Paul krugman thesis

I am disinclined to think that Republicans are yet ready for a serious questioning of their philosophy or strategy. They comfort themselves with the fact that they held the House (due to gerrymandering) and think that just improving their get-out-the-vote system and throwing a few bones to the Latino community will fix their problem. There appears to be no recognition that their defects are far, far deeper and will require serious introspection and rethinking of how Republicans can win going forward. The alternative is permanent loss of the White House and probably the Senate as well, which means they can only temporarily block Democratic initiatives and never advance their own.

Economists Robert Kuttner and Paul Krugman have supported the contention that the repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act contributing to the subprime meltdown [21] [22] although Krugman reversed himself several years late saying that repealing Glass-Steagall is "not what caused the financial crisis, which arose instead from ' shadow banks .'" [23] Andrew Ross Sorkin believes the repeal was not the problem. The vast majority of failures were either due to poorly performing mortgage loans, permissible under Glass-Steagall, or losses by institutions who did not engage in commercial banking and thus were never covered by the act. [24]

This is a very attractive cop-out. The reality is that the loss of jobs and upward transfer of wealth were the result of conscious choices by Washington policy-makers, and those policies could be changed. (Economist Dean Baker has written a book about this, aptly named Rigged .) But acknowledging this means abandoning the Democratic Party’s attempts to build a winning electoral coalition of wealthy whites and people of color—serving the economic interests of the affluent and addressing only the social and cultural concerns of people of color.

Paul krugman thesis

paul krugman thesis


paul krugman thesispaul krugman thesispaul krugman thesispaul krugman thesis