Whoops, didn't see this was already posted..Krugman on the Stimulus"What the Centrists Have Wrought"

[amborin]

"I’m still working on the numbers, but I’ve gotten a fair number of requests for comment on the Senate version of the stimulus. The short answer: to appease the centrists, a plan that was already too small and too focused on ineffective tax cuts has been made significantly smaller, and even more focused on tax cuts.

According to the CBO’s estimates, we’re facing an output shortfall of almost 14% of GDP over the next two years, or around $2 trillion. Others, such as Goldman Sachs, are even more pessimistic. So the original $800 billion plan was too small, especially because a substantial share consisted of tax cuts that probably would have added little to demand. The plan should have been at least 50% larger.

Now the centrists have shaved off $86 billion in spending — much of it among the most effective and most needed parts of the plan. In particular, aid to state governments, which are in desperate straits, is both fast — because it prevents spending cuts rather than having to start up new projects — and effective, because it would in fact be spent; plus state and local governments are cutting back on essentials, so the social value of this spending would be high. But in the name of mighty centrism, $40 billion of that aid has been cut out.

My first cut says that the changes to the Senate bill will ensure that we have at least 600,000 fewer Americans employed over the next two years. The real question now is whether Obama will be able to come back for more once it’s clear that the plan is way inadequate. My guess is no. This is really, really bad."

<http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/appeasing-the-centrists/#comments>



"February 8, 2009, 5:25 pm

Happy Stan

Stan Collender offers the most cheerful assessment I’ve seen for a while — not about the economy, or about the disappointing stimulus plan, but about Obama’s prospects for getting more on a second round. Collender says that in the months ahead there will be several opportunities to introduce new spending in a way that isn’t subject to a filibuster.

I hope he’s right, and that Obama has not shot his bolt. Because what’s coming out of the current deliberations is really, really inadequate. I’ve gone through the CBO numbers a bit more carefully; they’re projecting a $2.9 trillion shortfall over the next three years. There’s just no way $780 billion, much of it used unproductively, will do the job."

[Thrill]

1. Krugman welcome to the world of Policy making in this country

When you have to get Conservative Democrats to vote with the Liberal Democrats. Its hard to get these guys to go along with it. I'm still surprised they are signing off on 800 Billion

[amborin]

2. very difficult situation, no question

[Peace Patriot]

3. We are going to pay dearly for all those 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines,

with the code owned and controlled by far rightwing corporations, with 100% non-transparency in half the voting systems in the country, and 99% non-transparency in the rest.

I was thinking: The whole House and a third of the Senate is coming up for re-election in 2010. We have to throw about half the House out of office, and whoever is running for Senate re-election who voted against the Jobs bill or undermined it in any way.

But we can't. We can't do that. Our right to vote has been too seriously compromised. With the 'TRADE SECRET' code and the 99% to 100% non-transparency, far rightwing CEOs can easly--EASILY!--control who gets to Congress (and watch out in the primaries, cuz that's where a lot of it happens).

I've criticized Paul Krugman for not addressing this issue. WE CANNOT CHANGE CONGRESS WITHOUT TRANSPARENT VOTE COUNTING. This is what non-transparent vote counting is FOR. That's why they fast-tracked these election theft machines all over the country. I originally thought it was primarily to keep the Forever War going. I think now that it had a dual purpose, and that the primary purpose was the Financial 9/11 that the Bushwhacsk pulled off, just before this last election. I also think both Obama and the Democratic Party were fraudulently denied a much bigger landslide. And there is now a statistical study of the election data, by experts, who believe this as well.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8179485

So, tell me, Paul, how do remedy this situation, without transparent vote counting? You think all these Bushwhacks and "Blue Dogs" are suddenly going to get religion, if you yell at them long enough--or we all do? Why are they deaf? You're a smart guy. Explain how all this corpo/fascism got so entrenched, and, why, when we vote, nothing changes?

[amborin]

4. have you emailed him concerning this?

[Peace Patriot]

7. I can't remember, but I think I did. It was four years ago.

I was upset right after the 2004 election, that Krugman went on vacation, and didn't support the poor activists in Ohio who were working so hard to investigate, to get a recount, etc. It was such a dark, dark time. I couldn't believe that anyone who cared would go on vacation at that moment.

He seemed to be the only voice in the entire corpo/fascist media scene who was for the people and writing good columns. I expected him to say SOMETHING. We were so alone, the few of us who were onto this--black-holed by everybody, even our own party, even leftist blogs (except for DU).

But I just can't remember if I did. I might have been too upset.

[Bjorn Against]

5. Actually Krugman was one of the first major columnists to write about voting machine fraud.

He started taking the issue on in 2003, here is one of the columns he wrote about it: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940CE2DF1E3AF931A35751C1A9659C8B63

[Peace Patriot]

6. Thank you! I didn't know this. I will read it.

Note: I read many of his columns, but miss some. I guess I missed his mention of this issue. But his silence right after was 11/2/04 was notable and haunting and upsetting.

[Peace Patriot]

8. It's a VERY GOOD COLUMN! 2003. Mea culpa, Paul! You DID warn people. nt

[Bjorn Against]

9. Here is another one...

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F03E5D71139F930A15752C0A9629C8B63

[amborin]

10. thanks for finding those links

here is another:

<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/27/opinion/27krug.html?ex=1234242000&en=f14cb1b1c0a854b7&ei=5070>


and another:

<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/19/opinion/19krugman.html?scp=12&sq=krugman%20and%20vote%20fraud%20and%20kerry&st=cse>