Things happened over the weekend other than the Broncos game and the Grammys. Not that anyone — except apparently New York Times economist Paul Krugman — is interested in anything else. Read Dave Krieger’s column on the game here. We’re not linking to anything about A-Rod. Bridgegate and Obamacare controversies continued apace. And Jacqueline Bisset‘s Grammy acceptance speech.
Paul Krugman lit up his corner of the web with first a micro post and then a macro post on the continuing trouble with today’s conservative economics. In a nutshell, today’s conservative economics is politics not economics:
Micro: How’s the Republican unemployment “tough love” experiment going in North Carolina? Not well: “If there were anything to the theory that cutting unemployment benefits encourages job search and somehow translates into higher employment even in a slump, harsh policies should work better at the state than at the national level. But there is no sign at all that North Carolina’s harshness has done anything except make the lives of the unemployed even more miserable.”
Macro: “Let me summarize: we had a scientific revolution in economics, one that dramatically increased our comprehension of the world and also gave us crucial practical guidance about what to do in the face of depressions. The broad outlines of the theory devised during that revolution have held up extremely well in the face of experience, while those rejecting the theory because it doesn’t correspond to their notion of common sense have been wrong every step of the way. Yet a large part of both the political establishment and the economics establishment rejects the whole thing out of hand, because they don’t like the conclusions.”
When Obamacare opponents tell their personal stories about Obamacare, why do they never seem to quite ring true? Here’s Rand Paul’s story. Via Fact Checker.
The Broomfield election last November, which saw results sea-saw on a fracking ban, has been ridiculously bungled. The municipal election and its bad handling didn’t receive the close attention it deserved as events were unfolding. Now the question on fracking may have to be put to the voters all over again.
Everything the New York Times knows about Christie’s bridge to nowhere.
Chris Cillizza says Christie is still the frontrunner for 2016. So far.
Ariel Sharon’s corrosive legacy. Via the New Yorker.
Jeffrey Goldberg says Sharon never changed. Was that a good thing? Via Bloomberg.
The argument: Every war movie is, in fact, a pro-war movie. Discuss. Via the Atlantic.
Jacqueline Bisset, I saw your movie, wondered if you ever felt that way. Do you ever fear the images of Hollywood? Have you felt a shadow of its pain? I thought of you in Clifton in the rain.