On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Carrol Cox <[email protected]> wrote: > If those who see the crisis as something other than the beginning of a > New Depression are correct, then Krugman is correct. But if those, such > as Patrick Bond, who see the crisis as much deeper are right, then > Krugman is as far off or further off than those he criticizes. >
Krugman and other mainstream economists seem to think that 8.8% unemployment is the worst case scenario. Really? To arrive at this number they seem to be extrapolating from previous recessions in one way or another as in, x dollars of stimulus results in y% additional employment (see e.g. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/stimulus-arithmetic-wonkish-but-important/) Is this valid? Don't we already know that this is no ordinary recession. Does the "worst case scenario" merely represent a failure of the imagination? -raghu. -- "We in the industry know that behind every successful screenwriter stands a woman. And behind her stands his wife." _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
