That is what readers can glean from an article on Germany's elections next weekend. The article asserts that: "many economists see Germany as settling into a phase of slow growth or stagnation in the coming months and years." It then complains that there has been a lack of debate "over possible corrective measures — revamping the German welfare state, changing tax policies or deregulation." It might have been useful if the NYT relied on economists with names. Not all economists agree with this assessment of Germany's economy. It is likely that these unnamed economists failed to see the onset of the current economic crisis, which may be a factor that readers would want to consider in assessing the merits of their arguments. The article also complains that Germany's government has used "a combination of government programs and retraining" to mask an increasingly idle workforce. In fact, redistributing work, as Germany has done, is a very effective and economically sound way of addressing unemployment. Instead of having people being completely unemployed, Germany's policy has been to try to reduce work time -- in effect giving workers more leisure time. The NYT may not like this approach, but there is no obvious economic argument as to why this is less desirable than having more unemployment.
--Dean Baker
