fuster wrote:

It isn’t what it won’t be, but whatever was?

Everything
anafakeeleziya
chugetusetabeandebt

But I'll just add that my theory and my experience have always been that events in the external world as I internalize them and events in my internal world as I externalize them have always sooner or later been interpretable as translations of each other.

@ Scott Miller:
I was going to leave a comment at one of the blogs linked at the top, but changed my mind and wrote it up as a small post instead.

Wish I were a little more confident about the right way forward with the stuff I'm "really" working on - when sharing it is a good idea, and how much attention and effort I should be devoting to the sharing.

@ miguel cervantes:
Actually, one didn't have to struggle very much to find infrastructure work in ARRA - at least not in my neighborhood, but, though you and I may disagree about very, very much, we agree that the structure or distribution of "demand replacement" is an important consideration. That's my point. A massive expansion of the sort Krugman is constantly arguing for will sooner or later have to be expansion of a certain type. It may not have to be full-blown industrial planning, but it's not as simple as plugging in new numbers in pre-existing equations, especially if there's going to be any effort to stimulate our economy, or certain sectors of it, more than lots of other people's economies.

@ fuster:
Oddly enough!

It's an old finance cliche - used to be very common esp. in comments on Federal Reserve interest rate policy whenever rates got too low, back in the pre-econopalypse days.