Paul Krugman argues that success in business is not, by itself, a qualification for making wise economic policy, and I agree. But then he goes all looney-tunes on us:
A businessman can slash his workforce in half, produce about the same as before, and be considered a big success; an economy that does the same plunges into depression, and ends up not being able to sell its goods.
So according to Krugman, it’s better for you and your spouse to earn $40,000 each than for one of you to earn $80,000 while the other stays home with the kids. I wonder how many two-earner families would agree with him.
Perhaps Krugman hasn’t noticed that the US economy, over the past century or so, has managed to cut its per capita labor input roughly in half without plunging into a 100-year-depression. There are even some people who think we’re better off these days partly because we work 35 hours a week instead of 70.
Apparently business isn’t the only profession where success is not always accompanied by wisdom.