Paul Krugman today, saying what he was saying several months ago:
At the beginning of this year, you may remember, Mr. Obama made an eloquent case
for a strong economic stimulus — then delivered a proposal falling well short of
what independent analysts (and, I suspect, his own economists) considered
necessary. The goal, presumably, was to attract bipartisan support. But in the
event, Mr. Obama was able to pick up only three Senate Republicans by making a
plan that was already too weak even weaker.
At the time, some of us warned
about what might happen: if unemployment surpassed the administration’s
optimistic projections, Republicans wouldn’t accept the need for more stimulus.
Instead, they’d declare the whole economic policy a failure. And that’s exactly
how it’s playing out. With the unemployment rate now almost certain to pass 10
percent, there’s an overwhelming economic case for more stimulus. But as a
political matter it’s going to be harder, not easier, to get that extra stimulus
now than it would have been to get the plan right in the first place.
I would add that many other economists and liberals were saying the same exact thing, because, you know, duh, macroeconomics sort of works a certain way, regardless of what some Bubba in South Carolina (with an Argentinian lady-friend, maybe) has to say about it.
The rest of the piece is about healthcare. You should read it.
(h/t Blue Texan)