I was pleasantly surprised to see Newsweek report that James K. Galbraith, son of one of the most famous of the liberal Keynesian economists, recently sided with a debate team challenging the proposition that ?Obama?s Economic Policies Are Working Effectively.?

Unfortunately, Galbraith criticizes Obama because Galbraith prefers even goofier policies:

The stimulus did some good, it helped forestall the complete collapse of state and local government budgets, it created some construction jobs. The question is, was it enough? And I think it’s pretty clear that it was not. It was based on a forecast that unemployment would not rise past about 8 percent by the middle of this year and would decline after, which was wildly optimistic. We think the housing crisis is important, the collapse of small business is important, we think 10 percent unemployment as far as the eye can see is a disaster. Better than nothing is not good enough.

What would a working program look like? It would dissolve rather than coddle the toxic banks. It would stop the displacement of people from their homes, not just slow it ? and it would fund a lot of new green jobs all across the country, providing every American who wants it a chance to work.

Why not throw in a partridge in a pear tree?

For a saner take on the value of government stimulus, click the play button below.