What’s unforgivable is the way policymakers, both at the Fed and elsewhere, basically declared Mission Accomplished as soon as the panic in financial markets subsided and stocks were up again. When spring rolls around, we’ll reach the third anniversary of Ben Bernanke’s declaration that “green shoots” were making an appearance — and there will still be 4 million Americans who have been out of work for more than a year. Yet there has been no sense of urgency about dealing with unemployment; indeed, most of the elite conversation has been about stuff like cutting Social Security payments a decade or two from now.
As Drum says, that’s the true radicalizing experience.
I'm curious to know how Drum, and Krugman for that matter, have been "radicalized." I mean, we all know Tim Geithner was the person who fought hard for the approach the Obama Administration has taken. Shouldn't someone "radicalized" be asking why Geithner is still the Treasury Secretary? Sure, the GOP won't let you name a Treasury Secretary afterwards, but wouldn't the removal of Geithner be a positive in and of itself? If not, why not?
Speaking for me only
|< Senate to Consider Detainee Legislative Amendments Tomorrow | The Return of Bell Curve Sully >|