[liberallarry]

I'm going to re-read with your comments in mind.

On the strictly economic issues I don't expect any resolution and I do expect people to adopt positions along party/ideological lines. Good, strong arguments are the best that can be expected.

What disturbed me on first reading was something that Capitalist Eric also noticed; the author politely, but harshly, criticizes Robert Rubin for blatantly favoring friends on Wall Street and in the international banking community (on more than one occasion). Later he gives credit to Rubin for some policies he likes. And he leaves it at that! I don't think that's right.

[beckett]

I re-read the piece. It is a craftily constructed, pro-regulation political piece, not a serious attempt at economic scholarship. Every item he explores is spun left. He admits some fault in the Clinton administration only to in the end hold up Sweden as the ideal state. Sweden! A recent in-depth study --- heavily covered in Sweden itself --- recently showed that Sweden has standard of living indices lower than those of Mississippi, the poorerst region in the United States.

Having re-read the article and thought about Stiglitz's numerous vanities of interpretation (he even manages to squeeze in a meniton of his Nobel win!), I now think Kaus may not even address this article. It is lightweight tendentious folderol dressed to impress.