PPI - Radically Pragmatic
  • Donate
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Locations
    • Gallery
    • Careers
  • People
  • Projects
  • Our Work
  • Events
  • Donate

Our Work

More Clarity on Uncertainty

  • August 18, 2010
  • Scott Thomasson

I wrote last week about the political rhetoric of “uncertainty,” both real and imagined.  My thinking was that Republicans should be called out for their recent talking points that attribute our continued economic woes to fears and uncertainties created by the Democrats’  agenda, but that we should be careful not to dismiss legitimate problems of uncertainty that actually do exist in the economy.

In the Times today, Tom Friedman makes a more eloquent case for the need to recognize the real uncertainties we face.  His analysis is from a higher altitude, as one might expect, and it is dead right.  Friedman attributes broad economic uncertainties to three structural problems: (1) a decade of U.S. growth fueled by deficits and borrowing rather than investment and innovation, (2) a wave of new technology that is destroying lower-skilled jobs in favor of those requiring more education and training, and (3) the “existential crisis” of the European Union as German discipline is exported to Greece and elsewhere.   But these real uncertainties are not on anyone’s political agenda:

America’s two big parties still cling to their core religious beliefs as if nothing has changed. Republicans try to undermine the president at every turn and offer their nostrum of tax-cuts-will-solve-everything — without ever specifying what services they’ll give up to pay for them. Mr. Obama gave us expanded health care before expanding the economic pie to sustain it.

Friedman does not get very deep into specifics for structural solutions, but he doesn’t need to.  As is often true of Friedman’s perspective, the real value of today’s piece lies in the diagnosis.  We are facing real economic uncertainties, and the fact that Republicans are mischaracterizing them so shamelessly does not relieve the president and Democrats from the obligation to show more leadership.  As I wrote last week, Democrats need to stop sticking their fingers in the dike and come up with a more comprehensive plan built on a long-term vision of investment and sustainable growth.  Or as Friedman puts it:

The president needs to take America’s labor, business and Congressional leadership up to Camp David and not come back without a grand bargain for taxes, trade promotion, energy, stimulus and budget cutting that offers the market some certainty that we are moving together — not just on a bailout but on an economic rebirth for the 21st century.

I couldn’t agree more.

Related Work

Podcast  |  October 1, 2026

Ainsley on The Spectator Podcast Coffee House Shots: Can Andy Keep Up With His Promises?

  • Claire Ainsley
Op-Ed  |  September 30, 2026

Kahlenberg for The Atlantic: How the Culture War Put Public Schools at Risk

  • Richard D. Kahlenberg
In the News  |  September 29, 2026

Marshall in Mainichi: Democratic Party’s Left-Wing Candidates May Struggle to Expand Support in Battleground States Ahead of Midterm Elections

  • Will Marshall
Press Release  |  September 23, 2026

California’s Copper Mandate Ties Up $1 Billion a Year That Could Expand Broadband, PPI Finds

  • Andrew Fung
Publication  |  September 23, 2026

What California Is Giving Up to Keep Copper Online

  • Andrew Fung
Op-Ed  |  September 23, 2026

Steitz for MS Now: Trump’s New Defense for His Arch Is Absurd – And Dangerous

  • Danielle Steitz
  • Never miss an update:

  • Subscribe to our newsletter
PPI Logo
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Donate
  • Careers
  • © 2026 Progressive Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.
  • |
  • Privacy Policy
  • |
  • Privacy Settings