After reading about the withdraw of Nobel Prize winner Peter Diamonds name from the nomination to the Federal Reserve’s board of governors due to ‘politics’, I had many thoughts & questions going through my head. The following is a word for word account of what I posted on Jared Bernstein’s wonderful blog entry on (6/7/11) that also focuses on this issue.
The economic and traditional policy setting debate has been infested with opportunistic doomsdayers who tend to attract more media attention due to the nature of their polarizing & flawed opinions. Politicians, media personalities, & (some) bloggers alike have become the modern day snake oil salesmen who offer quick, cheap, & unproven subscriptions to our economic ill’s. Recessionary & difficult times tend to lead to an environment where demagogues & individuals who prey on peoples emotions, can eventually dictate policy goals. This sociological phenomenon requires the effort by the ‘fact based crowd’ (particularly those supporting additional well targeted spending to offset the demand glut & the effects of deleveraging) to ‘frame’ the issues to the public in such a way that it is understandable & rational for them to support the correct subscriptions. Readily available facts, supporting evidence & historical lessons are sometimes not enough to convince the collectively flawed groupthink of the GOP/Teaparty ideology (which in itself supports the flawed supply side economic ideas of the past).
– Understandably the phrase ‘well targeted spending’ is a very complicated issue in itself. Although, that phrase represents an issue that needs to be discussed more thoroughly rather than dismissed.
– I understand my generalizing the GOP/Teaparty of other sympathizers might be seen as the wrong way to go about issues. Of course groups of individuals differ in many ways & have their own set of unique thoughts & opinions. Ultimately though, in America, the two powerful groups of Democrats & Republicans, often tend to echo & follow a general sentiment of policy goals that is created by their current party leaders & party participants that oftentimes run perpendicular to each others proposed national directions. Contemporary Republicans & Teaparty members want to take this country in a backwards direction & continue to ignore the reality of the modern world. Contemporary Democratic leaders like to sell the vision of adjusting to global competitiveness & continuing social & economic progress but oftentimes compromise in ways that hurt their own cause.