Bad Argument

It seems to me that Matt Yglesias is trying to be too clever by half. His argument appears to boil down to the idea that the spin was better when we argued that we could live with the Sequester rather than that it would be a disaster. Whether that is true or not, it says nothing about the merits. Is the Sequester better than nothing? Obviously, it is not. The economy is on the mend and starting to gather strength. The Sequester will slow economic growth, create chaos, and needlessly ruin hundreds of thousands of people’s lives. As long as it persists, it is evidence that our political system is dysfunctional on a grand scale. If Yglesias is trying to head-fake the Republicans with some kind of double reverse psychological jujitsu, he isn’t taking into account that the new Republican Party doesn’t care as much about military spending as the old one. Not only are they willing to slash Pentagon spending in a stupid and irresponsible way, but they are likely to agree to future cutting done in a sane and responsible way. If Yglesias is actually serious that we can live with the Sequester and that it is preferable to simple repeal, he should be stripped of his job, his health insurance, and his housing, and be forced to live in a box for a month.

Author: BooMan

Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.