What Obama Wants - Paul Krugman/NYT

[WillyT]

What Obama Wants
By PAUL KRUGMAN - NYT
Published: July 7, 2011

<snip>

On Thursday, President Obama met with Republicans to discuss a debt deal. We don’t know exactly what was proposed, but news reports before the meeting suggested that Mr. Obama is offering huge spending cuts, possibly including cuts to Social Security and an end to Medicare’s status as a program available in full to all Americans, regardless of income. Obviously, the details matter a lot, but progressives, and Democrats in general, are understandably very worried. Should they be? In a word, yes.

Now, this might just be theater: Mr. Obama may be pulling an anti-Corleone, making Republicans an offer they can’t accept. The reports say that the Obama plan also involves significant new revenues, a notion that remains anathema to the Republican base. So the goal may be to paint the G.O.P. into a corner, making Republicans look like intransigent extremists — which they are.

But let’s be frank. It’s getting harder and harder to trust Mr. Obama’s motives in the budget fight, given the way his economic rhetoric has veered to the right. In fact, if all you did was listen to his speeches, you might conclude that he basically shares the G.O.P.’s diagnosis of what ails our economy and what should be done to fix it. And maybe that’s not a false impression; maybe it’s the simple truth.

One striking example of this rightward shift came in last weekend’s presidential address, in which Mr. Obama had this to say about the economics of the budget: “Government has to start living within its means, just like families do. We have to cut the spending we can’t afford so we can put the economy on sounder footing, and give our businesses the confidence they need to grow and create jobs.”

That’s three of the right’s favorite economic fallacies in just two sentences. No, the government shouldn’t budget the way families do; on the contrary, trying to balance the budget in times of economic distress is a recipe for deepening the slump. Spending cuts right now wouldn’t “put the economy on sounder footing.” They would reduce growth and raise unemployment. And last but not least, businesses aren’t holding back because they lack confidence in government policies; they’re holding back because they don’t have enough customers — a problem that would be made worse, not better, by short-term spending cuts.

<snip>

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/opinion/08krugman.html

:kick:

[WillyT]

1. Ouch !!! - That Last Paragraph...

Mr. Obama’s people will no doubt argue that their fellow party members should trust him, that whatever deal emerges was the best he could get. But it’s hard to see why a president who has gone out of his way to echo Republican rhetoric and endorse false conservative views deserves that kind of trust.

[blkmusclmachine]

8. +1

The WH has done precious little to have earned any trust whatsoever from Progressives/Liberal Democrats (or should I say "The Professional Left"?) on this or any of a slew of other important issues.

[Bluebear]

10. 'Obama’s people will no doubt argue that their fellow party members should trust him'

Including here!

[Somawas]

19. Thuck Fat.

[lark]

29. Recommending that last paragraph x 1,000,000,000,000

So understated, yet so very hard hitting and absolutely true.

[jannyk]

2. Kick & Rec!

[Faygo Kid]

4. +1

I take no joy in criticizing the president. But the appointment of Alan Simpson to cochair the Catfood Commission was the clear sign of where he was headed. Now he wants to extend the "payroll tax holiday" for another year, further weakening Social Security. These actions add up, and I don't like their total.

[fascisthunter]

3. Kick and Recommend! (nt)

[ClarkUSA]

5. Krugman always wrings his hands beforehand but praises the final result.

[keopeli]

6. He had no praise for the 09 stimulus package that was negotiated. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

7. I believe he did. I read some OPs here which praised it but with the caveat that...

... Krugman knew Republicans refused to make it as big as it needed to be so Pres. Obama had to take what he got, which was still more than many thought he'd get.

[amborin]

9. no, Krugman had no praise for the stimulus & how O got zero rethug votes for capitulating to them on

the useless tax cuts it included

[ClarkUSA]

11. I disagree, for the reasons I mentioned above.

[amborin]

13. the 'reasons' you mentioned above are inaccurate, however

[liberation]

20. Yay for circular reasoning

or was it pretzel logic.

[Jakes Progress]

33. Yep. He believes. That makes it so.

[Better Believe It]

12. I don't blame him. It was terrible, way short of what was necessary. Roubini called it "puny".

Only a small fraction of that so-called stimulus was devoted to actual job creation. Most of it was tax cuts.

[Doctor_J]

39. You True Believers need to get your story straight

usually you tell us that Krugman hates Obama and everything he does, and always has. Now you're telling us he ends up liking everything?

:wtf:

[senseandsensibility]

14. Why isn't he replacing his economic advisors?

This is the first I've heard of this, and it seems very significant. Their is an economic CRISIS going on, and he is listening to his political team? I wish this would be publicized more.

[JCMach1]

15. With people like Krugman, Stiglitz and Reich... Now that would be my economic team

[senseandsensibility]

16. Yours and mine both.

How sad that there is absolutely NO chance of that happening in a Dem administration.

[jtown1123]

17. Don't forget James Galbraith.

[liberation]

21. Why would he?

Obama has the team he wants, to help him craft the policies he wants.

[bvar22]

18. Obama is getting exacxtly what Obama wants.

I have never subscribed to the popular myths at DU that:

*Obama is a weak President who can only do what Congress lets him do,

*Obama is doing exactly what he promised during the campaign,

*Obama is naive,

*Obama does not know how to play hardball,

*that it is ALL Joe Lieberman's fault.

For gawds sake,
Obama made it to the Top of the Heap in Chicago.
You do NOT do this if you are weak, naive, and can't play hardball.
Obama is a savvy president who KNOWS how to Play the Game,
and is getting what he wants.
He has even said so with regards to Health Insurance reform.




Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

[Doctor_J]

40. Your pic is great

When Boner says "Americans do want to raise taxes", he is LYING

[Metta]

22. He's more and more wolf-like under those sheep's clothing.

In addition to abandonding the platform he ran on. He's sooo short sighted and makes things worse for himself.

[sabrina 1]

23. He is implementing the Global Austerity Program, designed

to destroy Social Programs across the globe, to bail out the corrupt, Global Corporatists who destroyed the world's economy, to save them from having to contribute one dime to paying back what they stole and to force the bill onto the Middle Class, or what's left of it anywhere.

He's implementing the IMF solution, right here in the US, but pretending he's trying to reduce the deficit.

I would not be surprised to learn that the Republicans are simply playing their part in next big shakedown of the poor and the working class.

They won't be finished until the workers in what used to be first world countries, are willing to take wages nearly equal to their counterparts in third world countries.

They will privatize everything, if they can get away with it. They own the media so they control the message.

You cannot look at what happened in Argentina eg, Africa and now Europe, and here without seeing the exact same pattern.

Naomi Klein and John Perkins warned us.

[Dont call me Shirley]

31. You hit the nail on the head!

[LooseWilly]

36. Yup. Globalization inevitably *has* to lead to level wages globally...

and since the odds are slim of prying first-world wages out of corporations for the developing world, the inverse will likely be the case.

Unless workers unionize globally...

[sabrina 1]

41. That's what needs to happen. 'Unless workers unionize globally'.

THEY have been busy on a Global level while the people have been kept in their individual 'boxes' or countries. NOW we know what has been going on and the people of the world WILL have to unite to defeat the Corporations of the world, who are more than willing to let millions die if that's what it takes to hold on to their power and money.

Global Corps. They were treating each country like their own personal banks. They totally raped third world countries, then moved on to second and first world countries.

[Jakes Progress]

24. Fire geitner. Hire Krugman.

Or admit that you are just sitting in the WH to fulfill grover norquist's every dream.

[MissDeeds]

25. K&R

[FreakinDJ]

26. Reaganomics made the Recession / Reaganomics won't Fix It

continuing Tax Cuts for the Wealthy will only increase the depth of the Recession

[Jakes Progress]

34. But under Obama we're gonna get reaganomics.

[fascisthunter]

27. If So... he is INSANE

[on point]

28. He gets it right again. As usual. He should have been Treasury Sec!

[onehandle]

30. No fucking way. That wouldn't have been all bipartisanshipy.

Nothing less than Ronald Reagan's rotting corpse would have been supported by the GOP.

[McCamy Taylor]

32. Obama wants... to win in 2012. Period.

[Doctor_J]

38. Well, he's going about it in a strange way

since a huge chuck of his 70 million supporters from 2008 won't be around this time.

[BrightSideOfLife]

35. I don't want to admit that he need to be primaried

I don't want to admit that it might be necessary to primary President Obama, but I really start to wonder what kind of DINO we fell for. My first worry came when I saw the documentary on his Law Review editor days. If I remember correctly, everyone thought Obama would take the editor's seat and veer left, but he did the exact opposite and listened to the few conservative members of the law review at the least as much as the progressives on the staff.
I wish Dean were running.

[Doctor_J]

37. Echoing GOP lies

and the loyalists wonder why we don't trust Obama any more