How the Grand Bargaineers Hurt America
By
Matthew Yglesias | Posted
Tuesday, Oct. 9, 2012, at 12:15 PM ET
Jon Chait writes that "the liberal critique of Peterson Inc. is that
its advocacy of deficit reduction is wrong," but that his critique is
different. Rather, his issue is "that these groups are very bad at
understanding how to achieve their goal." The problem, according to
Chait, is that the professional deficit scold industry fails to
adequately account for the fact that it's the modern conservative
movement's foundational opposition to tax increases that prevents
deficit reduction. Noam Scheiber, reviewing Bob Woodward's book, seems to have a similar critique:
Woodward argues that the White House and Congress failed to reach a major deficit-reduction deal last summer because Obama didn’t provide the necessary leadership, even though this thesis is untethered from Woodward’s own reporting, to say nothing of reality.
Betsey Stevens & Justin Wolfers offer a similar argument in Bloomberg View this week, noting that over the past generation Democrats have consistently been the party of fiscal responsibility and the GOP the party of high debt.
That is all, I think, correct. But I'd like to push the idea that the
deeper critique is also correct—the focus on long-term fiscal policy is
misguided and it's the misguided nature of this focus that helps drive
the odd interventions into partisan politics.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home