John Harwood, writing in the New York Times today, explains at great length that the current high unemployment is a mystery that has "flummoxed" economists of both parties. He claims that no one could blame Obama since unemployment went higher than anyone would have predicted when Obama took office. How desperate is that? It is the rough equivalent of saying that the doctor who gave the patient the wrong medicine has no responsibilitty when the patient gets very sick since the doctor did not understand what was wrong with the patient. That argument would not fly in a malpractice lawsuit, and it will not fly in the court of public opinion. Indeed, the very fact that Harwood feels compelled to try to come up with such a lame excuse for Obama shows how damaging Obama's economic incompetence has proven.
One thing is certain: the stimulus bill which was sold as a way to lower unemployment has been a titanic failure -- no jobs created but at enormous cost. Had Obama actually tailored the spending to items likely to increase economic growth, there could have been job creation. Instead, Obama funneled the money to Democratic interest groups who got payoffs for supporting him in the election. the media, however, virtually ignored this aspect of the stimulus, instead portraying it as money spent to create jobs. Now that there are no new jobs it is a "mystery" as to what happened.
I have a degree in economics. It is just a BA, I did not study economics in graduate school. It was clear to me, however, that the stimulus spending chosen by the administration would never create huge numbers of jobs. It is no mystery. It is just simple economics. Maybe someone should explain this to the New York Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment