One of the more polemic writers in the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal is Daniel Henninger. To write for the Journal means there is no requirement for honesty in a discussion. The conclusions are what are important, regardless of their validity, or in the case of Mr. Henninger and his most recent screed, the lack of validity.
Mr. Henninger takes the position of most right wing fanatics, that government spending must be cut or else the entire country will collapse. He starts out with a totally erroneous statement.
There is general agreement on at least two things about the current
economy. It is emerging from the deepest recession since the Great Depression,
and its debt level is unsustainable. U.S.
No, there is not general agreement that the current debt level is unsustainable. In fact other than ideologically driven economists no one else is all that concerned about the current debt level of the
States. Willing lenders have driven the interest rates on U. S. debt to their lowest levels
But Mr. Henninger appeals to expertise, in this case economist Alberto Alesina.
The path back to stronger growth, argues Mr. Alesina, is a combination of significant, permanent cuts in public spending and relatively small tax increases, if any.
Gosh, that doesn’t sound right, and it is not, as real world data shows. Here is what Mr.
Alesina (speaking in the third person) said in 2010 response to criticism of his so-called research into the issue.
Well, 3 years later there is the empirical test of the above words. They turned out to be totally, completely, utterly fallacious. Wrong. Incorrect. In error.
But why then would a writer of opinion for the Wall Street Journal choose Mr. Alesina as his authority? The obvious answer, there is no real, legitimate authority that supports his view, so a bogus expert is the only alternative.