The American economy has seen better days. No one questions this point.

But the approaches which have been offered for dealing with the fix could not be more varied or disparate.

NYT columnist and liberal economist Paul Krugman offers readers a history lesson of sorts likening the present economic slump to the Great Depression. His conclusion of the matter (after the history lesson, of course) is the following:

Mr. Bernanke and his colleagues at the Fed are doing all they can to end that vicious circle. We can only hope that they succeed. Otherwise, the next few years will be very unpleasant — not another Great Depression, hopefully, but surely the worst slump we’ve seen in decades.

[Link]

In brief, the Fed is doing all it can to solve the problem. But we've failed to internalize the lessons of the Great Depression.

Such academic exercises are important and they have their place in public conversation so I cannot begrudge Mr. Krugman his soapbox.

But, by far, the more interesting piece out today on the economy came from billionaire-businessman Steve Forbes.

Forbes' solution rested on two planks:

1. Strengthen the dollar.

2. Reign-in writedowns on banks taking up subprime mortgages.

[Link]

My sense is that there seems to be widespread agreement about the anemic dollar. The price of gold has soared since stocks began falling, primarily as a result of the dollar's weakness against other foreign currencies. Forbes critique of the Bush Administration's failure to deal with this longstanding problem is fair.

As for the spending reductions, here Forbes' solution seems a bit askance. Part of the problem is that financial institutions are panicked exactly because they might have to writedown actual losses on their mortgages. Then again, Forbes' solution is a long-term solution to an immediate problem. The steps taken by the Fed in recent days, as Forbes notes, only provide a band-aid to a hemorrhage.

The real solution must come in addressing the long-term policy issue.

Their suggestions aside, I think the articles underscore well the differences between liberals and conservatives. I won't be so trite as to argue that one view is backward-looking and the other solution-oriented. Though I believe this is true.

I do believe, however, that it represents fundamentally different ways of approaching problems. Liberals engage from a far more theoretical framework, while conservatives take a very practical, hands-on approach.

As Kipling might say, and never the twain shall meet.