RE: Re: RE: Keynes on "sinking funds"

["Max Sawicky" <sawicky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

. . . Is it really true that most macroeconomists in Washington are now
rejecting
the fiscal austerity of PK and the DLC? ("PK & the DLC" sounds like a rock
group.)

mbs: My source for this is a front-page article in the
WSJ last week (I think).  Based on a round of
interviews, incl Blinder and Feldstein, the idea
was that only politicians buy the 'lockbox.'
In addition, there is the new book by Blinder
& Yellen which throws cold water on the idea
that deficit reduction (and indeed, the entire
'policy mix') explains a great part of the '90's
boom.  (some credit goes to the '93 budget,
the ensuing bond market rally, and Greenspan's
good sense and good luck).

Since the Republicans have drifted into a zone
of fiscal rationality, now is a good time I think
to destroy the conventional ideas of fiscal
rectitude.  They key is if enough liberals
and lefts can chime in, this disable the charge
that anti-surplus mania is nothing more than
politically inspired opportunism.

>   Most everyone else
>has jumped ship, probably in response to
>my article in The Progressive Populist.

is this the famous "butterfly effect," in which small events can cause much
larger effects (a flapping butterfly in China causes a hurricane -- or a
himmicane -- in Florida)?

mbs: more likely the delayed-flashback LSD effect.