Bruce Bartlett: Keynes was right, I was wrong
Krugman linked to this today.
Major advocate of supply-side economics admits that Keynes and Krugman have been practically completely right on the facts.
(Yep, it's another old Conservative Movement Republican complaining that when he tried to talk sense about science, reality, and data, he was shut out by the party. This is a genre now.)
It's gratifying to see one of the most influential advocates of the unsustainable wackiness called supply-side economics finally realize that this sort of policy doesn't really sustain broad economic growth.
It seems to have become a convention of corrupt politicians to strip it down to the following crude formulation: "Cut taxes. Win votes."
From where I sit, it seems supply-side politics is mostly bribery of special interests and flattery of public wishes for something-for-nothing. It's not real economic science.
P.S.: I've seen enough old Conservative Movement Republicans complain that when they tried to talk sense about science, reality, and data, they were shut out by the party, that I think there's a historical explanation for it. Movement Conservatism (as opposed to traditional moderate conservatism) is defined by rejecting science, reality, and data that don't fit certain preconceptions or certain ends. What they have done to Bartlett is what they and their fathers did to the liberals when they started this movement, and what they've done all along. It's the basic premise of the conservative schools, conservative media, conservative churches, and so forth--at least it's the basic premise for many in the movement. It's a shame that someone like Bartlett can't use his position to modify their thinking, but rejection of Keynes is a litmus test, apparently.
Major advocate of supply-side economics admits that Keynes and Krugman have been practically completely right on the facts.
(Yep, it's another old Conservative Movement Republican complaining that when he tried to talk sense about science, reality, and data, he was shut out by the party. This is a genre now.)
It's gratifying to see one of the most influential advocates of the unsustainable wackiness called supply-side economics finally realize that this sort of policy doesn't really sustain broad economic growth.
It seems to have become a convention of corrupt politicians to strip it down to the following crude formulation: "Cut taxes. Win votes."
From where I sit, it seems supply-side politics is mostly bribery of special interests and flattery of public wishes for something-for-nothing. It's not real economic science.
P.S.: I've seen enough old Conservative Movement Republicans complain that when they tried to talk sense about science, reality, and data, they were shut out by the party, that I think there's a historical explanation for it. Movement Conservatism (as opposed to traditional moderate conservatism) is defined by rejecting science, reality, and data that don't fit certain preconceptions or certain ends. What they have done to Bartlett is what they and their fathers did to the liberals when they started this movement, and what they've done all along. It's the basic premise of the conservative schools, conservative media, conservative churches, and so forth--at least it's the basic premise for many in the movement. It's a shame that someone like Bartlett can't use his position to modify their thinking, but rejection of Keynes is a litmus test, apparently.