re:  Lights are going out across America

In decrying cost-cutting measures by local governments, Paul Krugman seems either to lack understanding (doubtful) or willingly ignoring (more likely) a simple concept of the approach of many politicians to budget "cutting".  All too often, when politicians see shortfalls coming that require belt tightening, they don't tend to exhaust every effort to cut the non-essential costs.  Instead, they go straight for the things that should be cut last — like police, firefighters, and teachers. Why?  To drum up public support for raising taxes instead of cutting spending.

For example, look at the average salary for teachers in school districts that are cutting back on teachers and educational programs, then look at the average salary of administrators, and in particular, the salary and benefits of the superintendent.  Compare the total amount spent per pupil to the amount actually spent in the classroom.  But cutting back on the number of, or compensation for, administrators, cutting back on travel, and selling off unnecessary assets doesn't cause a public outrage. Cutting teachers, classes, and enrichment activities does, and thus helps facilitate requests for higher taxes and more revenue instead of belt-tightening.

Sincerely,
Dave Smith
Houston, TX  77002