I'm with you there. Sometimes I worry that I sound like "some squirrely guy... runnin' down a way of life our fightin' men've fought'n died to keep." But I think Merle is probably just as concerned as anybody these days. I'm going to drink a beer right now for the Workin Man.

Posted at October 31, 2007 3:53 PM in response to The awful truth, and the better future

Nope. Sorry, but I think we're going down, short term, and hard. Paul Krugman is just as good at explaining why as anybody I've read. The economy is based on borrowed money that's not being reinvested. Just squandered. Our society over-consumes on a MASSIVE scale, the Al Gore/Hillary Clinton yuppie set more than most, I'd guess. Thing is, and what I tried to get at in my first question, is that I think we need to collapse. The sooner the better I'd think. My hope is for a post-imperial America, something like the Europe that's emerged after WWII. (I have heard P.K. voice a similar hope in his meditations on a recent visit to Europe.) The problem is, it's going to get really bad before it gets better. Who knows, maybe even WWII bad.

I hope I'm wrong, and that the US will find another way out of the quagmire. Sadly, I have lost all faith that that other way will come from the Democratic Party.

This is not an admission of defeat. I'll do what I can to change the country and the party, but my honest assessment of the situation is that our empire is crumbling, and the fallout won't be pretty, and the Democrats are just the wing of the Empire that represents upper-middle class and wealthy Americans, rather than the super-rich and corporations.

I think that P.K. probably has a much clearer view of all this than I do, and I'd love to hear him address it.

Sorry if my question is a downer. I still love this country and the people who live here, and I know we will be ok, whatever happens. We are a country of immigrants and adventurers and outlaws. We're tough!

Posted at October 29, 2007 10:13 PM in response to The awful truth, and the better future

Prof. Krugman,

Thanks for diagnosing the housing bubble in your N.Y. Times column. You've saved a lot of people a lot of money and heartache.

I have a big question for you. If you read this and choose to respond, please answer with as bold and broad strokes as feel comfortable.

I've been following your analyses for about a decade now, and you have helped me to understand that our currency and economy are perched on the edge of true crisis. In fact, it seems to me that you are saying that barring some new, fortuitous (for the U.S.) event, crisis is inevitable.

And yet, when you discuss the Social Security issue you seem to be saying that the program is simply a large bond, and that the government can meet its obligations if it will only decide to do so. This argument makes perfect sense, assuming a continuation of the status quo. But, won't the (probable) coming financial collapse negate any possiblity (in the near future, at least) of any kind of social (or financial) guarantees?

Even as low as it's sinking, my guess is that our currency is the biggest bubble of all.

Isn't it?

Are these the end times for the U.S.A.?

I am almost afraid to ask this, and yet: Might that end be a good thing for the people living here?

Your presence in the mainstream media has meant a great deal to me in these culturally bleak times. Keep fighting the good fight!

Matt Emmons

Posted at October 29, 2007 5:08 PM in response to The awful truth, and the better future

Maybe "limiting" was the wrong word. I will substitute instead "over-simplified." Religious thought and identification is an extremely complex matter.

It is just language, after all, and If your definition works for you, then OK. BUt I imagine you will run into a lot of people who don't share your extraordinarily specific definition, and the result may be miscommunication or, even worse, unintended insult.

Posted at October 17, 2007 1:29 PM in response to Ann Coulter Anti-Semitic? What a shocker.

Good luck to you, too.

Matt

Posted at October 12, 2007 11:36 AM in response to Ann Coulter Anti-Semitic? What a shocker.

I don't claim a faith but yours seems like a very limiting definition to me.

How about this definition?
Christian= One who follows a creed or philosophy inspired or guided by the New Testement, or by the story of Jesus as otherwise related.

Posted at October 12, 2007 11:34 AM in response to Ann Coulter Anti-Semitic? What a shocker.

ah, yes... USA, a land teeming with Enlightenment Liberals. herds of them. it's really great to be here among them.

Enlightenment Liberals founded Monticello and the Farmer's Almanac; our country and culture were made by all the people who lived here, most of whom were and are "Christians." And what about colonial architecture?

Posted at October 11, 2007 4:36 PM in response to Ann Coulter Anti-Semitic? What a shocker.

uprated for the perceptive ad hominem. i am also drinking. cheers!

Posted at October 11, 2007 4:22 PM in response to Ann Coulter Anti-Semitic? What a shocker.

the dude is going nuts, but i don't hate him for it.

Posted at October 11, 2007 4:18 PM in response to Ann Coulter Anti-Semitic? What a shocker.

I just read a review by Norman Finklestein of a book of Goldberg's. Haven't read the book, but I thought the review was very informative: http://www.counterpunch.org/finkelstein10062007.html

Posted at October 7, 2007 12:13 PM in response to Time to weigh in on the Israel lobby debate