There are many many things wrong with the article (elementary mistakes that a Harvard economist should not have made), but considering that it is basically a pu

There are many many things wrong with the article (elementary mistakes that a Harvard economist should not have made), but considering that it is basically a puff piece for his book, I'm not surprised in the slightest. The article is typical WSJ garbage, gets cause and effect confused, makes comical, out-of-touch assumptions and, as usual, places the burden and fault on NEETs.