From the “told you so” department:
Will the stimulus actually stimulate? Economists say no
WASHINGTON — The compromise economic stimulus plan agreed to by negotiators from the House of Representatives and the Senate is short on incentives to get consumers spending again and long on social goals that won’t stimulate economic activity, according to a range of respected economists.
Meanwhile, in intellectually unstimulating news, a bizarre attack on Arnold Kling becomes an even more bizarre attack on Megan McArdle that includes this wonderful nugget:
white people are far less concerned about racism than they are about accusations of racism
Making a nasty remark directly targeting “white people” in the course of claiming you’re speaking out against racist acts (the basis of which claim is a very indirect reference, something one might interpret as perhaps having racial connotations) is not just hypocritical but nonsensical enough to make one wonder how someone with any critical thinking skills could possibly write such a thing.
Sigh. The real victim in all this is rational thought.
{ 3 comments }
I think your comments on the Kling/McArdle imbroglio is on target, but while I agree that the massive spending bill is unlikely to provide any stimulus, it is a bit early to say “I told you so” or judge its effects. It hasn’t even been passed yet (soon enough). That umpty-dozen economists dislike it is important, but not dispositive. They could be wrong. I don’t think they will be proven wrong, but I find the rush to declare that events have proven one right, before the events take place, is rather forced.
How dare you question the Dear Leader’s wisdom?
It was only a matter of time before someone like Wolcott declared that criticism of the President is racism. I mean, really, isn’t the only thing surprising here that it didn’t happen sooner?
Comments on this entry are closed.