This biased rag is trying to continue the Enron myth, that regulated markets are "deregulated" when politicians do something stupid designed to get their incompetent buddies rich. The repeated examples of antilibertarian bias & economics 101 cluelessness in this piece worry me. The socialist bailout of bankers, once again, has nothing to do with capitalism and everything to do with socialism, no matter how prestigious the newspaper lying about what's to blame.
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

With that thieving scumbag Al Gore "winning" the Nobel Peace Prize and this economically illiterate clown "winning" the Pulitzer Prize, there's a clear indication as to what the value of such awards is...ZERO.

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan

fitzfong.blogspot.com

....Here in the United States, consumers have already realized most of
the possible gains from importing different and cheaper goods -- any
further liberalization won't help them much. But because the government
has refused to deal, in any serious way, with the dislocation and
economic insecurity that increased trade has spawned, too many
lower-skilled workers have concluded, with reason, that they are the
inevitable losers from globalization.

One of the most compelling realities in life and economics is that things change, and people need to adapt or die.  That is not the responsibility of government.  People don't need to wait for government to adapt to changing conditions.

The blame lies squarely with a business community that continues to
support Republican politicians who refuse to raise the taxes and spend
the money necessary to provide the economic safety net for American
workers that a free-market economy has not, and will not, provide.

Government can only raise taxes so high.  Eventually they'll be so high that any increase in the rate leads to a decrease in revenue.  The burden of taxes becomes a drag on the economy.  That's why Reagan's tax cuts brought in record revenues to the treasury.  (Unfortunately, a Democrat Congress increased spending even faster.)

Despite the fact that the U.S. health-care system is the most
privatized and market-driven of any in the industrialized world, it has
become one of least efficient and effective, with extraordinarily high
costs, mediocre results and a large and growing pool of working
families with little or no insurance and inadequate care.

Our system certainly has problems, but it beats waiting several months for a government run system to allow routine procedures.  The medical system is geared to protecting itself from lawsuits, including frivolous claims.  That is a major factor in the high cost.

Deregulated energy markets have, for the most part, failed to provide a
steady supply of affordable electricity to businesses and households
due in large part to imperfect competition that has allowed the
industry to manipulate prices and earn above-market returns.

The "deregulated" energy system has been blocked by government from developing new sources of oil and coal, from expanding oil refinery capacity, from building new nuclear generating plants, and in some cases putting up high voltage transmission lines.

This guy's Pulitzer is for writing, not economics.  He's just better at spewing the same liberal bilge we've been hearing for several decades.  He doesn't understand economics at all.

When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.

"Wave Goodbye to the Invisible Hand"

And say hello to unemployment! If we raise taxes on businesses, we increase their expenses and that will take away the very revenue that that those businesses rely upon to pay their workers. Reduce revenue and you are forced to reduce employment (isn't that right, Washington Post?). Why can't a supposed "business columnist" understand that basic fact of business?