Comments on: Puzzling Through Brad DeLong

By: J Mann

J Mann — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 14:08:33 +0000

Back in 09, DeLong and Krugman both sneered at Mankiw for suggesting that the economy might not snap back to trend. I suppose that their model suggests that but for the parasitic economic overclass, it would have snapped back, but presumably they knew about the existence of a parasitic economic overclass back in 09 and should have included it in their model.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/roots-of-evil-wonkish/?_r=0

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2009/03/permanent-and-transitory-components-of-real-gdp.html

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Sat, 04 Jan 2014 12:28:49 +0000

Did I miss the paper that proved trend was destiny?

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 03 Jan 2014 18:58:28 +0000

Have we started the countdown for Brad DeLong to leave a vague, yet condescending comment here in response?

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Fri, 03 Jan 2014 18:56:53 +0000

“even some relative deterioration recently”

I hope that doesn’t look, in hindsight, like the understatement of the year.

So, let’s start he discussion early. What will be the dollar figure for what isn’t considered too little intervention?

By: Lord

Lord — Fri, 03 Jan 2014 17:06:30 +0000

Seven years with no return to trend is a long time. Progress was made in the 30s until set back in 37 and progressed from there again, but it was never really closed until the war. See a war on the horizon? In contrast we have no closure and even some relative deterioration recently. Yes, conventional macro is suffering its dark ages which include the idea that demand shortfalls can’t persist. No doubt someone out there would also insist the Fed setting interest rates at 20% and leaving them would cause inflation to rise to that level too since obviously the economy will always correct itself if left alone.

By: Daublin

Daublin — Fri, 03 Jan 2014 16:28:58 +0000

To pick one charitable point out of this mess, it sounds like a core part of DeLong’s perspective is that in the long run, growth conquers all. If you think the world has a hundred years of exponential GDP growth in it, then the only policy that matters is how to make that exponent large and to make it happen now rather than later.

Anyway, I agree about the odiousness of blaming it all on rich people. How has so much of modern thinking come to be captured by American political spats and class warfare?