hard heads soft hearts |
|
a scratch pad for half-formed thoughts by a liberal political junkie who's nobody special. ''Hard Heads, Soft Hearts'' is the title of a book by Princeton economist Alan Blinder, and tends to be a favorite motto of neoliberals, especially liberal economists. mobile
Archives
June 2002 July 2002 August 2002 October 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 April 2003 December 2003 June 2004 September 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 March 2005 April 2005 June 2005 August 2005 January 2006 February 2006 January 2009 April 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 November 2009 January 2010 February 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 May 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 January 2013 March 2013 May 2013 June 2013 December 2013 February 2014 June 2014 November 2014 August 2015 January 2016 April 2016 April 2017 July 2018 December 2018 September 2019 December 2019 August 2020 January 2021 October 2021 May 2022 June 2022 July 2022 October 2022 December 2022 January 2023 June 2023 July 2023 August 2023 September 2023 October 2023 November 2023 December 2023 January 2024 February 2024 March 2024 April 2024 May 2024 June 2024 July 2024 September 2024 October 2024 Short List: Brad Delong Yahoo Long List: Arthur Silber The Note Arts and Letters Daily Andrew Tobias Daily Howler Talking Points Memo New Republic Armed Liberal Eschaton Eric Alterman Slate Salon TAPPED David Corn (Nation) BuzzFlash Max Sawicky Oliver Willis InstaPundit Patrick Ruffini National Review Weekly Standard Amygdala BartCop Andrew Sullivan Drudge Report Romenesko Media News Matt Yglesias Daily Kos MyDD PLA William Burton Matt Welch CalPundit ArgMax Hullabaloo Pandagon Ezra Klein Paul Krugman Dean Baker TomPaine Progressive Michael Barone James Howard Kunstler Pundits & Editorial Pages NY Times Washington Post LA Times USA Today Washington Times Boston Globe Stanley Crouch Jonah Goldberg Molly Ivins Robert Novak Joe Conason Gene Lyons WSJ Best of the Web Jim Pinkerton Matt Miller Cynthia Tucker Mike Luckovich "What's New" by Robert Park Old Official Paul Krugman New Official Paul Krugman Unofficial Paul Krugman Center on Budget & Policy Priorities Washington Monthly Atlantic Monthly |
Saturday, September 17, 2011
(Via Yglesias) JEFFREY GETTLEMAN (NYT) - Famine Ravages Somalia in a World Less Less Likely to Intervene NYT - How to Help Victims of the East Africa Famine Matthew Yglesias - Be The Change You Want To See In The World NYT: Portraits of Grief Wikipedia - Troy Davis Case (Via Gary Farber) Lena Groeger (Wired) - The Dead, the Dollars, the Drones: 9/11 Era by the Numbers Violet Socks - Reclusive Leftist here’s an excerpt from Richard Clarke’s Against All Enemies, describing the conversations happening in the White House on September 12, 2001: Susie Madrak - CBS/NYT Polling . . .The poll found that nearly three-quarters of Republicans said they thought Social Security and Medicare were worth their costs. Arthur Silber - Once Upon a Time. . . Shorter Netanyahu: We're a good people, so it's not possible for us to do anything bad. Siegbert Tarrasch: "It is not enough to be a good player: One must also play well." tweets from dsquared & co: DD "simple" plan for financial regulation: loan growth > deposit growth = visit from regulators Re: Brooks column on limits of government responsibility for the economy, I think he's conflating productivity and employment. The three main fundamentals of an economy are productivity, distribution & employment. Government cannot magically increase productivity, can partially affect distribution (at least, it can make sure everyone has access to affordable basic education and health care), and not only can, it must be held accountable for achieving full-employment. I actually think the productivity numbers would be more accurate and meaningful, and a better guide for policy, if they included the unemployed/discouraged workers in the calculations. re: "let him die", I guess my fantasy "grand bargain" is that conservatives give up on the idea of lightening their load by chucking people off the bus, liberals give up on the idea of lightening their load by putting it all on the backs of the rich. Conversation I had with someone: "Obama can't do anything about jobs. No politician can. It's being driven by deep forces, outsourcing, globalization. Jobs will come back in this country only when wages equalize with India & China". Me: What about Germany? Same first world wages, but they've been good at reducing unemployment. "Oh, but their politics is completely different. . ." Obviously, the world did not fall at Obama's feet after his jobs speech, but I still think his current strategy of proposing something that might work but might not pass is better than strategy of proposing something that might pass but won't work, or the strategy of proposing nothing because prosperity is just around the corner. One other possible strategy: Congress, 1) here's your budget. 2) here's the number of jobs you must create 3) how you do it is up to you.
Comments:
Post a Comment
|