[lbo-talk] Krugman

[Seth Ackerman]

Rakesh Bhandari wrote:

>3. You seem to be saying that productivity gains are not so 
>impressive and widespread as to encourage a general upsurge in real 
>investment. But that's Jha's point, so don't understand where the 
>difference is.
>  
>

That's not what I was saying. Productivity improvements were 
concentrated in a few sectors, but that's exactly what you would expect 
from a boom. Every boom is focused on particular sectors. The point is 
that the upsurge in productivity was certainly not caused by eliminating 
low-productivity activities but rather by large and genuine productivity 
advances in major sectors of the economy.

I'm not dogmatic on this point. It's quite possible the productivity 
surge is over, having ended in 2006. But it was certainly very real. 
Hardly propitious terrain for anyone arguing for the long-term 
stagnation of capitalism.

Seth