TWO FROM KRUGMAN

A couple of always relevant essays from the New York Times' resident Princeton economist and one-time Bill O'Reilly scourge, Paul Krugman.

First, courtesy of WorkingForChange, Krugman opines on French economic trade offs that disgust the US elite:

French Family Values

Americans are doing a lot of strutting these days, but a head-to-head comparison between the economies of the United States and Europe - France, in particular - shows that the big difference is in priorities, not performance. We're talking about two highly productive societies that have made a different tradeoff between work and family time. And there's a lot to be said for the French choice.

First things first: given all the bad-mouthing the French receive, you may be surprised that I describe their society as "productive." Yet according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, productivity in France - G.D.P. per hour worked - is actually a bit higher than in the United States.

It's true that France's G.D.P. per person is well below that of the United States. But that's because French workers spend more time with their families.

Click here for the rest.

I've hit on this theme before, myself. If somebody who loves his work wants to spend every waking minute devoted to his job, that's okay; it's what seems to make him happy. Most Americans, however, hate their jobs, or are, at least, bored by them, and that's okay too, because we all must work in order to make civilization function. Unfortunately, when we get home from those awful jobs every evening it seems that we only have enough energy and mental focus to turn on the TV, microwave a lame-ass pasta box, and collapse into the couch: in the United States you are your work, and if your job sucks, then your life sucks. The French seem to understand this trap and have arranged their society such that life is actually worth living. Sure, they're slightly less well off than we are on the whole, but their lives are much richer, being spent with friends and family, on personal interests, generally making their nation a better place. In France, workers are human beings; in the US, they're robots. It doesn't have to be like this.

Next, Krugman again exposes the Bush administration's parasitical "governance." Courtesy of BuzzFlash:

Triumph of the Machine

The campaign for Social Security privatization has degenerated into farce. The "global war on terrorism" has been downgraded to the "global struggle against violent extremism" (pronounced gee-save), which is just embarrassing. Baghdad is a nightmare, Basra is a militia-run theocracy, and officials are talking about withdrawing troops from Iraq next year (just in time for the U.S. midterm elections).

On the other hand, the administration is crowing about its success in passing the long-stalled energy bill, the highway bill and Cafta, the free-trade agreement with Central America. So is the Bush agenda stalled, or is it progressing?

The answer is that the administration is getting nowhere on its grand policy agenda. But it never took policy, as opposed to politics, very seriously anyway. The agenda it has always taken with utmost seriousness - consolidating one-party rule, and rewarding its friends - is moving forward quite nicely.

Click here for the rest.

It's been clear for some time that the White House approach to politics has nothing to do with the standard American conservative-liberal ideological divide. Sure, BushCo exploits rank-and-file political points of view, but they're definitely not liberal, and they're definitely not conservative--after all, Bush spends tax dollars like a drunken sailor, and uses the military to play global games of cowboys and indians. Call it what you want; that's not conservative. So what are they about? Obviously, they're about gaining and holding power and Krugman illustrates that rather nicely.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$