"Good things happen to bad people, at least for a while." Dr. Krugman, are you a secret RIchard Thompson fan?
8
trumpist off, for a long time.Thanks for your continued guidance
8
Democrats must stand up to him. They must constantly insist that every new item that Trump proposes be paid for by either tax increase or across the board cuts in the budget as his proposal are simply to expensive and we just cant afford his run-away "credit card spending".
Here's the problem - They wont!
Not one of the Democrats on Capitol Hill has the "internal fortitude" to stand up to Don the Con.
The Democrats mantra should be, must be
That we will give to the new President the same amount of support that the Republicans gave to President Obama.
not ONE DROP LESS and certainly not ONE DROP MORE!
Here's the problem - They wont!
Not one of the Democrats on Capitol Hill has the "internal fortitude" to stand up to Don the Con.
The Democrats mantra should be, must be
That we will give to the new President the same amount of support that the Republicans gave to President Obama.
not ONE DROP LESS and certainly not ONE DROP MORE!
75
Paul, you've been do wrong about so many predictions, it's impossible to believe anything you write going forward. I do find it interesting that this time you've hedged your bet by saying the impact may not happen for years.
91
Does this signal your exit from punditry and return to economics? I hope so, but it may be too late. After your trashing of true progressive and adherent to your former economic principles Bernie Sanders, anything detrimental you write about Trump rings quite hollow. Thank you and your neoliberal soul mates for President Trump.
92
With his boasted methodology for sexual assault endorsed by mass voting for him, women are immediately more in danger. This will happen to female Trump voters and to the relatives of Trump supporters. Just remember when it does happen to you and your family that with your vote you said it was OK.
81
So now Mr. Krugman you retract and it is all right even for renown professors but I do wonder on what assumptions you made your new forecast? you write, ".. putting such a terrible man, with such a terrible team, in power?.." when the team is not yet known and Trumps economic plan was not published/ of course there is a disconnect between what is good for society, or even the economy, in the long run, and what is good for economic performance over the next few quarters. every economist knows that but you don't know Trumps plans neither to the short nor to the long run yet. Could you not wait a month or two? you may have to change your mind again.
71
Hey Paul, how long before Democrats stop whining, crying and stomping their feet?
59
Professor Krugman, admit that you were wrong about Bernie Sanders. Admit that you should have heeded the polls showing Hillary neck-and-neck with Trump, while Sanders was well ahead of him. Admit that you were wrong to overlook Hillary's high negatives with the American people, and that you should have understood that Sanders was the man who could get elected.
By sliming Bernie Sanders and pushing Hillary, you helped give us Trump.
Admit it.
By sliming Bernie Sanders and pushing Hillary, you helped give us Trump.
Admit it.
89
Isn't it kinda weird that a politician is being praised for immediately backing down on the campaign promises that got him elected?
42
How will we do on the NY "soul" exchange?
Part of infrastructure spending aside from bridges tunnels etc maybe high speed
rails et al.....is the huge amounts of money which must be spent on the re-education of
those whose jobs will not come back for jobs that are out there.
Corporations create jobs.....OK let's see them participate in the education
of workers who must make a transition from an old economy to a new one.
It might have a surprising effect on shareholders.......They could start by
readjusting the wages and glut of perks at the top...Do we think of Trump
as a person who would lower the wages of CEO"s?
Part of infrastructure spending aside from bridges tunnels etc maybe high speed
rails et al.....is the huge amounts of money which must be spent on the re-education of
those whose jobs will not come back for jobs that are out there.
Corporations create jobs.....OK let's see them participate in the education
of workers who must make a transition from an old economy to a new one.
It might have a surprising effect on shareholders.......They could start by
readjusting the wages and glut of perks at the top...Do we think of Trump
as a person who would lower the wages of CEO"s?
10
We have to stop this man from his Non-economic policies!! Wake up those who voted for him: He will install a supreme court justice to abolish Roe v. Wade. At the same time he plans on de-funding Planned Parenthood. Wow how Stupid that is! Sure, take the right of women away to have control of their uterus, but at the same time make it harder for poorer folks to get birth control, thus escalating the situation of more of them pregnant with no options. So that will also cause economic and social decline. RIDICULOUS.
46
Beacause you've been sooo right about everything else. Give it a rest.
53
from John Brews...."It's time for corporations to become citizens, to support solutions, not to subvert them for profit."
14
Paul, you are still here?
You should have been run out of town on a rail for supporting the miserably failed program called Obamacare! Not only did you support it, you ridiculed others who didn't and predicted its failure.
Your analysis is not just sub par, it was and is atrocious.
You should have been run out of town on a rail for supporting the miserably failed program called Obamacare! Not only did you support it, you ridiculed others who didn't and predicted its failure.
Your analysis is not just sub par, it was and is atrocious.
68
And if you push it out into the future long enough - anything you predict will likely happen. You 'chumped' out so why not just stop writing until you have something meaningful to say that is not of a whining nature.
62
You did not mention a huge fear although I know you are aware of it: what Trump will do to the Chair of the Fed. If he chooses to politicize that position the damage would be deep. Please discuss this in a future column.
I hope you are regretting your trashing of Bernie, Paul. You didn't feel the Bern, now you will feel the burn... From a Canadian perspective, America, the shining city on the hill, is over.
I hope you are regretting your trashing of Bernie, Paul. You didn't feel the Bern, now you will feel the burn... From a Canadian perspective, America, the shining city on the hill, is over.
29
MMMMM delicious salty Paul Krugman tears. Keep them flowing. Your days are limited NYT. Trump was elected which means this kind of propaganda DID NOT SELL. National Enquirer has become more reputable then you. And that is sad.
47
........so let me get this straight, Mr. Trump.
You promised to bring coal mining jobs back to Scranton, PA. when no one has mined any appreciable coal there for almost 80 years?
Perhaps you can get Carl or Ivan or some other New York pals to build manufacturing plants in all of the Rust Belt cities and towns to make the products you are in-sourcing from your China tariff program.
.....not to mention all of the really great things you have planned for immigrants, gays, women, African-Americans, healthcare, and education at all levels.
Please go slow and be thoughtful, Donald.
Make America Wait Again!
You promised to bring coal mining jobs back to Scranton, PA. when no one has mined any appreciable coal there for almost 80 years?
Perhaps you can get Carl or Ivan or some other New York pals to build manufacturing plants in all of the Rust Belt cities and towns to make the products you are in-sourcing from your China tariff program.
.....not to mention all of the really great things you have planned for immigrants, gays, women, African-Americans, healthcare, and education at all levels.
Please go slow and be thoughtful, Donald.
Make America Wait Again!
37
It's impossible, I know, but Krugman needs to think outside of himself; i.e., see reality outside of the personal benefits of being a Washington insider (more than he will be under this administration). On trade, the US is now a backwater peep in the world of regional and global development as with the AIIB, and China's One Belt-One Road arrangements; even Japan is looking west to the East. Only the TPP would have kept the US's foot in the door on future global trade, but that is now, wonderfully, history. On infrastructure, Krugman never understood (and apparently still does not understand) that infrastructure spending is an INVESTMENT IN OUR NATION’S ECONOMIC POTENTIAL IN THE 21ST CENTURY – much more than the simpleton idea of “stimulus” spending where workers move dirt from one hole to the next and paradise is asphalt-covered. In a sustainable economy, half of the workforce would be involved in some way on these common and advanced systems of infrastructure. It is my view that the Republican menace Krugman fears, is about to topple – those who he trots out so he can say he’s not one of them. With less of the traditional Republican non-sense (smaller government, tax breaks for the rich), Krugman is a nobody. Let’s celebrate, then work hard for sane policy.
8
All well and good to shy away from "the sky will fall" thinking ... especially at a time when there's a ton of that going around.
But the specifics Mr. Krugman points to are the opposite of "comforting."
Take his "$4.5 trillion in tax cuts that mostly to to the super-rich ... would not be my first choice as a way to stimulate the economy."
Leaving aside whether something so "bizarre" could get enacted - "income inequality" has moved in 2016 from a radical battle cry to something that might have done 20-30 points better than either of the 2 major party candidates! That is, this isn't just my preference or yours or Mr. Krugman's - for one of the first actions to be one that really DISADVANTAGES the middle class in terms of its position relative to those more affluent ... is insane.
Destabilizing, wasteful, pernicious, too.
Similarly, those trade and immigration policies WILL have short-term consequences (to our economy) much greater than Mr. Krugman predicts at this moment.
MOSTLY, oh, for the last 8 years, Mr. Krugman has been doleful - often bordering on histrionic. NOW?? he wants to rein it in. Yes, we all need a little (or a lot of) "We WILL survive," but this is the oddest possible source ... and the most porous set of arguments I can imagine.
Somebody with even more time to waste than I have can put a dozen of Mr. Krugman's older articles next to this one and say, "Who's got Paul locked up in some hideout and is putting words into his mouth?!"
He was right THEN!
But the specifics Mr. Krugman points to are the opposite of "comforting."
Take his "$4.5 trillion in tax cuts that mostly to to the super-rich ... would not be my first choice as a way to stimulate the economy."
Leaving aside whether something so "bizarre" could get enacted - "income inequality" has moved in 2016 from a radical battle cry to something that might have done 20-30 points better than either of the 2 major party candidates! That is, this isn't just my preference or yours or Mr. Krugman's - for one of the first actions to be one that really DISADVANTAGES the middle class in terms of its position relative to those more affluent ... is insane.
Destabilizing, wasteful, pernicious, too.
Similarly, those trade and immigration policies WILL have short-term consequences (to our economy) much greater than Mr. Krugman predicts at this moment.
MOSTLY, oh, for the last 8 years, Mr. Krugman has been doleful - often bordering on histrionic. NOW?? he wants to rein it in. Yes, we all need a little (or a lot of) "We WILL survive," but this is the oddest possible source ... and the most porous set of arguments I can imagine.
Somebody with even more time to waste than I have can put a dozen of Mr. Krugman's older articles next to this one and say, "Who's got Paul locked up in some hideout and is putting words into his mouth?!"
He was right THEN!
3
Here is an actual fact. Facts are the only thing which matter in modern science.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.htm?s...
For 210 years, sea levels, which are also the best dilation thermometer, rose at THE SAME RATE. Sea levels all around the globe show the same.
Which shows that we are in the midst of global warming, but for more than two centuries, and the whole industrial age had no measurable influence on it at all.
That is not my opinion, which does not matter in science. That is what data shows. Which is all what matters in science.
So, sadly, Mr. Krugman, whose economics career was based on analyzing data, choses to treat the climate issue as political and never ever look at climate data.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.htm?s...
For 210 years, sea levels, which are also the best dilation thermometer, rose at THE SAME RATE. Sea levels all around the globe show the same.
Which shows that we are in the midst of global warming, but for more than two centuries, and the whole industrial age had no measurable influence on it at all.
That is not my opinion, which does not matter in science. That is what data shows. Which is all what matters in science.
So, sadly, Mr. Krugman, whose economics career was based on analyzing data, choses to treat the climate issue as political and never ever look at climate data.
24
Was it not John Maynard Keynes who said: "In the long run, we're all dead" ?
31
You seem to be right a lot of the time. For some reason the right people don't listen to you. Maybe you could find a way to make sense to the people
who never believe you instead of having to say I told you so all the time.
This goes to all the non-Trump supporters, not just you.
who never believe you instead of having to say I told you so all the time.
This goes to all the non-Trump supporters, not just you.
17
Speculative markets wills see US trends and begin to downward adjust US worth because as powerful as the US is, the rest of of the planet is 75%.
China will growth and the US, India and UK as well as any other who take the path of isolationism will shrink WHILE China expands it's markets.
However, this will not matter because the US and other western markets will not need cheap foreign labor given the option to invest in automated factories at home for production and national security.
I would be surprised is we don't see an arms race trigger because of all the advanced in AI, robotics and batteries. All the nations of the world have to revamp their military due to new technologies AND with Trump running the US, their isn't a lot of reason to trust American leadership.
Under these conditions China should rise to forefront of global economics and maybe UK will be their western banking partner, who knows. Russia gets left in the dust either way because they don't have the industry, but perhaps lots of minerals.
Global corporations all get rich and outpace governmental control in ALL scenarios, and NOW FASTER THAN EVER! Right when we needed to address the wealth gap, we handed more power to them and with no promises in return, as usual. If you're going to hand power or money to government or corporations, at least get something for it. Humans are born suckers
It's looking like a tough 20+ years for humanity.
China will growth and the US, India and UK as well as any other who take the path of isolationism will shrink WHILE China expands it's markets.
However, this will not matter because the US and other western markets will not need cheap foreign labor given the option to invest in automated factories at home for production and national security.
I would be surprised is we don't see an arms race trigger because of all the advanced in AI, robotics and batteries. All the nations of the world have to revamp their military due to new technologies AND with Trump running the US, their isn't a lot of reason to trust American leadership.
Under these conditions China should rise to forefront of global economics and maybe UK will be their western banking partner, who knows. Russia gets left in the dust either way because they don't have the industry, but perhaps lots of minerals.
Global corporations all get rich and outpace governmental control in ALL scenarios, and NOW FASTER THAN EVER! Right when we needed to address the wealth gap, we handed more power to them and with no promises in return, as usual. If you're going to hand power or money to government or corporations, at least get something for it. Humans are born suckers
It's looking like a tough 20+ years for humanity.
21
Hey Krugman, if you are going to apologize (which is what this article is), don't be so wishy-washy. Just say you are sorry for being so incredibly reactionary right after the election to signal an immediate recession - but now say that Trump's policies might actually boost growth. How irresponsible are you, by the way ?
Two other points:
1. Other countries - "A return to protectionism and trade wars would make the world economy poorer over time, and would in particular cripple poorer nations that desperately need open markets for their products." Let me put this in capital letters so maybe you'll understand. WE DON'T CARE ABOUT POORER NATIONS. For a change, let's take care of the United States first before we worry about others.
2. Government - " Yet we’re about to see a major degradation in both the quality and the independence of public servants." Oh, so somehow we are more at risk because a bunch of government workers might actually need to do something other than push useless regulations ? Uh, yeah. Remember what I said about poorer nations ? That goes double for government workers.
Two other points:
1. Other countries - "A return to protectionism and trade wars would make the world economy poorer over time, and would in particular cripple poorer nations that desperately need open markets for their products." Let me put this in capital letters so maybe you'll understand. WE DON'T CARE ABOUT POORER NATIONS. For a change, let's take care of the United States first before we worry about others.
2. Government - " Yet we’re about to see a major degradation in both the quality and the independence of public servants." Oh, so somehow we are more at risk because a bunch of government workers might actually need to do something other than push useless regulations ? Uh, yeah. Remember what I said about poorer nations ? That goes double for government workers.
41
Why do Republican'ts hate this country and Constitution so much as per their actions not words?! What are you smoking?!
Thanks stupid myopic arrogant Americans, we are now a fascist state just like 1930s Germany and Italy. Trumpet NOT my president, not now, not ever. Resist! ALL Republican'ts and deplorables are unAmerican unpatriotic misogynistic masochistic sadistic myopic fascists as per their actions not words. Deplorables can never learn and never will learn! Did you not remember the illegal war criminal Bushie family from only a few years ago?! Thankfully a good person President Obama saved us from your stupidly and arrogance with Bushie but now because of your ignorance and arrogance we are gonna do it all over again. President Hillary Clinton, another good person, would have saved us even further but you decided to believe liars and fascists over a good person President Hillary Clinton. How stupid can you get?! Guess not stupid enough. As the old adage "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it." We didn't like it nor want it the first time and definitely won't like it this time. Never going to learn! Gumbmint is NOT the problem but you deplorables and Trumpet and Republican'ts most definitely are. You do realize that because of your ignorance, you will lose you social security, medical coverage, homes and apartments, inflation will skyrocket and then what are you going to do?! But I doubt you are smart enough to even understand?!
Thanks stupid myopic arrogant Americans, we are now a fascist state just like 1930s Germany and Italy. Trumpet NOT my president, not now, not ever. Resist! ALL Republican'ts and deplorables are unAmerican unpatriotic misogynistic masochistic sadistic myopic fascists as per their actions not words. Deplorables can never learn and never will learn! Did you not remember the illegal war criminal Bushie family from only a few years ago?! Thankfully a good person President Obama saved us from your stupidly and arrogance with Bushie but now because of your ignorance and arrogance we are gonna do it all over again. President Hillary Clinton, another good person, would have saved us even further but you decided to believe liars and fascists over a good person President Hillary Clinton. How stupid can you get?! Guess not stupid enough. As the old adage "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it." We didn't like it nor want it the first time and definitely won't like it this time. Never going to learn! Gumbmint is NOT the problem but you deplorables and Trumpet and Republican'ts most definitely are. You do realize that because of your ignorance, you will lose you social security, medical coverage, homes and apartments, inflation will skyrocket and then what are you going to do?! But I doubt you are smart enough to even understand?!
47
kakistocracy
PRONUNCIATION:
(kak-i-STOK-ruh-see, kah-ki-)
MEANING:
noun: Government by the least qualified or worst persons.
ETYMOLOGY:
From Greek kakistos (worst), superlative of kakos (bad) + -cracy (rule). Ultimately from the Indo-European root kakka-/kaka- (to defecate), which also gave us poppycock, cacophony, cacology, and cacography. Earliest documented use: 1829.
PRONUNCIATION:
(kak-i-STOK-ruh-see, kah-ki-)
MEANING:
noun: Government by the least qualified or worst persons.
ETYMOLOGY:
From Greek kakistos (worst), superlative of kakos (bad) + -cracy (rule). Ultimately from the Indo-European root kakka-/kaka- (to defecate), which also gave us poppycock, cacophony, cacology, and cacography. Earliest documented use: 1829.
13
Like nine of our forty-four Presidents who never completed their Presidency,Trump will never make it to the end. There are also the five who had serious health problems while in office,rendering them at times ineffective. For obvious reasons,Trump is a prime candidate not to last very long in office: 70 years old,strongly hated by many,overweight,out of shape,incompetent,unstable,etc. These traits do not make for much time in the most important,pressure-packed job in the world.
17
Stop whining in advance, Mr Krugman, stop preaching apocalypse and give him a chance! Theorist like you never built anything in their life and learned everything from the book. Let practical mind of accomplished businessman have a shot and wish him success!
18
However, evidence of Krugman's continued editorial awfulness is readily apparent twice each week from good Liberals at the NYTimes!
16
Boy, talk about having your cake and eating it, too...
Krugman long ago stopped being an economist and now is just another angry voice among the whining children. First, he puts out a doomsday prediction on election night, then quickly pulls it off the internet because he realized what a tool it made him sound like.
Let me summarize his stream of semi-lucidness: "the sky is falling, the sky is falling. BUT FIRST, we have a few years of growth."
Krugman long ago stopped being an economist and now is just another angry voice among the whining children. First, he puts out a doomsday prediction on election night, then quickly pulls it off the internet because he realized what a tool it made him sound like.
Let me summarize his stream of semi-lucidness: "the sky is falling, the sky is falling. BUT FIRST, we have a few years of growth."
22
Dear Krugman, how about instead of starting your article with:
"Let’s be clear: Installing Donald Trump in the White House is an epic
mistake."
You start with the more precise, appropriate (to say nothing about being more inline with the confidence we have in the value of your assessments and predictions):
"Let’s be clear: IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, Installing Donald Trump in the White House MAY JUST PROVE TO BE an epic mistake."
You - and most of your NYT cronies - still didn't learn your lesson yet, did you, huh? So here it is, lightly, once over:
Krugman - you are intelligent and have an opinion that is well reasoned BASED ON YOUR PARTICULAR SET OF ASSUMPTIONS YOUR HEART DESIRES- but you don't really KNOW anything. Your opinions are smart and erudite, but as far as having to do with what will actually happen in the real world, they are about as reliable and sagacious as those of Elmer Fudd. (As are our opinions, by the way.)
How about you write more humbly, keeping your words soft and sweet on the off chance you'd have to swallow them...as the lot of you had to before?
"Let’s be clear: Installing Donald Trump in the White House is an epic
mistake."
You start with the more precise, appropriate (to say nothing about being more inline with the confidence we have in the value of your assessments and predictions):
"Let’s be clear: IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, Installing Donald Trump in the White House MAY JUST PROVE TO BE an epic mistake."
You - and most of your NYT cronies - still didn't learn your lesson yet, did you, huh? So here it is, lightly, once over:
Krugman - you are intelligent and have an opinion that is well reasoned BASED ON YOUR PARTICULAR SET OF ASSUMPTIONS YOUR HEART DESIRES- but you don't really KNOW anything. Your opinions are smart and erudite, but as far as having to do with what will actually happen in the real world, they are about as reliable and sagacious as those of Elmer Fudd. (As are our opinions, by the way.)
How about you write more humbly, keeping your words soft and sweet on the off chance you'd have to swallow them...as the lot of you had to before?
26
This is great, I love the fact that you can give yourself a "do over" once you realized that your first prediction was totally wrong. That's the beauty of being on the left, you are never held accountable.
24
But wouldn't you rather have Trump than Bernie Sanders? This is partly your fault, Krugman.
23
If you care so much about climate change why did you smear Bernie?
31
Paul, so glad you "quickly retracted that call."
Since Paul Ryan explained two days ago the Obamacare had to go, but had unfortunately tied Medicare into it, so Medicare will need a major overhaul (teensy vouchers!) at the same time.
Too bad you can't retract the asinine opposition you showcased against Bernie Sanders Medicare for All proposals. Too bad you can't retract your fawning endorsement of Hillary Clinton. Saw the names of possible White House appointees. Your name wasn't on the list.
Since Paul Ryan explained two days ago the Obamacare had to go, but had unfortunately tied Medicare into it, so Medicare will need a major overhaul (teensy vouchers!) at the same time.
Too bad you can't retract the asinine opposition you showcased against Bernie Sanders Medicare for All proposals. Too bad you can't retract your fawning endorsement of Hillary Clinton. Saw the names of possible White House appointees. Your name wasn't on the list.
21
Trump is a New York liberal acting's as someone else
3
Paul, I depend on you to be right. Like everyone else, you blew it. Yet even without a worldwide recession, the incompetent blowhards--led by the blow-hard in chief--that are taking over are somewhere between incompetent, insane, and evil, and will certainly do immeasurable, long-lasting harm to the country.
I also dont see that protectionist tariffs &/or trade wars will be a wash. How much stuff can we make for which we ourselves would be the only buyers? Don't give up economics just yet, Doc.
I also dont see that protectionist tariffs &/or trade wars will be a wash. How much stuff can we make for which we ourselves would be the only buyers? Don't give up economics just yet, Doc.
5
To paraphrase a wise & aging Nobel laurelate:
Darkness at the break of noon
Shadows even the silver spoon
The handmade blade, the child’s balloon
Eclipses both the sun and moon
It's all right Ma, I'm only bleeding....
Darkness at the break of noon
Shadows even the silver spoon
The handmade blade, the child’s balloon
Eclipses both the sun and moon
It's all right Ma, I'm only bleeding....
7
What is not addressed by so many economists is the adverse employment impact of automation - regardless of protectionism. I went to the bank last week to cash a check. With great fanfare the manager tried to introduce me to the new "auto teller". Just slide the check into one of the six machines where the teller used to be and I would receive $100 fot its' first-time use! There are now only two human tellars at my bank. I chose to wait on line for one of them. Robots design, build, maintain and install other robots with increased frequency. As Pink Floyd stated: "RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE!". P.S. this comment submitted from my droid ): .......
8
Go back. Paul Krugman go back and analyze why your Clinton prediction
was wrong. Readers are seeking answers on how the GOP and Trump pulled
off one of the great upsets of American political history. Forget the name
calling. You don't want to be cast aside as the Irving Fisher of 2016.
was wrong. Readers are seeking answers on how the GOP and Trump pulled
off one of the great upsets of American political history. Forget the name
calling. You don't want to be cast aside as the Irving Fisher of 2016.
13
Keep on predicting doom, then.
8
Paul,
Whatever happened to in the long run we are all dead?
Whatever happened to in the long run we are all dead?
12
May be Trump victory was bad or good but the constant negative attitude of the New York times to everything Trump is nothing but one sided and is sure to erode NYT's credibility.
19
Repeal and replace Obamacare with something better.... Medicare for All.
Cheaper, better, covers more people.
Seize the high ground first, and you won't have to take it back.
But the Dems are too incompetent to jump on it.
Just like they are too incompetent to stop Trump.
Cheaper, better, covers more people.
Seize the high ground first, and you won't have to take it back.
But the Dems are too incompetent to jump on it.
Just like they are too incompetent to stop Trump.
13
Be careful with the elliptical irony, especially when stated in the negative: "Donald Trump isn’t proposing huge, budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations because he understands macroeconomics."
That sentence was a jarring stumbling block, because I believe Krugman means to say the opposite.
Trump IS/IS proposing huge, budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy because he does NOT/NOT understand macroeconomics.
That sentence was a jarring stumbling block, because I believe Krugman means to say the opposite.
Trump IS/IS proposing huge, budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy because he does NOT/NOT understand macroeconomics.
9
So what you're saying is not that the sky is falling, but that it eventually it may fall. Chicken Little tell us more.
18
Forgive me, but I'm having a very hard time putting any faith at all in anything printed in the NYT right now, and Krugman's forecasts are no exception.
38
What makes a good or bad leader is the advisers he surrounds himself with and
Trump is using the most corrupt people who should not be allowed back into the White House.
Trump is using the most corrupt people who should not be allowed back into the White House.
14
So economic growth may actually accelerate for a couple of years? And that is enough to make you sanguine about the short-term effects of Trump as president? Shallow, you are micrometers deep.
8
Is it time for the Democrats to play like the Republicans did the last 8 years and stonewall everything in Congress, or should they go along with the Republicans and try to make the best of a bad deal?
10
"How did you go bankrupt?" “Two ways,” Mike said. “Gradually and then suddenly.” Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.
So, in other words, 'it takes time to really mess up the economy, but when it happens it will be swift and catastrophic.'
So, in other words, 'it takes time to really mess up the economy, but when it happens it will be swift and catastrophic.'
14
What I see is chaos and that cannot be beneficial to anyone or to anything.
13
You will see some serious real estate churning in the near future as capital gains rates plummet.
3
Given how wrong Krugman has been throughout the election process, why should anyone start believing him now? His partisan blindness has pretty much disqualified him from having his predictions taken seriously.
23
Of course good things happen to bad people and bad things happen to good people. Liberals need to ditch or at least scale back their unrealistic romantic view of life.
9
This "editorial" sound like it was written by Mr. Chicken Little. Sound to me like: let's make these predictions. and hope our readership does not catch on or remember them next month. Forecasting Gloom and Doom does not unify a country–oops, didn't mean to say you were trying to.
10
I just hope it doesn't take four years for the minority that elected Trump to discover that he's a fraud. Four years of Trump is a nightmare; eight would be hell.
28
You still can,t recover from getting your butt kicked by Trump. Let it go, quit trying to put the whammy on him. Give him the chance to help the country.
We finally have a business person in charge. I am excited about seeing what he can do.
We finally have a business person in charge. I am excited about seeing what he can do.
16
Thank you Paul, well stated. More terrifying, (hyperbole? I think not), we are not faced by only economic decline under trickle down, but human rights, free speech, government ethics, environment, nuclear arms, foreign policy, ETC. The simple (and egregious) fixes to their problems so many Americans have endorsed through the president elect, will potentially (probably) ...darn, got to go to work...any way bad things will happen.
7
President Obama kept us the ship of state on an even keel, but the new captain will turn up to full speed ahead right into that looming reef. I think I'll keep my life vest on.
18
"Let's be clear," Mr. Krugman is not an objective individual. He has so many proclamations (and slanderous remarks) to retract that he should probably just retract from the public eye, altogether. I wonder if he will still tell us, "This is what you need to know." I was always a little proud that we English speakers don't have a word for "Schadenfreude". But here I am needing it.... Pride is a venial sin, indeed.
23
Fourth day now and the markets are up. Ignore the exit polls, ignore the liberal pundits (any other kind) at the Times the predictors of doom and gloom. Though eventually they may get some things right but as of now they got it all wrong.
What's done is done, she lost, the DNC lost....big time. Face it both parties didn't give us much choice, both deeply flawed and hated one more than the other. And still the Clinton camp and Clinton herself still wont' take the blame. Typical of her and how she and Bill live their lives. Place the blame squarely on someone else's shoulders. And I voted for her but she still can't accept responsibility. In a way I'm glad she lost......I've ben suffering Clinton fatigue for some time.
What's done is done, she lost, the DNC lost....big time. Face it both parties didn't give us much choice, both deeply flawed and hated one more than the other. And still the Clinton camp and Clinton herself still wont' take the blame. Typical of her and how she and Bill live their lives. Place the blame squarely on someone else's shoulders. And I voted for her but she still can't accept responsibility. In a way I'm glad she lost......I've ben suffering Clinton fatigue for some time.
23
WOW, you just don't get it. In your whole article you did not talk about the economic destruction of a large part of our citizens due to disproportionate trade deals which benefit the 1% and the Washington/Wall Street cartel. But you did find time to highlight how Trumps proposed policies would impact poorer nations. This is exactly why Trump was elected, you disrespect and ignore the generations of people who built this country as part of our industrial base and are now caste aside. With this type of thinking get real for 8 years of the Donald.
24
From the economist who gave us Enron. A brilliant piece of work.
17
Everyone at the NYT, including virtually all of Krugman's comments and predictions, have been flat out wrong concerning Trump and what he would or would not do. Why should I believe anything this out-of-touch gentleman says?
29
I am hoping for a little time. If T rump is going to be so very very good to the banks maybe my portfolio will get a little help as well and maybe I'll not have to sell my property during a bust and so realize some gains there. All of which I intend to put into the search for a sane Nation to live in.
I will not be a citizen of a Nation that would elect the darling of the KKK or the American nazi party.
I will not be a citizen of a Nation that would elect the darling of the KKK or the American nazi party.
31
Congress, with trump as president, is more frightening than trump.
28
This short term prediction of no Trump slump in the near term, if borne out in 2017, is heartening because that means Hillary Clinton is unlikely to be prosecuted next year as a purely diversionary tactic with Trump, a Trump Justice Dept. and FBI together on the same page. Uhmmm, actually not so heartening.
3
I thought Krugman would be more optimistic. Look at all those broken windows and private property from the rioters in Portland. Talk about economic stimulus!
26
Thinking hard--as I am getting close to retirement--about what to do with my 401K. I remember 2008. I don't think if we have a slide like that, I will live long enough to recover. Trump, of course, will be fine. I am praying for RBG's good health and longevity. And the only comfort I take is that Paul Ryan, in his interview with CNN, looked slightly more terrified than I feel. Will the GOP Congress approve 35% tariffs on imports? Are there enough Democrats to obstruct and keep things stable. Like sands in the hourglass, these are the days of our lives.
16
I have to laugh at the dimwitted working class voters that think Donald Trump can wave a magic wand and bring back their jobs. Of course, it won't happen. Drumpf has to fail at every level and it is our duty to obstruct, obfuscate, and delay. It is our job that he becomes a total absolute failure.
Of course, I have no trust for the stupid and intellectually lazy blue collar voter. Now we know just how deplorable these fools can be.
Of course, I have no trust for the stupid and intellectually lazy blue collar voter. Now we know just how deplorable these fools can be.
23
PK has been arguing for years that the way out of our hole is to undertake credibly to behave irresponsibly. And that that is very hard for policy makers to do. Of course it depends on the policy maker...
1
Yes - good thing happened to bad people. But it is sad that bad things happen to good people - may be many of the bad policies will not pass the powers. Many of the Republicans are intelligent and rational - hope they prevail.
4
Before Professor Krugman continues his rhapsody about the value of what he calls the 'quality and independence of public servants,' which he feels will be lost under Trump, let me remind him that it was a group of these highest-quality public servants - Bundy, McNamara, Rostow - the 'whiz kids' brought to DC by JFK who took us into the most horrifically-misguided foreign policy event of this country's entire history.
12
Leave it to this liberal rag to cast an endless line of horrors before anything even happens. I want to see the results in two years before I judge.
19
By the time the depression hits, Donald Trump will be president for life, and the American people will be blaming the Democrats, Blacks, Hispanics and Muslims for bring it on. With the radical right controlling a permanently gerrymandered Congress and the Supreme Court, the government's propaganda machine will be working overtime to silence or shout down anyone questioning their version of events and history. Sorry, I have been having flashbacks to Orwell's "1984" lately.
22
The Demagogue-in-chief is as dumb as a post, there is no doubt about that. We all saw his meeting with President Obama. The proverbial deer in the headlights metaphor comes to mind. An orange-faced doofus with white rings around his eyes, coiffed in his hideous gravity-defying hair style, the Demagogue was sheepish in demeanor. It seemed as though he was finally realizing how far in over his head he is. Of course this egomaniac won't admit it. He's got, according to him, a "tremendous" brain. He's a quick study. He's a leopard who can change his spots. If Rump's disciples believe any of these claims of his are true, they are more delusional than one can imagine. And now they are about to get the Right wingnut government they want. And they deserve to get it, good and hard.
DD
Manhattan
DD
Manhattan
15
I only hope Trump is around long enough to apologize to his great grandchildren for plundering the Earth.
6
Trump has promised to rebuild America with massive infrastructure spending. Trump argues that that this will provide a huge number of well paying working class jobs, as well as bring our infrastructure up to par. Is he wrong?
6
I think the key point here is the damage Trump will do to our institutions - we will see a lot of incompetent people in powerful agencies - and probably at some point they will start selling off federal property - or opening it up for the unrestricted use of the ranchers and the oil companies -
Here's a prediction - economic events will happen, as they do - but whatever happens, the Republicans will take credit for anything good, and refuse to take responsibility for anything bad - they'll blame it on the "global elites", the liberals - they'll probably find a way to blame HRC personally.
Maybe if things go really badly, we'll see Kaine in the White House in four years. And then people will start blaming him for not fixing up the mess quickly enough.
Here's a prediction - economic events will happen, as they do - but whatever happens, the Republicans will take credit for anything good, and refuse to take responsibility for anything bad - they'll blame it on the "global elites", the liberals - they'll probably find a way to blame HRC personally.
Maybe if things go really badly, we'll see Kaine in the White House in four years. And then people will start blaming him for not fixing up the mess quickly enough.
13
There is one thing for certain. If something negative happens in our economy, the in power Republicans will find a way to blame Democrats for it.
16
One can only hope that those who voted Republican begin to see the folly of their choice before November 2018.
12
Because his policies are divisive, contradictory or vague, it is impossible to guess what he may do or what might happen. He wants to keep us guessing so that he will dominate every newscast and every newspaper for the next four years . His main goal, as always, is to be the center of attention. He knows that just one tweet is enough to dominate the news cycle. Forget policy goals. His number one goal is simply to gain more Twitter followers.
16
We can never underestimate the potential for a sudden, horrific surprise from Donald Trump that will crash the markets. I expect that, at some point. Trump, and his minions are so self-interested that they will never consider the consequences of their actions, because, in the short run, they will profit from them. But, in the long run, we will ALL pay a heavy price. Fortunately for White House Trumpsters, there's an underground bunker that will allow them to escape the worst consequences of their ill considered actions. Trump, and the Republicans do not care about our country; they do not care about YOU. YOU are expendable.
14
It will be fun the see all those 94 million Americans that are said by Trump and Hannity and others to be unemployed suddenly all be employed the day after inauguration. It'll be the greatest drop in unemployment ever. :-)
8
Face historical facts.
The GOP is responsible for Trump. Beginning with Reagan, Republicans constantly wined that all government is bad and needs to be starved. RR preached and pushed for de-regulation, which brought us the savings and loan scandal and later the 2008 banking and investment house disaster.
The conservative Republican, Tea Party ilk drove the GOP out of all congressional seats in New England. Bush 41 and the Republican establishment surrendered to their ideologues, and helped ensure the death of the moderate wing of the Party. Saltonstall, Dirksen, Mathias, Lindsey, and other moderates were a viable counter to Democrats.
The 20th Century GOP brought us Hoover, McCarthy, Nixon, and Bush 43, and delivered an embarrassing GOP legacy. Now fix it for your future and that of America.
The GOP is responsible for Trump. Beginning with Reagan, Republicans constantly wined that all government is bad and needs to be starved. RR preached and pushed for de-regulation, which brought us the savings and loan scandal and later the 2008 banking and investment house disaster.
The conservative Republican, Tea Party ilk drove the GOP out of all congressional seats in New England. Bush 41 and the Republican establishment surrendered to their ideologues, and helped ensure the death of the moderate wing of the Party. Saltonstall, Dirksen, Mathias, Lindsey, and other moderates were a viable counter to Democrats.
The 20th Century GOP brought us Hoover, McCarthy, Nixon, and Bush 43, and delivered an embarrassing GOP legacy. Now fix it for your future and that of America.
9
I loved reading this column, because it confirmed all my criticisms of Dr. Krugman. He engaged in the same hedge that he always does that effectively negates falsifiability. If the economy does well over the next few years, then, well, he predicted that it would despite how bad the policies of Trump are. If anything goes wrong, then he will blame it on Trump. He did the same thing when Barack Obama became president, only in the opposite direction. He said that Obama was doing the right thing, for the right reasons in this case, but that the stimulus was just not big enough, so the economy would continue to struggle. Then over the next eight years every piece of economic good new was because of Obama's policies, and every piece of bad news was because the stimulus was just not big enough. Krugman, the High Priest of Progressive Economics, had a ready answer for the faithful whatever the outcome. Paul Krugman is actually the greatest science denier in the world, because he, as Nobel Prize Laureate, he insidiously rejects the idea that his arguments should be subjected to any test of falsifiability.
20
The universe contains constants that others have already pointed out ...
... from HL Mencken:
As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
... and a pearl from Albert Einstein:
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
... from HL Mencken:
As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
... and a pearl from Albert Einstein:
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
8
Consumer confidence . 10-15% of the country just experienced one of the worst weeks of their lives. That's about 30-40 million Americans you feel the country is in a tailspin. This will be the big story in about 14-21 days not months.
7
I have one question and one suggestion.
As a lay person, I get the idea that declining imports and exports offset one another. But what we import isn't the same as what we export. So, isn't there a lot of potential disruption from finding export markets closed for goods we can't easily sell at home, and imports scarce or more expensive for items we can't quickly replace domestically? And, doesn't such disruption have a ripple or even tidal effect through the economy?
My suggestion is that, after a very bitter campaign (largely Trump's doing), we need to separate hostility to Trump from targeted hostility to those policies that can most effectively be fought. And, progressives should embrace infrastructure spending for 1) the good it may do; 2) the divisions it may sow among Republican tightwads; and 3) the opportunity to have a seat at the table. Any influence we can exert to tip the balance of infrastructure spending away from useless defense spending, and to push for responsible financing and regulation will be worth the effort. Beyond that, we must recognize that Mr. Trump has demonstrated that he can skillfully and successfully cast any opposition as scapegoats. So, we need to be careful not to hand him scapegoats. Don't get out into the streets and protest the man himself, get out into communities that voted for Trump and make his voters hold him accountable on issues of economic inequality and on safety net protections.
As a lay person, I get the idea that declining imports and exports offset one another. But what we import isn't the same as what we export. So, isn't there a lot of potential disruption from finding export markets closed for goods we can't easily sell at home, and imports scarce or more expensive for items we can't quickly replace domestically? And, doesn't such disruption have a ripple or even tidal effect through the economy?
My suggestion is that, after a very bitter campaign (largely Trump's doing), we need to separate hostility to Trump from targeted hostility to those policies that can most effectively be fought. And, progressives should embrace infrastructure spending for 1) the good it may do; 2) the divisions it may sow among Republican tightwads; and 3) the opportunity to have a seat at the table. Any influence we can exert to tip the balance of infrastructure spending away from useless defense spending, and to push for responsible financing and regulation will be worth the effort. Beyond that, we must recognize that Mr. Trump has demonstrated that he can skillfully and successfully cast any opposition as scapegoats. So, we need to be careful not to hand him scapegoats. Don't get out into the streets and protest the man himself, get out into communities that voted for Trump and make his voters hold him accountable on issues of economic inequality and on safety net protections.
11
Bad things have already happened. Americans saw that half the country finds acceptable as their president someone who offers to pay the legal fees of anyone who beats up protesters at his rallies, encourages torture, knows nothing about the issues that will face him, would never be hired to be the face of a company, threatens to undermine the basic freedoms protected by our Constitution, and who, if someone spoke to and treated women like he does, you would not want to be in the same room with. Americans don't know what America stands for, and the world is losing its hope and inspiration that the idea of America can succeed.
19
"the consequences of the new regime’s awfulness won’t be apparent right away. "
Well maybe not the consequences, but the awfulness of the new regime is.
Well maybe not the consequences, but the awfulness of the new regime is.
8
All I know is my modest portfolio had finally recovered from the Bush years. I've invested in the stock market most of my working years, following my father's advice that buying stocks was an investment in America. (He was first wiped out in the market in the crash of 39.) I'm glad the market has not immediately tanked, because I'm selling. I'm not going to lose my retirement security to another Republican administration.
9
We've seen this movie at least three times before: Nixon, Reagan and George W. Military spending will go up, innocents will die, rich Americans will get richer, and the abandoned places--Northeastern cities with decrepit infrastructure and housing fit only for poor people and slumlords, rural areas where family farms and light industry and mineral extraction disappeared long ago--will stay abandoned. We will hear lies that insult the intelligence, to be followed by the too-late discovery of decisions like those that led to Watergate, the end of Bretton Woods, Iran-Contra and the savings and loan crisis, the Iraq War and the Great Financial Crisis, etc. Wake me when it's over.
9
Don't underestimate, as many economists do, the negative side effects of political instability and social upheaval, both of which are more than likely in the short run.
6
Whatever happens happens, but let us be clear -- when the black president requested stimulus for infrastructure, the trumpista neo-fascists and their white working class supporters derided it and opposed it as just so much socialism. Now they love it.
19
The cruel truth is that the United States will grow itself out of some of the Obama trillions of debt when the regulatory reigns are freed and the hoax of human cause of climate change balances the hysterics of the likes of Krug and Barry.
Read his words carefully, they are the words of the smarty pants effete regulation loving, rules for us, rule exceptions for them, know-it-alls that have just been given the exit door by the working people of the United States. To him and his ilk I say :Take you pumpkin spiced lattes and please sit down, thank you.
Read his words carefully, they are the words of the smarty pants effete regulation loving, rules for us, rule exceptions for them, know-it-alls that have just been given the exit door by the working people of the United States. To him and his ilk I say :Take you pumpkin spiced lattes and please sit down, thank you.
6
These same words could have been written about the Reagan administration. The awfulness of what that man helped create with his conservative economics are still with us, and helped elect Donald Trump.
10
Down in the dumps? / No quick Trump slump? / Cheer up, we are headin' / To the climate Armageddon.
What's worse, Trump "doing the right thing for the wrong reasons" or the Obama doing the wrong thing for the "right" reasons?
The toothpaste principle applies: If you can't put it back in the tube, the answer is obvious. Example: Obama-Clinton's irrational, nuclear-proliferating, legacy-driven deal and secret side deals that de facto nuclearized Iran, setting up a nuke arms race in the entire insane, apocalyptic region intent on annihilating us… "Never nukes" had been our Iran policy forever. Obama-Clinton's legacy-driven deal and secret side deals, IF OBEYED, give Iran nukes in a blink of an eye as the deals defeat the grim logic of MAD.
As for demagogic exploitation of the delay for the bad stuff to kick in, remember this gem:
“I’ve been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon *on my watch*”
– Obama to Thomas Friedman
Handwringing about climate is a joke: Obama-Clinton's de facto nuclear arming of radical-Islamic terrorists is anthropogenic interference of cataclysmic proportion—obviously the real and immediate threat to the "climate."
MAD
There once was a prez named Obama
Who confused CO2 with H-bomba.
He banished all carbon,
Gave nukes to I-ran
He cured global warming with nuke winta.
7
Trump is going to bring back jobs!
Jobs like galley-slave, sharecropper, wage slave are going to be hiring all thru the mid-west and the south. All temporary jobs, too. When you're too sick to show up or pregnant, over the rails you go!
The plum job, the one that really fervent Trump supporters are gonna get are the slave drivers. They enjoy making others sweat. They like their job, even when it doesn't pay well.
I wouldn't put a major disaster out of Trump's reach too soon. In fact, I think we should be saying he's gonna start a war to cover up his mistakes and he's gonna wreck the economy right away! It worked for the republicans, didn't it?
The average man these days doesn't even know what macroeconomics means, let alone sea level rise caused by thermal expansion. He knows that if it freezes and he doesn't have a solution of ethylene glycol and water in his radiator, then the engine cracks in places and he can't drive but that's because it's happened to him. His paycheck being another's wage begetting more for himself and better a life for all isn't on the tv.
If you thought W was bad, then get ready for the guy that's gonna make him look good. The use of propaganda by Trump will rival Hitler's use of it so saying Trump is a failure before it happens isn't all that great of a lie.
Jobs like galley-slave, sharecropper, wage slave are going to be hiring all thru the mid-west and the south. All temporary jobs, too. When you're too sick to show up or pregnant, over the rails you go!
The plum job, the one that really fervent Trump supporters are gonna get are the slave drivers. They enjoy making others sweat. They like their job, even when it doesn't pay well.
I wouldn't put a major disaster out of Trump's reach too soon. In fact, I think we should be saying he's gonna start a war to cover up his mistakes and he's gonna wreck the economy right away! It worked for the republicans, didn't it?
The average man these days doesn't even know what macroeconomics means, let alone sea level rise caused by thermal expansion. He knows that if it freezes and he doesn't have a solution of ethylene glycol and water in his radiator, then the engine cracks in places and he can't drive but that's because it's happened to him. His paycheck being another's wage begetting more for himself and better a life for all isn't on the tv.
If you thought W was bad, then get ready for the guy that's gonna make him look good. The use of propaganda by Trump will rival Hitler's use of it so saying Trump is a failure before it happens isn't all that great of a lie.
21
When Mr. Krugman wants to include reality and not his politics, in his prognostications, I'll take them seriously.
In the meantime, I'd learn more from the Psychic Friends Network than this drivel.
In the meantime, I'd learn more from the Psychic Friends Network than this drivel.
12
The only comfort I can take from this "election" is that Hillary Clinton won the majority of real people votes, by over 2 million votes. We are out there and will be very wary and active to stop the worst of Trump's moves. Of course I realize that won't be easy or maybe even possible, but that doesn't mean we can't try.
We must work with groups such as the ACLU, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc. We need to make our voices heard, rather than the voices of the Electoral College who do not have the majority of people behind them.
We must work with groups such as the ACLU, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc. We need to make our voices heard, rather than the voices of the Electoral College who do not have the majority of people behind them.
12
In the immortal words of Boyle Roche, why should we put ourselves out of our way to do anything for posterity, for what has posterity ever done for us?
2
Some times it's better to take a day off professor. This is just the opposite of Trump's it will be something beautiful, tremendous, amazing, big league.
9
Thus endeth the beginning. Let the roll-back begin (on both sides)!
Seems that the train to Armaghedon isn't an express after all.
Seems that the train to Armaghedon isn't an express after all.
Reading this convinces me that Mr. Trump was the right choice.
9
A bit hard to take Mr. Krugman seriously when less than a week ago he predicted that Trump would cause a severe recession that would end "maybe never."
11
Whether we feel it now or in a year from now, the con man who bankrupted several businesses and left others holding the bag doesn't know a thing about growing an economy.
13
This column is so full of equivocation that it is pointless. Mr. Krugman should have taken the day off.
13
You say "the Brexit recession doesn’t seem to be happening." Why should it, right now? The UK hasn't even formally requested to leave the EU, and apparently that won't even happen until March. Any recession now would be a blip based on momentary political reaction to the Brxit vote.
7
Lets see what he can do. If he can fix the healthcare issues among other things he will be just fine. He also needs to put a stop to the anti immigrant nonsense from some of his supports. He must be wondering what the hell did I get my self into.
3
It doesn't matter what happens. trump and his cronies will blame the Democrats. After all, it was the Republican policies, or failure to do any of President Obama's programs that caused the inaction in Washington, which is what the trump supporters were so angry about. Yet they voted in the past and in this election, against their own self interests. Why does anyone think this will change?
10
Kind of funny to watch Dr. Krugman and the liberals squirm.
Dr. Krugman first writes an "imminent collapse" column on the night of the election, saying markets will crash. Then when markets, instead of crashing, hit record highs, the tune changes to "it will crash eventually".
So is Dr. Krugman now rooting for a crash so he can claim to be right?
Why not acknowledge that Trump is closer to what Krugman has been preaching for 8 years - loosen up the deficit strings and run a stimulus?
That would be too easy, on the evil president-elect, right?
Dr. Krugman first writes an "imminent collapse" column on the night of the election, saying markets will crash. Then when markets, instead of crashing, hit record highs, the tune changes to "it will crash eventually".
So is Dr. Krugman now rooting for a crash so he can claim to be right?
Why not acknowledge that Trump is closer to what Krugman has been preaching for 8 years - loosen up the deficit strings and run a stimulus?
That would be too easy, on the evil president-elect, right?
8
I'm sure Mr. Krugman's projections are spot on about the economy. I'm also concerned about remarks of K. Conway, telling Harry Reid he may face legal action for his words critical of Trump. The message this sends is, don't criticize us or you will be sorry. He has already been tweeting with words against the NYTimes. If they can stifle dissent effectively, we will lose our democracy. SO what's worse, the economy's long term dire future, or the loss of democracy?
11
This won't be a Trump government. His enablers will use him for their own ends. K Street will slice and dice. Trump will become a shill. In fact, he will likely be impeached by his own party. The Pence administration will be, essentially, a coup d'etat.
Conspiracy theories aren't just for the right wing any more.
Conspiracy theories aren't just for the right wing any more.
4
Professor Krugman,
It may be wise to address the anger and frustration towards you held by a significant proportion of your readership. Throughout the Democratic Primary, you not only cheerleaded for your candidate as well as tauntingly and dismissively ridiculed Bernie Sanders and his supporters. Even after Hillary Clinton clinched and accepted the nomination, you kept up the "Bernie Bros" insults and peppered every column and every little blog post with a little gloating aside.
In the end, with as flawed as Sen. Sanders and his supporters may have been, they were on to something important that the Democrats and Ms. Clinton needed to listen to and understand. Instead, we just got time after time how Sanders supporter were just snitty dreamers unnecessary to the inevitable Clinton coalition and electoral firewall.
I (along with many others) have been screaming since March that this behavior was really, really unnecessary as well as profoundly unhelpful to Ms. Clinton's general election chances and to the coalition she would have had to formed to be able to govern.
Prof. Krugman, as other progressive institutions and voices are performing a post-mortem on how we allowed the country to drive off this cliff, you should really address your attitudes and works on this point and whether you should have operated differently.
It may be wise to address the anger and frustration towards you held by a significant proportion of your readership. Throughout the Democratic Primary, you not only cheerleaded for your candidate as well as tauntingly and dismissively ridiculed Bernie Sanders and his supporters. Even after Hillary Clinton clinched and accepted the nomination, you kept up the "Bernie Bros" insults and peppered every column and every little blog post with a little gloating aside.
In the end, with as flawed as Sen. Sanders and his supporters may have been, they were on to something important that the Democrats and Ms. Clinton needed to listen to and understand. Instead, we just got time after time how Sanders supporter were just snitty dreamers unnecessary to the inevitable Clinton coalition and electoral firewall.
I (along with many others) have been screaming since March that this behavior was really, really unnecessary as well as profoundly unhelpful to Ms. Clinton's general election chances and to the coalition she would have had to formed to be able to govern.
Prof. Krugman, as other progressive institutions and voices are performing a post-mortem on how we allowed the country to drive off this cliff, you should really address your attitudes and works on this point and whether you should have operated differently.
13
We don't need a big fat tax break for the rich
We need massive investment to create jobs for infrastructure which in turn will create demand and that will create growth
But we won't get that we will get the big fat tax break and then an elimination of estate taxes and then a giant deficit and the folks in the middle states get nothing...as usual
Hello carrier employees and Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio... you have been Trumped but we will give you hate and alt-right and immigrants to vent your frustrations on. More guns anyone?
We need massive investment to create jobs for infrastructure which in turn will create demand and that will create growth
But we won't get that we will get the big fat tax break and then an elimination of estate taxes and then a giant deficit and the folks in the middle states get nothing...as usual
Hello carrier employees and Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio... you have been Trumped but we will give you hate and alt-right and immigrants to vent your frustrations on. More guns anyone?
11
So what? It doesn't take much intelligence to know what Krugman said here. Sum total of Krugman's lifetime contribution to the benefit of the country and world continues to be so far in the red that he doesn't have enough life left to become whole. Just his contribution in getting Trump elected president outpaces any good he's ever done. And I can't think of any good he's ever done unless it's show austerity doesn't work; but everybody already knows that, even the ones who claim it does work.
1
It wasn't the first time the New York Times were categorically wrong in assessing both policy and politics, and it won't be the last. Prof Krugman "retracted" his first predictions within hours, after the stock market swelled on the news that liberalism was in full retreat. This disconnect from reality is truly remarkable. Fortunately, as the Republicans install an entirely new staff and press forward to reverse the liberal decay, Americans can dream again.
7
"Let’s be clear: Installing Donald Trump in the White House is an epic mistake."
Let's be equally clear: the next four years will still have Professor Krugman blaming any bad economy on Trump. If the economy grows during Trump's term, Krugman will say it happened despite Trump's policies. And there will always be a plug for climate change.
Let's be equally clear: the next four years will still have Professor Krugman blaming any bad economy on Trump. If the economy grows during Trump's term, Krugman will say it happened despite Trump's policies. And there will always be a plug for climate change.
5
The weak growth, less than 2% averaged over the last 16 years since your ideas became reality during the 21st century (Since full implementation of all the Clinton trade policies Krugman championed), could be taken by some to think your ideas are not very bright.
You talk about the poor world economy and climate change, yet it is the world economy that, with it's focus on unregulated pollution, contributes the most to climate change.
You're a globalist, Krugman and I think you've now fallen out of favor. Your views, as with the majority of the NYTimes, are irrelevant.
You talk about the poor world economy and climate change, yet it is the world economy that, with it's focus on unregulated pollution, contributes the most to climate change.
You're a globalist, Krugman and I think you've now fallen out of favor. Your views, as with the majority of the NYTimes, are irrelevant.
6
it's quite clear that Krugman is rooting against the success of our next President. His bitterness exploded in his now retracted first post election column and only partly ameliorated in this column. I. E. Maximal Obama stimulus was good. but Trump stimulus is bad, even though it might be good in the short term. As if the Obama stimulus was somehow different. Keynesian spending is spending no matter the intent behind it. Proper Economic analysis does not include intent as a factor in probable policy outcomes. Krugman knows this, but he is letting his biases color the tone of his column.
6
"Failure to take action on climate may doom civilization, but it’s not clear why it should depress next year’s consumer spending" . In the long run we are all dead? (Couldn't resist it)
There's a real lack of public discussion regarding possible side effects of proposed deregulation, and ignoring them offers our greatest national and personal threat!
1
Don't forget Trump's promise to 'rebuild' our 'depleted' military. With that and huge tax cuts for the comfortable, Trump will be reverting to standard Republican military Keynesianism, just as Romney promised four years ago. It's the only kind of Keynesianism with bipartisan support and will be what we get.
What Krugman does not seem to really appreciate, and the media, including the NYT, clearly do not, is that "making America great again" has nothing to do with improving economic conditions for the white working class. In fact, the median income of white Trump voters was significantly higher than that of those who did not vote for him. Let us be clear, Making America Great Again was all about making it like it used to be, without blacks, Jews and foreigners occupying an important and powerful place in society. In this, Trump is likely to be successful. It will be a cruel joke, but it is not the white Trump voter who will be suffering the most from it.
2
I really believe the whole purpose of Trump's platform/campaign was to mock the working class. I mean, bringing jobs back to America? There's NO WAY the salaries people this side of the world demand/require would be just as cheap as in developing countries, and thus, anything made in the US will be much more expensive. You want a new cellphone? Get ready to pay $1,500 for one. And at $1,500, no one's going to buy it. It's a domino effect and everything will collapse. However, his supporters, mostly less-educated, aren't thinking about that. I don't even know if it occurred to them that this could happen.
3
Hypocrisy at its best!! Republican governors want to step aside and let the free markets work the magic to create jobs. Now conservative voters have spoken to have federal government step in to create jobs. And the republican controlled congress that resisted Obama's infrastructure spending will now gladly embrace the initiative because they have a republican president in power. They will go one step further to take credit as well.. Nice!!!
6
You have been wrong on everything else so what is one more prediction that is going to go wrong. As the cheerleader in chief for the nation that has been sinking into the marsh of debt for the past 10 years, why the sudden worry about more debt? The crash is already baked in the cake, just like the Greenspan put set up GW Bush for the crash, the Bernanke-Yellen QE/0 % interest for 8 years has set up Trump for the crash. The democrats will celebrate when the crash comes, not realizing that the mistakes were all made in the Bill Clinton/Obama years when the bubbles were being created.
3
When America did great things it had a high marginal tax rate. I don't see how it is possible to cut taxes and do big great things without running up huge deficits and high inflation, not the good kind, the inflation where your money looses its value and you have less buying power. This will be a disaster to the Trump voters because i don't see wages going up, just the value of money going down. We have been stuck in this rut fro a long time and the solution takes a long time with gradual progress. Yes, Trump is the king of debt and as will all debt based solutions it is fun to spend money you haven't earned yet but down the line you pay a huge price.
4
"But those tax cuts would add $4.5 trillion to U.S. debt over the next decade — about five times as much as the stimulus of the early Obama years."
What a deceptive and sleazy sentence designed to confuse people. $4.5T in a decade? Obama will have added $9.4T in 8 years to the debt. Krugman here tries the shell game, comparing the added debt to the 2009 stimulus. Totally different. Trump would have to add $25T to the debt in 8 years to be comparable. Sleazy.
What a deceptive and sleazy sentence designed to confuse people. $4.5T in a decade? Obama will have added $9.4T in 8 years to the debt. Krugman here tries the shell game, comparing the added debt to the 2009 stimulus. Totally different. Trump would have to add $25T to the debt in 8 years to be comparable. Sleazy.
5
Another piece of garbage from Krugman. He HAS to be right! Trump's sure defeat at the election did not happen. The global recession prediction on election night did not happen. So now go in reverse gear predict everything is OK for two more years. He does not know anything. Neither do we. The ivory tower in Princeton has bred a bunch of no nothing experts whose only contribution to society is abject display of hubris and pettiness. The train has left the station for Krugman and his deplorable cohorts. They are just a speck of dust in the fog of history - Nobel prize notwithstanding!
9
For a highly trained and respected economist Prof. Krugman is departing from his professionalism with his political comments reflecting his values. Lets hope he returns to his field of expertise - economics.
10
I continue to wonder about those talking about Donald Trump's policies. What policies? I waited all through the election campaigning to hear about them, but they never came.
3
My hope is that DT's campaign, focused on frustrated white middle class voters, was just that. Now that Mr. Trump has won, he will "revert" to his business origins; there are no campaign promises.
Like I say, a hope. Maybe the revolt will be less severe than if Mrs. Clinton won.
Like I say, a hope. Maybe the revolt will be less severe than if Mrs. Clinton won.
1
Money is like fertilizer spread it around everything grows- dump it in one spot everything dies- this economy has been stagnant for many years as far as the middle class is concerned and it is dying -
1
So what are we to make of Paul Krugman's columns now that he suggested a global recession was imminent because he was angry that Hillary didn't win the election, i.e., he let his emotions determine his predictions, which is the last thing you want an economist to be doing? For years I trusted the Nobel Prize winner's opinions and advice, that is, until he got so involved in this last election that he toed the line of the DNC and NYT and spent more of his time and energy on politics than on economics. Socrates said in his Apology that one of the biggest mistakes noted people make is to believe that because they're an expert in one field they're an expert in them all. I'll be glad to see more of his columns based on economic facts and careful analysis. That's what he's good at and why he has so many readers.
2
There is one thing that is very important missing from your analysis, Dr. K. It could be called psychology. It could be labeled confidence. It could, from the other perspective, be called fear.
Right now, the news media are in a big rush to normalize Trump. You know, appointments to key positions, the meeting with the president, the usual hither and fro of a new administrations. Exciting. The Times has even run two columns spouting nonsense about why federal workers need to stay in their jobs and, potentially, violate the laws and morality by following orders from Trump and his merry band of disrupters.
These ain't normal times. No matter how you try to dress it up, a guy is headed to the White House with no govt. experience, a head jammed full of ideas about how wonderful and infallible he is, a guy who has promised to violate international law by killing the families of terrorists, who has expressed doubts about why we can't use nuclear weapons, who said it might be a good idea if more nations, like Japan, had them...a guy who is thoroughly off the rails unless you can bob and weave through all of his outrageousness and come up with your own definition of something that makes sense. These ain't normal times.
First of all, the economy usually tanks under a new Republican president. That has been the primary pattern for the last 60 yrs. or so. Secondly, Trump is very likely to do something to scare the pants off the world and an economic collapse could, indeed, ensue.
Right now, the news media are in a big rush to normalize Trump. You know, appointments to key positions, the meeting with the president, the usual hither and fro of a new administrations. Exciting. The Times has even run two columns spouting nonsense about why federal workers need to stay in their jobs and, potentially, violate the laws and morality by following orders from Trump and his merry band of disrupters.
These ain't normal times. No matter how you try to dress it up, a guy is headed to the White House with no govt. experience, a head jammed full of ideas about how wonderful and infallible he is, a guy who has promised to violate international law by killing the families of terrorists, who has expressed doubts about why we can't use nuclear weapons, who said it might be a good idea if more nations, like Japan, had them...a guy who is thoroughly off the rails unless you can bob and weave through all of his outrageousness and come up with your own definition of something that makes sense. These ain't normal times.
First of all, the economy usually tanks under a new Republican president. That has been the primary pattern for the last 60 yrs. or so. Secondly, Trump is very likely to do something to scare the pants off the world and an economic collapse could, indeed, ensue.
142
Good to know we have a temporary reprieve. A couple of years sounds good. By then I'll be on Medicare and able to take Social Security, which I can't right now because I'd lose Obamacare. Sorry to sound so selfish, but in the End Times, for us poor folk, we are all scurrying for whatever little bit of cover is available. And if Congress screws with Social Security and Medicare, which I'm sure they are powerless to restrain themselves from doing...it will be the Apocalypse. Forgive me, for once again taking out my long needle to poke you with, but this could all have been avoided if you HRC enablers had been willing to step outside your cozy cocoons of wealth and privilege for just 10 minutes to realize you don't run a person for president who caused a Federal Criminal Investigation of her mishandling of her Cabinet position to be conducted while she's running for President. If she had produced her emails as soon as the first FOIA came in, it would have been over before she announced. Not to mention the truckload of other baggage she generated in the space of two years immediately preceding her candidacy announcement, mostly due to her and Bill's epic grab for wealth while the getting was good.
39
So Trumpism is like a cigarette - smells bad but feels good in the moment; cancerous in the long run.
10
I used to respect you Paul, but you've become just another trickle down economics fan. Oh, you don't believe in tax cuts for the wealthy, rather you seem to think that if enough money is thrown at the big institutions like Wall Street and the Banking Industry that money will trickle down to other facets of the economy.
Here's the thing. A lot of people who voted for Trump this time around have been living in a permanent recession for the past 20 years anyway. Why should they care if one hits the rest of us, when we don't seem to care what they have been going through.
Your policies concentrate money at the top just like any Norquestian tax scheme. There is an article on Wright Patterson in the Atlantic, you might want to read. Our America is shifting to a different kind of Liberal.
Here's the thing. A lot of people who voted for Trump this time around have been living in a permanent recession for the past 20 years anyway. Why should they care if one hits the rest of us, when we don't seem to care what they have been going through.
Your policies concentrate money at the top just like any Norquestian tax scheme. There is an article on Wright Patterson in the Atlantic, you might want to read. Our America is shifting to a different kind of Liberal.
1
So you and your paper obviously can't predict what's going to happen in the next 24 hours, but we should trust your judgment on the long term. That makes sense. Maybe what actually makes sense is to use appropriate words such as "in my opinion, not shared by all, this policy presents the following risks." The paper's post election coverage is bordering on satire.
4
You've strained your credibility, Mr. Krugman, with your initial inflated comments on election night about economic doom and subsequent backtracking. With this election, the last thing we needed was more inflammatory writing and emotionally confused response.
4
Can't wait for the next treasury auction...
Dr. Krugman-I discontinued my NYTimes subscription of many years this summer over the Times' slated coverage of Hillary Clinton boosting her at every turn over Bernie Sanders. Your fawning support for Clinton and rote and condescending dismissal of Sanders' policies was part of my decision, and very disappointing as I had also been a long term fan of your columns. The Conscience of a Liberal indeed. I came back to post this today because I keep seeing your column headlines in my FB feed and realize I am still angry.
I find it sad/ironic that one of the areas of overlap in what Trump says with my progressive view of "The Truth" is that the corporate media is rigged, or completely commodified which amounts to the same thing, including the great historical institution of the NYTimes. I just subscribed to Democracy Now hoping to get more substance than I can find here and less filtering of what stories are worthy of attention then from the corporate media. This is more of a bitter goodbye post than an "ask" of you Dr. Krugman but maybe this kick in the gut that we've received will cause you to question and reevaluate your "liberal" support for someone who was such a willing pawn and supporter of Wall Street interests as Secretary Clinton and what is in the best long term interests of this country and the majority of its citizens. Columns such as you've written the last few days certainly suggest you are flailing around for a new viewpoint to take.
I find it sad/ironic that one of the areas of overlap in what Trump says with my progressive view of "The Truth" is that the corporate media is rigged, or completely commodified which amounts to the same thing, including the great historical institution of the NYTimes. I just subscribed to Democracy Now hoping to get more substance than I can find here and less filtering of what stories are worthy of attention then from the corporate media. This is more of a bitter goodbye post than an "ask" of you Dr. Krugman but maybe this kick in the gut that we've received will cause you to question and reevaluate your "liberal" support for someone who was such a willing pawn and supporter of Wall Street interests as Secretary Clinton and what is in the best long term interests of this country and the majority of its citizens. Columns such as you've written the last few days certainly suggest you are flailing around for a new viewpoint to take.
4
So, we shouldn't be fooled when things improve because it's all an illusion if Trump does anything positive. Meanwhile, we should resolve ourselves to failure because the Democrats did nothing because that's all that is possible? This column gave me a headache.
5
Climate change is my biggest concern. It's tough to sit in your living room having a polite conversation about race, gender and economic issues while your house is burning down and there's not enough water to put out the fire.
It took this election to make me realize that I'm a single-issue voter, and I wish more people were. I voted for HRC primarily for that reason. The damage a Trump administration can and almost certainly will do in terms of climate change is IRREVERSIBLE.
At age 67 and coming from a long-lived family, I could very well be alive in another 20-30 years...and we'll see catastrophic damage and incredible misery due to climate change well within that time span. Young people, in a Mad Max scenario, will be strong and healthy and perhaps have a prayer of surviving. I'll be old and feeble. I'll be road kill.
I'm terrified. Not for my children and grandchildren (although, yes, there's that). For myself.
It took this election to make me realize that I'm a single-issue voter, and I wish more people were. I voted for HRC primarily for that reason. The damage a Trump administration can and almost certainly will do in terms of climate change is IRREVERSIBLE.
At age 67 and coming from a long-lived family, I could very well be alive in another 20-30 years...and we'll see catastrophic damage and incredible misery due to climate change well within that time span. Young people, in a Mad Max scenario, will be strong and healthy and perhaps have a prayer of surviving. I'll be old and feeble. I'll be road kill.
I'm terrified. Not for my children and grandchildren (although, yes, there's that). For myself.
4
I expect that ,most, if not all, Republic obsessions with debt will fall by the wayside when the cause of the debt is building walls, making bombs and guns, and freeing the rich from taxes.
4
"But those tax cuts would add $4.5 trillion to U.S. debt over the next decade — about five times as much as the stimulus of the early Obama years."
Neither Krugman nor anyone else has a clue as to what will be added to the debt over the next decade. He doesn't know what the economy will look like next year, let alone ten years from now.
"There is always a disconnect between what is good for society, or even the economy, in the long run, and what is good for economic performance over the next few quarters."
There is also a disconnect in government between good intentions and the unintended consequences of those intentions.
"Brexit will make Britain poorer in the long run..."
By what metric are you basing your prediction? How long, Professor Krugman? Five years? Ten Years? Fifty years?
Neither Krugman nor anyone else has a clue as to what will be added to the debt over the next decade. He doesn't know what the economy will look like next year, let alone ten years from now.
"There is always a disconnect between what is good for society, or even the economy, in the long run, and what is good for economic performance over the next few quarters."
There is also a disconnect in government between good intentions and the unintended consequences of those intentions.
"Brexit will make Britain poorer in the long run..."
By what metric are you basing your prediction? How long, Professor Krugman? Five years? Ten Years? Fifty years?
2
We learned during the Bush years how an incompetent government runs. Then we learned how the Democrats usually do a better job of running the government with competent people who seem dedicated to their jobs. During Bill Clinton's time the government became more efficient and the overall economy improved. Now? I'm afraid the incompetents will be put back in charge, and we will have a whole lot of nothing to show for it. Thanks, red America.
4
Dear, dear PK: I'm With You, but please stop calling "apocalypse" to cover that coumnists' positioning "I told you so" base. Write all your prognostications, spin scenario pro and con, but skip the end-of-the-world business. As a pessimist who forces himself to try try try to look to the bright side, I'll remember that the office of the presidency often molds the man, which shaping effects in this case would be centralizing. Remember that Nixon, wanting to be loved, was a surprise relative social progressive, that Reagan, not wanting to crater the government, raised taxes. The Battle for the Mind of Trump is, at this moment, an imponderable. We have some evidence, from his long-time business associates, of how the new decider will decide. You can try, if you dare, to work with that, but why not leave it an open question until you have a bit more data? This man wants, perhaps more than even Nixon, to be loved and adulated, and not by simply the constituency - however you might choose to characterize it - that lifted him to the presidency. And he was a Democrat before he was a hybrid Trumpocrat. Let's hold our breath a bit (and let the transition make its own politics and polarities, as it already has).
2
Republican obsession with the evils of debt are extreme when Republicans are not in power. When they are, defucits explode beyond control. As a nation, we have become so stupified and vulgarized that we drink the polemical kool-aid until we drown in it.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
www.endthemadnessnow.org
5
Why does everyone think we can just reinstall manufacturing and everything will be rosy again? From the heart of the "rust belt", I tell you its not true. Reasons: 1. automation: those jobs are not coming back. They will be given to robots, many jobs are already being done by robots. 2. the jobs that remain, or come back pay less and less: the effort to keep wages down over these last forty years has been so successful that even a new job with the big three no longer provides a middle class life. This is what people wanted, back in 2008, when they were screaming about those over-entitled auto workers. Now, wages are low enough that working class people can't afford a new car, let alone a house. This was what the people thought was appropriate, back in 2008. Turns out, it is bad for everyone, even the people who thought lowly auto workers shouldn't make such wages....3. (related to 2): the Unions are a shadow of what they once were-- the war on unions has been very successful and unions no longer have the power to affect wages, influence the voting patterns of their members, or indeed even retain their members.
we will have to figure out another way to achieve economic growth, because manufacturing isn't going to get us there.
we will have to figure out another way to achieve economic growth, because manufacturing isn't going to get us there.
11
Due to living in a retirement community, I've gotten to know an extremely wealthy, humble man in his late 80's, who left college after one year to start a business. He's plowed all his earnings back into the business and has factories at home and abroad. He put all his children and grandchildren through college and they now run the company. By all accounts they are good, hard-working people.
This old gentleman voted for Mr. Fix-it. For one reason. He doesn't want his heirs saddled with inheritance taxes.
Think about it. Already will always have insurance. They will certainly have retirement income. They won't lose their jobs, their families will never suffer financially.
He has extremely loyal employees. He sees himself as responsible for some hundreds of them. They almost never leave his employ. (I've personally met some, when he threw a huge open party for a whole community to celebrate his decades in business.)
HOWEVER, he apparently does not feel responsible for or to the rest of us. It's just not on his radar screen. Even in spite of his religious faith.
This, I think, is our problem, America. Why is it that a wealthy man can feel concern only for those he personally employs? Why does he not understand we are all in this together? Not just Americans or white people. But every single person on the planet. And the planet itself.
Our educational system, our society, is failing to instill a sense of "in this ALL together."
This old gentleman voted for Mr. Fix-it. For one reason. He doesn't want his heirs saddled with inheritance taxes.
Think about it. Already will always have insurance. They will certainly have retirement income. They won't lose their jobs, their families will never suffer financially.
He has extremely loyal employees. He sees himself as responsible for some hundreds of them. They almost never leave his employ. (I've personally met some, when he threw a huge open party for a whole community to celebrate his decades in business.)
HOWEVER, he apparently does not feel responsible for or to the rest of us. It's just not on his radar screen. Even in spite of his religious faith.
This, I think, is our problem, America. Why is it that a wealthy man can feel concern only for those he personally employs? Why does he not understand we are all in this together? Not just Americans or white people. But every single person on the planet. And the planet itself.
Our educational system, our society, is failing to instill a sense of "in this ALL together."
10
I do believe Hilary was right when she said "he deserves an open mind and a chance to lead" It displays the open attitude of liberals to look objectively at evidence and not stick to preset pre-set theories.
I hope the Republicans will not convince Trump to return to Ronald Reagan/Milton Friedman/Ayn Rand selfish-land.
Our economic system is innovative and disruptive. The election of Trump shows the consequences of ignoring the plight of those affected by economic disruption.
I hope the Republicans will not convince Trump to return to Ronald Reagan/Milton Friedman/Ayn Rand selfish-land.
Our economic system is innovative and disruptive. The election of Trump shows the consequences of ignoring the plight of those affected by economic disruption.
1
A simple shorthand is: 'it's 1928 all over again'. That's the last time Republicans were fully in-charge. Constituents "won" for one year and then it turned into an global nightmare that didn't recover until the late 40's.
As Dr. Krugman points out, this nightmare may be worse, as climate change is not as reversible as an existential threat as socio-political disruptions.
As Dr. Krugman points out, this nightmare may be worse, as climate change is not as reversible as an existential threat as socio-political disruptions.
5
It will be interesting to see if the Tea Party wing of the GOP continues to decry the national debt as the root cause of America's decline when the national debt balloons under the new administration's pursuit of greatness.
8
I agree that tough times are certainly ahead of us. Also, post-Brexit, and with the possibility similar nationalistic, and perhaps, protectionist, movements--possibly beginning in France and Italy, the World Order is beginning to fracture.
Just think back to World War II, Japan and Nazi Germany were rolling-over Asia and Continental Europe, respectively. America held fast to its Isolationist policy, that is, until Pearl Harbor. Only by banding together, and with the inclusion of the U. S, were the Allies able to defeat the Axis Powers.
But, as Europe begins to fracture, first Brexit and, then, other nations leaving the E, U.--and let's not forget the divisive carry-over to NATO--China and Russia are watching event fall into place--for them. The Global Alliance is doing their work for them: Divide and Conquer. But, we're dividing ourselves.
Reince Priebus, as Chief-of-Staff, is a step in the right direction--at least somewhat toward the Center. The question remains: how much of Trump's bluster will ever be enacted; what will be modified or be permanently hung-up in a GOP-led Congress; and what had he never intended to follow-through with?
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Just think back to World War II, Japan and Nazi Germany were rolling-over Asia and Continental Europe, respectively. America held fast to its Isolationist policy, that is, until Pearl Harbor. Only by banding together, and with the inclusion of the U. S, were the Allies able to defeat the Axis Powers.
But, as Europe begins to fracture, first Brexit and, then, other nations leaving the E, U.--and let's not forget the divisive carry-over to NATO--China and Russia are watching event fall into place--for them. The Global Alliance is doing their work for them: Divide and Conquer. But, we're dividing ourselves.
Reince Priebus, as Chief-of-Staff, is a step in the right direction--at least somewhat toward the Center. The question remains: how much of Trump's bluster will ever be enacted; what will be modified or be permanently hung-up in a GOP-led Congress; and what had he never intended to follow-through with?
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
1
Good piece, thanks. It will truly be the Wild West in financial circles for a while. But it's so hard to predict anything about this walking black swan generator. Things could get very ugly at nearly any moment in ways that no one saw coming. And it could happen often. We know he'll face serious crises and disasters not of his making as all Presidents do and we have little idea how he'll react. We also can be fairly certain he will face self-made catastrophes that could be globally devastating. The only clues we have on how he'll react is that he will look to profit from it and will look to scapegoat his enemies. We are in uncharted waters so put on your life vests.
5
How long after inauguration will it take for Putin or some other crisis to challenge the temperament of Trump and show his election to be a major mistake for the country and world. Not a slump, but a debacle totally outside of his narrow intelligence. I hope there are those who can step into the huge gap if, for example, Putin annexes one or more of the Baltic states, before Nato can even get its act together.
5
One peculiar Trump squib that went past me on YouTube this morning was The Donald apparently conceding that global warming is happening, but whining that a whole bunch of people are trying to make money out of it.
Not complaining that anyone was stomping coal, which he might in other situations have felt and said. People were trying to make money out of it.
Now the ver-ree obvious fact is that a post-carbon economy is going to involve a whole lot of profitable building. Duh, Donald.
How do we get it across to the guy that this is the neatest opportunity -- jobs, profit, America, all that good stuff -- since slapping ormolu on old buildings?
-dlj.
Not complaining that anyone was stomping coal, which he might in other situations have felt and said. People were trying to make money out of it.
Now the ver-ree obvious fact is that a post-carbon economy is going to involve a whole lot of profitable building. Duh, Donald.
How do we get it across to the guy that this is the neatest opportunity -- jobs, profit, America, all that good stuff -- since slapping ormolu on old buildings?
-dlj.
4
There are far more independents than registered voters of either party. Anti-Washington, anti-status quo sentiment has upended the elite of both parties. In what the pundits should be discussing as a stunning reversal, a large swath of the working class electorate is now turning to the Republican party for help.
Every liberal pundit in the country should be blaming the Democratic party establishment and the center-right, economic policies of the last two Democratic presidents for the stranglehold the Republicans now have on our government.
Instead, pundits like Krugman are attempting to defend the neoliberal economic policies of the "New", triangulating Democrats that contributed significantly to the economic malaise that created a level of desperation sufficient for shyster Trump to successfully portray himself as a working class hero.
It's time for the pundits to get real about the dreadful economic right turn the Democratic party took 24 years ago. Acknowledge the huge downside of globalization and the Democrat's failure to fight for worker protections with the trade pacts, and policies that enabled Germany to retain 20% of their workforce in manufacturing, while the US is at 8.6%
If pundits like Krugman are sincerely concerned about "apocalyptic...climate change", then it's time to speak truthfully about Obama's mixed record on the environment - a record that can only compare favorably to those who deny climate change exists.
Every liberal pundit in the country should be blaming the Democratic party establishment and the center-right, economic policies of the last two Democratic presidents for the stranglehold the Republicans now have on our government.
Instead, pundits like Krugman are attempting to defend the neoliberal economic policies of the "New", triangulating Democrats that contributed significantly to the economic malaise that created a level of desperation sufficient for shyster Trump to successfully portray himself as a working class hero.
It's time for the pundits to get real about the dreadful economic right turn the Democratic party took 24 years ago. Acknowledge the huge downside of globalization and the Democrat's failure to fight for worker protections with the trade pacts, and policies that enabled Germany to retain 20% of their workforce in manufacturing, while the US is at 8.6%
If pundits like Krugman are sincerely concerned about "apocalyptic...climate change", then it's time to speak truthfully about Obama's mixed record on the environment - a record that can only compare favorably to those who deny climate change exists.
3
What I really love, is all of the coverage now about how bad his policies will be. Where the heck was the news coverage on policy before the election. I know, they were busy looking at charlatan issues like the email server, or the Clinton foundation. How easily our media is manipulated should be the real story of this election.
11
The sentence that reads," Donald Trump isn't proposing huge tax cuts...because he understands macroeconomics" was startling to read! Of course, what Krugman meant is that an understanding of macroeconomics doesn't explain Trump's tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. But this isn't the most obvious or literal reading of the sentence.
Am I offering anything other than an English teacher's critique? Possibly not. But I do think the election makes one thing startlingly clear: most of America could benefit from a better collective understanding of the history and concepts that might make us more responsible, knowledgeable citizens.
Is it "dumbing down" to take a little more time to provide clarity and context when discussing ideas like macroeconomics, trickle down economics, economic bubbles? I would rather think of this as taking time to consider one's audience. And if there is anything we should now understand about America, it's that there is a huge population of Americans who have no understanding of their own self-interest.
Am I offering anything other than an English teacher's critique? Possibly not. But I do think the election makes one thing startlingly clear: most of America could benefit from a better collective understanding of the history and concepts that might make us more responsible, knowledgeable citizens.
Is it "dumbing down" to take a little more time to provide clarity and context when discussing ideas like macroeconomics, trickle down economics, economic bubbles? I would rather think of this as taking time to consider one's audience. And if there is anything we should now understand about America, it's that there is a huge population of Americans who have no understanding of their own self-interest.
3
No one feared the election of G. W. Bush, who turned the US inside out and upside down, (where we remain)! The subsequent election of a Democrat from Illimois and Hawaii, who claimed a liberal "identity" made no difference. The Democratic president simply adopted most of Bush's policies. It should be remembered that Bush was a creature of his advisors and his vice president. He was not a great deep thinker who considered long range consequences of his acts. In the days after 9/11, perhaps no one wanted to think too deeply. However, it became apparent that Bush and the media, headed by his staff, were dragging the US like a ship dragging it's anchor, to places where we ought not to have gone-. We are still saddled with the results of Bush/Obama in our courts and our foreign policy. It is much like a monkey on our back that we cannot shake, but parts of America want to keep things as they are. The people to watch are therefore, the staff and advisors of Mr. Trump-not his starry eyed self. Presidents come and go and have power mostly or not given by Congress. Trump can bluster, but, it will be his aides who execute.
America now pretends Bush never existed and he rarely leaves the 'safety' of Texas. Maybe Bush was the victim of his times his aides and cabinet. So, also with Trump: It will depend on how our media act and report on his administration that will set the tone foer the next four years. Campaign talk is cheap and most often very quickly discarded.
America now pretends Bush never existed and he rarely leaves the 'safety' of Texas. Maybe Bush was the victim of his times his aides and cabinet. So, also with Trump: It will depend on how our media act and report on his administration that will set the tone foer the next four years. Campaign talk is cheap and most often very quickly discarded.
2
While I agree with this general view on the economy, my main worry about this presidency is the treatment of minorities, the horrible effects of which have already kicked in and are much more immediate. From bolstering and validating all kinds of hate crimes to unjustly detaining and perhaps even torturing helpless innocent people, that is the real apocalypse that I'm seeing coming.
1
"Installing Donald Trump in the White House is an epic mistake". -- I agree, but so would have been the installation there of Hillary Clinton. Economic slumps and hunger, correlated with the ephemeral policies of the rulers, have always led to uprisings, rebellions, revolutions or civil wars. Historically, the New Era of Trump may turn the wheel to a similar state of affairs.
I think one of the mistakes of the Democrats or progressives has been that they never came up with a message for those in the slumping industrial heartland. For an entire region that used to be the manufacturing powerhouse of the world, advice to do something else is condescending and unrealistic at least for the active lifetime of the now 30-50 year olds. What are they supposed to do?
Anyway, I agree that manufacturing *jobs* won't come back, but manufacturing per se could and should. There still is know-how, infrastructure, and work ethic in the Midwest, that would be put to good use even in manufacturing that doesn't use much human labor.
I think the Democrats should try to work out a framework proposal where Western environmental, job safety and worker rights standards are used to limit imports from countries that don't follow them. So instead of the Republican argument against all of those things that are good but make our exports more expensive, we should insist on applying those standards globally, thus eliminating the competitive advantage of low regulation, dictatorial countries.
Anyway, I agree that manufacturing *jobs* won't come back, but manufacturing per se could and should. There still is know-how, infrastructure, and work ethic in the Midwest, that would be put to good use even in manufacturing that doesn't use much human labor.
I think the Democrats should try to work out a framework proposal where Western environmental, job safety and worker rights standards are used to limit imports from countries that don't follow them. So instead of the Republican argument against all of those things that are good but make our exports more expensive, we should insist on applying those standards globally, thus eliminating the competitive advantage of low regulation, dictatorial countries.
3
Mr. Krugman needed to add a potential of scary prospect that delayed aftereffects of Trum policies creates a possibility of second term for Trump.
Trump, master of reading the pulse of people, will resort to populist policies in small doses to avoid a big disasters in the first 4 years. His increased infrastructure and defense spending will secure conservative votes. His softening stance on issues that are near and dear liberal hearts ensuring on-fence liberal votes who would see short terms gains in job market as virtue of Trump presidency.
After securing second term, Trump will take harder stance on the issues. At the same time, the financial drag due to decreased tax revenue and increased spending will become apparent. Recession will be imminent.
To avert this scary scenario, democrats need to ensure that Trump ends up being a one term president. They need to find a stronger and more energizing personality with minimum political baggage to run in 2020 election.
Trump, master of reading the pulse of people, will resort to populist policies in small doses to avoid a big disasters in the first 4 years. His increased infrastructure and defense spending will secure conservative votes. His softening stance on issues that are near and dear liberal hearts ensuring on-fence liberal votes who would see short terms gains in job market as virtue of Trump presidency.
After securing second term, Trump will take harder stance on the issues. At the same time, the financial drag due to decreased tax revenue and increased spending will become apparent. Recession will be imminent.
To avert this scary scenario, democrats need to ensure that Trump ends up being a one term president. They need to find a stronger and more energizing personality with minimum political baggage to run in 2020 election.
4
Time. What a powerful concept. Trump voters want change right now, but people have short memories. The bad will be forgotten, especially if it doesn't happen immediately, or more likely blamed on Obama or the next president.
3
We know, we know. Growth under Democrats, good. Growth under Republicans, bad. Higher deficits under Democrats, good. Higher deficits under Republicans, bad.
6
What is certain, both in the long and short term is those 25-30 hour dollar jobs that Trump's followers are expecting to return to the rust belt will not materialize nor will corporations stopped moving abroad.
7
Considering that Trump seems to be backsliding on many of his campaign rhetorical promises, maybe he does nothing on trade, limits his tax cuts on the wealthy and yet bolsters infrastructure spending in a kind of Democratic move? who knows, maybe he puts judge Garland up as a SCOTUS nominee? I'd imagine his 'base' is beginning to get worked up over these perceived flip-flops.
1
I don't know about anyone else, but I've already started cutting back on non-essentials. Thanksgiving dinner? I can't imagine what we have to be thankful for.
At least all those people who voted for Donald Trump because he's going to save their jobs are happy. Let them make this a banner holiday season for retailers. They can, and will, be able to afford it, right? Me? Not so much, and even if I could, I really am not in a festive, jolly mood.
At least all those people who voted for Donald Trump because he's going to save their jobs are happy. Let them make this a banner holiday season for retailers. They can, and will, be able to afford it, right? Me? Not so much, and even if I could, I really am not in a festive, jolly mood.
7
It will take a little time for the people who voted for Trump realize they have been conned, flimflammed, and led down the garden path. When they do, there may be another backlash against Trump and his cronies. People keep posting that he will drain the swamp yet they voted many of the incumbents back into office. At this moment the swamp is even more dangerous with the lowlifes Trump is putting in place as well as himself. People do not like to be fooled so it may take a little while for them to grasp it. When he starts to renege on his campaign rhetoric with the wall, the deportation, banning of immigrants, etc. the people who voted for him will not be happy. That is when buyer's remorse will set in.
7
I see you've started calling Trump's administration a "regime." It may be a bit early, but I'm simpatico. I never imagined ...
5
All the more reason for a national minimum income. We may be one of the few developed countries in the world wherein the recipients of a handout will not save any of it.
A good thing in economic stimulus strategy.
A good thing in economic stimulus strategy.
2
Couple of things. First, there hasn't been a post Brexit recession because Brexit hasn't happened yet. If it does happen, there might or might not be one. As for the effects of Trump, I doubt anyone has a clue. First, because no one has a clue what will actually happen, and second, because economics is essentially non predictive. When some policy change happens, economists predict essentially all possible outcomes. Someone is right, but it's never the same person it was last time.
3
The scary thought is that economic rebound begun under Obama will take off in the next few years and Trump will be given (and take) unwarranted credit for it! And, that, alas, will help him get re-elected!
On this, you are right: "In the long run, its consequences [i.e., Trump's election] may well be apocalyptic, if only because we have probably lost our last, best chance to rein in runaway climate change."
November 8, 2016: The day the planet died...
On this, you are right: "In the long run, its consequences [i.e., Trump's election] may well be apocalyptic, if only because we have probably lost our last, best chance to rein in runaway climate change."
November 8, 2016: The day the planet died...
10
The economy is one of the least of my worries with Trump.
7
When the first factory opens in the Mid West, paying more then $20/hr, let me know. The same goes for coal mines. PT Barnum was right, and Trump certainly knows that much about economics.
8
Here's where the electorate that put Trump into office will find their decision a poor one. In a couple of years Joe Six-pack drives over to Costco to buy a new 55-inch flat-panel for his man-cave. A few years ago he paid $500 for his current flat-panel. Today he walks in, looks around and can't understand why the same 55-incher now costs $3,500. The fact that it doesn't say "Made in China" might be his first clue. Let's hope he figures it out.
118
Trump is calling for a massive increase in infrastructure spending. He is also calling for a change in a tax structure so that all the trillions of dollars that are parked abroad by our corporations will come home and be invested in the economy. These seem to me to be very good ideas. Professor Krugman you are so biased you are not willing to give Trump any credit at all.
3
A $305 Billion dollar infrastructure bill was passed in December 2015. Why did that receive so little notice? During the campaign, the press made it sound like spending on infrastructure was a new and novel idea. President Obama also approved the two transportation bills.
As those projects and jobs begin, who do you think will take credit?
As those projects and jobs begin, who do you think will take credit?
8
There's an election consequence that I don't see discussed much: Trump advocates pulling out of trade agreements and many other international co-operations. China has already signalled it's more than ready to assume global leadership roles as the U.S. president trumpets his disdain for all non-Americans. Trump supporters, I ask you. Will Vlad Putin's love be enough?? Thanks for handing decision making to China and Russia!
6
Brexit hasn't happened yet. How does he make conclusions on its consequences without results?
3
If Trump follows through on the campaign promise of cutting financial support to NATO and his co-conspirator, Putin, takes the Crimea again, then Angela Merkel needs to resurrect the Wehrmacht for protection of western Europe.
3
I always find myself more depressed after read Krugman...If it ain't his way, it's bad.
4
Regime? No, the winner of a free election, not a regime. I wonder if Hillary Clinton would have won the election, you would have been scrutinizing her policies and affect on the economy before she even took office?
5
I've been thinking that a great new source of jobs is to hire moderators for all the electronic media posting. All of it. It's such a pleasure to post and read the posts here. Hurray for civilized discourse!
7
Just like you did when obama was first elected in 2008 and you were not completely on board, because you still preferred a Clinton, fast forward 8 years and you will spend all your time and energy wasting on bashing Trump. Back then we urged you bring people together but no everything you think of us partisan, for you even the air you breathe is democrat not republican. The sunlight that shines on you is demicrar and the water you drink is democrat. When you were born, your parents labeled you conscience of a so called liberal so you decided to paste it on your door plaque.
Grow up, Paul. As always you have the choice of dwelling less on negatives, on pessimism and figuring out what is good for the country, not the party. Otherwise you have wasted your breath in divisiveness, petty name calling (yes we remember Bernie Bro bashing).
Grow up, Paul. As always you have the choice of dwelling less on negatives, on pessimism and figuring out what is good for the country, not the party. Otherwise you have wasted your breath in divisiveness, petty name calling (yes we remember Bernie Bro bashing).
7
Paul, this is what arrived by email this morning:
A.Word.A.Day
with Anu Garg
kakistocracy
PRONUNCIATION:
(kak-i-STOK-ruh-see, kah-ki-)
MEANING:
noun: Government by the least qualified or worst persons.
ETYMOLOGY:
From Greek kakistos (worst), superlative of kakos (bad) + -cracy (rule). Ultimately from the Indo-European root kakka-/kaka- (to defecate), which also gave us poppycock, cacophony, cacology, and cacography. Earliest documented use: 1829.
USAGE:
“We must weigh our votes carefully. Else we are in danger of turning America’s time-tested democracy into a kakistocracy.” --Dan Warner; The Best Man for the Job Is Not as Easy as it Sounds; The News Press (Fort Myers, Florida); Jan 17, 2016.
A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed, and love of power. --P.J. O'Rourke, writer (b. 14 Nov 1947)
A.Word.A.Day
with Anu Garg
kakistocracy
PRONUNCIATION:
(kak-i-STOK-ruh-see, kah-ki-)
MEANING:
noun: Government by the least qualified or worst persons.
ETYMOLOGY:
From Greek kakistos (worst), superlative of kakos (bad) + -cracy (rule). Ultimately from the Indo-European root kakka-/kaka- (to defecate), which also gave us poppycock, cacophony, cacology, and cacography. Earliest documented use: 1829.
USAGE:
“We must weigh our votes carefully. Else we are in danger of turning America’s time-tested democracy into a kakistocracy.” --Dan Warner; The Best Man for the Job Is Not as Easy as it Sounds; The News Press (Fort Myers, Florida); Jan 17, 2016.
A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed, and love of power. --P.J. O'Rourke, writer (b. 14 Nov 1947)
15
I am so sick of people moaning about climate change without manning up and talking about what is really needed for any real effect: population control.
18
It's a slow motion train wreck and I am against my will on the train. Anyone with Medicare and Social Security needs to be very worried. You every dollar and safety net will be eroded. Should have been thinking about that if you voted Trump or GOP.
9
“Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
Everybody knows that the war is over
Everybody knows the good guys lost
Everybody knows the fight was fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
That's how it goes…
Everybody knows”
Leonard Cohen
Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
Everybody knows that the war is over
Everybody knows the good guys lost
Everybody knows the fight was fixed
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
That's how it goes…
Everybody knows”
Leonard Cohen
22
Let rural ohio, michigan and other states people wait for manufacturing jobs Trump promised them during campaign. When world low level wage is 1$, we can not compete at 10$ for many things. And most of repetitive low end jobs are done by machines.
People are still waiting for Bush Trickle down, let them wait for one more thing. I hope this election makes people smart in long term!
People are still waiting for Bush Trickle down, let them wait for one more thing. I hope this election makes people smart in long term!
8
Krugman is taking Trump at his word about tariffs. But Trump, unscripted and in the heat of his rallies, made so many promises off the top of his head, without thinking, that God only knows what he'll finally do. He's already backtracked on Obamacare, and the free-trade GOP is not likely to permit the 35% tariff of American goods made in Mexico that he promised.
4
Ridiculous that those who lived through 8 years of the Bush debacle still believe that smaller government and lower taxes for the ultra wealthy and corporations will provide relief to a nation of "have nots". Eighty per cent of our population admit that they worry about tomorrow for food clothing health care and education. Yet many believe that Republicans offer solutions to these vast problems and a globe dealing with global warming, economic, educational, ultra nationalism. So far Trump's qualified transition team of family, and lobbyists give us little comfort that our needs and problems will be addressed. I think our collective sadness reminds of the loss we suffered as we watched a Supreme Court choose our leadership in the year 2000 and the opportunities we lost (as well as lives and treasury) that will never be returned. We are a nation operating on thin margins and we will not have the bankruptcy courts to bail us out as they did our vaunted leader. At times in our history have misjudged the wisdom and intelligence of the electorate. We need to do more than become disgusted we need to become energized. Difficult tasks remain and they will require great effort and resistance.These begin with a rewrite of the constitution eliminating the electoral college and proactive measures to combat coal, the anti-women's rights campaign and the dissolution of American society.
15
The effort now should be for us voters who care about the country to stop the coming destruction of it by the Trump administration by giving Congress back to the Democrats in the mid-term election.
We should know by then the eventual route of that destruction.
We should know by then the eventual route of that destruction.
6
" we have probably lost our last, best chance to rein in runaway climate change"
The best chance to avert climate change was putting teeth into the 1992 Kyoto accord after it became obvious to the vast majority of scientists and anyone not so arrogant or ignorant to ignore them.
Paris was just the last chance. It is increasingly apparent that "climate change" means "global mass extinction of species" and will result in unprecedented famine and war.
Other than that Ms. Lincoln, what about those near term employment figures? ..
The best chance to avert climate change was putting teeth into the 1992 Kyoto accord after it became obvious to the vast majority of scientists and anyone not so arrogant or ignorant to ignore them.
Paris was just the last chance. It is increasingly apparent that "climate change" means "global mass extinction of species" and will result in unprecedented famine and war.
Other than that Ms. Lincoln, what about those near term employment figures? ..
6
"Let’s be clear: Installing Donald Trump in the White House is an epic mistake. In the long run, its consequences may well be apocalyptic, if only because we have probably lost our last, best chance to rein in runaway climate change."
I completely agree. But what I find most outrageous is that for the past 18 months, throughout this incredibly useless campaign media coverage, this paper did not discuss climate change as the emergency it is. Nor was it a campaign topic anywhere -- the NYT might have made it one -- as evidence by the fact that no journalist ever brought it up in the debates. Why is the media not talking about this massive threat to civilization as we know it?
Now, right now, before this president enacts his 19th century policies, installs "deniers" who will harass our scientific community, tears up the Paris Accord, destroys regulations, works to "bring back" coal, this paper -- which really now has nothing to lose -- needs to put this topic on the front page daily, explaining it for the emergency it is.
I completely agree. But what I find most outrageous is that for the past 18 months, throughout this incredibly useless campaign media coverage, this paper did not discuss climate change as the emergency it is. Nor was it a campaign topic anywhere -- the NYT might have made it one -- as evidence by the fact that no journalist ever brought it up in the debates. Why is the media not talking about this massive threat to civilization as we know it?
Now, right now, before this president enacts his 19th century policies, installs "deniers" who will harass our scientific community, tears up the Paris Accord, destroys regulations, works to "bring back" coal, this paper -- which really now has nothing to lose -- needs to put this topic on the front page daily, explaining it for the emergency it is.
10
In today's Guardian: "China threatens to cut sales of iPhones and US cars if 'naive' Trump pursues trade war"
Also, since Trump seems pretty casual about defaulting on US debt, won't countries like China demand higher interest rates for treasuries? Won't that cause inflation? The east and west coast liberal elites can weather this, and in fact profit from it, but for Trump's poor white supporters , who will also see their disability checks and food stamps slashed, will be in for a hard time of it.
Also, since Trump seems pretty casual about defaulting on US debt, won't countries like China demand higher interest rates for treasuries? Won't that cause inflation? The east and west coast liberal elites can weather this, and in fact profit from it, but for Trump's poor white supporters , who will also see their disability checks and food stamps slashed, will be in for a hard time of it.
5
We should also pay heed to the role of the consumer in whether Trumpism will lead to long run catastrophe vis-à-vis climate change. If consumers demand greener energy, the energy industry will need to keep up with this demand.
Maybe instead of protesting in the streets (I endorse all protests, believe me) -- let's protest by reducing our appetite for superfluous consumption.
The revolution starts with US
Maybe instead of protesting in the streets (I endorse all protests, believe me) -- let's protest by reducing our appetite for superfluous consumption.
The revolution starts with US
2
Dr. Krugman, I'm surprised you didn't bring up the economic consequences of Mr. Trump's signature policy proposal - deportation of illegal immigrants. With wages stagnant, the only leverage America's working class has had for their standard of living is that inflation has been kept in check. The lowest wage jobs in America are filled by illegal immigrants. Without this low-cost, mobile labor pool, prices (especially for agricultural products) will skyrocket. For low-income Americans, many of whom voted for Mr. Trump, this may be the first hard lesson in Trumponomics.
6
Clearly there is only one solution to the morass resulting from the election. Mr. Sorkin must bring back The West Wing so once again we can have an alternative administration that we can believe in.
5
The presidency of the United States may just have become a symbolic position. We barely survived George W Bush. Our only hope on this one is that more good than harm is done by the mid-term election by which time "the forgotten man" should have figured out that he is now both lost and forgotten.
Wishful thinking maybe but just as likely maybe not.
Wishful thinking maybe but just as likely maybe not.
5
Tsk tsk!
Republican Party Saint Ronald Wilson Reagan prophesized that we can cut taxes and increase spending on entitlements and defense forever because neither deficits nor debt matter because we are Americans and this is America. And Saint Ronald never got a Nobel Prize in Economics.
Republican Party Saint Ronald Wilson Reagan prophesized that we can cut taxes and increase spending on entitlements and defense forever because neither deficits nor debt matter because we are Americans and this is America. And Saint Ronald never got a Nobel Prize in Economics.
5
Fear sells. There should be plenty of that around to boost the economy. But of course, fear is never the answer... it's immobilizing.
Now we have fear as embodied in the government itself. I believe that is in part thanks to Krugman and his fellow columnists who belittled Sanders and his supporters for months while simultaneously paying outsized attention to early Trumpism as fodder for clicks. We've been force fed the phenomenon of Trump for the past year in this paper and that has played it's hand.
Sanders was in touch with the anger of the disenfranchised white voter, the anti-Wall Street sentiment and actually could be believed when he spoke. He had the energy of the youngest of our voting population and support from the core of the truly progressive voters. All of that was disregarded because the Democratic establishment wasn't ready for a next generation progressive agenda, it was too focused on it's Camelot fantasy.
Now we have fear itself. Be afraid.
Now we have fear as embodied in the government itself. I believe that is in part thanks to Krugman and his fellow columnists who belittled Sanders and his supporters for months while simultaneously paying outsized attention to early Trumpism as fodder for clicks. We've been force fed the phenomenon of Trump for the past year in this paper and that has played it's hand.
Sanders was in touch with the anger of the disenfranchised white voter, the anti-Wall Street sentiment and actually could be believed when he spoke. He had the energy of the youngest of our voting population and support from the core of the truly progressive voters. All of that was disregarded because the Democratic establishment wasn't ready for a next generation progressive agenda, it was too focused on it's Camelot fantasy.
Now we have fear itself. Be afraid.
6
This my prediction. There will be a lot of domestic upheaval. I read last week that a large number of corporate CEOs wrote a letter to Trump to tone down his rhetoric. He won't, because number one, he likes it, two, as he gets more stressed he won't be able to control himself, and three, he will have to blame his problems on someone else. The first impact is people will feel less secure and will change their spending patterns. It's already happened in England. No more new car purchases, home starts, discretionary spending. After all, it's the blue states that are supporting this mess, and they are getting tired of it all. The Trump voters don't get their wall, their jobs, and will lose ACA, Medicare, and Social Security. I'm going to be ok. They won't. Good luck.
8
For months, I've been telling Trump supporters that handing even more money to the wealthy is not only next to worthless, but - in some ways - it will actually make their lives worse. I tried to tailor the argument to the guys I know with pretty specific examples, like:
-The rich will buy even more old muscle cars, driving up the price, putting their dream car even further out of reach.
-They'll drive up the price of beach property, making a vacation even more expensive.
-They'll drive up the price of stocks, making it that much harder to fund a secure retirement.
I'm usually called an idiot when make this argument. I still do it, though. Because I know it reaches them. I can see it. Which is why I'm asking if you would consider writing a column about the ways cutting taxes for the rich would actually make the lives of his supporters even worse. I'm not talking macroeconomics. Just small-ball stuff they can relate to. It would be nice to hear this argument in your words.
-The rich will buy even more old muscle cars, driving up the price, putting their dream car even further out of reach.
-They'll drive up the price of beach property, making a vacation even more expensive.
-They'll drive up the price of stocks, making it that much harder to fund a secure retirement.
I'm usually called an idiot when make this argument. I still do it, though. Because I know it reaches them. I can see it. Which is why I'm asking if you would consider writing a column about the ways cutting taxes for the rich would actually make the lives of his supporters even worse. I'm not talking macroeconomics. Just small-ball stuff they can relate to. It would be nice to hear this argument in your words.
4
By February of next year the current economic expansion will be the 3rd longest in U.S. history. There is no reason to think it won't go on for awhile unless there is a terrorist attack that makes 9/11 look like child's play or unless a trade war breaks out and threatens to become an actual war. One thing is for sure, however. Trump's rural supporters won't be helped by Trump's economic policies. Those will be designed to help the richest of the rich.
4
"Trump administration might actually end up doing the right thing for the wrong reasons."
In fact Trump does not deal with the pseudo liberal establishment blind for progress called incremental pragmatism.
Ever heard of Tactica Adversa, the tactical exhausting of the adverse. When such tactics are applied, the enemies often contribute to the success.
In fact Trump does not deal with the pseudo liberal establishment blind for progress called incremental pragmatism.
Ever heard of Tactica Adversa, the tactical exhausting of the adverse. When such tactics are applied, the enemies often contribute to the success.
I have read that there is in fact a shortage of skilled trades workers in the US now that the boomers are retiring and the children of the boomers did not go into the trades. Even if a new factory magically appeared in the midwest, it would be a new type of factory with more automation and robotics. This means that all the out-of-work guys whod didn't study computer science ot math won't qualify. Wouldn't it be sad if Trump has look to immigration to find skilled workers for the infrastructure programs?
3
The Ace of Spades for the establishments in this election, and I don't just mean for the liberal elites, but also the for fractured GOP, is the "working white non-college class" and the "suburbanites" and "white women." Unlike the 2008 and 2012, it's not the millenniums' turn, or turnout. Hillary did not have a gender advantage, and in combination with the lowest voter turn-out since 1996, Trump supporters' thunder became the focus of the movement once Bernie became a side-show for the DNC.
People trust how you they make you feel, not what you say (or in Hillary's case, do or experience). Coming from the Midwest, I can tell you that this is even more true for the people in the Bible and Rust Belts than your coastal sunshine states. This is because the communities are smaller, there are not much cultural distractions, and all you have is each other to "feel" better and to survive during long winters. Bill and Barrack understood this, and they got Kansas, Iowa, and Ohio. Hillary did not got a good pulse on this, and she lost Wisconsin and North Carolina. My point is that to win here economics may be a talking point, but it's not enough. People have to feel good about their candidates. Their hope is not in their paychecks and corporate promotions, but for protection in their traditional ways of life.
But the operative word going forward is "working." This is the common thread that had allowed the storm upsurge that broke the political seawalls. It has been dehumanizing.
People trust how you they make you feel, not what you say (or in Hillary's case, do or experience). Coming from the Midwest, I can tell you that this is even more true for the people in the Bible and Rust Belts than your coastal sunshine states. This is because the communities are smaller, there are not much cultural distractions, and all you have is each other to "feel" better and to survive during long winters. Bill and Barrack understood this, and they got Kansas, Iowa, and Ohio. Hillary did not got a good pulse on this, and she lost Wisconsin and North Carolina. My point is that to win here economics may be a talking point, but it's not enough. People have to feel good about their candidates. Their hope is not in their paychecks and corporate promotions, but for protection in their traditional ways of life.
But the operative word going forward is "working." This is the common thread that had allowed the storm upsurge that broke the political seawalls. It has been dehumanizing.
Back to the "economy on steroids" we saw during the GWB administration is my best guess. It will be interesting to see if the deficit hawks in Congress now roll over to accommodate Trump. Certainly, such an about face would serve to show it was really all about opposing anything Obama, not a concern for debt and deficit - the story they've been selling for years. Borrow and spend has been the Republican trick while complaining about tax and spend Democrats as they do it.
The result will be a bubble. Shades of the early 2000s. A faster growing economy might help to get the Donald re-elected in four years and then the bubble will start to burst during the next four. Then blame it on the Democrats, another trick successfully pushed to the faithful by the media that knows how to sell faux news.
So, if you can, plan to shoot up with the new stimulus and good luck on selling out at the high. Hope the Millennial generation comes to recognize what these Boomers, making a play on their way out, are about to spoil, not just Millennials' chance joining the economic party, but send our entire environment into faster decline, as well. Buh-Bye!
The result will be a bubble. Shades of the early 2000s. A faster growing economy might help to get the Donald re-elected in four years and then the bubble will start to burst during the next four. Then blame it on the Democrats, another trick successfully pushed to the faithful by the media that knows how to sell faux news.
So, if you can, plan to shoot up with the new stimulus and good luck on selling out at the high. Hope the Millennial generation comes to recognize what these Boomers, making a play on their way out, are about to spoil, not just Millennials' chance joining the economic party, but send our entire environment into faster decline, as well. Buh-Bye!
4
How long, how long indeed! How long before the classic Trump supporter tires of the soaring stock and capital markets and the disconnect with the poorly-performing economy that they experience, how long before the Trump supporter ceases to be distracted and entertained by the political sideshow and culture wars that Trump will stoke and delight in. Mr. Krugman is right - this will all take time.
7
How to explain American presidential elections in the 21st century:
Prediction: By 2020, the know-nothing, anti-humanitarian, all-white and 99.9% male Republican Trump administration and his anti-expert advisors and cabinet officers will have made a horrendous economic, social, military, and political mess--so terrible that even the G.W. Bush reign will look like better times.
A Democratic president will be elected in 2020 to clean up the mess and will make some progress--despite the efforts of the disgraced Republicans to obstruct and block anything positive the Democratic administration wants to do for this country, the 99% of the people who are in economic stagnation or decline, and the chocking planet.
In 2024 or 2028, Americans will elect a right-wing Republican administration, because the small improvements made during the Democratic administration (resisted every step of the way by the Republicans) were not insufficient, and voters believe their hopes and expectations were dashed once again--and it's all the Democrats, liberals, non-Christians, and nonwhite people's fault.
In 2028 or 2032, Americans will elect a Democratic president to clean up the mess.
Prediction: By 2020, the know-nothing, anti-humanitarian, all-white and 99.9% male Republican Trump administration and his anti-expert advisors and cabinet officers will have made a horrendous economic, social, military, and political mess--so terrible that even the G.W. Bush reign will look like better times.
A Democratic president will be elected in 2020 to clean up the mess and will make some progress--despite the efforts of the disgraced Republicans to obstruct and block anything positive the Democratic administration wants to do for this country, the 99% of the people who are in economic stagnation or decline, and the chocking planet.
In 2024 or 2028, Americans will elect a right-wing Republican administration, because the small improvements made during the Democratic administration (resisted every step of the way by the Republicans) were not insufficient, and voters believe their hopes and expectations were dashed once again--and it's all the Democrats, liberals, non-Christians, and nonwhite people's fault.
In 2028 or 2032, Americans will elect a Democratic president to clean up the mess.
7
I'm no fan of Trump, but won't his tax cuts from the rich and infrastructure spending, in the short term before a crash, create jobs for blue collar workers directly in construction and (through deficit spending stimulus) indirectly through the multiplier effect?
One of my main problems with this article has to do with Trump not really being the guy in charge. We are looking at a parallel Bush/Cheney administration, only this time it's Trump/Pence. Let's start examining what Pence has done as a governor, what his economic strategies are, for a real look at where we are headed. And look to who Trump is surrounding himself with for other directions on climate change, education, and civil rights. He will turn out to be Pence and Ryan's puppet more than Putin's.
3
Krugman receives an F grade. He makes broad conclusions about the "bad people" who will be running the Trump administration = to be clear, except for a couple of names we don't even know who these people are yet. But for Krugman the fact that they will be Republican means that they are "bad people". His entire premise rests on two non-facts. One, that these same unknown "bad people" will be less capable then the current crop of Democrats of responding to an economic crisis. This is pure conjecture and a dumb statement. The second is that Trump will fail to create jobs. Once again, a complete conjecture on Krugman's part. Two years from now one may have some basis for this statement. At present, it is just whining from a bitter man whose candidate lost the election.
3
Yes, but what if we just spent the next two years denying the truth. What if, instead of accepting facts and figures produced by non-partisan organizations about the state of the economy, we just produced our own, took the worst of the economic data and skewed it to look even worse, or even twisted and manipulated graphs to make it look like no progress had been made. If all the Democrats in Congress just obstructed and threatened for two to four years then we could stop any excessive progress from being made. If we did that and just kept repeating it as fact, if we got our media outlets, hired foreign bloggers, and spokes people from past administrations to just keep telling those lies we could get people to believe that good was bad. THEN we could probably kick the Republican's out of the Senate and cripple Trump's chances for re-election.
Of course then we would be no better than the Republican Party, the right wing media, or Trump and his evil minions. I guess I'll stick with integrity and honesty instead and hope for better. But, its tempting.
Of course then we would be no better than the Republican Party, the right wing media, or Trump and his evil minions. I guess I'll stick with integrity and honesty instead and hope for better. But, its tempting.
2
Mr. Trump is already walking back most of his ridiculous promises, hiring well-connected Washington insiders and lobbyists to fill the 4,000 administration jobs, and signaling that he will not be proposing anything that could be described as "draining the swamp". I doubt that the small government ideologists, anti-deficit and balanced budget contingents in Congress that have paralyzed the government for years will agree to vote for most of his proposals. The result will be more paralysis.
3
Typical DEM loving, GOP bashing Krugman - just to cite some flawed assertions and canards: "more deficits is good" - that's idiotic as more deficits adds to more national debt, and maybe some intelligent, stringent budget cuts on DEM favored programs (that used to help them get elected) would help; and thankfully the GOP - with its "trifecta" of Pres + Congress control - can help in the matter of Social Security + MediCARE + MediCAID, which is scheduled to go bankrupt in 20+ years unless entitlement reform is enacted. I did not vote for either of the 2 historically pathetic "nominees" but put in my ethics + principle vote for Evan McMullin in my extreme "blue" state of NY, with the extreme "long-shot" hope that McMullin would win Utah and Hill + Don would be "close" to direct the selection of President to the GOP House of Reps - where Gov. John Kasich (or Ryan or Romney) could be President. For America's sake, I'll hope for Pres. Trump - hoperfully with good aides - handling the Presidency intelligently, faithfully and dutifully. "ps" the one good thing is that a conservative Supreme Court is in the offing to survive a heretofore possibility of a liberal court under the arrogant, obtuse, vacillating, extreme progressive Clinton.
I hate to say it, but comforting ourselves with punditry is not good enough. We've been doing it for years. It's not enough to be right, when the planet is burning up all around us.
So I'm going to descend into the playground and say: I loathe and despite that fat greedy selfish face, and I never ever want to see it again.
The man is evil. He's discovered that if you don't have a conscience, you can become President. There are no words dirty enough to describe the foulness of his accomplishment.
So I'm going to descend into the playground and say: I loathe and despite that fat greedy selfish face, and I never ever want to see it again.
The man is evil. He's discovered that if you don't have a conscience, you can become President. There are no words dirty enough to describe the foulness of his accomplishment.
10
I have never believed the GOP didn't know exactly what needed to be done to help the economy. They are only anti-deficit spending when they are in power and the spending would not benefit their constituents or might help the Democratic administration stay in power. Will see infrastructure spending and it will be a lot - going to Republlcan contractors and creating jobs and - coupled with increased defense spending - cause at least a mini-boom. This is what happened in the past and their is no reason to think it won't happen now. The danger will be the lack of financial regulation which will lead to another huge bust in a shorter time (10 - 15 years tops) and with the usual desperate consequences.
lff
lff
2
Donald Trump may be the best hard lesson that ever happened to this country. I think many of America’s citizens have taken for granted the democracy and, for the most part, decent living conditions we enjoy. Trump will cause massive destruction and shake up our government and our way of life. It may take generations to overcome the damage and come back to where we were at the end of the Obama Administration, but I don't think we will ever take the importance of elections for granted again.
9
I think it would be wise to prepare for the possibility of a Trump slump. To take just one example: if you think Congress will bulldoze Obamacare with Trump's blessing and replace it with nothing, millions of people will find replacement insurance unaffordable and millions of others will pay more from their stagnant wages. Both groups will not be ready to spend what may be desperately-needed dollars on consumer goods.
Business uncertainty is one thing--and it may be a while before uncertainly returns to some sectors of the business world, as Krugman suggests--but consumer uncertainly can have massive effects, and they can come quickly.
Business uncertainty is one thing--and it may be a while before uncertainly returns to some sectors of the business world, as Krugman suggests--but consumer uncertainly can have massive effects, and they can come quickly.
3
Is Dr. Krugman presenting fact or opinion when he writes that trade wars would make the world economy poorer over time, that Brexit will make Britain poorer in the long run, and that in the longer run Trumpism will be a very bad thing for the economy? He states these premises as if they are fact. Clearly, they are opinions based on his dubious understanding of the socioeconomic picture on a macro level.
It is apparent to me in reviewing Dr. Krugman's analyses in columns leading up to last week's elections that he has lost touch with what's going on in the country and the world, and that his world paradigm has little basis in reality and should be viewed accordingly.
It is indisputable that there will be unintended consequences of many of the actions that transpire when such a major change in direction is embarked upon, but it is foolhardy to assume that there won't be some positive unintended outcomes to offset those consequences. Time will tell how things will play out - it's too early to tell ten weeks before President-elect Trump takes office.
It is apparent to me in reviewing Dr. Krugman's analyses in columns leading up to last week's elections that he has lost touch with what's going on in the country and the world, and that his world paradigm has little basis in reality and should be viewed accordingly.
It is indisputable that there will be unintended consequences of many of the actions that transpire when such a major change in direction is embarked upon, but it is foolhardy to assume that there won't be some positive unintended outcomes to offset those consequences. Time will tell how things will play out - it's too early to tell ten weeks before President-elect Trump takes office.
Democrats should immediately, as in yesterday, start pushing for widespread service sector unionization and collective bargaining!
This will serve three main purposes:
1) It will call Trump and the GOP's bluff on how much they really mean to do for the working class (at least 75% of the economy is consumption, most of it services).
2) It will appeal to both white Trump voters and democrats and have the added attraction of placating "moderate" democrats because the service sector really has nothing to do with foreign trade.
3) The resultant rise in service workers' spending power would, once and for all, cause even a good chunk of republicans to abandon this 35-year nightmare of supply-side, trickle down nonsense.
Bubble up economics!
This will serve three main purposes:
1) It will call Trump and the GOP's bluff on how much they really mean to do for the working class (at least 75% of the economy is consumption, most of it services).
2) It will appeal to both white Trump voters and democrats and have the added attraction of placating "moderate" democrats because the service sector really has nothing to do with foreign trade.
3) The resultant rise in service workers' spending power would, once and for all, cause even a good chunk of republicans to abandon this 35-year nightmare of supply-side, trickle down nonsense.
Bubble up economics!
2
A large reason for the corporate malfeasance that exists today rests with our country's top economic colleges. These colleges need to find a method of teaching social morality and responsibility and not merely comply with John Smith's view of servitude to the "Masters of Mankind" and corporate self-centeredness and exclusivity. However, I agree with the author's analysis that the "baby boomer" generation's desire to devolve back to the good old days (In deference to the realities we lived through) and the huge divide that has developed between the cities and rural America, has produced a virtual Hitlerian return to the ideals of white supremacy, exclusivity and a xenophobic nation.
1
The economy will not rebound until the country gets the cost of healthcare to appropriate levels. Right now healthcare is wasting about 10% of the GDP. That is enough to double the size of the US military. The cost of healthcare, social security and debt service on the national debt use up almost all revenue collected by the Treasury. The rest of the government runs on increases in the national debt. The country cannot look to fiscal policy to stimulate the country because we do not have the funding for it. The county cannot look to monetary policy because we abused that game when we got interest rates close to zero. Moving interest rates from zero to about one percent does not get anyone excited. The country has no choice but to look into how we spend our money and to find cheaper ways to get what we need. The first item on that list should be the cost of healthcare.
2
The dismal political outlook at least allows for an ex ante test of Republican economic policy. What are the effects of pumping up the supply side even more while doing little or nothing for slack demand? Sending young and growing immigrant families out of the country helps neither sales nor labor force. Without immigrants we look a lot like Japan - too old to spend and nothing to invest in. What will be the effects of restrictive trade rules on the US and the world? At any rate it is useful for both professional and amateur macroeconomists to make assumptions about what policies the Trump administration will enact and the resultant economic outcomes. Defunding health care, ignoring climate change and shifting back to fossil fuels have both short and longer term economic impacts. All of these policies should be assessed for extent, timing and resultant shifts in employment and income.
One other thought - what if national economic policies no longer matter much? The world economy just steps around them one way or another - Maybe that is happening in Europe?
One other thought - what if national economic policies no longer matter much? The world economy just steps around them one way or another - Maybe that is happening in Europe?
First, there are a lot of really cool newish technologies that will give humanity something closer to a fighting chance. There's the new desalination method developed by a Qatari chemical engineer that simultaneously desalinates ocean water and sequesters CO2 in the process. The old process took seven different reactions, the new one only takes two. Also, there are fuel cells that can scrub 90% of refinery emissions. Also, it's now possible to run commerical passenger jets on entirely renewable fuels. Hopefully we do much better on the climate, as climate change is the single greatest threat to mankind.
Second, while the Republicans can screw up fiscal policy pretty bad, Janet Yellen is going to be on for another two years. This is a really good thing. Hopefully, before the Republicans try to put on another austerity scold, the Democrats can pull themselves together and at the very least win a Senate Majoriity.
Finally, I'm sure economists are overstating the political reaction, especially on the part of China, to American protectionist trade policies. Trade liberalization is good, but unilateral economic disarmament is not.
Second, while the Republicans can screw up fiscal policy pretty bad, Janet Yellen is going to be on for another two years. This is a really good thing. Hopefully, before the Republicans try to put on another austerity scold, the Democrats can pull themselves together and at the very least win a Senate Majoriity.
Finally, I'm sure economists are overstating the political reaction, especially on the part of China, to American protectionist trade policies. Trade liberalization is good, but unilateral economic disarmament is not.
The hype of populism won, while the reality of math lost. Both Trump and Clinton had spending plans that depart far to the left of the Ryan doctrine. Big spending priorities common to both candidates included infrastructure, social security and Medicare. Trump also recently confirmed that he wants to keep the most expensive parts of Obamacare. The president elect then departs from Clinton in a large and worrisome way. Regressive tax cuts that unnecessarily reward America's already undertaxed millionaires will blow the debt into smithereens. Add in Trump's plan to grow defense spending and a longer term economic disaster may be all but inevitable. Clinton was far more fiscally responsible than Trump, with actual plans to pay for most of what she proposed. The master political illusionist of our age, Trump may create a short term economic boost with his smoke and mirrors tax plan and simultaneous surge in spending. As with Reagan's tax less, spend more growth bubble, this president will be long gone when the trickle down, Trumponomics hangover begins. As with his casino debacle, Donald J. Trump will probably succeed yet again at making himself look good at someone else's expense, at least until the reality of history finally catches up with the wishful thinking economics of teflon Donald.
2
Prof. Krugman is underestimating the negative consequences of protectionism. Trade wars have unintended consequences. Perhaps the loss/gain of jobs in the US as a result of tariffs, embargoes and barriers on free trade will be a wash, but in hand with trade barriers will also come new restrictions on the free flow of capital around the world. How a decrease in international trade does anything but increase the risk of global recession is beyond me. What will happen to the global trade in oil? Trump increases uncertainty. That means the risk premium applied to discount future cash flows has to increase, which means the present value of those assets has to decline. I think the equity markets are underestimating the risk of a Trump administration, and being far too bearish on bonds, expecting that the Republican controlled Congress is going pass a fiscal stimulus program that will result in inflation. Given the greater risk to the global economy created by the Trump Adm, financial and capital assets are going to have decrease in value.
41
Why would there be a recession when Trump promises a large stimulus composed of lower taxes, infrastructure and military spending. The serious debt is no longer a problem. See start of Reagan administration.
2
And over time even liberals will start to get desensitized to the plight of those who have been truly left behind, and will end up looking the other way when Medicaid is cut and education programs directed at those who can't afford 529 accounts are slashed.
The time for comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted is about to check in at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and is already setting the new agenda from 5th Avenue.
And gerrymandering, a right-wing SCOTUS, and new and even more ingenious forms of voter suppression will keep it in place for a generation -- at least.
The time for comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted is about to check in at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and is already setting the new agenda from 5th Avenue.
And gerrymandering, a right-wing SCOTUS, and new and even more ingenious forms of voter suppression will keep it in place for a generation -- at least.
5
Probably the greatest damage to the US will be the long term effect of tax cuts for the wealthy.
It will increase the deficits and debt and leave them for our children and grandchildren.
It will continue then having to make more cuts to social programs.
Next on Paul Ryan's agenda is Medicare "privatization," a plan in his own words which will be vouchers similar to the ACA.
It will increase the deficits and debt and leave them for our children and grandchildren.
It will continue then having to make more cuts to social programs.
Next on Paul Ryan's agenda is Medicare "privatization," a plan in his own words which will be vouchers similar to the ACA.
4
"predictions that Trumpist tariffs will cause a recession never made sense: Yes, we’ll export less, but we’ll also import less, and the overall effect on jobs will be more or less a wash."
I hate to quibble with a Nobel Laureate who is a specialist in international trade, but if other countries adopt tariffs on U.S. goods, then you get a global decline in trade and that leads to global recession, doesn't it? That's what we learned in econ class, anyway.
I hate to quibble with a Nobel Laureate who is a specialist in international trade, but if other countries adopt tariffs on U.S. goods, then you get a global decline in trade and that leads to global recession, doesn't it? That's what we learned in econ class, anyway.
4
Just wait until the pro-Trumpers take to the streets. Once they find out that he can't possible deliver on most of what he has promised, their disillusionment over this so-called outsider will grow far more ferocious than the anti-Trump protests. Most of his platform pledges simply can't be enacted. And the measures he does take won't have the desired affects.
8
Politics in America has been divisive forever: it's a democracy. Relax, the world is not falling apart.
Republicans will install non workable or discriminatory policies across the board and few will work because they're based on magical thinking, like climate change denial, tax cuts for the rich as job creation, etc.
Then, it will be the Democrats turn, and they too will install more worthless policies.
We are a dying empire and nothing will alter that: election of this fool has established democracy works poorly.
Here: Go to work. Make a plan. Save for your retirement. Raise your kids well. What the federal government does has mostly null impact except on a very few occasions. And in those occasions it can be circumvented.
Keep calm and carry on.
Republicans will install non workable or discriminatory policies across the board and few will work because they're based on magical thinking, like climate change denial, tax cuts for the rich as job creation, etc.
Then, it will be the Democrats turn, and they too will install more worthless policies.
We are a dying empire and nothing will alter that: election of this fool has established democracy works poorly.
Here: Go to work. Make a plan. Save for your retirement. Raise your kids well. What the federal government does has mostly null impact except on a very few occasions. And in those occasions it can be circumvented.
Keep calm and carry on.
2
While I do not support Trump, that does not mean everything he said was wrong. I think we should be more strategic about our world trade. Proposed agreements should consider their total effect over the lifetime of the agreement. An agreement that lowers prices at the cost of 1 million displaced workers is not just 'collateral damage.' That kind of thinking just cost Hillary her job and imposed a radical shift in our political system.
Secondly, enriching China through our trade is dumb, dumb. China is a rival, not a trading partner, a fact they have demonstrated through their actions. We are giving them the funds to build up their military and economic power which they will use to our detriment. Use our trade to help our friends around the world, not our adversaries. It wouldn't hurt politically, to bring some of the foreign trade back home. This is not isolationism, it is being strategic with our trade, helping our friends, not our enemies and helping ourselves.
Secondly, enriching China through our trade is dumb, dumb. China is a rival, not a trading partner, a fact they have demonstrated through their actions. We are giving them the funds to build up their military and economic power which they will use to our detriment. Use our trade to help our friends around the world, not our adversaries. It wouldn't hurt politically, to bring some of the foreign trade back home. This is not isolationism, it is being strategic with our trade, helping our friends, not our enemies and helping ourselves.
Perhaps tellingly for some of us, I at first mis-read the last sentence of Krugman's final paragraph
"But all of this will probably take time; the consequences of the new regime’s awfulness won’t be apparent right away. Opponents of that regime need to be prepared for the real possibility that good things will happen to bad people, at least for a while."
to be: "Opponents of that regime need to be prepared for the real possibility that bad things will happen to good people, at least for a while."
"But all of this will probably take time; the consequences of the new regime’s awfulness won’t be apparent right away. Opponents of that regime need to be prepared for the real possibility that good things will happen to bad people, at least for a while."
to be: "Opponents of that regime need to be prepared for the real possibility that bad things will happen to good people, at least for a while."
2
If Paul Ryan ends Medicare for baby boomers in 2017 by offering vouchers that are grossly inadequate, this will be enough to cause and economic contraction. Boomers will not retire to pass on jobs to the young. They will stop spending and keep working. They will not be able to plan for retirement in places like Florida. This will depress the real estate market. If Trump rounds up immigrants, this will also depress the economy in the many states that depend on immigrants from south of the border to pick strawberries and build Mc Mansions.
I,for one, am postponing trading in my Prius for a newer car. I will just keep it going and if I have to get another car, I will spend much less that I had intended because of the uncertainty that a GOP coup may mean for middle class Americans.
I,for one, am postponing trading in my Prius for a newer car. I will just keep it going and if I have to get another car, I will spend much less that I had intended because of the uncertainty that a GOP coup may mean for middle class Americans.
7
I don't agree. Interest rates. Rentiers want a raise. Already, I believe, interest rates have spiked upward. They will continue that ascent in the near term and they will come down only in the face of catastrophe, huge catastrophe.
My index? The euro. It is plunging. The pound plummeted on Brexit. Yet, the dollar is skyrocketing on Trump. Interest rates.
Soon. Soon. Not far away.
My index? The euro. It is plunging. The pound plummeted on Brexit. Yet, the dollar is skyrocketing on Trump. Interest rates.
Soon. Soon. Not far away.
2
I believe people don't do evil things either because they have a high moral compass or because they fear to get caught. Trump was able to get elected with lies and dubious acts. On other word, Trump did not get caught for behaving in a highly immoral way. Hence horrible things are about to happen because we enter amoral time and one will be able to get away with anything. On a separate note, Trump will lower taxes and spend heavily on infrastructure. Therefore the debt will run wild. Can Paul Krugman and the NYTImes explore in details what could happen to the economy?
4
Trump DID behave in a highly immoral way, and got caught, and STILL got
elected. This does not change your conclusion except to make the possibilities worse.
elected. This does not change your conclusion except to make the possibilities worse.
To me Mr Krugman, the most immediate need not mentioned in this article is for the Liberal/Progressives of this country to do everything in their power to make sure that the 20 plus million Americans who currently enjoy a measure of health care access through the ACA do not (once again) get shut out of the national consciousness. If in government the measure of urgency is human suffering, certainly this situation ought to be addressed immediately and with all urgency and dispatch.
2
Besides swinging back and forth on opinions about most issues economic and social, what is Trumpism? So now we will have a thoughtless braggart as President. Mr. Trump forced his own financial empire into bankruptcy several times. How long will it take his administration to force the country into bankruptcy? Judging from his post-election statements and given his tax policy pronouncements to date we the People of the United States will have to declare bankruptcy on Jan1, 2018 in order to pay for what he intends to do without the revenue to do pay for it. When will China call in it's first loan payment?
1
The most important and potentially most impactful outcome of this election is the emergence within the two party system of one of the parties becoming the party of both capital and labor. Historically, the two party system has been the arbiter of the conflict between capital and labor; generally, one party represents capital and one party represents labor. Now the republican party is attempting to represent both capital and labor, and how this can be accomplished is yet to be known.
87
You must be talking a hundred years ago because for as far back to the depression, the two party system has benefited the Ruling and the Corporate classes. This went into hyper drive with Reagan and we haven't looked back. The two party system is destroying the middle class just as it destroyed the poor.
1
Aren't we, in the near term, going to have a Reagan like boom if not based on Keynesian principles at least on "pump-priming"? Trump plans huge tax cuts, large defense and infrastructure spending. While Ryan will try to paid for this by cutting Social Security and Medicare will it be enough to limit the large deficit spending? If not, the next president, like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama will be faced with large deficits and probably slowing economic growth as bubbles burst.
3
In his 60 Minutes interview, Trump did not mention infrastructure spending. Me thinks Ryan and McConnell let him know real fast that billions for roads, bridges, terminals etc. was a non starter.
..and each time this happens, the tools the "clean up" Democrat has to fix it get
weaker.
weaker.
The Republicans are going for the coup de grace to end the Democratic Party. They will pass an infrastructure and tax cut bills. People will enjoy and spend those tax cuts just like they did under GWB. The economy will grow and they will have super-majorities in the House and Senate after the 2018 midterms.
Obama is leaving a steady economy for Trump. With targeted infrastructure spending in the areas that shifted from Obama to Trump, Trump will solidify those gains.
Then the conservatives will have carte blanche to shape the country in their own image with voters suppression and gerrymandering all over the country.
The Trump voters do not care if things he says are not true like that healthy babies are aborted at nine months so reality does not matter. If he tells them things are they will believe him.
Even if things go sour under Trump's steps his voters might not believe it.
Obama is leaving a steady economy for Trump. With targeted infrastructure spending in the areas that shifted from Obama to Trump, Trump will solidify those gains.
Then the conservatives will have carte blanche to shape the country in their own image with voters suppression and gerrymandering all over the country.
The Trump voters do not care if things he says are not true like that healthy babies are aborted at nine months so reality does not matter. If he tells them things are they will believe him.
Even if things go sour under Trump's steps his voters might not believe it.
5
As usual - a thoughtful and excellent analysis, Prof. Krugman.
One sad observation from the election is that about half of all voting Americans don't seem to have access (access in the broad term) to thoughtful analyses and facts. We need a constructive debate on how to protect - and provide all Americans with access to - truthful and meaningful information.
One sad observation from the election is that about half of all voting Americans don't seem to have access (access in the broad term) to thoughtful analyses and facts. We need a constructive debate on how to protect - and provide all Americans with access to - truthful and meaningful information.
3
I don’t think Trump will actually impose tariffs. Once he understands that most of the imports are actually being made by American companies, I don’t think will do it. he has already walked back from killing NAFTA and said it “needs to be discussed, not renegotiated.” Trump will probably be better for growth in the short term. The Republican controlled Congress would d never have given Clinton anything. They only care about deficits when a Democrat is in the White House. My biggest overall fear of Trump by far is on the environment. Not only climate change but many other environmental regulations. However, although there are many that will take advantage of rolled back environmental regs, I don’t think the major corporations will. They know that any roll back is very temporary and they have invested tens of millions complying and trading their employees. They won’t just throw that out the window for a short term fix.
3
Trade is an insignificant part of the problem. Tax and labor laws that funnel money to the rich and away from the consumers is the problem. Reagan slashed taxes on the rich and we went into decline. Clinton raised taxes on the rich and we had growth. Bush cut taxes on the rich and we had an economic crisis. Obama raised taxes on the rich and we had job and wage growth.
Bush's tax cuts for the rich took 4 or 5 five years to finally crash the economy. Trump's tax cuts for the rich will likewise take a few years before the economy crashes again.
Bush's tax cuts for the rich took 4 or 5 five years to finally crash the economy. Trump's tax cuts for the rich will likewise take a few years before the economy crashes again.
3
There's a lot of brag and bounce with Trump, but the man is no fool. He understands politics and economics and is also in tune with the mindset of the millions who elevated him to the Presidency. Neither failure nor indifferent performance is an option. So, he will initiate stimulus and jobs programs and if the Republican Congress attempts to stalemate him, they will suffer in the election 2 years hence, not him. Moreover, modestly curtailing illegal immigration is not a bad thing for millions of non-tech American citizens who can fill those jobs at a pay grade of $10 or more an hour. And if the price of oranges goes up? So be it.
2
To be sure Trump's policies, just as Reagan's policies, will hurt America. Unfortunately I agree with Mr. Krugman that it will take awhile and will have long lasting devastating effects. One thing missing when the press dissects this election, is what really motivated Trump voters. I don't think it was the "economy stupid". I have seen reports that indicate Trump supporters have been doing just fine. One report highlighted the bubble in which these people live in that they would state that their community was thriving but their perception throughout the country was that other communities were failing, violence was rampant and ISIS was coming. These people think that government is against them. They feel like their whiteness is working against them and that all government does is take their money and give it to the poor who are lazy and black. This election was really all about race and religion. It may take more than 4 years for it to be about the economy at least for these folks.
8
I'm not an economist, however I've been an investor for 35 years. I've also been a faithful reader of this column and am the better for it. A friend asked me when the election outcome was clear if he should sell all his mutual funds. "Not tomorrow," I replied. The momentum of the Obama years is still in place fundamentally, though psychologically there could be volatility, but then there always is.
Eventually, if there are tax cuts that lead to deficits, mitigated somewhat by infrastructure spending (which now, amazingly, seems to be a good thing...), the picture could change. With changes in trade agreements, inflation could reappear. If mop and brush factories return to the U.S., workers will be paid the minimum wage, yet the cost of goods will rise. Interest rates will rise and stocks will fall. I have no confidence in the tax cut/trickle down theories of the right. History has judged those harshly.
The economy likely will go through a slow unraveling at first and then go downward quickly.
I hope I'm dead wrong.
Eventually, if there are tax cuts that lead to deficits, mitigated somewhat by infrastructure spending (which now, amazingly, seems to be a good thing...), the picture could change. With changes in trade agreements, inflation could reappear. If mop and brush factories return to the U.S., workers will be paid the minimum wage, yet the cost of goods will rise. Interest rates will rise and stocks will fall. I have no confidence in the tax cut/trickle down theories of the right. History has judged those harshly.
The economy likely will go through a slow unraveling at first and then go downward quickly.
I hope I'm dead wrong.
13
In the long run another recession is inevitable regardless of who is President or which party is in power. This is the rule of all economies, managed or otherwise.
In the long run a lot of the older workers will be on Social Security and the younger workers presumably will have been properly educated for the new economy. In the long run our borders will have been better managed and we will have less illegal immigrants in the country. In the long run we may have less war expenses and deaths and maimed young men and women because of a President that is less likely to have such a belligerent attitude in foreign affairs.
In the long run a lot of the older workers will be on Social Security and the younger workers presumably will have been properly educated for the new economy. In the long run our borders will have been better managed and we will have less illegal immigrants in the country. In the long run we may have less war expenses and deaths and maimed young men and women because of a President that is less likely to have such a belligerent attitude in foreign affairs.
Of course the effects of trickle down economics take time to damage the macro economy. Remember those seven fat years (1983-89) of Reaganomics before people realized all that “prosperity” had come at the expense of the national debt, which had tripled?
Trump kept talking about our $20 trillion debt during the campaign, but given his potent mix of tax cuts, infrastructure spending and unencumbered entitlement spending – the national debt will be headed into the stratosphere. Sure he will make America great again for a few years, once again on the backs of our children and grandchildren.
“Trumpnomics” is going to be trickle down on steroids or as Hillary called it “trumped up trickle down,” in which the least benefits will filter down to the “working class.”
Trump kept talking about our $20 trillion debt during the campaign, but given his potent mix of tax cuts, infrastructure spending and unencumbered entitlement spending – the national debt will be headed into the stratosphere. Sure he will make America great again for a few years, once again on the backs of our children and grandchildren.
“Trumpnomics” is going to be trickle down on steroids or as Hillary called it “trumped up trickle down,” in which the least benefits will filter down to the “working class.”
126
I think we can expect tax "reform" with lower taxes on the rich and a cut of the corporate tax rate, probably to something like 20%. These may have some mild stimulatory activity. Trump's proposed infrastructure spending would definitely help the economy as long as we don't build bridges to nowhere. But if Trump cuts government jobs, reduces government wages and fails to raise the minimum wage we would see low to no growth and sooner rather than later.
3
' There is always a disconnect between what is good for society, or even the economy, in the long run, and what is good for economic performance over the next few quarters.'
For that matter, there's a disconnect between the abstractions of economists and the individual lived reality of the average person's life. This is where Prof Krugman so often goes wrong. Old joke: one economist says to the other, 'that's fine in practice, but it won't work in theory'. Prof Krugman deals in macro, but we - and Trump voters - live in micro. Moreover, Prof Krugman doesn't live in our world; I doubt he remembers the last time he had to decide which bill to leave unpaid, if indeed there ever was such a time. For a good examination of the problem, I recommend the new book 'Strangers in Their Own Land.' The author visits Louisiana and talks to people who actually have participated in the pollution of their bayou, with long-term dire ecological and economic consequences. Why? Because 50 or 100 years from now is someday, and they needed work to pay their bills today. It really is that simple. Krugman doesn't understand because such dilemmas lie outside the bubble of academe in which he dwells. I don't endorse the situation in which the bayou-dwelling collaborators in pollution participated; but at least I understand it.
For that matter, there's a disconnect between the abstractions of economists and the individual lived reality of the average person's life. This is where Prof Krugman so often goes wrong. Old joke: one economist says to the other, 'that's fine in practice, but it won't work in theory'. Prof Krugman deals in macro, but we - and Trump voters - live in micro. Moreover, Prof Krugman doesn't live in our world; I doubt he remembers the last time he had to decide which bill to leave unpaid, if indeed there ever was such a time. For a good examination of the problem, I recommend the new book 'Strangers in Their Own Land.' The author visits Louisiana and talks to people who actually have participated in the pollution of their bayou, with long-term dire ecological and economic consequences. Why? Because 50 or 100 years from now is someday, and they needed work to pay their bills today. It really is that simple. Krugman doesn't understand because such dilemmas lie outside the bubble of academe in which he dwells. I don't endorse the situation in which the bayou-dwelling collaborators in pollution participated; but at least I understand it.
1
I saw three routes that could lead to recession from Trump's policies.
1) Trade war. While the net impact on jobs would be neutral, friction in any transition would result in skill-mismatches, labor relocation, and the like. Wouldn't that have an impact on aggregate demand with a sufficient shock?
2) Budget cuts. While Trump and Ryan aren't on the same page on everything, cuts in social programs would seem obvious common ground. Those types of programs supposedly have the strongest impacts on aggregate demand.
3) Pressure on the Fed to raise rates. It's unclear whether the hostility toward the Fed about low interest rates was a sham. Past GOP Presidents have usually seen the pragmatic side of loose money, but the current regime is so bubbled that they really might think higher interest rates and tighter money would be a good thing. The Fed is a creature of Federal Law, and they now control all three branches.
1) Trade war. While the net impact on jobs would be neutral, friction in any transition would result in skill-mismatches, labor relocation, and the like. Wouldn't that have an impact on aggregate demand with a sufficient shock?
2) Budget cuts. While Trump and Ryan aren't on the same page on everything, cuts in social programs would seem obvious common ground. Those types of programs supposedly have the strongest impacts on aggregate demand.
3) Pressure on the Fed to raise rates. It's unclear whether the hostility toward the Fed about low interest rates was a sham. Past GOP Presidents have usually seen the pragmatic side of loose money, but the current regime is so bubbled that they really might think higher interest rates and tighter money would be a good thing. The Fed is a creature of Federal Law, and they now control all three branches.
2
We're making a mistake not to see this new administration for what it is - it is the most complete departure from the norms of our Republic that we have ever seen. There is no longer any need for truth - that has been proven throughout a campaign that allowed candidate Trump to lie, just outright lie, and not be penalized at all. Tax records - unreleased; fraud charges - unaddressed; sexual misconduct and misogyny - dismissed with a joke; poor record in business - lie. All wrapped up in "trust me" "believe me". And now, with control over the Congress, with pending control over the Supreme Court, we have a philosophy that will be unchecked by any of our customary democratic institutions. "I'll drain the swamp" - followed by installing the most entrenched insiders, the most vehement partisans, the rich and the powerful, rather than the best and the brightest. Make no mistake, this is how democracy dies - how dictatorships are born. The systems of democracy that we've taken for granted are fragile and have relied upon the good will of office holders - on their commitment to a continued Republic. That is gone - Mr. Trump and his followers haven't the slightest actual respect for the will of the people, or the tenets of our Constitution. Dictators do not come bearing messages of power - they come with smiles, wrapped in flags, singing hymns, making promises. Then their enforcers come in the night - and the night will never end.
16
I was in banking for fifteen years. I then worked for the FDIC from 1986 - 2006. My first training in DC was in December 1986 when Reagan was celebrating Christmas at the White House hosting a party for the Boys and Girls Club of America.
I have long ago lost count of the number of bank closings that I worked nationwide as an investigator during the Reagan/Bush years. Bank failures were not a topic during this presidential election. People have forgotten or do not care how bad it really was for many long years. FDIC insurance was limited to $100,000. The current FDIC insurance fund that provides depositor protection nationwide is less than the net worth of one Walton.
Mr. Krugman please write about historical bank failures during Republican rule and how they might occur again with brutal results during the next four years.
Explain once again how the Federal Reserve is out of some of its ammunition to handle any significant financial downturn. Discuss Europe's growing basket case of bank problems. Highlight the failing Deutsche Bank's market in over seventy countries including the US. Continue to share and expand your perfect knowledge with reader / depositors and hopefully with the FDIC's plenary powers we will somehow survive a brutal economic devastation. A type of cancerous financial devastation only President Trump could produce. I cannot see how we possibly will.
I have long ago lost count of the number of bank closings that I worked nationwide as an investigator during the Reagan/Bush years. Bank failures were not a topic during this presidential election. People have forgotten or do not care how bad it really was for many long years. FDIC insurance was limited to $100,000. The current FDIC insurance fund that provides depositor protection nationwide is less than the net worth of one Walton.
Mr. Krugman please write about historical bank failures during Republican rule and how they might occur again with brutal results during the next four years.
Explain once again how the Federal Reserve is out of some of its ammunition to handle any significant financial downturn. Discuss Europe's growing basket case of bank problems. Highlight the failing Deutsche Bank's market in over seventy countries including the US. Continue to share and expand your perfect knowledge with reader / depositors and hopefully with the FDIC's plenary powers we will somehow survive a brutal economic devastation. A type of cancerous financial devastation only President Trump could produce. I cannot see how we possibly will.
6
Dr. Krugman and other international trading advocates always say that in the long run using tariffs will hurt the US worker. The crux of the explanation is always that by having us produce everything in the USA (which sounds good) with more jobs created to do so, it will also hurt us because we cannot produce everything efficiently (i.e. cheaper goods from China helps the USA consumer with cheaper goods) and overall the common man's wealth situation. However, I have never heard a discussion on what limited international trade that allows us to buy better cheaper goods from abroad but allows trade deficits to become only so large (limits the percentage of deficits with partners like China)would result in? Wouldn't this accomplish our efficiency issue while avoiding the decimation of entire manufacturing industries in the USA such as textiles and consumer electronics? Not being a trained economist (other than by Osmosis and a few college courses) I am not saying this is the answer but does it not address the issue of huge deficits and job loss and efficiency of production? Love to hear Dr. Krugman comment on that sometime.
1
The results of this fiasco are obvious, and destructive.
How Trump got to the White House cannot be erased. We know what he said, and how he said it.
How Trump got to the White House cannot be erased. We know what he said, and how he said it.
4
I don't understand how you can say the short-term effect of tariffs will be "a wash" for jobs - "we'll export less, but we'll also import less." Is there strong data to support this? I would think that both importing less and exporting less would reduce jobs, as there is no short-term capacity to make up for many imports with domestic production. And fewer imports would impact jobs in industries related to those imports, whether services or finished products. I see tariffs as having a big negative job impact in the short term.
2
It's obvious to me at least that we're now in The Long Emergency that was predicted by American novelist and futurist H.J. Kunstler. A period of social upheaval, strife, and chaos as the era of "never ending" growth comes to an end and humanity struggles to adjust to it. It's going to be a turbulent century.
7
I am concerned about the assumption that infrastructure spending will bring the creation of many jobs. Has anyone looked at this? I watched a new bridge built across the upper Hudson and the old one removed. I never saw more than six men and two women working on the project, plus a number of drivers brought in materials and someone manufactured the beams and concrete that were used. I was surprised at how few people were needed for this project. How many are working on the Tappan Zee? Such jobs are short term, also.
4
Tax policy that favors the rich will only take more and more money out of the functional economy. The wealthy will want to park their excess wealth somewhere with a return. This is how bubbles are formed and eventually burst. Just one more danger of a Trump presidency.
5
The economy won't be disrupted in the short term because doing do would harm the very people Trump is proposing to help. How would the Walton family owners of Walmart react if a 45% tariff was placed on Chinese goods? Surely the lobbyists must be mobilized already. Not many customers would be buying Walmart goods if they are 45% more expensive. Large tariff increases are just a small example of the extremist policies being discussed in among Trumps new supporters - those politicians who were so much against him before he was elected - and now see the genius of this proposals.
2
Health care repealed or remade to be ineffective.
Iran rebuffed, turns to making nukes again.
North Korea threatened, decides to attack the South.
Millions of people deported by a "purification force".
The Supreme Court politicized for generations to come.
Our political system stolen, irretrievably.
The end of the fight against global warming.
Dr. Krugman, it's not "the economy, stupid". It's an existential struggle for the American dream and the survival of civilization as we would like to know it.
Iran rebuffed, turns to making nukes again.
North Korea threatened, decides to attack the South.
Millions of people deported by a "purification force".
The Supreme Court politicized for generations to come.
Our political system stolen, irretrievably.
The end of the fight against global warming.
Dr. Krugman, it's not "the economy, stupid". It's an existential struggle for the American dream and the survival of civilization as we would like to know it.
5
I'm going to be a bit contrarian here, and say that I think it is not possible to predict what Trump will do because Trump is not a dyed-in-the-wool, orthodox member of the GOP. Frankly, I'd be more frightened of a President Pence or a President Ryan. Let me explain.
Trump seems to be driven by ego and insecurity. Now that he has won, I ask myself what I believe he most fears? I think it would be that he is a one-term president who leaves office to ridicule and is forevermore regarded as a loser. I don't know that President Trump (God, I hate writing that!) will toe the typical GOP line and do the typical GOP stuff.
If Trump really intends to keep his campaign promises, quite a few of them will require him to act more like an FDR-style Democrat than a modern Republican. Example: bring back good-paying manufacturing jobs to those who lost them. Example: forgive massive amounts of student debt. Example: keep a number of parts of Obamacare that he has already stated he will keep. When have modern Republicans cared about these issues? Clue - never.
Trump is clearly in over his head and knows it. He's making some staff choices that I regard as horrible, and I don't want any of his SCOTUS choices to be put on the court. I'm already urging my federal representatives to oppose anyone he puts forward because he lost the popular vote.
So, for now I will wait and see and hope. What else can I do?
Trump seems to be driven by ego and insecurity. Now that he has won, I ask myself what I believe he most fears? I think it would be that he is a one-term president who leaves office to ridicule and is forevermore regarded as a loser. I don't know that President Trump (God, I hate writing that!) will toe the typical GOP line and do the typical GOP stuff.
If Trump really intends to keep his campaign promises, quite a few of them will require him to act more like an FDR-style Democrat than a modern Republican. Example: bring back good-paying manufacturing jobs to those who lost them. Example: forgive massive amounts of student debt. Example: keep a number of parts of Obamacare that he has already stated he will keep. When have modern Republicans cared about these issues? Clue - never.
Trump is clearly in over his head and knows it. He's making some staff choices that I regard as horrible, and I don't want any of his SCOTUS choices to be put on the court. I'm already urging my federal representatives to oppose anyone he puts forward because he lost the popular vote.
So, for now I will wait and see and hope. What else can I do?
7
Americas economy and place in the world has been a carefully orchestrated and nuanced achievement. It is imperfect but we are the envy of most of the world.
Handing the government over to Trump and his minions is akin to placing a 7 year old at the helm of a 747. He may get it off the ground with some help from his co pilot, but you need a Sully Sullenberger in case of the unexpected.
And that is the problem with Trump and our economic future. He will be tested but without the critical thinking skills he so obviously lacks, the odds favor a real disaster ahead. Think 9/11, Cuban Missle Crisis. Does anyone really think he has the chops to act appropriately and as important, maintain confidence in Washington and throughout the world?
We have put a renegade in office. He comes with a lot of baggage and none of it praiseworthy or confidence building.
Handing the government over to Trump and his minions is akin to placing a 7 year old at the helm of a 747. He may get it off the ground with some help from his co pilot, but you need a Sully Sullenberger in case of the unexpected.
And that is the problem with Trump and our economic future. He will be tested but without the critical thinking skills he so obviously lacks, the odds favor a real disaster ahead. Think 9/11, Cuban Missle Crisis. Does anyone really think he has the chops to act appropriately and as important, maintain confidence in Washington and throughout the world?
We have put a renegade in office. He comes with a lot of baggage and none of it praiseworthy or confidence building.
7
Yes, one of many bitter ironies of this electoral tragedy is that just as wage growth is rising in a palpable way on the back of, despite the GOP obstruction, both Obama's and the Fed's policies, the benefits will occur in the first 18-24 months of Trump.
A very grave danger as a result of this serendipitous growth could be that people will more readily ignore the steady erosion of civil and human rights that will take place in the meantime.
If people are "feeling better" financially, they might be less prone to care if, say, a few journalists are jailed or Rudy's "law and order" troops storm those "terrible, horrible" inner cities.
Semper vigilis!
A very grave danger as a result of this serendipitous growth could be that people will more readily ignore the steady erosion of civil and human rights that will take place in the meantime.
If people are "feeling better" financially, they might be less prone to care if, say, a few journalists are jailed or Rudy's "law and order" troops storm those "terrible, horrible" inner cities.
Semper vigilis!
7
This writer voted for Hillary and Bill in all elections internal or external. However, Hillary has been demonized, by minor faults, for many years now. Even I had preferred another candidate without her baggage. Unfortunately, when there is trouble people are not concerned in establishing truth. They just want to get rid of it. NO other candidate was available, Bernie was not going to make it, communist and all; therefore, we went to war with what we had and lost.
On another issue, where are the progressives who claim that the country is steadily becoming more leftist by the day? Even Rima did not post for a while, remorse anybody?
Regards
On another issue, where are the progressives who claim that the country is steadily becoming more leftist by the day? Even Rima did not post for a while, remorse anybody?
Regards
2
I don't know how the markets will react if Trump goes on trial for the 34 charges against him. The Trump University class action suit stands out, if convicted Trump would be a felon. He has recently requested to have this legal action postponed until after he is sworn in as President. I guess if there was a possibility of being convicted, this would prevent him from taking office; If the trial takes place after he is in office and if then convicted, impeachment proceedings would begin? --- I think this needs to be cleared up NOW, for the sake of the economy and the nation.
14
If Republicans respond to the overdue downturn in the business cycle with austerity and budget balancing they will precipitate another great recession. They managed to take only a few months to do that the last time they had such a commanding position in 1929. The shaped charge that blew the hole in the "blue wall" was the decrease in farm economies in those states. At the same time taxes on those economies stayed the same or even went up. No wonder they turned out and voted for what they perceived as change.
1
There is one thing you can count on with Donald Trump: he is headed to Washington, DC, to be outrageous. It would take an insane person to wallow through his various statements during the campaign and figure out which ones he meant, but his promise to his supporters amounts to this: violate all the known norms, violate international law and the Geneva Conventions, give illegal orders to generals and fire them if they don't obey, use the Justice Department as an active political arm of the presidency, etc. (The list goes on and on.)
Suppose, then, that Trump is indeed as he has presented himself, outrageous. Suppose this part is, indeed, what he meant and what a large portion of his voters loved about him. How's the economy then?
Trump threatens an international financial collapse and the potential for new wars breaking out around the world. Yes, we've all calmed down since last Tuesday night, haven't we? Here is why the alarm bells are still going off for me: the international financial system and geo-political stability both ride on the belief that they will continue, that certain known forces are in play and, when the chips are down (2008) smart people know how to keep us from going off a cliff. When the belief disappears, then the system starts to crack and can fall. When it starts to fall, nothing can hold it up. This is the ultimate threat of putting a rank amateur in the most powerful job in the world.
Suppose, then, that Trump is indeed as he has presented himself, outrageous. Suppose this part is, indeed, what he meant and what a large portion of his voters loved about him. How's the economy then?
Trump threatens an international financial collapse and the potential for new wars breaking out around the world. Yes, we've all calmed down since last Tuesday night, haven't we? Here is why the alarm bells are still going off for me: the international financial system and geo-political stability both ride on the belief that they will continue, that certain known forces are in play and, when the chips are down (2008) smart people know how to keep us from going off a cliff. When the belief disappears, then the system starts to crack and can fall. When it starts to fall, nothing can hold it up. This is the ultimate threat of putting a rank amateur in the most powerful job in the world.
5
It was predicted that Trump's candidacy would wreck the Republican Party, but in the wake of his surprising victory, it's the Democratic Party that is a shambles, with Hillary Clinton, defeated at the polls, while its most popular figure, Barak Obama about to retire, the Vice President in eclipse, and Bernie Sanders in the twilight of his years. The Democrats' most viable leader is now Elizabeth Warren, and we'll see if she has the stuff to become the next presidential candidate. The centrism of Clinton has been repudiated - as much by the intransigence of a Republican Congress as by the voters, who actually gave Clinton more votes than Trump, and populism is the order of the day. Since Trump's right-wing version is a dead-end, the left-wing populist version of Sanders and Warren is the most viable alternative, and it can be a winner at the polls. But first the Democrats must organize around some version of the progressive agenda outlined in the party's 2016 platform, and we must start the arduous process of taking back state governments, in order to correct the re-districting that occurred after the last census. A lot of grass-roots work lies ahead, to energize those who stayed away from the recent election, and to move the party away from Clintonism, and toward a truly left-populist agenda that Hillary could never credibly advocate. Rather than compromise with Trump, Democrats should be as intransigent with him as Republicans were with Obama.
7
There are a bunch of 40 something Dem politicians who probably would have beaten Hillary in a fair and open primary and had a chance against Trump just as Bernie did - who would have beaten him too in many pollsters mind.
1
With unemployment under 5%, I disagree that this is a time for greatly expanded deficits. Increased infrastructure spending, yes, but funded responsibly. Even with a Republican Congress, I’m hopeful the ultimate tax reform will be more balanced than so far proposed. Those infrastructure projects, along with apprenticeship programs, could make a dent in underemployment. Tax reform should unleash the animal spirits.
On many aspects of environmental policy we have social consensus - ie we no longer need to overly regulate. However, the biggest human impact on the environment is population growth, and we’re a long way from addressing that.
On many aspects of environmental policy we have social consensus - ie we no longer need to overly regulate. However, the biggest human impact on the environment is population growth, and we’re a long way from addressing that.
2
"Yes, we’ll export less, but we’ll also import less, and the overall effect on jobs will be more or less a wash."
Statements like these are why the Democrats lost. Whose jobs are lost? I'd venture to guess there is not even a model that demonstrates this is true. In an underperforming economy, with underemployment and a gap in workforce participation, and low inflation, it's not a given higher prices for some items have a macro effect of depressing employment. This would be especially true under a regime of fiscal stimulus. It's also common sense.
Also saying one fears for long term consequences of policy and suspect levels of competence, is meaningless. First, Bush set the bar so low, (terror attack, war of choice that cost at least tens of thousands of lives, and destabilizes the west, financial meltdown at least partly owing to administration policy, rising debt instead of lower by surplus).
Secondly, Obama's center right policy, and policy of appeasement with the Republicans never really let the economy recover either.
Statements like these are why the Democrats lost. Whose jobs are lost? I'd venture to guess there is not even a model that demonstrates this is true. In an underperforming economy, with underemployment and a gap in workforce participation, and low inflation, it's not a given higher prices for some items have a macro effect of depressing employment. This would be especially true under a regime of fiscal stimulus. It's also common sense.
Also saying one fears for long term consequences of policy and suspect levels of competence, is meaningless. First, Bush set the bar so low, (terror attack, war of choice that cost at least tens of thousands of lives, and destabilizes the west, financial meltdown at least partly owing to administration policy, rising debt instead of lower by surplus).
Secondly, Obama's center right policy, and policy of appeasement with the Republicans never really let the economy recover either.
28
The same political forces that would pass an accidental and inefficient stimulus through a large reduction in taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations, may also succeed in passing that other favored, but most troubling proposal, a Balanced Budget Amendment. And that is how your severe recession could be brought about.
8
D. Duprass,
A Balanced Budget Amendment would have only one effect. We would switch, in one year flat, to above the line/below the line bookkeeping. Expenditures in one place. Investments, and probably a whole lot of funny-ha-ha-"investments," in the other.
You could have two different schools to argue over it, taking opposing positions on which is over and which is under. There is no doubt that the outcome would balance the budget. All you have to do is capitalize investments, if you're sensible, or anything you care to imagine if you're the typical Republican bookkeeper.
The better case, the first, might have salutary effects. We would make better analyses of what we were doing. The worse case, the latter, could easily slip into wild delusion, crazy new rhetorics, and a good deal of bureaucratic fiddle-faddle. I.e. it would be essentially what we have right now.
-dlj.
A Balanced Budget Amendment would have only one effect. We would switch, in one year flat, to above the line/below the line bookkeeping. Expenditures in one place. Investments, and probably a whole lot of funny-ha-ha-"investments," in the other.
You could have two different schools to argue over it, taking opposing positions on which is over and which is under. There is no doubt that the outcome would balance the budget. All you have to do is capitalize investments, if you're sensible, or anything you care to imagine if you're the typical Republican bookkeeper.
The better case, the first, might have salutary effects. We would make better analyses of what we were doing. The worse case, the latter, could easily slip into wild delusion, crazy new rhetorics, and a good deal of bureaucratic fiddle-faddle. I.e. it would be essentially what we have right now.
-dlj.
Regarding the comment about protectionism, trade wars and the poor nations (world economy) getting poorer.... I see little wrong with a degree of protectionism. We have to remember that as a nation we can be quite self sufficient.
The poor nations of the world are poor, not for lack of others trying to help them but because they are still tribal, much like what is going on in the middle east right now. The fault with what we have done for them is in raping their assets and installing and or supporting dictators, mostly for our benefit. But nonetheless, they are still tribe oriented and have little interest in dealing with their neighbors, let alone consolidating governments for the common good.
My fear with the Republican ideas is the return to power of the individual States and the tribalistic ideas that come with a States' Right mentality. It's all about us and to the devil with the rest of the country.... we know what's best for us.
The poor nations of the world are poor, not for lack of others trying to help them but because they are still tribal, much like what is going on in the middle east right now. The fault with what we have done for them is in raping their assets and installing and or supporting dictators, mostly for our benefit. But nonetheless, they are still tribe oriented and have little interest in dealing with their neighbors, let alone consolidating governments for the common good.
My fear with the Republican ideas is the return to power of the individual States and the tribalistic ideas that come with a States' Right mentality. It's all about us and to the devil with the rest of the country.... we know what's best for us.
1
I like the reasoning of the Professor, this time very well balanced.
You don´t need to have a degree in Economics to realize that you cannot spend what you don´t have, that increased expenditures in defense, an activity with no multiplier economic impact does not go well with tax cuts.
That leaving 20 million people without medical services is not a very good stimulus and that deporting people massively will probably cause some disruptions.
Then we have the curtailing of the new energy industries that were set to provide the economy with million of jobs, plus a cleaning of the environment.
We can enjoy the spending spree but then we will all have to pay the piper and probably very soon.
You don´t need to have a degree in Economics to realize that you cannot spend what you don´t have, that increased expenditures in defense, an activity with no multiplier economic impact does not go well with tax cuts.
That leaving 20 million people without medical services is not a very good stimulus and that deporting people massively will probably cause some disruptions.
Then we have the curtailing of the new energy industries that were set to provide the economy with million of jobs, plus a cleaning of the environment.
We can enjoy the spending spree but then we will all have to pay the piper and probably very soon.
2
It is incorrect to say that increasing expenditures in defense would have no multiplier effect. Dollars spent in the US buying weapons, supplies and paying military personnel find their way into local economies. Remember the 1990s? Military base closures contributed to a recession which was most severe in the regions and states which had a large number of bases closed or in which the shuttered base was the main economic driver of the area.
"You don´t need to have a degree in Economics to realize that you cannot spend what you don´t have"
No but with the instance that increased debt is a good thing, many with an advanced degree in Economics believe that one CAN spend what one does not have.
No but with the instance that increased debt is a good thing, many with an advanced degree in Economics believe that one CAN spend what one does not have.
If there were no changes to the status quo in laws affecting taxation, or tax rates, then regardless of which candidate won the presidency, the odds that the economy would experience a recession in the next 4 years are pretty good anyway. Periods of economic growth never last forever.
2
When I look back on history to say Nixon ford Reagan and bush number two, they had a disastrous impact on economics, environment and the rights of those who were not members of the republican country club set. Only bush number one was different and most likely a closet democrat. As of this morning the dollar has been gaining Since the election. American exports will cost more as a result. Most of my friends who voted for trump did it on hope. Hope that something will change for the better. I agree with mr krugman and think they will get worse. Irreversible consequences are the likely outcome for most Americans and the world. Trump talks big. And has a history of producing only for himself.
4
I am more concerned about the effect of Paul Ryan's policies (elimination of Medicare, privatization of Social Security) on the economy in the near-term than I am about Trump's (protectionism, deficit spending). Trump's protectionist policies are likely to run into resistance in Congress while Ryan's entitlement reform can probably be packaged with something Trump wants to get his signature.
8
Couldn't dramatic changes in trade policy have immediate and highly disruptive effects on supply chains, and thus the economy as a whole? I would think that, in the extreme case, a total trade embargo on China would have dramatic and immediate effects on our economy and the world economy. And I'm assuming that scaling that back to the types of things Trump has proposed could result in less dramatic but nevertheless immediate adverse effects on the economy. Am I missing something?
2
One issue that needs addressing is trade and the potential impacts of Trump's trade policy. The real tragedy of the Bernie Sanders candidacy is that he joined Trump in demagoguing this issue, making a rational discussion of it impossible in the general election. No one brought up the fact that if tariffs on China actually bring back American jobs, those cheap prices at WalMart would disappear. Maybe that's a good thing. But voters never had to confront that issue because trade was BAD. Full stop. The fact is that is, as is well known, the manufacturing base has disappeared for a lot of reasons, with automation a main factor. Trade is certainly another. It was impossible to have that discussion during the campaign. Maybe we can now.
5
What I see as a major problem, and which neither major party candidate addressed adequately, is the increasing size of corporations, and not just financial institutions, and the inclination of government officials of both parties to buy into the notion that what's good for these mega-corporations is good for the country. These corporations, which are not in any way democratic, are becoming more powerful than government itself. What is especially scary, and what I have not heard Donald Trump mention, is the Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions in NAFTA and the TPP, which basically place corporate profits ahead of people's right to govern themselves.
1
In other words: fascism.
The following suggestion should be made to Mr Trump.
Delay your actions on taxes.
Initiate and spend heavy on real infrastructure improvement via public spending.
At the end of the day, all sides will be served.
General wealth and jobs will increase via infrastructure spending.
And the net worth (Total National Assets) of the country will increase, thereby supporting the deficit spending and possibly some level of tax cuts.
Delay your actions on taxes.
Initiate and spend heavy on real infrastructure improvement via public spending.
At the end of the day, all sides will be served.
General wealth and jobs will increase via infrastructure spending.
And the net worth (Total National Assets) of the country will increase, thereby supporting the deficit spending and possibly some level of tax cuts.
No matter which economic policies Trump adapts, I consider him to be erratic, unhinged and paranoid, and so do not have the least confidence he will make sensible decisions or lead a stable team of advisors.
I think we are in for a wild ride, and so am going to cut my personal spending, postpone major purchases, tighten up investments, and hunker down financially for the near future. Wonder if others will do the same--or if all those Trump supporters will go wild with consumer confidence and partisan exuberance this holiday season.
I think we are in for a wild ride, and so am going to cut my personal spending, postpone major purchases, tighten up investments, and hunker down financially for the near future. Wonder if others will do the same--or if all those Trump supporters will go wild with consumer confidence and partisan exuberance this holiday season.
4
And this type of financial behavior brings on recession without government involvement. A conscious decision to slow the economy.
Free trade has dramatically lowered costs of consumer goods. Hence, the explosion of discount retailers and big-box stores to serve the masses. Lower income families have benefited the most from this trend.
Oh, sure, protectionism will "bring back the jobs." Hah, not going to happen! But it will definitely raise the costs of consumer goods, making the Trumpistas even more angry. Of course, the opposition party will be blamed for their personal economic predicaments.
Can never quite understand why some people continually vote against their best interests. Can the lies be that convincing?
Oh, sure, protectionism will "bring back the jobs." Hah, not going to happen! But it will definitely raise the costs of consumer goods, making the Trumpistas even more angry. Of course, the opposition party will be blamed for their personal economic predicaments.
Can never quite understand why some people continually vote against their best interests. Can the lies be that convincing?
6
The silver lining. No more GOP "obstruction and NO!"
It is remarkable how quickly we forgot the GOP Obstruction as Obama inherited
2 failed elective wars (un)paid for by tax cuts (mostly) for the rich AND the Second Great Depression.
Obama, blocked in Congress by Filibuster et al, used Presidential powers to convert Depression into recession- only to be accused of assuming dictatorial powers. Yes, the country is still crawling out of depression- ahead of schedule- thanks to Obama. Seems like Trump- whatever his character faults- does understand we need to grow the economy while investing repair for failing infrastruction- long delayed by investment in Middle East wars.
Some light in the tunnel, maybe.
It is remarkable how quickly we forgot the GOP Obstruction as Obama inherited
2 failed elective wars (un)paid for by tax cuts (mostly) for the rich AND the Second Great Depression.
Obama, blocked in Congress by Filibuster et al, used Presidential powers to convert Depression into recession- only to be accused of assuming dictatorial powers. Yes, the country is still crawling out of depression- ahead of schedule- thanks to Obama. Seems like Trump- whatever his character faults- does understand we need to grow the economy while investing repair for failing infrastruction- long delayed by investment in Middle East wars.
Some light in the tunnel, maybe.
1
As Allen Butler says in these comments, corporations do not exist to benefit society. That is the basic flaw in the economy and the source of joblessness. Of course, corporations SHOULD exist to provide useful goods and needed services at a reasonable return, but they don't. The other problem is that corporations are narrowly focused, and cannot handle large multifaceted problems. So jobs essential to society are left to volunteers or are poorly paid or, like politics, are corrupted to serve narrow aims.
Corporations as presently constituted are greedy self-serving myopic institutions. So far, only government regulation has reigned them in at all. It's time for corporations to become citizens, to support solutions, not to subvert them for profit.
Corporations as presently constituted are greedy self-serving myopic institutions. So far, only government regulation has reigned them in at all. It's time for corporations to become citizens, to support solutions, not to subvert them for profit.
8
What many don't realize is that the business gospel of the corporation as existing only to maximize return for shareholders is a relatively new development in economics. It dates primarily to (surprise!) the Reagan era, when it started to crop up in MBA curricula. You will not find it in Adam Smith; in fact, Smith, whose other principal work is 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments', would be stunned and shocked. So, I expect, would Friedrich Hayek. Even Milton Friedman might raise an eyebrow. And as recently as 1990, the Business Roundtable identified a range of stakeholders as properly involved in a corporation's decisions - not just shareholders or even management, but all employees, customers, and the greater good of society. (Cited in Ehrenreich, Nickeled and Dimed)
2
Since The Great Depression and WW II the United States has suffered eleven recessions and the first financial collapse since October of 1929 in the administration of Herbert Hoover. The Truman administration suffered an 11 month recession in 1948-49 and the Carter administration had the shortest recession, six months, of all of them in 1980.
Nine of the eleven recessions have occurred under Republican presidents. The worst were the 1973-75 Nixon recession that featured deep recession accompanied by accelerating inflation which is really hard to do. Indeed, it had never been done before, and, fortunately, not since.
The Reagan 1981-82 was a deeper recession than the Nixon recession.
The Bush I 1990-91 recession featured a jobless recovery.
The first Bush I-Cheney administration recession in 2001-02 featured a job loss recovery. The second Bush II-Cheney recession started in December of 2007 as scored by the National Bureau of Economic Research. The economy began to lose 200,000 jobs per month. This continued for 3 conservative quarters until Lehman Bros. filed for bankruptcy on September 15, 2008 and the entire financial system collapsed for the first time since Hoover. The economy started losing 700,000 jobs per month. In all 8.7 million jobs were lost all of which had a severe adverse effect of the economy.
When is the last Republican to complete his presidency without one or more recessions or depressions be they Great or Less Great?
Nine of the eleven recessions have occurred under Republican presidents. The worst were the 1973-75 Nixon recession that featured deep recession accompanied by accelerating inflation which is really hard to do. Indeed, it had never been done before, and, fortunately, not since.
The Reagan 1981-82 was a deeper recession than the Nixon recession.
The Bush I 1990-91 recession featured a jobless recovery.
The first Bush I-Cheney administration recession in 2001-02 featured a job loss recovery. The second Bush II-Cheney recession started in December of 2007 as scored by the National Bureau of Economic Research. The economy began to lose 200,000 jobs per month. This continued for 3 conservative quarters until Lehman Bros. filed for bankruptcy on September 15, 2008 and the entire financial system collapsed for the first time since Hoover. The economy started losing 700,000 jobs per month. In all 8.7 million jobs were lost all of which had a severe adverse effect of the economy.
When is the last Republican to complete his presidency without one or more recessions or depressions be they Great or Less Great?
11
Will Trump's victor finally get you to talk about neoliberalism, Professor Krugman? You know, the market-obsessed approached to economics and society that, in conjunction with globalism, has hollowed out the middle classes across the West? Why won't you mention it? Why won't you acknowledge what a disaster it has been?
Why won't you ever say that while both parties espouse it, the Republicans at least talk in populist terms, thereby seducing people to believe they are going to follow policies that work (they never do), while the Democrats, like you, speak in technocratic terms ("a moderate rise in inflation," "entitlements," etc.) that sound like you're trying to get something over on everyone, even though, as we've seen under Obama, Democrats pick up the pieces again and again and set the economy on a decent course?
PLEASE: discuss neoliberalism and why it's killing this country's middle class. People need to hear why it's bad and why Trump, like W Bush, will double down on it. Those tax cuts, etc., look good, but once everything is privatized and jobs are again outsourced, etc., people will still not know what hit them!
Why won't you ever say that while both parties espouse it, the Republicans at least talk in populist terms, thereby seducing people to believe they are going to follow policies that work (they never do), while the Democrats, like you, speak in technocratic terms ("a moderate rise in inflation," "entitlements," etc.) that sound like you're trying to get something over on everyone, even though, as we've seen under Obama, Democrats pick up the pieces again and again and set the economy on a decent course?
PLEASE: discuss neoliberalism and why it's killing this country's middle class. People need to hear why it's bad and why Trump, like W Bush, will double down on it. Those tax cuts, etc., look good, but once everything is privatized and jobs are again outsourced, etc., people will still not know what hit them!
7
No, Virginia, Trump's taxation plan is not excellent, and he is not Santa Claus despite his grandiose claims. As a retired CPA/MBA with economics training, a long memory and many successful clients along with some who failed, I suggest that the one tool he has not invoked that really did work is the Investment Tax Credit. The trickle down, supply side, general tax cuts to the affluent did not deliver twice before and will not this time.
I generally enjoy these columns, but this is just silly. I disagree with Trump but I also know that on many policy issues, especially economics, nobody has all the answers and the correct answer is somewhere between Krugman and whoever Trump puts in charge of economic policy. And "good things will happen to bad people" suggests what? That the people who supported Trump are bad people? Or that the people he appoints to high office will be bad people?
1
So you understand reality - that is things as they are not as you wish .
Global recession is coming? Really? Thanks to people like Krugman, middle America is already in a recession. Has Krugman not noticed the closed factories in Upstate New York?? Stop listening to the elites people! Let's give Trump a chance....
4
Who in god's name are the elites? People with educations? Expertise? Experience? Guess what? THEY are people too. They pay bills. Send children to college. Buy homes. To dismiss "the elites" is nonsense and worse, it serves to tarnish your opinions. Say what you mean. There are many who are suffering and they want help. Help, thus far, has not been forthcoming. So why not vote in a "non-elilte?" HAHAHAHA. Trump is the elite of the elite, sucker! And if he truly were NOT....well, put it this way. Tell me one other circumstance in your life when you choose the untrained over the trained. Need surgery? Why not hire Paul down the street who is a really creative guy and seems to feel your pain. Need major engine work on your car? Sure, hire Joe...not a mechanic but hey he is a real hard worker and has got lots of really cool looking tools. NO - you hire experts because expertise matters. Well, training and expertise matters in governing too.
2
Have you heard of a plan how to achieve this?
Congratulations professor k on the new administration adopting one of your prescriptions for faster economic growth-a large infrastructure program funded by low cost debt. Republican deficit scolds will be reduced to sputtering fools, mumbling away in the corner, while Paul Ryan puts on a brave face and supports the Trump plan.
The only way this doesn't occur is if President Obama hails it as an innovative and bold plan that he fully supports. At that point the knee jerk Republican reaction to oppose anything Obama supports will overwhelm all rational thinking on their part. Deficits only matter when a Democrat is in the White House.
The only way this doesn't occur is if President Obama hails it as an innovative and bold plan that he fully supports. At that point the knee jerk Republican reaction to oppose anything Obama supports will overwhelm all rational thinking on their part. Deficits only matter when a Democrat is in the White House.
11
The Trump plan is for a large scale PRIVATE infrastructure investment assisted by tax incentives. To quote directly from his "hundred day action plan":
"American Energy & Infrastructure Act.
"Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral."
Of course he most likely depends on voodoo economics for that accounting. Since he also proposes to tax business income only once at 15%, tax deductions will become a much smaller incentive than they currently are.
"American Energy & Infrastructure Act.
"Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral."
Of course he most likely depends on voodoo economics for that accounting. Since he also proposes to tax business income only once at 15%, tax deductions will become a much smaller incentive than they currently are.
Because Krugman has stated repeated during the Obama years that deficits don't matter, he cannot state now that Trump's tax cut for the wealthy is a bad idea because it will unnecessarily add trillions to the debt.
Similarly, as Obama has ignored the constitutional restraints on the presidency, especially regarding military endeavors, so Trump is now open to use presidential powers with abandon.
One should never assume that one's allies will be in power forever.
Similarly, as Obama has ignored the constitutional restraints on the presidency, especially regarding military endeavors, so Trump is now open to use presidential powers with abandon.
One should never assume that one's allies will be in power forever.
2
Deficit spending on multiplier issues and long term projects (i.e. free education) is very different from lowering the tax base so the 0.1% create more bubbles.
The economy is probably the least of our worries. The mechanism of a responsive, up to date thinking is about to be jettisoned into deep dark space. I fully expect that the next 18 months will see a fairly good economy. After all, the American people along with a lonely, outcast President managed to bring sanity back to fiscal thinking and once President Obama had enough of the debt ceilings and the game of chicken that accompanied it, "We the People" found our own way: without any Republicans in Congress.
So now with only themselves to take the blame, I suspect many of Mr. Obama's ideas will finally get a tryout. Infrastructure rebuilding will satisfy a large highschool educated construction worker component of the workforce. But other than that the wheels come off the airplane, just after takeoff. It's going to be a rough landing for those without a parachute.
So now with only themselves to take the blame, I suspect many of Mr. Obama's ideas will finally get a tryout. Infrastructure rebuilding will satisfy a large highschool educated construction worker component of the workforce. But other than that the wheels come off the airplane, just after takeoff. It's going to be a rough landing for those without a parachute.
3
You are not "the Left", Paul.
You fought the progressive candidate in this race tooth and nail with dishonest arguments, Bernie exposed you as a faux progressive: all of a sudden the programs you claimed are "the Left"'s goals were "unicorns" and utterly impossible/unrealistic/stupid/naive. Sorry, all this stuff works elsewhere and is very much possible, if the pundits don't block the people from demanding them.
The Dem elite pushed a terminally uninspiring, untrustworthy candidate without a clear program just because she was the embodiment of corporatist Dem establishment and held the purse.
Bernie would have wiped the floor with Trump but for the Dem establishment Bernie was as bad as Trump because their goal is to elevate themselves and he would elevate millions of Americans instead.
The media and the pundits bias against Bernie were nauseating. We will remember.
http://fair.org/home/washington-post-ran-16-negative-stories-on-bernie-s...
Why Trump won? The disconnect of the elites, the open disdain of the Dem pundits towards the working class struggling from the neoliberal policies the elites had pushed. It didn't matter that Trump was not making sense (Clinton also wasn't: balanced budget in a growing economy that needs more money/bonds every year? - idiotic. More wars? - idiotic, TPP? - idiotic) so they voted "no".
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/30/what-do-donald-trump-vot...
You fought the progressive candidate in this race tooth and nail with dishonest arguments, Bernie exposed you as a faux progressive: all of a sudden the programs you claimed are "the Left"'s goals were "unicorns" and utterly impossible/unrealistic/stupid/naive. Sorry, all this stuff works elsewhere and is very much possible, if the pundits don't block the people from demanding them.
The Dem elite pushed a terminally uninspiring, untrustworthy candidate without a clear program just because she was the embodiment of corporatist Dem establishment and held the purse.
Bernie would have wiped the floor with Trump but for the Dem establishment Bernie was as bad as Trump because their goal is to elevate themselves and he would elevate millions of Americans instead.
The media and the pundits bias against Bernie were nauseating. We will remember.
http://fair.org/home/washington-post-ran-16-negative-stories-on-bernie-s...
Why Trump won? The disconnect of the elites, the open disdain of the Dem pundits towards the working class struggling from the neoliberal policies the elites had pushed. It didn't matter that Trump was not making sense (Clinton also wasn't: balanced budget in a growing economy that needs more money/bonds every year? - idiotic. More wars? - idiotic, TPP? - idiotic) so they voted "no".
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/30/what-do-donald-trump-vot...
6
I would expect some sort of economic boom first, because Trump will ignore the deficit. In that sense, he will be exactly like all Republican politicians. When they are out of power it's all about Democratic profligacy and deficit control. When they are in power, tax cuts are greater than cuts to social programs, so the deficit widens. This may be more true with Trump, assuming he starts a government construction program as well. He's gotta make his fortune grow somehow. The risk would then either be translated into higher interest rates or a lower dollar exchange rate.
2
Rather simplistic today, eh? Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I think we have a gambling man, bargain hunter, one looking for deals in the W.H. now. On infrastructure spending, lots of places voted for more spending and those projects are thought out and moving, and can be supported. There are no doubt many close to shovel ready. But please no high speed rail to nowhere. No across the board handouts to agencies to spend, spend, spend. Be smart about that.
On climate change, change does happens, has happened and will happen again. If we knew for sure that it could be stopped at some one place that might be worth lots of sacrifice but truth is, we don't really know without a very wide margin for error as to what if anything will work.
There are many things which we can't change, some we can. But one thing we can do with a fair amount of success: manage what come up. If the sea level rises and we need to build new cities, well, what a wonderful way to create jobs, new modern cities. Change comes, man needs to adapt. We can survive, or at least those who do survive, can rebuild.
We have a system of governance which can work. If it is circumvented by unilateral action ((pen and phone)) it can be reversed the same way. The ground is laid for lots of swift change. It will likely happen. So for the future, perhaps we should agree that the constitutional framework should prevail and not be so easily abandoned. We do need to get back to regular order.
On climate change, change does happens, has happened and will happen again. If we knew for sure that it could be stopped at some one place that might be worth lots of sacrifice but truth is, we don't really know without a very wide margin for error as to what if anything will work.
There are many things which we can't change, some we can. But one thing we can do with a fair amount of success: manage what come up. If the sea level rises and we need to build new cities, well, what a wonderful way to create jobs, new modern cities. Change comes, man needs to adapt. We can survive, or at least those who do survive, can rebuild.
We have a system of governance which can work. If it is circumvented by unilateral action ((pen and phone)) it can be reversed the same way. The ground is laid for lots of swift change. It will likely happen. So for the future, perhaps we should agree that the constitutional framework should prevail and not be so easily abandoned. We do need to get back to regular order.
1
This is ridiculously cynical and callous about climate change. What kind of person would say something like that? Those who do survive... Jesus. Is this our nation now? Future generations we hope you make it ...because ours is too selfish and insane to make even the slightest sacrifice for the good of the world. Agh it makes me despair for humanity.
Eliminating the half-a-trillion dollar trade deficit could boost GDP growth by 3% as Neil Irwin and Paul Krugman have discussed in articles. That would be Trump's biggest growth driver. Next would be an infrastructure spending plan and raising the personal exemption on income taxes. These will increase US domestic demand. The tax cuts for the rich and "repatriation" of corporate money will do little.
I fear that on the whole, Trump, in short order, will be a detriment to th US and especially to the people who voted for him. He is already back tracking on his promises and the appointments he already made and promises he will make, do not show that he is willing "to drain the swamp". It is already starting to be a hayday for the lobbyists. That all by itself should be disppointing to the "pro-trumpers". My big worry is that by undoing the financial reform, another "bubble" is in the waiting. I do agree that the environmental impact caused by dismantling environmetal restrictions and laws won't be seen right away however, the long-term effects will be everlasting. Yes, I do fear for the future of our children, grandchildren and future generations.
5
Social, economic, and political instabilities will continue to increase so long as individual pieces of the economic pie continue to decrease in real terms.
The Republicans will add sugar to the individual pieces but will do nothing to stop the decline. The sugar rush will feel good for a while and then the crash will follow. Many will recognize that they were once again duped and left with an even smaller portion of the economic pie.
The instabilities will continue to grow and the electorate even more radicalized and desperate for the next savior.
The Republicans will add sugar to the individual pieces but will do nothing to stop the decline. The sugar rush will feel good for a while and then the crash will follow. Many will recognize that they were once again duped and left with an even smaller portion of the economic pie.
The instabilities will continue to grow and the electorate even more radicalized and desperate for the next savior.
2
Just one point on the lack of Brexit recession. This one is really simple to explain. Britain is still a member of the EU and still has access to all the global free trade deals that go with that. It now has a weaker currency too. That means more exports, a slight reduction in imports, and more tourism, which all adds up to economic growth. Actually doing what was voted for and leaving the EU results in breaking all those free trade deals, which will have a much bigger impact (especially on financial services and the car industry, two of the biggest export sectors).
3
Snapshots. Just as over-simplified solutions to complex problems were a large part of Donald Trump’s attractiveness to voters who felt marginalized by the establishment, the devastating effect of his presidency will not be accepted by those supporters because of quick, short-term successes.
Trumpism thrives on using anecdotal evidence in the place of logical thinking.
Snow storms show the falsity of global warming. Loss of assembly-line jobs for semi-skilled workers confirms that American jobs are being shipped to Asia. Undocumented agricultural works are found helping harvest crops, and it signifies that there has been a virtual invasion from Mexico.
A gang shoot-out in East L.A. means that American blacks across the country are living in are in hell. A mentally ill, sexually conflicted man shoots up a gay nightclub, and it means America is in mortal danger at home from Muslims, because the man’s parents were from a Muslim country.
We must resist the use of snapshots and anecdotes by the Trump administration to “prove” its validity and its wisdom.
Trumpism thrives on using anecdotal evidence in the place of logical thinking.
Snow storms show the falsity of global warming. Loss of assembly-line jobs for semi-skilled workers confirms that American jobs are being shipped to Asia. Undocumented agricultural works are found helping harvest crops, and it signifies that there has been a virtual invasion from Mexico.
A gang shoot-out in East L.A. means that American blacks across the country are living in are in hell. A mentally ill, sexually conflicted man shoots up a gay nightclub, and it means America is in mortal danger at home from Muslims, because the man’s parents were from a Muslim country.
We must resist the use of snapshots and anecdotes by the Trump administration to “prove” its validity and its wisdom.
6
Has financial reform created less concentration of banks? If it has, I haven't seen it.
I was outraged by Elizabeth Warren and fellow Senators both Democrats and Republicans grandstanding about the Wells Fargo fraud. This fraud was public in 2011. The Attorney General did nothing, the SEC did nothing, Elizabeth Warren did nothing for years. The AG and SEC were both operating with appointments from President Obama.
Enjoy the sugar rush, you advocate it when sensible Democrats are in power and ashore it when evil Republicans are in power. Both sides ignored the Presidents bipartisan commission on deficit reduction and tax reform.
Elections have consequences. Democrats with more money, more ground game and more registered voters couldn't even bother to vote. That's with a Supreme Court, tax policy, economic policy and regulation all on the table. Perhaps it's time for the Democratic party to rethink it's identity based coalition and start appealing to actual voters in swing states.
I was outraged by Elizabeth Warren and fellow Senators both Democrats and Republicans grandstanding about the Wells Fargo fraud. This fraud was public in 2011. The Attorney General did nothing, the SEC did nothing, Elizabeth Warren did nothing for years. The AG and SEC were both operating with appointments from President Obama.
Enjoy the sugar rush, you advocate it when sensible Democrats are in power and ashore it when evil Republicans are in power. Both sides ignored the Presidents bipartisan commission on deficit reduction and tax reform.
Elections have consequences. Democrats with more money, more ground game and more registered voters couldn't even bother to vote. That's with a Supreme Court, tax policy, economic policy and regulation all on the table. Perhaps it's time for the Democratic party to rethink it's identity based coalition and start appealing to actual voters in swing states.
3
Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch epitomize the Peter Principle. Both are empty suits who have no right being where they were and are. Under Obama nothing has changed on Wall Street as he had promised, again another candidate who told us how he was going to change things. And what did we get? Under Clinton? More of the same as her top donors hailed from Wall Street. So all of you libs who are still crying and wringing your hands over her defeat think again she would have changed NOTHING.
Yes, perhaps a near term wash on jobs by while the elimination of trade deals creates this wash, new trade alliances elsewhere in the world are formed and strengthened. Several significant ones have been reported this week including one yesterday in the Wall Street Journal between Japan and India. Too bad we won't have something to allow us to compete better in the Pacific. Protectionism will never return us to the economic standing we had in the last century. Longterm effects are just that and the situation we are in is unsustainable including a choking income inequality, empty promises regarding job dislocations due to globalization , climate devastation, the continuing breathtaking control the 1% has on our elections. The media rendered itself ineffective as a counter to such monied interests. To where do we turn for effective dialogue on these matters?
3
How in the world can Trump bring the old manufacturing and mining jobs back to the rust belt and coal country when the US is a capitalist market based economy and the US dollar is the global reserve currency? The white working class and middle class who voted for Trump are in for the most bitter disappointment. The US is not a command economy and its political system is not an authoritarian dictatorship. Companies make production decisions based on labor and supply chain costs. The US dollar, due to its reserve status, is highly value versus other currencies. Trump won the presidency because of uninformed and uneducated voters who were seduced by simple slogan and wildly simplistic solutions in a complicated global economy.
345
Spot on. As Steve Jobs told President Obama when asked how to get tech manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.: "Those jobs are never coming back."
2
I'm sensing a plan that involves the "privatization" of infrqstructure by giving a tax cut to the rich and businesses so that they can use it to buy up infrastructure and rent it back to "we, the people".
One more stab at milking the country and the people to prove the Republican idea that the only change we need is a newly minted breed of Kings to rule a new minted population of serfs.
It won't take long to find the wannabe Kings, but it could take quite a bit of time to find a way to fully sneak the chains around the ankles of the serfs.
It would be better if economists started to address the real issue, the impact of robots and automation, and the potential for the loss of billions of human jobs; along with the fact that business owns the robots, the automation, and the underlying intellectual property. These are huge levers over the lives and destiny of we, the regular old, humans.
What does the new, global capitalism, the new economics look like? Where do wages come from, how do we support a consumer-based economy, and how do people spend their time?
How do we do all of that and still repair the planet itself?
Trump is a supplier to the idle rich because they happen to be the most viable consumers at present. However, they are only the best consumers because they've been feasting on the productivity of everyone else. It's 1928, and we're on the brink of shooting humanity in the foot yet one more time.
One more stab at milking the country and the people to prove the Republican idea that the only change we need is a newly minted breed of Kings to rule a new minted population of serfs.
It won't take long to find the wannabe Kings, but it could take quite a bit of time to find a way to fully sneak the chains around the ankles of the serfs.
It would be better if economists started to address the real issue, the impact of robots and automation, and the potential for the loss of billions of human jobs; along with the fact that business owns the robots, the automation, and the underlying intellectual property. These are huge levers over the lives and destiny of we, the regular old, humans.
What does the new, global capitalism, the new economics look like? Where do wages come from, how do we support a consumer-based economy, and how do people spend their time?
How do we do all of that and still repair the planet itself?
Trump is a supplier to the idle rich because they happen to be the most viable consumers at present. However, they are only the best consumers because they've been feasting on the productivity of everyone else. It's 1928, and we're on the brink of shooting humanity in the foot yet one more time.
12
The ultimate enemy of capitalism is its need for continued, compound growth. In the end, it will destroy itself. Unregulated, it will reach that end sooner rather than later. No revolution required...
11
Paul, with your attack jobs against Bernie Sanders you did your part to help make this happen. It's one of several reasons I'm cancelling my subscription to the Times. You should stick to economics.
10
Trumpism will have a profound affect on what a future administation policies. I fear that a profoundly conservative supreme court will limit what the governemt as a regulator. With deregulation the devil is in the details. Many regulation are pubilc protections against private abuses. I do not trust Trump or republicans to act in the pubic good.
I also fear for the future of public assets.The republican have had a long term goal of exploiting public lands and assests. They beleive we can expliot, extract, and pollute our way to prosperity. When the pillaging is done they will eturn the assest to the government to clean up.
Trump talks of big infrastructure projects based on public private partnerships. Implementation and management will be critical. Againt the potential for abuse is great.Transferring public assests to private hands is just another transfer of wealth upward.
The foxes are now in charge of the hen house.
I also fear for the future of public assets.The republican have had a long term goal of exploiting public lands and assests. They beleive we can expliot, extract, and pollute our way to prosperity. When the pillaging is done they will eturn the assest to the government to clean up.
Trump talks of big infrastructure projects based on public private partnerships. Implementation and management will be critical. Againt the potential for abuse is great.Transferring public assests to private hands is just another transfer of wealth upward.
The foxes are now in charge of the hen house.
21
Increased import duties and inflation, caused by massive deficit spending (where employment is just under 5%) because of tax cuts and unfunded infrastructure spending, will brutalize the working class. The dollar will slide in value as inflation builds, making imports much more expensive and significantly so when higher duties of up to 45% on select products are added. American families will get eaten alive since so much of what they consume are inexpensive imported goods. Try taking a trip to Walmart and see if you can find inexpensive American made products. There in no immediate substitute in any event for most consumer products. I think the bond market has already sniffed out inflation. My thought is the effects of his trade and tax policies will not take years to manifest themselves. Maybe the stock market might get jazzed up with Trump open wallet, but the bond market, nope.
66
I think Trump will fail, and fail badly.
The question is whether the Democrats will be ready when he does with a clear agenda that speaks to the needs of the vast majority of the country that has not shared in the prosperity accruing to the country. The real median income has dropped almost 10% since the financial crisis hit in 2008, and while the employment situation has improved somewhat during Obama's term the Democrats need to be providing a clear solution or they will go down in flames again.
The question is whether the Democrats will be ready when he does with a clear agenda that speaks to the needs of the vast majority of the country that has not shared in the prosperity accruing to the country. The real median income has dropped almost 10% since the financial crisis hit in 2008, and while the employment situation has improved somewhat during Obama's term the Democrats need to be providing a clear solution or they will go down in flames again.
5
Regarding climate change...if Trump actually follows through with his protectionist rhetoric, wouldn't that mean that there would be less stuff imported from countries with dismal environmental protections and more stuff made here at home where we have quite strict environmental regulations and are exceedingly more efficient at getting the most out of our polluting buck? In other words, wouldn't the world's environment be better off for a bit less globalization?
China is the world's most prolific producer of CO2 and was never going to agree to reduce its emissions absent being forced to do so. If we make trade with China, et al., contingent on cleaning up its polluting, carbon-spewing ways (along with providing its workers with the protections American labor employs--a matter for another day), isn't that about the only hope we have for actually improving the environment? Treaties are nice, but without the force of economic or military sanction, are meaningless.
China is the world's most prolific producer of CO2 and was never going to agree to reduce its emissions absent being forced to do so. If we make trade with China, et al., contingent on cleaning up its polluting, carbon-spewing ways (along with providing its workers with the protections American labor employs--a matter for another day), isn't that about the only hope we have for actually improving the environment? Treaties are nice, but without the force of economic or military sanction, are meaningless.
3
Trump will be doubling down on Supply Side Economics: Huge tax cuts for individuals and corporations. The Republicans keep citing President Reagan for jump starting the economy with his Supply Side Economics. What they fail to mention is that President Reagan was forced to raise taxes 11 times to offset the huge deficits that resulted from those huge tax cuts. Recently President Bush and Governor Brownback of Kansas tried Supply Side Economics. However, they once again resulted in huge budget deficits. Supply Side Economics sounds good in principle, but does not work. Huge cuts in taxes result in less revenue for government.
13
Sour grapes! Krugman is just sore because his candidate didn’t win. He doesn’t know what Trump will do; no one does. Donald has already softened several of his campaign promises.
I’ll tell you this: If there's anyone to blame for Trump's rise it is Krugman and all his liberal followers who have demonized the working class for years, tarred them all with the brush of racism, ignored their existential plight of lost jobs and shattered lives, and treated them as disposable human beings. For them, this election was a “primal scream of despair and rage.”
In his last column, Krugman talked a lot about truth. I’ll tell you this: the truth looks one way from the luxury an Upper West Side condo, but the truth is a lot different to those on the edge of survival, with everything they’ve known and valued disappearing before their eyes.
Two recent columns in The Times put the plight of the working class in human terms. Note the contrast to Krugman’s whining tone:
• "Can Trump Save Their Jobs? They’re Counting on It," Nelson D. Schwartz, http://tinyurl.com/gu65rta
• "The Democratic Coalition’s Epic Fail,” Thomas B. Edsall, http://tinyurl.com/zfquhd4
Whatever we may think of Trump, he can exhibit empathy. Whether we like it or not, he's going to be President. As Elizabeth Warren wrote in a recent email to constituents, Trump promised a lot of things we agree with, so let's give him a chance. Let’s support him if he takes the high road, but fight him if he takes the low.
I’ll tell you this: If there's anyone to blame for Trump's rise it is Krugman and all his liberal followers who have demonized the working class for years, tarred them all with the brush of racism, ignored their existential plight of lost jobs and shattered lives, and treated them as disposable human beings. For them, this election was a “primal scream of despair and rage.”
In his last column, Krugman talked a lot about truth. I’ll tell you this: the truth looks one way from the luxury an Upper West Side condo, but the truth is a lot different to those on the edge of survival, with everything they’ve known and valued disappearing before their eyes.
Two recent columns in The Times put the plight of the working class in human terms. Note the contrast to Krugman’s whining tone:
• "Can Trump Save Their Jobs? They’re Counting on It," Nelson D. Schwartz, http://tinyurl.com/gu65rta
• "The Democratic Coalition’s Epic Fail,” Thomas B. Edsall, http://tinyurl.com/zfquhd4
Whatever we may think of Trump, he can exhibit empathy. Whether we like it or not, he's going to be President. As Elizabeth Warren wrote in a recent email to constituents, Trump promised a lot of things we agree with, so let's give him a chance. Let’s support him if he takes the high road, but fight him if he takes the low.
25
Putting aside whether Trump exhibits empathy, exhibiting empathy is different than having it. And yes, we can predict what a wealthy, narcissist demagogue will do with great power, based on history (Nero) and psychological science. Now these are just rather broad characterizations and educated, probabilistic guesses but to think that Trump is likely give the working classes more than breadcrumbs and media circuses is unwise or desperate denial. And putting aside your own demagogery, I'd like to see your evidence that Krugman or the average liberal has demonized the working class. They've tended to assist them minimally, e.g., the ACA, while making the rich richer, but they've not demonized them.
1
Sir, I'm not sure in which universe Mr. Krugman or liberals have been "demonizing the working class for years" but the fact is Mr. Krugman and the vast majority of liberals support more unionization, higher minimum wages, more paid maternal and paternal leave, etc.
Let's see where Trump and his "brain trust" come down on these issues and then decide who really "demonizes the working class" where it counts. Their wallets!
Trump's statements as a candidate and track record as a business man don't bode well for unionization.
Let's see where Trump and his "brain trust" come down on these issues and then decide who really "demonizes the working class" where it counts. Their wallets!
Trump's statements as a candidate and track record as a business man don't bode well for unionization.
Ron, let's be even more honest; less than half of the electorate failed to identify a monstrosity masquerading as a human being. I don't need a "tinyurl" for proof, just click anywhere in the last two year news archive.
Don't let the personal cloud the policy.
Trump is uniquely poised to succeed on enacting stimulus where Obama failed. He has set himself up to propose tax cuts AND huge infrastructure projects. Regardless of which one will be more effective at stimulating the economy--and there are fair arguments the latter is much more important than the former--the country will get both. And we'll have to wait and see, but I don't expect "deficit hawks" like Paul Ryan to put up much of a fight to Trump. Trump may have been the only candidate out of both parties' fields who would propose this approach and also possibly succeed in enacting it.
So there's chance to get the exact policy prescription (or something very close to it) that Krugman has been advocating for 8 years. And there's good reason to hope that all the campaign rhetoric about trade wars was just that--rhetoric. Trump's already walking back significantly his most outrageous "policy" positions). I guess this column kinda gets there in the end (very, very begrudgingly), but let's at least give the guy a chance to see what his policies will actually be (now that he can put his dog whistles down) and not criticize potentially helpful policies merely because they come from a flawed source.
Trump is uniquely poised to succeed on enacting stimulus where Obama failed. He has set himself up to propose tax cuts AND huge infrastructure projects. Regardless of which one will be more effective at stimulating the economy--and there are fair arguments the latter is much more important than the former--the country will get both. And we'll have to wait and see, but I don't expect "deficit hawks" like Paul Ryan to put up much of a fight to Trump. Trump may have been the only candidate out of both parties' fields who would propose this approach and also possibly succeed in enacting it.
So there's chance to get the exact policy prescription (or something very close to it) that Krugman has been advocating for 8 years. And there's good reason to hope that all the campaign rhetoric about trade wars was just that--rhetoric. Trump's already walking back significantly his most outrageous "policy" positions). I guess this column kinda gets there in the end (very, very begrudgingly), but let's at least give the guy a chance to see what his policies will actually be (now that he can put his dog whistles down) and not criticize potentially helpful policies merely because they come from a flawed source.
12
Hmm. Why wait? Why doesn't Trump provide his imprimatur right now to legislating a stimulus package that includes huge infrastructure spending?
Why does he actually have to be sitting in the Oval Office? Those people who voted for him (and many that didn't) could use the work RIGHT NOW, right?
Why waste 70 days if Ryan and his ilk are ready to drop whatever opposition they formerly had to fiscal stimulus (political gamesmanship with a dash of racism)?
Why does he actually have to be sitting in the Oval Office? Those people who voted for him (and many that didn't) could use the work RIGHT NOW, right?
Why waste 70 days if Ryan and his ilk are ready to drop whatever opposition they formerly had to fiscal stimulus (political gamesmanship with a dash of racism)?
Actually when it comes to greenhouse emissions global trade is a serious contributor BUT seldom mentioned because as Naomi Klein pointed out to her shock, greenhouse emissions from the horribly polluting dirty diesel fueling most ocean shipping is NOT counted against any countries greenhouse emissions!
Hence when the Northwest forests are chopped down and shipped to China to make toxic Thomas the Tank Engine toys and then ship them back across the Pacific none of that counts against either China or the US greenhouse emissions. The greenhouse emissions from coal mostly used by China is counted against China even though the output is for US consumption.
The other irony is that actually restoring factory production to the US would probably reduce coal use which is unlikely to increase greatly in the US despite Trump's promises. The real threat of a recession is Peak Oil and an increase in oil prices as OPEC and Russia cut a deal to cut oil production.
And this was likely to happen no matter who was elected. If Trump actually does withdraw from NATO and end some of the endless Wars this would also be a benefit for cutting greenhouse emissions as the Pentagon is the world's biggest greenhouse emitter responsible for 6% of US oil usage and greenhouse emissions. But will Trump really do that? Who knows? As usual he has taken contradictory positions on this. The worst impact of Trump on Climate Change would be to direct almost all infrastructure spending to Auto Addiction
Hence when the Northwest forests are chopped down and shipped to China to make toxic Thomas the Tank Engine toys and then ship them back across the Pacific none of that counts against either China or the US greenhouse emissions. The greenhouse emissions from coal mostly used by China is counted against China even though the output is for US consumption.
The other irony is that actually restoring factory production to the US would probably reduce coal use which is unlikely to increase greatly in the US despite Trump's promises. The real threat of a recession is Peak Oil and an increase in oil prices as OPEC and Russia cut a deal to cut oil production.
And this was likely to happen no matter who was elected. If Trump actually does withdraw from NATO and end some of the endless Wars this would also be a benefit for cutting greenhouse emissions as the Pentagon is the world's biggest greenhouse emitter responsible for 6% of US oil usage and greenhouse emissions. But will Trump really do that? Who knows? As usual he has taken contradictory positions on this. The worst impact of Trump on Climate Change would be to direct almost all infrastructure spending to Auto Addiction
7
Trump will in all likelihood continue most of the neoliberal economic policies of Bush and Obama. The tax deal that Obama made with congress to get his very modest stimulus, on top of earlier tax cuts will eventually top out at some 10 trillion dollars. According to the GOP this will cause investments and jobs to fall like rain. Except they won't.
Similarly the Democrats and the GOP are close to deal to repatriate the nearly 3 trillion dollars in off shore corporate profits by lowering their tax rate to somewhere between 5 and 8%. Politicians, Trump included, will praise this as a job growth plan. But neither will note that we did that already under Bush, allowing corporations to bring money back at 5%. The jobs bonanza didn't happen.
Best estimates are that 95% of the income growth since 2008 has gone to the top 1% and only about 20% of that was turned into domestic investments. The rest went out into the global economy in the form of a host of exotic investments, none of which produce US jobs.
When this happens the GOP will need Trump the showman because it will take a lot of smoke and mirrors, bluster and blame to explain to Trump's struggling working class why they will continue to struggle. Wake up middle America! The average wage in some Asian countries is $28 a month! Capital is not going to bring those jobs back and pay you $20 an hour.
The capital elites may not have supported Trump, but they will very shortly own him. And he is always interested in a deal.
Similarly the Democrats and the GOP are close to deal to repatriate the nearly 3 trillion dollars in off shore corporate profits by lowering their tax rate to somewhere between 5 and 8%. Politicians, Trump included, will praise this as a job growth plan. But neither will note that we did that already under Bush, allowing corporations to bring money back at 5%. The jobs bonanza didn't happen.
Best estimates are that 95% of the income growth since 2008 has gone to the top 1% and only about 20% of that was turned into domestic investments. The rest went out into the global economy in the form of a host of exotic investments, none of which produce US jobs.
When this happens the GOP will need Trump the showman because it will take a lot of smoke and mirrors, bluster and blame to explain to Trump's struggling working class why they will continue to struggle. Wake up middle America! The average wage in some Asian countries is $28 a month! Capital is not going to bring those jobs back and pay you $20 an hour.
The capital elites may not have supported Trump, but they will very shortly own him. And he is always interested in a deal.
21
One of my biggest fear is the continued privatization of public agencies. We've seen it happen in the transition from pensions from pensions to defined contribution plans, with prisons. We see captalism interfere with Americans in need of healthcare; they have to negotiate with insurance companies to struggle to get coverage needed. Students trigger profitmaking in charter schools. Fortune 500 companies have already, quietly, assumed the power in the realm of foster agencies, where orphans are bottom line profit makers in the pyramid schemes permitted by local and state agencies. The continued privatization of as many public agencies is a dream of Paul Ryan and his ilk. You can trust these agencies will no longer be looking first to the people they're supposed to serve. But, yes, the rich will get richer, so there's always that.
24
I wish the liberal establishment on both sides of the Atlantic would stop combining Brexit and the success of Trump as equivalents. They both represent a poke in the eye for an arrogant privileged liberal elite which was a long time coming but there the much of the similarity ends. Brexit was not about protectionism but about withdrawing from an outmoded inward looking structure that is run by unelected beureaucrats. The UK has and always will have a global, free-trade outlook just as the U.S. will always be engaged with the rest of the world.
The other similarity between Brexit and the election of Trump is the reaction to the results bythe self-regarding liberal elites in both countries. They continue to demonstrate their lack of empathy with a major portion of their countrymen by ascribing all kinds of insulting descriptions to their democratically expressed views such as ignorant or racist. It is about time these "good people " examined some of their own prejudices and intolerances.
The other similarity between Brexit and the election of Trump is the reaction to the results bythe self-regarding liberal elites in both countries. They continue to demonstrate their lack of empathy with a major portion of their countrymen by ascribing all kinds of insulting descriptions to their democratically expressed views such as ignorant or racist. It is about time these "good people " examined some of their own prejudices and intolerances.
4
Since economics is not good at predicting the future this article is simply a guess what will happen? Economics is not hard science. Do we really know what people are going to do tomorrow? As for climate change ending the world? That is like the weather. Not mentioned is the fact it will turn the planet more green. Turns out there are two sides to such things. Noted Krugman did not guess right about president Hillary. As for debt it can not go on forever but it does look like it will continue for a long time. After the United States will fall off a cleft. But since I am 81 years old I will not see it happen. So politics may work short term but reality takes place long term. But long term I will be dead. But Krugman may still be with us and eat his words. I really don't think the world is coming to an end. I used to see one or two people holding the end of world signs. Never took those as being in there right mind. On the other hand this country did have a depression which I was born in. And not doubt could happen again.
Far from a slump, the tax money Trump will take away from safety net programs and place into a huge infrastructure project, will inject money into those pockets who will spend it. The Republicans will time the economy to peak in 2020. The chance for the Democrats is 2018.
An infrastructure project is a good idea that Bernie and maybe Hillary had as well--but Bernie would have funded it by a tax on those that can afford it--but nowhere close to the 92% income tax bracket of that "socialist" Eisenhower.
And climate change jobs --even climate change itself, the real trumpeting elephant in the room, is invisible to the press. Not one question in the debates. Either the media is, like the Republicans, in denial of the science, or the press is not as independent as they proclaim.
An infrastructure project is a good idea that Bernie and maybe Hillary had as well--but Bernie would have funded it by a tax on those that can afford it--but nowhere close to the 92% income tax bracket of that "socialist" Eisenhower.
And climate change jobs --even climate change itself, the real trumpeting elephant in the room, is invisible to the press. Not one question in the debates. Either the media is, like the Republicans, in denial of the science, or the press is not as independent as they proclaim.
12
Dr. Krugman writes: " If we face a new economic crisis -- perhaps as a result of the dismantling of financial reform -- it's hard to think of people less prepared to deal with it."
Put that thought together with the realization that the Democrats have not been this weak since 1928.
And guess what happened in October of 1929.
Very few people alive when The Great Crash happened are still alive and aware today to tell us about the years that followed that stock market devastation.
The Great Depression then went on for three years with President Hoover unable or unwilling to do what had to be done to end the mass suffering.
It took FDR and his New Deal policies to bring us out of that miserable time.
But it is those very New Deal policies and protections that the Republicans have been lusting, ever since, to dismantle and eliminate.
Their time has come; they will be in complete control of passing and repealing legislation.
So, when the misery of the Next Big Crash descends on us, there may be no unemployment insurance; no Social Security; no Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare; and very few regulations remaining to protect us from stock market swindlers.
The list goes on of what will NOT be there to help the majority of us.
FDR's New Deal programs, and similar programs from later Democratic administrations that help the jobless, homeless and hungry will disappear into the mists of time.
There will be Hoovervilles again, but they will have a new name: Trumpvilles.
Put that thought together with the realization that the Democrats have not been this weak since 1928.
And guess what happened in October of 1929.
Very few people alive when The Great Crash happened are still alive and aware today to tell us about the years that followed that stock market devastation.
The Great Depression then went on for three years with President Hoover unable or unwilling to do what had to be done to end the mass suffering.
It took FDR and his New Deal policies to bring us out of that miserable time.
But it is those very New Deal policies and protections that the Republicans have been lusting, ever since, to dismantle and eliminate.
Their time has come; they will be in complete control of passing and repealing legislation.
So, when the misery of the Next Big Crash descends on us, there may be no unemployment insurance; no Social Security; no Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare; and very few regulations remaining to protect us from stock market swindlers.
The list goes on of what will NOT be there to help the majority of us.
FDR's New Deal programs, and similar programs from later Democratic administrations that help the jobless, homeless and hungry will disappear into the mists of time.
There will be Hoovervilles again, but they will have a new name: Trumpvilles.
17
I guess we should all reread The Grapes of Wrath.
It's important to remember former VP Cheney's dictum that deficits only matter when Democrats are in office. According to the CRFB study referenced in the article, Trump is proposing to add $5-7 trillion in debt over a decade, on top of the already sizable debt increase in the current policy baseline. This will send the debt to GDP ratio from 75% GDP today into the 110% - 130% GDP level by 2026, versus about 85% GDP under the current policy baseline, which Clinton planned to follow. So she was the low-deficit candidate by far.
Since about 50% of his tax cuts go to the top 1%, and the spending cuts required to offset defense spending increases will dis-proportionally hurt the poor, Jonathan Chait has estimated this may be the biggest upward transfer of wealth in modern times, on top of the already record wealth and income inequality.
I wonder how many people consciously thought that Trump was the big deficit and debt candidate going into the election, and that he was proposing such a wealth transfer.
About 80% of districts with more than 50% college educated adults voted for Mrs. Clinton. It seems educating folks sufficiently to be aware of the policy consequences would be essential to protecting our democracy.
Since about 50% of his tax cuts go to the top 1%, and the spending cuts required to offset defense spending increases will dis-proportionally hurt the poor, Jonathan Chait has estimated this may be the biggest upward transfer of wealth in modern times, on top of the already record wealth and income inequality.
I wonder how many people consciously thought that Trump was the big deficit and debt candidate going into the election, and that he was proposing such a wealth transfer.
About 80% of districts with more than 50% college educated adults voted for Mrs. Clinton. It seems educating folks sufficiently to be aware of the policy consequences would be essential to protecting our democracy.
313
Good reason for the GOP to eliminate or at least drastically reduce the department of education, right?
1
Here's the thing... There is no evidence that lowering corporate income taxes does anything to stimulate jobs. Corporations who pay less taxes simply have happier shareholders. The purpose and responsibility of any corporation is to create value for its shareholders. Period. Creating jobs is only a priority in the case where creating jobs also creates value. Corporations are not benevolent organizations that exist to help society and prop up the working class.
It is interesting to me that the CEO of a privately-held company does not understand this. Mr. Trump's company has not been particularly benevolent in times of plenty or when tax breaks were received. Mr. Trump has taken full advantage of the tax code and the bankruptcy courts to enrich the shareholders of his company - in many cases, at the expense of the working class.
I don't really have any predictions about what the next four years holds because trying to discern Mr. Trump's is true position is akin to trying to successfully nail jello to the wall. Currently we are exporting the equivalent of raw materials that other countries make into products. We don't have any choice except to buy those products with whatever tariffs the incur. American manufacturing exists but it is highly-skilled, complex, small and specialized. Jobs for those with a high school education in this country are, and for the near future will be, in retail, but they are minimum wage... which Mr. Trump does not want to raise.
It is interesting to me that the CEO of a privately-held company does not understand this. Mr. Trump's company has not been particularly benevolent in times of plenty or when tax breaks were received. Mr. Trump has taken full advantage of the tax code and the bankruptcy courts to enrich the shareholders of his company - in many cases, at the expense of the working class.
I don't really have any predictions about what the next four years holds because trying to discern Mr. Trump's is true position is akin to trying to successfully nail jello to the wall. Currently we are exporting the equivalent of raw materials that other countries make into products. We don't have any choice except to buy those products with whatever tariffs the incur. American manufacturing exists but it is highly-skilled, complex, small and specialized. Jobs for those with a high school education in this country are, and for the near future will be, in retail, but they are minimum wage... which Mr. Trump does not want to raise.
221
"It is interesting to me that the CEO of a privately-held company does not understand this."
I don't think that's the problem, at all.
"Corporations who pay less taxes simply have happier shareholders."
Among them, Mr Donald Trump. Which is the real reason he's supporting it. Trickle-down nonsense is just an excuse for Mr Trump to change government policy to benefit himself and his friends. Period. End of story. There's nothing more sophisticated going on, and no real economic theory involved.
I don't think that's the problem, at all.
"Corporations who pay less taxes simply have happier shareholders."
Among them, Mr Donald Trump. Which is the real reason he's supporting it. Trickle-down nonsense is just an excuse for Mr Trump to change government policy to benefit himself and his friends. Period. End of story. There's nothing more sophisticated going on, and no real economic theory involved.
2
Except corporations cannot exist without the masses, because they are the consumers of the good and services they produce. Likewise, the rich and well off cannot exist without broad based mass consumption. Meaning that the rich and well off cannot maintain their economic position by simply purchasing goods and services from each other. So, as the purchasing power of the masses decreases, eventually the rich and well off will also decline. Stockholders cannot benefit from lower corporate tax rates, if the corporations they own stock in are in decline because they do not have enough customers.
I also believe Trump will be a financial disaster, and I agree with most of what you say. I am, however, willing to wait and see on the corporate income tax. I have always felt that businesses, regardless of size, don't pay income tax, they merely collect it from their customers through higher prices and pass it along to the government. If the happy shareholders make more, then their income should be taxed higher. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. If it does, good; if it doesn't, then the government will be the worse for it, since the money they used to get from companies and corporations (actually yours and mine, not the companies') won't be coming in anymore. That should result in lower prices, since they don't have to pay the taxes, but I don't see that happening either.
I am expecting Krugman to be spectacularly wrong over the next 4 years, the same he was wrong in the 2000s, blinded by ideology he claimed deficits would bankrupt the US (try to bankrupt a money printing shop! Go figure).
It is obvious that any infrastructure stimulus will be fantastic for the economy.
In this article PK has no specifics only some vague platitudes on the dangers of Trump. The professional liberals still have nothing to offer the American electorate, they would have run a candidate without a program, such as Hillary, again, if given the chance.
Paul, there is never a tradeoff between a short term and long term economy performance. If we are better off now, more people are employed, the infrastructure is better etc then the future generations inherit a stronger economy, less acute social problems and better infrastructure.
Disclaimer: i don't support Trump's right wind ideology.
It is obvious that any infrastructure stimulus will be fantastic for the economy.
In this article PK has no specifics only some vague platitudes on the dangers of Trump. The professional liberals still have nothing to offer the American electorate, they would have run a candidate without a program, such as Hillary, again, if given the chance.
Paul, there is never a tradeoff between a short term and long term economy performance. If we are better off now, more people are employed, the infrastructure is better etc then the future generations inherit a stronger economy, less acute social problems and better infrastructure.
Disclaimer: i don't support Trump's right wind ideology.
3
you are wrong ; I have been reading Krugman--Krugman advocates deficits & infrastructure projects --- you may be reading Paul Ryan Thesis
We have more workers than we'll ever have jobs for thanks to mechanization. Neither party is really offering a long-term sustainable solution to this problem. Sen. Sanders wanted to invested $1 trillion over 10 years into infrastructure, which would've created millions of jobs. But what happens then? Public works spending under the New Deal helped create demand to the point that when it ended, there were jobs for people to transition into. That won't happen now.
We're in a period of major transition right now. At some point in the not-too-distant future (if climate change doesn't extinguish the flame of human civilization) we're going to reach a point where most people simply won't have to work. That's really the end of the road for capitalism. Yet it's hard to imagine the owners of capital ever agreeing to magnanimously give up the fruits of their machines' labor to the starving masses, considering their reluctance to allow workers to share in the benefits of their own labor.
We're in a period of major transition right now. At some point in the not-too-distant future (if climate change doesn't extinguish the flame of human civilization) we're going to reach a point where most people simply won't have to work. That's really the end of the road for capitalism. Yet it's hard to imagine the owners of capital ever agreeing to magnanimously give up the fruits of their machines' labor to the starving masses, considering their reluctance to allow workers to share in the benefits of their own labor.
12
"Republicans have been against anything the Obama administration proposes."
I don't remember Obama proposing deficit spending.
I remember him telling poor people to 'take responsibility', & that the US had to 'tighten our belt'.
I remember a 'Grand Bargain', where the best way to keep tax rates low for the wealthy was to raise the Medicare eligibility age.
I remember Simpson-Bowles brand catfood being the only choice we had.
I don't remember Obama proposing deficit spending.
I remember him telling poor people to 'take responsibility', & that the US had to 'tighten our belt'.
I remember a 'Grand Bargain', where the best way to keep tax rates low for the wealthy was to raise the Medicare eligibility age.
I remember Simpson-Bowles brand catfood being the only choice we had.
6
Keep predicting nyt ...eventually you will get something right...even a blind squirrel gets a nut sometimes...even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
3
Paul,
How are your predictions working out so far?
Thou doth protest too much.
How are your predictions working out so far?
Thou doth protest too much.
6
Just read the posts below. Consider it exceptional advise!
"The Republicans are likely to create an intentional financial bubble. It will make it seem like times are great again. They will be gorging themselves at the trough. They know it is a bubble, so they will find safe havens before it bursts. Then they will step in to buy assests at bargain prices. The collapse of the housing market in 2008 was the greatest transfer of wealth, from the middle class to the 1%, in history. That is the reason they want to get rid of the Fed, who's job is to smooth out the economy, to avoid bubbles."
"The law of unintended consequences. That's why in repub years, always be very careful. Don't follow the crowd. The easing of bank loans & throwing out the Volcker Rule will create another environment of easy money & speculation. Vegas is back guys. Watch out for a dramatic increase in Ferraris on the road, more orgy parties, rocketing real estate prices, inflation, cheap debt. Over-exuberance is the sign of an imminent collapse."
"The Republicans are likely to create an intentional financial bubble. It will make it seem like times are great again. They will be gorging themselves at the trough. They know it is a bubble, so they will find safe havens before it bursts. Then they will step in to buy assests at bargain prices. The collapse of the housing market in 2008 was the greatest transfer of wealth, from the middle class to the 1%, in history. That is the reason they want to get rid of the Fed, who's job is to smooth out the economy, to avoid bubbles."
"The law of unintended consequences. That's why in repub years, always be very careful. Don't follow the crowd. The easing of bank loans & throwing out the Volcker Rule will create another environment of easy money & speculation. Vegas is back guys. Watch out for a dramatic increase in Ferraris on the road, more orgy parties, rocketing real estate prices, inflation, cheap debt. Over-exuberance is the sign of an imminent collapse."
35
What is it about the left that it can't get even well-known facts right?
The TRUTH is that the collapse of the housing market destroyed wealth -- it did not transfer it. And guess who took the biggest hit? Why the people with the wealth, silly. The result was a sharp reduction in inequality!
The TRUTH is that the collapse of the housing market destroyed wealth -- it did not transfer it. And guess who took the biggest hit? Why the people with the wealth, silly. The result was a sharp reduction in inequality!
1
For a time frame perhaps the Reagan-Thatcher alliance that put a happy face on poor fundamental economics may be a good reference. It set the foundation for the 2008 recession. Things happen faster in the age of increased communication technology so perhaps divide that time difference by the rate at which the internet has advanced and you could get a good approximation of when the next collapse will occur. It is only an economic mathematics exercise since there is no predicting the future. I will take a positive view that the collective we - as humanity - will see the folly of macroeconomic growth which leaves a stagnant or sliding middle class as unsustainable. But there are plenty of ways that Trump might transfer the burden of inequality from his white male base to his intended meanies of people of color and Islamic religion, there to disappear into benign neglect. Just put on a happy (Reagan-Thatcher) face and all will come out fine someday.
6
Since "Things happen faster in the age of increased communication technology", does that mean the recovery from the next economic struggle will be swift as well?
Trump's tax windfall for the rich, in concert with his crumbs-from-the-table sprinkle on the struggling middle and desperate lower economic classes, will allow a dozen or two of the fortunate to punch up the economy with their new $100-million yachts while millions will still struggle with 6-year loans on starter cars, if they can afford an automobile at all. That's far from a wash.
The same applies to housing. A $10-million mansion can take a couple of years to complete, employing only marginally more carpenters, masons, plumbers and electricians than does a $150,000 home which can go from first shovel to final strip of sod in about 6 months. The math does not favor the economy, particularly in the rural areas Trump dominates. Nor does it, in the home construction industry in particular, do anything about the use of immigrant --legal or not-- labor. Here, the decimation of unions is a particularly acute, and major, contributing factor to the loss of well-paying jobs. Let's not even get into the subject of quality of workmanship.
The comfortable-but-not-wealthy, which I must confess includes my wife and me, will continue to get along with little or no disruption in our daily lives or future plans. That does not mean I don't care deeply about my country, the land my ancestors (who were here before the first illegal immigrants arrived at Jamestown and Plymouth) loved, revered and preserved rather raped and pillaged.
To me, Donald Trump is an illegal.
The same applies to housing. A $10-million mansion can take a couple of years to complete, employing only marginally more carpenters, masons, plumbers and electricians than does a $150,000 home which can go from first shovel to final strip of sod in about 6 months. The math does not favor the economy, particularly in the rural areas Trump dominates. Nor does it, in the home construction industry in particular, do anything about the use of immigrant --legal or not-- labor. Here, the decimation of unions is a particularly acute, and major, contributing factor to the loss of well-paying jobs. Let's not even get into the subject of quality of workmanship.
The comfortable-but-not-wealthy, which I must confess includes my wife and me, will continue to get along with little or no disruption in our daily lives or future plans. That does not mean I don't care deeply about my country, the land my ancestors (who were here before the first illegal immigrants arrived at Jamestown and Plymouth) loved, revered and preserved rather raped and pillaged.
To me, Donald Trump is an illegal.
66
I worked as a consultant for many Wall Street firms over the decades, so I'm reasonably competent to interpret tax, investment, and real estate data. From what I see in Trump's tax plan, the top 0.1% will get an average tax break of over $1,000,000. The lowest 20% of workers, the rust-belt and rural voters who wanted to "send a message," will see an average tax break of $100 for the year.
That's less than $2.00 a week. If you stash all of your Trump tax cut savings, the average family might be able to go out for a Happy Meal every six weeks or so.
As for creating millions of new well-paying jobs by rebuilding infrastructure, Senate Leader Mitch McConnell said last week, "Infrastructure is just not something we are really interested in." Paul Ryan in the House has echoed these sentiments. Trump still doesn't understand the way our government works. He is not going to get many of his programs through even a Republican congress unless they are about killing Obamacare, cutting taxes on the rich, reversing Roe v Wade, removing all legal protections from discriminating against the LGBTQ community, deporting Hispanics and Muslims, and implementing Giuliani's "Stop and Frisk," which was declared unconstitutional by even Scalia's court several years ago.
One thing missing in all of these "accomplishments" is that they don't do squat for the disenfranchised workers who voted for him.
That's less than $2.00 a week. If you stash all of your Trump tax cut savings, the average family might be able to go out for a Happy Meal every six weeks or so.
As for creating millions of new well-paying jobs by rebuilding infrastructure, Senate Leader Mitch McConnell said last week, "Infrastructure is just not something we are really interested in." Paul Ryan in the House has echoed these sentiments. Trump still doesn't understand the way our government works. He is not going to get many of his programs through even a Republican congress unless they are about killing Obamacare, cutting taxes on the rich, reversing Roe v Wade, removing all legal protections from discriminating against the LGBTQ community, deporting Hispanics and Muslims, and implementing Giuliani's "Stop and Frisk," which was declared unconstitutional by even Scalia's court several years ago.
One thing missing in all of these "accomplishments" is that they don't do squat for the disenfranchised workers who voted for him.
42
Republicans will shoot for 'instant gratification' at the expense of studied, long term planning because they believe that nothing changes, including capitalism, and the principles of governance. Republicans will shoot for personal wealth and security because there they can never have enough to guarantee that they've achieved certainty and control over everyone and everything that surrounds them.
There may be a way to scrape the bottom of the barrel of capitalist growth, but scraping will not deliver the river of economic change that we need to avoid the inevitable trip back into th ditch of conservative self service.
There may be a way to scrape the bottom of the barrel of capitalist growth, but scraping will not deliver the river of economic change that we need to avoid the inevitable trip back into th ditch of conservative self service.
"One thing missing in all of these "accomplishments" is that they don't do squat for the disenfranchised workers who voted for him." Exactly. We need to show what is happening as it happens. Those disenfranchised workers were conned. Shamelessly. We owe it to them to point out to everybody when it turns out this is so.
There are two ways to accomplish the Keynesian stimulus that derives from government deficit spending -- the Republican way of cutting taxes predominantly on the rich, and the Democratic way of increasing government spending for social programs and business subsidies.
The first way puts more money into the hands of those who have no need to plow it back into the consumer economy -- they already have all the creature comforts that can be purchased in a market economy. They therefore tend to use the money for foreign purchases and to purchase additional political influence.
The second, Democratic way puts money into the hands of people who need it for their day to day expenses, and to create jobs directly. This money is immediately plowed back into the consumer economy, causing a rise in demand and in the need for increased supply to meet that demand.
We have chosen that first stimulus method several times before to disastrous results. Whenever we have taken the second path, however, it has brought about a broad-based prosperity and economic strength and stability.
Alas that we have chosen wrong.
The first way puts more money into the hands of those who have no need to plow it back into the consumer economy -- they already have all the creature comforts that can be purchased in a market economy. They therefore tend to use the money for foreign purchases and to purchase additional political influence.
The second, Democratic way puts money into the hands of people who need it for their day to day expenses, and to create jobs directly. This money is immediately plowed back into the consumer economy, causing a rise in demand and in the need for increased supply to meet that demand.
We have chosen that first stimulus method several times before to disastrous results. Whenever we have taken the second path, however, it has brought about a broad-based prosperity and economic strength and stability.
Alas that we have chosen wrong.
34
Supply side economics works best when there is high inflation. Demand side works best when there is low inflation.
Sorry, Doc, but you have Keynesianism just a bit wrong in your first scenario. In a healthy economy, cutting the deficit is justifiable as long as it is done in ways that will not weaken the overall economy. In an unhealthy, or even unsteady economy, the two main tools to right the economy are increases in taxes and increase in debt-financing programs that will put people to work at higher wages and make the country ultimately more competitive.
We were a Keynesian country until Ronald Reagan and company introduced the heterodox Austrian School "Supply Side" economics. (The Austrian School had always been a fringe theory from the late 1900s, rejected by (and laughed at by) most economists when Von Mises, Hayek, and others coming out of Austrian schools in the 20s began to hype it. Until Reagan, the GDP and median income had been rising at approximately the same rate for over a century. Once Supply Side was introduced, GDP continued to skyrocket, while median wages have remained flat or fallen. Neither Republicans nor Demo-publicans have seen fit to revive Keynesian economics, even though it built our (formerly) healthy working class and middle class. Supply Side has been tried for the past 35 years here and in other countries and has universally failed - leading to a small obscenely rich elite and an ever-more-impoverished working class, with only a small middle class left to supply services to the plutarchs. Expect much more of the same with Hyper-Elite Trump.
We were a Keynesian country until Ronald Reagan and company introduced the heterodox Austrian School "Supply Side" economics. (The Austrian School had always been a fringe theory from the late 1900s, rejected by (and laughed at by) most economists when Von Mises, Hayek, and others coming out of Austrian schools in the 20s began to hype it. Until Reagan, the GDP and median income had been rising at approximately the same rate for over a century. Once Supply Side was introduced, GDP continued to skyrocket, while median wages have remained flat or fallen. Neither Republicans nor Demo-publicans have seen fit to revive Keynesian economics, even though it built our (formerly) healthy working class and middle class. Supply Side has been tried for the past 35 years here and in other countries and has universally failed - leading to a small obscenely rich elite and an ever-more-impoverished working class, with only a small middle class left to supply services to the plutarchs. Expect much more of the same with Hyper-Elite Trump.
2
The difference between the two approaches is in the trust of "others". Conservatives are constantly looking to control and contain the behavior of "others" in order to guarantee the certainty and control of their own personal security.
Liberals have an implicit trust in humanity, and understand that civilization itself (the very platform that provides conservatives with their comfy, secure nests) is built on the faith and cooperation with others, aka, the collective "we". There is risk in that, but contrary to conservative doctrine, risk is inherent in the human condition because it is inherent in the physics of our Universe.
The issue is whether we, as a species, continue to change and grow to meet both the challenges of today, and the challenges of the future.
Liberals have an implicit trust in humanity, and understand that civilization itself (the very platform that provides conservatives with their comfy, secure nests) is built on the faith and cooperation with others, aka, the collective "we". There is risk in that, but contrary to conservative doctrine, risk is inherent in the human condition because it is inherent in the physics of our Universe.
The issue is whether we, as a species, continue to change and grow to meet both the challenges of today, and the challenges of the future.
1
The bad news.
1.The main threat to all of us here is incompetence. Management by
a cast of characters willing to work with a buffoon is very dangerous.
2. Small towns and rural areas are never coming back. They sadly are relics
and do not have the scale of our urban centers to support the services and opportunities that define the best of our nation. The next government needs policies to have many urban centers flourish and be attainable to more people. BTW this election was cities versus small towns/rural.
Now the good news.
Climate management is still attainable. Coal plants will not be showing up any time soon. They are vanishing. FAST. No utilities want it. Either do their investors or customers. Gas taxes are skyrocketing and more are coming.
It's an easy sell with higher mileage on autos. It will dampen demand for oil.
Protectionism will not work. Yes there will be a tariff here and there for a
political story but the supply chair for our most valuable goods is global
and can not be unwound.
Infrastructure spending will skyrocket on both a Federal and State level
bidding up labor and reducing unemployment.
The weight of the deficit will eventually be sold by more gifted populist
politicians than Trump as a crisis requiring progressive taxes.
Trump's ability to manage low skill labor will be no match for the Federal
Government's shark tank. His approval ratings start at 44%. Let's
see where they are a year from now.
1.The main threat to all of us here is incompetence. Management by
a cast of characters willing to work with a buffoon is very dangerous.
2. Small towns and rural areas are never coming back. They sadly are relics
and do not have the scale of our urban centers to support the services and opportunities that define the best of our nation. The next government needs policies to have many urban centers flourish and be attainable to more people. BTW this election was cities versus small towns/rural.
Now the good news.
Climate management is still attainable. Coal plants will not be showing up any time soon. They are vanishing. FAST. No utilities want it. Either do their investors or customers. Gas taxes are skyrocketing and more are coming.
It's an easy sell with higher mileage on autos. It will dampen demand for oil.
Protectionism will not work. Yes there will be a tariff here and there for a
political story but the supply chair for our most valuable goods is global
and can not be unwound.
Infrastructure spending will skyrocket on both a Federal and State level
bidding up labor and reducing unemployment.
The weight of the deficit will eventually be sold by more gifted populist
politicians than Trump as a crisis requiring progressive taxes.
Trump's ability to manage low skill labor will be no match for the Federal
Government's shark tank. His approval ratings start at 44%. Let's
see where they are a year from now.
16
I also think that the climate will benefit from the slow (or maybe less slow) decline in population that Trump's policies will produce. He and Ryan are going to end Obamacare and put nothing equivalent in place. Ryan has already announced plans to replace Medicare with something that offers less and costs more money to the individual. That will end up as a hit on the population, particularly in the red states where employers paying for good health benefits are rare. No new jobs are going to be created that offer excellent health care benefits - that was the reason Obamacare was created in the first place, too many employers were getting rid of health benefits, most often by outsourcing to companies that had never offered them. Also, anyone thinking of having children now who is neither wealthy nor employed in a sure thing job with great health benefits is taking a huge risk, both young women and their parents. I suspect people will be using birth control pretty assiduously until the economic situation gets sorted out, at least in blue states. Everyone seems to firmly agree that young adults should keep their ability to stay on their family health insurance until 26. But how about the 50% of the families who do not have employer insurance? It's a little hard to look at 2 25 year olds, and one has health coverage because mom or dad works for a big employer who offers it, and the second has nothing.
Heh, you think the "thoughtful citizens" that just voted for trump know how to use birth control? Thanks, I needed a laugh this morning.
The GOP are going to cut taxes and give corporations a tax holiday. This will cause a surge in the Net profits after tax for companies. The profits stashed away will be repatriated to the states but
(a) Companies like Apple don't need repatriated funds for investments. It has more than enough. So repatriated profits flows to the rich to make them feel richer. Money stashed in tax havens might flow back too - and then flow back out taxed are low rates and then flow back out. This is not money the rich need to spend you know?? the multiplier effect won't be as much as they hope.
(b) asset inflation - which is not always productive. Property prices may go up.
(c) there might be a trade war between the US and EU and other nations who want to get a slice of the repatriated profits made in the EU or Russia. So that might gum stuff up for a bit.
(d) then offsetting the surge in income amongst the better offs would be cuts in financial help to the poorer folks. Sooner or later, lower tax rates will reduce benefits to the poor. But it is the poor who tend to spend a larger portion of any increase income because they need more to begin with. So, tax cuts are going to ultimately result in less income for the poorer folks and reduce the multiplier effect.
When will these scenarios play out? I don't know. But if adjustments are NOT made to the mad obsession to tax cuts, it will play out.
(a) Companies like Apple don't need repatriated funds for investments. It has more than enough. So repatriated profits flows to the rich to make them feel richer. Money stashed in tax havens might flow back too - and then flow back out taxed are low rates and then flow back out. This is not money the rich need to spend you know?? the multiplier effect won't be as much as they hope.
(b) asset inflation - which is not always productive. Property prices may go up.
(c) there might be a trade war between the US and EU and other nations who want to get a slice of the repatriated profits made in the EU or Russia. So that might gum stuff up for a bit.
(d) then offsetting the surge in income amongst the better offs would be cuts in financial help to the poorer folks. Sooner or later, lower tax rates will reduce benefits to the poor. But it is the poor who tend to spend a larger portion of any increase income because they need more to begin with. So, tax cuts are going to ultimately result in less income for the poorer folks and reduce the multiplier effect.
When will these scenarios play out? I don't know. But if adjustments are NOT made to the mad obsession to tax cuts, it will play out.
5
The problem, as Krugman hints, is that there is a time delay between the enactment of a policy and its effects, and often things get better before they get worse, or worse before they get better.
Look at Bill Clinton's firing of the rules that separated investment banks from insured banks, and the legalization of derivatives (acts which should have made him a hero on the right, but of course they have no gratitude). They created a short term boom, but a decade later Gerry contributed, with a lot of help from the Bush Administration that created another boom by cutting regulators, to the great recession.
This is why winning the 2008 election might not have been so wonderful as people assumed. Things were really bad when Obama become president, ad's it was going to take a long time to bring them back. Unfortunately, he sought reconciliation with the people that destroyed the economy instead of making war on them. He got labeled a socialist, but raped none of the benefit of actually being one. Instead of going in the offensive, he went in the defensive, and ended up taking responsibility for the slow recovery sms the coddling of billionaires.
Look at Bill Clinton's firing of the rules that separated investment banks from insured banks, and the legalization of derivatives (acts which should have made him a hero on the right, but of course they have no gratitude). They created a short term boom, but a decade later Gerry contributed, with a lot of help from the Bush Administration that created another boom by cutting regulators, to the great recession.
This is why winning the 2008 election might not have been so wonderful as people assumed. Things were really bad when Obama become president, ad's it was going to take a long time to bring them back. Unfortunately, he sought reconciliation with the people that destroyed the economy instead of making war on them. He got labeled a socialist, but raped none of the benefit of actually being one. Instead of going in the offensive, he went in the defensive, and ended up taking responsibility for the slow recovery sms the coddling of billionaires.
8
Correction to J McGloin.
Note his remark: "Look at Bill Clinton's firing of the rules that separated investment banks from insured banks, and the legalization of derivatives ....."
WRONG. (Will this myth ever be laid to rest.)
Regarding the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and laying it at the doorstep of Pres. Clinton:
At that time the House and Senate of the Congress were both controlled by the GOP.
The final repeal bill, titled the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, hit the desk of President Clinton with a VETO PROOF majority. A few concessions had been wrung from the GOP throughout the entire dismal process.
The repeal bill was initially put forward by 3 GOP Senators led by Phil Gramm from Texas. (Gramm was also involved in the legalization of derivatives.)
At that initial time all Democrats voted against this legislative tragedy. It is all history and documented - if anyone cares to do so.
Make an effort to review the legislative history in the legislation archives of the Congress.
And then there is the economic damage done by "W" by way of the budget deficit and the national debt explosion - both of which he enabled.
This came about because of the "W" Bush tax cuts for the wealthy which decimated the budget surplus left behind by President Clinton when he left office.
Trump will now repeat this dismal history when he and the GOP Congress once again favor the wealthy with tax cuts they do not need and do not deserve.
We can now label it as ....... Trump Trickle.
Note his remark: "Look at Bill Clinton's firing of the rules that separated investment banks from insured banks, and the legalization of derivatives ....."
WRONG. (Will this myth ever be laid to rest.)
Regarding the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and laying it at the doorstep of Pres. Clinton:
At that time the House and Senate of the Congress were both controlled by the GOP.
The final repeal bill, titled the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, hit the desk of President Clinton with a VETO PROOF majority. A few concessions had been wrung from the GOP throughout the entire dismal process.
The repeal bill was initially put forward by 3 GOP Senators led by Phil Gramm from Texas. (Gramm was also involved in the legalization of derivatives.)
At that initial time all Democrats voted against this legislative tragedy. It is all history and documented - if anyone cares to do so.
Make an effort to review the legislative history in the legislation archives of the Congress.
And then there is the economic damage done by "W" by way of the budget deficit and the national debt explosion - both of which he enabled.
This came about because of the "W" Bush tax cuts for the wealthy which decimated the budget surplus left behind by President Clinton when he left office.
Trump will now repeat this dismal history when he and the GOP Congress once again favor the wealthy with tax cuts they do not need and do not deserve.
We can now label it as ....... Trump Trickle.
If Donald Trump can sell his infrastructure plan to a Republican congress that will be a major accomplishment. Of course the Republican Congress would not allow Obama to achieve this because it meant giving him credit for reviving America. Now that the Republicans may do it and perhaps budget accordingly this country could become great again and serve its citizens appropriately. (Don't hold your breath.)
6
Trump is white. Big advantage.
We saw that in Bush 2 for a spell and well... That didn't happen in spite of tax cuts and 2 wars which inevitably led to very large deficit spending... I think the more prudent approach is to wait and see. None of us have even seen his budget nor do we have anywhere near a granular understanding of his policies.
5
One important factor that Prof. Krugman did not mention is that Trump will take office at a time when economic conditions for all Americans are moving forward with great momentum. The Census Bureau report that median income increased at the fastest rate ever recorded, 5.2%, between early 2014 and early 2015 (the data is collected in February, March and April each year) and that the official poverty rate declined from 14.8% to 13.5%. It is extremely likely that the 2016 data and 2017 data will show that the improvement has continued since job creation has remained very strong and wages and other personal income and personal consumption expenditures have continued to rise.
The downside of course is that the public, whom polling show overwhelming find their household economy is improving but strongly belief the national economy is getting worse may decide that Trump should get the credit just as Obama got the blame for the after-effects of the recession that ended about four months after his compromise stimulus was enacted.
The downside of course is that the public, whom polling show overwhelming find their household economy is improving but strongly belief the national economy is getting worse may decide that Trump should get the credit just as Obama got the blame for the after-effects of the recession that ended about four months after his compromise stimulus was enacted.
16
I think it is a mistake to indulge in rational analysis when the players are irrational. Our greatest concern should be that Trump has a form of narcissistic personality disorder - he exhibits every sign of being a megalomaniac. A second related concern is that most of our elected representatives are drawn to politics for power and riches. More of them than not are narcissists and a fair number of them exhibit sociopathic tendencies. Washington runs a muck in a toxic brew that has led to a 90% disapproval rating in the eyes of the public.
Krugman takes a practical view by looking at the big picture of whether business/Wall Street/banks will continue to prosper, the GDP will increase, and the stock and real estate markets will inflate. On the other hand Americans are concerned about more mundane concerns like putting food on the table, finding affordable housing and health care, and enjoying a decent quality of life. Many Americans and in particular millennials are worried about competing in today's economy given fewer job opportunities coupled with a demand for specialized higher education that few can afford.
Long view or short view, until massive income and wealth inequality is addressed, this country and the world are sitting on a powder keg of raw feelings, unbridled frustrations and enormous discontent. I hope that the keg goes off in a Republican controlled government and sweeps them out of power forever. If not Dems will be brought in to take all the blame.
Krugman takes a practical view by looking at the big picture of whether business/Wall Street/banks will continue to prosper, the GDP will increase, and the stock and real estate markets will inflate. On the other hand Americans are concerned about more mundane concerns like putting food on the table, finding affordable housing and health care, and enjoying a decent quality of life. Many Americans and in particular millennials are worried about competing in today's economy given fewer job opportunities coupled with a demand for specialized higher education that few can afford.
Long view or short view, until massive income and wealth inequality is addressed, this country and the world are sitting on a powder keg of raw feelings, unbridled frustrations and enormous discontent. I hope that the keg goes off in a Republican controlled government and sweeps them out of power forever. If not Dems will be brought in to take all the blame.
21
My worry is that the actions of a GOP dominated Congress combined with Trump and his closest advisors will gradually push us into another Great Recession. This will hurt the middle and working classes more than the crisis of 2008 because we haven't recovered the ground we lost. In my opinion economists measure the wrong things when they are looking for a recovering economy. The stock market averages mean nothing to people who cannot find jobs or cannot pay their bills because their jobs don't pay them enough, to those who are spending too much of their net income on housing, who cannot save because they have nothing to save with. Quite often that pent up demand economists refer to is nothing more than spending based on necessity not confidence in the economy.
I've been working since 1980. In that time I have never felt economically secure. I've had to run through half my savings to survive long term unemployment. I've been unable to save for retirement because I feel that all my savings must be immediately available to me in case I lose a job and can never find another (increasingly likely as I approach the age of 60), or I need extended medical care, etc. I'm struck by how often our politicians, on both sides of the aisle, fail to understand how precarious our lives are even if we're employed and have health insurance. They assume that we can get jobs if we just try hard enough. And they listen to experts rather than to us. GOP or Democrat, they don't get it.
I've been working since 1980. In that time I have never felt economically secure. I've had to run through half my savings to survive long term unemployment. I've been unable to save for retirement because I feel that all my savings must be immediately available to me in case I lose a job and can never find another (increasingly likely as I approach the age of 60), or I need extended medical care, etc. I'm struck by how often our politicians, on both sides of the aisle, fail to understand how precarious our lives are even if we're employed and have health insurance. They assume that we can get jobs if we just try hard enough. And they listen to experts rather than to us. GOP or Democrat, they don't get it.
45
If Trump de-regulates, lets corporations do what they want, reduce expenditures required to safeguard the environment, etc., of course, it will boost profits and will create some jobs. But this laissez-fair approach comes at a cost, water, air, river degradation will not be set aright easily. There is no free lunch: the profits that are made now will be paid later. The argument between left and right is precisely this: do you take measures now to ensure future well-being or do you get immediate results at the expense of the future. Ironically, Republicans make the argument when dealing with the debt but are tone deaf when dealing with really existential matters like climate change. It is a complex balancing act because sometime you have to go one way and other times the opposite. Unfortunately, we have someone in charge who does not deal in complexities.
33
Say the word "jobs" and common sense goes to sleep. After 8 years of being told the government cannot create jobs, voters now say them voted for a government that will create jobs!
Would that it be so easy: the key word is not "jobs" but "demand." No job, whether high or low wages, is created without demand. To think otherwise is make-believe and tribal myth; to think otherwise posit a set of causes (and dreams) that deny the simple, obvious relationship of cause and effect. Between jobs and demand.
Demand has to raise so that producers need more labor capacity for jobs to be created. Labor is both a variable and a constant between supply and demand.
The honest question is where will demand come from? How long will it the supply chain to meet the new demand? What training will be needed? Will it involve factory units being built with employees who have traditional benefits? In what economic sectors will demand increase to create new jobs? Tech/healthcare/defense/industrial/consumer/media/wireless/energy/the internet of things?
Too many people have fell under the spell of the word "jobs." The reality (numbers and wages!) will be much different!
Would that it be so easy: the key word is not "jobs" but "demand." No job, whether high or low wages, is created without demand. To think otherwise is make-believe and tribal myth; to think otherwise posit a set of causes (and dreams) that deny the simple, obvious relationship of cause and effect. Between jobs and demand.
Demand has to raise so that producers need more labor capacity for jobs to be created. Labor is both a variable and a constant between supply and demand.
The honest question is where will demand come from? How long will it the supply chain to meet the new demand? What training will be needed? Will it involve factory units being built with employees who have traditional benefits? In what economic sectors will demand increase to create new jobs? Tech/healthcare/defense/industrial/consumer/media/wireless/energy/the internet of things?
Too many people have fell under the spell of the word "jobs." The reality (numbers and wages!) will be much different!
23
I like your thought process. Demand creates jobs. But what creates demand? I contend that it is spendable income. Having an income in excess of one's basic needs means people are going to buy stuff. My wife and I are fortunate enough to have a family income that more than covers our basic needs, so we buy stuff that we like and that we believe will add value to our home.
My point being that a government policy that puts more emphasis on moving money to the very rich instead of the middle class will result in a declining middle class and a slackening of demand and then of course a decrease in jobs.
My point being that a government policy that puts more emphasis on moving money to the very rich instead of the middle class will result in a declining middle class and a slackening of demand and then of course a decrease in jobs.
2
Hi Walter: There's a lot of truth here - the whole idea of "jobs" is fetishized - if that's the word - and needs a lot of new thought.
On the other hand, the government isn't as helpless as you suggest - the field of education comes to mind - There are some rural areas where the local school department is one of the biggest employers (along with the highway department). It's not just teachers, it's bus drivers, administrators, maintenance workers - and these jobs create real value in improving the lives of the community - in ways I won't start listing right now.
On the other hand, the government isn't as helpless as you suggest - the field of education comes to mind - There are some rural areas where the local school department is one of the biggest employers (along with the highway department). It's not just teachers, it's bus drivers, administrators, maintenance workers - and these jobs create real value in improving the lives of the community - in ways I won't start listing right now.
Demand will rise because the new jobs will be in infrastructure. The. Infrastructure prograns the Republicans would not approve under Obama.
I predict a repeat of the toxic mortgage crisis (or its equivalent) in the first four years. You simply cannot de-regulate bankers and expect them to behave differently they did in the buildup to the Great Recession.
I'm always struck by the films that get made in the years following great crises: "Inside Job," "the Big Short," "The Wolf of Wall Street," "American Hustle." Even if their time and place don't exactly mirror the very recent past, they reveal the kind of greed and enjoyment of the "take" that doesn't speak well of our financial class.
Should this happen--and the need for bailout occur--the country risks major defaults by big businesses given the high levels of debt left over from the first Great Recession. Debt: Donald's biggest love won't work for him the same way in running the country as it did in his real estate shenanigans.
And of course, who will all this hurt the most?
Yes, the people who can least afford it: the middle and lower class, including all the Trump voters who put their trust in Trump's business acumen.
I'm always struck by the films that get made in the years following great crises: "Inside Job," "the Big Short," "The Wolf of Wall Street," "American Hustle." Even if their time and place don't exactly mirror the very recent past, they reveal the kind of greed and enjoyment of the "take" that doesn't speak well of our financial class.
Should this happen--and the need for bailout occur--the country risks major defaults by big businesses given the high levels of debt left over from the first Great Recession. Debt: Donald's biggest love won't work for him the same way in running the country as it did in his real estate shenanigans.
And of course, who will all this hurt the most?
Yes, the people who can least afford it: the middle and lower class, including all the Trump voters who put their trust in Trump's business acumen.
67
Christine,
Yes, I agree with your assessment entirely. I live in a solidly Red state whose largely white population suffered badly during Dubya's recession. These communities will undoubtedly suffer the most under Trump. But they will not assign any responsibility for this to him or his minions. They will look elsewhere to blame others, i.e., those who don't look like themselves. In fact, here they have already started, with the targeting of the Latino community, which I, as an Arizona resident, have had a sickening front row seat. I predict similar targeting of other minority communities now, in Trump's America.
Yes, I agree with your assessment entirely. I live in a solidly Red state whose largely white population suffered badly during Dubya's recession. These communities will undoubtedly suffer the most under Trump. But they will not assign any responsibility for this to him or his minions. They will look elsewhere to blame others, i.e., those who don't look like themselves. In fact, here they have already started, with the targeting of the Latino community, which I, as an Arizona resident, have had a sickening front row seat. I predict similar targeting of other minority communities now, in Trump's America.
3
And you have did what, exactly? It's people like you that are part of the problem -- rather than help others navigate the waters, people like you help sink their boats.
Let's speak honestly. Any economist today -- including Nobel Prize winners --making predictions can't be taken seriously. Too many crucial wrong analysis were made by mainstream economists in the last two decades.
True. Abandoning the climate change agreement will be a serious mistake. Not only for the US but for the world. The US is the largest world pollution producer.
Regarding the economy, Donald Trump has all the necessary tools --including a world currency and the classical foreign policy tool of speaking softly while carrying a big stick -- to accomplish the following macroeconomic goals below:
(a) foster sustainable GDP growth; (b) promoting job creation policies while sustaining a wage growth cycle; (c) renegotiate existing trade agreements, eliminating clauses biased against domestic job creation.
As soon as anti-Trump middle-class Americans start to feel the positive impact of his policies in their pockets, any political opposition will fade away. Trump's chances to be reelected will increase substantially.
For Trump's political adversaries, his rise to power reminds me of the 1970s SNL shtick ' the creature that won't leave."
True. Abandoning the climate change agreement will be a serious mistake. Not only for the US but for the world. The US is the largest world pollution producer.
Regarding the economy, Donald Trump has all the necessary tools --including a world currency and the classical foreign policy tool of speaking softly while carrying a big stick -- to accomplish the following macroeconomic goals below:
(a) foster sustainable GDP growth; (b) promoting job creation policies while sustaining a wage growth cycle; (c) renegotiate existing trade agreements, eliminating clauses biased against domestic job creation.
As soon as anti-Trump middle-class Americans start to feel the positive impact of his policies in their pockets, any political opposition will fade away. Trump's chances to be reelected will increase substantially.
For Trump's political adversaries, his rise to power reminds me of the 1970s SNL shtick ' the creature that won't leave."
11
Mr. Nogueira,
China's CO2 output is twice that of the U.S. Add to that it's water, soil and misc. air pollution and no other country comes close to being polluters on par with China.
China's CO2 output is twice that of the U.S. Add to that it's water, soil and misc. air pollution and no other country comes close to being polluters on par with China.
I am faithful reader of Paul Krugman, his predictions were mostly right no, not sure which wrong economics analysis you are referring to unless you lump him with the GOP economists who continue to ignore the facts and the expert opinion (including that of a Prof Krugman) and promise growth based on failed policies of the last. If you need a glaring example you can just read again your own writing.
Dream on. There will be no new coal mines or steel mills opened and the reemployment of o those , now 15-30 years older , workers who voted for " bringing our jobs back home". Economics demands that investments have returns. Mexico, China, Korea, Vietnam ad infinitum can produce the same quality as us and cheaper. There's no way to change that!!!
Paul Krugman is definitely a Democratic establishment addict. It's propelling him to make all kinds of dire predictions and then retract them on the basis that yes, they will happen, but it will just "take more time." Well, he had to show some kind of contrition after the stock market hit an all time high.
Sooner or later, we're going to have a recession. Of course we're going to have a recession, but not because of Donald Trump or his policies. It's going to happen because our economy is nothing but a house of cards being propped up by borrowed money that Wall Street is using to drive up the stock market. That's it in a nutshell. The banks aren't lending to small start up businesses that have inherent risk. Why should they, when they can simply borrow government money at a ridiculously low interest rate and throw it at the soaring stock market??
Borrowing money to prop up an economy is a little like treating anemia by applying leeches. If everybody thinks it will work, then, everybody sees improvement, even the afflicted. But even as the afflicted look rosier, it's only because there's a fever setting in. There's simply not enough blood to maintain a healthy immune system.
Our economy will most certainly tank again, but not because of Donald Trump. It's because we're not being responsible; we've lost our manufacturing; we're not taking care of each other; and we are not administering the correct remedy which is borrow less and invest in tangibles.
Sooner or later, we're going to have a recession. Of course we're going to have a recession, but not because of Donald Trump or his policies. It's going to happen because our economy is nothing but a house of cards being propped up by borrowed money that Wall Street is using to drive up the stock market. That's it in a nutshell. The banks aren't lending to small start up businesses that have inherent risk. Why should they, when they can simply borrow government money at a ridiculously low interest rate and throw it at the soaring stock market??
Borrowing money to prop up an economy is a little like treating anemia by applying leeches. If everybody thinks it will work, then, everybody sees improvement, even the afflicted. But even as the afflicted look rosier, it's only because there's a fever setting in. There's simply not enough blood to maintain a healthy immune system.
Our economy will most certainly tank again, but not because of Donald Trump. It's because we're not being responsible; we've lost our manufacturing; we're not taking care of each other; and we are not administering the correct remedy which is borrow less and invest in tangibles.
44
Already making excuses for the low-performing Trump?
24
I think that our deficit is so out of control that unless Trump slams on the brakes of borrowing and starts pouring our tax dollars into tangible assets like American manufacturing and infrastructure, that we will hit another economic wall. I'm hoping he does something extreme, but it's very unlikely. He'll probably make incremental changes as he can but what we really need is a radical policy change.
Not sure about a low-performing Trump: he's an outstanding marketeer, or his cronies are. Place maps of previous elections together, mark that Dems have the coasts and check out the silent majority in the middle of the country who are suffering lack of jobs sent away by corporations seeking cheaper workers. Ah, customers there who will buy the right sales pitch. Hammer in "I Will Fix it" incessantly. Success! But. Buyers beware!
1
It won't take long for the "cruel joke" just played on the American middle class to become apparent. They want their jobs back on January 20. I am no economist, but I am a student of history. When you offer false and downright dishonest hope to people who are desperate, you are asking for revolution.
166
kglen,
I agree. My biggest concern, however, is that Trump and his toadies won't pay any price in what will be a very ugly America these next few years. It's that we in the minority communities will be blamed for situation of the white working poor. History does provide a couple examples...
I agree. My biggest concern, however, is that Trump and his toadies won't pay any price in what will be a very ugly America these next few years. It's that we in the minority communities will be blamed for situation of the white working poor. History does provide a couple examples...
1
No, there will not be a revolution. There will be attacks on the minorities. That is trump's solution. He has no actual policies.
2
Exactly. Just look at the big HOPE guy and the past 8 years that lead to THIS guy that steps in come January.
"A return to protectionism and trade wars would make the world economy poorer over time, and would in particular cripple poorer nations that desperately need open markets for their products."
.
Working class Americans in small towns don't care about that! For years, and especially under Barak Obama and Bill Clinton, we have allowed ourselves to view global trade deals as charity because we don't want to cripple poorer nations. We make dollar contributions; but we also donate jobs. Poor From a geopolitical standpoint it's working. The numbers of people livin in deep poverty have gone way down. But it has come at a terrible cost for working class people in the West. Towns have been devastated. People have fallen out of the middle class in record numbers. It's terrible.
.
Working class Americans are ready to let the poor nations fend for themselves. And I can't say I blame them (having grown up in a former factory town in Maine.). We need to focus on ourselves for a bit here. Otherwise the next Donald Trump could actually be worse!
.
Working class Americans in small towns don't care about that! For years, and especially under Barak Obama and Bill Clinton, we have allowed ourselves to view global trade deals as charity because we don't want to cripple poorer nations. We make dollar contributions; but we also donate jobs. Poor From a geopolitical standpoint it's working. The numbers of people livin in deep poverty have gone way down. But it has come at a terrible cost for working class people in the West. Towns have been devastated. People have fallen out of the middle class in record numbers. It's terrible.
.
Working class Americans are ready to let the poor nations fend for themselves. And I can't say I blame them (having grown up in a former factory town in Maine.). We need to focus on ourselves for a bit here. Otherwise the next Donald Trump could actually be worse!
18
The problem with letting poor nations fend for themselves is that they can become failed states like Somalia and near-fail states like Afghanistan. Then they become the political equivalent of tumors where the growth industries are narco-terroism, religious fascism (and not just Islamic), human trafficking, piracy and other profitable forms of organized crime wedded to political kleptocracies. It also doesn't help that often these failed and near-failed states sit on hugely valuable mineral or biological resources that can be exploited for criminal gains. For this reason, Trump's foreign policy will be penny wise but dollar foolish in the long run. Right now it has become clear that the American polity will not spend one dime to prevent a crisis (especially global warming) but spend trillions in reaction to one (sounds like our health care system as well!).
Don't you understand? We need to have "open markets", so China can sell their cheaper products in the USA, in order to have enough money to buy US Treasury Bonds. Those of us that live in "rural" areas need to quit thinking of ourselves and get on board with the big picture. On a serious note: the US petrochemical industry is one area of the economy that can't be outsourced to China. How about we make sure we support those companies, with our economic policies?
Nonsense. The 8 years of Bush sandwiched between 8 great years of Clinton, and 4 lousy years under Obama and 4 okay years under same-- were a disaster on an order of magnitude that the GOP has somehow convinced the average American meant nothing. And thus, the democratic party allows the GOP to write the script. How convenient.
Dr. K I think we have seen this economic train before less than 16 years ago the SCOTUS appointed a Texan with business savvy and his experienced Vice President. The VP ran the country and the President ran his bike around his ranch. It didn't turn out so well economically and some of the economic drain is still going on - paying for unfunded wars and the lose of economic status of Main Street to Wall Street during the great recession. The one economic force you have not talk about is the president-elects admiration for Russian President Putin who is a criminal in every sense of the word but has successfully drained the Russian economy of an estimated $20B to his private account. That has been an enormous determinate on the Russian economy but there no one to stop him. Are we looking at the former administration or the latter? Time will only tell if it is a slow moving train of the Bush years or a high speed bullet train of Putin.
31
The US has plenty of wealth and plenty of leeway for bad changes to be absorbed (the earth may not have such wiggle room). But the questions remains: will the wealth and problems be fairly spread about, or will a few benefit and the rest suffer? So, politics and social relations will be part of the answer, not economics alone. Wait for Trump's policies to be announced, then we will know better the balance between economic issues and the rest. Economic strains on some can lead to political and social unrest for all.
5
I'm not sure what the point of this column is. I mean, it's very hard to predict what the long- and short-term economic effects of a Trump presidency would be, because it's uncertain what Trump will do and what he'll be able to do. Trump has said a lot of things about the economy that are either contradictory or betray a deep ignorance about certain issues. So it's hard to say, based on his statements, that he's resolved to do any particular thing in that area.
Sure, if Trump does a $1 trillion infrastructure plan, that will probably help the economy. If he starts a trade war--not just slapping tariffs on China, but actively fighting them on currency and trade--then that would be bad, and might be bad in the short term. If Trump pulls out of NAFTA, that will at least hurt the stock market, and may kill a lot of jobs in the process of a quick readjustment. If Trump and the Republican Congress manage to pass something ending the Federal Reserve's jobs mandate, or yoking it to the political will of the White House, that may cause severe short- and long-term economic consequences, as investors would assess this as adding enormous uncertainty. (Is Trump really going to sit on his hands while Yellen starts raising rates, making his administration look less economically successful?)
Adding to the uncertainty is that Republicans are ideologically still opposed to many of Trump's economic policies. What will they let him get through Congress?
Sure, if Trump does a $1 trillion infrastructure plan, that will probably help the economy. If he starts a trade war--not just slapping tariffs on China, but actively fighting them on currency and trade--then that would be bad, and might be bad in the short term. If Trump pulls out of NAFTA, that will at least hurt the stock market, and may kill a lot of jobs in the process of a quick readjustment. If Trump and the Republican Congress manage to pass something ending the Federal Reserve's jobs mandate, or yoking it to the political will of the White House, that may cause severe short- and long-term economic consequences, as investors would assess this as adding enormous uncertainty. (Is Trump really going to sit on his hands while Yellen starts raising rates, making his administration look less economically successful?)
Adding to the uncertainty is that Republicans are ideologically still opposed to many of Trump's economic policies. What will they let him get through Congress?
19
The point of this column is that the near term economic impact of the Trump election could be positive (higher asset values, more public investment, etc.) but that the long term impact with be negative (higher prices, tremendous reduction in bubble-infected asset values, etc.) The problem is that no one knows how long "short-term" or "long-term" is. The best financial advice is to stay flexible, accept lower investment returns, reduce debt and constrain or even lower your standard of living. One could add to move to higher ground and away from the coast.
1
Pierce, the "point of this column" is what you noted - no one knows what Trump will say or do AND no one knows what events will occur external to the Trump administration to drive its decision-making, BUT regardless, Paul Krugman is contractually required to have a Monday column. Why not just cut to the chase Paul and say "For those who enjoy or can profit from unpredictability, volatility, uncertainty, and insecurity, you folks will do fine. As to the great mass of everyone else, we're in uncharted waters here."
Paul, I made the same comment on your blog. There is every possibility that the iniquitous policies of Trump may occur quite quickly given that all 3 branches of government are controlled by the Republicans. Top priority policy initiatives are typically made at the beginning of a new administration during the short-lived, "honeymoon" phase. In fairness to Trump, not even God knows where he stands on issues so it's anyone's guess what he will do. Let us have a national moment of prayer.
49
In all fairness to people who think, who use their brain to think more than to react, if there is a God, even that God doesn't know where Trump stands on issues, as Trump wavers back and forth on his opinions all of which show his lack of understanding them to any degree. It is people, not gods, who know and come to know and can anticipate the realities of human life. Those who are informed, think better than those who blithely go along mindlessly. Those who think better eventually decide what societies will do. They find ways to rectify what had been wrought through social insanities. It is just that in the meantime, many will be damaged and die as a result of the insanities.
OK, but don't tell the ACLU.
Truthfully Mr Krugman you have no idea what will happen. Economists are useful for telling us when we are in a recession (usually after we have exited it). The hour is the writings and rantings of your ilk..the media elites. You all got it wrong. What America wanted was not more statistics of how well job creation was going and how well things were statistically. In the Words of that great intellectual Leo Deroucher"Statistics are for losers".
13
None of these experts know more than the average high school drop-out anyway, right? That's sarcasm, by the way.
Predicting the economy was always difficult. Now, with trading and super-computers dominating the market, the Dow etc. do not fairly represent the economy. The lag in growth is not a reflection of industrial activity as such but also of the shunting of profits away from re-investment in worker compensation/job growth to shareholder paybacks. A major disciple of this suctioning of wealth to the 1% is Carl Icahn, who apparently was invited by Trump to join his team. Already on the team--Stephen Moore, Club for Growth (growth of what?), hunter of RINOs, and champion of the flat tax. Add Peter Navarro and his recommendation of a 45% tariff on imports from China--maybe he didn't really mean that, just as Trump seems to decide day by day what he really means. We're watching a high-school experiment in governance.
357
The high school experiments would, I suspect, appear worthy of MBA credentials when compared to Trumpian economic actors more concerned with milk and cookie breaks and neatening-up their cubbies.
"We're watching a high-school experiment in governance."
If you want a lesson in experimenting with an economy, start with FDR and the New Deal.
If you want a lesson in experimenting with an economy, start with FDR and the New Deal.
I don't think you give enough credit to high school kids.
Infrastructure spending should stimualte the economy. Enabling polluters, tax cuts, the deregulation of business and banking, the reduction or abolition of tax on off shore corporate profits must create some surge of capital that will boost the economy short term at the cost of long term stability. Akin to addressing long term malnutrition with junk food. Why woudn't stocks do well? The money must find a home somewhere and US stocks seem likely.
Those with money to invest in the market, a tax-advantaged investment, should do well– if we ignore climate change, the loss of public lands given to Republican states to manage (sell off) and the additional increased deficit from tax cuts to be paid for by those lesser Americans who don't live in "the real America of 'The Heartland, '" more aptly named "The Belly of America" as it consumes and is subsidized by the remaining unreal Americans- those with 2nd class votes and voting rights and far fewer congressional representatives by structural design.
Long term rates should move up abetting polarization and setting up another real estate collapse. The interest cost to pay for the expanding deficit will increase. Add to this mix the potential of terrorist attacks, the return to bankruptcies from health care charges and the added instability of the world from Russia and China extending their hegemonic control. Oh, and that CLIMATE CHANGE! thing.
Those with money to invest in the market, a tax-advantaged investment, should do well– if we ignore climate change, the loss of public lands given to Republican states to manage (sell off) and the additional increased deficit from tax cuts to be paid for by those lesser Americans who don't live in "the real America of 'The Heartland, '" more aptly named "The Belly of America" as it consumes and is subsidized by the remaining unreal Americans- those with 2nd class votes and voting rights and far fewer congressional representatives by structural design.
Long term rates should move up abetting polarization and setting up another real estate collapse. The interest cost to pay for the expanding deficit will increase. Add to this mix the potential of terrorist attacks, the return to bankruptcies from health care charges and the added instability of the world from Russia and China extending their hegemonic control. Oh, and that CLIMATE CHANGE! thing.
25
The stock market is not the economy.
@JT... Right you are. I'm already pre-missing the good old days when long term interest rates were at historic lows.
Like every reader of this column, I find the idea of a Trump presidency horrifying. But it's time to think critically about how he won the election and Professor Krugman isn't doing so. To imply that Clinton was "our last, best chance to rein in runaway climate change" is to avoid looking at why she was so unpopular that we wound up with a fascist President-elect. The hard fact is that Clinton would have exacerbated climate change. She supports fracking and refuses to oppose dangerous (and even illegal) oil pipelines. She supports free trade agreements that transfer U.S. manufacturing operations to countries with no pollution controls and that require products that used to be manufactured domestically to be transported on gas-guzzling container ships half way around the globe. Climate science is, indeed, science, and no one studying it could endorse Hillary Clinton's pro-oil industry, pro-free trade policies. This is one of many, many reasons progressive response to her was tepid at best.
43
You'll like President Trump so much more.
How he won the election was by convincing many progressives that your summary of Clinton's policies is accurate.
How he won the election was by convincing many progressives that your summary of Clinton's policies is accurate.
2
A tad overboard! Progressives had already tempered her fracking and pipeline stances; she would have wanted re-election, so she would not have gone overboard. She is hardly the Big Coal, Big Oil representative you make her out to be or that Trump actually is. (Remember that she got in trouble for rightly saying that the coal jobs weren't coming back!)
But most important, she respects science, recognizes that global warming is real, and would have supported Obama's key climate change initiatives, including the latest international agreements.
You cannot say the same things about Trump-- who is anti-science, anti-fact, has investments in the very pipeline companies we decry, and called global warming a "Chinese hoax", displaying an even deeper ignorance mixed with traces of racism.
Any progressive who stayed home because they found Hillary too centrist ignored these realities and the progressive policies she was espousing-- and ignored the deep dangers of the ignorant, racist, unhinged Trump. Any who stayed home are thus complicit in the havoc, pain, and damage Trump will cause-- and the suffering he will inflict on millions of people, their families, and the world.
But most important, she respects science, recognizes that global warming is real, and would have supported Obama's key climate change initiatives, including the latest international agreements.
You cannot say the same things about Trump-- who is anti-science, anti-fact, has investments in the very pipeline companies we decry, and called global warming a "Chinese hoax", displaying an even deeper ignorance mixed with traces of racism.
Any progressive who stayed home because they found Hillary too centrist ignored these realities and the progressive policies she was espousing-- and ignored the deep dangers of the ignorant, racist, unhinged Trump. Any who stayed home are thus complicit in the havoc, pain, and damage Trump will cause-- and the suffering he will inflict on millions of people, their families, and the world.
Right, so you allow Trump to be elected because your response to Hillary is tepid, great thinking.
I believe the consequences of a trade war may be more disruptive than Dr. Krugman imagines. China is already threatening to stop sending us iPhones and automobiles. Perhaps this is bluster, but I don't see the Chinese as simply sitting idly by as the U.S. attempts to re-nationalize its economy. While in the long-run this might (might) restore some American jobs, in the short run, there's the potential for serious inflation. And the political and economic cannot be completely disentangled here. If the U.S. /Chinese relationship deteriorates to one of finger-pointing and name-calling (not that Trump would ever do that, right?), this could have a very disruptive impact on global financial markets that could in turn have negative macroeconomic consequences.
16
You might add that destruction of regulations will mean many, many sicker people. With dirtier air, the food supply totally unregulated, and minimal healthcare because "it's too expensive," there will be "Soilent Green," more quickly than we expected.
This is an unmitigated disaster. At 82, I have watched the trajectory. Every day since last Tuesday, I am more afraid, not of the protesters or the "terrorists," or the immigrants, but of the failure to address climate change and what the Trump tax plan and eleminate regulation plans mean for our future.
This is an unmitigated disaster. At 82, I have watched the trajectory. Every day since last Tuesday, I am more afraid, not of the protesters or the "terrorists," or the immigrants, but of the failure to address climate change and what the Trump tax plan and eleminate regulation plans mean for our future.
2
A far more likely scenario is that the central bank-induced low growth we've been managing to eke out continues to offer diminishing returns and finally just clunks to a stop over the next six months.
One thing I will look forward to under this administration is some real coverage (finally!) of the jobs report. Look for Trump's first big jobs report to be riddled with asides and qualifications, the way they always should have been, but unlike they have been under Barry.
In fact, given that things remain more or less the same, I expect pundits circa year two of Trump's administration to be spending a lot of time looking at just how and why things are not so rosy... unlike during this administration.
One thing I will look forward to under this administration is some real coverage (finally!) of the jobs report. Look for Trump's first big jobs report to be riddled with asides and qualifications, the way they always should have been, but unlike they have been under Barry.
In fact, given that things remain more or less the same, I expect pundits circa year two of Trump's administration to be spending a lot of time looking at just how and why things are not so rosy... unlike during this administration.
7
The jobs reports have always been that way. You've fallen prey to the spin of Fox News that the data are being reported any differently than they ever have. CONSISTENCY in reporting is paramount if we ever hope to compare one period to another. Imagine the chaos if Trump changed the length of a ruler. That's the kind of change you think is a good idea. Bush tried this when he took the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq off the books and did not include their cost in his economic reports. It was smoke and mirrors then, and changing the jobs report would be the same thing.
There has always been an acknowledgment that much of the job growth has been in the service area and are not as high paying as other jobs, so I don't know exactly what you are talking about. And, if you think Donny is going to qualify the jobs report with asides and qualifications, you are hallucinating. Administrations are always going to be putting a positive spin on anything that might look good for them and there is no reason to think that Donny will do otherwise.
Trumps philosophy will empower those who only want government to benefit wealth. Those of us who went into government to serve will be hurt. We are people driven by doing good for others, and this trait will not be of value in this administration. Public jobs have built a solid middle class, think police for the Irish, and the military for the black community. Team this up with a pension and Medicare and you have a solid life into old age which most Americans would be happy with. This is being threatened now, and I am not hopeful. The current administration will rip the safety net and try to get rid of what's left of secure, public work and benefits. its mean spirited, but gives power and wealth to those at the top. If they have us all on our knees, they call the shots.
39
Yes, Cathleen! Spelled out exactly. Thank you. I wish the Times would see fit to pick this. It's a big part of what has people in the streets. Trump knows this, but is so busy taking power and enriching himself and his friends that he has no time for the people who bought his lies.
The Republicans in rural America think the urban elites look down on them, but the truth is that the liberals vote in ways that better represent the poor and the Republican red states vote in ways that help the rich, this is why liberals think red state Americans are out of touch. They vote against their interests because they are blinded by their hatred and the Republican leadership uses that. Donald Trump certainly stoked those flames for his own benefit. A big tax cut for the rich is not going to help the working class in middle America!
137
My experience with rural voters is that they look down on people who wasted their time going to college. As one guy told me, "You are always reading books" with a sneer as if I had committed a felony.
Nope. Bernie better understood the heartfelt sentiments of the poor in red states. It wasn't a democrat or republican thing, it was a human dignity thing.
1
The Brexit recession has not yet happened, because the UK is still a member of the EU, has not yet invoked article 50 and will be able to sell SERVICES to the EU for two more years after Brexit negotiations have been triggered - unless the British Parliament puts an end to this madness. But if Britain does leave the EU and doesn't join the EEA it will go through a very rough spot 3 years from now.
21
The apocalypse is coming!
A Republican has been elected.
Don't worry Paul, our next President will not pay any attention at all to you, so there is no risk.
A Republican has been elected.
Don't worry Paul, our next President will not pay any attention at all to you, so there is no risk.
10
Yes, and sadly you may be right on both counta. I trust you are very, very rich and are likely to remain so.
The last Republican president led the charge to start an unjustified war, committed war crimes, and ushered in the worst financial crisis since the great depression. And he was just stupid, not insane. No, can't see any reason to be concerned.
1
DT is not just "a Republican." I could have tolerated a Kasich. The public persona of the President-elect has a lot of people scared, including me. I hope he is different when he gets in.
I have been trying to get my head around why the working people of the Midwest voted for a blowhard billionaire (on the backs of small contractors and working people) huckster peddling jobs out of nothing. I have had a few theories: Fear of losing economic status because of jobs going to Mexico and Asia?, dislike of foreign workers coming to US?, Fear of ISIS?, or fear of the change in our Eurocentric culture? (or effective de-marketing of Clinton). None of these theories seem to fit by themselves, but add them together and you cover the spread. Trump had simple messages that people believed viscerally. Why did they believe them? They have been conditioned to believe these things. Clinton's emails have been on the front page of the liberal press every day for several years. Why was this news? because the press had been chasing, not truth, but stories. What harm did the emails ever do? How did the workers get the impression that manufacturing jobs go to China not to robots? Why would tax cuts help the economy? Yes magical thinking.
Two things: first, the Media/Industrial/Complex is not doing a proper job. second, the electorate does not understand the problems we face and Democracy doesn't work well without knowledge.
Two things: first, the Media/Industrial/Complex is not doing a proper job. second, the electorate does not understand the problems we face and Democracy doesn't work well without knowledge.
170
The people of the midwest have been devastated by trade deals, which the Clintons pushed for.
You need to focus on the fact that Trump got fewer votes than Romney, and Romney lost badly.
The real question is why the Democratic party nominated a neo-liberal party hack with ties to Wall Street because it was 'her turn'. A person who was up to her eyeballs in 'Free Trade' until it was convenient to pretend she was not, who campaigned for her husbands 'three strikes' lock em up and throw away the key policies that turned us into a prison-based society. Who secretly pined to bankers that she dreams of open borders throughout the Western Hemisphere. I could go on, but you should wake up and look in the mirror.
Trump didn't win the popular vote, but a lot of Dems stayed home. That's the real problem here, not 'magical thinking' on the part of the people.
The real question is why the Democratic party nominated a neo-liberal party hack with ties to Wall Street because it was 'her turn'. A person who was up to her eyeballs in 'Free Trade' until it was convenient to pretend she was not, who campaigned for her husbands 'three strikes' lock em up and throw away the key policies that turned us into a prison-based society. Who secretly pined to bankers that she dreams of open borders throughout the Western Hemisphere. I could go on, but you should wake up and look in the mirror.
Trump didn't win the popular vote, but a lot of Dems stayed home. That's the real problem here, not 'magical thinking' on the part of the people.
The seeming paradox of better fiscal times in the short run is reminiscent of the equally paradoxical period of extreme happiness in an individual who has decided on suicide. All the sadness, all the struggle, all the desperation is gone--we have a plan.
We are all smiles as we get into our barrel in the Niagara River and prepare to go over the falls.
All any skydiver will tell you, it's not the fall that kills you. It's the sudden stop at the end.
Wheeeee!
We are all smiles as we get into our barrel in the Niagara River and prepare to go over the falls.
All any skydiver will tell you, it's not the fall that kills you. It's the sudden stop at the end.
Wheeeee!
25
Thank you for the dark laugh!
I think trying to predict Donald Trump is like trying to out guess a sociopath. As he has no idea what he is going to do, until he has done it, all of us might be better advised to study that psychology rather than trying to predict his policies, which in effect do not exist.
33
If the American economic successes since the fifties are really because almost every other country in the world after the war was either devastated or undeveloped, and over the last thirty years or more those devastated countries have recovered and those undeveloped countries have become more productive, aren't we now in uncharted economic waters? If the American economy was great simply because there were no other capable economies in the fifties, and now economically capable countries abound, how can anyone expect that America could be great "again"?
28
Without a strong manufacturing base America cannot be great again. But economists, such as krugman, disagree. Manufacturing is not coming back, in fact, more factories are closing, more jobs are being lost. Poverty will continue to spread in the USA -- but don't worry. The stock market will be booming.
Our fear from Europe is precisely that Donald Trump will wreak devastation upon us. His number one European contact and devastator seems to be Nigel Farage.
One way to stop Trump and the Republicans from giving huge tax cuts to the rich would be to give the Red States what they’ve wanted for years: a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution. Such an amendment might well pass if Blue-State citizens pushed for it—one poll found that 85% of Americans supported the idea in 2013.
In normal times, of course, such an amendment would be madness. If it passed, it could trigger a long-term recession that would be hard to fix, given that the Fed has already played most of its monetary-policy cards. And as a 2014 paper published by the Brookings Institution argued, “[r]equiring a super-majority to raise the debt ceiling or to run a deficit ‘is a veritable summons to political extortion by an intransigent minority’ and could trigger a constitutional crisis.”
But these aren’t normal times. I would sign a BBA petition in a heartbeat.
In normal times, of course, such an amendment would be madness. If it passed, it could trigger a long-term recession that would be hard to fix, given that the Fed has already played most of its monetary-policy cards. And as a 2014 paper published by the Brookings Institution argued, “[r]equiring a super-majority to raise the debt ceiling or to run a deficit ‘is a veritable summons to political extortion by an intransigent minority’ and could trigger a constitutional crisis.”
But these aren’t normal times. I would sign a BBA petition in a heartbeat.
4
The BBA is a knife in the back. Look to Kansas. I have watched this thinking in Iowa. We don`t have a balanced budget system but I have watched as tax cuts are given and then later the loss of revenue used is to cut education, health care and other social contracts.
I cannot prognosticate when or if there will be a D.T slump. But, it doesn't look good for many of D.T's followers. My knowledge of his policies is limited to what the media shared - much more than I cared to hear. But, the media is owned by corporations and making money is the objective. So, D.T wants to end the ACA. Apparently he has had a compassionate moment about all who will suffer, but his congress wants it killed. The Iran deal is dead - heaven knows what that will precipitate. The environmental agreement with the nations of the world is dead. What little chance we have had to stop the CO2 rise is dismissed as coal miners return to work (and sludge pits grow and mountains disappear and ...) The Education department is dead. The only infrastructure I heard D.T talk about was our horrible airports - he should know. Congress has been negative toward rebuilding America, so he may get just enough funds to hire a few to improve an airport or two. He doesn't like the minimum wage, nor, apparently does the Republican Congress. We can't expect any change - stimulation - there for some of his base supporters. Sounds like he is backing off wall construction and limiting his deportation of Hispanics project. Since half of America no longer trusts even the FBI, he might as well assign them the task of rounding up the undocumented (illegals-he prefers). Of course, we will all get a tax reduction which combined with an Iran war and no good jobs ... may just lead to a slump.
16
Congress may go along with infrastructure and other spending now that they can put their name on it. Remember that ACA was a Republican idea that only became evil when Democrats picked up the banner.
All we hear about are jobs. Corporations are the nation's largest employer (or is it government). In order to force them to create more jobs, I believe the carrot is mightier than the stick. Leave the corporate tax rate at 35% or raise it higher and force them to pay it. Close all the loopholes that allow companies like GE to get away with paying nothing. Then if and when they bring back a manufacturing plant or a corporate headquarters and they provide at least X number of well-paying jobs to a community, give them substantial tax breaks. The workers' expenditure of their salaries will more than make up for lost corporate revenue.
Even the robots need humans behind them to program them and recognize what needs to be done. People learn "on the job," not always by some retraining program for a generic class of industry. Give them jobs. Give them opportunities. Reward the good companies who make it happen. Broadcast it from the loudest speaker so regular people can support these companies' products with their dollars.
Even the robots need humans behind them to program them and recognize what needs to be done. People learn "on the job," not always by some retraining program for a generic class of industry. Give them jobs. Give them opportunities. Reward the good companies who make it happen. Broadcast it from the loudest speaker so regular people can support these companies' products with their dollars.
5
Re; robots.
Ehh, kinda. The robots do need people to program and guide them but that doesn't make up for the number of jobs that they remove(otherwise there would be no point in having the robots in the first place).
Ehh, kinda. The robots do need people to program and guide them but that doesn't make up for the number of jobs that they remove(otherwise there would be no point in having the robots in the first place).
Using carrots seems like a good idea but greed usually raises it`s ugly head. The incentives used for the Pipeline her in Iowa was for jobs for Iowans and yet most of the construction jobs have went to out of state workers. The money stashed outside the country is another story. The last time the corporations were allowed to bring back this stash was with the promise of jobs yet most of it went to buy back stock which then made the CEO`s look good and increase their compensation.
Dear Paul,
There is no Trumpism. Why do you elevate his electoral pronouncements to some level of policy? Yes, large tax cuts and federal spending targeted to support the Republican party will be forthcoming. You know these data well. https://mises.org/blog/which-states-rely-most-federal-spending. Disproportionate federal spending in relation to taxes paid correlates pretty well with republican support. If I were Chuck Shumer and Nancy Pelosi I would hold them to Trump and the Republicans for smaller government starting with the dis proportionality in federal spending.
There is no Trumpism. Why do you elevate his electoral pronouncements to some level of policy? Yes, large tax cuts and federal spending targeted to support the Republican party will be forthcoming. You know these data well. https://mises.org/blog/which-states-rely-most-federal-spending. Disproportionate federal spending in relation to taxes paid correlates pretty well with republican support. If I were Chuck Shumer and Nancy Pelosi I would hold them to Trump and the Republicans for smaller government starting with the dis proportionality in federal spending.
4
I'm a liberal that cares about everyone. If I learned anything this election year, it's that most people only care about themselves and those close to them.
I will be rebalancing my spending and saving plan. I will now adopt the Republican idea of "Austerity" and curtail my spending and pay down my debt.
Let's see if that makes the Republicans happy. I know I will be.
I will be rebalancing my spending and saving plan. I will now adopt the Republican idea of "Austerity" and curtail my spending and pay down my debt.
Let's see if that makes the Republicans happy. I know I will be.
35
Not even "those close to them." Trump voters have condemned their children and grandchildren to the horror of global warming.
Most voters chose Hillary. Make no mistake that this is still a country of liberals, run (unfortunately) by gerrymandering, photo IDing, poll-closing Republicans.
PK -- do you really think Congressional Republicans are going to play along with Trump's grandiose plans? Most Members despise him, just as most Democrats. The GOP establishment will cherry pick those aspects of Trump's " policies" that they can use, like more tax cuts for the rich. The rest, like a wall, forget it.
Their strategy will be one of isolating Trump, as they did Obama, and do what they damn well please, such as totally decimating government regulations on industry, the environment, SS and Medicare, and much else --- and then take full credit for it all in advance of the 2020 election and the next round of
redistricting. Trump will be eating large helpings of humble pie if he believes he can control his new buddies, like Ryan, McConnell and the rest of the GOP pirate ship crew.
Their strategy will be one of isolating Trump, as they did Obama, and do what they damn well please, such as totally decimating government regulations on industry, the environment, SS and Medicare, and much else --- and then take full credit for it all in advance of the 2020 election and the next round of
redistricting. Trump will be eating large helpings of humble pie if he believes he can control his new buddies, like Ryan, McConnell and the rest of the GOP pirate ship crew.
12
Yes. But Trump will be oblivious to all this, so no humble pie.
3
PaulB: A sign that corroborates your assertion is Mitch McConnell's statement that infrastructure spending is not on his agenda. But I do wonder why not? Why should ranking Republicans object to spending on infrastructure?
These Quislings (look it up) will do no such thing. They will fold like a bad umbrella.
Now that Republicans are firmly in control of the federal government, deficit concerns will magically disappear, with the help of Steve Bannon, the Minister of Propaganda and Pravda, aka Fox News . The nonsense about balancing budgets and managing federal finances like family household expenses will similarly disappear.
Spend and borrow will return as fiscal policy. Infrastructure spending will go up.
The questions to be asked is why huge deficits are ok under Republican regimes, not Democratic? Why for the last 6 years, Republicans played politics, obstructing infrastructure spending, while people suffered? Why the increase of Republican control of state houses hasn't resulted in economic prosperity in those states?
Spend and borrow will return as fiscal policy. Infrastructure spending will go up.
The questions to be asked is why huge deficits are ok under Republican regimes, not Democratic? Why for the last 6 years, Republicans played politics, obstructing infrastructure spending, while people suffered? Why the increase of Republican control of state houses hasn't resulted in economic prosperity in those states?
23
I hesitate to pick an argument on trade with someone who got their Nobel for trade theory. BUT. . . .
I have to wonder if even the short-term effects of trade disruption might be worse than you expect. It is not just the macro effects of changes in net exports. So many of the goods we produce require inputs from abroad, I worry about the microeconomic effects upon production. "Global supply chain" has been a cliche buzzword for some time. These days product R&D is a similarly global process that would suffer indirectly from both tarrifs on final goods and from visa policies.
As you note, making it easier to use coal could have short-term positive supply-side economic effects. But Trump's policies on trade & immigration have anti-supply-side effects dwarfing all else.
I have to wonder if even the short-term effects of trade disruption might be worse than you expect. It is not just the macro effects of changes in net exports. So many of the goods we produce require inputs from abroad, I worry about the microeconomic effects upon production. "Global supply chain" has been a cliche buzzword for some time. These days product R&D is a similarly global process that would suffer indirectly from both tarrifs on final goods and from visa policies.
As you note, making it easier to use coal could have short-term positive supply-side economic effects. But Trump's policies on trade & immigration have anti-supply-side effects dwarfing all else.
9
The NYT just spent 18 months trying unsuccessfully to keep Trump from being elected. Are they now going to spend the next 4 years trying to keep Trump from being successful?
11
No more than the Republicans who created roadblocks for President Obama. It appears that unfettered criticism of Obama is OK, but Trump's thin skinned supporters want/expect silence from American's who disagree. Not how a democracy works!
1
They don't need to. He will be a disaster all on his own.
Because Donald Trump doesn't read, he is probably unaware that climate refugees by the millions with some estimates of 65-70 million in Sub Saharan Africa alone heading for Europe because life is becoming increasingly impossible due to climate change.
This is not a Chinese conspiracy as Trump said on the campaign trail and if he could just look at a map or take a walking tour in Miami and see the clear day flooding going on due to rising sea levels.
Will it take climate change threatening his beloved Mar A Lago before he takes action? By then it will be too late.
This is not a Chinese conspiracy as Trump said on the campaign trail and if he could just look at a map or take a walking tour in Miami and see the clear day flooding going on due to rising sea levels.
Will it take climate change threatening his beloved Mar A Lago before he takes action? By then it will be too late.
22
Nothing happens in the next 3 years that is not from Obama, though Trump et al is likely to take credit. At the end of the first Trump term, we may begin to see the effects of the next administration's change in policies, but it actually takes 5 years for any shift to begin affecting the economy. However, this time, controlling both houses and SCOTUS , things might be different.
If we believe Trump from his campaign, and with little congressional resistance, there may indeed be more rapid change than seen in the past. The disaster of extreme right wing small government and shifts in trade agreements might indeed happen more quickly than under previous conservative leaderships of the past century, or two. Trade wars due to cancellation of pacts and punitive tariffs; reduction of government oversight FDA on the SEC, FDA, and EPA; and the re-deregulation of banking and finance might happen quickly enough that in only a couple or three years the effects of Trump policy outlined these past 18 months will result in much the opposite from what the Trump electorate anticipated.
The coming 4 years, hopefull not 8, will be Bush 2 on steroids. Trump is and always has been an opportunist operating on the risk of others, other people's money, and the safety net of Chapters 7 and 11 all the while stick by liability with those who can afford it least. Yes, he will be a disruptive administration, but not in the way those who voted for him ever thought.
If we believe Trump from his campaign, and with little congressional resistance, there may indeed be more rapid change than seen in the past. The disaster of extreme right wing small government and shifts in trade agreements might indeed happen more quickly than under previous conservative leaderships of the past century, or two. Trade wars due to cancellation of pacts and punitive tariffs; reduction of government oversight FDA on the SEC, FDA, and EPA; and the re-deregulation of banking and finance might happen quickly enough that in only a couple or three years the effects of Trump policy outlined these past 18 months will result in much the opposite from what the Trump electorate anticipated.
The coming 4 years, hopefull not 8, will be Bush 2 on steroids. Trump is and always has been an opportunist operating on the risk of others, other people's money, and the safety net of Chapters 7 and 11 all the while stick by liability with those who can afford it least. Yes, he will be a disruptive administration, but not in the way those who voted for him ever thought.
8
Trump's taxation plan is excellent; it will stimulate business and encourage people to put money into the economy. He will change the job picture. Unfortunately, since Biden and Edwards campaigned (to bring jobs back to the U.S.) it has never happened then nor in the past eight years when the socialistic democrats did not achieve a thing. And that includes the unaffordable healthcare plan they created so people on Obamacare could not afford it. Someone needs to tell the democrats: THE ELECTION IS OVER SO GET OVER IT; REPUBLICANS WON THE HOUSE AND SENATE NOT JUST THE PRESIDENCY.
7
The President-Elect himself said the election was rigged. Do you now not believe him?
3
Believe me people are telling them that. But you know what? The Democrats remember what George Bush did to the economy. The Democrats remember what George Bush did to the Middle East by getting us into a war with false infromation.
The Democrats remember what Reagan did to the environment and what Nixon did to the Justice department. So we know who won...but we know its a disaster waiting to happen.
So you know what? After years and years and years of listening to Republicans raging against our president..now we will rage. Maybe in eight years we will take OUR country back.
The Democrats remember what Reagan did to the environment and what Nixon did to the Justice department. So we know who won...but we know its a disaster waiting to happen.
So you know what? After years and years and years of listening to Republicans raging against our president..now we will rage. Maybe in eight years we will take OUR country back.
4
His "plan" did not work when GW Bush tried trickle-down in the oughts. Sure - the rich got richer - but real household income actually went down, the economy crashed and we shedded 720,000 jobs a month last quarter of '08.
It kind of 'worked" when Reagan did it in the 80s, but it started the acceleration of our massive debt - and the wealthy became wealthier wjile household income stagnated.
Trickle down does not work. Your caps and lack of context demonstrate you are merely partisan.
It kind of 'worked" when Reagan did it in the 80s, but it started the acceleration of our massive debt - and the wealthy became wealthier wjile household income stagnated.
Trickle down does not work. Your caps and lack of context demonstrate you are merely partisan.
1
"Good things will happen to bad people"-- So what exactly does that mean? Anyone who has money is bad?
2
No, having money is not in itself bad. It's how it is used or if you have more than you need at the expense of those who struggle to eat and/or have no shelter.
I'm likening this to something along the lines of a dating someone with the flashy car to upset the parents with similar consequences. At first there will be delight at the reactions when you bring him home to dinner, to Thanksgiving, to your brother's wedding. But when that person does not bring home the paycheck promised because he showed up drunk or somehow misbehaved and got fired--for the very same things you brought him home for, consequences begin. When you do not show anything but pleasure with the type of personality who will go to your family events and so misbehave is, he's going to slap you around a little bit. It's how that kind of person works, but it's worth it to stick it to Mom & Dad and goody two shoes little sister. A little slapping around turns into outright assault maybe rape. Then it's not so funny any more.
I believe something like this will happen politically. I think we should prepare now for something along when the daughter shows up at 2:00am black and blue and asks to be taken in. Should we say "I told you so?". No. We cannot we must address what motivated the need to stick it to us in the first place.
We on the right or left, on the one hand exploiting it on the other side shaming and writing off. have yet to address what we all know is destructive behavior. Now is the time to prepare for them when they come, beaten and even more scared, this time with open arms and attention to their wounds. Exploitation & shame must stop now.
I believe something like this will happen politically. I think we should prepare now for something along when the daughter shows up at 2:00am black and blue and asks to be taken in. Should we say "I told you so?". No. We cannot we must address what motivated the need to stick it to us in the first place.
We on the right or left, on the one hand exploiting it on the other side shaming and writing off. have yet to address what we all know is destructive behavior. Now is the time to prepare for them when they come, beaten and even more scared, this time with open arms and attention to their wounds. Exploitation & shame must stop now.
11
Nemo, thank you. That fits so very well with what many are feeling. The more lies, the more bruises. And the Republican Party lies as it promises the impossible.
Hmmm..., "protectionism and trade wars would make the world economy poorer over time, and would in particular cripple poorer nations".
How about the poor nations of West Virginia, Mississippi, Detroit, and etc?
How about the poor nations of West Virginia, Mississippi, Detroit, and etc?
10
We can thank the do-nothing Republican Congress for the plights of those!
4
They will get what they asked for.
1
Don't you mean the people of the poor educational systems of West Virginia, Mississippi and Detroit?
1
I don't know why, but I do not get the same feeling that the folks in Trump's circle are of the same level of competence as those involved on Bush's team in 2000. Rumsfeld, Wolfewitz, Cheney, etc. were mostly folks who had been in DC for some time, and were waiting to put their bankrupt ideology into play. So far, many of the Cabinet candidates do not look as credentialed. Many are investors, some are politicians, and of course the usual suspects like Christie and Guliani.
Now, I'm sure these individuals can do a great deal of damage, but I don't see any thought leaders. It's almost the same feeling as having your company taken over by a foreign corporation. What do these people want? Is it really only a shallow idea like reducing government, or decreasing taxes on the wealthy, or "Make America Great Again"?
I never heard Trump vocalize a clear vision for the Country, except for wacko ideas like building a wall, increasing trade barriers, breaking up NATO, etc., and undoing Obama's legacy. HOW exactly does he plan to make America great again? I think he owes the USA and the world a clearer discussion of what he plans to do to accomplish this goal.
Now, I'm sure these individuals can do a great deal of damage, but I don't see any thought leaders. It's almost the same feeling as having your company taken over by a foreign corporation. What do these people want? Is it really only a shallow idea like reducing government, or decreasing taxes on the wealthy, or "Make America Great Again"?
I never heard Trump vocalize a clear vision for the Country, except for wacko ideas like building a wall, increasing trade barriers, breaking up NATO, etc., and undoing Obama's legacy. HOW exactly does he plan to make America great again? I think he owes the USA and the world a clearer discussion of what he plans to do to accomplish this goal.
23
I doubt he or they have any ides. They just received the keys to the kingdom and I think all they care about is becoming richer than they are. The environment and the poor be damned. Any more talk about a blind trust?
Dr. Krugman, the Electoral College blocked the popular vote in favor of Trump. The Electoral College must be abolished. In the computer age we can tabulate everyone's vote exactly.
26
All how will persuade the Republicans to do that?
Yes, and it is doable without a constitutional amendment. States can make a law that electors vote for the winner of the popular vote. It is my understanding that 24 states have already done this, my own included.
You don't understand the voting process. The result would have been exactly the same if only the popular vote counted because republicans would then spend more time in NY and California. The idea of abolishing the electoral college is just moronic.
And if they have a few good quarters, you can expect those to become the "defining" moments of Trump's economic history. Bush and Reagan had a few good quarters and those are touted as their economic miracles. Forgetting of course where the country was at the end.
20
Dr. Krugman correctly points out a time lag between dumb economic steps and their direst results. Alas, the opposite is also true -- smart moves take time to demonstrate the wisdom of their implementation. Half-smart moves such as the "bail-out" offer less pain in the political moment but bring less gain the long run, whenever the latter is. Had we gove farther in debt under Obama, we'd now be farther ahead in job-creation. And in electing a decent president with a functioning awareness of economic policy and its potential to heal or harm. . The poor decisions are coming, and then the wait for the dire news begins, not just for the US, but for the world. Thanks, FBI.
10
Hopefully we are capable of learning something from anything, even the false apotheosis of Mr. Trump.
But lest we hysterically over-react; only about one third of us even voted, and Trump and Ms. Clinton were practically tied, the difference in the popular vote being like .009 of the turnout.
Some less great countries would demand a coalition government.
Less than 20% of the U.S. voting population managed to vote for Mr. Trump.
Where is this mandate that Ryan was crowing about? Another electoral fluke, for which we will all be paying.
We can give the vote to everybody that does not seem to want it. No qualifications, no requirements, no penalties for not voting.
And then we run the whole thing through the electoral college grinder, that now is perfectly at odds with our liberal franchise policy.
And after all of that, we are still here reading your opinions about restrictions on free trade that would "cripple poorer nations that desperately need open markets."
There was point somewhere in that quotation, but none of any of it makes any sense at this juncture.
But lest we hysterically over-react; only about one third of us even voted, and Trump and Ms. Clinton were practically tied, the difference in the popular vote being like .009 of the turnout.
Some less great countries would demand a coalition government.
Less than 20% of the U.S. voting population managed to vote for Mr. Trump.
Where is this mandate that Ryan was crowing about? Another electoral fluke, for which we will all be paying.
We can give the vote to everybody that does not seem to want it. No qualifications, no requirements, no penalties for not voting.
And then we run the whole thing through the electoral college grinder, that now is perfectly at odds with our liberal franchise policy.
And after all of that, we are still here reading your opinions about restrictions on free trade that would "cripple poorer nations that desperately need open markets."
There was point somewhere in that quotation, but none of any of it makes any sense at this juncture.
3
People who can't be bothered to go to the polls are not likely to put in the effort to make an informed vote.
We will keep hearing about a mandate the right has, but you are correct there is no mandate. Facts regarding a mandate are not going to matter.
Economists are like weathermen. and two relevant quotes come to mind:
The weatherman is always right. It's just his timing that's off.(Bill Cosby)
and Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future.(Niels Bohr)
The weatherman is always right. It's just his timing that's off.(Bill Cosby)
and Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future.(Niels Bohr)
10
This is an old Danish proverb.
It is important to link economics to social structure and communicate well. It might be better for Silicon Valley to use some of its cash to start an "all the truth all the time" cable network. Most economics have been critical of the Trump plan all along, but have not done well to communicate their concerns. This must be done using simplified language and linked to social structures that people can understand. As baby boomers retire, few will want to see their personal social security privatized, but will they understand the effect of privatization on their grandchildren? Will they understand the effects of loose banking regulations on their own personal savings, ability to purchase a house, or other things as they age? Will "small town USA" understand how deregulation will affect their loan at John Deere down the line?
6
You have very effectively ponted out that we will be, even more then we are now, an oligarchy:a country for the rich, where everyone else is a wage slave. No one has mentioned that the $15.00 an hour minimum wage is probably a dead issue.
Expect the Trump administration to blame democrats for his failures. He always has, and always will, never take blame and always find scrape goats. So, he'll take credit for Obama's improved economy and when it turns south, he'll blame it on 'Democrat obstructionism." Just watch. That's a prediction I'm confident in.
22
Dear Mr. Krugman,
I'm not an economist but it seems to me you're describing the cyclical 'boom and bust' nature of what passes for the 'American Economy'.
After every calamity caused by the greed of the wealthy, the rest of us are required to pick up the pieces and start the whole 'Ponzi Scheme' all over again.
First, the Stock Market was unhappy with the election but got over this feeling about three hours into the trading session.
Yet you tell me you can predict what this 'economy' is going to do in a few years...really?
Everyone in the media has had their 'cyrstal balls' sent back for repair due to incompetence in guessing the mood of the electorate. As for your column, I think Mr. Trump can screw things up faster than you can say 'Where's my passport' and he seems hell bent on doing just that.
Let's see how things look this spring, the season known in the military as the true 'campaign season' and, brother, we may just be marching off to war somewhere. Nothing like combat to distract the American public, don't you think?
I'm not an economist but it seems to me you're describing the cyclical 'boom and bust' nature of what passes for the 'American Economy'.
After every calamity caused by the greed of the wealthy, the rest of us are required to pick up the pieces and start the whole 'Ponzi Scheme' all over again.
First, the Stock Market was unhappy with the election but got over this feeling about three hours into the trading session.
Yet you tell me you can predict what this 'economy' is going to do in a few years...really?
Everyone in the media has had their 'cyrstal balls' sent back for repair due to incompetence in guessing the mood of the electorate. As for your column, I think Mr. Trump can screw things up faster than you can say 'Where's my passport' and he seems hell bent on doing just that.
Let's see how things look this spring, the season known in the military as the true 'campaign season' and, brother, we may just be marching off to war somewhere. Nothing like combat to distract the American public, don't you think?
4
The Brexit downturn hasn't happened yet because Brexit hasn't happened yet. If you don't think the gutting of finance regulations and the elimination of the safety net combined with a trade won't put the USA into a depression, you are not the Nobel laureate I've been reading for over a decade.
29
The GOP now has the opportunity to do all the generally unpopular things they've been advocating for their single-issue voters for decades. And I agree with Dr. Krugman that the laissez-faire economic philosophy will do long-term damage, as is its habit.
But the short-term will taste of Trump's personality. He remains a con man. He has survived in business by lawsuit, lies, and payoffs. He will assemble a government that includes those who are part of the con. That suggests a good deal of cronyism, promises and payoffs.
Cash will be flowing. Stay tuned.
But the short-term will taste of Trump's personality. He remains a con man. He has survived in business by lawsuit, lies, and payoffs. He will assemble a government that includes those who are part of the con. That suggests a good deal of cronyism, promises and payoffs.
Cash will be flowing. Stay tuned.
22
kc - Bigly !
8
This is coming from a man who for the last eight years has been a major supporter of Obamacare, when many experts knew it was destined for failure from the beginning. Not only has it failed, but it may be responsible for the next president being Trump instead of Clinton.
Yes, those bronze plans that cost $1,300/month with $6,500 deductibles/person, with total out-of-pocket expenses capped at around $30,000, really, really hurt, Professor Krugman.
Yes, those bronze plans that cost $1,300/month with $6,500 deductibles/person, with total out-of-pocket expenses capped at around $30,000, really, really hurt, Professor Krugman.
15
You do realize that a major cause of the increase in premiums is the high cost of drugs. For example, premiums in Michigan are increasing 17.5%, after not going up much the last several years. Insurance companies there stated that they needed this increase because prescription drug costs have gone up 800% ( no typo). Perhaps you have noticed that drug stocks have shot up since the election. While Hillary promised to do something about price gouging, Trump is all for the " free market".
1
total out of pocket (for a single person) was capped at $6500 in network and $13000 out of network. show me otherwise
So, suddenly it does matter, how you create a deficit ?
Suddenly it does matter, that we all are in the long run not dead.
The whole time you lashed the europeans for not spending money of taxpayers in the north for corruption and excessive social benefits in the south. Of course this spending would have had a short-term effect. But what kind of stimulus is an early retirement with 55 in greece ?
Trump is now making a stimulus, and it is just dishonnest suddenly to distinct between 'good' and 'bad' stimuli. That put you on par with the german minister of finance Wolfgang Schäuble and his zeal for reforms.
Suddenly it does matter, that we all are in the long run not dead.
The whole time you lashed the europeans for not spending money of taxpayers in the north for corruption and excessive social benefits in the south. Of course this spending would have had a short-term effect. But what kind of stimulus is an early retirement with 55 in greece ?
Trump is now making a stimulus, and it is just dishonnest suddenly to distinct between 'good' and 'bad' stimuli. That put you on par with the german minister of finance Wolfgang Schäuble and his zeal for reforms.
5
Well, because US unemployment has dropped from 10% to 4.9% during the Obama administration, I'd say an earlier stimulus would have been better.
Trump has been aggressive about infrastructure spending, which is a plus for the U.S. economy. Short run, tax cuts for the wealthy should have short-term stimulative effects, too-- although I agree with Krugman that their long-term effects will be deleterious. Short-term, though, fiscal policy-- sadly vanished since 2010-- will be back in business.
Krugman may be right that an imposition of trade barriers will reduce global economic output long-term, but what will be the effects on U.S. jobs? Failure to grapple with the U.S. job losses associated with free trade is of course what has fueled this deplorable election result.
Krugman may be right that an imposition of trade barriers will reduce global economic output long-term, but what will be the effects on U.S. jobs? Failure to grapple with the U.S. job losses associated with free trade is of course what has fueled this deplorable election result.
6
The Trump infrastructure spending plan is bizarre. Apparently, he plans to give yuuge tax rebates to corporations that build infrastructure. Somehow this doesn't increase the debt, although I can't believe this. Who owns the bridges and highways that are built? Will they be toll roads? I don't know.
Sounds like a scam to me.
Sounds like a scam to me.
Down here on the fuzzy end of the economy I predict serious and immediate hardship from Trump economic policy. While you, Dr. Krugman, see a balancing of more manufacturing jobs caused by a decrease in imports, and I see immediate higher prices and no new jobs. Since we import about 80% of consumer goods from China these days that means significantly higher prices for every level of consumer -- from Walmart to Macy’s, and Target to Amazon. American importers are not going to absorb Trump's promised 45% tariff on Chinese imports. – consumers will have to pay at the check-out line.
And American business are not going to spring up like weeds to manufacture those mops, toys, greeting cards, thermometers, auto parts, and steel. No American business is going to invest in factories and tools based on the reliability and predictability of Trump economic policy, only to risk see it change next year. So we can forget about all those extra jobs that higher tariffs *theoretically* will produce.
Trump voters will soon be seeing the effects of their votes, but it won’t be in the way they thought. And with an economy still weak from the Great Recession, I do indeed see economic hardship in the near future.
And American business are not going to spring up like weeds to manufacture those mops, toys, greeting cards, thermometers, auto parts, and steel. No American business is going to invest in factories and tools based on the reliability and predictability of Trump economic policy, only to risk see it change next year. So we can forget about all those extra jobs that higher tariffs *theoretically* will produce.
Trump voters will soon be seeing the effects of their votes, but it won’t be in the way they thought. And with an economy still weak from the Great Recession, I do indeed see economic hardship in the near future.
626
A Cleveland journalist (name forgotten by me) noted a new French owned steel plant, costing 1 billion dollars, and is more productive than any of the old plants ever were, employs only 400, not 4,000, 40,000, nor 400,000. Modern manufacturing efficiency requires fewer human workers. Job creation will require work in other areas besides manufacturing,
RE: "And American business are not going to spring up like weeds to manufacture those mops, toys, greeting cards,..."
Many greeting cards (and other paper products) are still Made in the USA. Look on the back of the card before you buy. If I see made in China, I put it back on the rack and find another made here. Hallmark makes cards both here and in China--always purchase the ones made in USA and we will maintain and grow one industry.
Many greeting cards (and other paper products) are still Made in the USA. Look on the back of the card before you buy. If I see made in China, I put it back on the rack and find another made here. Hallmark makes cards both here and in China--always purchase the ones made in USA and we will maintain and grow one industry.
1
80% of the imports from China are junks (mugs, t-shirts, etc.) that American consumers buy and clutter their home, so I don't mind their prices going up so that we buy less junks. That will hurt Wal-mart and Target, but it will benefit the economy in general and also good for the environment!
I continue to be bothered by the general unsupported statements that Trump and his surrogates offer as policies. His comments on 60 Minutes regarding his replacement of the ACA, essentially better care at lower cost, merely continue his campaign's principal message: "Believe me." I know it's early, but the known candidates for key positions not yet filled do not inspire confidence. We could see a ship of state with no one's sure hand on the tiller.
450
Trump's infrastructure plan isn't any better.
Agreed. Perhaps Trump learned his lesson from President Obama, who also promised better care at lower cost, with the added benefit of keeping your doctor, and couldn't admit his mistake even after none of it worked out.
He talks about the wonders he will accomplish but never says how. Just waving a magic wand and saying "Abracadabra" only works in the movies.
1
Let's assume the national forests will be clearcut, and the national parks strip-mined. More short term stimulus and long term disaster.
22
I think Mr. Krugman is missing the immediate effect of the election itself. The economy, as it demonstrated so vividly in 2007-8, is a confidence game in the truest sense of the phrase, and one-half of the country has absolutely no confidence in the pending leader. Consumers can stop buying; we can have a blue Christmas. Crash may happen sooner than you think.
23
Exactly, I don't think this point can be emphasized enough. Even with personal discretionary income, I'm already cutting back on fears of the future. Save more, spend less.
Krugman misses the substantial prospects of the big infrastructural investment that fits some intermittent promises from Trump, the at least short-term economic interest (especially for manual labor and, perhaps,most especially rust belt labor), and the joint Trump/GOP interest in consolidating their new white working class support.
3
Yes, that GOP interest that was sorely lacking when Obama tried over and over to get an infrastructure package together while our construction workers were so available and interest rates were lot. Trump may be able to get it through the Congressional blockade simply because he represents their "team" but it will cost a lot more, and with the proposed tax cuts on the table....it's the usual when the GOP is in charge "Debt? what Debt?"
4
WHAT debt problem?
No real debt problem until the big investors squawk and, when they do, Trump and the GOP will listen.
No real debt problem until the big investors squawk and, when they do, Trump and the GOP will listen.
The idiots they elected in Greece destroyed the banking sector within a few months, making a bad situation much worse.
5
Paul Krugman is looking at the consequences of policy. But consequences no longer matter. Facts no longer matter. The power of the conservative media is now so great that they can lie about anything and prevail with their lies.
Mr. Comey put out false accusations. Fox ‘News’ greatly expanded the false accusations of Clinton, and their false stories won the day. A news report and accompanying video show that emails Clinton was accused of mishandling were not properly labeled classified. Yet the only story on conservative media and most MSM was the opposite. www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-bordo-/james-comeys-sins-of-omis_b_12735220...
The power that conservative media now has to promote falsehood makes reasonable government impossible.
Mr. Comey put out false accusations. Fox ‘News’ greatly expanded the false accusations of Clinton, and their false stories won the day. A news report and accompanying video show that emails Clinton was accused of mishandling were not properly labeled classified. Yet the only story on conservative media and most MSM was the opposite. www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-bordo-/james-comeys-sins-of-omis_b_12735220...
The power that conservative media now has to promote falsehood makes reasonable government impossible.
73
A major cause of Trump, the Trump voters, and the degradation of American democracy is the conservative media. Trump is the product of their handiwork over the past generation.
Corporations and political parties know that advertising works. That’s why they spend billions on it. Trump, already a media personality, had his version this year: twitter, his access to cable news, and his entertainment and ratings value to MSM.
Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent on the operation of the conservative media since Reagan blocked the fairness rule for MSM in 1987. http://articles.latimes.com/1987-06-21/news/mn-8908_1_fairness-doctrine
Nothing in MSM or on the left matched the onslaught of propaganda from the right. The conservative media has simply re-educated/propagandized a near majority of people.
In recent Op-Eds (9/9, 9/23 & 10/10/2016) Paul Krugman documented the scope of lying and reminded us what Hitler and his team said in the 1930s: You had to fill the German people full of lies so they would go along with a fascist agenda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie
Remember, after Kristallnacht there were no innocent Europeans.
GOP extremists in Congress caused the downgrade of our credit rating, a dastardly first. Now the destruction of our democracy by the conservative political and media leadership causes us to be despised around the world, and discredits democracy. Iran broadcast our Presidential Debates this year as a simple way to discredit our democracy.
Corporations and political parties know that advertising works. That’s why they spend billions on it. Trump, already a media personality, had his version this year: twitter, his access to cable news, and his entertainment and ratings value to MSM.
Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent on the operation of the conservative media since Reagan blocked the fairness rule for MSM in 1987. http://articles.latimes.com/1987-06-21/news/mn-8908_1_fairness-doctrine
Nothing in MSM or on the left matched the onslaught of propaganda from the right. The conservative media has simply re-educated/propagandized a near majority of people.
In recent Op-Eds (9/9, 9/23 & 10/10/2016) Paul Krugman documented the scope of lying and reminded us what Hitler and his team said in the 1930s: You had to fill the German people full of lies so they would go along with a fascist agenda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie
Remember, after Kristallnacht there were no innocent Europeans.
GOP extremists in Congress caused the downgrade of our credit rating, a dastardly first. Now the destruction of our democracy by the conservative political and media leadership causes us to be despised around the world, and discredits democracy. Iran broadcast our Presidential Debates this year as a simple way to discredit our democracy.
Trump voters won across America. The largest block of them is the Tea Party. So, we are now governed by the Tea Party.
The usual neolib Democratic Party leadership, as usual, demonstrated their stupidity by believing they could dismiss TP as a minor event, instead of addressing populist, job, banker bailout and bonuses issues.
The principal creator of the Tea Party was Fox ‘News.’ So, Rupert Murdoch and his Fox ‘News’ dominate now both in the media and in politics. Murdoch is now our dictator. Pols come and go. Trump is only one of the pols in his stable.
The usual neolib Democratic Party leadership, as usual, demonstrated their stupidity by believing they could dismiss TP as a minor event, instead of addressing populist, job, banker bailout and bonuses issues.
The principal creator of the Tea Party was Fox ‘News.’ So, Rupert Murdoch and his Fox ‘News’ dominate now both in the media and in politics. Murdoch is now our dictator. Pols come and go. Trump is only one of the pols in his stable.
What makes you know for sure that Trump will follow up on the moves that you fear will ruin the universe?
Admit that everything you write is a fanciful guess.
Admit that everything you write is a fanciful guess.
5
He has tapped Myron Ebell to head his EPA transition team. Ebell is a climate denier/shill for Big Oil. I'll let you fill in the blanks.
5
History of Trump's behavior and attitudes make it far more than a guess.
4
Dr. Krugmjan, your reactions have all been knee-jerk, as you yourself have admitted in your article.
There will not be a recession until there has first occurred a Trumpanomics-triggered boom. This is Reagan Reprise. So enjoy the ride while it lasts.
There will not be a recession until there has first occurred a Trumpanomics-triggered boom. This is Reagan Reprise. So enjoy the ride while it lasts.
3
I have read Mr. Krugman's columns religiously for years. However, for some time they seem to have devolved to the same hand-ringing small set of themes and are becoming irrelevant:
We need more stimulus.
The Republicans are bad.
Obama is good.
Deficit spending isn't bad.
It's not that I disagree, but who needs to read the same thing over and over again?
We need more stimulus.
The Republicans are bad.
Obama is good.
Deficit spending isn't bad.
It's not that I disagree, but who needs to read the same thing over and over again?
3
We did need more stimulus in 2008. Not so much now.
The Republicans are very, very bad.
Obama is good.
Deficit spending isn't always bad.
I don't know. Why do you keep reading Krugman's column?
The Republicans are very, very bad.
Obama is good.
Deficit spending isn't always bad.
I don't know. Why do you keep reading Krugman's column?
Basically a realistic appraisal after Krugman's initial completely OTT reaction last week (he does this rather a lot witness demise of Euro and collapse of EU). Personally I've never doubted the Republicans would turn on a dime on deficit spending if it suited them. They've done it twice in the last 35 years so why should now be different. However, on the general principle front the room for reckless fiscal maneuvers is considerably less than on the two previous occasions. The debt was under one trillion on 1981 and there was a budget surplus in 2001. Now the debt is at 20 trillion and unemployment at 4.9%. If all of a sudden the country is looking at circa one trillion deficits the reaction from markets is likely to be swift (remember the panic atmosphere over the debt in 1989-93?) and if inflation takes off the Fed shoe is also going to fall. The conservative appointees to the FOMC are itching to do it now. It's all through a glass darkly at present (who for example is going to be Treasury Secretary?) and the last thing Trump needs is to destabilize financial markets by reckless action in any arena; fiscal policy; trade; foreign policy; messing with the Fed. Watch this space.
3
I think the climate change we're really going to have to worry about is nuclear winter.
19
Cute handle, Mr. McGeddon.
1
The Doomsday Clock is at 23:57. Just sayin'.
"And Trumpist policies will, in particular, hurt, not help, the American working class; eventually, promises to bring back the good old days — yes, to make America great again — will be revealed as the cruel joke they are."
You may be right but no one else has an answer or is even willing to address the reality that we all know:
The digitalization of the world economy is a job killer.
The world is awash in labor.
For the First World middle class they are looking at a lower standard of living over the next several decades.
Politically the above message is suicide.
You may be right but no one else has an answer or is even willing to address the reality that we all know:
The digitalization of the world economy is a job killer.
The world is awash in labor.
For the First World middle class they are looking at a lower standard of living over the next several decades.
Politically the above message is suicide.
19
Wow -- did not take a week.. Now I have to see Krugman's doom and gloom headlines (again) for the next four years.
8
It's 2001 again, and you voted for it.
3
Yes, it's all Krugman's fault.
One of the problems many voted against was the incompetence, cronyism, over reach and arrogance of our public servants from the IRS, EPA, HUD, ED, DOJ, FBI and the top of the democratic ticket. Trump was very few peoples first choice, but the other candidate just promised more of the same and that appeared as the greater danger.
4
More suppositions from commenters. A woman as President? That's more like the reason as patriarchy is still with us, especially in the southern and western areas of the U.S.
1
Are you awake? Do you see the people Trump is gathering into his circle? More of the same on steroids coming your way.
1
Sorry, DM, but personally more of the same would have been far, far preferable to what we are confronting now.
Mr. Krugman you have been warning of an unpredictable future long before Trump won. (I'm an elephant!) Do you think for once, maybe we/you could take our medicine sitting down? (And not spit it out on others?) We've lost so many - Brook's "Road to Character" board is full of rabid animals, from both sides. This is not the time to act like spoiled brats --- we need adults.
2
I don't think we need to worry about the long time environmental consequences aof the DT; after all he will have his hand on the button at 3 in the morning.
8
He probably thinks it's for room service.
A Trump slump is putting it mildly. One need not be an economist to figure out that draining federal revenue by reducing taxes while increasing federal spending with bold infrastructure proposals is a recipe for fiscal disaster. This cannot possibly be seen by the GOP as anything but crazy.
10
Dr. K’s column centers on economics and is spot on. I would suggest the one "economic" factor may be that the election has destroyed the American “brand” and that will affect our position in the global economy. Post World War II America, stood as the savior of the world, the liberator of peoples. We were the home of innovation and ingenuity. Above all we had a statute in our harbor that welcomed all. That was the America on the red hats and that “brand,” sometimes referred to as "soft power," was no small part of our economic success. Now the Republican Party has planted itself “ athwart history, yelling stop. “ as William F. Buckley said. The GOP now opposes every trend in the modern world. As the images of the deportations spreads across the net, as our scientists are silenced, as the courts support our version of racial apartheid, and the denial of the rights of woman, the globe will begin to look for inspiration in other places. That's bound to hurt our sales, not to mention our souls.
32
"the globe will begin to look for inspiration in other places."
Yes, Russia and China will welcome them with open arms. It will be what is in those arms that will trouble them. The US is still their best option in any endeavor.
Yes, Russia and China will welcome them with open arms. It will be what is in those arms that will trouble them. The US is still their best option in any endeavor.
So now that Mr. Trump is President-elect can we expect that the IRS -- acting on his direct urging -- is going to complete work on their audit of his taxes, so he can present his tax return to the American people before he takes office?
Alternately, as a kindness to Mr. Trump, President Obama could order the IRS to do it.
Alternately, as a kindness to Mr. Trump, President Obama could order the IRS to do it.
26
thank you for pointing that out...I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere since the election...where are the journalists?
1
"Is A Slump Coming?" Off course a slump is coming! This expansion is long in the tooth, and the business cycle is after all, a cycle!
All of the recent pressure to raise interest rates has nothing to do with an uptick in core inflation.
The truth is that monetary policy as the exclusive palliative to economic stagnation has failed, and the Central Bankers are desperate to put some distance between zero, and whatever current rates are when the next recession arrives, in order to stave off another economic collapse, when the economy dives again... as it must.
The key for economists, who double as political hacks like Krugman, who has herein asked what is in reality a silly question, is that it be assured that when recession returns, they can rely on the probability that a majority of us will blame Donald Trump for the fallout from the inevitable contraction, which they all know is overdue.
Then once blame is established, the next step in the neoliberal lexicon of Paul Krugman is to ensure that the crisis is used to make the rich richer, and in that cause a little panic never hurts.
The real question, which will never be asked is: Can the rich top the rate at which paper wealth accreted to them from the last financial crisis of 2008? I don't know what Krugman thinks, but I'll bet they can.
All of the recent pressure to raise interest rates has nothing to do with an uptick in core inflation.
The truth is that monetary policy as the exclusive palliative to economic stagnation has failed, and the Central Bankers are desperate to put some distance between zero, and whatever current rates are when the next recession arrives, in order to stave off another economic collapse, when the economy dives again... as it must.
The key for economists, who double as political hacks like Krugman, who has herein asked what is in reality a silly question, is that it be assured that when recession returns, they can rely on the probability that a majority of us will blame Donald Trump for the fallout from the inevitable contraction, which they all know is overdue.
Then once blame is established, the next step in the neoliberal lexicon of Paul Krugman is to ensure that the crisis is used to make the rich richer, and in that cause a little panic never hurts.
The real question, which will never be asked is: Can the rich top the rate at which paper wealth accreted to them from the last financial crisis of 2008? I don't know what Krugman thinks, but I'll bet they can.
3
Paul, failure to deliver has consequences…While the Democratic Party leadership…the People’s Party…was partying in Hollywood, raising money on Wall Street, and concerned about transgender individuals using restrooms different from their birth gender, the American worker has faced a slow bleed death trying to survive in a slave wage economy.
18
The White American worker's problems started thirty years ago with Ronald Reagan. Republican controlled congress over the last eight years and opposed everything Obama wanted to do. Republicans need to look in the mirror.
3
Republicans do not produce a reflection in a mirror.
1
The hysteria about Trump had been similar to the hysteria about Brexit.
Because the neoliberals couldn't marshal coherent arguments that would appeal to the people who were never invited to their cocktail parties, they concocted bizarre dooms that would inevitably consume all the good of civilization if they didn't get their way... and they weren't believed.
Neoliberals (like Paul) should have instead been looking for new policies that actually addressed the valid concerns that many people had with both European integration and the dispiriting prospect of another Clinbama administration.
Trump and Brexit are terrible, granted.
But for those dissatisfied with the current situation, they are a radical change.
In America we did have a real change candidate who was also an honorable man and would move the county toward greater equity, fairness, and prosperity. It's too bad that people like Paul ran him down, insulted his supporters, and claimed that incrementalism was the only realistic path forward. I wonder- don't you remember 2008 when the candidate promising change won easily?
In any case, if incrementalism is the only realistic way forward, then we've got not a lot to worry about from Trump, do we?
Because the neoliberals couldn't marshal coherent arguments that would appeal to the people who were never invited to their cocktail parties, they concocted bizarre dooms that would inevitably consume all the good of civilization if they didn't get their way... and they weren't believed.
Neoliberals (like Paul) should have instead been looking for new policies that actually addressed the valid concerns that many people had with both European integration and the dispiriting prospect of another Clinbama administration.
Trump and Brexit are terrible, granted.
But for those dissatisfied with the current situation, they are a radical change.
In America we did have a real change candidate who was also an honorable man and would move the county toward greater equity, fairness, and prosperity. It's too bad that people like Paul ran him down, insulted his supporters, and claimed that incrementalism was the only realistic path forward. I wonder- don't you remember 2008 when the candidate promising change won easily?
In any case, if incrementalism is the only realistic way forward, then we've got not a lot to worry about from Trump, do we?
3
Economists seem to assume away problems to difficult to face.
Dr Krugman's column assumes no shocks due to foreign policy mistakes. In this area, Congress plays a small role and the Courts basically has none.
What happens when Trump overreacts to some pipsqueak leader's taunts? Will the markets remain calm while young men are sent off to avenge some stupid slight? Russian leaders are seasoned, capable and have not an ounce of conscience or sense of restraint in prosecuting their interests (e.g., Syria). What happens when Putin's compliments blind him to our country's interests?
Trump showed himself time and time again to be unsuitable to lead. No amount of fancy thinking or good writing can make that go away. We are in for a very rough four years.
Dr Krugman's column assumes no shocks due to foreign policy mistakes. In this area, Congress plays a small role and the Courts basically has none.
What happens when Trump overreacts to some pipsqueak leader's taunts? Will the markets remain calm while young men are sent off to avenge some stupid slight? Russian leaders are seasoned, capable and have not an ounce of conscience or sense of restraint in prosecuting their interests (e.g., Syria). What happens when Putin's compliments blind him to our country's interests?
Trump showed himself time and time again to be unsuitable to lead. No amount of fancy thinking or good writing can make that go away. We are in for a very rough four years.
14
I expect much more from Krugman than a knee jerk reaction quickly glossed over as a retraction. Like so many others--left and right--Krugman should acknowledge how quick he was to judge, and how slow he was to think things through. The question that requires thought---not reaction--is this: what is to be done? Don't expect the same punditry that got this so terribly wrong to help us with that.
4
You know, it's funny. America was built by people physically moving from a "worse place" to a "better place" where more opportunity awaited. Now, America elect a man because they don't want to move to where the opportunities are - they want yesterday's opportunities (steel, coal, furniture, textiles) to come back to them. Sad to say, rural and semi-rural America, but that isn't going to happen. China produces a ton of steel - and does it with steelworkers making $500.00 a month, or less. How many Pennsylvanians are willing to head back to Bethlehem for $500.00 a month? The same goes for all those other factories. My advice to Middle America is that if you aren't where the opportunities are, then you better get out of where they aren't. Or be prepared to be passed by. That's not the President's fault. It's not the Democrats or Republicans fault. It's just progress. Sometimes people win, sometimes they lose. The perfect trifecta of World War II devastation fueling all the American factories lasted over 20 years, but has been waning for the past 30 or so. I sense a lot of hatred for Trump coming up when he can't change history either.
50
I blame the nytimes and other of the token left whose role has been reduced to international virtue signalling for calling all of us who said that illegals are illegal not "undocumented" racists. This made some people so angry that voted for Trump.
I blame the post GFC economists who smugly congratulated themselves when the debts of some in the Wall Street casino were liquidated at the expense of savers and retirees for 8 long years of Zero yield.
I blame the econmists who restated again and again that free trade rises all ships when China disproportionatel benefited and thousands of working Americans were put out of work.
And then I can blame trump for vandalizing the environment, womens right to choose, gun control, obamacare. Etc etc etc.
But please dont just blame Trump. He is a toxic opportunist but the smug economists and racist and deplorable accusers helped put him there.
I blame the post GFC economists who smugly congratulated themselves when the debts of some in the Wall Street casino were liquidated at the expense of savers and retirees for 8 long years of Zero yield.
I blame the econmists who restated again and again that free trade rises all ships when China disproportionatel benefited and thousands of working Americans were put out of work.
And then I can blame trump for vandalizing the environment, womens right to choose, gun control, obamacare. Etc etc etc.
But please dont just blame Trump. He is a toxic opportunist but the smug economists and racist and deplorable accusers helped put him there.
4
Unfortunately there are other tools in Mr. Trump's tool belt that will affect the economy. Paul Ryan might get his wish to turn medicare into a voucher system, or turn Social Security over to Wall Street. Mr. Trump may expand his "enemies list" and start trying to jail reporters and other "haters". And worst of all, Mr. T could decide to try out those nuclear codes.
7
Once again your economic predictions are heavily biased by your politics. You are out of touch with America. After that embarrassing prediction you now cover yourself with "a slump will take years to occur" and in the mean time "don’t be surprised if economic growth actually accelerates for a couple of years". If that is true then Trump's Presidency will be considered a success and will further accelerate the movement to elect Republicans.
"With Donald J. Trump’s win, Republicans will soon control the White House,
both chambers of Congress, the tilt of the Supreme Court, more state legislative chambers than any time in history, and more governor’s offices than they have held in nearly a century.".......NYT 11/13/16
Yes climate change is a pressing issue but right now the American working middle class is in a economic slump. Once the base, they have been abandoned by the Democratic Party. The party now belongs to the Wall Street, Hollywood and so called intellectuals like yourself. Bernie had it right.
"With Donald J. Trump’s win, Republicans will soon control the White House,
both chambers of Congress, the tilt of the Supreme Court, more state legislative chambers than any time in history, and more governor’s offices than they have held in nearly a century.".......NYT 11/13/16
Yes climate change is a pressing issue but right now the American working middle class is in a economic slump. Once the base, they have been abandoned by the Democratic Party. The party now belongs to the Wall Street, Hollywood and so called intellectuals like yourself. Bernie had it right.
5
Cutting the corporate tax rate to 15% will spur growth since cash tax is costly to companies. Perhaps tariff income will somewhat offset the lost revenue if Congress imposes tariffs on goods made by American based companies which have factories or manufacturing agreements outside of the US. I expect the deficit to increase dramatically because Trump has promised tax cuts for the 1% and Congress has been wanting to do that since Obama took office. Plus if you add in the end of the estate tax, the 1% will get even richer. This is what America mostly wants and in some measure its because people don't want government support. They want jobs. But they want $50K a year jobs and roofing or picking strawberries doesn't pay $50K a year. Hillary offered training and well they don't want or trust training to deliver them jobs where they live. Sort of ironic in an anti immigrant era that 100 years ago people from Europe would travel across the Atlantic for a better life and rust belters won't move across the country for a better job. The bottom line is that the country really does better under a Democratic president. And Krugman's predictions will eventually come true. One other thought, if Trump does as he promised to not pay American treasury holders their agreed on interest, capital will leave the US since at this point it is thought to be safest place to put money. If China ever gets its corruption climate under control China will surpass the US in no time.
5
The housing bust of 2009 pretty much ensured most Americans could not easily move across the country in search of a job. With underwater (if not fully foreclosed) houses and banks unwilling to lend to people whose jobs were (are) shaky or non-existent, where are people to go? Where are they to live? It's complicated. Banks win. People lose.
2
Cash tax is costly to companies? You jest, surely. American corporations are flush with cash at amounts that would shock the CFO's of the 1970s and 80s. There is no "cash tax" if your cash isn't busy making profit. And the effevtive tax rate on that cash right now is near zero. Sorry to burst your bubble.
People everywhere need access to community outreach programs that teach the basics of economics, face-to-face with a person they can create a level of trust. Somebody should prepare simple explanatory statements of why tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation of the financial industry will never help the working folks. Democrats need to start this type of on-the-ground movement now. Come 2020, Trump will have every believable lie ready to con them again. Witness his interview on 60 Minutes. He has to surround himself with lobbyists: "I had no choice, there's nobody else". I can already hearing him saying it in 2020 and his crowds chanting their agreement and feeling sorry for him because he had to deal with these monsters...and then they'll vote for him again. Up to the task of preparing the materials, Professor?
10
Now that a Republican is in the White House, all of a sudden talk of an "infrastructure" investment seems to make practical sense as a way to both stimulate our economy and create jobs; but when President Obama and the Democrats were pushing it, it was falling on deaf ears in the Republican controlled Congress. Republicans are notorious for putting Party before Country. This is just one more vivid example.
48
Obama's $900 Billion "stimulus" was supposed to go into infrastructure building and repair, the so called "Shovel Ready Jobs". Obama had to admit later that there were no shovel ready jobs. That's because the lead time on an infrastructure project is years.
The signage costs on these designated projects was an average $40,000 per. I'll bet you couldn't find any of it anywhere today.
A flop. A big expensive flop. What happened to the $900 Billion?
The signage costs on these designated projects was an average $40,000 per. I'll bet you couldn't find any of it anywhere today.
A flop. A big expensive flop. What happened to the $900 Billion?
Is it possible for the Treasury to issue some kind of weird new public debt that wouldn't be as sound as normal treasury bonds? Trump has a history of weaseling out of his financial obligations. I wonder if he'll issue special Build That Wall bonds that will appeal to unsophisticated investors but be loaded with fine print that could make them worthless. (I think we need to think about the unthinkable.)
It will be interesting to see how Ryan and the Republicans square their supposed opposition to big deficits with Trump's lifelong embrace of debt.
It will be interesting to see how Ryan and the Republicans square their supposed opposition to big deficits with Trump's lifelong embrace of debt.
6
"Is it possible for the Treasury to issue some kind of weird new public debt that wouldn't be as sound as normal treasury bonds?"
The Treasury cannot issue bonds without the permission of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve likes to make money on Treasury bonds. If they are less sound then they'll not permit them because no one will buy them. Treasury bonds are not offered to Joe Lunchpail. They go to institutions which are not peopled with unsophisticated investment personnel.
The Treasury cannot issue bonds without the permission of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve likes to make money on Treasury bonds. If they are less sound then they'll not permit them because no one will buy them. Treasury bonds are not offered to Joe Lunchpail. They go to institutions which are not peopled with unsophisticated investment personnel.
The voters' have shown that climate change is not the number one issue. It may be your issue but not theirs.
7
True, to their everlasting regret.
1
But it will be their grandchildren's.
2
I predict that Paul Krugman will be bitter about not getting that Clinton Administration job for at least four, maybe eight, years. Well, that's what you get for smearing Sanders and his supporters. The candidate who could not win against Trump. And you'll be making excuses for 16 years, and smear everyone not Hillary as you did Nader.
Who's scaring America now?
Who's scaring America now?
13
Dear Dr. Paul - throwing the bones, reading the entrails, prognosticating, predicting, doesn't mean diddly. It's tasting the pudding after it's made that gives an idea of its ingredients good or bad. "Trump Slump Coming?" - a cute headline, but the headlines for the past 17 months were Hillary boosting and Trump slamming, till the Presidential Election pudding was tasted. Bitter to the Democrats, given Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote, sweet to the GOP, given Trump winning the Electoral College votes. First business should be the amendment removing the 1846 Electoral College from our Constitution. But I digress. As usual a good piece of word work, Dr. K. "A terrible man, a terrible team" that's what we the people have raised to the Oval Office and White House. They got the power. We shall see if your prognostication that Trumpist policies wil lbe "revealed as the cruel joke they are" in the coming kakistocracy. Let's hope good things will happen to all of us under Trump's amazingly unforeseen (by the press, lamestream and social media) victory.
1
Right - they will give Trump credit for the improved economy, which has been improving throughout Obama's 8 years all the while declaring Obama an "absolute failure." Then after 2020 (please, God) or 2024 when Trump is gone and Trump's "policies" finally exact their toll, the Democrats will be blamed... what a racket!
And, yes, Trump fans in the hinterlands will likely still be looking at shuttered factories with parking lots full of crab grass. They will be feeling betrayed and angry, seeking their next "outsider" to be their savior. Trump and his kids will be richer, as will the GOP establishment...
And, yes, Trump fans in the hinterlands will likely still be looking at shuttered factories with parking lots full of crab grass. They will be feeling betrayed and angry, seeking their next "outsider" to be their savior. Trump and his kids will be richer, as will the GOP establishment...
27
I doubt that this country will ever fully recover from the viciousness of the election campaign just waged by Mr. Trump against Mrs. Clinton; his frequent denials of her legitimacy as a presidential candidate; his crude insults to everyone who opposed him; his repeated charges of a rigged election and his ongoing delays in refusing to affirm that he would accept Mrs. Clinton as our President in the event she won the election.
All of the tools and techniques that he successfully employed to make his campaign for President the most destructive in our modern history are now available for use by future candidates for office all up and down the line.
How long will it be before we see them being used by candidates for the office of city dogcatcher?
There is legitimate reason for despair.
All of the tools and techniques that he successfully employed to make his campaign for President the most destructive in our modern history are now available for use by future candidates for office all up and down the line.
How long will it be before we see them being used by candidates for the office of city dogcatcher?
There is legitimate reason for despair.
239
A. Stanton, as a Democrat who has watched as one candidate after another has refused to play dirty against his/her opponent, I for one would be delighted to see future aspiring politicians master the time-tested craft of sharp political rhetoric and invective! For God sakes if we've learned nothing from this election it's that you'd better learn how to win if you want to represent the people in higher office!
I, first, and foremost, supported, and still support the ideas expounded by Bernie Sanders, and regardless, I believe the next eight years with Mr. Trump, as our President, will prove to be a time of revival, and great growth, for all Americans.
Historically, Americans, one and all, always came together, and rallied behind our President, and I know this will be the case with our 45th President, Mr. Trump.
His infrastructure proposals, and stated belief in protecting the American people from the TPP, and other such awful trade agreements, which only benefit corporate America, and foreign interests, will give us the long sought after economic opportunity to come roaring back.
End the naysaing, and help instead of hinder.
Historically, Americans, one and all, always came together, and rallied behind our President, and I know this will be the case with our 45th President, Mr. Trump.
His infrastructure proposals, and stated belief in protecting the American people from the TPP, and other such awful trade agreements, which only benefit corporate America, and foreign interests, will give us the long sought after economic opportunity to come roaring back.
End the naysaing, and help instead of hinder.
1
Mr. Krugman "quickly retracted his call" of a forthcoming fiscal disaster...after the Dow went up 5% in a week. Unfortunately he is unwilling to actually withhold judgement for longer than a day to see how the new president elect actualizes his ideas. The futile fury in the streets reflects this same intolerance of a democratic process that denied their fantasy outcome - a Trump free United States.
I didn't vote for the man, but he was elected our president and he deserves a chance. So take a deep breath, liberal America and open your mind.
I didn't vote for the man, but he was elected our president and he deserves a chance. So take a deep breath, liberal America and open your mind.
15
Just for the record:
The time stamp of the retraction on twitter was: 5:35 AM - 9 Nov 2016, which said: "Having some second thoughts about my global recession call. As with Brexit, the short-run case isn't that clear. Still a disaster"
This was before the stock market even opened Wednesday morning.
The time stamp of the retraction on twitter was: 5:35 AM - 9 Nov 2016, which said: "Having some second thoughts about my global recession call. As with Brexit, the short-run case isn't that clear. Still a disaster"
This was before the stock market even opened Wednesday morning.
3
Hilarious advice. In 2008 and 2012 the Republicans pledged to block every Obama effort and succeeded in creating a deadlock in Washington. Do you remember the government shut downs? Republicans should get ready to take some of their own medicine. Democrats - who just won the popular vote by 1.7M - aren't backing down from anything.
So we are not allowed to plan, predict or criticize based on what Trump has promised because everyone knows he was lying through his teeth to get votes? You don't see a problem with that logic (or even more, with Trump himself)?
What should the response of the Democrats be? I propose filibuster tax cuts for the rich. With 51 republicans they can't have a majority in each committee. So Dems should do what republicans did, undermine all legislation that leads to increased deficits, I.e, withhold all stimulus. In the words of McConnell, try to make him a one term president. It's time for Democrats to play the same strategies as the Republicans. In this case you must remember, short term growth vs planetary distruction.
143
Dream on. They'll roll over. A lot of them are closet Republicans, DINOs.
We have to stimulate the local and global economy in infrastructure spending WITHOUT THE PRIVATELY OWNED BANKING SYSTEMS BUT WITH BANKS WITH 100% RESERVES. May be the time has finally come to have a worldwide serous debate on money creation, not debt creation. We need trillions of dollars every year or even every month to deal with the climate and development challenges that imperil human and other life.
However, one more major, transformational step has to be taken in the face of a looming climate catastrophe and the emergence of dangerous demagogues in the US, India, Russia, Turkey etc. We should be willing to transform the unjust, unsustainable and, therefore, unstable international monetary system which as glue does not only bind together the monetary, financial, economic and commercial systems, but as a pivot can transform our global community in its transformed, i.e. carbon-based form. The conceptual, institutional, ethical and strategic dimensions of a carbon-based international monetary system with its monetary standard (not a Republican gold standard) are presented in Verhagen 2012 "The Tierra Solution: Resolving the climate crisis through monetary transformation" and updated in www.timun.net. Global climate leader .” Bill McKibben rightly observed on May 17, 2011: “The further into the global warming area we go, the more physics and politics narrows our possible paths of action. Here’s a very cogent and well-argued account of one of the remaining possibilities".
However, one more major, transformational step has to be taken in the face of a looming climate catastrophe and the emergence of dangerous demagogues in the US, India, Russia, Turkey etc. We should be willing to transform the unjust, unsustainable and, therefore, unstable international monetary system which as glue does not only bind together the monetary, financial, economic and commercial systems, but as a pivot can transform our global community in its transformed, i.e. carbon-based form. The conceptual, institutional, ethical and strategic dimensions of a carbon-based international monetary system with its monetary standard (not a Republican gold standard) are presented in Verhagen 2012 "The Tierra Solution: Resolving the climate crisis through monetary transformation" and updated in www.timun.net. Global climate leader .” Bill McKibben rightly observed on May 17, 2011: “The further into the global warming area we go, the more physics and politics narrows our possible paths of action. Here’s a very cogent and well-argued account of one of the remaining possibilities".
4
I don't know about the second paragraph. It sounds good, but I am wary of any proposal that would limit the creation of money by the government. Especially in light of the first paragraph which would prevent banks from creating ANY money. In an ideal word, the banking system can provide a short term buffer, to get us over a brief period of high trade deficits and too small federal deficits.
If you look at the record in the US from about 1995 to 2007, you see that the federal government did not create enough money to support a growing economy and a large trade deficit. Banks supplied the money that kept it going.
Of course, that went way, way, too far, but I wonder if we had elected a sensible President in 2000 (although one was not running), whether the federal deficit could have been increased enough to account for the large trade deficit and unwind the mountain of private debt created by the banks lending. Bush did neither. His deficits were too small and way too inefficient, sending low velocity money to the private sector.
If you look at the record in the US from about 1995 to 2007, you see that the federal government did not create enough money to support a growing economy and a large trade deficit. Banks supplied the money that kept it going.
Of course, that went way, way, too far, but I wonder if we had elected a sensible President in 2000 (although one was not running), whether the federal deficit could have been increased enough to account for the large trade deficit and unwind the mountain of private debt created by the banks lending. Bush did neither. His deficits were too small and way too inefficient, sending low velocity money to the private sector.
Money is debt. There's nothing else it can be.
MKR - Nonsense! Money is a device that let's us keep track of the value of things so we can conduct commerce without relying on bartering.
thanks Paul as alwys for your expertise and insight. Did you realize that you quoted nearly word for word richard thompson's song good things happen o bad people? great song and certainly correct about this moment.
5
I don't know how many trillions of dollars the Trump regime will add to the debt at the end of his occupation of the White House, but I predict he will leave office as the world's first trillionaire. There are always winners and losers in trickle-down economics and the losers just picked Trump to win...on many levels.
25
Trump is the puppet and his masters are the Republican party. Let's face it they are going to implement all of Paul Ryan's policies. Debt doesn't mean a thing to these guys as long as they get their profits. And their in control of causing those debts. Infrastructure spending as stated by Mitch McConnell is a low priority. Drain the swamp? Not yet and not in the near future. What we learned from this election is that the Republicans and everyone of their voters don't understand economics. Feelings are more important than facts. And I'm no genius but I've experienced trickle down and how damaging it is to the most vulnerable. These people don't care about this country or anyone who is not in the top 1%.
41
I doubt he is controlled by the GOP. They actually despise him. He however is easily flattered and expects fawning like he's Louis the XIV. Remember how impressed he was that Pence treated him respectfully. Pence wants his job and the GOP elite want Pence. So Trump better stay sort of legal or he will the first president to be kicked out of office under impeachment and by his own party no less.
Mr. Krugman, you know much, far more than I do on these matters. As his win has taught us we are in unpredictable times, it's impossible to say what will happen next. Count on uncertainty as the safest bet.
The millennials who thought it cool to write in Jill Stein, the blacks who stayed home, the women who scream equality yet mimicked their husbands and boyfriends opinions in the voting booth, they handed a Sociopath unseen power in the Whitehouse in modern times.
HI supporters aren't as pathetic, but they are hostile to facts. Their rusted factories will not ever billow smoke. They are already forgotten.
The new York Times has done great damage to news, falling right into Trump's palm, as now even Times readers don't know what to believe. The Upshot, which I quoted loudly and with gusto daily during the election, had the landslide correct but the names transposed. Who believes anyone or anything anymore. How will the NYT help repair this?
The millennials who thought it cool to write in Jill Stein, the blacks who stayed home, the women who scream equality yet mimicked their husbands and boyfriends opinions in the voting booth, they handed a Sociopath unseen power in the Whitehouse in modern times.
HI supporters aren't as pathetic, but they are hostile to facts. Their rusted factories will not ever billow smoke. They are already forgotten.
The new York Times has done great damage to news, falling right into Trump's palm, as now even Times readers don't know what to believe. The Upshot, which I quoted loudly and with gusto daily during the election, had the landslide correct but the names transposed. Who believes anyone or anything anymore. How will the NYT help repair this?
16
How can this be a landslide when Trump lost the popular vote. Time to dump the Electoral College is way past due.
1
first there was no landslide;; the predictions fell within 1 and 2% see Nate Silver; it's just that the improbable happened in that eight states were won by Trump by 1 or 2%. Nobody expected it because they figured he would stumble in one or two.. he did stumble in Nevada, Colorado, Minnesota.
Now that a Republican is back in the White House, at least we won't be hearing from the deficit scolds for a while.
24
"Trumpist policies will, in particular, hurt, not help, the American working class......"
Fine. Since they have condemned their children to breathe foul air and inherit bad climate, I no longer care about them. Let them sink in their swamp.
Fine. Since they have condemned their children to breathe foul air and inherit bad climate, I no longer care about them. Let them sink in their swamp.
74
As I read you, Goldman Sachs is all that is wrong with our economy; GS is, essentially, as I understand what you have written, a parasite that is paid way to much
Yet Hillary was *friendly* with these people
no wonder she lost
it isnt' the 250 thousand dollars for a hours talk; it isn't hiding the transcripts; it is that she (and you) don't seem to get that all of us, left and right, are ground to dust by wall street and hillary is part of it
Yet Hillary was *friendly* with these people
no wonder she lost
it isnt' the 250 thousand dollars for a hours talk; it isn't hiding the transcripts; it is that she (and you) don't seem to get that all of us, left and right, are ground to dust by wall street and hillary is part of it
4
And Trump just installed a former Goldman exec as his "chief strategist". It appears that you really didn't gain anything, did you?
1
No need to worry. Trump will unleash nuclear war long before any possible economic collapse.
18
It appears that Trump will be following the pattern created by George W. Bush, run as a Republican but maintain a liberal fiscal policy. While he probably will be forced to maintain many of his bigoted positions to keep the mob happy, he will use a liberal fiscal policy to keep the economy going. This is hypocritical to say the least, since Republicans outside the White House have blocked Obama on every turn. They wanted economic failure during Obama's term, even if the average American suffers. Now that they are in power they will pull any strings necessary to stay in power.
That's the GOP for you.
That's the GOP for you.
63
It's the Reagan pattern -- burn the floorboards to heat the house. Bush was Reagan 2.0 and Trump promises to be Reagan 3.0.
However, Reagan had a cushion (low debt/GDP ratio), Bush had a cushion (Social Security surplus), and Trump has neither. To the contrary, Social Security is about to enter a deficit phase, and the US government will have to redeem the bonds purchased with the "surplus" even as Trump pursues policies which will require massive borrowing for just about everything else. It should be added that his energy policies will aggravate this problem, quite aside from their environmental impacts, by increasing US borrowing from the rest of the world.
Trump will be a disaster if he does anything he promises. Obama had things on the right path, even if he failed to explain this satisfactorily.
However, Reagan had a cushion (low debt/GDP ratio), Bush had a cushion (Social Security surplus), and Trump has neither. To the contrary, Social Security is about to enter a deficit phase, and the US government will have to redeem the bonds purchased with the "surplus" even as Trump pursues policies which will require massive borrowing for just about everything else. It should be added that his energy policies will aggravate this problem, quite aside from their environmental impacts, by increasing US borrowing from the rest of the world.
Trump will be a disaster if he does anything he promises. Obama had things on the right path, even if he failed to explain this satisfactorily.
5
Trump's other commonality with Bush is his weak mind, and desperate need for advisors whom he picks with terrible, horrible judgment. Cheney, Rumsfeld... now Bannon and countless other dangerous intimidators. Scary times.
". . . these tax cuts would add $4.5 trillion to U.S. debt over the next decade - about five times as much as the stimulus of the early Obama years."
Dr. Krugman fails to understand much about macro economics. Deficits caused by stimulus spending are "bad numbers," deficits caused by social welfare spending are "terrible numbers" and deficits caused by tax cuts to the wealthy are "good numbers." Think of it this way, what deficits would Ayn approve of?
Dr. Krugman fails to understand much about macro economics. Deficits caused by stimulus spending are "bad numbers," deficits caused by social welfare spending are "terrible numbers" and deficits caused by tax cuts to the wealthy are "good numbers." Think of it this way, what deficits would Ayn approve of?
13
So true.
1
This column begs the question, will Trump's failures manifest themselves before he comes up for reelection? How many jobs will be created? How will his incredible promises pan out?
Paul, America has just gone to school on the fine art of predictions and we didn't pass. Are you sure of what you write?
Paul, America has just gone to school on the fine art of predictions and we didn't pass. Are you sure of what you write?
8
The effects will be sooner rather than later. The import tariffs alone will increase prices on everything from toothbrushes to steel, and consumers will start hurting immediately. And if Trump's 45% tariff on Chinese imports happens, there will be crying in the aisles of Walmart.
But won't consumer goods become far more expensive in a protectionist economy in which we pay for higher American wages? As tariffs are enacted, won't consumers see an immediate impact on their standard of living? I defer to Mr. Krugman, of course, but wonder why he doesn't see protectionism as having an immediate negative impact on American families.
13
Exactly. And what Mr. Krugman has also failed to take into account is that the theoretical increase in manufacturing jobs that result from tariffs will never happen during the uncertainty of Trump Economic Policy (and I use that term loosely). What business is going to invest in plants and tooling if the tariffs might disappear as quickly as they appeared?
The operative sentence: "we’re about to see a major degradation in both the quality and the independence of public servants."
That is what is coming next.There will be people installed at newspapers, organizations, universities, city councils who will serve as advisors to make sure that the organization adopts a certain tone, a certain policy, a certain choice among staff to enhance the central leader's vision. To ignore or resist those advisors risks being isolated and pushed out or depriving a group of funding or preference if the organizations chose to support their truth tellers. People will say "I have to go along because I can't lose my job. " It will be impossible to tell who is honest and who is a collaborator. The New York Times will be frozen out if they resist muzzling their reporters and will made an example of-- just as Trump froze out Ted Cruz at the convention, and then Trump walked out over the end of Cruz's talk to embarrass him, putting him in the dark, drawing the crowd's ardor, and showing others what will happen if Trump is resisted. The only powerful person who has ever resisted Trump is...Hillary. It will be just little adjustments at first. Someone from the President's council on economic recovery will come to make the city a special project. Or a special new think tank at the university. Colleagues will become strangers to each other. Each will guard his own thoughts and words. That's how the major degradation is going to happen.
That is what is coming next.There will be people installed at newspapers, organizations, universities, city councils who will serve as advisors to make sure that the organization adopts a certain tone, a certain policy, a certain choice among staff to enhance the central leader's vision. To ignore or resist those advisors risks being isolated and pushed out or depriving a group of funding or preference if the organizations chose to support their truth tellers. People will say "I have to go along because I can't lose my job. " It will be impossible to tell who is honest and who is a collaborator. The New York Times will be frozen out if they resist muzzling their reporters and will made an example of-- just as Trump froze out Ted Cruz at the convention, and then Trump walked out over the end of Cruz's talk to embarrass him, putting him in the dark, drawing the crowd's ardor, and showing others what will happen if Trump is resisted. The only powerful person who has ever resisted Trump is...Hillary. It will be just little adjustments at first. Someone from the President's council on economic recovery will come to make the city a special project. Or a special new think tank at the university. Colleagues will become strangers to each other. Each will guard his own thoughts and words. That's how the major degradation is going to happen.
37
It's the Soviet style, and we have seen it before in Republican administrations. Like Stalin, Bush II tried to install political overseers (i.e. political commissars) at NASA and NOAA to review every scientific paper and article to scrub reference to "global warming" or "climate change" from the text. Every article, paper or speech had to be approved by the political commissar. If it did not toe the political line it was sent back for rewrite.
That effort failed because of brave scientists who refused to do it and threatened to resign, but here we go again.
That effort failed because of brave scientists who refused to do it and threatened to resign, but here we go again.
1
Brexit : it is for mars 2017 ! how can you see the consequences ?
1
It makes no sense to me that reducing both imports and exports where the dollar is strong can have any other result than less overall activity, as home made goods become too expensive for most Americans. Higher prices for them will result in less being sold. Stagflation is likely to be the result.
12
i am having trouble sleeping. I awake hoping that all this has been nothing more than a nightmare. But alas the nightmare seems real. Predicting economic conditions under a unpredictable, mentally challenged president and his sycophant cabinet may be well neigh impossible. It is quite clear with his first cabinet picks that ideology based on ill-conceived fictions will drive policy and revenge politics. Already trump has stated that 2-3 million will be immediately deported of locked into prisons - nothing more than internment or concentration camps. Bannon a raging white supremacist and anti-semite is now advising on policy. Don't expect decisions to be based on science, but rather on ignorance, bias and bigotry. trump himself does not have the attention span to be bothered with systematic attention to detail, so his minions will be deciders. Economic collapse accelerated by a very angry populace and what is sure to be authoritarian crackdowns is closer than you think. It will take a generation to put things back together if it is at all possible.
217
Feeling exactly the same way. The fact that private prison stocks rose significantly as soon as he was elected only worsens the feeling of dread. What did these corporations know ahead of time? It feels like the world has lost its mind. I'm so worried that exercising one's constitutional rights of speech/protest will become an act of bravery.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-09/private-prison-stocks-...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-09/private-prison-stocks-...
Jeff,
Thank you for your sober analysis of our country's situation. I've taken an "informal" poll of acquaintances (none of my friends is a Trump supporter), and found that the only ones who believe "things won't be that bad" (hardly a ringing endorsement of their candidate) are whites. There's your answer.
Thank you for your sober analysis of our country's situation. I've taken an "informal" poll of acquaintances (none of my friends is a Trump supporter), and found that the only ones who believe "things won't be that bad" (hardly a ringing endorsement of their candidate) are whites. There's your answer.
Stupid will soon be in charge. In fact, it now rules. Why all the philosophizing? Just say it, just believe it. And do something!
9
I think you are right about it taking a bit of time before the train actually crashes...but even now, many Trump supporters are reveling in what truly mattered to them, and it wasn't the economy - which they know will have the final word over them. It is that self-righteous "I was born white, that means I'm superior" feeling they felt they'd lost when Obama was elected.
The rash of hate crimes (both larger reported crimes and the type of smaller "insignificant" ones like those perpetrated by old white ladies talking dirt to small non-white children in the grocery store) will only continue to escalate because that "restored power" is what's really important to them; they once again feel they can hate in the open, and it will once again be socially acceptable.
GOP politicians - especially Mitch McConnell - who so openly showed their bigoted hatred of the very idea of a non-white person in a position of power, have done the country a grave disservice...for they have opened the floodgates of bad policy - but worse than that, they've opened the floodgates of a mindset that doesn't even care. To them, any policy takes second place to identity, one reason Trump won. Those who feel it is a white's job to rule over persons of color lose their emotional composure when that particular part of their world is upset, and their apples fall to the ground.
Having control over blacks, Latinos, the LGBT community, women - this is what is important to the GOP...not policy.
The rash of hate crimes (both larger reported crimes and the type of smaller "insignificant" ones like those perpetrated by old white ladies talking dirt to small non-white children in the grocery store) will only continue to escalate because that "restored power" is what's really important to them; they once again feel they can hate in the open, and it will once again be socially acceptable.
GOP politicians - especially Mitch McConnell - who so openly showed their bigoted hatred of the very idea of a non-white person in a position of power, have done the country a grave disservice...for they have opened the floodgates of bad policy - but worse than that, they've opened the floodgates of a mindset that doesn't even care. To them, any policy takes second place to identity, one reason Trump won. Those who feel it is a white's job to rule over persons of color lose their emotional composure when that particular part of their world is upset, and their apples fall to the ground.
Having control over blacks, Latinos, the LGBT community, women - this is what is important to the GOP...not policy.
209
I'm in total agreement. But I'd like you to go further because I'm not an economist, but I do have some impressions.
First, this situation seems a lot like 1992, when Bill Clinton took office and the economy wasn't great, but the foundation for a better economy had been laid by H.W. Bush. Clinton got all the credit, only some of which was deserved. I feel we may be in for a similar situation here, where Obama laid the groundwork for a better economy that won't take off until he's out of office.
Second, the potential danger lies in Trump's relationship with the FED. The FED's policies had a lot to do with the Great Recession, but they also had a lot to do with us not going into recession while our government was gridlocked. I feel like they were counting on having continued freedom to raise or lower interest rates without a political spotlight, something they lose with Trump. While some inflation may be good, I never feel like I know when the quantitative easing bubble is about to hit. I always figure that the FED would force interest rates up to sort of "ride the wave" of having basically printed a ton of money. Trump will politicize that so I'm scared that they will limit their intervention. While the economy will seem great, as it did under Bush, this will also lead to a bubble which could result in another recession when it breaks. But this time, we would already have a large amount of debt, and limited flexibility to deal with it.
First, this situation seems a lot like 1992, when Bill Clinton took office and the economy wasn't great, but the foundation for a better economy had been laid by H.W. Bush. Clinton got all the credit, only some of which was deserved. I feel we may be in for a similar situation here, where Obama laid the groundwork for a better economy that won't take off until he's out of office.
Second, the potential danger lies in Trump's relationship with the FED. The FED's policies had a lot to do with the Great Recession, but they also had a lot to do with us not going into recession while our government was gridlocked. I feel like they were counting on having continued freedom to raise or lower interest rates without a political spotlight, something they lose with Trump. While some inflation may be good, I never feel like I know when the quantitative easing bubble is about to hit. I always figure that the FED would force interest rates up to sort of "ride the wave" of having basically printed a ton of money. Trump will politicize that so I'm scared that they will limit their intervention. While the economy will seem great, as it did under Bush, this will also lead to a bubble which could result in another recession when it breaks. But this time, we would already have a large amount of debt, and limited flexibility to deal with it.
79
"but the foundation for a better economy had been laid by H.W. Bush."
Nonsense. He and Reagan bankrupted the country.
Nonsense. He and Reagan bankrupted the country.
40
Bush 41, to his credit and the chagrin of his party, did begin a reversal of Reaganism (higher taxes, reduced military spending) that Clinton continued. Bush 41, despite his association with Reagan, was still Reagan's harshest critic (voodoo economics).
3
Is Krugman really saying that he is wrong and the economy won't get worse but trust him because sometime in the future the economy will get worse. I don't think that argument is a strong one. :(
It certainly appears as if Mr. T went into a conciliatory posture immediately after the election, with Reince Preibus as chief of staff, dropping the idea of a diverse (politically and culturally) cabinet, etc. And this is certainly a move toward autocracy, how severely we have yet to see. He definitely has Idi Amin Dada potential, doesn't he?
I find the shock of the transition creating late night panic attacks—going from Barack Obama, who performed many miracles despite the obstructionist Congress and his own aloofness, and surrounded by some brilliant minds—to this menacing narcissist and his ludicrous array of ghouls (Giuliani as Attorney General is more horrifying than Trump's meager victory, and Sarah Palin as Secretary of the Interior always brings sharp, boisterous guffaws followed by group vomiting. I have to reread Nicolai Gogol's "Dead Souls". It feels like only Russian literature, which usually starts with dark purple and ends in pitch black, could offer some insight to this retired teacher.
I find the shock of the transition creating late night panic attacks—going from Barack Obama, who performed many miracles despite the obstructionist Congress and his own aloofness, and surrounded by some brilliant minds—to this menacing narcissist and his ludicrous array of ghouls (Giuliani as Attorney General is more horrifying than Trump's meager victory, and Sarah Palin as Secretary of the Interior always brings sharp, boisterous guffaws followed by group vomiting. I have to reread Nicolai Gogol's "Dead Souls". It feels like only Russian literature, which usually starts with dark purple and ends in pitch black, could offer some insight to this retired teacher.
44
Dr. K, you can't know the effects of a Trump presidency until you see which ideas he is willing to spend political capital on. If it a yuge infrastructure package, wouldn't that be exactly your preference?
6
He wants to privatize the roads. Tolls wherever you go. Don't you get it. It's in his policy proposals.
8
Yes. But what price will we have to pay to keep his racist cohorts quiet?
1
Henry David, and his first major proposal, the wall, has been downgraded to fence in some areas and to virtual in others.
That's the point, all proposals are fungible, and unknown until they are put forward in reality. You take him at his word, Henry David? Do so at your own risk, sir.
That's the point, all proposals are fungible, and unknown until they are put forward in reality. You take him at his word, Henry David? Do so at your own risk, sir.
1
Trying to come to terms w/ what Trump will bring -- and determined to ward off the temptation to believe that it's all okay (a/k/a Stockholm Syndrome). Thanks to Krugman for a reasoned discussion, and a step back from the emotional morass of the past week. One thing to remember -- and remember well -- is that throughout the election campaign Trump said what his listeners wanted to hear, with gusto. His first interviews offer words of reassurance, but they are only words. The sky is not falling, but there are storms on the horizon. "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." (Bob Dylan, Subterranean Homesick Blues, 1965).
9
PK has a visceral dislike for Donald Trump, and i can certainly understand that, but he may pay a price for it. He eagerly awaits a bad result of any kind, ready to pounce on the new president with a blinding flurry of "I told you so's". He may be right on some issues, but it will be interesting to see how he reacts when good things happen.
The Affordable Health Care Act has all but failed, and i think Trump is going to fix it.
America is the highest consuming nation on the planet, there is room to restrict imports to increase job opportunities in America without triggering protectionist reactions which make the outcome a net negative. Comparative advantage has been over-worked, it is time to be less efficient for the sake of job creation, we can sacrifice some productivity for the benefit of the common man.
Trumps plans for deportations, securing the border and immigration reform seem reasonable.
Better relations with Russia would be good. shifting a greater burden of free world military costs to American allies would be good.
The effect of these changes on the American economy could be spectacular
I am afraid PKs biggest fear is not that the future will be a disaster, it is that it won't be.
The Affordable Health Care Act has all but failed, and i think Trump is going to fix it.
America is the highest consuming nation on the planet, there is room to restrict imports to increase job opportunities in America without triggering protectionist reactions which make the outcome a net negative. Comparative advantage has been over-worked, it is time to be less efficient for the sake of job creation, we can sacrifice some productivity for the benefit of the common man.
Trumps plans for deportations, securing the border and immigration reform seem reasonable.
Better relations with Russia would be good. shifting a greater burden of free world military costs to American allies would be good.
The effect of these changes on the American economy could be spectacular
I am afraid PKs biggest fear is not that the future will be a disaster, it is that it won't be.
8
Did you take a look at the "fix" Paul Ryan is advocating for ACA? Refund tax credits? How is that going to help people paying for coverage month to month?
5
Plus, Ryan said that he will propose phasing out Medicare in 2017.
3
How about Ryan's plan to have Medicare provided by private insurers with their 20% or more profit margin instead of a 0% profit margin today. Old, sick people will pay more because their care costs more. I call this the GOP genocide plan. Kill off those old sick people as soon as possible. Don't pay attention to Trump. Pay attention to Ryan. For all of those white Trump voters will you remember that with Trump no veto of Ryan? Will you remember the jobs promise when more manufacturing is moved offshore. Finally will you remember your for vote for Trump when your mom can't buy Medicare because she lives on Social Security, which by the way, the GOP wants to put in the hands of Wall Street. Or will you foolishly blame Obama?
3
The tax policies will be Reagan redux. A good drunk and a long hangover. The trigger this time may well be a global trade war. Just watch and listen to the comments already from the EU countries. Does anyone think that China will simply roll over and play dead when they are labeled a currency manipulator? When interest rates rise taking the interest on the debt with them, is there any doubt where the cuts will be? Not the defense contractors, I assure you. This time middle America may well go down for the count. In the long run, we need sound money, a comprehensive jobs and training plan and much higher taxes on the wealthy. A single payer health care delivery system for catastrophic care would actually save in the long run. How easy would it be to invite Merkel to the White House so we could copy Germany? After all, isn't that where Trump's ancestors are from? Or were they all from the fascist thinkers there?
10
The Republicans blocked every Obama proposal on infrastructure spending. They blamed Obama for budget deficits when he inherited a financial crisis. Now the same voters who were hurt by Republican policies voted a neoliberal fascist who will get infrastructure spending, a large taxcut, and a large budget deficit. The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Trump is not my president. Those who voted for him should deal with the consequences of a Trump Presidency.
15
If, G-d forbid, this country ever again gets desperate enough to want to put a Mussolini in the White House, let us at least find us a dignified and proper one, as opposed
to a coarse, swinish and contemptible one like Mr. Trump, no offense to hogs intended.
Mussolini, you know, was a great success, until he wasn't.
to a coarse, swinish and contemptible one like Mr. Trump, no offense to hogs intended.
Mussolini, you know, was a great success, until he wasn't.
24
Infrastructure spending was unaffordable during the Obama years, and as a result the middle class suffered, and suffered hard. We know this was necessary because our Congressional leaders told us defecit spending was an unthinkable evil.
I wonder what combination of tax cuts will magically make "trillions" in infrastructure spending affordable in the Trump years.
Excuse me while I catch my breath on this one.
I wonder what combination of tax cuts will magically make "trillions" in infrastructure spending affordable in the Trump years.
Excuse me while I catch my breath on this one.
29
Blah, blah, blah.
A broken clock is right twice a day. You should wish for that accuracy.
A broken clock is right twice a day. You should wish for that accuracy.
8
1. This is not the time for Hillary to be afraid. The more deferential she is to Trump, the more he will bully her. She has to come out and say, "if Trump and the Republican party launch a campaign of persecution, I want to be the first to go to jail. I want to get there before Jews, before Hispanics, and before the national humiliation of women led by a sexual predator"
2. Dems should attack immigration law violations by Trump's wife. Politicians of the left are afraid of their own shadows and have little clue how to attack. Properly done, this can be a bigger issue than Hillary's emails.
3. There is a huge alt-right presence on social media peddling and creating lies. There is no counter to it on the left. The grassroots has to do something about it and fast.
4. Read Masha Gessen's article at nybooks.com. There is a lot more in Plato about how tyrannies are established, but Gessen hits the main points.
5. Krugman should reflect upon why Hillary was the wrong candidate, his disparagement of Bernie, and his past support of John Edwards. Mistakes that are not understood will be repeated.
2. Dems should attack immigration law violations by Trump's wife. Politicians of the left are afraid of their own shadows and have little clue how to attack. Properly done, this can be a bigger issue than Hillary's emails.
3. There is a huge alt-right presence on social media peddling and creating lies. There is no counter to it on the left. The grassroots has to do something about it and fast.
4. Read Masha Gessen's article at nybooks.com. There is a lot more in Plato about how tyrannies are established, but Gessen hits the main points.
5. Krugman should reflect upon why Hillary was the wrong candidate, his disparagement of Bernie, and his past support of John Edwards. Mistakes that are not understood will be repeated.
12
The Democrats pushed for Superdelegate Superimposed Superelite Woman with her superbaggage in elite-allergic 2016 that had people screaming for hope and change 8 hard obstruction years after h&c (witnessing small ball change next to banker pardon and boons instead), an easy prey to a mean rightwing media machine (and a 5th bureau column) keen on capitalizing on the baggage, against the odds of low popularity and trust stats and the NYT writers used their brains to smear the virgin alternative instead of reconsidering.
Why didn't we go with who enthuses and soothes soul? How come I even have to ask?
When a charismatic outsider comes so close to battling down the establishment lock-in in spite of the most ugly and disciplined media blackout the history of media hit jobs has ever seen, and you witness election fraud in the primary on an unprecedented scale, you keep ignoring the spelled-out doom?
Flabbergasted by the stubborn sense of self-entitlement wilfully irresponsibly ignoring the immense risk in this choice, I'm left to pick an ulterior motive.
Does your agenda at maximum want to dole out mere crumbs of the cake that the robber baron wealthy steal and was Bernie's redistribution and regulation agenda a bigger nightmare to you than the extreme rightwing bucket list, full of illegal alien pain, of Trump and the vultures hiding behind his bully-shouldered silhouette of "cheer" doom?
Is that why Krugman Bros Inc. just co-killed progress and sanity and threw our future?
Why didn't we go with who enthuses and soothes soul? How come I even have to ask?
When a charismatic outsider comes so close to battling down the establishment lock-in in spite of the most ugly and disciplined media blackout the history of media hit jobs has ever seen, and you witness election fraud in the primary on an unprecedented scale, you keep ignoring the spelled-out doom?
Flabbergasted by the stubborn sense of self-entitlement wilfully irresponsibly ignoring the immense risk in this choice, I'm left to pick an ulterior motive.
Does your agenda at maximum want to dole out mere crumbs of the cake that the robber baron wealthy steal and was Bernie's redistribution and regulation agenda a bigger nightmare to you than the extreme rightwing bucket list, full of illegal alien pain, of Trump and the vultures hiding behind his bully-shouldered silhouette of "cheer" doom?
Is that why Krugman Bros Inc. just co-killed progress and sanity and threw our future?
5
--We are forced to gamble in the stock market with our retirement accounts.
--We are forced to use health insurance companies whose goals are to deny/reduce benefits to make a profit.
I would never trust this upcoming admin. with my health or my money, so gov. plans are not longer acceptable.
Can we set up a People's Retirement, a People's Health Plan etc., outside of gov. and profit-vultures?
There must be a way.
--We are forced to use health insurance companies whose goals are to deny/reduce benefits to make a profit.
I would never trust this upcoming admin. with my health or my money, so gov. plans are not longer acceptable.
Can we set up a People's Retirement, a People's Health Plan etc., outside of gov. and profit-vultures?
There must be a way.
12
Indeed.
I doubt even the short term "stimulus" effect of more Tax Cuts; except more mega yachts and luxury housing. The main result of the Tax Cut programs proposed would be to enhance the concentration of wealth (and Political Power) controlled by the .01%. Certainly a major feature of the Republican Agenda is entrenching the doctrine of One dollar/One Vote. More Dollars means more votes for the Plutocrats, while continuing the disenfranchisement and voter suppression agendas.
And you have all the Republican Controlled State Legislatures out there, all with their own Tax Cut and Spending (cut) plans. Here in Arkansas, that is the top agenda item for the forthcoming legislative session in January, another round of Tax Cuts.
How soon will State cuts to education and social spending, combined with cuts to Federal Programs, tip Trump Land into deeper recession?
Note the back pedaling in some circles on simple repeal of the Affordable Care act, without the newly insured, rural hospitals and health care would collapse, Health Care and education and transfer payment are the only things keeping many rural area economies afloat, all areas targeted for "Reform" (cuts).
Meanwhile, is the Democratic Party even capable of preparing to take advantage IF the problems manifest themselves before the 2018 election cycle?
Based on this year, NO; I mean simple things, like having viable candidates for all the State Legislative and Congressional seats.
I doubt even the short term "stimulus" effect of more Tax Cuts; except more mega yachts and luxury housing. The main result of the Tax Cut programs proposed would be to enhance the concentration of wealth (and Political Power) controlled by the .01%. Certainly a major feature of the Republican Agenda is entrenching the doctrine of One dollar/One Vote. More Dollars means more votes for the Plutocrats, while continuing the disenfranchisement and voter suppression agendas.
And you have all the Republican Controlled State Legislatures out there, all with their own Tax Cut and Spending (cut) plans. Here in Arkansas, that is the top agenda item for the forthcoming legislative session in January, another round of Tax Cuts.
How soon will State cuts to education and social spending, combined with cuts to Federal Programs, tip Trump Land into deeper recession?
Note the back pedaling in some circles on simple repeal of the Affordable Care act, without the newly insured, rural hospitals and health care would collapse, Health Care and education and transfer payment are the only things keeping many rural area economies afloat, all areas targeted for "Reform" (cuts).
Meanwhile, is the Democratic Party even capable of preparing to take advantage IF the problems manifest themselves before the 2018 election cycle?
Based on this year, NO; I mean simple things, like having viable candidates for all the State Legislative and Congressional seats.
9
"In the long run, its consequences may well be apocalyptic, if only because we have probably lost our last, best chance to rein in runaway climate change."
Our planet does not spin around an axis with Washington DC at the center. Hillary Clinton was never our last best chance for anything. This chicken little style fear mongering ought to end. It clouds rational thought and has a tendency to backfire.
Hillary lost the election because suburban women saw that the family finances can not sustain the gaping hole created by compounding increases in health insurance costs.
If you want to do something tangible to save the planet please consider that your employer still delivers newspapers one at a time by fossil fuel burning automobiles. It shouldn't be that hard to calculate how many barrels of oil are burned each day in that endeavor. Let's see that number.
Or else spare us the horror of what happens to the planet while our saviors fly around burning jet fuel non stop in their private jets and helicopters.
Our planet does not spin around an axis with Washington DC at the center. Hillary Clinton was never our last best chance for anything. This chicken little style fear mongering ought to end. It clouds rational thought and has a tendency to backfire.
Hillary lost the election because suburban women saw that the family finances can not sustain the gaping hole created by compounding increases in health insurance costs.
If you want to do something tangible to save the planet please consider that your employer still delivers newspapers one at a time by fossil fuel burning automobiles. It shouldn't be that hard to calculate how many barrels of oil are burned each day in that endeavor. Let's see that number.
Or else spare us the horror of what happens to the planet while our saviors fly around burning jet fuel non stop in their private jets and helicopters.
12
Well I turn to the comment sections of the NYT to read opposing views, learn from them, take that knowledge to expand my understanding of the complex issues in this very modern world.
However the comment I am replying to offers nothing. It is just a rant. A rant about an election that is done. Right now Hillary Clinton has at least the role that no one can take away from her; grandmother. You know, like she is doing the Thanksgiving cooking while you rant about the game on TV. Like what should happen to make America great again.
However the comment I am replying to offers nothing. It is just a rant. A rant about an election that is done. Right now Hillary Clinton has at least the role that no one can take away from her; grandmother. You know, like she is doing the Thanksgiving cooking while you rant about the game on TV. Like what should happen to make America great again.
1
Rarely are opposing views reflected in the comment section --- It all group think. I think Paul just grabbed a column from the first week after the 2000 decision and switched out Bush's name.
3
and the Brexit has very little to do with what happened in our homeland.
As the outcome of the Brexit vote also might have been some (accidental?) vote against some Establishment - but it wasn't at all such a definite 'win' of the so called 'working class' as in the US.
In the US the Rust Belt rebelled - or as Trump said in one of his last speeches: “Tomorrow, the working class takes back this country.”
And it is an unbelievable tragedy - that the American working class did that - not by voting for an empathetic and liberal thinking human being like Bernie Sanders but by voting for somebody - who the editors note of the Huffpo used to describe like that:
'Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.'
As the outcome of the Brexit vote also might have been some (accidental?) vote against some Establishment - but it wasn't at all such a definite 'win' of the so called 'working class' as in the US.
In the US the Rust Belt rebelled - or as Trump said in one of his last speeches: “Tomorrow, the working class takes back this country.”
And it is an unbelievable tragedy - that the American working class did that - not by voting for an empathetic and liberal thinking human being like Bernie Sanders but by voting for somebody - who the editors note of the Huffpo used to describe like that:
'Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.'
14
I'm not a climate change denialist, but I am a climate change nihilist - or at least, a climate change fatalist. The Trump administration will be terrible for climate change, no question, but the dirty little secret is that a Clinton administration would have been only marginally better. Clinton would have done a better job of making us FEEL like we were doing something to tackle anthropogenic global warming, but unless one of those deleted emails contained the secret to cold fusion, the best she could have been done would have been to slow the pace of carbon emissions by a few percentage points.
What many people ignore is that once CO2 is released into the atmosphere, it will remain there for millennia. Thus the rate of carbon emissions is less important in the end than the total amount of fixed, fossil-fuel carbon released over the course of human history. Unless and until we stop burning ANY carboniferous fuels AT ALL, we're still heading over the cliff. It's only a question of whether we're heading for the precipice in a Ferrari or a VW microbus.
I don't believe that Homo sapiens sapiens is capable of reining in fossil fuel use in a meaningful way until climate change starts to hurt and hurt a lot, President Trump vs President Clinton doesn't much alter the schedule according to which such pain will begin to be felt.
And who knows, if Trump could translate his man-crush on Putin into reductions in nukes, it could be a net plus for civilization's future.
What many people ignore is that once CO2 is released into the atmosphere, it will remain there for millennia. Thus the rate of carbon emissions is less important in the end than the total amount of fixed, fossil-fuel carbon released over the course of human history. Unless and until we stop burning ANY carboniferous fuels AT ALL, we're still heading over the cliff. It's only a question of whether we're heading for the precipice in a Ferrari or a VW microbus.
I don't believe that Homo sapiens sapiens is capable of reining in fossil fuel use in a meaningful way until climate change starts to hurt and hurt a lot, President Trump vs President Clinton doesn't much alter the schedule according to which such pain will begin to be felt.
And who knows, if Trump could translate his man-crush on Putin into reductions in nukes, it could be a net plus for civilization's future.
6
Wealth disparity - I see little in Trump's plans, if one can call them that, that will address what is, I believe, the key to voter angst, and the key economic issue of our time. Maybe if he does indeed get approval to build his wall it will act as a temporary stimulus. But, together with his plan for a regressive tax cut, it will inevitably shift the cost onto the middle class, which mostly got us into this demand ditch in the first place. Worse, last time I checked, a wall does not create wealth - after it's built it just sits there. And that is part two of what got us into this ditch - grossly inefficient capital allocation over a span of decades. If the capital to be spent on that wall were instead used to fund basic research we might see a lasting benefit. But everything I understand about the agenda makes me certain that we're headed for disaster, and even greater societal unrest. Labor is being devalued by automation and, despite what The Donald says, it will also continue to be devalued in the US by globalization. Nobody in political ranks (though some economists are) is discussing what we must do to adjust to this fact, just as few are discussing climate. So the two main forces undermining global stability are off the table. Beautiful. Now each election merely serves as a rage outlet, and it will be no different in two years, or four. Because the main challenges are not being addressed, in fact they are not even being discussed.
19
Mr. Krugman claims that globalisation has value by itself. It hasn't. In fact - as countries recently hit by falling oil prices, an exit of flash capital or sanctions can confirm - it has disadvantages too. A sound policy is one that seeks a balance: allowing enough globalisation to enjoy its benefits while keeping enough control to counter its disadvantages.
Of course we have to wait how Trump will address this issue. His solutions may make the problems only worse. But we should keep in mind that one of the reasons he could rise to the top by addressing the disadvantages of globalization was that people like Krugman refuse to do that.
Of course we have to wait how Trump will address this issue. His solutions may make the problems only worse. But we should keep in mind that one of the reasons he could rise to the top by addressing the disadvantages of globalization was that people like Krugman refuse to do that.
3
Perhaps the depressive effects of Paul Ryan economic policies will be muted by Mr. Trump. That may be the only upside to this.
7
I'm working to get passed deep feelings of sadness and fear, feelings which have been making it hard to read editorials explaining what has happened. Explanations do not help; it is what it is. Time will tell what deviousness took place to make this election take the last minute turn.
The devastation to come, pipe lines crossing the U.S, water contamination as a result of roll backs in climate control measures, among others will come slowly (boiling frog) but will be remarkably harmful and hard to repair.
We will need to have a 'President Obama' to save us from the results of this election much as following George W's presidency.
So, now we have to live with Donald, the Ronald, the biggest clown in Washington. Heaven help us. Tana
The devastation to come, pipe lines crossing the U.S, water contamination as a result of roll backs in climate control measures, among others will come slowly (boiling frog) but will be remarkably harmful and hard to repair.
We will need to have a 'President Obama' to save us from the results of this election much as following George W's presidency.
So, now we have to live with Donald, the Ronald, the biggest clown in Washington. Heaven help us. Tana
27
Later this morning the Philadelphia Federal Reserve will release the results of its regular quarterly survey of economic forecasters. The numbers were due to the bank last Monday, the day before the election. The National Association for Business Economics' very similar survey (with a large overlap in the group of respondents) set today as its deadline. Thus, a comparison of the two sets will give a quick read on how economists are changing their view on the near term (as one of those in both groups, I lowered my forecast for the next year a bit: essentially, the uncertainty should boost long-term interest rates and discourage capital spending and homebuilding. Any kick from fiscal stimulus would come later. It's not a recession--real GDP continues to crawl up--but job growth stalls out for a spell and the unemployment rate moves up a bit).
3
Angst will grow around civil liberties, justice, and freedoms, but the big action will be in the political economy. Not the tides--recessions/depressions vs. prosperity/bubbles--but the current: the directed use of powerful streams of public money, its regulation and oversight; its shift from social benefits to private enterprise is the quiet storm ahead.
On healthcare: 2016 HIV medicaid spending is $10 billion; will it cut? Will the new payment rule for Medicaid remain in effect? From patients to drugs, will new risks enter medical supply chains? Already, many healthcare stocks have dropped by 40 % (CNC, AMN).
On social security: its $2.8 trillion cash and payables trust fund equals the world's 5th largest GDP, larger than the entire economy of Great Britain or France. Start the betting pool on how long it will be before Ryan, et al. make their run!
On wages: will the all-GOP government suppress wages despite Trump's murmurs of “big-league jobs?” Will tradition or an about-face rule the day?
On prosperity: private firms, esp. in tech, are growing (see Forbes); fewer firms are going public and families are being denied access to new found prosperity—this has short and long term effects! How will the widening split between publicly traded and privately owned companies affect family net worth and financial planning?
The GOP will use social issues as deflections, but the permanent changes (defense/farms/taxes) they are after seek not to reduce the budget but to break it!
On healthcare: 2016 HIV medicaid spending is $10 billion; will it cut? Will the new payment rule for Medicaid remain in effect? From patients to drugs, will new risks enter medical supply chains? Already, many healthcare stocks have dropped by 40 % (CNC, AMN).
On social security: its $2.8 trillion cash and payables trust fund equals the world's 5th largest GDP, larger than the entire economy of Great Britain or France. Start the betting pool on how long it will be before Ryan, et al. make their run!
On wages: will the all-GOP government suppress wages despite Trump's murmurs of “big-league jobs?” Will tradition or an about-face rule the day?
On prosperity: private firms, esp. in tech, are growing (see Forbes); fewer firms are going public and families are being denied access to new found prosperity—this has short and long term effects! How will the widening split between publicly traded and privately owned companies affect family net worth and financial planning?
The GOP will use social issues as deflections, but the permanent changes (defense/farms/taxes) they are after seek not to reduce the budget but to break it!
12
Another note: the current issue of global capital's "superabundance" is being discussed as trends and information by knowledge firms like Bain, Deloitte, and others, but ignored by US officials. The production of goods and services has slowed as fiscal assets have rapidly expanded. (Also reflected in the widening gap between public-private firms described above.)
This gap is producing not only financial excesses but also social instability in the forms of excesses (the election itself!); it is fragmenting regions, communities and countries as it unifies a global movement (think Asia, Africa, Haiti!) to suppress labor, limit health and safety, restrict job growth and access to future economic value (for retirement, savings, education, business capital, et. al).
Social excesses are the veils around this powerful shift of capital from government to private hands, and only China is maintaining an effective partnership (internally and externally) to mitigate the effects of this continuing trend.
This gap is producing not only financial excesses but also social instability in the forms of excesses (the election itself!); it is fragmenting regions, communities and countries as it unifies a global movement (think Asia, Africa, Haiti!) to suppress labor, limit health and safety, restrict job growth and access to future economic value (for retirement, savings, education, business capital, et. al).
Social excesses are the veils around this powerful shift of capital from government to private hands, and only China is maintaining an effective partnership (internally and externally) to mitigate the effects of this continuing trend.
2
Trump will apply Keynesian macroeconomic policy; increase spending on infrastructure; increase inflation; increase real wages; reduce the trade deficit; increase the GDP; initiate an arms race a la Reagan which will make Russia look much weaker (Putin will rue the day that he hacked the emails of the Clinton campaign); and hurt ISIS big-time.
The shame is that the unpatriotic Republican Congress would not give Obama a nickel for infrastructure or jobs, after the initial *stimulus*; they put partisanship ahead of the national interest. But Trump will roll them, using his poodle Priebus.
So why all the negativity? Sounds like "Trump Derangement Syndrome".
The shame is that the unpatriotic Republican Congress would not give Obama a nickel for infrastructure or jobs, after the initial *stimulus*; they put partisanship ahead of the national interest. But Trump will roll them, using his poodle Priebus.
So why all the negativity? Sounds like "Trump Derangement Syndrome".
6
I hope you are right.
2
Wonder what the Republican Congress will give Trump when it comes to infrastructure. After viewing the interview on 60 Minutes, I found some hope that just maybe Trump is a better man than given credit and he really might have some empathy for the working man. The interview left me wondering who he is, was he acting during all the campaign or was he putting on an act during the 60 Minute interview? Time will tell. At least he recognized it when he met a truly Remarkable Human Being and the Best President to ever live in the Whitehouse. Thank you Obama for serving our country for eight long years!!
5
Thank you for dialing back the hysteria. We need more support for America and less vituperation. Perhaps the President will speak to the fact that we are one America and must pull in the same direction - no matter the specific differences which are part of the American way.
1
I feel like a passenger on a ship in a storm tossed sea who discovers that some of the passengers were down in the hold punching holes in the hull. I feel betrayed by my fellow Americans who voted for DT. And so I am not going to be sorry for in what's coming. After speaking with my friends on Wall St., I agree that the economy is likely to soar (thanks to deregulation, changes in the tax law, and the "no prosecution" attitude). People like me (with money) are going to make a lot of money. The blue collars who voted for DT, they are not going to do as well, not at all. And in the crash that follow, they will starve. I'll be sitting at my beach house thinking "to all the poorly educated beloved by trump: thank you for voting for trump, destroying yourself, and making me much richer"
382
Once you get past the anger, do you think you could help out, say by advocating for a fairer tax structure or less antiquated electoral system? Just asking....
6
sjs,
Exactly. I'm not going to have one bit of concern about the fate of Trump voters or their families. My family's situation parallels yours. However, because we're an identifiable ethnic minority, our beach house (for which we're now shopping) will be far outside the U.S. The only well-to-do people the Trump voters will target are people like us.
Exactly. I'm not going to have one bit of concern about the fate of Trump voters or their families. My family's situation parallels yours. However, because we're an identifiable ethnic minority, our beach house (for which we're now shopping) will be far outside the U.S. The only well-to-do people the Trump voters will target are people like us.
1
You left out one thing, sjs. Your beach house in Connecticut is going to be under water. Better try to raise it and put it on stilts the way they do in New Orleans or South Beach.
Global warming is real, and the Greenland ice cap is melting almost ten times faster than originally predicted by our scientists. Turns out that we didn't really know much about how fast really thick ice melts (Greenland ice shelf is up to 2 miles thick). Turns out that it accelerates melting with minor increases in temperature of air and water.
Of course we won't be able to monitor this very long. DT and the Republicans will cut the funding for global warming effects. It's expensive to heat up.
Of course this could all be reversed rather quickly with a global nuclear war followed by a long nuclear winter which would wrap the earth in dense cloud cover - too dense to grow grows to feed all of us.
Global warming is real, and the Greenland ice cap is melting almost ten times faster than originally predicted by our scientists. Turns out that we didn't really know much about how fast really thick ice melts (Greenland ice shelf is up to 2 miles thick). Turns out that it accelerates melting with minor increases in temperature of air and water.
Of course we won't be able to monitor this very long. DT and the Republicans will cut the funding for global warming effects. It's expensive to heat up.
Of course this could all be reversed rather quickly with a global nuclear war followed by a long nuclear winter which would wrap the earth in dense cloud cover - too dense to grow grows to feed all of us.
2
My thoughts are that Trump has no more than two years to show significant progress in bringing back jobs to those areas where the white working class suffer the most. Why, because they're desperate. And when the mid-terms roll around if he doesn't produce you may very well see a majority Democratic Congress get voted in.
And all the political rhetoric and lies will mean nothing to those in need of a decent job.
Now ask ourselves this. What can Congress get passed and up and running in two years? Nada! They have proven over and over again that getting anything to the Presidents desk for signing is very far away. And just because there's a majority republican House and Senate doesn't mean a thing. There's so much infighting nothing will get done. And the Democrats still have a firewall with the filibuster rule.
And all the political rhetoric and lies will mean nothing to those in need of a decent job.
Now ask ourselves this. What can Congress get passed and up and running in two years? Nada! They have proven over and over again that getting anything to the Presidents desk for signing is very far away. And just because there's a majority republican House and Senate doesn't mean a thing. There's so much infighting nothing will get done. And the Democrats still have a firewall with the filibuster rule.
13
I'm expecting the alt.right talk radio/Fox News disinformation network, led by the President's press secretary, will continually fix the blame for any underperformance on anyone who doesn't play along with and enthusiastically support the administration, Republican, Democrat, or whoever. Governance through lies. intimidation, and anger management (other peoples' anger). So who knows how the midterms will play out.
7
Yes, the Democrats have the filibuster rule, but only as long as the Republican Congress lets them keep it.
3
Dr. Krugman, As you know, Brexit plans are now in disarray as Parliament must have its say on the declaration of article 50, which was originally set to be triggered in March 2017. So Brexit had not yet begun, if it ever will be. Thus, no recession as of today.
6
I wish we could so easily throw off the mantle of Trumpism.
5
The conclusions of this analysis have been apparent for a long time. The length of a "recovery" to nowhere for 8 years should have been a tip that we live in unusual times. Or maybe it is just that the data gathered, parsed and spooled which is then analyzed is just plain garbage. I don't mean the "made up numbers" ala Jack Welch. I mean the fact the economies of the world(in particular the US) have gotten so big and so complex, that gathering seems to be a guess at best. Seriously, one could guess the trade balance, plus or minus $5 billion, each month. The jobs report, slap 150,000 on your report to clients and more often than not you beat the consensus. Inflation, none existent so just say 1% plus or minus 1%. Or maybe to call the next election, flip a coin, heads D, tails R. Big data is a joke. Unfortunately the joke is on us.
9
Re: Brexit.
Mr. Krugman must be too occupied to read the BBC
Brexit Britain: What has actually happened so far?
10 November 2016
The UK may have voted on 23 June to leave the European Union but it is not yet clear what the country's path to Brexit will actually mean.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36956418
Brexit has not even begun, but the mere announcement by Ms. May for a date on negotiations send the pound to record lows
"Figures from the ONS suggest inflationary pressures are building for businesses bringing in materials from abroad. Materials and fuels bought by UK manufacturers rose by 7.6% in price. That was the fastest rise since December 2011, and compared with a rise of 4.1% in the year to July."
Mr. Krugman must be too occupied to read the BBC
Brexit Britain: What has actually happened so far?
10 November 2016
The UK may have voted on 23 June to leave the European Union but it is not yet clear what the country's path to Brexit will actually mean.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36956418
Brexit has not even begun, but the mere announcement by Ms. May for a date on negotiations send the pound to record lows
"Figures from the ONS suggest inflationary pressures are building for businesses bringing in materials from abroad. Materials and fuels bought by UK manufacturers rose by 7.6% in price. That was the fastest rise since December 2011, and compared with a rise of 4.1% in the year to July."
8
PK is correct that there is still slack in the economy, but here he is understating the case.
After decades of low wages, labor is too cheap. As with anything that is underpriced, it will be used less efficiently. Some concrete examples: Greeters in discount stores, stores staying open all night with very few customers, all kinds of custom niche products, large (unneeded) variety of choice in products, large numbers of underpaid people working long hours to meet the wants of wealthy people for labor intensive goods and services, a health insurance industry which uses large amounts of skilled workers just to decide who pays for what. And our financial system - exemplified by drilling through mountains to save microseconds on electronic trades, and the huge percent of GDP apportioned to that sector, compared to historic norms.
In order to purge this waste without causing mass unemployment and hardship, we will need to raise wages greatly, stimulate, and not back off due to temporary instability - which is almost certain to occur as we even begin to approach full employment, and try to normalize interest rates. Higher rates will eventually crash bonds, and maybe destabilize stocks and currencies in the medium term. But we must stay the course.
We are *much* further from potential GDP and full employment than mainstream experts believe. And we do need large stimulus spending. In that respect, Trump's instincts are better than those of many so-called experts.
After decades of low wages, labor is too cheap. As with anything that is underpriced, it will be used less efficiently. Some concrete examples: Greeters in discount stores, stores staying open all night with very few customers, all kinds of custom niche products, large (unneeded) variety of choice in products, large numbers of underpaid people working long hours to meet the wants of wealthy people for labor intensive goods and services, a health insurance industry which uses large amounts of skilled workers just to decide who pays for what. And our financial system - exemplified by drilling through mountains to save microseconds on electronic trades, and the huge percent of GDP apportioned to that sector, compared to historic norms.
In order to purge this waste without causing mass unemployment and hardship, we will need to raise wages greatly, stimulate, and not back off due to temporary instability - which is almost certain to occur as we even begin to approach full employment, and try to normalize interest rates. Higher rates will eventually crash bonds, and maybe destabilize stocks and currencies in the medium term. But we must stay the course.
We are *much* further from potential GDP and full employment than mainstream experts believe. And we do need large stimulus spending. In that respect, Trump's instincts are better than those of many so-called experts.
13
Don't confuse instincts to give himself and others like him massive tax cuts from the nuanced argument that you present (which I cannot argue with).
5
Wage growth for workers would be Good.
What will these wages be spent on? Consumer Goods from China? Rents paid to the 1%?Delivering pizza to each other?
"Efficiency" in a consumer economy is more than seeing everyone has three hots and a cot and access to reality TV.
What will these wages be spent on? Consumer Goods from China? Rents paid to the 1%?Delivering pizza to each other?
"Efficiency" in a consumer economy is more than seeing everyone has three hots and a cot and access to reality TV.
3
Isn't it too early to declare that Brexit has not had the severe effect that was predicted? Wait until Article 50 is invoked and the process actually begins to see what the impact will be not only on the UK, but on Europe and the rest of the world.
Trump is the same. So far all he has spawned is a series of hate crimes and a move to normalize him by the corporate media. Wait until January 6 when a newly emboldened GOP Congress starts passing legislation from Paul Ryan's Randian playbook. Wait til January 20 when Trump can start signing off and when he can order the power of the federal government to start rounding up both undocumented immigrants and anyone he decides is a threat (remember, Congress gave the President that power in the Patriot Act). It's not until then that we will know what white rural America has inflicted on this once great republic.
Trump is the same. So far all he has spawned is a series of hate crimes and a move to normalize him by the corporate media. Wait until January 6 when a newly emboldened GOP Congress starts passing legislation from Paul Ryan's Randian playbook. Wait til January 20 when Trump can start signing off and when he can order the power of the federal government to start rounding up both undocumented immigrants and anyone he decides is a threat (remember, Congress gave the President that power in the Patriot Act). It's not until then that we will know what white rural America has inflicted on this once great republic.
185
Thanks for mentioning hat MSM has done-- normalizing this man is a stain on them and is bad for all of us. Stunning, disappointing, weak.
Demagogues always consolidate power after achieving office. There is nothing that warms Republican hearts like upper end-tax cuts. Expect elimination of the estate tax, combined with history's largest corporate giveaway to the inversion-scammers hiding tax free overseas, with lots of talk about jobs. Trillions in new debt are never a problem when plutocrats are the beneficiaries, and higher interest rates will be great for bankers profit margins, as will the elimination of serious bank regulation intended to prevent a re-run of the 2008 Financial crisis. Actual job growth will be as with the Bush years, approximating zero. As the Rust Belt continues to rust, and the economy crumbles, scapegoats will be needed. We all know who that will be, and they won't be the white guys in the red hats.
This is going to be a looter's paradise.
This is going to be a looter's paradise.
417
The looter's won, elected by the looted.
14
Well, I suppose it is good that Professor Krugman is focusing on economics, but it still feels like he's going into a defensive crouch. Maybe that's all we can do at this point.
My view of the election is that all of the international force vectors have been altered. Russia's force has probably been doubled, Iran greatly strengthened, and obviously that is mostly due to people expecting America to retreat from the world. I think China would have gained more except that the Chinese economy is overly linked to America, but the Chinese leaders will surely start working to change that.
If Putin is really behind Trump's victory, then I suppose he thinks it's just tit for tat. President Obama put some heavy sanctions on Putin's associates in 2014, and Hillary surely would have continued that approach. In contrast, Trump apparently admires Putin's effectiveness as a leader. Has Trump yet said that Putin made Russia great again? I'm sure that's what he thinks, so I'd be surprised if he hasn't said it...
Rough ride ahead.
My view of the election is that all of the international force vectors have been altered. Russia's force has probably been doubled, Iran greatly strengthened, and obviously that is mostly due to people expecting America to retreat from the world. I think China would have gained more except that the Chinese economy is overly linked to America, but the Chinese leaders will surely start working to change that.
If Putin is really behind Trump's victory, then I suppose he thinks it's just tit for tat. President Obama put some heavy sanctions on Putin's associates in 2014, and Hillary surely would have continued that approach. In contrast, Trump apparently admires Putin's effectiveness as a leader. Has Trump yet said that Putin made Russia great again? I'm sure that's what he thinks, so I'd be surprised if he hasn't said it...
Rough ride ahead.
45