But he is very wrong on most economic questions for a very simple reason.
We have committed ourselves to a social matrix that is inherently unable to survive in its present form. There can be no recovery of education, of housing, of transportation. Each of these is part of the problem, not an answer. All of these enterprises are predicated on the "self-evident" of continuing automobile use, continued need for stand-alone houses and continued capacity to afford and benefit from the educational system that we have.
The solution lies in a transition to concentrations of population that can generate bottom-up economies, a recalibration of enterprise so it can serve car-free cyber-communities of up to 10K persons each. These communities would be zoned for everything and essentially emulate cities of the past that were self-enclosed. All current institutions would be resized to serve the cyber-community and thus provide employment to its residents.
Cyber-communities could and would operate at roughly half the expense of maintaining our sprawl society. Cyber-communities would be able to afford eco-sustainability. They would be culturally alive. They would be diverse.
Krugman joins many public intellectuals in rejecting the need for a social sea change. We have had no discussion of these matters since the 1960s when four bullets stopped all discussion for more a half-century.
