4 ms·
The fact that this is an ideological screed as opposed to a thoughtful piece comes through almost immediately. (E.g. blaming the regulatory state for failing to
by addicted 6y ago
The fact that this is an ideological screed as opposed to a thoughtful piece comes through almost immediately. (E.g. blaming the regulatory state for failing to impose mask restrictions, which in the US at least, was a result of the current administration going out of their way to dismantle the apparatus setup to handle pandemics).
That would be ok if there were some numbers or data presented to show that the great stagnation was indeed coming to an end. Unfortunately it’s simply a collection of dubious anecdotes that really don’t mean much in the bigger picture. Anyone could collect a similar collection of anecdotes which were less dubious than what the author has picked from almost any time period during the “great stagnation”.
- md_ 6y agoI tend to agree with your second paragraph, but this is a blog post and is clearly speculative; it's not an econ paper. To your first paragraph: AFAICT this is a blog by the Progressive Policy Institute, which is a centrist Democratic think tank. I think they were just "blaming the regulatory state" in the sort of formal sense that they were saying there was lost productivity due to regulatory missteps; they weren't making an ideological screed about harmful regulation.
- randallsquared 6y ago> blaming the regulatory state for failing to impose mask restrictions, which in the US at least, was a result of the current administration going out of their way to dismantle the apparatus setup to handle pandemics It's interesting that the CDC's initial statements that masks don't work and are counterproductive (later reported to be deliberately misleading) seem to be fading from memory so fast that it's not even a conceivable criticism, which leaves us with "well, they didn't impose mask restrictions".