The Stupidity of Austerity

Michael Kinsley: There are two possible explanations. First, it might be that I am not just wrong (in saying that the national debt remains a serious problem and we’d be well advised to worry about it) but just so spectacularly and obviously wrong that there is no point in further discussion. Or second, to bring up the national debt at all in such discussions has become politically incorrect.

Brad DeLong: Kinsley assumes that it must be the second explanation, and then goes on from there.

I can’t speak for anyone else who pushed back against Kinsley’s column from last week. Speaking for myself, however, I blogged about it because Kinsley was “spectacularly and obviously wrong.” I say this because almost everything I wrote in my response to Kinsley I knew at age 18 after taking Economics 101 in college.

Click here to read why Kinsley is spectacularly wrong.



Britain’s government is engaged in the steepest deficit reduction of modern times. People are losing, or will soon lose, benefits in the biggest shakeup in the shape and scope of Britain’s welfare state since its foundation more than 60 years ago. A team of reporters from the Financial Times tracks the cuts and their impact in this comprehensive multimedia project.

In this video, Sarah Neville discusses the project. Read her look behind the scenes of the project here.

This report is part of a Pulitzer Center-sponsored project “Britain: Charting the Impact of Austerity.”

To give the prize to the European community, at a time, effectively, when economically, it is promoting unemployment, creating real class divides in virtually every country in Europe, where it has led to enormous violence on the streets of Greece, because of the policies being pushed by the EU … it is a complete and utter joke.
Tariq Ali on the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to the EU [Via Verso Books]