by Metatone
Mon Jul 8th, 2013 at 01:26:05 AM EST
Economics and Politics by Paul Krugman - The Conscience of a Liberal - NYTimes.com
I've been having a strange reaction to recent news about economic policy. Stuff is happening: the Fed bungled its communications, doing its bit to undermine modest economic progress; the European Commission is sorta kinda relaxing its demands for austerity; the Bank of England appears to have issued forward guidance that it's going to issue forward guidance; and so on. But with the possible exception of Abenomics, it's all pretty small-bore stuff.
And that's disappointing. We had what felt like an epic intellectual debate over austerity economics, which ended, insofar as such debates ever end, with a stunning victory for the anti-austerity side -- and hardly anything changed in the real world. Meanwhile, the pain caucus has found a new target, inventing dubious reasons for monetary tightening. And mass unemployment goes on.
So how does this end? Here's a depressing thought: maybe it doesn't.
Thus starts Krugman's blog today. As usual, I recommend you read it all, it's not that long and it's interesting. I post this though more out of psychological interest than anything. I think most of us in part cope with our political malaise using that old Marxist theory in the back of our minds - the notion that as things roll along badly, eventually it sows the seeds of change. We fear a descent into fascism or failed states, we hope for (flavour depending on who you ask) the rise of the left.
However, as Krugman suggests, there's another way for our societies to fail, not with a bang, but a whimper, a fall back into permanent high unemployment, poverty and inequality:
front-paged by afew
Economics and Politics by Paul Krugman - The Conscience of a Liberal - NYTimes.com
But won't there be an ever-growing demand from the public for action? Actually, that's not at all clear. While there is growing "austerity fatigue" in Europe, and this might provoke a crisis, the overwhelming result from U.S. political studies is that the level of unemployment matters hardly at all for elections; all that matters is the rate of change in the months leading up to the election. In other words, high unemployment could become accepted as the new normal, politically as well as in economic analysis.
I guess what I'm saying is that I worry that a more or less permanent depression could end up simply becoming accepted as the way things are, that we could suffer endless, gratuitous suffering, yet the political and policy elite would feel no need to change its ways.
[editor's note, by Migeru] Bumped
