[lbo-talk] Krugman: "The question then is why."

Jordan Hayes jmhayes at j-o-r-d-a-n.com
Thu Jan 26 13:16:11 PST 2012


Last July there was a thread about whether Larry Summers was "for" more stimulus or not.

It starts here:

http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2011/2011-July/007493.html

But I wanted to pick up here:

http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2011/2011-July/007682.html

[ the "he" in the first quote (from me) is Larry Summers; Doug is in the middle ]


>>> And yet: he was only an advocate for doing "the bare minimum"
>>> -- and Romer says he was a bully, and got his way.
>>
>> He claims otherwise.
>
> Of course he claims otherwise :-)

On Monday Krugman blogged this:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/larry-and-the-invisibles/

<snip>

Ryan Lizza’s new piece on policymaking in the Obama

administration is out. One of the documents the piece

rests on is a December 2008 policy memo from Larry Summers

to Obama on the size and composition of stimulus; Ryan

shared it with me to get my take, and some of what I said

is reflected in his article.

The key thing I took away from the memo is that it does not

read at all like the current story the administration gives

for the inadequate size of the stimulus, which is that they

knew it should be larger but had to face political reality. </snip>

(the rest of it is good, and it's short)

And I still stand by this:


> The other thing to consider is this: if Summers *had* been
> for more stimulus back then, don't you think we would have
> gotten it?

/jordan



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list