Krugman is right, but...

Krugman sayeth:

[T]his is also a good time to engage in some serious infrastructure spending, which the country badly needs in any case. The usual argument against public works as economic stimulus is that they take too long: by the time you get around to repairing that bridge and upgrading that rail line, the slump is over and the stimulus isn’t needed. Well, that argument has no force now, since the chances that this slump will be over anytime soon are virtually nil. So let’s get those projects rolling.

Will the next administration do what’s needed to deal with the economic slump? Not if Mr. McCain pulls off an upset. What we need right now is more government spending — but when Mr. McCain was asked in one of the debates how he would deal with the economic crisis, he answered: “Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control.”

If Barack Obama becomes president, he won’t have the same knee-jerk opposition to spending. But he will face a chorus of inside-the-Beltway types telling him that he has to be responsible, that the big deficits the government will run next year if it does the right thing are unacceptable.

He should ignore that chorus. The responsible thing, right now, is to give the economy the help it needs. Now is not the time to worry about the deficit.

I think Krugman is exactly right that A) more stimulus spending would help right now, and B) we should spend the stimulus money on infrastructureinvestment, which will both create jobs in the short-run and grow the economy in the long-run. And I agree that we're not going to be able to avoid running a deficit anytime soon.

But does that mean that we shouldn't worry about the deficit? That conclusion doesn't seem to follow. All other things being equal, it's nice to have a lower deficit. If we end the Iraq war now, cut Pentagon spending, and shrink the Department of Homeland Security, it'll help turn an enormous deficit into just a pretty big one. And if the money that's now going down the toilet were spent on infrastructure that helps the economy (which increases our security in the long run), it would be better for all concerned.