Structural Rationale
by digby
If you read Krugman, you're already aware of the emerging argument that current unemployment is "structural" rather than "cyclical" and that we just have to live with a very high level until ... well, I'm not sure. Until the people who are unemployable die off? Emmigrate?
Anyway, James Surowiecki of the New Yorker offers a succinct explanation as to why the current unemployment is in fact cyclical and therefore why the government needs to provide more stimulus rather than "waiting it out." He points out that there are always those who insist that unemployment is structural and that's certainly correct. The usual suspects have been saying this in recessions as long as I can remember. But this time, I'm a little bit worried that it's going to come from Democrats rather than Republicans as they attempt to rationalize the persistence of unemployment on their watch. I could certainly see the Ben Nelsons who are facing the Teabags in 2012 adopting that as a rationale for austerity and heartlessness.
.
.