Somebody please tell David Brooks to STFU

Especially when he doesn't know the first that about what he is talking about.

Seriously.

The Serious Mister Brooks has an article up at NY Times where he is ostensibly discussing Cyclical vs Structural issues in he current downturn.  Sure. Fine. Whatever.  He wants to be an armchair economist, then he can absolutely go knock himself out - heck, I'm one too.

But then comes the zinger

Unlike the cyclicalists, we structuralists do not believe that the level of government spending is the main factor in determining how fast an economy grows. If that were true, then Greece, Britain and France would have the best economies on earth. (The so-called European austerity is partly mythical.) We believe that the creativity, skill and productivity of the work force matter most, and the openness of the system they inhabit.

Say what?  Huh? 

"Unlike the cyclicalists, we structuralists do not believe that the level of government spending is the main factor in determining how fast an economy grows"?

Really Serious Mister Brooks?  Really?  A straw man?  Thats the best you can do?  I mean, I absolutely expect arguments at this level from idiot economists political economists like Greg Mankiw and/or John Cochrane who have so many balls in the air over at the Rebublican camp that nary a day goes by when they don't rail against something that they might have argued for just a short while ago.  But seriously, are we expected to fall for this shit?  I'll let Karl Smith take it away

If I am not a card-carry Cyclicalist then I am not sure who is, yet I don’t believe that government spending is the main factor in how fast an economy grows. Scott Sumner may be the leading pure money Cyc and I am sure he would laugh at this idea.

Even Delong, Summers and Krugman who clearly advocate more government consumption and investment and emphasize the long run dangers of hysteresis wouldn’t say that.

So, Serious Mister Brooks, please, oh pretty please, Shut The F**k Up!