Very energetic post, I loved that a lot. Will there be a part 2?Also visit my homepage - hip waist ratio
Hasn't Professor Krugman touched upon issues dealt with by Post-Keynesian economists like Lance Taylor before? I vaguely recall some article jointly written by him and Lance Taylor that I think was published in The Quarterly Journal of Economics a long time ago.Also, this isn't the first time that Professor Krugman referred to Michal Kalecki. The first mention of Michal Kalecki on his blog was in 2009. I *think* that the first time that he formally cited (or perhaps more appropriately, the closest he came to formally citing, as his latest book doesn't have a bibliography of references) Kalecki's October 1943 article in The Political Quarterly was in his 2012 book, End This Depression Now!.Though, as astute as that essay by Kalecki is, I personally believe that Krugman would be far wiser and even more powerful if he elected to follow in the footsteps of a man, who like Keynes and Kalecki, was born in the 19th century, but unlike them, never lived to the 20th century. A man who Keynes himself actually cited, and owed a debt to from his younger days...http://www.torrossa.it/resources/an/2569189
Krugman says "This is pretty close to the argument that we must have austerity, because stimulus might remove the incentive for structural reform that, you guessed it, gives businesses the confidence they need before deigning to produce recovery."This is a pretty question begging statement: What happens if structural reform IS needed for long-term health and stimulus DOES prevent that change taking place ? I'm not saying that it is/does but Krugman just seems to dismiss anyone who uses that argument as blatantly self-serving or deluded.
All anonymous comments will be deleted. Consistent pseudonyms are fine.
Daniel Kuehn is a doctoral candidate and adjunct professor in the Economics Department at American University. He has a master's degree in public policy from George Washington University.