Health-care reform: Krugman misses Nixon

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2009 5:24 AM GMT
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/opinion/31krugman.html?ref=opinion

    This Nicholas Kristof Op-Ed by Nicholas Kristof is also worth reading (though I know it was already posted in another thread):

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/opinion/30kristof.html


  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Aug 31, 2009 2:51 PM GMT
    Krugman is always insightful and he's hit the nail on the head

    We have government that has become ungovernable
    at every turn the republican party has stymmied progress
    we have had more filibusters run by the republicans in the last few sessions than in the entire history of the United States

    They block every bill that comes down the pike
    if they can
    There is no negotiation
    We had big bills become law in the time of Nixon and even during Ronnie

    But now every minute detail becomes bogged down in infights
    The polarization of the republican party in their catering to these birthers and the teapartiers is getting ridiculous
  • mustangd

    Posts: 434

    Aug 31, 2009 3:07 PM GMT
    hey deregulation has worked hasn't it? look how much money it has freed up to be used to purchase influence in the legislative and judicial systems.
    reaganomics was a success...icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2009 4:18 AM GMT
    I don't think it's that government is ungovernable, but that we've accepted rhetorical flourish as truth -- in this case Reagan's "Government isn't the solution; it's the problem." Or something similar.

    Government is neither. It is neither the solution nor the problem, but good government is essential to a well functioning society or country, and good government is philosophy neutral. The regulation undertaken by government or government direction is no different. Regulation can be bad, or it can be good, there can be too much or too little, but regulation itself is neither bad nor good, and if there's too little or too much it's because we've made it that way.

    The same goes for government, if government is bad it's because we've made it so, and if we don't believe in the ability of government to be functional it won't be. It's a catch-22: government hasn't delivered so we don't believe in it, and we don't believe in government therefore it can't deliver. This goes for both parties in the United States, and I'm not convinced the current president believes in the ability of government to deliver -- actually I'm not convinced he believes in much other than his ability to give a good speech.

    But good governance is neither a property of either the right or the left -- the Scandanavian countries have demonstrated that under certain conditions leftist philosophy can produce good governance, but then places like Singapore, Korea and Taiwan have demonstrated that rightest or even military dictatorships can produce good governance, and prosperous socities. On the other hand there are places like Argentina and Italy where poor governance by both the right and left has proven ineffectual in solving the problems faced by such countries despite the natural resources and human talent or the educational advantages these countries have or may once have had.