adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Economy

Paul Krugman Is Right About the Economy, and the Polls Are Wrong – New York Magazine

Published

 on


One of the most uncomfortable arguments to make in America is that the people are wrong. It’s especially uncomfortable when the subject is something you experience in a more comfortable, privileged way than most people. And so when liberal economic elites insist the economy, which opinion polls consistently find the public considers terrible, is actually very good, it makes liberal economic elites come off badly.

Paul Krugman is one of those dreaded liberal elitists who believes the economy is actually good. So (at a much lower level of confidence and frequency) am I. We have developed a number of explanations for why people believe an economy that The Wall Street Journal recently called “the envy of the world” is so awful.

The most generous of these accounts is that people consider higher wages something they earned and higher inflation something that happened to them. But all the explanations involve conceding some level of basic irrationality on the part of the public. And the attempts to make sense of public assessments of the economy seem deeply unconvincing.

Biden’s low economic ratings are “not hard to grasp,” argues Robert Kuttner in the left-wing American Prospect, “None of the recent improvements have altered the basic situation of most Americans, in which reliable careers are scarce, college requires the burden of debt, health coverage is more expensive and less reliable, and housing is unaffordable.” The solution, Kuttner argues, is for Biden to implement “radical” economic reforms along the lines of those promised by Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Kuttner’s hypothesis fails to explain why Americans were thrilled by economic conditions as recently as 2019, when the same basic features of the economy remained in place. Indeed, it fails to explain why Americans have ever considered the economy to be healthy, given that Bernie-style social democracy has, famously, never been tried in the United States.

Michael Powell, writing in the Atlantic, flays liberals in general, and Paul Krugman in particular, along lines similar to Kuttner’s:

The modern Democratic Party, and liberalism itself, is to a substantial extent a bastion of college-educated, upper-middle-class professionals, people for whom Biden-era inflation is unpleasant but rarely calamitous. Poor, working-class, and lower-middle-class people experience a different reality. They carry the searing memories of the Great Recession and its foreclosure crisis, when millions of American households lost their home. A large number of these Americans worked in person during the dolorous early days of the pandemic, and saw its toll up close. And since 2019, they’ve weathered 20 percent inflation and now rising interest rates—which means they’ve lost more than a fifth of their purchasing power. Tell these Americans that the economy is humming, that median wage growth has nudged ahead of the core inflation rate, and that everything’s grand, and you’re likely to see a roll of the eyes.

Powell makes several claims here, all of them deeply flawed.

He argues the working class considers the economy terrible because of “searing memories” of the Great Recession and then the pandemic. Yet, like Kuttner, he fails to explain why these same voters considered Trump’s economy to be so splendid. Memories of the Great Recession and its aftermath were fresher under Trump than they are now. And the worst and deadliest period of the pandemic actually occurred under Trump, which makes the current nostalgia for Trump’s economy all the more incompatible with Powell’s hypothesis.

It is true, as he writes, that prices have risen 20 percent since 2019. But that doesn’t mean people have “lost more than a fifth of their purchasing power.” Purchasing power is a function of the relationship between what things cost and how much you have to spend. Wages have been rising faster than inflation since last year, and the average American is better off than before the pandemic.

What’s more, contrary to Powell’s argument that the working class has suffered under Biden’s inflationary economy, wages have grown much faster at the bottom than at the top.

Powell reasons that public opinion is essentially dispositive. If the people feel the economy is bad, then it’s bad, regardless of what economists like Krugman tell them. “Working- and middle-class Americans,” he argues, “are wiser to trust their feelings and checking accounts than to rely on liberal economists.”

The trouble here is that polling finds plenty of public optimism about the economy in contexts other than asking people how the American economy is doing. An Axios poll earlier this year found 63 percent of Americans rate their personal financial situation as “good,” a figure in line with historical levels. That is also reflected in people’s spending practices — they are behaving as though the economy were booming, even if they don’t think it is.

A Wall Street Journal poll last month of seven swing states found a gigantic disconnect between the public’s view of economic conditions in their own state and in the country as a whole. Fifty-four percent of respondents believe economic conditions in their state are excellent or good. But only 36 percent of respondents said the same of economic conditions in the country.

Now this was a poll of seven swing states, not the entire country. I suppose you could imagine the swing states are in dramatically better economic shape than the rest of America, though if that were true, you’d expect Biden to be polling a little better.

What this suggests to me is that public assessment of the economy reflects something other than an objective assessment of economic conditions. People think they are doing well and their state is doing well but the country is doing horribly. Must we assume some deep wisdom underlies these seemingly irreconcilable beliefs? Sometimes people, even with the benefit of close personal experience, just believe things that aren’t true.


See All



Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Construction wraps on indoor supervised site for people who inhale drugs in Vancouver

Published

 on

 

VANCOUVER – Supervised injection sites are saving the lives of drug users everyday, but the same support is not being offered to people who inhale illicit drugs, the head of the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS says.

Dr. Julio Montaner said the construction of Vancouver’s first indoor supervised site for people who inhale drugs comes as the percentage of people who die from smoking drugs continues to climb.

The location in the Downtown Eastside at the Hope to Health Research and Innovation Centre was unveiled Wednesday after construction was complete, and Montaner said people could start using the specialized rooms in a matter of weeks after final approvals from the city and federal government.

“If we don’t create mechanisms for these individuals to be able to use safely and engage with the medical system, and generate points of entry into the medical system, we will never be able to solve the problem,” he said.

“Now, I’m not here to tell you that we will fix it tomorrow, but denying it or ignoring it, or throw it under the bus, or under the carpet is no way to fix it, so we need to take proactive action.”

Nearly two-thirds of overdose deaths in British Columbia in 2023 came after smoking illicit drugs, yet only 40 per cent of supervised consumption sites in the province offer a safe place to smoke, often outdoors, in a tent.

The centre has been running a supervised injection site for years which sees more than a thousand people monthly and last month resuscitated five people who were overdosing.

The new facilities offer indoor, individual, negative-pressure rooms that allow fresh air to circulate and can clear out smoke in 30 to 60 seconds while users are monitored by trained nurses.

Advocates calling for more supervised inhalation sites have previously said the rules for setting up sites are overly complicated at a time when the province is facing an overdose crisis.

More than 15,000 people have died of overdoses since the public health emergency was declared in B.C. in April 2016.

Kate Salters, a senior researcher at the centre, said they worked with mechanical and chemical engineers to make sure the site is up to code and abidies by the highest standard of occupational health and safety.

“This is just another tool in our tool box to make sure that we’re offering life-saving services to those who are using drugs,” she said.

Montaner acknowledged the process to get the site up and running took “an inordinate amount of time,” but said the centre worked hard to follow all regulations.

“We feel that doing this right, with appropriate scientific background, in a medically supervised environment, etc, etc, allows us to derive the data that ultimately will be sufficiently convincing for not just our leaders, but also the leaders across the country and across the world, to embrace the strategies that we are trying to develop.” he said.

Montaner said building the facility was possible thanks to a single $4-million donation from a longtime supporter.

Construction finished with less than a week before the launch of the next provincial election campaign and within a year of the next federal election.

Montaner said he is concerned about “some of the things that have been said publicly by some of the political leaders in the province and in the country.”

“We want to bring awareness to the people that this is a serious undertaking. This is a very massive investment, and we need to protect it for the benefit of people who are unfortunately drug dependent.” he said.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 18, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

N.B. election: Parties’ answers on treaty rights, taxes, Indigenous participation

Published

 on

 

FREDERICTON – The six chiefs of the Wolastoqey Nation in New Brunswick distributed a survey on Indigenous issues to political parties ahead of the provincial election, which is scheduled to kick off Thursday. Here are some of the answers from the Progressive Conservative, Liberal and Green parties.

Q: How does your party plan to demonstrate a renewed commitment to recognizing our joint treaty responsibilities and acknowledging that the lands and waters of this territory remain unceded?

Progressive Conservative: The party respectfully disagrees with the assertion that land title has been unceded. This is a legal question that has not been determined by the courts.

Liberal: When we form government, the first conversations the premier-designate will have is with First Nations leaders. We will publicly and explicitly acknowledge your treaty rights, and our joint responsibility as treaty people.

Green: The Green Party acknowledges that New Brunswick is situated on the unceded and unsurrendered territories of the Wolastoqiyik, Mi’kmaq and Peskotomuhkati peoples, covered by the Treaties of Peace and Friendship. Our party is committed to establishing true nation-to-nation relationships with First Nations, grounded in mutual respect and co-operation as the treaties intended.

Q: How does your party propose to approach the issue of provincial tax agreements with First Nations?

Progressive Conservative: The government of New Brunswick operates in a balanced and fair manner with all organizations, institutions and local governments that represent the citizens of this province, including First Nations. Therefore, we cannot offer tax agreements that do not demonstrate a benefit to all citizens.

Liberal: Recent discussions with First Nations chiefs shed light on the gaps that existed in the previous provincial tax agreements with First Nations. Our party is committed to negotiating and establishing new tax agreements with First Nations that address the local needs and priorities and ensure all parties have a fair deal.

Green: The Green Party is committed to fostering a respectful relationship with First Nations in New Brunswick and strongly opposes Premier Blaine Higgs’s decision to end tax-sharing agreements. We believe reinstating these agreements is crucial for supporting the economic development and job creation in First Nation communities.

Q: How will your party ensure more meaningful participation of Indigenous communities in provincial land use and resource management decision-making?

Progressive Conservative: The government of New Brunswick has invested significant resources in developing a robust duty to consult and engagement process. We are interested in fully involving First Nations in the development of natural resources, including natural gas development. We believe that the development of natural gas is better for the environment — because it allows for the shutdown of coal-fired power plants all over the globe — and it allows for a meaningful step along the path to reconciliation.

Liberal: Our party is focused on building strong relations with First Nations and their representatives based on mutual respect and a nation-to-nation relationship, with a shared understanding of treaty obligations and a recognition of your rights. This includes having First Nations at the table and engaged on all files, including land-use and resource management.

Green: We will develop a new Crown lands management framework with First Nations, focusing on shared management that respects the Peace and Friendship Treaties. We will enhance consultation by developing parameters for meaningful consultation with First Nations that will include a dispute resolution mechanism, so the courts become the last resort, not the default in the face of disagreements.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 18, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Canadian Coast Guard crew member lost at sea off Newfoundland

Published

 on

 

ST. JOHN’S, N.L. – A crew member of a Canadian Coast Guard ship has been lost at sea off southern Newfoundland.

The agency said in a release Wednesday that an extensive search and rescue effort for the man was ended Tuesday evening.

He was reported missing on Monday morning when the CCGS Vincent Massey arrived in St. John’s, N.L.

The coast guard says there was an “immediate” search on the vessel for the crew member and when he wasn’t located the sea and air search began.

Wednesday’s announcement said the agency was “devastated to confirm” the crew member had been lost at sea, adding that decisions to end searches are “never taken lightly.”

The coast guard says the employee was last seen on board Sunday evening as the vessel sailed along the northeast coast of Newfoundland.

Spokeswoman Kariane Charron says no other details are being provided at this time and that the RCMP will be investigating the matter as a missing person case.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 18, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending