PAUL KRUGMAN writes in the New York Times:
Maybe we knew, at some unconscious, instinctive level, that it would be an era best forgotten. Whatever the reason, we got through the first decade of the new millennium without ever agreeing on what to call it. The aughts? The naughties? Whatever. (Yes, I know that strictly speaking the millennium didn’t begin until 2001. Do we really care?)
But from an economic point of view, I’d suggest that we call the decade past the Big Zero. It was a decade in which nothing good happened, and none of the optimistic things we were supposed to believe turned out to be true.
It was a decade with basically zero job creation. O.K., the headline employment number for December 2009 will be slightly higher than that for December 1999, but only slightly. And private-sector employment has actually declined — the first decade on record in which that happened.
It was a decade with zero economic gains for the typical family. Actually, even at the height of the alleged “Bush boom,” in 2007, median household income adjusted for inflation was lower than it had been in 1999. And you know what happened next.
Read More of PAUL KRUGMAN in the New York Times
Latest posts by ralph (see all)
- Fats Domino Has A Really Awesome Couch - Nov 8, 2012
- You Are Still Being Lied To: Howard Zinn’s “Columbus and Western Civilization” - Oct 8, 2012
- If ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ Was Marketed Today (Video) - Jul 27, 2012