Michael Gerson who appears to do political and economic commentary for a living, although you could have fooled Wonks Anonymous, believes that now is the time to go slow on serious policy change because:

Whatever their virtues, restricting carbon emissions and expanding the health entitlement do not constitute a direct response to America's financial and economic failures.

And we have to worry about the deficit after all:

Is a time of unsustainable debt and economic contraction really the right moment to add enormous spending and debt, along with the taxes they eventually require?

May Wonks Anonymous provide some insight?

First the government has no shortage of funds available to borrow at this point in time. Some of us are paying off our debts while others are increasing our savings to compensate for the decline in the value of our homes and 401K plans. As a nation we do not seem to be planning to increase consumption, which Mr Gerson seems to think is the only hope to bring about recovery. Been there, done that, don't really like the consequences.

On these circumstances there is a lot of potential output that is not happening because we are holding back on our purchases. We would like to invest these savings in something productive but the private sector is missing in action. In this situation it makes sense for the government to use our savings on projects that support the public welfare and increase the efficiency of the economy.

For example, one way to reduce carbon emissions is to invest in energy conservation which also has the benefit of decreasing costs and making people who we do not like uncomfortable. Investment in universal primary health care not only makes people happier - which is supposedly the goal of our economic system - it also reduces the demand for high tech late stage treatments of chronic diseases.

And it is not as if we do not have the resources to do these things. Health care, for example, is facing serious financial problems. Workers are losing jobs and insurance while business that keep health care are providing less and less. In this situation providers are facing tightening budgets and increased demands that they provide uncompensated care.

Lowered income and layoffs in the health care sector will, of course further lower income and consumption which Mr Gerson pretends to be concerned about.

This cut off of funding will not have much impact on the parts of the sector that specialize in high tech treatment for diseases of the rich but it will put great pressure on the people who provide ordinary medical care.

Because resources are specialized it will take some time for them to leave the industry but they will leave, decreasing our capacity to produce health care in the long run. Wonks Anonymous supposes that this is another example of creative destruction and that doctors, nurses and hospitals are all slated to go the way of the buggy manufacturing business.

Wonks Anonymous supposes that they will be quickly replaced by drug vending machines, internet Viagra and various web applications. In the future we will all be our own doctors.

Unless you genuinely believe the above, this is a foolish response to a short term problem.

In fact now, when the health care industry is facing a serious contraction, is the best time to reform and restructure the system to increase efficiency and to sustain health coverage for all. Particularly for those who are facing unemployment.

The resources are there to provide the care. Use them or lose them.