You know, with the newest employment numbers, I have no doubt Krugman is right:
O.K., Thursday’s jobs report settles it. We’re going to need a bigger stimulus. But does the president know that?
Let’s do the math.
Since the recession began, the U.S. economy has lost 6 ½ million jobs — and as that grim employment report confirmed, it’s continuing to lose jobs at a rapid pace. Once you take into account the 100,000-plus new jobs that we need each month just to keep up with a growing population, we’re about 8 ½ million jobs in the hole.
And the deeper the hole gets, the harder it will be to dig ourselves out. The job figures weren’t the only bad news in Thursday’s report, which also showed wages stalling and possibly on the verge of outright decline. That’s a recipe for a descent into Japanese-style deflation, which is very difficult to reverse. Lost decade, anyone?
Wait — there’s more bad news: the fiscal crisis of the states. Unlike the federal government, states are required to run balanced budgets. And faced with a sharp drop in revenue, most states are preparing savage budget cuts, many of them at the expense of the most vulnerable. Aside from directly creating a great deal of misery, these cuts will depress the economy even further.
The problem is that while Krugman is probably right, he was also right last week when he said that climate change is a serious issue and that we need to spend a lot of money to address it. And he was also right the week before that when he said that we need to do something about the health care system. And on and on.
Add to that, the opposition, which stood by and did nothing when Bush exploded the deficit in peactetime, and then write things like this (and this really is a wingnut tour de force- almost every sentence contains multiple falsehoods, distortions, and outright gibberish):
Porkulus has utterly failed, as has the Obama administration’s fiscal policies. Businesses have conserved capital in the face of massive new taxes and costs associated with Obama’s stated fiscal policies, such as cap-and-trade, foreign-income taxation, and the higher interest rates that will spring from the massive deficits Obama plans to create. The capital necessary for growth won’t appear in the market under these conditions, as we have clearly seen. When will the media begin to hold this administration responsible for Obama’s economy-killing agenda?
Now some of you might disagree, but I happen to know that Ed Morrisey is not that god damned stupid. I read him before he signed on with the Malkin empire, so I know he is just playing along because he knows what pays his bills. But he doesn’t have to believe this stuff, nor does Michele Bachmann really need to believe that the Census workers will- actually, I’m not really sure what she thinks the census workers are going to do. They are just playing a game to convince the people dumber that them, and believe it or not, there are a lot of those people out there.
So Krugman is right. Again. But there isn’t anything that anyone can do about it.
MattF
I’m a Krugman fan– he’s clear, he’s over-the-top every now and then (no, climate change denial isn’t treason), and he drives wingers absolutely nuts. Compare, e.g., with Bob Herbert. I’d bet that the Collected Writings of Bob Herbert make all the same points that Krugman makes– but I wouldn’t actually know, because I’ll never read them.
Aaron
I think Krugman, like the DFH issue, speaks to the fact that bipartisan bills and compromise, as appealing as they often are, are not always the right answer. This is particularly true when one of the negotiating parties is batshit insane.
However, and correct me if I am way off, but I thought I read that only a very small portion of the original stimulus money have been distributed?
someguy
Sure we need a bigger stimulus. It’s not coming from the Chinese, who aren’t buying our debt any more. Nor is it coming from printing more money, which will cause big inflation. The only alternative is a tax hike. Since a stimulus that was roughly a 28% increase in the federal budget wasn’t enough, and it’s going to be hard to finance a comparable new amount with debt, we’ll need major tax hikes immediately. Alternately, we could impose a one time wealth tax. Good luck on getting the Dems to pass this.
khead
The damage is still the same whether Ed is “game playing” or not.
So quit with the “Ed knows better” bullshit and just keep teeing off on him like a John Daly drive.
Blue Neponset
IMO, it is worse that Ed is willfully lying about this stuff.
I have more respect for people who truly believe something stupid than those who pretend to for a paycheck.
Re: Krugman
One thing the wingnuts were kind of right about was that the stimulus money will take a while to work itself into the economy. The stimulus bill passed on Feb 17th. Four & 1/2 months is not enough time to spend all that money.
hidflect
Ahh yes… The Lost Decade. Here in Japan we are now into our 18th year of the lost decade and it looks likely to continue for the next 5 years at least. I must say, this is the longest decade I’ve seen for many a decade…
donovong
While Krugman is way too fond of reminding us that he was a fan of Hillary over Obama, I agree wholeheartedly with most of his economic opinions – which either belies my ignorance of economics or his political gamesmanship.
He was right all along about the stimulus being too small, and right about the need to spend more on the environment and health care. Personally, I am willing to let those making over $250K pay for a great deal of it, and am willing to allow my taxes to go up to take up the slack.
And I don’t give a shit if Morrisey et. al are simply going through the motions to fake out their fan base. That just makes them whores.
metricpenny
Krugman is right. It needs to be soon and the money needs to be put directly in the hands of Americans.
My simplistic plan is for the Treasury to write a check in the amount of $15 to $20k to every adult American on the grid.
If only half spend it, that translates to increased sales tax revenue to the states. That will lead to hiring, at least on a retail level. Then the retailers need additional skilled labor to handle the hiring, accounting, etc.
Some, who are now able to afford a mortgage or a car payment, but don’t have a down payment, will use it to make those purchases. More sales tax (cars) and an increase in property tax collections. Real estate and car industries begin to recover.
Some will pay down their unsecured debt (me for instance). With less going out each month on these payments, I can save and spend. I’m unable to do either right now.
As more companies become profitable, and more Americans are put back to work, an increase in income and FICA taxes occurs.
As companies become profitable their stock prices rise. Americans’ retirement plans start to recover their value.
The dollar becomes devalued, but doesn’t this create an increase in exports? More jobs, income and FICA taxes and spending.
What am I missing other than the deficit grows? It’s going to grow anyway and/or we’re going to experience a SERIOUS depression.
I’m no economist and I have a pretty thick skin, so please don’t hold back on the rebuttals.
kay
@Aaron:
That’s true, only a small portion has been distributed. They should know now what works and what doesn’t. In my purely anecdotal experience, the 250 one-time bonus to all Social Security recipients was stupid. I’m not sure why we gave 250 dollars to people who were and are on a fixed income. Their situation hasn’t changed. They aren’t spending it.
A better choice was the extra in unemployment checks. People really appreciated that (it’s only 25 dollars/2 weeks in my state) and they spent it.
I listen to Paul Krugman, but he did an interview on CNN last week where he backed off his dire predictions on the banks. I think that makes him more, not less credible, incidentally. He’s willing to admit he might have been off a little off on the banks. That was before this job number.
I think it’s too early to talk about another stimulus. I see the political problem, and I don’t blame Krugman at all for jumping on the number to hammer his original point, but, like the “green shoots”, it’s just one number.
sparky
ok, let’s assume all these people know they are lying.
the situation seems akin to the problem with tobacco. remember the tobacco institute? shills to study the question of whether smoking caused cancer. bought the companies another generation of smokers, so it was worth it for them. and there, right there, people is the problem. when you set up a country that is today run on the notion that thou shalt have no god other than mammon, this is the result.
so, what to do?
here are a couple of suggestions
–instead of engaging with these arguments, just call them out as whores. there is no point in engaging in debate with people who are not acting in good faith. incidentally, this is why they advance so many contradictory arguments–they don’t care about the actual argument just whether it “works”, defined loosely as people agreeing with the other side.
–begin the process of structural change in the US. this means rearranging the Union so that the Senate is not so lopsidedly run by small states (eg, vested interests)
–begin work on a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s Buckley decision, which, structurally speaking, has been a catastrophe for the US. that’s the decision that said money is speech and that consequently you could spend as much of it as you wanted to get elected. yes, it’s true that it’s not as if the US Congress wasn’t corrupt before, but this decision made it legal. today all people do is wrangle over silly loopholes. since you cannot remove the vested interests, the only thing you can do is make a level playing field. it will not guarantee better results but it’s a start.
and for those of you who think that these are pipe dreams, well, they are pipe dreams now, sure. but we have to start somewhere, and endless dickering within the existing system isn’t going to work. if anything demonstrates this, it’s the Obama administration to date where hope and change meets the reality of structural vested interests.
kay
Can they re-allocate the TARP money to stimulus? They had 56 billion left over (best estimate, they won’t say) and they got 60 billion back. Is that just naive?
That’s with the 100 billion allocated but not spent to prop up the whiny and petulant finance sector so they can compete on a tilted playing field with manufacturing and service:)
sparky
ps: i know nothing i suggested is exciting, but the US got this way in no small part due to structural issues that made it easy to create the dysfunction we have now. changing the figureheads at the top matters, but only at the margins. though we have just lived through a pretty damn large margin, admittedly. now, before you start thinking i am saying Obama = Bush, think of Harding with nuclear missiles and you’ll see what i mean.
Mr Furious
@metricpenny: Sounds like as good a plan as anyone else’s…and might actually stand a better chance of passing.
Knowing that any more noble public works plan (my fantasy preference) or straight-up health care giveaway would maintain it’s price tag yet be rendered worthless by a thousand giveaways and compromises, I want someone to tell both of us why that’s wrong.
Fuck trickle-down. Whether from Reaganomics’ route through the wealthy or some liberal fantasy of building a solar grid. Might be time for bottom up.
Six months ago I was filled with the HOPE™ that Obama and the Dems would use their power for good and usher in a massive WPA plan. I see now that was pretty fucking naive of me.
El Cid
Good point. Why are there so many of these damn annoying people whose job is to write and talk publicly insist on telling the damn truth all the time & shit even when politicians may not feel like they’re in a position to do the apparently correct thing?
People like Krugman ought to spend more time writing about stuff that politicians feel ready to do, right?
JGabriel
donovong:
Fixed. Some ho’s take it up out of desperation. Morrisey, et. al, clearly do it out of choice.
.
JGabriel
kay:
Uh, in my anecdotal experience, they are spending it. Mostly on little things like a car repair they’ve been putting off, new bedding, a small LCD monitor to replace their dying CRT, etc. So, it helped some people. I can’t speak to its larger effect on the economy however.
.
Surly Duff
The point that amazes me is that the current unemployment rates are the highest we have seen in 26 years. Hmmm…26 years ago it happened to be 1983. Who was leading the country in 1983? Reagan you say? Well, this is different. In 1983 it was Carter’s fault just like this time it is Obama’s fault.
How is it that in 1983, 3 years into Reagan’s first term, the recession was in full swing and Carter was still getting the majority of the blame for the economic woes of the country, while 26 years later, a recession that was evident in 2007 is being blamed on the new President only 5 months into his term? Why is idiocy so rampant?
Brian J
Are you referring to the fact that Republicans are feckless hacks or the fact that the economy is going to need another jolt? If it’s the former, I’m not particularly worried…if there are legislative ways, like reconciliation, around their most destructive tendencies. Hell, taking a long term view, perhaps their descent into uselessness is a good thing if it allows us to get to 67 Senate seats. Granted, if we can’t pass anything worthwhile until then, a lot of suffering will continue.
If it’s the latter, it looks like Krugman is right again, but there are still plenty of solutions. We could, as Brad DeLong suggested, guarantee the debts of each state to relieve them of balanced budget requirements and to let them run their own stimulus programs as each saw fit. Or we could simply pass another stimulus. The latter may be the simplest option in theory, but will congress go along? If not, Obama simply needs to crack some skulls together. His administration should do everything short of anything that’s legal to get reluctant members of the Democratic party to go along. If Ben Nelson, for instance, is being a pain in the ass, make it a priority to stage rallies and public relations events in Nebraska so he can’t escape the pressure. I’m all for bipartisanship, but when you’ve got tools on one side and useless seat fillers on the other, it’s time to bat them back and move forward.
kay
@JGabriel:
I know the SSI disability folks spent it, so I would split it into two groups, retirees and others.
I had seniors telling me they didn’t need it and thought it should go to people who didn’t have any income coming in every month.
I know anyone can use 250 dollars, and I know a middle class retirement income isn’t princely. I don’t resent them getting it. I just would have allocated it to people who have fixed expenses and didn’t plan on months and months with no income. Retirees immediate situation didn’t change. I would have allocated it to people who took a real-time hit, who had a change in income.
mclaren
While Krugman is right, it’s frustrating to read him because the time has long passed when we could have done anything about the problems he points out. In fact, that window closed back in 1981. This all goes back to the senile sociopath Ronald Reagan, the cruel man with the kindly smile.
Jimmy Carter nailed it with his “malaise” speech. If America had put in place the policies Carter outlined in his “malaise” speech, we wouldn’t have the problems we’re having today. Our army wouldn’t be stuck in 2 quagmires in the middle east, global warming wouldn’t be threatening to drown New Orleans and Miami and Key West and turn the midwest grain belt into a dust bowl, our deficit wouldn’t be strangling us, and we wouldn’t be paying $3 a gallon for gasoline at the pump.
But the American people listened to Jimmy Carter’s “malaise” speech and squawled like 3-years throwing a tantrum and voted en masse for the senile sociopath Reagan. And Reagan jacked up the deficit out of sight with insane military spending (which never ended — insane military spending is still with us, it never went away) and he ripped the solar panels off the White House and said to hell with CAFE standards for U.S. cars, so we’re still driving gas-guzzling land yachts like the Hummer and all those SUVs, and Reagan topped off the giant turd sandwich he gave us with an extra special diarrhea frosting by appointing a bunch of Christian fundamentalist religious fanatics to head government agencies and by subverting the constitution with a conspiracy to flagrantly violate the law from inside the White House (Iran Contra).
Gee, sound familiar?
We had a chance to fix all this in 1981 by re-electing Jimmy Carter. America pissed away the opportunity. Now we take the consequences.
kay
@JGabriel:
Retirees also have health care coverage, and that’s not true of the unemployed. COBRA costs, if it’s even available. I think that should have been factored in. Working middle class were reeling with health care out of pocket costs before the crash. Now they don’t have insurance. I get really worried. I worry they are going to be so far down they can’t get back up.
Brian J
The economy doesn’t appear in many ways to be getting better, but there are some signs it’s stabilizing in the sense that it’s not getting much worse. Now, as you said, much of the stimulus money hasn’t been released yet, but isn’t it possible that that was the point?
This might not be the most apt comparison, but if you’ve broken a bone to the point that it’s popping out of your skin, before you can bandage the skin and set the bone, it needs to go back inside the body. Isn’t it possible that the economy needed to fall a little further as it naturally might before any sort of healing in the form of stimulus spending might have a strong effect, or is it a case of the sooner, the better?
The Raven
Historically, it took three years of disaster, from 1929 to 1932, before the federal government was willing to act against the Great Depression. It looks like it’s going to take at least that long now. Obama could start by firing Geithner and Summers, and hiring some economists who actually care about the poor and the middle class. Activists can keep working on the conservative Senate, which is the biggest legislative roadblock. The USA could stop fighting wars abroad and start taking care of its people at home. But this will all take time, and the rest of the world is not going to wait while the USA gets itself together. (Cross-posted to Krugman’s comments section.)
Brian J
Because the Republicans realized a long time ago that you could easily bully the press into spreading nonsense and lies if you pressed firmly enough. It doesn’t matter if the information in question is a matter of fact–the average of a tax cut, who did what to whom–as opposed to a value judgment–like whether or not taxes should be higher–nor does it matter that the information in question is easily refutable if wrong. For some reason, the press insists on treating claims that the earth is flat with the same respect as anyone normal who claims it’s round.
That doesn’t explain all of it, of course, but it definitely explains more than half of it. I’m almost certain that if the press called the Republicans on their bullshit (and the Democrats on theirs, too, except the Republicans in the past decade seem a little more high on using nonsense to advance their agenda) the majority of what they propose wouldn’t see the light of day.
DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)
Fix’t bettah.
Comrade Dread
Perhaps.
I’m slightly more cynical. I think these cheerleaders would love (as a political party) to see things get worse, so their own fortunes rise.
Paul MacDonald
John,
Thanks for pointing out that Ed isn’t that stupid. This makes what he is doing, as has been mentioned, not very good at all.
Et Tu Brutus?
Apparently , he ain’t FDR , and virtually all the ‘Dems’ are in the pockets of the rich. They have the rest of the year to show some sense and backbone if they want to keep my vote- otherwise it’s going to be Green party or some other hopelessly futile gesture of electoral disgust. Chomsky was dead on- all hail the corporate state.
media browski
Krugman is wrong. Sorry, but he often ignores basic econonomics when it suits his purpuse (proving he was right). In this case kruggles disingenuously forgets the policy lag problem, that any keynesian stimulus will be delayed as it moves through the gov’t. The stimulus bill funding hasn’t even been distributed yet; all the green shoots so far have resulted from people feeling like we are on a better economic path, from having confidence in the Obama admin (a fact kruggles is loath to admit, I’m sure).
Further, once that 800 or so billion is actually distributed (federal rfps just went out for many programs, btw), there are still the energy and health care bills funds ready to go out, each to the tune of about anothe 100 billion. These are de facto stim bills, as Obama aluded to back in February, and good ways to spend the funds as well.
K. Grant
I read Krugman regularly, and nod in agreement with his diagnosis, but he still bothers the piss out of me.
Why?
Quite simply, I want him to get off his god-damned perch and drive down to DC, pull up to the White House, and offer his services to the Obama administration. If he is all that fired up concerned, then do something, get your hands dirty, work with people you don’t particularly like. I don’t care if he feels that he has to debase himself to work with the Orzags and Summers of the world, I really don’t care if he thinks that Obama doesn’t ‘respect’ him – if he can help, then pitch in, that is patriotism. Talk is cheap Dr. Krugman, time to start actually doing something.
media browski
Metricpenny,
Economist here. Giving a one-time payment has been tried by both Bush and JFK. In both cases it was less effective as stimulus than direct gov’t spending. Plus direct gov’t spending can be used on infrastructure projects that have long-term benes to all of society.
kay
@media browski:
No one remembers the Bush direct check to consumers stimulus. No one. It’s gone down the rabbit hole. It wasn’t even wildly controversial. It just went out, and then everyone forgot about it.
There were two if I remember right.
Gregory
So he isn’t stupid, he’s just dishonest.
media browski
Kay,
Reminding people that there’s nothing new (and that most of it was stupid) under the sun is my reason for being.
Yep, Bush/Wingnut Congress 2001 wasted the SURPLUS that Clinton’s economic policies collected on non-stimulating non-infrastructure investing non-payiong down debt non-saving for times like now vote buys.
Paul L.
Lets look at the last time Krugman offered his services to the Federal Government.
Can’t say I agree based on Krugman’s past predictions during a recession.
The Raven
The current Senate would never confirm him. Besides, I think he had his fill of administration under Reagan. That one of his colleagues at the time was none other than Larry Summers probably had something to do with it.
Zuzu's Petals
No, Ed isn’t as stultifyingly dumb as some of them, but I still saw him post lazy-minded crap at his old site, shrieking points he obviously agreed with but didn’t have the sense or, if you prefer, the integrity to research.
Re the size of the stimulus: isn’t the health care package designed to also stimulate the economy?
Elie
Media Browski
You speak a lot of good sense even though you are an economist!
I am always surprised at the impatience of those who are theoretically smart enough to know better. How on earth after 5 months could we even think that the stimulus had even been distributed, much less spent or had time to have any effect? Even I know that.
Brian J made a pretty good analogy to when someone has a compound fracture and the bone has to be put in place first before it can be bandaged and allowed to heal. Exactly. We are still putting the bone back in the right place including the correct infrastructure and other expenditures.
It is maddening when people on the left or progressives call for things like firing Geithner, not because in the end he may not work out, but because just firing someone and replacing them in this kind of situation is so premature and overly simplistic to what needs to happen to fix our situation. In some instances you just have to think that people are not honestly trying to understand the situation but are repeating some knee jerk mantra that they think they should repeat over and over.
Krugman should know better about the impact of the stimulus but he has all these obligations now to be in print and on his blog and he can’t seem like he doesnt have anything important to say. In his mind that necessarily means a critique because one just cannot have anything worthwhile to say if its in support of policy — only if it is a critique. His “homies” on the left/progressive just dig that too.
binzinerator
It matters that he knows better. It matters that he is just doing this for the money, that he probably doesn’t believe what he writes himself or actually holds no such animosity.
This is more than just dishonest. This is creeping into little Eichmann territory.
Wile E. Quixote
@John Cole
These people are stupid, immature, narcissistic and nihilistic fratboys and the best way to deal with them is to beat the living shit out of them every chance you get. Seriously, look at Paul L. or any of the other conservative trolls here, none of their arguments are about advancing any cause, it’s just about pissing people off and getting attention for themselves, it’s the equivalent of ringing doorbells at night and running away or TP’ing someone’s house.
The Raven
Krugman, in the article under discussion:
Last time I looked 3.5 << 8.5.
By Odin, an economist is supposed to be able to read and to count!
He probably does, though, or will come to. This is a studied phenomenon. People who lie often enough come to believe their lies. Add in the hominid malleability of memory, and most people can believe six impossible things before breakfast. This old corvid has a curse: a too-good memory. Krawk!
The Raven
Writing, on the other hand, this corvid doesn’t do so good. I was addressing the people who are objecting that the stimulus hasn’t started working yet and somehow lost that paragraph in the editing. Oh, well.
Meantime, Loudon Wainwright III has The Krugman Blues.
media browski
@Elie: Thanks! I strive to remain calm in the face of systemic silliness.
Shell Goddamnit
Our army wouldn’t be stuck in 2 quagmires in the middle east, global warming wouldn’t be threatening to drown New Orleans and Miami and Key West and turn the midwest grain belt into a dust bowl, our deficit wouldn’t be strangling us, and we wouldn’t be paying $3 a gallon for gasoline at the pump.
And Katrina. Carter was reining in the water boys – Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corps of Engineers – who were running wild all over the landscape. With more accountability MRGO & the Industrial Canal might not have been built, and those levees might not have been constructed on unreinforced sand & gator spit.
My contempt for the people who refused to face what appears to be any facts whatsoever for the past 30 years, sadly, continues to fester.
Shell Goddamnit
Well DUH, MRGO & the canal were already in place. Still with the levees and taking what steps could have been taken instead of building more projects all over the place.
AllenS
Would all of you people who want more stimulus money, please, please, tell me where you’re going to get it. Krugman is a fool. He’s a former Enron advisor. If you look at his overall record going back 20 years, you’ll find out, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He does nothing but fulfill a political need for some people who haven’t considered the implications of spending money that isn’t there. Tax people more? Don’t you understand that the more tax people have to pay, the less they have to stimulate the economy. Do any of you people work? Do any of you own a house? The present monetary policies of this administration, and the one that preceded it, in the long run, will saddle the next generations with a debt they’ll never be able to pay.
mclaren
Thanks for showing your grotesque lack of basic economic knowledge, Allen S. One of the most fundamental principles of modern economics assures us that running high deficits in a severe economic downturn is unimportant. Printing massive amounts of money at the bottom of a recession doesn’t cause inflation because inflation is produced by two components acting in tandem: the actual money supply, and the velocity of circulation. So even if the money supply is gigantic, if the velocity of circulation is near-zero (as it is in a depression), you get no inflation.
Idiotic and foolishly ignorant gibberish like the drivel Allen S is spouting about the alleged problems of “spending money that isn’t there” aptly echoes the ignorance and folly of the Hoover administration. They feared “spending money that wasn’t there.” Of course, it was only when FDR started to spend money that wasn’t there that the U.S. economy took off again. You may have heard of the term “priming the pump.” Look it up, Allen S. Read a book on economics sometime. Learn something.
The kind of laughably ignorant nonsense Allen S spouts of course entirely misses the point. The big issue right now is that Obama and company aren’t doing enough. They’re not providing a big enough stimulus to get jobs growing rapidly enough, which of course will take care of those tax receipts Allen S is making a fool of himself by whimpering about. But more importantly, Obama needs to crack down hard on the massive fraud that still infests our banking system and Wall Street. Until huge numbers of major players on Wall Street and in the banking system start to go to jail, there won’t be serious reform — and without serious reform, this economy won’t recover. Until we get real reform of the banking and corporate and wall street sectors, TARP etc. is all just trickle-down economics Part Deux.
AllenS
I’ve forgotten more than you’ll ever know, mclaren. I was also one of those 50+ million who received a $250 stimulus Social Security check. How much did that cost the government? What good did it do? Since you think that “running high deficits in a severe economic downturn is unimportant”, how about giving each one of us $5000 next year. Why not? Just print more, right?
AllenS
What the hell. Next year I’d like a $50,000 stimulus check. Why not, I won’t have to pay it back. Make it an even million, would ya. Then I’ll go away. I promise. Right after I laugh my way to the bank.
LongHairedWeirdo
That’s what’s bothered me for a long time. When people are willing to lie like this – to say things that are nasty, and untrue, things they know are untrue – the country is in danger.
The biggest danger is, if they create enough of a tinderbox, sooner or later, a firebrand will come along and *whoomf*, there’s a huge blaze. If a presidential candidate can joke about how we should “bomb bomb Iran” while on the campaign trail (and not just in a quiet corner when he thinks there are no live microphones), what happens if someone says the same kind of thing and isn’t joking?
But even without that, the idea of setting American against American can’t help but weaken this country.
mclaren
You’re an ignorant kook, Allen S, and the proof is clear. You’ve never even heard of “velocity of circulation,” you can’t even spell it, and your infantile tirade entirely ignores a discussion of basic economics 101.
Typical wingnut gibberish.