My New Krugman

I like to consider myself fair, and honest, with regard to the articles and opinions I read. Sure, I tend to agree much more with conservative/libertarian pieces I read, but how to what degree would I know that if I didn't read stuff I knew slanted the other way? That part of my reading took a sizable hit when the New York Times decided a year or so ago to make their columnists accessible only via paid subscription. Only very infrequently, thanks mostly to the gentlemen at RealClearPolitics.com, can I catch one of their articles as syndicated through another paper. For a fleeting moment, I thought Maureen Dowd was the left's answer to Ann Coulter. Even though I generally disagreed with her, she made me laugh. Alas, her ability to make me laugh lasted for a piece or two, while my impression of her snootiness continues. Bob Herbert occasionally has a good, honest, personal piece. But then he goes and shows his true liberal colors. The one I miss the most, however, is Paul Krugman, if only because we share a bit (and I mean just a bit) of academic background in economics.

Rejoice! I have found a new leftie columnist I like to read regularly: Harold Meyerson of the Washington Post and American Prospect. This guy takes positions opposite mine on everything from the minimum wage (that which contributes to unemployment, particularly amongst youth), the estate tax (which makes death a taxable event), unions (which retard economic growth and intrude on the free market) and more. I have to say, though, I did agree with him on the inevitable political realignment from Democrat to Republican in the northeast, much like the south turning the other direction in the last decade or so.

He wrote a good one Thursday (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR2006120601671.html), starting off by casting his lot with those who thought ads run against Harold Ford in the recent Tenessee senate campaign were racist. He most surely has in mind the one with the lady claiming she "met Harold at the Playboy party...hey Harold, call me." Joshua Marshall over at TalkingPointsMemo.com was the first one I can remember who raised a stink about that ad. In an email exchange, he said he'd give me, and by extension my wife, who agreed with me (two native southerners from Texas), the benefit of the doubt that I was "just acting stupid and not the real deal." Gee, thanks, but 3 college degrees between us tell me differently. Where, in the ad, was the N-word used? Where, in the ad, did it say African-Americans were in any way inferior to Americans of other descent? I guess some of us are more colorblind than others.

Then, unfortunately, he goes the disingenuous demagogue route by claiming that Republicans "blocked stem cell research." This kinda stuff really peeves me. They did NO...SUCH...THING! What they did do was strictly limited federal funding of such research. (Unfortunately, however, many of them did do it on the grounds that it would be funding the destruction of life. That's true, and personally, I would not want my taxes going to fund such practices, but how about taking the if-it's-really-as-promising-as-is-claimed-to-be,-why-are-private-investor-funds-not-enough? Someone once said "the market is smart; government is dumb.") It's one thing to have an opinion. I can at least respect that. But don't intentionally mislead people. What good does it do to be anything less than honest??

Finally, he wouldn't be a true liberal if he didn't rail against Wal-Mart. My favorite passage here was "expands this practice...of offering low wages and no benefits...threatening the living standards of unionized retail workers". What?? Exactly what kind of living standards should people who work retail jobs have? I worked retail. My sister worked retail. Most of my friends worked retail. But, we worked retail when we were either living with our parents and/or going to school. I remember when one day I thought to myself 'I don't want to go through life supporting myself on these wages,' so I got off my ass and went to school. It says a lot about a person who parks his/her life working behind a cash register (slacker) and even more about their enablers (democrats, unions, liberals). Retail unions combine with wage controls (minimum wage rates) to suck ambition from people. Moreover, they keep many teens from getting their foot in the door of the workplace. Think about it: isn't that who low hourly-wage jobs are perfect for, those just breaking into the workforce who don't need to support themselves?

There does seem to be one difference between Meyerson and Krugman. Krugman is highly educated in economics, whereas I see no such evidence that Meyerson is. When one speaks about economic matters, he knows what he's talking about. The other one does not. One would tend to think, therefore, that one can be taken seriously. But it has always seemed blasphemous to me for an economist to support liberal policies, which, more times than not, intrude on the free market and retard growth.