At 8:48 AM 6/10/95, Michael Perelman wrote: >I know that the political debate is shifting to the right, but what are we >doing debating whether or not deficits are bad? > >Every real penner knows how to balance the budget. Tax the rich. Cut >corporate perqs. The progressive caucus has already provided a plan to >do this. > >Of course, congress is not about to pass such a program. > >Don't we have more important questions to address? Part of what the deficit discussion is a sorting out of "progressive economists'" relation to Keynes. With Marx very un-chic, many progressives - or, as Alex Cockburn says, pwogwessives - have embraced JMK as an acceptable alternative. Which Keynes - the conservative or the radical, the Bastard or the Legitimate Original the Post(-)Keynesians claim to have rescued - isn't clear. Is this a promising thing, or a sign of weakness and desperation? Are progressive economists, or pwogwessive economists (uh-oh, am I guilty of speechism?), doing anyone a favor by trying to hide, retreat from, or sugar coat their radical roots? Is radical uncertainty something one can build an intellectual and political movement on? Doug -- Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax
