I got about half way through this Paul Krugman, and it felt like I had read his piece before:
Americans tend to believe that we do everything better than anyone else. That belief makes it hard for us to learn from others. For example, I’ve found that many people refuse to believe that Europe has anything to teach us about health care policy. After all, they say, how can Europeans be good at health care when their economies are such failures?
Now, there’s no reason a country can’t have both an excellent health care system and a troubled economy (or vice versa). But are European economies really doing that badly?
The answer is no. Americans are doing a lot of strutting these days, but a head-to-head comparison between the economies of the United States and Europe – France, in particular – shows that the big difference is in priorities, not performance. We’re talking about two highly productive societies that have made a different tradeoff between work and family time. And there’s a lot to be said for the French choice.
First things first: given all the bad-mouthing the French receive, you may be surprised that I describe their society as “productive.” Yet according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, productivity in France – G.D.P. per hour worked – is actually a bit higher than in the United States.
And then I read on, and that is when I realized- I HAD read this before. When Matt Yglesias wrote it a month ago:
The average American works 46.16 weeks per year, while the average Frenchman only works 40.54 weeks per year. What’s more, 67 percent of Americans are working age, and only 65 percent of French people are.
So France has fewer workers, working shorter weeks, and taking longer vacations — that is why they make less money. Per hour of output, France is generating much more value than America is. If your buddy made 50 percent more than you because he was working 50 percent longer and had four weeks less vacation than you did, it certainly wouldn’t be obvious that your buddy had a better job than you do. Similarly, while it’s clear that the French have less stuff than we do, they have more leisure time, and it’s not obvious that our situation is better. Indeed, it’s not clear what “better” would even mean in this context.
Strangely similar… Of course, Matt being Matt, he just provides the data. Krugman being Krugman, tries to turn it into a pointed attack onk Republicans.
Pelikan
Are you confusing Americans with Republicans? Krugman seems to be picking on all of American society and it’s.. ah, obsession with making more of that shiny, shiny lucre.
Of course if you want to pin that aspect of our culture squarely on your former party, go right ahead.
Sojourner
But isn’t it the Repubs like Stormy who are the French bashers? Wasn’t it a Repub who came up with the freedom fries insanity?
It’s not at all strange that Krugman would have these thoughts. Hell, I’ve made the same arguments to my colleagues who worship at the alter of American capitalism. And there was a letter to the editor in the NYT whose author made a similar argument.
Krugman had an earlier column that peeked under the hood at claims that the US has the best health care in the world. He used hard data in his column to show that this is an unfounded position.
Mike
“Are you confusing Americans with Republicans? Krugman seems to be picking on all of American society and it’s.. ah, obsession with making more of that shiny, shiny lucre.
Of course if you want to pin that aspect of our culture squarely on your former party, go right ahead.”
Krugman is picking on a particular philosophy, one that the Republican party, at least some aspects believe in. Also this: “And whatever else you may say about French economic policies, they seem extremely supportive of the family as an institution. Senator Rick Santorum, are you reading this?”
Might explain why John feels he’s attacking Republicans. That’s because, well he is.
I notice that although he mentions it, he makes little note of France’s Unemployment record. I guess in Krugman’s World, the Unemployment Rate is not something that is considered by Economists when trying to judge the success of government policies and a country’s economy. Also I went and looked at that organization he mentions. I assume (I’m not sure) that what he is looking at is the Hourly earnings for manufacturing (See here). And Indeed according to this, France is higher than the US. But then…so is Mexico. Which makes me wonder why we have all these illegal aliens coming across the border. The fact is, this is only ONE Indicator, which Krugman as usual tries to stretch to make his point. (For another example of Krugman doing well…what he does all the time, go here.)
Then there’s this:
“And they even offer some statistical evidence that working fewer hours makes Europeans happier, despite the loss of potential income.”
Maybe. I guess I can see where if someone is asked the question: “Does working less make you happier”, I think most Americans would say “Yes” to that as well, but I’m not sure I’d pin much on that. I’m wondering if a better indicator of overall “Happiness” might be in comparing Suicide rates (Since I think we can all agree very few “Happy” people kill themselves). WHO has that data.
You’ll note all those “Progressive” Countries like France, Germany, Belgium, Canada, Denmark and Finland (what the hell is going on in FINLAND?!) aren’t very happy. Funny Krugman not looking at Suicide rates as a possible indicator of happiness.
P.S. The Brits and Italians on the other hand are even happier than we are!
doinkman
Every time I read Matt Yglesias, I can’t believe the guy is 24. He is so far ahead of the game for his age.
Kimmitt
He’s a bright fellow.
Jess
I’m glad this issue is getting more attention, even if John’s just posting it here to be critical. I lived in the Netherlands and Belgium for several years, and have spent a lot of time in England and Germany as well. While I prefer the sheer lunacy of America’s multi-faceted attempts at a free society to the more homogenized and watered-down versions in Europe, it’s true that in many ways they’re living healthier, saner, more balanced lives than most Americans. The fact that the whole community has more leisure time (especially the unemployed!) means that they actually have a sense of community and family, something we’re sadly lacking in America these days. People have less stuff, but spend more time in the company of their friends and family, play more sports together, visit museums, travel, play music together, etc. Public transportation is excellent and reasonably priced. Food is also cheaper, and doctor visits and prescription medication is dirt cheap even if you don’t have insurance. It’s amazing what can be accomplished with a different set of priorities. We do have a lot to learn from Europe, not as a model to copy necessarily, but as an alternative to consider.
mere mortal
The likely reason you see Krugman’s column as an attack on Republicans is that only one party has made hatred of the French a political value, and that same party holds a dim view of labor as a political force.
Therefore I’m not sure how a positive discussion of workers’ rights in France vis-a-vis those of Americans can be made without being critical of Republicans.
As for Mike’s nugget of dishonesty:
“I notice that although he mentions it, he makes little note of France’s Unemployment record.”
Krugman merely mentions it specifically as a complicating factor and calls it “a real problem.” Or perhaps I’m being too hard on Mike, he could just be illiterate instead of dishonest in his desire to slam Krugman. Suicide rates as the data point for measuring societal happiness? Wow, look how happy the Syrians and Egyptians must be, maybe USA should change to a dictatorship to be that happy! Slamming Krugman for not using such an odd measure? What a clown.
– mere mortal
insider
You should have said “Something Flawed”.
We feel that people are giving Krugman far too much credit for his column which was, in a word, flawed.
Here is what Krugman should have written:
1. The French economy is stagnant and does not generate enough jobs for its citizens. The French unemployment rate is 66% higher than that of the U.S.
2. Being an unemployed Frenchman is not a choice or side affect of French worker’s spending more time with their families.
3. Most importantly, French people are not more happy or satisfied as their American counterparts as Krugman suggests. In fact, its quite the opposite.
We’ve detailed all of these arguments using many of Krugman’s same sources.
Krugman’s French Connection or Les Miserables?
The only people in the world who believe the French are having happy family fun seem to live in the ivory towers of downtown New York.
Stormy70
I work less hours than the French. I rule!
Freedom fries was stupid and I had nothing to do with it. sounds like a Senator came up with it.
Mike
“Krugman merely mentions it specifically as a complicating factor and calls it “a real problem.” Or perhaps I’m being too hard on Mike, he could just be illiterate instead of dishonest in his desire to slam Krugman. Suicide rates as the data point for measuring societal happiness? Wow, look how happy the Syrians and Egyptians must be, maybe USA should change to a dictatorship to be that happy! Slamming Krugman for not using such an odd measure? What a clown.
– mere mortal”
Believing Krugman is anything more than a partisan hack who’s been taken apart by so many different people so many times? What a clown.
Randolph Fritz
Prof. Krugman has an excellent reputation. There’s very few economists, of any persuasion, who would speak ill of his expertise, regardless of political disagreement.
As for what Krugman says here, repeating this point to a wider audience seems worthwhile; the Times is more more widely read than Yglesias’ blog, after all. And there is a central contradiction between the “family values” and populist Republican voters and the “anything for the rich” Republican policies, you’ve even noticed it, John. Krugman is just formalizing and clarifying it.
Stormy70
Krugman gets taken apart all the tume for his stupidity on a regular basis by economists who don’t color their analysis with politics.
Sojourner
Are those the same economists who claimed that a tax cut for the wealthy would pay for itself in increased tax revenues?
Stormy70
It’s too easy. I thought you read the Times? Did you miss this or did Kos not post this on his site?
Randolph Fritz
Stormy: based on your comments in this thread, I conclude that you can easily be taken in by a stock or insurance scam. I suppose you could be educated. I’d be happy to do so for an appreciable portion of your life savings. :-)
More seriously, a one-time rise in tax revenues is not going to wipe out the huge deficits the Bush administration is racking up, nor is there any reason to believe that revenues will continue high. You are making a chump’s argument here, and I wish you wouldn’t.
As for those economists who regard Prof. Krugman as a fool: name them. There are a few credible radicals, perhaps, who do so. You might also try naming his field; it isn’t hard to find out.
Stormy70
Tax cuts work, and I work in insurance, so I doubt I’ll be taken in by any scams. Although, they will certainly try, hee.
mere mortal
“Believing Krugman is anything more than a partisan hack who’s been taken apart by so many different people so many times? What a clown.”
Do you count yourself as someone who took Krugman apart with your feeble complaint that he didn’t mention unemployment rates often enough to suit you or that he didn’t use your bizarre pet measure of happiness which makes no sense?
Do you think John Cole took him apart when he noted that Krugman made the same point that Yglesias had made before in another medium?
I fear that you probably do.
Sojourner
Evidence please.
Your claims that they are working now are belied by the current status of the deficit.
Randolph Fritz
Soujourner, when the bookkeeping was done on the Reagan cuts, they didn’t work either; Reagan exploded the national debt. (no, it wasn’t spent on Democratic programs.)
Stormy, what part of the insurance industry are you in?
Knemon
By the deficit’s “status,” you mean that it’s shrinking?