, that’s right, negative natural rate of interest.