Something fishy is going on at The Economist. The rest of the magazine still features economics, but the United States section increasingly reads like talking points from the White House. Policies for which they ridicule President Hollande in the Europe section magically make sense in America. We suspect that “Lexington” is actually James Carville.
Pearson has billions of dollars in long-term contracts with education departments in a number of states and municipalities
Last week, the magazine featured a faulty analysis of economic growth having something to do with which president is in office. To be useful, such an analysis must identify whether the economy is responding to a policy at all, and then whether (some) president is responsible for the policy.
Even if you wanted to draw simple minded generalizations about presidents and the economy – Jeremiah doesn’t – you would have to add lag time for the policies to take effect.
The same issue featured an equally idiotic assertion that our economy must be good because the stock market is up. Seriously? In a magazine called The Economist? We are not even going to dignify that one with a rebuttal.
Something fishy is definitely going on. We suspect it has something to do with Pearson’s lucrative no-bid deal to provide Common Core materials. We will continue to read the finance and economics sections, but the United States? Forget about it. You might as well read Huffington Post.