Gavin Kennedy tries to protect the terribly good name of Adam Smith here, though it is not as much a slight to Smith, as it is a condemnation of the political process. Personal debate stands attacked and injured by personal insult, no one actually accepting responsible debate resolution. When did all political issues devolve from debate to the War of Slogans. No one comes up with an idea which has not been mouthed at least fifty thousand times previously, and never first presented without having been highly vetted by Advertising agents. Sound-Bite technology has replaced any real debate, and often, has nothing to do with the real position of either Side. No one suggests there will ever be a better day, though One has to listen to grandiose plans every day. One of the reasons they are so great in design stands as assurance that such Plans will not actually be implemented. Neither Democrat or Republican actually want what they propose; they only desire for the Status Que to remain static.
Richard Gordon tries the new course of informing his Peers, without infuriating the political wing of the economists’ union. He mentions there will be weak hiring and strong productivity growth; Translation: The Consumption markets have lost about 20% of their Dollars, and about 50% of the Consumer desire for status consumption. Gordon believes Hiring will occur much faster than it did in the last Recession, stating there will be much less reliance on intangible capital. I agree with the contempt for capital which actually does not produce Profits, but for the life of me, cannot see How Gordon could equate this with increased Hiring. It is far more indicative of a double-dip recession progressing, than it would be for assumed risk of massive Hiring. The only element I can see to improve Employment is the creation of shortages of Product, highly doubted in the current economic matrix.
Paul Krugman is now proposing a Selective Service for Mathematics (I am teasing, Paul). What he is saying consists of a Statement that economic precepts must work out in both Math and logical Proof, in order to be sound. The difference between Sound and Truth stands that Sound should be Right, while Truth has little to do with Math models; did you not notice the degrees of Accuracy always associated with such models. Sound means that you possess a stable assertion, capable of being assumed without further proof. Sound economic principles also have a somewhat discredited history in economics, but We can leave that for another time. lgl