Tag Archives: paul krugman

Dear Dr. Krugman: Please Let Me Explain

By Joe Firestone

Paul Krugman can’t explain why the deficit issue has suddenly dropped off the agenda. He says:

. . . quite suddenly the whole thing has dropped off the agenda.

You could say that this reflects the dwindling of the deficit — but that’s old news; anyone doing the math saw this coming quite a while ago. Or you could mention the failure of the often-predicted financial crisis to arrive — but after so many years of being wrong, why should a few months more have caused the deficit scolds to disappear in a puff of smoke?

Why indeed are they so quiet? Could it be because the deficit hawks have succeeded in getting the short-term result they want, which is a likely deficit too small to sustain the private savings and import desires of most Americans, and also because the political climate is such right now that they cannot make progress on their longer term entitlement-cutting program until after the coming elections have resolved the issue of whether there will be strong resistance to such a campaign if they renew it? Let’s look at the budget outlook first.

Continue reading

Professor Krugman’s Nervous Tic?

By Joe Firestone

Paul Krugman’s recent post makes some good points about the myth of the undeserving poor. But does he have a nervous tic? When criticizing conservative economic views, doesn’t he always seem to genuflect slightly to conservative opinion in order to appear “reasonable”? In this post he says:

“I’ve noted before that conservatives seem fixated on the notion that poverty is basically the result of character problems among the poor. This may once have had a grain of truth to it, but for the past three decades and more the main obstacle facing the poor has been the lack of jobs paying decent wages. But the myth of the undeserving poor persists, and so does a counterpart myth, that of the deserving rich.”

What “grain of truth” ever existed in this story? Where is the empirical evidence that the poor were ever more “lazy” than the rich or had other “character defects” (Not K’s words) that the rich don’t have in abundance, as well? I don’t think there is any. What the conservatives believe is pure BS. Some people are certainly “lazier” than others. But there’s no evidence that this aspect of character is class-based. It’s just prejudice, myth, and conservative fairy tales, which they embrace in place of authentic religion, run rampant.

Continue reading

Bow down to the Bubble: Larry Summerian Endorses Bubbleonian Madness and Paul Krugman Embraces the Hansenian Stagnation Thesis*

By L. Randall Wray

{*Sorry, I couldn’t resist. As many of NEP’s readers know, Michael Hudson has long advanced the argument that America’s policymakers have purposely created Bubbleonia—NOT to generate growth but rather to enrich the thieves at the top. And many of you are familiar with the work of Geoffrey Ingham—a fellow Chartalist traveler—who has focused on J.M. Keynes’s “Babylonian madness”, the period after Keynes had discovered the writings of A.Mitchell Innes that led him to explore the origins of money in Babylonia. Hudson is also a scholar of that period. Alvin Hansen reintroduced the thesis of secular stagnation, giving it a Keynesian flavor.}

Larry Summers has made a big splash by (finally) recognizing that the US has had a series of financial bubbles. (See here.)  Duh! Who wudduv thought? The Reagan years were just a bubble, driven by thrift excesses. The Clinton years were just a bubble, driven by dot-com excesses. And the most recent real estate boom and bust was just a bubble, driven by Wall Street’s thieving Investment Banks. Bubbles-R-US. It’s all we’ve got going on.

Continue reading

What If China Dumps US Treasury Bonds? Paul Krugman inches toward MMT

By L. Randall Wray

Our deficit hysterians love to raise the specter of China. Supposedly Uncle Sam is at the mercy of the Chinese, who have a stranglehold on the supply of dollars necessary to keep the US government above water. If the Chinese suddenly decided to stop lending those scare dollars, Uncle Sam would be forced to default.

Can anyone, please, explain to me how the sovereign issuer of the US dollar—Uncle Sam—could ever run out of his supply of dollars? Please, give me one coherent explanation of how that could happen.

Continue reading

Rajan Calls Krugman “Paranoid” for Criticizing Reinhart and Rogoff’s Research

By William K. Black

This article discusses a simmering feud among five of the most prominent economists in the world (two of them Nobel Laureates).  It was prompted by the August 8, 2013 article by Raghuram Rajan, who has just been selected to run India’s Central Bank, entitled: “The Paranoid Style in Economics.”  (Note: I have deliberately “buried the lead” in my last section.)

The personalities involved have a great deal to do with the feud, but as Paul Krugman wrote on May 23, 2013, “It’s Not About You.”

Continue reading

William Black’s Comment to Krugman’s Twinkie Manifesto

NEP’s William Black posted the following comment in response to Krugman’s Twinkie Manifesto post: Continue reading

Chris Matthews Embraces Self-Parody by Calling for Obama to Ignore Krugman

By William K. Black
(Cross-posted and Benzinga.com)

Chris Matthews considers it urgent and essential that President Obama and House Speaker Boehner reach what they call a “Grand Bargain” that would impose an austerity budget and begin to unravel the safety net.  Why is it essential?  Matthews provided no analysis or discussion.  It was simply obvious that austerity and beginning to unravel the safety net were essential because otherwise we would face budget austerity via the so-called “fiscal cliff.”  The form of austerity imposed by the fiscal cliff would throw us into recession, increase unemployment, increase the budget deficit and the debt, cut social programs (and military spending), but not unravel the safety net.  If you think that adopting even greater austerity plus far more severe cuts to social programs and the safety net (i.e., what I term the “Great Betrayal”) in order to avoid “fiscal cliff” austerity is logically insane – then you might be rational.  Matthews, however, thinks that ability to use logic makes you a problem. Continue reading

CNBC’s Quick uses Clinton to aim at Krugman, but shoots herself in the foot

By William K. Black
(Crossposted at Benzinga.com)

Becky Quick is a television co-host of a business entertainment program on CNBC.  She has written a column stating that Paul Krugman’s “claim that there is no fiscal crisis isn’t just laughable, it’s downright dangerous.”  She argues that the “only problem” with Krugman’s conclusion was:  “It is hard to find anyone who actually agrees with him.”  She is furious that Krugman concluded that the Bowles-Simpson austerity plan is “a really bad plan.”

Continue reading

Neoliberalism Kills: Part One

By Joe Firestone

During the run-up to passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), I wrote a number of posts here, here, and here assessing the ACA very negatively, and pointing out the shortcomings of the various versions of this bill, preceding its final passage. My focus was on contrasting varying versions with HR 676, the Conyers-Kucinich Medicare for All bill, in relation to its likely impact on fatalities, bankruptcies and divorces attributed to lack of health insurance coverage in the US.

Continue reading

Paul K’s Strange Logic

By Joe Firestone

In an October 12th Post entitled “Foreigners and the Burden of Debt,” Paul Krugman made the following comment.

”. . . we’d all agree that deficits make us poorer if they crowd out investment spending — which they would if the economy were near full employment, but won’t if we’re deeply depressed. All we have to do is realize that net foreign investment — purchases minus sales of assets from and to foreigners — is also a form of investment. Or to put it a bit more simply, sure, budget deficits can make us poorer as a nation if they lead to bigger trade deficits.”

Continue reading