What is it with Republicans and economists and their "feelings?" Right now on the front page there's the headline "Senate GOP feels jilted after being wined and dined by Obama."
And if you're following the Econoblogs like I have, you'd learn that Rogoff and Reinhart, authors of the notorious and debunked "Don't go above 90% Debt to GDP Ratio or You'll be Sorry" paper, wrote to Paul Krugman about how deeply hurt they were by Paul's critique of their faulty work, sparking a big hubbub in the world of wonks. R & R whine:
We admire your past scholarly work, which influences us to this day. So it has been with deep disappointment that we have experienced your spectacularly uncivil behavior the past few weeks. You have attacked us in very personal terms, virtually non-stop, in your New York Times column and blog posts. Now you have doubled down in the New York Review of Books, adding the accusation we didn't share our data. Your characterization of our work and of our policy impact is selective and shallow.
My heart bleeds for these two. They wrote a deeply flawed paper that has been the basis for policies that have caused misery for tens of millions. And, they have parlayed that into lucrative appearances on the lecture circuit.
But how dare the Shrill One point out their errors and their effects. Why, land sakes, the very idea makes me feel faint.
Well, today Paul Krugman comes clearn!
Let’s stipulate that:
1. I am a big meanie
2. Reinhart and Rogoff never should have claimed that there is some kind of critical threshold at 90 percent, and they certainly should disavow any such claim now (which I don’t think they have, yet). I believe that the 90 percent claim had a remarkably malign effect on policy discussion, but let’s look forward.
Absolutely right, Paul. If anything, you've been too easy on these charlatans and their allies.
What a debased public discourse, when "feelings" and "being jilted" are more important
than policy that can have devastating consequences.