Skip to comments.Paul Krugman to Obama: You’re gonna lose unless you demand a huge stimulus package
Posted on 05/02/2012 9:31:40 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Paul Krugman continues his Chicken Little tour in service to his new book, End This Depression Now!, by giving the Obama campaign a little free advice. Did I say “free”? Actually, it comes at a steep, steep price:
In his book, which hit shelves May 1, Krugman laments the shadow of economic catastrophe we live in, and the opportunity cost of huge stockpiles of underutilized human and physical capital. The government should put that to work, Krugman says, first by reversing the state layoffs of teachers, firefighters and other employees, and then ideally with a New Deal-style public works push to rebuild American infrastructure by putting the unemployed to work. But even though GOP opposition makes that all but impossible, Krugman believes its a mistake for Obama not to go the extra mile and at least tell voters what more he would do if only he could.
There is a political danger to Obama, which is that [Mitt] Romney can go around saying, The economy is still lousy, which is true, Krugman said. And the fact that Obama has never made a really clear case for his own economic leadership hurts. Now, I still think Obama will probably win, because there are other issues, but they have created a trap for themselves on the economic policy front by allowing themselves to own a weak economy in a way that they shouldnt, because a lot of the problem has been tortured opposition from the Republicans.
The White Houses narrative developed amid strong political headwinds. Pressure not only from Republicans but many Democrats and even administration officials, along with a broad establishment consensus, compelled Obama to pivot to deficit-reduction, after the Democrats 2010 congressional losses and in the face of an exploding national debt.
I’m pretty sure that a proposal to spend another $2 trillion in stimulus spending would just about put a bow on the election for Mitt Romney, not Barack Obama. That became very clear after 2010, when Republicans won a landslide in House elections that hadn’t been seen in a midterm since 1938. However, the notion that Obama pivoted to deficit reduction is rather ludicrous. His proposed FY2013 budgets reduced the deficit to $900 billion, which is better than the four straight trillion-dollar-plus deficit budgets Obama signed — remember, he signed the FY2009 budget after the Democratic Congress played keep-away with George W. Bush — but it’s hardly a reduction to pre-Obama levels.
On the other hand, Krugman does correctly identify the inherent contradiction in Team Obama’s campaign:
Theyve tied themselves up in knots because theyve bought into this notion that it would sound wrong to admit that they havent been able to do everything that they really should have done, Krugman told TPM in an interview following the release of his new book, End This Depression Now! Its incredible they cant quite make up their minds on whether the theme is that Republicans are standing in the way of doing what has to be done, or things are really good and Americas back on track. The problem is that you cant perceive both of those lines at the same time.
No, they have to argue that the 2009 stimulus worked, when it obviously didn’t. They can’t blame GOP recalcitrance for that, either; Democrats locked Republicans out of the drafting of that stimulus package, and then passed it themselves without any GOP votes in the House and only three in the Senate, including one who later switched parties (Arlen Specter). They own the 2009 stimulus package, and they own the results.
Speaking of results, the Romney campaign released another campaign ad today, attacking Obama on his promises of economic resurgence:
How do you define “progress”? Probably not with these economic statistics. No matter what Krugman claims now, the Obama administration proposed the $800 billion stimulus and predicted it would stop joblessness from rising above 8%, and it hasn’t been below 8% since. That’s failure no matter how one wants to spin it.
Update: Liz Peek slams Krugman’s “left-wing bullying” of Ben Bernanke:
Paul Krugman vaulted over the line recently, issuing an ad hominem attack on Fed Chair Ben Bernanke for not doing enough to boost the economy. Krugmans anxiety that the stuttering recovery will bounce President Obama from the White House seems to have loosened his already-fragile grip on reality. His conclusion that right-wing bullying is holding Bernanke back seems especially nonsensical, even for the truculent Mr. Krugman. …
Krugmans frustration is understandable. Many Americans are still without jobs, and income growth is tepid. However, driving the nation full tilt towards the next financial cliff is not the answer. Leadership and pro-business measures such as those adopted in Canada and Germany in recent years an approach consistently undervalued by the Obama White House would better help us get back on the speedway.
Fortunately, the Fed is in the hands of a sober driver, who appears immune to right-wing bullying. Let us hope he will resist Krugmans left-wing bullying as well.
I think that’s a safe bet. Is anyone taking Krugman’s advice these days? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Please Obummer. Listen to this Commie dope. Calling for another stimulus will guarantee your loss in Nov.
it is amazing how many complete idiots have nobel prizes.
So Krugman is paying attention to Obama's huge package again?
TMI... Get a room...
TMI... Get a room...
Paul Krugman in his natural state.
Oh man...With the “real” condition that American (producing) citizens are in, asking for yet MORE money will put some over the edge.
The scientist equivalent of Krugman (hypothetical, because NO scientist even approaches Krugman’s stupidity)is the clod who claims that one can really lift himself by standing in a bucket and pulling the handle hard enough.
Krugman really should book an appearance on “Coast to Coast”.
He belongs there.
Respect, more respect... the man is a distinguished Princeton Economics Professor, a distinguished Columnist for the Times, and a Nobel Prize Winner /s
Every thing about Keynes, himself, demonstrated the basest morality of one who lives for the moment, and compulsively despises those of us who see any society as a multi-generational project, with a multi-generational viewpoint.
For more on Keynes, Economics Of A Sociopath. To better appreciate the terrible damage done when central planners trash the value of their currency--as Krugman & the like, in effect, demand: Medium Of Exchange.
This is not a matter of differences of opinion. On one side is the whole moral heritage of the West; on the other, new variations of the seductive nonsense whispered into Eve's ear in the Genesis account of the fall of Man.
Spot on...what's that definition..."repeating the same mistake expecting a different result"?
That is why the democraps in congress have not passed a budget in 3 years!!!
They just keep ‘continuing resolutions’ that spend at current levels (after they locked in the $1.4 trillion increase )
If they passed an actual budget, it would be at 2008 budgeting levels +plus only baseline increases
My dad was a professor, and I grew up around Harvardheads
in Cambridge, Mass. I know these frauds for what they are.
Gee, let’s pay off the title loan on our first car by doing the same thing with our other car!
Ahh, Krugman, he already got it when Boehner extended the debt limit.
As a volunteer for NAMI, I am quite serious when I say that I believe Mr Krugman to be - literally - mentally ill. Not saying that as a metaphore - but I truely think his boat has detached from the peer of reality.
I would like to assess every elected representative who supported a stimulus and their children for their pro-rata share of the incremental debt they have placed upon our children. What does 1/535 of a $ Trillion look like?
Make this spending of other people’s money PERSONAL!
1) Technically there is no “Nobel Prize” in Economics.
2) Economics is a “hard science” in that it is essentially applied mathematics. The prime difference between Economics and the physical sciences is that in Economics we study, essentially, human behavior through prices, etc. and attempt to make predictions on that behavior. Math don’t work so good when humans are in the equation.
In regards to the article, Paul Krugman gives economists a bad name. I prefer Friedman.
‘End the Depression Now!’
Look around you. This is what a depression looks like.
Well, at least the ‘Progressives’ are recognizing that their efforts haven’t prevented a Depression at all. But the idiots will claim that they never spent enough in the first place.
I have no faith in the American Voter to do the right thing.
“Demand a Huge Stimulus Package” sounds like something that would be running on Cinemax between 1 and 4 A.M.
First time I've heard Austrian economics refered to as "right-wing bullying". If hundreds of billions in misallocated stimulus doesn't help the economy (actually hurts), why would anyone believe that low rates will help? Low rates suck capital away from long term investment.
And helicopter pilots are not "drivers".
Don't be too sure of that. Just remember that Obama's people liked Stimulus I and Son of Stimulus. There still are a lot of people with their hands out who missed out on "dat Obama money" the first time around and they vote, and vote, and vote...
We are $16 Trillion in debt and this wizard of smart says all our problems would be solved if only we spent more money?
Paul Krugman has been showing up on NBC and MSNBC more frequently pushing for more QE type funded spending stimulus. The other night prize winner P.K. was on Maddow and he pointed out how he has always been right (except predicting the crash and how the stimulus would work and lots of other stuff) .
Now they are claiming that it takes 10 to 15 years to recover from a crash like we had 2007 to 2009 and that only handing out lots MORE big money can save us (and when that runs out Paul?)
Have you ever noticed that according to these liberal economic experts like prize winner Krug, all the tried and true tested ways of fixing the economy meaning their economic theories (which they call facts) just happen to coincide with all the left’s social justice fairness objectives? All of them.
Take ‘Food stamps and unemployment comp is the most efficient way to create jobs’. That matches both exactly. How lucky is that?
They do create some jobs, like welfare caseworkers :)
And passing the Dream Act would create all kinds of interesting jobs, like teachers of Reconquista Studies (to satisfy the "educational requirements").
Below is an interesting chart that Dems are using showing changes in private sector job growth.
Here are a few simple calculations I can make that show how bads things are assuming this chart is even accurate. It shows job growth going positive about Feb 2010 and then bouncing around an average of about 150K jobs a month for 24 months.
150K times 24 months= 3.6 M jobs created
but during the same 2 year period the national debt increased by around $3T.
$ 3T divided by 3.6 million jobs= $833.0 K ($830,000) in increase in NEW national debt per NEW job.
In todays current political debate only the number of new jobs is counted (before the election) as a metric, not how much we all owe per job. It shows how superficial the debate is that the cost in new debt per new job is not consided relevent. This is like paying off your backlog of bills with those checks the credit card company sends you and then claiming you are moving 'forward' making progress.
Ohaha had two major pieces of legislation which were supposed to fuel his reelection: (1) the trillion dollar stimulus which bombed, and, (2) the healthcare mandate which could soon be kaputski or partially disemboweled by the USSC.
The 2012 Ohaha team are gonna use the 2008 Anita (Mao) Dunn strategy to manipulate voters, to downplay Ohaha's destructive policies ....and his scary plans for the next term. Dunn has said THEY and only THEY decided what the media should know about 2008 candidate Ohaha. The strategy is already in place---watch the Ohahas copping that "don't worry--we're harmless" attitude.
Obama's open mic slip in Russia revealed his hidden agenda. He didnt say "after the election, or after the next election. He said: This is my last election" ....... reassuring the Ruskis that he'll then have "more flexibility after the election....
Clearly Ohaha's certainty WRT staying in offce is not based on his approval ratings or massive opposition to his cockamamie polices----mandated healthcare, trillion dollar stimulus, using aborted babies' brains in lab experiments, giving himself massive executive power over Americans, co-opting religious beliefs, $4-Plus gas, 16% real unemployment, trillion dollardeficits, escalating inflation at the supermarket, the GSA spending scandal......to name a few.
No. Ohaha's certainty stems from his knowledge that he will stay in office---not by the will of the people---but by buying his reelection, using unprecedented vote fraud.
FIRST AND FOREMOST----WE MUST ATTACK THE MASSIVE
VOTER FRAUD OHAHA INTENDS TO USE TO GET REELECTED.
Remember, voter fraud is the Chi/mobs' specialty---do NOT underestimate Rahm and Axelrod (both running O's reelection), and Valerie whatsherface in the WH.
Let us not forget----the minute they hit the WH, the Chi/mob went into action: the WH Chi/mob took over the census---and now have all the CV they need to file phony FEC reports using stolen federal dollars as campaign contributions.
THIS MADE ME LAUGH OUT LOUD Obama's ex-COS "Wall Street Rahm" "suddenly" discovered he wanted to be Chicago's mayor---the little turd went before the mics and announced his campaign "raised $10 million in just a few weeks." Rahm also controlled the US Treasury as COS. This turd-o-crat knows where all the stolen Federal money is hidden....Wall Street knows how to make money disappear faster than a cream puff at a Weight Watcher weigh-in.
Do not underestimate the cash the Ohahas/Chi-mob can come up with to fix the election......remember, these are the kingpins of Chicago politics. At one time, conscientious FEC investigators verified money was coming from legal citizens....but if Obama wins there will be no investigations. Remember, there are billions unaccounted for in Obama's stimulus packages (probably used in the last election cycle).....you can be sure the Ohaha kingpins have tons of money stashed away for 2012.
POINTS TO PONDER
<><> author Dean Koontz estimates there's about $90 billion missing from the US Treasury.
<><> Ohaha's ex-COS Chi/Mayor Rahm Emanuel is running the reelection campaign----b/c this Wall Street turd knows where all the money is hidden. Rahm also controlled all US Treasury assets (at Obama's behest) when he was COS.
<><>The Ohahas took control of the census upon taking office----they have all the necessary CV to phony up contribution reports for the FEC.
WATCH FOR PHONY FEC REPORTS The Ohaha's "say" they added $45 million to reelection coffers in February.....raised jointly by the DNC, "Obama for America" and two other joint fundraising committees the "Obama Victory Fund" and the "Swing State Victory Fund,"...and whatever other voter frauds they dream up. ////JEFF HEAD All well said...and worth repeating. Not only have his signtures acts failed, they are destroying the country. Which of course is exaclty what they are meant to do. Obama is not an idiot or stupid. He knows exactly what he is doing and he is going about it with a will...to fundamentally change (read detroy) our Constitutional Republic. The man is... A Maxist ideolog who despises America http://www.jeffhead.com/obama-time.htm