Krugman
writes:
A correspondent asks how it’s possible that Paul Ryan would release such an extreme, unprofessional plan.
Folks, he’s always been like this. The image of Ryan as a thoughtful, serious conservative never had any basis in reality. The original “roadmap” was just as nonsensical as the new proposal; the Ryan-led attack on health reform was crude nonsense.
Ryan the serious deep thinker was a fantasy of Beltway types who think entirely in terms of images and perceptions, and can’t be bothered to dig into the policy details. Oh, and the haplessness of Heritage is also old news to anyone who has been paying attention to the think tank’s actual output..
After reading this, I thought to myself, all true. Then I looked at the words again and realized that you could substitute "Krugman" for "Ryan", "regressive" for "conservative", "NYT" for "Heritage", "attack on Austrian economists" for "attack on health reform", "rag's" for "think tank's" and you would have a pretty good description of Krugman.
It's sad. The left calls Ryan's plan extreme because it cuts too much. The right calls Ryan's plan "bold" and "courageous."
ReplyDeleteAll of this is crap. There's nothing extreme about this plan and it's certainly not "bold" and "courageous." It's weak tea and will likely only have the effect of keeping government as large as possible by avoiding fiscal meltdown (which is the path we are on now).
Part of me says bring on the meltdown so the economic and political realities will force meaningful government shrinkage.
I submitted Mr. Wenzel's post to the Krugman blog and it was published in its entirety:
ReplyDeletehttp://tinyurl.com/3r84djo
did you guys see this recent video of krugman speaking? http://f4a.tv/fjEwSF
ReplyDelete