Skip to content

Krugman Doesn’t Get It

13 January 2010

Nobel economics laureate Paul Krugman has a new column in which he lays out a defense of European social democracy. His central piont appears to be this: the empirical macroeconomic data do not support the contention that social democratic policies – the modern welfare state, essentially, with its punitive tax rates and generous (with others’ money, we must add) so-called “safety net,” or hammock – significantly impair economic growth and national prosperity. He says Europe’s not doing too badly despite the sizes of governments relative to the corresponding GDPs. Ergo, he says, conservatives shouldn’t be wringing our hands about Obamanomics and the socialization – nationalization – of the U. S. health care system. After all, Krugman writes, all the long-time democracies have national health care, and they’re doing just fine, thank you.

Let’s concede Krugman’s empirical piont for the sake of argument. qb doesn’t buy it, but qb’s not an economist.

But Krugman’s argument is only marginally relevant, if at all.

The American experiment was never principally about prosperity, anyway. The Founders, and the Pilgrims before them, viewed liberty not merely as a means to a more important end, such as prosperity, but as a worthy end in its own right. It was the royal oppression, not primarily the economic results, that gave rise to the insurrection against King George and his tax policies. It was the right of religious conscience – liberty of thought and association – that animated the colonists. “…Yearning to breathe free” was the piont, not achieving some arbitrary threshold of wealth.

Of course, though he hides behind the skirt of “not statistically different,” Krugman’s own performance data for the U. S. consistently exceed those of European nations in strictly numerical terms. Those differences might in fact be real; he just can’t prove it (or so he would have us believe). Very well; scientific method, and all that. But it wasn’t scientific method that filled the Mayflower. It was the clear air of political self-determination. Krugman doesn’t get it.

—–

Krugman is, in his heart, a technocrat. He would have us believe that we ought to leave governance to the scientific cognoscenti, the technical elite, who alone can tell us what is good for us, what “works.” We ought to trust them. Like Krugman, Obama thinks of the Constitution as an impediment to progress, which they define in redistributionist terms.

But history tells us that when government is given an inch, it takes a mile. Our founding documents are the product of genius precisely in that they focus squarely on what government must NOT do…for the sake, and even with the consent, of the governed.

On this, George Will emphatically agrees.

—–

Look, qb’s been to Europe. I love the food, the wine, the history, the languages, the art, the sophistication. But I wouldn’t want to live there, not for a minute. I love liberty too much. And I want my country back.

We cannot rely on the Supreme Court to vitiate this expansive claim on individual liberty; kill the health-insurance bill, and start over. With Madisonian principles, and Ockham’s razor, superintending.

qb

Advertisements
4 Comments leave one →
  1. Don Moore permalink
    13 January 2010 7:31 pm

    QB, I just discovered your blog, and appreciate so much of what you say. I am curious though as to why you consistently misspell “point” (as “piont”)–seven times on this page of postings. Is there a “piont” to it?

    • 13 January 2010 7:42 pm

      Long story, Don, going back 20+ years to grad school in Aggieland, when on-line Forums were just getting started and “flaming” was emerging as an art form. Thanks for your kindness, and for stopping by. qb

  2. Larry permalink
    10 February 2010 12:26 pm

    on the money, qb. if political arguments begin/end with the $ benefits, then everything’s on the table for a solution federales.

    read a bit o’ Mrs. Prez on “obeisity being a national security issue”. really?!? being slim will save our country? so, since fed gov’ment is supposed to be all about nat’l security, it only stands to reason that they should decide the fate of my health and into which doc’s hands i fall. yeah. makes sense. not.

    wondering… you read “5,000 year leap” yet? should be able to find a copy of this decades old tome. brings a righted perspective to many things about this republic we weren’t told in grade school. or high school. or college.

    joe bob sez check it out.

Trackbacks

  1. Time to Gloat? « Kingdom Matters

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: