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