I thought the Paul Krugman mention in the title was strange too.
The only time he mentions Krugman in the article is in regards to the TPP~
Nearly all left-leaning Democrats oppose the TPP: Paul Krugman, Joe Stiglitz, Bob Reich, Elizabeth Warren. One cant imagine Obama changing his mind on it any more than one imagines him asking any of them to help craft his new populist agenda. As he likes to reassure his donors, Im a market kind of guy, meaning he comes as close as a Democrat can to being a market ideologue. And yes, there is such a thing.
Market ideologues arent the sort to throw bombs or ruin dinner parties but theyre ideologues nonetheless. Their solution for every problem known to mankind is to adopt market principles. Their influence on Obamas generation of Democratic elites has been profound. Its why so many of them apply market theory to issues to which it is ill-suited, such as carbon reduction, health care and public education.
Obama doesnt get that free trade can be as good as he says for business and still be a terrible deal for workers. He doesnt get that markets by their nature do a great job of creating wealth and a poor one of distributing it; that absent a strong government to encode and enforce a social contract there is no middle class; that pitting our workers against those lacking such support will eventually impoverish them. Its why he opposed raising the minimum wage when he had the votes to do it in his first term. Its why he bailed out banks but not homeowners, and abandoned the public option.
Missing from Obamas speech, as from his presidency, was any mention of public corruption. Countless polls attest to the depth of public revulsion at the domination of government by moneyed interests. Obamas silence allows the Tea Party to fly the flag of crony capitalism. Most progressives miss the criticality of this issue that social change movements the world over put at the very top of their agendas...
Isn't Krugman all about those "market principles", or have I missed something?