A Challenge to Dr. Krugman, Mr. Taibbi, etc.

Ok, I'm not an economist. I'm a statistician, who oddly, when you put a $ sign in front of numbers, loses all mathematical ability.

BUT, I do know governmental and political reality. I work in government. I have a Ph.D. in a science. I'm not an idiot.

I have read almost every one of Dr. Krugman's articles. I've used him to rail against conservatives as he explains things clearly.

I've enjoyed Matt's pieces on Real Time, though I will acknowledge I always go the sense he was the type who voted for Nader, so always some sense of annoyance with him.

So, that's setting the context, here's the challenge:

The Challenge is...to all sniping from the sidelines...offer up your plan. Make your plan very perfect. Swear that it would work 100%. It would be cheaper and quicker. No doubt. Obviously, no plan is 100% perfect, but if that is true, you have to acknowledge that no plan would make you 100% happy.

You see, I thought Paul was sniping at Bush because he was an idiot who couldn't explain his way out of a paper bag. Now I see, he just likes to snipe.

"This plan won't work, that plan won't work."

No one knows what will work, but I don't see your plan. Yes, you have a Nobel Prize. That doesn't mean you're the most intelligent economist on the planet...because other people have them too.

So, offer up your plans. Put them on a website and let people model them out and see how they play.

BUT, remember this...your plan has to get votes from both sides of the aisle...there's the kicker. Your perfect plan that is 100% fair and 100% assured to work, has to please at least a couple republicans or it doesn't matter how smart and fancy it is.

I know some people will hate me for questioning Paul. But, even though people used to say i had a nerd crush on him, he's not god. he should be questioned, just like the President, and anyone else.

The easiest thing in the world, and its exacerbated in academia, is to tell others what they did wrong in their work/study, but not offer any suggestion about how they should have done it, given the realities they faced. It's time for academics, and even journalist, to change that paradigm. Don't just have fun telling people they're wrong...tell them why, and how they can make it better. That takes thought and time, especially when it's not in a perfect world vacuum.