Dr. Krugman you expect far too much from many of your fellow Americans, 50 million airheads voted for trump. You just can't correct stupid and lazy thinking, if one can even call it thinking.
25
Monty Python put it just right : he's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy!
5
Paul hopes ~!
Biden Beto 2020
Krugman as Sec of Labor
4
"Although there have been approximately 100,000 media profiles of enthusiastic blue-collar Trump supporters in diners..."
And 99,990 of those profiles seem to run in the New York Times.
9
If Trump had chosen the economy and market growth to crow about, instead of staying on his path of immigrant demonization, his popularity numbers would be higher now, and he would have broadened his base.
He wasn’t smart enough to do that. 2019 will deliver modest growth (well, IF Trump ends his stupid trade war), and 2020 will be worse. And he’ll be blamed, because investors always want someone to blame for a declining portfolio.
3
Don't forget - The Gipper survived getting shot, which provided a huge boost to his approval.
5
My recollection, from back when Regan was president, was the he was a B move actor who was a puppet for repubs and that his myth is a total fabrication
9
Also, he conspired with Russia.
4
He will be saved by AOC.
Trump is more likely than not to be our president for another term irrespective of the economy. The primary reason is that at the moment there is no player in the political arena who matches Mr. Trump's chess-playing skill (I know some like to claim he's a complete moron, but with less resources and experience he took down Bush and Clinton in his first try at running for office - hard things to do if he's really as stupid as some people claim to believe). The economic data may not help as much as he's hoping for, and it's true that, in part on account of the pro-growth Trump agenda, we've staved off a recession that we've been way overdue for (in spite of the efforts of the fed to remove the Obama punch bowl from the room right as things are getting fun). Given how overdue we are it would not be surprising if in the next year a recession hit. That said, to presume that we can predict where the economy will be when 2020 campaign is in full swing is wishful thinking. If Trump gets a deal done with China, which I think is very likely, it could easily be a catalyst for another round of phenomenal economic data (even if the deal turns out not to be all that spectacular in its own right). The increases in the labor force we saw in the last jobs report also show a potential avenue of growth (i.e., getting the excess capacity back on line). Let's hope for the sake of our great nation, that we continue to have this super economy spreading opportunity from sea to shining sea.
3
In the local hardware store I was listening to a somewhat senile old man telling the clerk about how he had to endure weekly injections into his eyeballs. If felt sorry for the old man until I saw him get into his beat up old car with a trump/pence sticker on it it. All my empathy vanished at that moment.
9
if the president doesn't figure a way out of the shutdown soon, he won't make it past june 2019
3
Plus, one other difference between Reagan and Trump is that Reagan was a decent person who was not nasty. Even though I hated his political opinions, I always thought he was a respectful person towards others and could empathize with other people's situation.
Trump, on the other hand, is a humorless jerk. He has no social graces and cannot understand anyone who is less fortunate than himself. He lacks social graces and is totally narcissistic about virtually everything.
In short, the American people just don't like Trump and won't vote for him (assuming he runs again, which I doubt. He doesn't want to be seen as a 'loser').
8
I hope you are correct and reality will prevail over the proven standard GOP template - design an economic plan for the donor class, disguise it for the middle class, blame everything that goes wrong on (SOCIALIST!!!) Democrats and spice it up with racist dog whistles.
3
Reagan's economic policies had a terrible effect on my family. I had two fatherless sons after 1974. One of the first things he did was to cut the top age for Social Security. Only when it proved unpopular was that age restored to 21, allowing my boys to attend college--and only because their father died in the Army.
Second, his "trickle-down" economic policy was and remains nonsense, even as Trump reinstituted it after his election.
Third, fast-forward to today. Trump's administration looks very much like the beginning of the Fascist governments of Mussolini and Hitler. This similarity hit home again yesterday when I watched a PBS program that depicted the rise of both fascist governments.
Lies, repeated lies and repeated agitation against "normal" government are the currency of Trump as well as the former fascist dictators. It's very scary.
17
Paul, you could have saved yourself alot of column space by saying; "it's NOT the economy stupid!" Perhaps the question should expand to; "will a 2-2 1/2% growth rate in the economy raise wages faster than inflation?" Probably not. Trump would only have a chance (based solely on the economy) if wages rise. So far wage growth has been modestly OK. It is hard to see them going to 3 or 4%.
I'm not sure why we all attribute the ups and downs of our economy to a man who has shown himself to be singularly uninformed, a pathological liar, and a greedy narcissist .Yes, he set up each crisis to deflect the russian reality of the moment, but we must remember that he is not alone ,he has an army of enablers, from the Senate to the right wing air waves. Unless we start to call these players out by name and hold them up to the scrutiny of all americans we can count on the bottom falling out of our economy.The only way to stop this nightmare is to vote and remember that one party ,namely the republicans, sold their country and their constituents out.
6
Sorry, Donald, no morning in America for you. And when you are finally gone, there will be no mourning in America for you, either.
8
If DJT wins a second term it will be because the Democratic circular firing squad is in full swing. Even more than 2016, the 2020 presidential race will be the Democrats' to lose. They managed to do so in 2016, and they may manage to do it again.
2
What does the author think will happen economically when the administration and the Chinese reach a trade accommodation? (which they will because they must).
I think the other way around is more likely, but even THAT is unlikely:
"[Another commenter's] candidate for president is Mitch Landrieu. He's levelheaded and solid as a rock, and also white, sorry. If he secures the nomination, it would be good, if he picks Elizabeth Warren or Amy Klobuchar as VP candidate."
The only white males who have shots at nominations are (1) Trump; and (2) Beto O'Rourke. Landrieu may have a shot at the VP nomination, though I doubt even that.
"What’s clear, however, is that Trump and his allies are in a deep hole right now — and the economy isn’t going to dig them out of it."
And my guess is that they'll resort to the time-tested solution to low approval ratings. They'll blame another country and try to start a war, for the benefit of the Kochs and the other Oligarchs.
76
Would you please consider writing an article about whether the Mexican wall controversy is bogus, and just one of many
under actions taken to destabilize the US internally both for the benefit of indulging Trump's ego but more critically for giving to Putin whatever it is Putin has extorted from Trump.
That seems to be the real motivation on so many issues, from his thumbs down on NATO to walking away from Syria to the "shutting down" of "government" to impoverish gov't workers.
1
There's always Putin coming to the rescue! And the Republicans will secretly roll out the welcome mat. We ought to give it our laser attention to check the Trump administration and the Senate and House Republicans.
Sorry Paul, it's Trump who rescued the economy.
This other commenter probably has it right:
"The proliferation of unimpressive, delusional Democratic presidential candidates coming on board is a terrible sign."
"Delusional," though? Personally, I think that's correct, but I doubt any of those "delusional" candidates agrees with that assessment of him or her.
Oh Krugman, if being wrong were a prize you’d have a mantle piece as long as a football field. Reagan’s big tax cut didn’t hit till 1983, not 1981. The same time as the economy started to take off. Housing in 1983 didn’t respond to rate declines but job confidence and business optimism. Mortgage rates were still 13% in 1983 for heavens sake. Clinton’s best economy arrived when capital gains were cut and the BBA brokered with GOP Congress. Additionally the excess tax take in 90’s was directly traced to capital gains, mostly from tech that had its nascent VC breakout in Reagan’s tax cut 1980’s. As to the economic predictions going forward... it wasn’t too long ago that Krugman maligned Ireland and championed Abe’s Japan only to go ‘oh for two’ there. So, I’ll take the over on GDP 2020. I feel the luck of the Irish here. We’ll win one for the Gipper!
4
First let's try the 3 Rs
Repeal and Replace ALL Republicans
If the dems still sell us out to big business and the banks then we'll try
3D
Denounce and Defeat ALL Democrats
One way are the other WE the people are going to take back OUR government.
Both political parties are nothing but cults.
In Davos they are starting to realize they are in trouble. The top 26 wealthiest individuals in the world control more wealth than the bottom 3.5 billion individuals. Just ten years ago it was the top 80 individuals. Apparently even among the wealthiest individuals they are seeing extreme income disparity.
Both cults have conducted economic warfare against the middle class for over fifty years. Bank deregulation, Wall Street Cheating, Endless Wars...
We want and deserve good government.
Republicans have signed onto Grover Norquist's pledge to DESTROY the United States government by cutting taxes until they can drown it in the bathtub. That is a conspiracy against the constitution. Do they follow their pledge to Grover or follow their oath to PROTECT the constitution?
Democrats willingly followed Bill and Hillary off a cliff in the 90s. Bill should have been forced to resign. PERIOD. End of discussion. Do you think we would have had the last 25 years of total political chaos if Hillary had just told Bill to resign? Of course she would not because she knew it would end both of their POLITICAL careers. Neither Bill or Hillary did the right thing.
Thanks for all the fish,
Dave
1
When mentioning the economy, let's not forget to mention that the budget deficit and the trade deficit have both gotten much worse since trump took office.
On the other hand, they both got much better when President Obama was in office while the growth rate and the unemployment rate decline followed the same trajectory under both presidents.
In other words, President Obama did a much better job than trump.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.html
https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_trade_deficit_monthly
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth
2
"If you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention."
Rough guess:
War against Iran.
Bolton wants it, always did.
Pompeo didn't rule it out.
Mattis opposed it, he's out.
Netanyahu needs it.
MBS craves for it.
Europeans will divide over it.
And Putin wouldn't mind.
After Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, not many places left in the Middle-East.
Iran's next. Possibly before Now Rooz.
1
I sometimes marvel at how different the world would be today had the Shah been incapacitated by cancer in 1973 instead of 1979.
2
All Americans should be scared when Trump cornered by Mueller and congresional investigations and by legislative impasse, will try to punish America for not being loyal to him.
Mr. Krugman states, "Sorry, Donald, no morning in America for you." There is, however, mourning in America because of Donald.
Reagan destroyed PATCO, the Air Traffic Controllers union. I think Trump can at least match that "achievement".
A "cornered" Trump probably isn't the best metaphor here... a corner requires two walls, and so far Trump's got none.
1
Trump already started a war: the war against the Democrats, women, all non-white people, children, those that live paycheck to paycheck which includes 80% of all Americans, those that can't afford the monthly cost and huge deductibles of health care plans. The Republicans joyfully joined this war lodged against the Democrats, the Socialists, the hungry and the poor.
2
You're all forgetting something. 35% of voters worship the man. Nothing he does will change their mind. Then there are the Evangelicals who have made a deal with the devil and will support him regardless of what he does. They're hoping RBG passes while Trump's still in office so he can appoint another Trump supreme court justice. In addition there are still a few "true" conservatives who will support him just because he's not a democrat. And of course there are the McConnell type hypocrites plus the monied oligarchs for financial support. Now add up the electoral college votes. :(
59
A Trump pivot almost happened. He signaled approval for bill to keep the government open, grant a three month delay in dealing with Homeland Security and the Great Wall. Ann Coulter, Limbaugh and Hannity expressed disgust with the plan. Trump tempted to pivot away from the right wing fringe caved in instead.
As President of the Base rather than of the US Trump's shringing popularity reflected in the numbers flowing from the 2018 midterms. The GOP experiment ended up killing the party of Lincoln. The struggle now is between those happy Trumpism won and those attempting to resurrect Lincoln's vision.
Regardless of Mueller Trump without the protection and comfort of Jordan, Nunes and Meadows in the House faces a tough two years.
I hope Krugman is right. But Trump won in 2016, when almost everyone thought he was going to lose, in part because we all assumed voters would notice how much better the economy was at the end of Obama's second term than it had been when he took office. Somehow, that improvement does not seem to have benefited Clinton much, or at least enough to allow her to win the election. Also, around forty percent of Americans appear to be die-hard Trump supporters, who are completely immune to negative evidence about his performance, or indeed to any external stimuli that don't emanate from Fox news.
2
Professor Krugman:
Do the stock buybacks and higher dividends paid by corporations as a result of the tax cut have a stimulative effect on the economy by putting more money in the hands of investors and generating tax revenue?
1
Thanks for mentioning those curmudgeons hanging out in diners (or barber shops for that matter). They aren't the epitome of the rural voter. Their presence has always been there and they have always been whining.
In the early 1980s there was also the crash in farming. We lived in rural areas and watched as our local dairy farmers who had invested in state of the art equipment lost their shirts and all the young people moved away. The government stopped supporting the cheese factories that were all over Wisconsin and the the tiny farms had to give up. Those were bad times.
But not as bad as these.
3
Donnie, the reality TV actor, is not Ronnie, the Hollywood B actor. While both profoundly felt that getting rich shouldn't be disabled, luck and Nancy's astrologer made Regan the better of the two. With Trump the quality is off.
5
I think you discount Reagan's contributions too much. 1. He timed his recession for the beginning of his 1st term, so the economy would bounce back by the time he was up for re-electon. He understood the business cycle which DJT does not. 2. He respected the independence of the Fed. By allowing them to do their job and fulfill their mandate, he stayed out of their way. DJT has no respect for his own hand picked president of the Fed. 3. The tax cuts and increase in Defense spending, provided a decent Keynesian stimulus right when the economy needed a boost. DJT engineered a stimulus during the boom, not the bust. 4. By firing the air traffic controllers, it led to the decline of the Union movement that has had repercussions for decades, but it helped break the inflationary spiral of the 70s where Unions demanded ever increasing pay tied to the inflation rate and not to productivity. Now the pendulum has swung too far the other way, and wages don't even keep up with productivity gains, and with DJT's right to work and other Union busting policies, wage gains are no better than under Obama or Bush.
It's a huge difference between Reagan having a coherent policy, and DJT having none.
2
It was impossible to think the Republican Party could sink lower than actor/TV star Ronald Reagan but then we got George W Bush through election fraud followed by Trump, another TV clown. All of these fake presidents have done massive dmage to this country. The downward spiral will continue uness and until American voters stop believing the Fox/Breitbart Big Lie propagansda and pursue their true interests: decent wages, health care and fair taxes for all.
5
so the economy does not look well into the future for a number of reasons: first the continued concentration of wealth in the US ; second the trillion dollar plus annual deficits plus the interest payments going forward ; also the cost of healthcare at 18.5% of GDP which is twice what any other developed country on the world spends w/o better outcomes ; and finally the probable many crimes committed by many Federal workers in DC with no consequences
4
my thoughts on this and my government 101 degree on this is that the first priority of a government is to create stability and reliability in government decisions so the stock market doesn't crash as the USA depends on what the stock market is doing for their economic success. If the stock market crashes then so does the economy and then the President gets voted out as people vote with their pockets. If you want the stock market to stabilise then you need consistency in government policies and to pay your workers. It's a domino effect - less money circulating then the economy isn't doing so well. More money in the average Joe Bloggs pocket then the more they spend and businesses do better.
4
Out of all the possible scenarios that could happen between now and 2020 that gets Trump re-elected, a war or an attack in the US seems the most likely. Trump is not going quietly or without a fight and who knows what he and Putin discussed.
13
Sadly, with a bloated federal budget deficit and climbing debt level, once we hit a recession, the government will have less fiscal space to counter the slowdown in private sector demand. The Republican tax cuts have been a scam on the working class sold by promises that the cuts would spur sustainable economic growth and jobs. The experience of tax cuts shows that this just isn't true. Instead of funds devoted to solving important problems facing this country, the money has gone mainly to stock buybacks and dividends. Shortly, the Republicans will start blaming the budget deficit on "too much spending", conveniently ignoring their role in creating the deficit spending. The solution they will propose will be to cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid...programs needed by many people but the Repubs derisively call "entitlements". As if healthcare and old age financial support are frivolous give-aways. We are in for a reckoning due to these tax cuts and it will become fully realized if the economy slides into a recession. And no one seems to be sounding the warning bells...yet.
14
The main point of this piece is that a corned DJT is a very scary prospect.
We (the body politic) have set the stage for a show-down between those who see America as fundamentally inclusive, on the one hand, and those who see it as a place where money should trump everything else, on the other, which could match the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s for civic unrest, and possibly even the Civil War.
The "keg" that is America, which Trump and his awful string-pullers are stuffing full of powder, is likely to get more and more explosive if left unchecked.
Remember, evil triumphs when good people do nothing--in fact, all it takes is for good people to do nothing.
Even at the risk of igniting the huge powder keg being readied for us, the sooner good people start marching in the streets peacefully, the safer we'll all be.
Time to read up on Ghandhi and, of course, MLK, Jr.
8
Trump's experiment is interesting as a test of the Laffer curve idea. Since people are working for free, it is analogous to paying 100% in tax. Unfortunately, the affected people are not multimillionaires who can gain satisfaction from shifting wealth to family members and friends, reducing their work hours to travel on the yacht, take the third trip to France this year, or travel to Aspen for another ski vacation. If one 'earns' twenty million dollars but pays fifteen million in tax, they would only be limited in paying an enormous amount of money to another rich person for some self-indulgent purpose. The 'necessity' of having a third, or fourth, large home that probably represents economically idle resource, could not be satisfied. Such a burden could be unbearable!
But this burden would have no effect on economic growth. Failing to pay people for working, depriving people of the money that is entirely reinvested into the real economy that sustains life, will result in an economic contraction. These workers have limited options including finding new jobs, dropping out of the workforce, protesting, joining unions, or revolting. This are not good options. It is not the same as increasing the burden on the wealthy. This is a mean spirited experiment taking us close to economic slavery by promising possible payment at some time in the future for labor done now. This is wrong.
7
One can only hope Mr. Krugman is as right about this as he was about the collapse of the markets following an election of Mr. Trump. We all remember the market coliapse that followed the election, right?
4
Nice try, but again, Krugman’s been proven correct about this so-called president over the longer term, while Trump’s groupies have no other argument than to regurgitate one prediction of his from two years ago that didn’t immediately come true (but will eventually, unfortunately).
1
The economy is not the only thing that determines popularity. It is clear that American values and institutions under attack, and the political divide created by Trump is in danger of tearing us apart as a country. If the midterms can be used as an indicator, I would say that Trump and party of Trump will be devastated in 2020 despite the economy.
8
It would be interesting to create a weighted approval rating where the rating is amended to control for the state of the economy. Put what Krugman wrote slightly differently, Trump is amazingly unpopular given the strength of the economy. This is, of course, a tribute to his personality. That is good news. The bad news is, think how popular an America First President would be if he didn't have Trump's personality flaws - if he was anti-immigrant but respectful of the Americans who are here legally without regard to their race, ethnicity or gender.
1
Agreed. Trump dogma embodied in a more palatable candidate would be scary. In a sense trump is his own worst enemy, unable to control his emotions, his childish outbursts. A more polished and capable candidate would be able to avoid many of the mistakes and build on the trump example. Breitbart, the Mercer’s and infowars will continue to look for their next standard bearer.
I read your piece and the overnight commentary. It is a thought provoking discussion. I remind everyone that the President is chosen by the Electoral College and the outcome is not necessarily connected to the popular vote . 2016 proved that an electoral vote strategy with the assistance of targeted propaganda could elect a President over the candidate with a large margin of the popular vote.
I would like for Pew or some of the other pollsters to read out the voter preferences based on the most likely Electoral College outcome.
2
Exactly. He's got a terrible approval rating when the economy is humming. Let's wait and see how people start turning on him once we hit a recession. The shutdown isn't helping, people aren't spending money.
3
A major problem with Prof Krugman's argument is that there hasn't been another president with whom the public has been in love with, though never a majority, since RR. A not that well-known book of Katie Tur can enlighten the magic of Trump's hold on the masses.
The proliferation of unimpressive, delusional Democratic presidential candidates coming on board is a terrible sign. Besides, Democrats are committing mass suicide, it appears with their intransigence in opening up the govt.
Instead of announcing presidential run, if they join AOC to fight for raising taxes on the rich, to have universal healthcare, and establishing an environmental New Deal, Democrats will have a reasonable chance to secure presidency next year, keep the House majority & secure the Senate majority as well.
My candidate for president is Mitch Landrieu. He's levelheaded and solid as a rock, and also white, sorry. If he secures the nomination, it would be good, if he picks Elizabeth Warren or Amy Klobuchar as VP candidate. Neither is no AOC to take the top spot.
4
Reaganomics would be more appropriately named Volckernomics. Volcker doesn't get the credit he deserves for braking the back of inflation with radically high interest rates. Don't have the numbers in front of me but Inflation was a plague on all our houses (pun intended) from the late 60's through the early 80's. Reagan could have arguably raised taxes and the economy still would have done dramatically better. Financial assets have rocked higher, including a handful of cyclical bear markets, for two generations. Is the secular boom in financial assets history? I believe so. And Trump's policies are adding fuel to the looming deflation fire.
He may be unpopular, but he has the Supreme Court, and that, most unfortunately,is that.
3
@zula Z Agreed. Though I'm often surprised at how often Justices cross apparent ideological lines (for example, Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined with her BFFs Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Sam Alito, and Anthony Kennedy in last year's Wayfair decision), the conservatives are likely to win the "ideological" cases going forward, even if RBG isn't replaced by Trump. It's 5-4 even if RBG stays on the Court.
Anyone remember when we weren't supposed to use the unemployment rate statistic? Apparently, it was unreliable, if not corrupt--- a claim made by conservatives when employment picked up under Obama. Instead we were supposed to use labor force participation rate. Now that we have a republican president, we are allowed to use unemployment rate and labor participation rate is never mentioned. I wonder why?
12
I haven't read all the comments, but there seems to be very little recognition of the fact that many, many people laughed at the idea of a Trump victory in 2016. All of what we know now about the man was known then and demonstrated again and again during the campaign. In one of the replies below, a Long Island hair stylist admires Trump's business success. These voters are still there and Trump only needs about 80,000 of them. I hope no one starts to take a Democratic victory in 2020 for granted...even slightly.
20
@RM Actually, although we knew much about Trump during the campaign it was social media and relentless fake media conspiracy theories against Hillary that made Trump President. He will use the same tactics this time around, but it is now clear what Trump's game is, and it is not to make America great again.
1
"First of all, where Reagan was unpopular because of a weak economy, Trump is unpopular despite a strong economy. That is, he starts from a much lower baseline."
I see Krugman is still pushing the delusion that the US economy is good for most workers.
It isn't. It's good for Facebook and Google employees and for finance types, and the interior designers, life coaches, and others who serve those fiance types.
1
@Yaj
The numbers don't lie. People who want a job these days typically can find one and people who hate their job can typically find a better one. That's a great economy for most workers; it's as good as it gets actually.
3
@Yaj I agree that the economic numbers do not capture the reality. Yes, there might be employment, but not medical or retirement benefits. Do people no longer get sick or old? What is up with that delusional thinking?
Back when jobs commonly had a generous benefit package, job figures more or less accurately reflected economic well being. No more.
1
@Bill:
Actually, no, the numbers do lie.
"People who want a job these days typically can find one and people who hate their job can typically find a better one."
Not one that pays a living wage in many cases.
Like many you think the Amazon warehouse is a job.
Keep up the delusions, like Krugman, you're telling people to "vote Trump or stay home in 2020".
Ironically the bad economy is hurting Trump.
"That's a great economy for most workers; it's as good as it gets actually."
It's a terrible economy for most workers. You've posted nothing to contradict that.
You underestimate Republicans. They will come up with a way to scare Americans or to make them hate other Americans. Or a black swan event could occur.
A real national security threat or a war has the potential to change approval ratings drastically.
9
Thinking exactly the same thing. This administration will want to expand on its malignant form of American nationalism. If I lived in Iran I’d make sure I knew the way to the nearest bomb shelter.
I'm reading Joseph Stiglitz's "The Price of Inequality", 2012.
He agrees with Krugman (and AOC - our youngest representative) that the top tax rate should be above 70%. Possibly above 80%.
You know, like it was when America really was great and the middle class was growing - before Ronald Reagan and the tax cut frenzy.
Republicans are traitors who genuflect to the wealthy.
14
@Tracy Rupp - One thing to keep in mind, the Democrats went along with Reagan on the tax cuts and reducing the number of tax brackets (claiming it would simply things which for the simpletons in America it made sense, and for the rich it was a windfall).
6
Mr Trump is already lashing out from the corner he's backed himself into. Why else is it okay to deprive 800,000 people of their income. Rocky road ahead. Hold tight.
6
Republicans who fear impeachment and want to just muddle along until 2020 might want to consider the constitutional crisis that will be triggered when Trump loses re-election but refuses to leave the White House, declaring the election invalid and rigged. Especially given that prison surely awaits him and his family when he leaves office. Trump's biggest fear, bar none, is being seen as a loser. He won't just leave on his own.
11
I have no doubt that Trump, if seriously threatened with impeachement and/or prison, will take the entire world down with him. He will do as much damage as he can. And the POTUS can do lots.
15
Trump does not expect the economy to get him re-elected. He expects to be re-elected by the Mercers, the Kochs, the Adelsons, the DeVos, the Uihleins, the Spencers, the Wilks [...] . These folks run the GOP & McConnell, and an unequaled propaganda machine that defines “reality” not only for Trump, but for 85% of Republicans glued to Fox & Friends, Hannity, Coulter, and Limbaugh.
11
"Ronald Reagan was no Ronald Reagan...almost all Republicans...expunge that fact from their memories...Reagan’s political success reflected...good luck with the timing of the business cycle."
Such is the sorry state of American Political Mythology aka Faux News
"And Trump almost certainly won’t experience comparable luck."
We hope you are as good as Tony Romo. But "luck" --like "accident"--is unpredictable by definition.
"It's the economy, stupid."
If people in two years can say "I'm better off now than I was two years ago" they will vote Trump back in (if he hasn't been removed by other means).
In order to guarantee that Trump has been voted out, it is my belief that we need to create a consumer-demand-led recession by forgoing discretionary consumer spending. This will be painful to many and distressing. But I believe it is necessary in order to ensure that Trump, unlike President Obama, truly is limited to one term.
4
With Mattis out, and one more of his paper-cut-out incompetent sycophantic stooges now at Defense, does anyone doubt that Trump may start a war and/or declare martial law in America sometime before November 2020? He'll have McConnell and the Republican Senate, and both the American and Russian oligarchy as allies, as well as his comrades-in-arms in the right-wing propagandist media of both countries. Far-fetched?...nothing would surprise me anymore. Greed and power and using the Christian cross and American flag as weapons and shields is what the GOP stands for now.
8
Remember Krugman's foreboding late on Election Day, 2016 about Trump causing a recession? He turned out to be grotesquely wrong. The Obama expansion continued and improved. I am not saying Krugman is wrong this time. I am saying that economists have a terrible track record at forecasting. Combine that with intense bias against Trump and you get a Nobel Prize winner whose economic forecast is worthless.
Show me someone who thought Trump would trigger good times but now thinks the expansion has about run its course. I'll listen to him or her with rapt attention. Be warned that you'll have trouble finding anyone who fits that description.
3
There's one other difference between Trump's and Reagan's mid first term prospects - people liked Reagan, and despise Trump.
Reagan was easily the most personable individual to ever occupy the White House. He was American optimism and goodwill personified. And he genuinely seemed to enjoy being president. American's have always responded positively to those characteristics in their leaders.
Trump, on the other hand is none of those things. He is combative, dark and moody. No one who has worked with him likes him, is loyal to him, or thinks he is anything other than an ignorant scoundrel. He obviously has no respect for the job, nor does he seem to enjoy doing it. He constantly shows himself as mean spirited and vengeful. This kind of nasty pessimism doesn't play well with most Americans. It's a big reason why his pole numbers are so bad, and it's why they'll just keep on getting worse.
9
I do not claim to be an economist but I do know that economic growth and recession are are affected by momentum. There is a lot of negative momentum factors affecting the economy right now, we seem to be at an inflection point like a ball tossed in the air suspended at its zenith and the gravity of Trump is about to pull it rapidly down to earth.
2
The only way DJT is going to go quietly is if he resigns. If he loses in 2020 (if he gets that far) he will say the election was rigged. Hopefully he will be backed into a corner by Mueller and the House where his only option to keep face is to resign. Hopefully it will be soon.
4
I would like to have faith in Krugman's prognostications, but his article ignores the fact that Trump isn't finished lying and never will be. And it fails to deal with the gullibility of those who vote for him, particularly in the Rust Belt states and the Deep South -- they are willing to believe that black is white and night is day if he tells them it is so. It shouldn't have taken much brain power to realize that Trump's tax cuts were not going to spur massive investment by business. Money was never the problem. In general, businesses invest not because they have money burning a hole in their pockets, but because steely-eyed analysis tells them there is profit to be made by investing. If they recognize the opportunity, they already have or will fairly easily raise the money to pursue it. But Trump will lie and say the tax cuts achieved their intended effects -- pointing out a new factory here or there (or lying about new factories) -- and if that fails, he will blame everyone except himself for the failure. And his supporters will take it all in, hook, line and sinker.
4
In 1982 one-third of the tax cuts enacted in the previous year were rolled back. I really wish Mr. Krugman had included this fact in his op-ed. It would have lent a lot to disprove the conservative argument that only tax cuts improve the economy.
2
Some thoughts as to what a Republican Party might do with its back against the wall.
1. Voter suppression on steroids. Passage of laws to make it difficult to vote in GOP run states and outright fraud in primaries and the national election with the funding of PACs and the Kochs.
2. Trumped up investigations of Democratic candidates.
3. Temporary giveaway bills to help the Trump supporters in failing states and industries.
4. Ramp up the threat of terrorism, real or imagined.
5. Social media voter manipulation that makes 2016 look like a high school government election.
6. Start a war.
12
Although one might choose not to argue with Mr. Krugman's historic assessment of the Reagan-era economic cycles, one can take issue with how instructive they are under our current circumstance. Despite a well-managed public-relations image as a "DC-outsider," Reagan was a consummate political insider, having served as California Governor. Also, he had a great sense of timing even with self-deprication, as he noted while Governor: "the sound you hear is the concrete breaking around my feet" when he reversed himself on his position in 1970 about state-withholding tax.
These days our political fortunes are much more determined by an almost universal breach in trust between voters and elected officials. Michael Moore is right: Trump is a symptom of our body-politic's illness, not the cause. Until the Democratic Party, or--if they are not totally extinct--some resurgent construct of progressive Republicans can offer credible choices to the American voter for a future they want to embrace--and that those parties can actually deliver--then Mr. Krugman's economic analysis, while historically edifying, will matter little in predicting any future electoral outcomes let alone the prospects for this President's return to office.
1
Besides the Fed's sharp interest rate drop halfway through President Reagan's first term, I would add the even more dramatic drop in petroleum prices that happened when President Carter's 1979-80 energy legislation got traction. By 1983, mean barrel price was down to about half of its 1980 peak in real terms. By '86, it was down by two thirds from 1980. This freed up mountains of cash that consumers were no longer pumping into their gas tanks. It's too easy to remember Carter as a failure because his greatest success happened after he left office, and continued to pay dividends for 20 years.
3
Amen to that.
Our underlying problem is that we've turned our backs on our own government--the only corporation in which everyone has a share. As a result of this neglect, the wealthy class has repurposed the government to be their government. The big tax cuts that enrich the already very rich. The cutbacks in Medicare and a Social Security policy that insures poverty are good examples of major negative effects on the majority of ordinary citizens. Toss in the intentional suppression of incomes and voting rights and a Supreme Court that declared bribery legal and you've pretty much achieved a coup d'etat. Democracy is not a hardy as imagined.
378
@Chris Herbert
Agree. Republicans always make the government the enemy and say it doesn't work, but it does work, as long as they are not in charge our government works just fine. In my 70's now, and during the past 50 working years my income and economic picture has always been better or improved under a Democrat administration.
110
@Chris Herbert Turning our backs on our own government—placing interests of the corporate state above those of our hard-won democratic society—is the enduring legacy of the Reagan years.
Remember his famous words, “Guv’ment isn’t the solution, it’s the problem.” Ironically, Trump is now turning that sentiment into action.
44
@Chris Herbert
Without mentioning Robert Michels, or his concept (the iron law of oligarchy), you have pretty described how he explains how a democratic governance is displaced by an oligarchal one.
32
What I find interesting about Mr. Trump's favorability ratings is how little they change. FiveThirtyEight has a nice graphical tracker of Presidential approval compared to all his modern predecessors. What is immediately striking is that all the other individuals have popularity which fluctuates much more drastically than Trumps. Trump is stuck at around 40% approval on average, not much higher, not much lower. This trend is fascinating given how crazy and volatile his term has been. What this tells me is that everyone has decided that they either like this guy or don't. Not much, including the economy is going to change their minds. Perhaps he will lose some margin of support over time, but I find it unlikely that he will gain much, as I have not met one person who voted for Hillary that regrets their vote as many who voted for Trump now express. In the end, this presidency is not about the economy. The other striking fact about the 538 charts is that no previous president examined was able to win a second term whose favorability rating was not very close to or above 50%. All of this does not bode well for Mr. Trump.
Since the economy won't rescue Trump, will his red-capped multitudes of worshippers keep him in our presidency for 2 more years? Chances are that Donald Trump will lash out soon to his detractors by planning another TV reality show for his red meat followers as he has done before and since he won the presidency. Another Singapore style Summit with Kim Jong-un, another Helsinki Summit with Putin? Another paper-towel roll throwing in Puerto Rico? Yesterday, on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, Trump and his Veep, Mike Pence, spent all of 2 minutes at the MLKJr. Memorial on the Mall, placing a wreath. Quick Hello, goodbye from Trump to one of our most revered American leaders. Bernie Sanders in South Carolina at a NAACP King Memorial yesterday called out "our president is a racist". Dr Paul, we shall have to live with this racist president till he is removed from office sooner or later.
3
#45 has the unique problem of never trying to appease or please anyone or thing except his base. It is a problem of his own making without any way out excepting tyranny.
Governing in a democracy requires compromise, something DJT and the recent GOP claim to never do.
Come on electorate, put their feet to the fire!
7
You can climb out of a hole......you can be lifted out of a hole......maybe you can jump out of a hole, but I have a hard time seeing how you can dig yourself out of a hole.
3
He can always try to "rally his base" by dropping a bomb somewhere.
4
He has white men and white women. They all vote. He stands a good chance even if he is impeached in the house.
1
@Mogwai: If that's the case, then America has effectively become an apartheid state. Or more accurately, after a 50-year experiment in representative democracy has reverted to its' origins as an apartheid state.
@Mogwai He does not have all white men and especially not all white women, not by a long shot. Look at the popular vote in 2016, which he lost. He stands a good chance? Impeachment leading to conviction is an entirely different matter. On that, a great deal of such an impact depends entirely on the grounds for the impeachment, which in turn weigh heavily on any possible conviction. Mueller holds unseen cards. The players are entirely unpredictable. Predictions, even from savvy analysts (who know it), are fraught.
The trump motto is, when you find yourself in a deep hole, start blasting!
1
By giving the green light to Wall Street to engage in their next big grift without any fear of the Federal Government stopping them, it is without a doubt that sooner or later there will be another big financial meltdown, the only question is if it will hit during the next Democratic Administration or not.
The Democrats need another FDR that will implement a New Deal, not just a Green New Deal but that too, that will put common sense regulations on Wall Street and the corporations for their own long-term health as well as our own. But today's Democrats and their media allies won't let that happen if they can help it, instead tacking slightly left of the Republicans' course, and allowing them to frame the debate, which means if the NYTimes and the Democratic Party get their way, they will never truly win.
2
The vast majority of Americans have been paying for our never-ending military adventures with stagnating wages, sinking standards of living, and growing poverty for decades, going back to the Vietnam war. The LBJ Great Society lasted a total of about 15 years and from day one the Republicans did all they could to destroy it. And before that, they worked to destroy the New Deal, they are almost done. The cuts in SS benefits are visible. What is left in the SSTF? Judging by our TV entertainment we are a nation of upper middle- class people, everyone is rich and we do know we have more billionaires than any other nation. Social and society are just dirty words for our government.
3
I speak for the nation: We are willing to suffer considerable instability in order to get rid of Donald Trump.
Morning comes after that.
4
I am no Reagan fan...not now or ever...but horses and dogs liked him. Every horse would throw Trump, and every dog would bite him.
4
"Deficits don't matter" unless of course you are a Democrat in power.The media should spend some time educating the public on the national debt instead of paying attention to trump's every moronic tweet. I am on overload hearing about everything trump, it is time to turn the page and let Mueller do his thing.
3
The road is littered with the bodies of those who underestimated Donald Trump.
The same metaphor could be made about Bernie Madoff. But every Ponzi scheme -- and what is Trump's entire career other than an enormous Ponzi scheme? -- must fail, if only because there are only so many suckers in the world and they have only so much money. And -- as is shown by his failure to move his approval rating beyond the 40% mark -- Trump has pretty much run out of suckers.
Frankly Trump's current political situation and strategy reminds me most of the scene in "Wizard of Lies" when Madoff desperately tries to sell his con to Kenneth Langone, and then reacts with equal measures of outrage and despair when Langone refuses to be conned.
If we go into recession in 2020 this may be a silver lining in the quest of decent people to rid themselves and our country of this clueless amoral D-Lister fake...and perhaps more once Mueller finishes his report and we see it all.
2
Scared of what he might do? Trump is a—perhaps the—master of distraction. Wars are very distracting.....indeed! Anyone see a possible pattern here? To Trump it probably looks like a syllogism—that is, if he believed in logic—which, to Trump, is too distracting. He’s not about to be distracted from his distracting. Nope. Time to start a war.....
or eat a hamburger....let his gut tell him what to do.
Donald Trump never hid who he was. He SAID the system was rigged...
...and we knew he was a liar and a thief.
And incompetent.
2
Here is what scares me:
“The person who cares the least, controls the relationship.”
That’s the game of chicken he’s playing with Pelosi now. In the process he’s destroying our government and its institutions. These are all things he’s fine with because these are all things that Putin wants him to do to us.
Trump is destroying our country, our way of life, all of our institutions, even our culture of decency even as we speak.
Government workers are being used as pawns. This is truly disgusting.
Can’t we elect leaders that care about America and its people and who embody middle class decency?
I accused Bush Jr of shortening the American century by 40 to 60 years. Trump is bring it to a halt forthwith.
It doesn’t matter what happens in 2020 because the rot will already have well set in by then.
I’m still fuming at Hillary over this. She could have won that election had she put Bernie on her ticket and picked up enough progressive votes in the rust belt to win. I know she didn’t like him but Reagan didn’t like Bush Senior either but he needed his wing to show up at the poles & vote for him on Election Day and putting Bush Senior on his ticket gave them reason to. It’s as if Hillary would rather lose to Trump than give progressives a seat at the table. I still don’t understand why she did any of that. Not doing the obvious to expand your base is Political malpractice.
3
Cornered his is and if Trump's conspirator was someone other than Russia he might have gotten away with it. Fortunately it is Russia and so there will be a sufficient number of republicans, not all mind you, that will rally against his treason.
PROSECUTE RUSSIAGATE!
Article needs one minor correction, sentence should read: "(Although all Republicans have managed to expunge all facts from their memories)." There, fixed it.
1
Re: “by increasing the budget deficit, that [tax] cut probably gave the economy some stimulus, temporarily raising growth.” Where is it written that “increasing the budget deficit” gives “the econ0my some stimulus?” An increase in the deficit that results from a tax cut is an effect, not a cause. The confusion between cause and effect is responsible for a great deal of the economic nonsense in the political debate we have seen in the past: http://www.rweconomics.com/Deficit.htm#App
2
MLK said it clearly, a college education does not teach anybody
to think, nor provides a defense against the onslaught of propaganda, nor the resources needed to separate truth form falsehood. That is something that each person has to learn by him or herself, but that only very few do.
As a result we have the falsehood of the need of the wall accepted as a legitimate need, when is something that neither Trump nor the GOP really want as they very well know it will not work. If they really wanted it they would have approved it when they had control of both chambers and with 51 votes as they did with the Tax Cuts, to satisfy their masters.
Same with the economy, that is based on cheap money and a debt that will not be paid.
Smoke and mirrors, lies, deception, propaganda and gullible masses.
2
I agree with the vast majority of the comments. However, let us not forget the Democrats huge failure to have a simple, coherent message with effective sound bites. Nature and politics abhor a vacuum.
2
@Blue Note In A Red State
You are right, the message is not coherent and it is not loud.
However the message, even if dispersed is there:
Prosperity for all
Health for all
Education for all
Justice for all
Equal opportunity fo all
Dignity for all
1
If the economy is so good, how come no one has any money?
5
Who would suggest to this president to shut down the governmdent in this manner? In any manner? Then stiffen one's resolve and not talk to the other side, regardless of those who suffer? What does this suggest to Krugman described by him as cornered? Pivotal moments? Tax cut. Shut-down. Bluff vs. reality? Trade policies that seem threatening? Minimum wage? Infrastructure? The latter two seem to be promising in simple ways. $Five billion toward a big jobs program rather than a foolish symbolic wall would go a long way toward allievating some of the poisonous gas in many peoples' bellies from taking all they've had to take.
1
The GOP is the machine works of magical thinking. Ideology is a poor substitute for rational thinking, experience, and evidence.
1
Yes of course this is what needs to be done, it will be a hard sell the GOP is on top and will stoop to what ever it take to keep it so! They have played the long game and for the most part have won it will take extreme pain to convince the base to see thing different they elected Trump in hope's of such change that were of course false. Case in point a Republican friend who has money who is just above middle class said to me so you think it is OK to take other peoples money for lazy people! There you have it they have convinced there base they can be just like them if they follow.
1
Don't forget that Krugman said that the stock market would tank because Trump was elected. Krugman is again "wearing his learning lightly".
1
The letter being circulated at Davos from billionaire investor Seth A. Klarman paints a bleak picture. Anyone paying attention to news (not just Fox News) and trump’s actions knows that this president could well be a Russian asset. The list of transactional activity between this bunch and foreign oligarchs is astounding. The fact that they have access to our country’s classified information leaves America betrayed.
2
I am wondering how many constitutional amendments are going to be required when 2020 rolls around to ensure that this Trumpocolypse never happens again.
2
It makes you wonder if, when Washington's officers suggested that he become King in place of George III, he shouldn't have taken them up on it.
It couldn't have come out much worse that it has.
"Which raises the question of what he and his party will do if defeat is staring them in the face."
Yamiche Alcindor gave a good example tonight on PBS Newshour. What will an elderly sociopath without conscious do if he declares a national emergency.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/why-trump-is-edging-closer-to-declaring-a-national-emergency-over-border-wall
As much as I hate to serve as a "cheerleader" for Dr. Krugman, it's really interesting how Reagan won in '84 despite a (relatively speaking) putrid, but still improving economy.
God help us all if Trump gets dusted in 2020. Republican "law and order" proclamations to the contrary (or is that sooo 1990's?) it's easy to see how the legions of AR15-toting Trump worshipers would resort to the unthinkable when confronted with a Trump, lost-cause Presidential reelection campaign.
Need proof? From an August 2016 debate - the dotard calls out for terroristic threats to Hillary Clinton:
"“If she gets to pick her judges ― nothing you can do, folks,” Trump said with a shrug at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina. “Although, the Second Amendment people. Maybe there is. I don’t know.” (Donald Trump Suggests Shooting Hillary Clinton, Her Supreme Court Picks, Or Both https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-clinton-shoot_us_57aa2f6de4b0ba7ed23dd652)
1
"Also, a housing boom driven by dramatic interest rate reductions was central to the rapid growth of Reagan’s third and fourth year in office. (No, it wasn’t all about the miraculous effects of tax cuts.) "
People forget what might be the single most important factor that powered the post-1982 recovery -- rapidly falling energy prices, down to their lowest inflation-adjusted levels ever.
When Jimmy Carter allowed us to let go of the Shah of Iran, which brought about the hostage crisis that dominated the news and caused his defeat by Reagan, Iraw and Iran waged a particularly bloody war. Both nations, among OPEC's top producers, began to run their pumps 24/7 at maximum volume to finance their war efforts, and this brought about an oil glut that drive prices into the basement.
This gave Americans a direct influx of cash into their wallets, which they spent on goods and services.
Giving corporations tax breaks does not stimulate investment if there is no market for the goods and services such investment produces. By thus stimulating markets, growth inevitably ensued.
Tax cuts just move money around, usually from the pockets of consumers into the pockets of the wealthy. A lot of money moved from OPEC into American pockets at the start of that boom.
2
Even as we wait for the USA to ratify the new Nafta and our economy hovers on the brink of disaster. Canadians see our deep state economists celebrate a banner year and Canadians see another interest cut from our central bank.
I am despite my best interests no longer upset that the USA has chosen to be led by its most uninformed and corrupt citizens.
Canada is moving in its own direction and those of us paying attention understand that peace, order and good government will give us a better future than relying on a sinking ship to save us.
We have been totally reliant on the USA since you had Reagan and we had Mulroney. With the USA ship of state taking on water we are forced to either cut the ties that bind or sink with our southern neighbour whose officers have abandoned ship and left the least qualified take charge.
I thank America for leaving Herr Trump in charge and left Canada with a no brainer. Our future belongs with the Western democracies even if too many Canadians have no clue of what is happening in Canada and it bears no relationship to the chaos to our south.
2
@Montreal Moe Yes, wish I was in Canada for it is terribly embarrassing to be an American with Trump in the W.H.!
1
@Ken McBride
Thanks,
We in Canada have some very serious problems that threaten to tear us apart. Our two most westerly provinces are split over the building of a pipeline to our west coast.
The two provinces are both led by democratic socialist governments but Alberta is a resource rich province and crude oil is its lifeblood and British Columbia stands between Alberta and the coast.
Environmentalists are a strong component of our democratic socialists and until we develop an economy that is not dependent on fossil fuels this is an issue with no easy answer.
Like America economics is a very complex issue and even as your two parties are split by philosophy not every problem is political and economy is not always of the utmost consideration for everyone.
Damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead doesn't make icebergs disappear.
Paul I take issue that the business investment in 2018 was driven in large part by higher oil prices. It's actually the tertiary sector of which comprises two thrids of our nations economy. Investment in oil took place as oil prices increased which in turn increased the cost to produce. Today production costs for US pumped oil is around $50 per barrel and its trading around $52. Many oil companies are forced to pump oil at a loss in order to meet interest payments on equipment purchased when oil prices were in the $60 - $70 per barrel range.
Like it or not Paul when the unemployment rate is at 4% our economy is doing well. When the Fed increases interest rates it's indicative of an economy that is heating up and needs to be throttled back. The 2018 stock market losses have been wiped out in the first three weeks of 2019. Those that pay taxes are in for a pleasant surprise when the file their federal returns. The Democratic states with high real estate taxes, maybe not so much. China's economy is slowing down, Europe's economy is weak and the US is seen as the only safe haven for foreign investments.
Comparing Presidents is nothing but an interesting parlor game Paul. The world is constantly evolving and a President is nothing more than the titular head of his nations economy. No conclusions to be drawn here.
Another Reagan myth is that his policies brought down the Soviet Union. What Reagan had was luck. Luck that his adversary was Gorbachev, who believed the system could be salvaged with more openness (glasnost) and political restructuring (perestroika). He was wrong, and Reagan the rest of the world were the beneficiaries.
2
Trumponomics: A nearly 50% increase in the debt additions expected 2018-2027 ($13.7 trillion vs. the $9.4 trillion he inherited from Obama) in exchange for...a half point increase in GDP growth for a couple of quarters, which mainly went to the rich, about 1 million more without health insurance in 2017 (the first increase since 2010), and job creation somewhat slower in Trump's first 23 months than Obama's last 23 months.
We need more stable geniuses in charge.
3
How does a cornered TRUMP lash out when beset with impeachment and poor performance of the economy and lackluster polls? War comes to mind as the model for any action. Those who act tough are tough. The number one enemy is the Dems who oppose him. The number two enemy is the immigrant at the southern border.
How can he get them both at the same time? Perhaps a military build up with new outposts kinda like the great wall of China is in order. But it won't be like China's wall from 375 AD, it will be like the TRUMP tower of 1982, only smaller, and many many more.
Time out, please.
"The economy" includes that pesky thing called the national debt, doesn't it?
Call a friend from Greece. They know.
2
"...the economy actually performed somewhat better under Bill Clinton, who raised taxes."
Well, Clinton, like Reagan, was the beneficiary of fortuitous timing in the business cycle. He was president during the period when the internet economy went from staggering around like a toddler to driving like a 16-year-old who just got a Corvette for his birthday. That doesn't invalidate Dr. Krugman's point that Bill Clinton raised taxes and still didn't tank the economy. Personally, I think there is very little a president can do to radically improve an economy during his presidency. Sure, he can boost short-term growth with government spending to mitigate the pain of a recession. And it's also possible to put policies in place that will plant the seeds for future prosperity. But investments like that take time to show results, and probably won't be realized until after he's left office. On the other hand, there are almost certainly things he can do to destroy an economy, or to make a bad economy worse, and Donald Trump is trying hard to prove this theory correct.
1
It's nice to hear some basic economic theory explained. Which clearly, those in the White House choose to ignore.
6
Paul has pointed out some facts unfavorable to Trump’s re-election. However, in Trump’s favor are some other facts, not economics related.
The biggest of these is the 85% of Republicans glued to Fox, Trump tweets, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and other facets of the huge propaganda machine run by a handful of dubious billionaires.
Besides promoting Trump, this machinery propagates “alternative facts” of various categories.
In particular, because Trump does not enjoy great popularity, part of this machinery can be turned to a different audience: those not enamored by the Dems. By pumping for a third party candidate, enough votes can be drained from the Dems to make Trump president again.
Will the media catch on? Highly improbable. The struggle between Dems and an Independent will prove irresistible and the billionaire backers of subversion will succeed once again,
5
will wyoming continue to send 2 senators, the same number as California, to the US senate in the foreseeable future? The answer of course is yes.
That makes Trump's election or non-election a totally moot point. The US government apparatus is effectively forever in the hands of minority red states.
3
@s e Let's not forget the totally archaic and unjust vestige of the antebellum slave economy, the Electoral College, which keeps putting a minority in the driver's seat.
1
My ex and I bought a house and 10 acres for $70,000 in Jan., 1982, on a VA 16+% loan. We eventually refinanced down to a more reasonable rate somewhere around 8%, but during the intervening years, even though we both had full time jobs as nurses, not a dime went into a savings program of any kind. The word "invest" was not even a part of our vocabulary.
I had voted for Carter in '80. In '84, I cast my ballot for Mondale. Reagan had merely reinforced the negative opinion of Republicans that I, a former Republican, came to develop, thanks to Richard Nixon.
Reagan was no slouch as a liar, but, compared to Donald Trump, he was a gushing fountain optimism, if not truth. At least he had a genuine smile and laugh, both direly absent from the visage of our current president.
3
This might be the most brilliant Krugman analysis since election night 2016, when he confidently predicted that America's stock markets would NEVER recover from the momentary blip of DOW futures falling 800 points when Trump's election became apparent.
I knew then that this was someone far too intelligent to allow his own strident political biases to color his economic forecasts. And I can honestly say, his work has consistently reflected the scholarly rigor of his election night observation.
1
Krugman’s been proven correct about this “president” over the longer term, while Trump’s wild-eyed comment board lackeys are reduced to frantically pointing at one prediction from two years ago that didn’t immediately come true.
2
I did not realize there was a huge housing boom in 1985. It would be great if there was another similar housing boom today, especially given the lack of affordable housing ... the lack of affordability is surely a major drag to the economy. I know it's dragging on commercial industries as well as residential.
But we have elected too many landlords. And the last thing landlords want is competition in the realestate markets.
1
There is one very important fact about Reagan that always has to be mentioned.
From the moment he took office, he began to destroy America's middle class, which is the basic reason why we are in the economic class distress we are now.
15
As much as I usually respect Dr. Krugman's economic analysis he, and most other economists, miss a crucial factor in the Reagan "recovery". That factor? Demographics. Heading into the late seventies the "pig in the python" demographic bulge of the baby boomer generation was entering their household formation, heavy durable goods spending years. This demand spike was an integral part of the inflation spike that necessitated Fed intervention with temporarily high interest rates. The demand did not DISAPPEAR when choked by high borrowing costs, in fact it built up behind the interest rate dam. When inflation abated and the dammed up demand was incrementally released those durable purchases resumed, providing the crucial demand side support for the housing boom that was only ALLOWED by interest rate reductions, not created by them.
2
Also the Democrats nominated Mondale, the Vice President of Jimmy Carter, the President Reagan had beaten four years earlier. Why the party thought that the country would welcome the Vice President of the the administration the country had voted out of office in last election is something I have never understood.
Be careful, who you nominate has consequences.
3
Who got the 7% rise in income in 1983-4? It wasn't wage earners. Average real wages (by the CPI) declined through the late 70's as nominal wages didn't keep up with inflation, but the fall continued through the 80's even though inflation was low and unemployment was decreasing:
http://www.skeptometrics.org/BLSB8.PNG
What Democrats need to emphasize - and propose real correction for - is the way that real wages fell and inequality increased through the inflation of the 70's, the drastic measures by the Fed and the tax cuts, which actually started in 1965. Unemployment decreased in the recovery in 1983, but otherwise those at the lower end were increasingly worse off.
5
I don't know if there is much joy in knowing "The Economy Won't Rescue Trump." I am much more concerned about what happens post-Trump. I keep hoping that you will finally publish a book revealing your comprehensive plan for replacing our current system of "tyranno-capitalism," which works against the common good, with a system of "democrato-capitalism" which works for the common good.
I know your book won't be like "Gone with the Wind" which told a false story and has kept racism alive for nearly a century.
Your book will have an impact even greater than Rachel Carson's masterpiece, "Silent Spring." It will be earthshaking.
I know you are busy, but the nation is dying and you, perhaps only you, can change everything for the better.
I know I'm asking a lot, but we, the people, really do need the help of the scientific-economists of the world. Under your leadership, you and the scientific-economists should be able to whip up a plan by Father's Day. Thanks in advance for all you are about to do. If I can help in any way just let me know.
Now for a shout-out to all you "Fans of Paul." Let him know how much we need his expertise and the expertise of his fellow scientific-economists who, like Paul, practice scientific-economics.
Just an afterthought. If you know that the science of economics really is not a "science," and cannot therefore help us out of our economic strangulation, then please let us know. Treat us like adults. We deserve to know the truth.
4
Reagan was somewhat competent, politically experienced and likeable. Trump is none of these things. If anything, Trump is becoming even more incompetent and detestable. That is why his polling is dismal and why he won't win re-election. Regardless of how the economy is doing.
4
I hope you’re right, but never underestimate the willingness of a critical mass of Americans not to rock the boat, even when it’s sinking. The same idiots who rocked a boat that wasn’t sinking (for those of us with an education and a work ethic).
Reagan had a sense of humor and genuine confidence in himself. He also knew how to win friends--and had friends. People had real affection for him. Trump is an empty vessel.
4
Donald Trump does not want to reopen the government. As long as it is shut down, his “enemies” list loses its punch.
It has NOTHING to do with the wall. It has to do with the decimation of the FBI, the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, and the federal judiciary.
Trump’s “enemies” receive no paychecks. They face bankruptcy, the loss of their medical coverage, an inability to pay for their homes, and no food except through gut-wrenching charity. They will soon drain their retirement and savings funds. No bank will loan them money.
Trump does not like democracy, and he has finally found a way to reduce it to rubble.
He ran his real estate empire in the same way. The list of lawsuits brought by unpaid people who worked for him is a legend. Now, with foresight and malice, he is systematically eliminating anyone’s ability to pursue his abhorrent acts.
Do you want a constitutional crisis? We already have one, slammed in our faces by a White House which is currently occupied by a megalomaniac.
God, save America.
9
@Temple Emmet Williams He said he could and would keep it shut down for years in order to get what he wants.
@grmadragon If that happened, the America we know and love would disappear.
If disaster faces Trump’s election possibility in2020, I believe he will suspend the presidential election, perhaps on the basis that Russian ( or 400lb guy in his basement bed) meddling would render voting invalid. The GOP “legislators”, equally scared of losing their positions, and McConnell-enabled rightist SCOTUS will go along.
3
I believe trump is doing the following: He has cut taxes for the folks who paid to get him elected. He is now suffocating a portion of the public who count on government subsidies that the rich call "handouts". That includes many of the out of work fed employees. Heritage Foundation, Mercers, etc. are thrilled that they don't have to pay anything toward helping what they imagine are the lazy people. Better yet if they are black or brown. They are also testing how few government employees the country can exist on. Next in line is handing out and privatizing war, the VA, public schools, prisons and anything else from which the wealthy might profit. As the people break down, his gun toting supporters are empowered by his violent rhetoric. This is a methodical DISMANTLING OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE, a clear and direct wish articulated by the likes of Steve Bannon. Every passing day is a step closer to this end. REMOVE HIM AND HIS COHORTS FROM OFFICE NOW.
9
The best scenario for the US would be for Trump to lose the next election in a record landslide. But regardless of how unpopular the polls say that he is, I will never again assume the Democrats have an easy win.
2016 slapped the rose colored glasses right off my face. And while I was initially shocked and confused that anyone would vote for such an incompetent, disgusting man; I later came to the conclusion that decades of right-wing brainwashing, coupled with a lack of desire to be truly engaged and informed, had left us with a populous that thought it was someone else's job to make the difficult decisions.
While many young people are now wholly engaged in politics and policy, there are still many in my generation (those born in the late 60's and 70's) who are still completely oblivious to current events. I spoke with one friend this morning who had no idea why the government was shut down.
4
"If you aren't scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out..." I'm more scared of Fox News. They control the minds of 40% of the population and a higher percentage of the Electoral College. If they know they are headed for defeat, they could drum up interest in a new threat.
8
trump shut down government in a temper tantrum. trump must reopen- NOW! If he refuses, VP Pence must use article 25 powers to remove trump and reopen government.
if Pence fails, the House should impeach them both. If Mitch is
awake, he will realize he must convict them. Better yet, Mitch should call trump and warn him he is history unless he reopens the government NOW! If Mitch fails he and the Senate will be taken over by D's in the next election. The deck is loaded against GOPers in the next election.
Better wake up, Mitch.
2
What I hate are lazy reporters who think they reporting news when they interview people at a diner. I love diners but they are the home of hard right Republicans who think they did it on their own while drawing Social Security, Medicare and farm subsidies. These people think they earned these things because they paid into them. In my case I had got all the money I had paid into SSAN by the time I was 65. So I have been living off taxpayer money for the past 17 years. I am what would now be called a “democratic socialist “ because I got essentially free college education and have been under socialized healthcare since I was 20. All my right wing friends at the diner who can, use the VA for all or part of their care.
So reporters get out of the diner and get the real story not the one the Trump supporting takers of government aid are telling you.
3
"It's the Economy, Stupid" - Thank you James Carville who wrote this in 1992 for Bill Clinton.
Yes; "The Economy" does seem to play an extremely strong roll as to whether the President (or any politician) are doing well in the eyes of voting public.
Really !
But a good economy for WHO !
The longest government shutdown in history has shown us something ALL working people should take notice of;
ONE paycheck has been missed by those 800,000 government workers - working without pay - and far too many of them are experiencing financial distress.
Meaning these hard working and loyal government workers are living paycheck to paycheck - "That's It" !
No financial cushion, very little savings, and no retirement monies beyond their so-called promised pensions.
I think we can expand this coast to coast group of Americans and apply their predicament to most of the middle class of America.
The economy is good for the very wealthy and huge corporations, however, for the average working American, WE are far worse off in our financial security.
This paycheck to paycheck financial stability MUST be taken to the voting booths.
In recent history, Republican Leadership has always extended our debt and Democratic Leadership has reduced it significantly.
So, who do you care about ?
You, your neighbor . . . . or the wealthy hedge-fund manager who lives in the castle on the hill !
4
Mr Krugman, how do you call yourself an economist.
Your answer to Ronald Reagan’s success is good luck.
Trump, being a racist, chooses to concentrate his feeble efforts on the building of a useless wall on the southern border to keep Hispanics out of the country. Forget about global warming, lack of healthcare and crumbling infrastructure. Actually, the people he wants to keep out probably strengthen the economy since they are willing to take the crummy jobs that Americans don't want anyway. Trump is simply riding the crest of a strong economy left to him by Obama. As I recall, Obama had to clean up the economic mess left to him by another Republican president.
3
Bill Clinton got the credit for the tech boom (which he did nothing to create) and his successor (George W. Bush) got the blame when the stock market bubble inevitably burst. Just goes to show you that life isn't fair. (In fairness, "W" did let that little glitch called 9/11 happen on his watch and that contributed to the severity of the 01-02 recession). Truth be told, the Federal Reserve engineers the economic booms and busts and has much more control over the business cycle than does the President or the Congress.
1
@Earl W.
The joke used to be that Bill (Gates) and Al (Greenspan) were responsible for the booming economy, not Clinton and Gore.
Never underestimate Trump’s ability to distract. Trouble is he’s used all the easy tactics, to use them over and over loses the news cycle. The worst is yet to come. Buckle up. It’s gonna be a bumpy ride.
3
Unfortunately, as long as the Russians are working the refs for Trump, coupled with the existence of the Electoral College and uneducated whites enthralled with his racism, it cannot be taken for granted that he still has a chance at re-election, no matter how unpopular.
3
The most important line in this column is, "... if you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention." Indeed. Because people with his particular brand of mental illness see themselves as never ever in the wrong, because they cannot truly share anyone else's pain or joy, cannot utter the word "sorry," cannot help but grow more paranoid by the day, cannot ever satisfy their craving for power, money, and attention, because of all this and much more, as Hurricane Don's situation grows more dire, watch out. He will not care who or what he takes down with him.
2
Never underestimate the power of ignorance, fear and racism. I believe Trump is a heavy favorite to get reelected, regardless of how the economy is performing.
1
A more sinister read on current happenings is that the Trump/GOP coalition already understands that the gig is up.
The only thing that can save them is to let the government shutdown go until it drives civil disobedience and rioting.
Then all bets are off.
2
When Ronald Reagan defeated Walter Mondale in the 1984 landslide, the Vice-presidential running mate was Geraldine Ferraro. She was the first woman to run as a Vice Presidential nominee. Elections are not only about economics.
2
I wouldn't count him out, despite what the economy does over the next two years. The amazing part about Trump isn't that he is so unpopular, but rather that despite everything, he is this popular, and that is important. Trump still has strong approval ratings among republicans, and overall his rating don't go below a 40% floor, despite the fact that Trump basically hasn't delivered what he promised, wages aren't really going up much, we don't have any replacement for ACA, North Korea is still a threat, and the trade war with China so far has caused a lot more hurt than help. The scary part about Trump is like all demagogues, he knows how to appeal to hate and the baser instincts (for whatever he was, Reagan at least tried to appeal to higher motives, even if it was just PR), and that works. So he has his blue collar base and older people, and in the next election, especially if the Democrats put up someone like a Hillary or Elizabeth Warren, he can win based on hating the Democrat more than supporting Trump. The fact that so many right now support him basically out of hate says a lot, it means that facts and figures and even their own self interest means less than lashing out with Trump.
4
Mr. Krugman doesn't even mention the Savings and Loan crisis of the late 80's/early 90's that was precipitated by the regulation-slashing gusto of the Reagan Administration. That was a disaster that ruined a great many people.
2
Given the shutdown, I think he is already lashing out. And yes, it will get worse.
8
I heard on NPR that a majority of Trump voters would vote for a him again no matter what. So, I guess we are in a scenario where arguments do not really matter. It is and us-and-them situation. So Krugman can only convince the already convinced (like me). What do we do about the rest (who, by the way are smart, reflective and intelligent people, just like we consider ourselves to be)?
4
I like reading Paul Krugman but he confirms in every column that economics truly is the dismal science. I take issue with one thing he said about it not being clear that there's any slack left in the economy. There certainly is in higher education, where employers these days are taking on average three months to hire for positions and, in some cases, asking applicants for their desired salary. It's hardly boomtown in this industry. In economics parlance, supply is outstripping demand -- too many people chasing too few jobs. I suspect that people's experience, or the data Mr. Krugman is looking at, is different from industry to industry and position to position, but from where I sit the economy has been in recession for a long time.
I graduated in the Reagan recession. That hurts during the rest of one’s earning years. I’m sure the hard reset on inflation was great, but not for my cohort.
1
I am retired from FDIC. I was hired in October 1986 in Houston during Reagan's second term. People do not realize how many banks failed nationwide during Reagan's second term. I have friends that were not alive during that period. If you research FDIC's statistics for the 1980s and 1990s they are alarming. There were so many bank failures in Houston alone that we almost never traveled to another region to close and liquidate a failed bank. We had so much business locally we could not handle it all. I remember going to my first bank failure north of Houston in the Woodlands area on Labor Day weekend 1986. The bank president cried like a baby in his office. These were bad times and they can happen again. When I transferred from Houston in 1991 to FDIC's Franklin, MA office I lost $40,000 on my Houston home. FDIC did not cover real estate losses for transferred employees. Many Houston home owners lost much more. Things can turn bad quick and get far worse from there. The nation is ripe again for massive bank failures on a grand scale like nothing ever experienced before. The small amounts of legally required capital will not save a bank in truly bad times. The second largest bank in Houston, First City National, where I was an assistant vice president before joining FDIC failed twice. Look it up. Trump is playing with fire and he doesn't have the presidential timber like Reagan to put out a national fire. Hopefully, the FDIC still does have that capability or can ramp up fast.
9
@Wyman Elrod - You are spot on. Including the aftermath. Reagan left office just in time for George H.W. Bush to give us the Savings & Loan scandal (including learning his son, Neil, was "surprised" that other people would be "surprised" at his Board membership at Silverado Savings & Loan, in Colorado. Silverado, of course, sank like a stone under the weight of the enforcement of actual lending standards, and was followed by the Resolution Trust Corporation. Anybody remember? All those Savings & Loans, now gone? Thanks to great fiscal governance by the Reagan and Bush administrations?
Your good comment, and this column, are stark reminders of how Republican administrations only take care of the rich.
3
Unfortunately, Dr. Krugman's analysis comes out of the real world. If we've learned anything over the past two years it's that the world of FOX and "conservative media" creates it's own reality to prop up Trump. They will have their audience believing its "morning in America" even if its the dead of night.
6
"Actually, even Ronald Reagan is no Ronald Reagan."
Truer words were never spoken. Reagan's views on immigration, for example, were much closer to the Democrat's than Trump's. In fact, in 2021 President Warren can use Reagan's final speech, verbatim, in her inaugural address.
I think, President Reagan is more mythologized than any other president except, perhaps, Abraham Lincoln. The truth is, most Trump Republicans, which is most Republicans, would be horrified by Reagan's policies if he were president today. Those policies are more in line with MSNBC Republicans.
4
I worked in a financial job at a transportation company in 1984. I remember a very quick upturn in loads occurred, and it was unexpected. So Reagan's re-election got the benefit of the sense that the economy was turning around for the better, suddenly. People felt good. Reagan could ask, as he did, are you better off now in 1984 than you were in 1980-81? The answer for most was "yes." Trump dare not ask that question.
2
What should be clear from all this is actually how little government policy affects the economy. Trump's economy is no different, the performance is the same as Obama's the trajectory is the same, the point in that trajectory is just higher. Even the growth under Clinton was due to the IT revolution. If you add up all the factors that influence the economy, peoples perceptions, global currency and trade markets, interest rates, etc., etc., etc., government policy is not near the top of those factors.
1
Reagan became a saint thanks to the media. Trump will most likely be brought down by the media, similar to how Nixon.
I'm all for it, but media should take care to exercise its power carefully and not just look at profits and bottom lines. For all his faults, Trump has made himself a sensation which the media is feeding off of.
1
@RB trump will be the cause of his own downfall. All the media needs to do is report the facts.
1
One other strength that Regan had which Trump completely lacks is the ability to communicate and unite. Granted Regan was an actor, and perhaps not the best actor in the world either, but he did a pretty solid job playing the role of President of the United States.
When we look back upon the Regan presidency, of course we do so in two distinct ways that we will never be doing when we review Trump's presidency. The first is our ability to see Regan as a nostalgic leader, a person who acted like a person that we want as President.
I didn't like many of Regan's policies, in particular his economic policies that placed many mentally ill, in particular Vietnam War veterans, into the streets - the birth of massive homelessness. But after the assassination attempt, he did sign the Brady Bill which severely limited the expansion of assault weapons.
The second is Regan's desire to unite America which is in stark contrast to Trump's shameless efforts to divide America for the sake of power. Here, history will treat these two Presidents very different.
But I doubt that Trump actually cares how history will treat him. Those are simply not the metrics by which he judges himself. Unlike Regan, Trump is motivated nearly solely by personal greed. Why would he even care what anyone thinks of him once he is gone from our national nightmare. Red-hatters beware, all he cares about is his personal empire. Sooner or later, you might actually realize this, but of course too late.
8
The economy as it actually is, is one thing , and it was getting better in 2016 yet Clinton lost to Trump largely on the perception that most people had been left out of the recovery. Trump spoke of infrastructure and tax cuts to get the economy moving, this message resonated with a good part of the country that shared the perception that the economic recovery was bypassing them.
The unfortunate truth is that though unemployment is down, wealth continues to flow mostly to the top ten percent. The other ninety percent even when employed have a hard time meeting their bills. Wealth distribution today favors the perception that we continue to need stimulus programs such as tax cuts and republicans are all too ready to talk up the benefits of a trickle down economy. The only problem is that the trickle down model does not work...still this will not stop republicans from selling that brand or Trump from using this fantasy to garner votes.
For Democrats the issue to confront is the reality that income maldistribution is fueling economic perceptions that republicans manipulate and that democrats must confront those perceptions not with manipulations but with real workable solutions... or face losing to Donald Trump again.
@Walter Nieves
American voters just can't seem to understand it is their boss, their banker and their lawyer who are their political and economic enemies.
The corporations and bankers have corrupted our government and manipulated our laws so they can take all of our nation's wealth for themselves.
We have met the enemy and it is the rich.
3
Ronald Reagan started a process that is still working itself out today, the destruction of the American worker. Trump ran on this issue and won, but he has done nothing to halt the process.
Workers now have fewer benefits, work longer hours at several jobs, have little job security and their power to bargain has been decimated as unions fell. Workers due to these things have a much shorter way to fall as a recession nears and are much more vulnerable to layoffs that can happen in a moment and now government shut downs
The rich always have their lifeboats, and dropping a few billion means little to their way of life. Income inequality creates most of our population as a feudal class.
Democrats do better because they support workers better with a strong safety net. And Trump will lose has people finally catch on to the threat to their way of life and futures.
8
49% of the country hates the other 51% and the map is Gerrymandered in a way to make certain they are the electoral majority.
So, yes, left wing liberal anti-semites will not propel to Democrats to 54-55%, and they’ll lose again.
1
Neither will Putin in 2020.
The Democrats are toast in 2020 unless they run Joe Biden or a clone of Barack Obama. Sorry to say...
Made my day!!!
to get an idea how biased krugman is, read his piece about ocasio cortez's 70% tax rate. i did my own research, and the data he cited is not only controversial and limited, it has the unfortunate problem of violating common sense.
i mean, if people are moving to texas and florida to avoid paying the state tax, and a yacht tax decimated the yacht industry under bill clinton, how could a 70% tax have zero effect on behavior/economy??
hello? this is scholarly, informed opinion? sounds like the kind of hack nonsense one reads on huffpost.
2
@Ari Weitzner. It's clear that you have the ability to out think a Nobel prize laureate in the economy any day of the week.
1
As a more apt title for this editorial, I suggest, "Whistling Past The Graveyard."
Yes. We definitely need to replace Trump.
We need a president who will be more subservient to Communist China, the WTO, the global finance system, the pharmaceutical industry, Silicon Valley, the military industrial complex, Hamas, and anti-semites everywhere. Then the world will be a better place.
1
@Greg It would be self deceiving to believe that trump is the opposite of any of these things. Fundamentally he is a bully and a coward. Sooner or later those traits catch up to a person.
1
@John Warnock
If he’s bullying my enemies, I don’t care. Not sure where you get the “he’s a coward part.”
The authoritarian party of guns, bombs and racism that is now beating the drums of hatred against people of color from south of the border only has one option. Go to war.
Now let us bring back the draft with no deferments for heel spurs. Let us prosecute the criminals on wall street and k street. Let us get our country back from the greedy republicans and their paymasters.
2
Reagan was a charlatan, surpassed only by his descendants W and Trump.
9
There is nothing more dangerous than a cornered wounded animal with the exception of a cornered wounded narcissist who happens to be President.
6
45 will counter with a war
He has several targets
Duck and Cover
Sad
3
Ahhhh, but . . .tRump can neutralize bad data coming for world economies from Davos' CEO and government finance types . . .by not showing up! tRump not there makes all of these people invisible . . .which is also the tenth stage of drunkeness !
FL voter F/70
1
I'm surprised at the amount of bias and hatred you have towards President Trump and the United States itself as a country. You no longer report news. You publish your personal opinions as news. It's so sad. But you know what, the US will survive your onslaught.
2
@Edward
But the real question, will we survive Trump's onslaught against the United States?
1
Under Trump, it's mourning in America.
5
Krugman also famously called for a market meltdown upon the Trump election. Even with this latest pull back, the S&P is still up 28% from the day after Trump was elected. Krugman is just a leftist hack. He has so much hate in his heart, it clouds his judgement. The economy is doing great. Its firing on all cylinders. We also have the greatest job market in decades, with every metric full steam ahead. All, btw, as a result of Trumps policies, much of which was reversing Obamas policies. So Krugman has a vested interest in convincing folks to pay no attention to the great economy. Nothing to see here. Sorry Krugman, youre a has been. You haven't been right on anything in years.
3
Sad to say, the US is in the hole with them.
1
Actually, Trump has done something very interesting – almost Nobel – in your neck of the woods...
If a billionaire had a chauffeur that drove in the ditch on one side of the road and then – for something different – swerved over to the ditch on the other side of the road for a time...
That chauffeur would be gone...
Yet, that’s precisely the behavior billionaires not only tolerate – but actually encourage – in central bankers...
A good part of how Soros became the billionaire he is...
Conventional wisdom is that once the yield curve inverts – recession surely follows...
Follow in time, perhaps – but cause <> effect is deliberately obfuscated...
It’s like the old carry trade in global currency – it’s front-running writ large...
So what has Trump done – well, not quite a self-driving Tesla...
But he smacked the driver in the back of his head with the heel of his shoe – and said how about trying to drive down the middle of the road, this time...
Said differently, rather than watching – or causing – the yield curve to regeneratively invert...
Why not make your job’s key metric to keep the curve flat – perhaps smoothed on a monthly back-looking basis...
Yes, the (other) smartest guys in the room could – in principle – gin up a derivative that either re-leverages or shorts this...
After all, they’ve given us derivatives that’re – like a Seinfeld episode – about nothing...
Yeah, the coins – but I digress...
Why would they want to – real assets could be cool again...
2
Thank you, Mr. Krugman. Illuminating--as always.
I just finished reading the piece about Mr. King's continuing popularity in Iowa. Food for thought.
I don't think (in all honesty) you can ignore the fact: people really fear--hate--despise Democrats. Or the leftist boogeymen they TAKE to be Democrats.
(1) They hate abortion. Democrats are (supposedly) in
love with abortion.
(2) They hate "gay marriage." Democrats are (supposedly)
"wedded" to "gay marriage." (Pardon the dreadful pun)
(3) Here I'll be brutally frank. Democrats are (supposedly)
"gonna take away my gun." (Shades of Roy Rogers!)
Mr. Krugman these are big things--and you notice none of them have anything to do with the economy. They represent fissures--appalling fissures!--in the American political landscape.
Some of this stuff I sympathize with. Underline "some" ten times!.
I am hungering and thirsting for Mr. Donald J. Trump to go down to ringing defeat in 2020. If indeed he is not impeached and removed from office before then.
I am hungering and thirsting to see the GOP trounced--baffled--thwarted everywhere in these United States. Till they (pardon my language here)--
--till they REPENT of their sin in allowing themselves to be made the mouthpiece of a small, profoundly selfish cadre of rich men--
--till they REPENT of having catered to the mean streak we see in so many Americans.
But the fissures remain, Mr. Krugman.
All but unbridgeable.
A shame.
1
The economy won't rescue Trump: DUH!!!!
The world is aware of a fraud now, and they (I, and all others) won't be interested in more MAGA nonsense.
1
Well written but I think you only showed one side.
Democrats can screw up to like Bill Clinton helping to overturn Glass Steagall. LBJ Great War on poverty that had good intentions but pretty much set up the. modern welfare state.
I think Obama economically should get credit for being one of our better modern presidents. He did not go to either extreme, right or left and "only" had eight yrs. of dull expansion, low interest, low inflation, low unemployment and help us get out of the great recession of 2008.
3
Trump's economy has a lot of room to perform. The problem he faces is he says things that make racists think he is a racist. And there he loses Black, Independent, and Swing voters.
He is up against the Dems, who are now being identified as amoral on the border; something like 90% of our 52% latino border patrol says a wall is very helpful. And all the rape, death, and chaos there is something Dems shrug their shoulders at.
But he will lose because he says disrespectful things to Black people, who will not support him. And also, Indies and Swings will not be able t publicly support him, and help tell others about the power of his ideas.
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American voter. The decades long Republican war on education and science is paying dovidends!
6
@Jim Dennis - My misspelling was a bit ironic, wasn't it?
Don't mess with a cornered rat! Better to bring in the Rat Terriers. Watch the sport. Rats bare their teeth, snarl, jump up and down, squeal loudly, tweet insults and obscenities, pump up their chests, look for a way out, scurry around. Rat terriers simply grab them by the scruff of the neck, shake them twice, break their necks. It's all over. I see some valid parallels here. Some advice -- don't bet on the rat!!
4
Wars are all about trade, markets, and resources never to bring democracy to other countries. The only dictators we put in power and support are rightwing fascists. Bush did not invade Iraq because Saddam was a dictator and the US wanted to bring the blessings of democracy to Iraq and the ME. Trump picks China and the EU, Russia is not big enough to be a threat to the biggest military power either.
Paul, once again you seem to be letting your hatred for the President take over your rational thinking.
Doesn't it bother you that so far all your negative predictions about the failure of President Trump have been proven wrong. Apparently it sure bothers the hillary campers that approx all of the Trump actions have benefited the country and the economy.
But that's OK you need to pacify your followers so they can at least dream at night.
3
@liwop
If this is "winning" I sure hope we never lose.
In baseball the Chicago white sox had to give Back their World Series title. So many athletes have not been inducted into various halls of fame because of cheating. But if you cheat to win the presidency your base thinks you are the reincarnation of Jesus and you get to ruin the country.
4
If you think the next recession is going to be bad, just wait. There is no enlightenment for the deplorables. They'll only get angrier.
2
Ya know? Kruschev didn't last too long after that shoe banging on the table stunt. 'Course trump never studied much history. Actually, from what I can determine, he never studied much at all.
1
Building "Trump's Toilet" in Moscow is reason enough to sell out America. Regardless of how the economy performs, Trump and his ilk will "make out". When the economy tanks it's a buying or money laundering opportunity. Access to the Trump "Court" is for sale. Just check-in and let us know what your pleasure and well do the best we can to take care of you. Sanctions; gone. Annex the Ukraine, no problems.
Donald is circling the drain. It won't be long.
3
"If you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention."
A war, Falkland style? Rough guess:
Iran.
Bolton wants it, always did.
Pompeo didn't rule it out.
Mattis opposed it, he's out.
Netanyahu needs it.
MBS craves for it.
Europeans will divide over it.
And Putin wouldn't mind.
After Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, not many places left in the Middle-East.
Iran's next. Possibly before Now Rooz.
1
Given the deeply undemocratic practices of Republicans these days we should be prepared for all manner of manipulations. Or, how about a nice little war? No matter what, it's going be be a very ugly campaign. And just when you thought it couldn't get uglier in our country. The remedy? Vote Democratic: from President to Dog Catcher...
3
Dr. Krugman gives an excellent analysis explaining why Trump voters do not "vote their pocketbooks". Art Cullen's column about the popularity of Steve King in Iowa is also instructive.
Essentially what we now have is a hard core 35-40% of whites, many of them racists, who are imposing their will on the rest of us.
And let's not argue the tired trope that Trump voters are "voting against their own interests". They are very much voting their interests. What drives them? Racism. Bigotry. Xenophobia. The "wall" is this century's Confederate flag. These ARE their interests.
And for leaders who tell them that as white Christians, they are the true Americans, they will gladly trade away affordable health care, affordable higher education and job opportunities for their children, and security in their senior years. As long as their president tells them that the KKK and neo-Nazis are "some very fine people", they will gladly go bankrupt from medical expenses. They will gladly draw unemployment until it runs out, as long as he continues to parrot their bigotry.
The rest of us, the 60% of us who want forward thinking leadership that focuses on the environment, higher education, affordable health care and good job opportunities, are now in thrall to this racist minority.
The Democrat who wins the party's nomination for presidency next year must do this - write off Trump voters entirely, and focus on the remaining 60% of us. We are the real Americans who have been "left behind".
6
They may be in a deep hole with regard to their political hand going forward, but in fact they just don't care. They took their share before even a few swings of the bat and have no need whatsoever for the general economy. They, unlike the Democrats who are not much better, don't even bother pretending they give a hoot about the working class.
Who among any of the politicos on either side of the aisle is in line to give back a penny of the tax break which was divided rather equally among the wealthy of both parties?
We, like most people in the world's democracies and republics, are always being played and yet still have faith in the greedheads who purport to be out for our interests.
These guys are masters of the art of the steal and we, the schleps who support them, have better luck barking at the moon.
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money"
.......Alexis de Tocqueville
2
Trump is a fraud who embraces Midnight In America because he's a soulless coward who thrives on pity and fear. If his so-called patriotic base with their love for this Country truly believe in it, they will realize they have made a horrible mistake, dumping this nation into the gutter..
4
I don't think he's counting on the economy to "save" him. He's counting on Putin, via Deripaska, to give him a golden parachute after he consigns the GOP to the dustbin of history.
6
From your lips to God's ear!
1
Let's all help the people of Kentucky to hang Trump around the neck of Mitch "the thug" McConnell when he next seeks re-election to the senate. We should all donate to his Democrat opponent for this will be very important. Remember the billionaires keeping him in office -- thanks to Citizen's United. I am determined to volunteer a lot of time as well to help whoever his opponent is win. And what a sweet victory that will be for American democracy... Just imagine!
6
There's a sad old saw in politics that goes "before things can get better they much get much worse." Trump's base will not turn on him until their pain becomes much stronger ... and even then he will retain many of his die-hards, because to change their beliefs will require too-painful personal reassessments.
The fundamental belief of the Trump base is that God guarantees the right kind of white people what they want, and that Trump is God's mysterious agent to give it to them, by smiting everyone they hate.
That this is a vicious form of a cargo-cult religion rather than anything even tangentially-christian does not disturb them in the least -- it seems congruent to them that their God would chose a man who gropes women, pays off mistresses, and locks little children up at the border to be their deliverer. One wonders when they will deliver children to the fiery furnace ... and whose children those would be.
Cargo cults only die slowly. It takes a lot of misery and failure to extinguish them because the people involved mostly never change their minds; it's just that their children don't believe the nonsense, and the old die off.
3
Reagan’s popularity was spurred by the assassination attempt and his buoyant spirit afterward.
1
The good news is that there's only 2 years until another 4 years. Trump in 2020.
2
If SCUMPf tries to block or reverse the will of the people in 2020 he will end up in jail for sure, but the price may be a second civil war with surviving red states in rebellion.
1
Another failed attack on Trump by a guy who claimed that Trump being elected would lead to recession.
No credibility just hatred of anything POTUS does.
4
You mean the folks with only a high school education are not going to be doing better under Trump??? Gee, that's not what they were told by Trump and the other rich people in the big companies.
3
The typical Trump voter is not able to understand this column. Or economic theory.
2
For all the juicy tidbits you may be able to fantasize of Donald Trump facing a Democratic opponent in a Presidential debate, first imagine a forward thinking Republican grabbing all of those juicy tidbits first. Imagine a gadfly like Ann Coulter, or even better, Columba Bush standing on a stage face to flush face with an apoplectic Donald J. Trump. Lambasting him on how badly he really did try and get casino gambling in Florida by her husband Jeb blocked him. A boy can dream cant he?
1
It’s ALL about who the Democratic nominee is. Nothing else really matters.
"What’s clear, however, is that Trump and his allies are in a deep hole right now — and the economy isn’t going to dig them out of it."
But Russia and Facebook can. Because you don't need reality or the truth anymore, you need trolls and a complicit platform to win a modern American election.
So I just saw a clip of Rudy defending the “president” on TV. I can think of so many politically incorrect adjectives to describe Rudy’s narrative. Let’s just say “incoherent and deranged” for now. But why would D$rty Don$ld allow someone like this to represent him? Desperate? Stupid? We know that “he and he alone” can hire the best people to solve the world’s problems (yeah, right). Rudy is crazed and Trump is probably worse. In my experience, NO ONE has ever had a successful business deal with someone who can’t be trusted on any level. But Mitch and others continue to play along with all of this. I’m sure Mitch will justify it all some day, but for now he continues to be another Trump enabler, along with so many others who could have fulfilled their obligation to the Constitution and provided oversight during this divisive time.
Trump plans on being President-for-life.
Let the clueless little mouse remain trapped in the cage- the evil genius created his own grave. He may be a evil genous- but he has zero skills on governance. Fear and division mongering can only take you some distance- but you need brain to make the economy strong. As expected from the child bully, he gave trillions of tax cut to help himself and his buddies with the false pretext that it will grow jobs. But as expected, the companies are using the christmas gift to buy back stocks, not investing in US economy. His mental instability also led to the chaos in the business world. Yes, the stock market jumped- but it went down fast because of the clueless man in the White House. Most importantly, the child bully pathological liar believes that he is better than everyone, generals, scientists, economists since he is so “smart”. The truth is he was never smart- inherited $400 million from his daddy and then declared bankruptcy six time. The billionaire made his money thru his money laundering scheme with soviet thugs. All of his predecessors had extremely talented cabinet members. But not the know all swamp king- he has filled his cabinet with most corrupt members known in the US history. He does not have a single soul in his cabinet to provide him guidance on any issue. It is a travesty that we have a clueless joker in the White House.
4
In 2020, Trump will do what he did in 2016, play the white racist, white nationalist, xenophobia, misogyny and islamophobia cards. He cannot claim to be an outsider though, in 2020, and the RNC together have a billion dollars or more in campaign donations to run negative ads against his opponents.
1
Trump has no idea how to even run a successful business. He is a con man, promoted by various Right Wing interests. Listen up, folks! He is the messenger!! Look to the evil behind him.
1
But will the economy save us from Trump?
Dems need to stiffen their spines over the next two years. So what if Drumpf is a wounded animal and will lash out? They can prepare for that and nominate the best dump-Slayer (preferably female) to take him out in Nov. 2020. His unpopularity,, continuing idiocy and lackluster economy will be arrows in the Dem quiver. Don't overthink it Dems.
1
Yes we should be very worried about a cornered Trump, because there is a good chance he'll do what Putin does when he's losing ground at home: start a war.
3
Trump is vicious. He will drag the country into the hole he is in. Yes, I am scared because the one who can stop this mad ride, Mitch McConnell, has no heart nor does he a brain.
2
Most of core GOP vote bank would not care and/or have the ability to analyse complicated data about economy or almost any issue that need rudimentary cognitive ability or meaningful education (degrees don't matter). They are more like tribals, as ancient Greeks defined "idiot", "tribal", and "citizen". But the Greeks were more civilized in terms of not allowing the "idiot" class to have voting rights, unlike our modern day democracy. That "tribal" nature of GOP is valid for both its rich donors, who control the party narrative, party policies that favor the donor class (tax cut being one), and control media & PR for the party. On the other hand, the "idiot" class became "tribals" in our democracy and have voting rights. They vote in mass and behave like a herd. Those are the people who matter most to win elections and Trump is desperate to keep them happy. That lot of GOP vote bank is more motivated by Christian (mainly Evangelical) fundamentalism, White supremacy, and almost any conspiracy theory that GOP's donor class manufacture and spread out for these people to consume and believe.
Trump's reelection also depends on how Dem leadership behave. If Dem leadership were neutral in 2016 and did not favor Clinton using smear campaign against Sanders, then Trump would not have won that election and we could spare this Trump nightmare. I hope Dem leadership learned form that mistake and would be more ethical and neutral in 2020.
1
The supply side con has never worked. It won't work
for the grifter in the White House either.
The problem as Bill Clinton famously said is"math"
1
How can anything save this guy when he doesn't understand the first thing about it? We have never had a more uninformed. ignorant, and yet bombastic individual in the white house. If anything his current crime, his shutdown is going to do real damage to the economy.
1
Continue self immolating trying to destroy the fairly elected President and see how well it turns out for your own party Democrats. Best case scenario you both burn to the ground. Who rises from the ashes? Some other establishment Republican that's who. The political equivalent of suicide bombing will not be rewarded with a return to power. It will have the same result to the party trying it as it does to the unfortunates who attempt the real thing. Self destruction and some eternal reward in heaven. What is the eternal reward for Democrats?
3
republicans never want to be swayed by the truth.
1
Oh no!
Krugman always makes wrong predictions— which means Trump will be re-elected.
3
@Tuco
I think you are confusing Krugman with Tom Friedman, whose ivory tower commentaries are nearly always wrong.
This is all too true. Which leads to the question, rhetorical at this point though it is - will there even be an election in 2020? You essentially contemplate that question in your next to last paragraph. He knows his base, he and Fox stoke it 24/7. The base has demonstrated time and again that it is not amenable to facts or reason, remains irrationally angry, and susceptible to brainwashing and the most outlandish propaganda. Think it can't happen here? Think again. We are much farther along the path than we wish to think. Our only real hope, our last hope, of avoiding oligarchic authoritarianism is in the election, and specifically turning over the senate. Hopefully we will have that opportunity. Whether we will seize it is an open question.
6
The economy is not going to get much if any better from here, and just look at the results of the 2018 election while we are in the midst of sub 4% unemployment. The bad news - good news for Dems is that most economists are not predicting a Recession between now and November 2020, but the good news for Dems is that this may not matter as the electorate is more focused on healthcare, education and housing affordability and retirement third rail issues far more in proportion to the economy. Meaning, Trump or no Trump, there may be a new normal where the economy is less of an election issue in politics, and where the other kitchen table issues become weightier. If so, this is very bad news for the GOP, as well as neoliberals in the Democratic Party. I see a major progressive shift coming.
1
"Actually, even Ronald Reagan was no Ronald Reagan. Although right-wing legend portrays his experience as proof of the magical power of tax cuts, the economy actually performed somewhat better under Bill Clinton, who raised taxes. (Although, to be fair, almost all Republicans seem to have managed to expunge that fact from their memories.)"
Also to be fair, HW Bush started that process as well, though he had to lie about it in order to get elected.
There were lots of hagiographical articles written recently about HW's passing and what a great and statesman-like leader he was. It's funny that no one ever called his administration what it was: four years of cleaning up the mess that Reagan had left. In domestic policy, where he had to be the bad guy and raise taxes to make up for the drunken spending/tax-cutting spree that Saint Ronnie had gone on. And in foreign policy, where he had to go up against two third-world dictators who had spent the eighties gorging themselves on Pentagon and CIA subsidies.
(Also in criminal justice, where HW "cleaned up" after Reagan in a somewhat more sinister way by pardoning everybody involved in the Iran-contra scandal).
2
Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan. He is not Abe Lincoln, Richard Nixon, or any other person who was president. He's unique and hopefully a mere quirk in the ongoing history of presidents of the United States. If he's not this country is in more trouble than the pundits realize.
The GOP however, is another story entirely. Since they took in the Dixiecrats back in the mid 1960s their collective common sense and concern for the people they are supposed to serve has diminished to non-existent. They could end this shut down and could exert some control on Trump but refuse to. My guess is that his extravagant and foolish actions serve as camouflage for what they want to do: destroy America for all but their rich donors/sponsors/owners. Of course we help when we re-elect them, believe their lies and refuse to think for ourselves or look past our own lives.
The GOP, like Trump, prefers poorly educated constituents to marginally educated ones. It prefers to create uncertainty beyond what most of us can endure so we'll forget to vote, look out solely for ourselves, and never question their successful attempts to divide us in order to pass their agenda. Their agenda is nothing less than creating and supporting an oligarchy run by their willing hand and their I mean the GOP.
We have succeeded in assisting in the creation of a completely incompetent government. If we want to know what's next we can look at Russian history or French history.
3
One point rarely gets mentioned. It was pledged by the GOP that huge cuts in corporate tax would spur investment that would create jobs. This misses the #1 rationale for business investment - productivity enhancement assets that reduce labor content. Eliminating heads / labor hour content is the gold standard for justifying investment. Not good, not bad, just is. Market growth, improved customer satisfaction, higher quality are important factors but less concrete than the hard, sure numbers from cutting heads
2
Donald Trump has China in his bag. In time of urgency, he can always pull out the China card and deliver many intermittent trade deals benefitting US consumers including farmers in the heartland and import-exporters such as Walmart, Amazon, Starbuck, and Apple. This trade dispute can last for a long time, providing many step-by-step China trade agreements. Other markets such as India, Japan, and EU are not too far behind. He can have another trade war with any one of them. Besides he can always go back to Mexico asking for "Wall" money and Canada for more market access benefitting us growers. Don't forget, he loves deals.
1
Let's throw in Trump's war against immigration -- both unprocessed and legal.
We are not replacing retiring workers as fast as we must. A growing work force is what fuels economic growth and we are going to need people to pay into Social Security so retiring people can draw from it.
In typical American fashion of cutting off our noses to spite our faces, many of these retirees vehmently oppose immigration.
Who is going to milk the cows, harvest the crops, clear the tables? Immigration opponents refuse to ask themselves these questions.
3
@Keith
Answer to your last sentence/question is simle:
ROBOTS
I suggest you discover what they are and what they do.
Concur on one part, the president for good or ill has some but not much impact on the economy and economic cycles and has to have the assistance for good or ill from Congress and the Fed. However, it is the long term that matters and long term, inflation adjusted wages have barely moved for the bottom 80% for over 3 decades. Long term, the trends in the stock market, the unemployment rate, and a host of economic indicators are now almost 10 years old and no different under Obama or Trump. Neither Obama or Trump supporters are willing to look at the long term data.
It's not the economy stupid! It is now Russia that will bring down the clown!
Trump inherited a very strong recovered and still improving economy. All he can be given credit for is sustaining what was already growing at a rapid pace. That said it is probably safe to imply that despite Trumps efforts to destroy it via tariffs, trade wars and further enrichment of the already rich, Obama left Trump in very good shape.
The economy is doing well in spite of Trump not because of him.
1
America is allowed to 'pass gas' every now and then. Whatever Reagan's policy faults were, and there were many, he was likeable. And so that made him widely popular. Our current president also has many policy faults as well, but he isn't likeable, and hence not popular.
1
I predict that when Trump is staring defeat in the face, he'll find an excuse to go to Moscow for a summit with Putin - and stay there.
Of course, this is assuming that Trump hasn't already been impeached once Mueller spills his by now copious beans.
3
What saved George W. Bush, the hatred by Americans by other Americans. To show this is not just a White issue, Bush won Ohio and the 2004 election because of Black hatred of gays. That is enough Blacks in Ohio in 2004 voted for Bush in spite of Bush'a only slightly lesa open racism toward Blacks because Bush was also anti gay.
This is why "the wall"is so important to Trump. It symbolizes hatred toward not so much Mexicans as it does Black and Brown Americans by Trumps base. My own view is you cannot love America when you hate so many Americans, but that is why Trumps base has no issue with the shutdown or Trumps overall attack on American institutions.
By attacking Gays, Bush in 2004 was able to expand his voters just enough to win and that is what Trump is trying to do in 2020.
1
"Which raises the question of what he and his party will do if defeat is staring them in the face."
It's possible that this will be the time when the right wing - at least the party - turns on him. Up to now, they have had more to gain than to lose (even counting Democratic takeover of the House). If that reverses, they'll dump him because they have the god-given right to win.
trxmp, of course, will be desperate. After the presidency, he has nothing. His life as a property developer (that's all he is or ever will be) is over. Conventional banks already won't touch him. That leaves him in the hands of oligarchs who now know that he needs them more than they need him, if he wishes to prolong his career of self-aggrandizement.
No lawyer will have him. Mob lawyers - Cohen, Manafort - will run in the opposite direction. The mob works in the dark, and any lawyer of trxmp might as well carry a sign in flashing red lights saying "investigate me."
He may "write" a book, and will get speaker fees from the NRA, ALEC and AIPAC, but it won't be the same. He won't get his rush of admiration that sustains his life. There will be a very expensive divorce.
Somewhere deep inside, under layers and layers of self-love, he knows this, and that's what makes him - and his bloodthirsty admirers - dangerous.
4
Imagine working without pay for a month.
Now, imagine ever voting for a political party that made you work without pay for a month over a stupid wall that has nothing to do with your agency or job.
Congratulations, Mr. Trump, if your goal was to destroy the party of Lincoln, you're doing a wonderful job.
8
Wishful thinking won't make the man go away.
2
So this is the point when the ongoing stream of immigrants save the economy by providing the next wave of homebuyers. Unfortunately, this country has its knives out for immigrants now and our population is in shrink mode.
Nothing rallies Americans around their leader like a war. And in Oct 83 Reagan attacked Grenada because some Cuban engineers were extending the length of a runway at the airport and this proved..........who knows what? Don't think Trump won't try the same gambit.
3
I enjoy Krugman’s pieces. I very reluctantly disagree with Mr. Krugman when he seems so sure Trump will need rescuing.
I was sure Trump would lose until he didn’t. I was sure even his base would see that the great tax cut legislation was great for corporations and Trump’s wealthy brethren, but was bad for the country as a whole (for so many reasons) and...well...his base in particular. I was sure that by now the “Christian Right” would finally see Trump as the antithesis of Christ’s philosophy, and I thought they would act more...well...Christ like.
Speaking of Reagan, there’s one bit of irony: Russia in its role as the great satan, as evil incarnate playing against Reagan’s role as the leader of the new Jerusalem did wonders for Reagan’s popularity and election victory. Russia in its role of what appears to be the great election manipulator, and the great Trumpian puppeteer does wonders for Trump’s base popularity and election victory.
Finally, Mr. Krugman, wasn’t it in Clinton’s reign that the last vestiges of the Glass–Steagall legislation were put to their bloody death. And, what did Bill and his economic henchmen do to Brooksley Born?
I thought you would end with the punch line taken from Lloyd Bentsen's put-down of Dan Quayle: "Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy."
And Trump, you're no Ronald Reagan.
1
If the economy won't rescue the President, I promise not to as well. I won't count the President down for the count until he is out of the White House. As an added bonus. I hope the future scrutiny he will undergo will neuter him with his base so that his influence will be reduced die hard cultists. If it is too much to ask, I also request that he do his post presidential damage from the bigly house.
Just imagining the worldwide celebrations once he’s gone keeps me going. Someday somehow it will be bye Bye felecia time.
1
It's indelicate to say it, but the Democrats are anti-American. They hope things go wrong, they predict (secretly hope for) recession, they hope some health or safety crisis arises from the gov't shut-down so they can say, "see, see", and score points. They want a fall in stock prices, deaths at the border (especially children)--anything to help defeat Mr. Trump in 2020 so that . . . we can elect one of them? Why do we want to be led by the party that actually wants to injure the nation so they can get into power? And what do they propose to do if they get in? Plunder hard-working taxpayers to reward oh-so-deserving layabouts?
2
The economy won't bail him out but Howard Schultz might.
Trumps’s Support will stay with him short of a depression. However, the loss of suburban women and Main Street business types will likel be enough to beat him, un;less the Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victor
Don’t think that cannot happen.
My former tech at FDIC now works at FBI Dallas. She's very discouraged and has a house payment to make and is single. The world is chock full of tragedies and misery mankind cannot solve or resolve. Why does our government makeup tragedies for citizens to suffer when we already face mounting human tragedy on a daily basis? Trump has taken world tragedy to a grander scale and made America worse and it will continue to get worse as long as we allow him to remain in office. Get him out now!
2
The only similarities I see between the two are:
1. Actors
2. Dementia
2
Seriously, is there anyone out there who would entrust his or her personal retirement investments to the likes of the Fake President, Mnuchin, or anyone else, with the exception of Fed Chairman Powell, in this incompetent Administration?
Impressive. But still two years to go! It's too long. It has to come to an end sooner. Indeed, it is not only about Trump but also abouth his followers in the Republican Party, like Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, both of Latin-American descendance, but nevertheless supporting Trump fully in his bashing of Spanish speaking refugees.
These guys should be whipped out of office too!
I wonder if a recession or the beginning of the downfall of trumpnomics can be triggered by China reducing or stoping buying US debt. I just wonder.
1
In 1992 GHW Bush, though extremely popular a year before, was defeated by a relatively unknown governor of Arkansas. Perhaps you remember the key campaign slogan Clinton used, "It's the economy stupid".
This time around, it will be the reverse: 'It's the stupid economy!' The stupid economy is evidently the result of a series of ad decisions by the alt-experts at the White House that gave us the deficit-exploding tax cut, the tariff wars creating not just spiraling costs with China but our allies, all the hype that fills hard-working immigrants with fear, and now the shutdown. These self-inflicted wounds are now stopping the Obama Boom that Trump claimed as his own. As my co-worker used to say, "Stuck on Stupid."
1
no morning in America for Donald ?
the mourning is from people wistfully recalling a time when people used to treat strangers as friends not-yet-met
before we got a wall (called the internet) that we just lob grenades over at each other ...
The whole country, and even much of the world, is in a "deep hole" because of Trump and Trumpism. I only hope that the time will come quickly when the so-called president and his associates go down together in flames.
3
Mr. Krugman still making definitive pronouncements, huh?
I'd think after your humiliating election night prediction, you would at the very least offer take a step back from pretending you really KNOW what the future holds.
But no.
We'll see. But Trump doesn't need a Reagan landslide, this Clinton voter knows he just needs the Democrats to nominate someone WE like, but someone who those two-time Obama voting Trump voters won't.
And we'll have this column to remind you- again- that you are no fortune teller.
Trumps will do what he always does: lie and declare victory.
2
I'm scared, Paul. I'm very scared. The shutdown shows daily what a cornered Trump can do when things don't go his way. And Trump is just getting started. Hoping for an act of God.
2
Trump will be afraid that when he leaves office, he will lose the protections the presidency affords him. He will want a presidency-for-life, as his fellow autocrats Putin and Xi now have for themselves. When he realizes he can't have that, what lies in store for us as a country?
Paul Krugman hints at the answer today: "... if you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention."
5
Question: Professor Krugman and commenters, what’s your take on the gloomy forecasts of Gundlach and Stockman?
Lost we are, with or without Trump.
Where are the good jobs? Tell me. And, since there aren't enough to go around, tell me what the 'others' should expect from life here?
After the calamity of global warming, that is the greatest terror we face: grotesque inequality in a so-called democracy of 'all created equal'. No, this is no answer to what civilization, community, humanity requires.
Trump-be-gone: soon. But then what? Where for art thou equality? In the new 'tech-age' of coders and entrepreneurs and the 'lean-in' folk? No, this place reeks of privilege; not white privilege, 'green' (money).
Trump will leave in dishonor, and then, who will we be?
1
And now Trump took yet another cheap shot at President Obama, with Donald claiming that he had waved 'a magic wand' which had eluded his predecessor. It would take use of the dark arts to give Trump a second term.
Of course it won't. Then POTUS does not care; all he cares is how to keep himself and his family out of prison for the crimes of the past and present. US President's office for him is essentially a protection against prosecution if not against investigation itself.
1
What might Trump do in the face of defeat? He'd try to take everyone down the drain with him.
Does that mean declare the vote null and void, impose Martial Law and imprison his enemies? Of course it does.
1
"how a cornered Trump might lash out"
Trump needs to distract from all his corruption and a war with Iran might do the trick.
1
Never overestimate the American voter. Whether caused by apathy, ignorance, or nefarious social networks, voters have already demonstrated that they're capable of putting a complete imbecile into office. Why shouldn't they do it again?
3
Don't sell short the likelihood that the democrats counter Trump with a high tax, high spending proposals combined with the sort of social justice/white privilege nonsense that can make suburban voters hold their nose and vote for Trump again.
1
Yet another inconclusive article by mr. Krugman. Iwonder what is his political purpose, except than repeating Trump is no good, in deep hoel and all sort of fantasies like this (included the comparision with Regan, they weren't even both Republicans! Trumo was for most part of his life a Dem).
Sure, when economy is good, president got re-elected. And yes mainly this is an unrelated matter to pplitics. It's about the coincidence of cycles with the timing of election.
Trump did not rescue the economy as Obama did, or get an health care system, like again Obama did during the first two years.
He probably knows that is timing has passed and with that also his double majority in both House and Senate. And he got nothing from his presidential campaign promises to show to people. He needs a flag. And that flag can't be economy. In fact he's not doing damage to it, i mean extensively (locally he did hurt come rural agro-economy which costed him the House along with Dems' campaign to vote), but he will eventually, as his nationalistic view is not viable on long term.
that's why his so much needed flag to show at rallies has to be the wall, he has to get hold of some promise and realize it, So it's undisputable that he will raise the stakes to its maximum to get even a mile of wall to boost about, even by hijacking federal government for as much as it needs to build pressure onto Dems, who have to justify their stance of protecting foreigner over federal (voting citizens) employees.
1
I didn't care for Reagan. One thing you had to give him is he was compassionate.Likable too. He was raised as one of the hoi polli, and made his life thru his own grit.
Trump , conversely is the meanest most uncaring landlord you'd ever want to meet. He basks in his greed, and scorns those who tend to be kind.He has no compassion and it is clear to all.
1
Good economy when our unfounded liabilities is some $ 122 trillion with a “T”. Our reserve currency held by foreign governments is 60%, but East Asian countries have dropped the dollar as their reserve currency and adopted the Chinese yuan. This sea of debt we are swimming in may not bother you, but this is not a sustainable economy. In 2011 our S&P rating was downgraded from AAA to AA+. We are headed downward and the bubble created by our phoney by back numbers without major investment and real growth is about to burst.
1
But there's Nancy and Kamala ... they might well ensure Trump's re-election to the Presidency.
1
well, you gotta admire krugman's hubris.
here is a man who has been so wrong about obamanomics and trump's economics yet he keeps on giving his opinion.
i guess even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
1
No morning in America for The Donald, but plenty of mourning in America for the rest of us.
3
In Republistan, it's not the economy so much as the tribal war. Economically, trump's base want to see democrats and elites suffer pain similar to what they themselves have been experiencing as the left-behind population in the US knowledge-based economy. In brief, they want to burn their neighbor's house down, and don't understand that the conflagration that trump will create is likely to harm them, too, and push them further from what they see as their privileged rights as "real" Americans.
1
The democrats might well have a fragmented field and race. I do not like the Trump Tax cuts, and his right wing court appointments on the Supremes and elsewhere. The shut down protracted will be a disaster and it could happen. So far we have been lucky: if Trump was more competent we could see world war, neo-fascism , and authoritarian government. Its lucky we have seen no major wars with anybody. As bad as Trump is and he is not good history so far has been kind given the possible disaster we could face. Lets hope and pray our luck continues.
2
I think we are already getting a taste of what Trump will do when cornered. He'll shutdown the government or otherwise throw a monkey wrench in the works and blame Schumer, Pelosi, or anyone else he can find (except for himself). He doesn't care about whom or what it affects or what the long term effects are. He just needs to prove he's a winner, even, and most especially when he is not.
3
"If you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out..." It's clear how he will lash out: he will take something precious to the common good hostage, as he is already doing to 800k government employees and economically vulnerable with the shutdown, to 1m plus Dreamers in canceling their protections and using then as a bargaining chip, to Medicare and Medicaid through the creation of unnecessary deficits, to all of us dependent on economic stability to get through choppy economic waters. Trump is a hostage taker and the Republican party actively aids and abets him.
2
During Reagan, the housing boom was supported by the Supermoms (family and career both); women entered the job market so their family could afford a home during a time of high interest rates. When a woman took a first job, that meant: a second car, clothes for work, day care, fast food, etc. This was a cultural revolution that fed the markets in both old and new ways.
1
As rationale and well-reasoned as Prof. Krugman’s article is, Trump and the Republicans will again rely on division, tribalism, scaremongering, and various methods of voter suppression to retain power in 2020. The right will turn 2020 into a battle for the irrational vote, which is where Trump’s strength lies.
2
People really don't vote on their financial status.
Those people that voted for trump voted against their financial status, their health care status and their educational status.
They voted for trump for two reasons: Supreme Court Justices and emotion, namely anger over immigration and racism. Those reasons still exist.
4
@esp
When it comes to most Trump supporters, I have to agree with you. Closed societies. As long as their neighbors are hurting just as badly, they'll stick to their beliefs.
Because of Trump's policies, both at home AND abroad when the next recession hits it is going to be BAD. The tax cuts mean that it will be increasingly difficult to borrow to spend on stimulus. Doubly so because of Trump intentionally making some of our biggest creditors angry as well as playing games with defaulting on the debt. If you are China or Japan, why would you lend money to a charlatan like Trump?
We know how Trump will lash back when cornered: Suggested that the Speaker of the House fly commercial, despite being 2nd in line for the Presidency...and then publicized her plans, putting her life, her delegation's lives, the staff's lives, the troops' lives and the innocent bystanders flying's lives, just because Pelosi, as Speaker, blocked Trump from using the State of the Union to attack the House, the Speaker, the Democrats, the Press, without (real) rebuttal.
Yeah, he was willing to get them all killed because of an "insult". That's Trump.
Two items, surprisingly, were not mentioned. 1st, unemployment rose in December, not by much, but started moving up. 2nd, Housing prices have softened and started to fall. Tangentially, average family income growth is stagnant, unlike under Reagan. This means the major actors for economic health, the ability of ordinary people to consume and increase consumption, and rely on their homes for financial security, is just not there.
Trump isn't very smart. He could have pushed a much smaller tax cut and not exploded the deficit, riding the healthy economy Obama left him. He could have not picked economic fights with ALL our trading partners (except Russia). He could have not cancelled TPP. He could have not forced a shut-down over a stupid wall that won't and can't work, nor actually be built in a timely fashion.
I'm more convinced than Prof. Krugman that a collapse is right around the corner, and think the signs are here.
1
"... if you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention."
If we are scared of Trump, then we are lost. If Mueller doesn't get him, if Congress will not impeach and convict, if the Cabinet will not exercise the 25th Amendment ... then we vote him out in 2020. With a vengeance. And we don't ever think twice about it.
We make his life as miserable as possible until then. We protest like there's no tomorrow. We support federal workers during this shutdown, with all our hearts and all our resolve.
We will never fear Trump. Trump will fear us. And that can never stop.
2
All the talk about how great the economy is has been disprove by this shut down of government. I was and am shocked by how many federal workers live paycheck to paycheck with no back up. If people with good jobs cant make it it shows just how bad the middle class has it while Trump did nothing to help them.
2
You're right, "Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan." He's a deformed version of our previously worst Electoral College President, George W. Bush. With his tax cuts for the rich, his "Tariff Man" Trump trade war with China, and his government shutdown, he's actually torpedoing the economy and pushing it toward recession, And, if you add the new target of his neocon security team of National Security Adviser, John Bolton, and Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, for a regime-change war against Iran, you have the potential for 2008 all over again. As with Bush 43, it's not that "the economy won't rescue Trump," but that it will insure his defeat. If there's one thing we know about Donald Trump, it's that he knows how to kill the golden goose and turn bounty into bankruptcy.
1
"What’s clear, however, is that Trump and his allies are in a deep hole right now — and the economy isn’t going to dig them out of it."
Good. The current GOP deserves to be voted out of existence.
The Progressives of the DP should own the day. The most successful States in the Union financially/economically are Blue States. The most successful Presidencies of late economically have been Democrats. Trump is riding Obama’s shirttails. Conservatism is a spirit killer. They spend more time depriving citizens of economic sustenance and futures. The GOP doesn’t allocate resources well. The DP does.
1
The economy is not just strong because of Trump, many other factors are involved starting with the economy Trump inherited ,deregulation and huge tax cuts pumping trillions into the economy. The other factors of the Mueller report and the House investigations which will expose the shady lying side of TRump from the Trump Moscow Hotel and his bizarre relationship with Putin. Trump may have committed fraud in his biz life and even if beyond statue of limitations knowing he is a crook hurts his image. Messing up foreign policy as he is erratic and ignorant will happen thru 2019 making him an unfit commander and chief.
Showmen like Trump can convince people that the only way to rise is to hook yourself to a star.
But there are different kinds of stars. Ego-driven maniacs like Trump — who can't survive without the spotlight and are willing to look and act like clowns to keep it — are captivating, but are incapable of looking at the bigger picture because in their minds, they are the picture. Nothing else matters.
The real stars are the men and women to toil in the background in a true effort to make and keep America great. They surround themselves with individuals of the same ilk and work. For their country. For us.
Obama comes to mind.
1
“So Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan.”
Yes, but Trump makes Madoff look like an amateur.
Madoff scammed a handful of investors who were financially hurt. Madoff had no documented history of deceit, cheating others, or failures. He gave off no overt warnings and didn’t have daily headlines revealing his true self.
Trump, on the other hand, scammed 60 millions voting taxpayers, with tens of millions more who will be financially hurt. Trump had a long well-documented history of deceit, cheating others, bankruptcies. He gave off multiple warnings documented in almost daily headlines revealing his true self.
We must find a way to hold self-interested and self-enriching Elected Politicians, government officials, their staffers and operatives from both parties personally and financially liable, responsible and accountable for the lies and half-truths they have told US, their gross mismanagement of our county, our $22 T and growing national debt (106% of GDP), and our $80 T in future, unfunded liabilities they forced on US jeopardizing our economic and national security, while benefiting themselves, their staffers, their party and special interest donors.
2
Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani has made abundantly clear that the president lied through his teeth about his connections to Russia during the entirety of the presidential campaign. So now the party line is "So what?"
What does it matter that the figure who now sits as the President of the United States was in constant contact with a hostile foreign power in negotiations that ended -- when was it -- January, June, November 2016? This is a classic definition of a conflict-of-interest.
So what? Who cares that the winning presidential candidate who felt a pervasive and persistent need to lie about his relationships with Russians now trots out his cartoonish lawyer to tell us that it all never mattered anyway.
Well, it did matter and it matters now, unless we are all comfortable living in the third continent as a Duchy on which the Russian State exists.
1
All of the normal conditions which would doom a second trump electoral victory are in place. The abnormal conditions keep the flame alive, however. The dense, loyal base, impervious to rational thought; the mechanisms to attempt to deny certain groups a vote; the disproportionate voting power of trump-obsessed states; and the willingness of the trump camp to adopt objectionable (and possibly illegal) strategies to win elections.
Only when the voting is done--and trump is screeching out non-stop, semi-literate, lying tweets blaming all and sundry but himself for a resounding defeat--will we know that he hasn't won a second term.
America is Trump's biggest casino as everyone is seduced by "Great" and Tax Cuts to gamble in his megacasino. Everyone should know that in the gambling business, you can't beat the House. So why then did Trump go bankrupt? Is that a testament to his abilities? Could be. Just look at the budget deficit he and McConnell created just to buy voters and payoff their sponsors.
In such circumstances demagogues usually look for foreign adventures (aka wars). Th option are limited for"splendid little wars", none of which are likely to turn out happily for the U.S./
Iran is the most likely choice because it has long been National Security Advisor John Bolton's dream to bomb Iran. But bombing will unleash Shiite terrorist attacks against America and American interests and restart the Iranian nuclear program. Given his habit of throwing other people's money at his failures, Trump will then have to invade, killing sons and daughters of his base and Lord knows how many innocent Iranians.
That's one scenario. There are others, even less attractive: War With North Korea, War With China (or both). A Latin American adventure, no matter how it is justified, is unlikely turn out well.
No, the economy will not save Donald Trump.The three senatorial stooges, MacConnell, Hatch and Graham will not be able to save Donald Trump. Chief Justice Roberts cannot save Donald Trump . The 800,000 government workers who are jobless at this moment will not save Donald Trump , and Rudolph Giuliani ( God help us if we have to listen to this clown for another year ) definitely won’t save Donald Trump .
What Mr. Krugman should be thinking about at this moment is - what will it take to save America from this clear and present danger which is the Trump administration ?
Okay, the economy won't rescue Trump. How about a war? Anyone think ol' Trumpy wouldn't start a war under false pretenses if he thought it would help him get re-elected?
Because presidents that don't get re-elected are losers. Everyone knows, and Trump knows that best of all. Trump would blow up the entire world if he thought it might help his brand.
Trump is laying an egg with suburban women who traditionally support Republican candidates, in most part because of his immoral behavior, i.e., Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen.
Trump waltz his way into the November midterms figuring that the unemployment rate and GDP growth would lead his Republican Party to victory. Nope, Trump singlehandedly led the party to humiliating losses, record losses it should be noted.
But Trump is such a narrow-minded tinhorn he still doesn't get it.
The oft-repeated statement that the president can't affect the economy is absurd on its face. Why is it that recessions and the Great Depression during the past century have all come during Republican administrations? Why is it that we had two (2) recessions under the previous Republican Administration and one under his father? The president's policies affect the economy. Tax cuts for the super rich take money out of circulation. The whole point of progressive taxation is to allow those who most need money to keep more of what they earn so that they can spend it, which, in turn, helps the rich as well as the poor. Conservatives always credit WWII with lifting us out of the Great Depression and deny that the New Deal was much of a factor. WWII was the New Deal on steroids! War is the ultimate government program. But, for some reason, conservatives act like war is NOT a government program but some feature of capitalism. During WWII, the vaunted "Freedom" that Republicans are always ranting about took a back seat to rationing, government control of the means of production and an intense propaganda campaign that depicted us as one big warring nation, determined to defeat evil under the leadership of FDR. Republicans LOVE WWII but HATE Roosevelt. That's why they're always worshipping Churchill. What fools these mortals be!
Donald Trump is devoid of substance---a vacuous cult of personality.
Of course, that was always the case. It's just more painfully obvious to anyone outside of his cult to see now. In addition, the Russia connection is wide out in the open for any rational person to see, and there won't be a James Comey swooping in at the last moment to defame Trump's opponent. All of this is dependent on the large assumption that the accidental president even completes his current term in office.
1
Trump will and cheat. He will make false accusations in his opponents. He will appeal to the basest instincts of his followers. And if that did not work, he would rig the election.
1
Unfortunately Trump has an enduring appeal that can't be eroded by bad news. He has tapped into the racist, anti -intellectual, anti-authority vein running deep in the American body politic. The only news or facts these folks believe is what Trump gives them.
1
Economists talk about “frictional unemployment” relative to the minimum unemployment level that we could expect under ordinary circumstances. We might consider “frictional stupidity” to describe the minimum number of people who would continue to support a president wholly out for himself, who displays utter disregard for the overall welfare of his country. He would be supported simply because he is tagged with the label “Republican” – and fellow members of his voting tribe blindly prop him up. After two years running this experiment, we can see that the figure hovers around 40 percent of the population. So now we have the answer. Wouldn’t it be unfair to claim that our current president has never provided us with any useful information?
If we are stuck with Trump for another two years, let’s make sure we vote him out in 2020, with a vengeance. He should not get more than 40 percent of the vote. And I still think we have it in us, between now and then, to ensure that number gets reduced, dramatically.
1
Being scared of how a cornered Trump might lash out is just what I am. There's no telling what that guy will do when he is faced with defeat. I don't take that lightly; he might start a war, anything, just to stay in power. So, yes, I'm scared.
The government shutdown is already a part of the Trump desperate lashing out.
He is counting on breaking the Democrats politically by causing pain and holding them for ransom.
So far Pelosi seems strong enough to stand up to him.
But there are some suspect spineless Democrats like Schumer always looking to duck out of a fight.
How could the economy rescue Trump when Trump is destroying the economy?
I'm convinced the shutdown is a manifestation of the collusion. Trashing NATO. Trade wars with allies. "Tearing up" TTP to strengthen China. Playing game with NK. Supporting BREXIT. Subsidizing dirty dying industries. Everywhere I look I see the nightmare impact of Donald J. Trump.
Please let it end soon.
1
I am very very sorry. This is all very nice and logical... if your perspective is that of an economist.
Trump remains popular enough in states with enough electoral votes to give him a chance of winning reelection, although he would lose the popular vote by an even wider margin.
It will have absolutely nothing to do with economics and everything to do with blood and soil racism, intolerant evangelical Christianity, male supremacy, and fear and hatred of the 'other'.
Dan Kravitz
1
Republicans will throw Trump out if they see him as a liability. Republicans are about themselves, then party and country last.
1
Krugman to Democrats: Continue with the same playbook and the world will be yours. Not sure I want to put all my eggs in that basket. For one, Krugman's track record is less than stellar.
Once again, Krugman engages in a shell game, tossing all manner of not-particularly-interesting tidbits out to distract us from noticing that he continues to do everything he can to avoid explaining how the real wage increase and real employment increase nullified his silly partisan predictions.
Krugman did overreact to Trump’s election. Like many others, he underestimated the animal spirits that would be released. Evidently there are many people out their who are invigorated by bigotry, racism, and sexism.
Plus, Krugman made his predictions before the huge tax cut to the wealthy and corporations. Of course that will stimulate the economy. And, as Krugman predicted, it’s blown up the deficit and debt. Let’s see how things look in a year or so.
In any case, nothing Trump has done looks anything more than a continuation of the Obama economy. Citizens might be surprised to know the stock market actually did better in Obama‘s last two years than in Trump’s first two.
Unlike other Presidents, with Trump it is not the economy stupid. He won because he tapped into the worst of American attitudes, and, more importantly, perpetuated the almost religious belief that global warming is a hoax. His platform was entirely nativistic. He succeeded, in large part, because millions of Americans were compelled to express their anger at the nation's election of a Black President, and did so at the polls.
I watched MLK's dream speech yesterday, as I always do, and cried, as I always do. Somehow this time the tears felt different. They were not caused by the joy of watching a nation slowly coming to its senses, but by an overwhelming sadness at how the nation had regressed. I don't know the answer. I fear, as you do, that the current chaos will become much worse before it improves.
2
"Which raises the question of what he and his party will do if defeat is staring them in the face." Well that is truly a terrifying question because what Republicans usually do in that situation is go to war and cut taxes even more. Even more terrifying is a cornered Trump lashing out with his finger on the nuclear option. We are not in a good place in this country right now. Our government is non-functional and in chaos. Will we even make it to 2020 as a republic with our current trejectory?
The hard thing would be to not have been paying attention. Is very scary to have been paying attention. A cornered Trump will create a big distraction. And blame Democrats for whatever he makes up.
A military attack on Mexico to stop the "rapists and drug dealers" who produced a "national security emergency"? Close the US to imports all together because "America is first"? Leave NATO and the declare war to one of its countries with the support of Russia? Maybe worse but I cannot think about it.
The "B" movie grade acting skills of Ronald Reagan certainly made his "morning in America" cheery optimism appear more sincere or palatable than Trump's dreary 30 foot concrete wall of "mourning in America" pessimism, threats and taunts delivered by a pathologically insecure and selfish man-child. There is absolutely nothing to find admirable in either Donald Trump's character or behavior but his taking credit for others' accomplishments is particularly repugnant. He was handed a veritable gift of a growing economy from the Obama administration that would have continued to expand without the totally unnecessary Trump tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
Let's hope America can recover from Trump's and congressional Republican's reign of terror and corruption and be made great once again.
1
Yes, a slump may be coming...and you didn't even mention the legal trouble that Trump's incompetence, arrogance and corruption is causing, nor the obstruction of justice so well announced already. Trump does not deserve to be president. But, if this demagogue were to be re-elected, we would surely deserve him (Ugh!).
Trump is in a deep hole of his own making.
His government shutdown is a cruel and ineffective extortion and will not get him his Wall that will never be built. It will harm the economy and lead to needless suffering to nearly a million dispirited government workers.
It will wake up some Americans to the recognition of how incompetent and misguided and unthoughtful he is.
It will lower also his already dismal poll numbers and hopefully make possible his political demise either through impeachment, resignation, or electoral failure. The day he leaves office will be a moment of relief and even jubilation as the national nightmare of his horrific administration will end. America will rejoice more than even can be imagined right now!
1
For Republicans (and their lodge brethren, the lords of commerce and industry on the extreme Right) the economy does not and has never mattered. It's always been about tax cuts for the wealthy. Nothing more.
The overall economic performance of America--GDP and unemployment and interest rates--always took a back seat to their culture dart board. They were always excellent at cherry-picking this or that fact to square with something out of a right-wing think tank to give it some semblance of credence and validation to dupe the gullible.
Ronald Reagan came along at the right time. He danced through the raindrops (tax increases, inflation, Iran-Contra, e.g.) and, with his Hollywood sunny smile, managed to "aw shucks" his way through any hair-pin turn, righting the wheel at just the right moment. To prevent white workers from too closely questioning the high interest rates or the lagging housing industry, he played the race card (affirmative action in hiring and education, e.g.) to divert attention from a mostly fortunate turn of events over which he had no control.
But Donald Trump is in a mess all of his own making. He inherited an economy that was growing out of a recession (2008) that skyrocketed to high unemployment levels, then eased, then dropped under his nemesis, Barack Obama. Trump has been riding that wave but it's ebbing now and he has nothing but a ballooning deficit to show for his Tax Cuts and Jobs Act heist.
He never had anything. He has no place to hide.
The Pats aren’t playing too hot, either, but they’re poised to win another.
Sometimes it’s merely whom one’s opponents are.
Democrats need a great candidate. Sorry, KH and EW.
If Trump wins re-election, it will be because of identity politics. He will be able to convince white, non-college educated voters in places like PA, Mi and WI that they belong with him instead of the democrats.
Sadly, many of the current democratic activist's and pundits play right into their hands by so blatantly disparaging and stereotyping white men.
Anyone who thinks this election is going to be a cakewalk for democrats is delusional. It's not the economy, it's identity this time around.
Why there aren't vast protests against the actual buying power of minimum wage is beyond me.
Dems need to jump on that issue hard. The typical trickle down rhetoric from Repubs once again has proven phony as the fat increases to corporations go back to stockholders. SAD!!
1
Trump personifies Orwell's truth expressed in "1984": Ignorance is strength. Anyone who follows him like a marshlight also makes that aphorism true.
1
It appears to me that we will be entering recession territory just in time for the 2020 election. Interest rates are up, housing starts are down and auto sales are stagnating. We have a trade war with China which just posted it’s slowest growth in a decade and Europe is staggering under Brexit and immigration. The average American consumer is tapped out and the government shutdown is delivering 0.1% loss per week according to statisticians. The stock market is bipolar. We are entering the perfect storm for an economic Armageddon.
The Donald (clueless) and his Republican enablers are whistling past the graveyard in total denial. Meanwhile, the majority of the country are living paycheck to paycheck and pawning things to eke by.
This is not a recipe for a robust economy.
I predict that an already unpopular President facing a meltdown similar to 2008 as the election approaches will either bail out as he routinely does with business failures or precipitate a crisis to shift the blame as he is doing with the government shutdown.
Either way, America and especially the bottom half of the economic population will pay the price.
We are the richest country in the history of the world. We could take care of our population, restore the crumbling infrastructure and return to leadership of the free world if we had the will as we did in the 60’s when we landed men on the moon.
Unfortunately, we have sold our heritage to the highest bidders.
949
@Doctor No. I do wish people would stop repeating that cliche about the US being the richest country in the history of the world. That was almost certainly Imperial Rome. And, really, how do you think we compare to the peak Victorian era of the British Empire that spanned the globe?
29
@Doctor No
i think, Doctor No, that you buried your lead .
the prediction of the future, as much as i may agree with it, is not solid .
your contrast, however, of the large majority of americans who will pay the price of our miserable political and economic policies, with the considerable wealth and economic vitality of america, needs to be stated and emphasized upfront and loudly .
one can only pray that those running for office make that case again and again .
america did not become economically strong by accident or luck or simply because god willed it .
we became what we have become because we had the political will to demand it .
the only thing we have to fear are the politicians who don't understand that and don't channel that into the election .
34
@Doctor No The "richest country in the world"? Maybe. But we're the only country on the rich list where the top 0.1% has half the money. So the average American doesn't live as well as the average German. But it's nice to know that our rich have the best houses and yachts.
64
Before he was President, Ronald Reagan was Governor of California for eight years.
He had much more experience than DJT -- actually relevant experience.
Reagan's so-called 'kitchen cabinet' was full of competent, trusted and trustworthy friends. Trump's equivalent innermost advisory circle is full of deeply compromised characters who are not exhibiting political acumen, integrity or the ability to anticipate developments.
Giuliani is speaking for Trump, and shredding whatever tatters are left of his own reputation, in the process.
Trump is like no one who ever previously took the oath of office. And, yes, that makes him highly dangerous -- and our nation, as well as its leading lights, woefully unprepared...
979
@Maria Ashot
Whoa, I don’t know what history books you’ve been reading, but Reagan’s “kitchen cabinet”—Walter Annenberg, William French Smith, Joseph Coors, et al—could only be construed as “competent” and “trustworthy” if you believed in wholesale deregulation, the hollowing-out of the University of California, the throwing out of the baby with the bath water as regards “welfare reform” and the generation of reactionary foreign and domestic policy for which we are still paying a price. To say that by comparison Reagan and his cronies were more competent than the current administration is like saying Mussolini was the nicest dictator of World War II.
96
@Maria Ashot
You may not remember but the indictments (and convictions) of Reagan's picks rained down like a hurricane, especially in the environmentally related offices. His administration was very corrupt, although of course no where near as corrupt as Trump's.
66
@Maria Ashot
You may not remember but the indictments (and convictions) of Reagan's picks rained down like a hurricane, especially in the environmentally related offices. His administration was very corrupt, although of course no where near as corrupt as Trump's.
As CA governor, he also signed into law a progressive abortion statute, and before he was governor, he was a Democratic union president, so yes, he had a LOT more relevant experience, which unfortunately he jettisoned much of to become a Republican right wing president.
35
Trump, the TV actor, will be protected and financed by those making extraordinary gains during his regime. The self-aggrandizing Davos crowd, nearly all middle class investors and, certainly, multinational corporations and banks will back him. The extreme Right, religious or otherwise, are just media interesting foils that help take normal, indebted people's eyes off of the ball.
He won't shuffle-off to Buffalo any time soon.
I never thought Trump could win in the first place, but between foreign interference, the media egging him on, and the electoral college, there’s he is. With the newly corrupted Supreme Court, a media ever more dependent on him for their livelihood, an official denial of foreign interference, and a public willing to accept that the popular vote doesn’t matter, there is no convincing reason to think he won’t get re-elected. I’m praying that he won’t, but I’ve had very mixed results with that.
2
Krugman's economic history is 100% accurate. I was there and in business at the time. Reagan happened to be standing in the right place at the right time when the Fed finished squeezing inflation out of the economy. And his description of the current situation is as far as one can tell fairly accurate. No recession looming but no boom either. And Trump is extraordinarily unpopular. Even most diehard Republicans I know either think he's a disaster or don't want to talk about him.
6
@John Wasn't it more like when OPEC finished squeezing the world economy? Volcker's foot on the public's throat just exacerbated oil price hikes' effects and was extremely useful in busting labour, which was its real intent. Never let a crisis go to waste, so they say.
@Steve Bruns
Certainly the oil price hikes of the 70's were an important fact in sparking the great inflation, but so was US spending on the Vietnam war, and the fiscal and monetary policies adopted to combat slowdowns caused by the oil price hikes. By the mid 70's when Carter appointed Volcker inflation was starting to run out of control principally because of these loose monetary/fiscal policies designed to combat the slowdowns induced by the price hikes and the carryover from Vietnam. This continued into Reagan's presidency exacerbated by his own fiscal policies. Volcker's didn't have his foot on the public's throat. He just cranked up interest rates which is the classic method of cutting inflation. What was the alternative? Would you like to tell us?
None of this had anything with busting labor even if Reagan was anti labor. You're confusing different issues; and cause and effect in the case of the oil price hikes.
1
@Steve Bruns
Here's a brief but reasonably accurate account of what happened in the 70's before Carter appointed Volcker in 1979.
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/1970s-great-inflation.asp
None of it had much to do with Reagan's anti labor stance and it was the reaction to the oil price hikes along with other issues that caused the great inflation.
1
Forget the about the economy---what the public wants now is morning in America, not what Trump brings us on a hourly basis: Katrina in America.
3
@Amanda Jones
I agree. I'm surprised by columnists' neglect of Trump's appeal to the emotions, and who forget that Reagan's luminous legacy is based upon his persona, not his policies. His personal warmth cheered up a despondent nation. Even Obama admired him. The best thing that could happen for democrats would be a run against Mike Pence. Only the most rabid fundamentalist could gear up for that guy. Impeach. I think this, not only as a citizen who finds Trump’s malfeasances transgressive, but selfishly, as a thoroughly partisan liberal: Pence’s effect on the next election would be great for my side.
If DJT wins another term I can assure readers that it won't be because of the economy but more likely because the free press, out of their mortal fear of being called biased, will come down with a such a severe case of 'bothsidesism', that the 'average voter' will be blinded to the obvious and see both candidates as equally good candidates for the highest office..
1192
@OBA, I can envision that possibility due to divisive “tribalism” on the left, combined with ideological purism of the type that caused Bernie supporters to skip voting in the general election. Those forces need to be acknowledged and addressed, if possible, by Democratic leaders.
53
@Just Curious
A sizable number of Bernie supporters did far worse than skip the general election. They voted for Trump in sufficient numbers to throw PA, Wis and Mich to Trump, giving him the White House.
Yes, the Democratic leaders need to address the issue of having non-Democrats take advantage of Democratic party structure and throw elections to Republicans.
65
@OBA
The multi-media has a lot to answer for in their treatment of the presidential candidates in the 2016 election. Money spoke. Integrity disappeared. Wake up, folks, having a democracy is a serious business. Freedom shouldn't mean freedom for our press to ignore, lie, and manipulate a public generally seriously uninformed.2020 decisions must count on honesty if we are to have a livable country
36
Many think the economy will do just fine, 3% GDP, consumer confidence at 17 year high, unemployment at 50 year low and minority and veteran unemployment at historical lows. I think Krugman should stick to economics and leave election predictions to those who understand it.
@Frank Leibold, and yet the vast population in America is barely getting by, wages are stagnant, health care if even available is way too expensive, and many people are big workers with zero benefits. Most people feel and are worse off in this so called great economy. It’s the 1% that benefits, but it’s the rest of us that actually drive the economy and without strong wages and benefits we are in the tank. Do some Econ 101 research.
1
@T
I have, that's where the numbers come from. I disagree the "vast population" - where did you get that from? Your opinion? Real wages in the aggregate have grown for the first time in almost a decade.
Let's take a look at exactly what this administration has accomplished in the last 2+ years:
1. A corporate and high end tax theft giveaway
2. A trade war
3. Deregulation for some, while more hurdles for others
The employment rate may be at historic lows, but there have not been any real catching up of wages, so people are working more than one job for less money, benefits and security.
The new crushing republican taxes (tariffs) have decimated whole sectors (especially farmers) whereas many businesses are severely over leveraged to just stay afloat. - I would submit part of the plan by many of this administration's backers to swoop in and buy things up for pennies on the dollar.
There are many businesses that are now free to pollute, trample on laws/human rights, and especially undermine health care. (the MAIN costs for many a family) Some of the executives/stock holders may be winning, but so many workers are feeling the brunt.
So, the bottom line is that there has been very little done economically for the vast majority of Americans, and in fact so much has been done to hurt millions upon millions.
The base is finally starting to peel off.
1086
@Funkyirishman. I was with you til that last sentence. A large portion of people in middle America show time and time again that they will vote against their own best self-interest.
Look at the farmers that are about to lose their entire livelihood, and they still strongly support Trump. Look at the people who only get healthcare because of the ACA, but if Trump wants to abolish “Obamacare”, they’re all for it.
254
@Jordan
I would agree with you, but it is clear that the base is peeling off here and there, because there was a LOT of movement in deep red districts (and even some major wins) in the midterms.
We shall see going forward, but the disenfranchisement on the red team grows stronger by the day.
71
@FunkyIrishman, I suspect that the midterm successes for the Democrats came more from getting out the vote, specifically voters who sat out 2016, rather than from peeling off Trump voters.
49
It must be a surprise to a lot of people that the so called "business man President" lacks the fundamentals of business. He has no idea of Macro Economics, how to change the demand curve or how to run a business in a competitive environment. Criticizing any one and everyone is his exclusive skill set.
1570
@R A
He does, however, understand one useful business strategy, which is to privatize the profits and socialize the risks.
Consider the many times he's taken his businesses bankrupt. All the creditors he stiffed were able to take tax deductions for Trump's failure to pay his debts. Meaning, we taxpayers paid the bills. Meanwhile, he's safely away with pre-bankruptcy revenues and profits.
Yes, he doesn't understand business fundamentals. But he understands graft and corruption. It concerns me greatly that the latter skill seems increasingly better rewarded than the former.
427
Trump "graduated" from Wharton - and I use the term loosely - and doesn't even understand the most basic fundamentals of economics, contract law, public policy, accounting. history, ethics, etc etc 101.
163
@qiaohan ~
Here is some clarification about that "Wharton
degree" trump brags about.
"Trump did not go to Wharton's prestigious MBA program. Rather, he received an undergraduate degree offered by Wharton to University of Pennsylvania students. And Trump didn't attend Wharton for a full four years. Instead, he transferred there after spending his first two undergraduate years at Fordham, the Jesuit university in the Bronx."
https://www.salon.com/2011/05/03/donald_trump_wharton/
150
You're over thinking it Paul.....trump want get reelected cause he'll be impeached well before election day.
1
I'd like to imagine the opposite of the usual. Trump is a narcissistic and bully. We've already seen what he does when facing defeat (Nov. 6, 2018)--he shuts down the government. And he backs off when power pushes back. I dare *45 to say something against Pelosi now. And if he does he's (how to say politely?) much less of a stable genius than he claims.
2
All I feel now is a profound sadness about what has happened to our country. Nothing that Putin's Fool can do in the White House, no government shutdown, no stupid tweet about "hamberders," no zany performance wall art, nothing can make me laugh anymore. In the words of Paul Simon: "Hello, darkness, my old friend; I've come to talk to you again. . ."
3
If Trump loses the 2020 election, he will refuse to vacate the White House on January 20, 2021, claiming, as he did in 2016 without proof, that his loss was due to the votes of illegal aliens. Any bets on this, and whether Fox News and congressional Republicans will back him up?
3
He will start another war.
2
@BnB I fear that is a distinct possibility. He has backed himself into a corner and out of desperation is capable of doing so.
so the headline for this article says...
“Sorry, Donald, no morning in America for you.”
but hey...I’m thinking we’ve been mourning in America ever since the day the 2016 election results were announced
4
Dr Krugman is suffering from selective amnesia. He forgets that Ronald Reagan won a 49 state electoral victory over a totally hapless Walter Mondale in 1984
2
@sharon5101
Paragraph 2 - sentence 1
"On the other hand, that president was Ronald Reagan, who went on to win re-election in a landslide."
@sharon5101 Or maybe that's irrelevant to this article.
Ive wondered about this for awhile, "Most of Reagan’s political success reflected not fundamental economic achievement but good luck with the timing of the business cycle." What about Clinton's economy? Isn't it true he inherited a business cycle on the rise from Geaorge H. W.? The repubs cast him out for raising taxes. That, didn't hurt the economy in hind sight. And American industry was on the mend, giving him a similar momentum. Then came Clinton and globalization.....
Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton in 2016 - it was our dysfunctional Electoral College system that gave him the White House. Since then, he's demonstrated that he's a fraudulent, ignorant, amoral narcissist, with an uncanny knack for doing exactly the wrong thing, every time.
If Republicans think he'll do better in 2020, then by all means, please do nominate him.
2
Here's a very low benchmark:
Tons of agita and slow violence but a body count beggared by Bush's and exceeded even by Obama's and Bush père's.
Won't make it on to a bumper sticker, but . . .
Unfortunately the American economy is doomed due to the massive debt buildup since Bushes massive mistake on entering Iraq. That decision was one of the worst in the last 50 years and possibly in American history.
Due to that decision we suffer with massive debt and are still bogged down in the Middle East. Its not all Trumps fault we have 122 trillion in unfunded liabilities, 27 trillion and 40 trillion in Social security and medicare debt. Throw on the 22 trillion in public debt we have a real mess.
Trumps tax plan will be looked back as a blow off top orchestrated with the help of Goldman ideology from Cohn. Unless this issue is tackled the next crisis will dwarf 2008. Its time to get real on this issue but NOONE in Washington will address this. Simpson and Bowles tried but failed during Obama years. So we await what we all know is coming.
The author of this piece debases the art of the insult. Tragic, immature, not very funny and clueless. Times should replace P. K. with a more intuitive comedian.
2
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Carlin
The GOP propaganda machine is still operating at peak efficiency which can still incite people into fearful actions and keep the Trump nightmare going though the next election. (and possibly global declaration of bankruptcy.)
5
The GOP uses a double bladed sword in elections. On one side is the Donald's popularity. He clearly works hard to coddle his narrow base. But the GOP has another powerful weapon not mentioned in this column. That weapon is demonizing their opponents. The hate they whipped up for Hillary Clinton was unmatched. I've never heard regular chants like 'lock her up' in any other election. The GOP leveraging propaganda outlets and 24hour talk radio sow the seeds of hate.
7
Creating an international crisis and waging another war in Asia is a favorite tool in Washington for priming the pump and distracting attention from domestic failings.
2
Making predictions is hard especially about the future.
@lester ostroy
Yogi Berra was right, "the future isn't what is used to be."
People differ on their views of immigration. But even if you were to agree with Trump on that issue, he has been so incompetent that Republicans should view him as a liability.
Tillerson, Sessions and Mattis all agreed with Trump on many issues, but Trump essentially fired them all, after simply ignoring their advice. He seems to believe he is an expert on every subject, so there is no need to consult before tweeting his latest impulse, which is often later walked back as his staff finds that this impulse was illegal or just couldn't be done.
In economics, Trump is particularly bad. Not only does he not understand basic economics, but he doesn't know that he doesn't know. He has surrounded himself with sycophants which try to make sense of campaign slogans, which are a poor substitute for well thought-our policy.
Thus Trump said that trade wars are easy to win, and imposed preemptive tariffs on China. But the argument of most economists that tariffs hurt both sides seems unassailable. In fact, much of the recent turmoil in the stock market can be attributed to uncertainty among American companies regarding how tariffs will cut into profits by diminishing trade with China.
Trump's incompetence goes beyond partisan politics. Perhaps Republicans have been reluctant to make proposals to open the government because they want to give him rope to hang himself.
Democrats should be seeking the 20 or so Republican votes needed to convict in the Senate.
2
Who wrote this? "Reagan tax cuts and defense buildup in the 1980s were the biggest "Keynesian" stimuli to aggregate demand our government ever delivered in peacetime. They helped generate recovery from the double-digit unemployment of 1982."
Answer: Nobel prize winner and unabashed liberal Joseph E. Stiglitz, ranked #4 most influential economist by IDEAS. (Krugman is ranked #31.)
1
Just in time for Christmas, Paul Krugman (the grinch) announced that the stock market had finally seen through Donald Trump.
On Dec. 24, the grinch wrote that after the 2016 election investors first panicked but very quickly they shrugged off their fears. "In other words, investors convinced themselves that they had a deal: Trump might sound off, but he wouldn’t really get to make policy. And, hey, taxes on corporations and the wealthy would go down."
He added "But now, just in time for Christmas, people are realizing that there was no such deal .... Put an unstable, ignorant, belligerent man in the Oval Office, and he will eventually do crazy things."
Guess what, little more than one week later, the market began a recovery that wiped out all those losses.
After his twin fiascos in Nov. 2016 and Dec. 2018, maybe Krugman should stay out of the soothsaying business.
Not saying he won't be right ... if he is prepared to wait long enough. The only safe prediction about the market is "it will fluctuate."
2
There may not be a morning in America for Trump, but there is mourning in America, for what Trump has done to us and for what his supporters have enabled him to do.
2
@kingfish: The closest thing to infrastructure Trump is zero'ed in on, is his "big, beautiful wall."
Discussing Reagan in the context of legitimate economics is always tenuous. Discussing legitimate economics in the context of Trump though is outrageous. The best thing any economist can say about Trump's tenure is the President doesn't know enough about economics to do more damage. The bar is so surprisingly low announcing Trump's cognitive degeneracy would likely boost stock markets.
I'm being polite here.
In that sense at least, Trump and Reagan have something in common. The economy performs better when the President is suffering mental decay. For Reagan, the effect was coincidental. For Trump, the relationship is causal.
Just like trump has ran most all of his businesses into the ground or bankruptcies he will do similar damage to the American economy. Trade wars, tariffs, fractured alliances, chaotic markets, government shutdowns for a vanity project (wall), attacks on the truth, ignoring the rule of law, attacks on individual freedom, (Roe v. Wade), attacks on a free press, are all hallmarks of the bizarre trump agenda and administration....Not to mention the constant investigations, indictments, guilty pleas and sentences. And we don't even know the half of that yet....No matter how you cut it this cannot stand!
2
Unpopular? Actually his ratings are far beyond Macron s.
Someone must be controlling Trump. He just can't be as bad as he is.
Check the power grid for modulations below 20 cycles per second, specifically, people yelling with a carrier removed. Think of it as a low frequency AM radio signal.
Trump must be a robot. Start continuous monitoring of the full spectrum.
Every Democratic presidential administration since World War II has had a stronger economy than Republican presidents have - according to economists who base success on data rather than racist Wall mnemonics. And according to a Jere Glover column in Forbes in 2016, Donald Trump agreed:
"'Donald was absolutely right when he told Wolf Blitzer in 2004: “I’ve been around for a long time and it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans.'
That’s right. Trump said out loud the same thing that Hillary Clinton has asserted—and top academics and journalists have confirmed. The same thing I’ve been compiling cold, hard government data on since 1980: By crucial metrics like GDP, job creation, business investment and avoiding recessions, the economy does a lot better with Democrats in the White House than with Republicans. Just one eye-opening example: Nine of the last 10 recessions have been under Republicans."
That's where the real shocker comes in for the rest of us: in a backwards kind of way, Trump is actually living up to his word.
311
@common sense advocate After all, even a broken clock is right twice a day!
9
@common sense advocate True, it is because the Democrats did the clean up at the expense of their constituents too. How can we be sure they will not do it again? They are as militaristic as the Republicans. The impoverishment of the working people is the price to pay.
@R. Littlejohn
What the Democrats clean up is the Republicans' economic and other messes. And yes, their militarism is a blot on their record.
8
Trump is too self centered to be in charge of our country.
Anyone who thinks it is okay to leave 800,000 federal employees stranded without a paycheck (while attempting to coerce a result he can't otherwise obtain democratically) and considers the debt crisis to he created to be okay because “Yeah, but I won’t be here,” is too irresponsible for a leadership position.
6
The question is, can he win in 2020 with only the support of his base. His overall approval is at about 40%, and based on how that has wiggled with what he has done, it's not going to go much lower. Is that enough? Will he be able to stir up crowds in 2 years?
1
I think of the economy as an organic ecosystem, or a physiology (I am a physician). In those instances there is a tendency to regress to a mean, or a "steady state" that is flexible regarding stresses. In times of stress, a medicine can be used to help the body heal, and in economies time to readjust to the new environment. I am not sure that economies grow properly with all kinds of external stimuli, nor is growth per se the measure of a good economy as a benefit for the average guy. Bigger economy gives nations more power, but not necessarily more happiness. The problem with our economy is that the lower half of income has not shared in the growth, also the products that are available, TV's, NFL, Iphones distract them from that fact. Stimulating the economy during growth and adding to deficit is like giving athletes steroids, not good for them. Or making plants grow all night under grow lights. In any event, the economy should be tended when sick and enjoy less external stimuli when well.
8
For the last six years of Obama's presidency, when the Republicans controlled Congress, they refused to cooperate with him at all. On the budget, this created the "sequester." As a consequence, restricted government spending was a serious drag on the economy for those six years. After der fuhrer was elected, they opened up the floodgates--not only by lowering taxes, but by also increasing spending. This huge combination fiscal boost fully explains the "booming" economy. More significantly, it has not trickled down--average real wages are up less than 1%; while the deficit, which was shrinking under Obama, is now rapidly increasing.
18
If you are correct then the 2020 election is the Democrats to lose.
If the Democrats do lose the presidency, it will instructive to see how they managed to do it.
Not that any lessons learned would stop them from doing the same again in 2024.
1
How can the Democrats lose another election to perhaps the worse sitting President in history? It is simple. They can select an a candidate that is even worse than the Donald, just like they did last time. Conventional wisdom told anyone listening that Hillary was generally disliked and her moving left made her candidacy less popular. So as the Dems select a minority woman (because we haven’t had one) who is a radical, social-democrat (because that’s the current feverish buzz in the party’s vocal base) they will again miss the opportunity to connect with the center of America, those who are not that jazzed about ideologies but just want pragmatist who can solve the real problems in the lives they face, and a centralist that can succeed in winning the election!
2
@Paul
Well said, completely agree.
What we are now seeing is the classic misdirection, make it big, make it loud. What is the reason for the misdirection, it is to take focus and energy away from a more important issue to the POTUS, the investigation. If it lasts two months, then the restrictions caused by the shutdown will in itself become an obstacle to doing the investigation.
Trump is using the polarized position of politically astute people to chase after their own tails.
A damaged economy that will require being repaired takes resources and energy away from the investigation and any potential prosecution.
5
There were so many factors that led to the Reagan landslide. Mostly that huge parts of the US turned hard right while the Democrats fielded a Liberal Candidate. The Democratic Party was torn between moderates like the unpopular Carter and the progressive but massively flawed Kennedy.
Also - Reagan was able to project a clear simple message (facts don't matter) on the economy, foreign policy, social issues that was mocked by elites (but was not lost on Clinton and Obama).
It will come down to who the Democrats select, and how they get branded in the popular mind. Will they be Clinton and Obama or Dukakis and Mondale and Gore and Kerry.
Kerry is the scenario that is most likely - he got swift Boated while being nominated by a sitting president.
3
@Tom
Weird "facts" my friend. You keep conflating 1980 and 1984. PK is talking about 1984, not 1980. So the split between Carter and Kennedy doesn't matter.
Kerry ran against the sitting President, George Walker Bush. And the point is 1984, not 2004.
4
To read some of the Trumpster comments herein you'd think nothing was going upward (in a positive way) until Trump came in and started to ...
dismantle institutions/programs that serve us,
erode environmental protections in place to save our future as well as our present,
officially work to divide us as a People,
lower our moral standing as a compassionate, honest, caring, and rational modern Nation,
sour our friends and exult our adversaries.
make the already rich much richer and give crumbs/allusions to the struggling,
reduce government revenue to diminish sustainability of social programs and enactment of vital infrastructure improvements,
etc..
No, to read some of the Trumpster comments herein you'd think all graphs in Obama era were negatively downward pointing and did not start positively upward trends until Trump.
That Obama taking us out of one the worst recessions ever never happened. That Trump saved the day.
That vindictively deciding the imperfection of anything "Obama" (e,g. "Obamacare") are worse than their positive effects.
That constructing your own facts and truths is an art form we should perfect; that "falsehoods" are things that don't serve you regardless of their basis is a good thing.
Some commenters herein seem to think a few more shekels in the pocket defines the greatness and worth of a Nation.
I suspect creating an autobahn defined the greatness of a Nation not so long ago.
Trump/GOP poses existential dangers - get woke!
29
This column is too optimistic. Republicans -- not just the so-called "base" -- give Trump approval ratings that suggest three out of every four members of the GOP support Trump. They will vote in 2020, and probably in much higher numbers than the Democrats.
We will know when Trump is in real trouble if or when the Republican-controlled Senate peels away from this awful regime and begins actively combating Trump's bizarre and craven Administration. That hasn't happened and, in fact, save for a handful of GOP Senators facing re-election in 2020, the majority have thrown in the towel of standing as a check and balance to this Administration. Under Mitch McConnell, who is really running the country, the Senate won't consider any legislation unless it is pre-approved by Trump himself. That includes, lest we forget, any serious, bi-partisan efforts to end the current Trump-imposed government shutdown.
So what's the Senate for, you ask? In the current situation, our nation is being led by a gaggle of political and moral reprobates, who have put Party squarely above country.
28
I remember that during the Clinton presidency that I would read and hear how well the economy was doing. There clearly was a disconnect between how almost everyone I knew was doing and how we were supposed to be doing. Have wanted to write that for the longest of times. For whatever reason never did. So now I have.
3
This of course didn't include the assault on welfare where the Clinton administration thought people seriously up against it were having it too good.
1
Supply side economics is an abomination against logic, facts and reality. Supply never precedes demand. Without demand supply is just garbage in a land fill.
Look around the world, the nations with the lowest tax rates on the rich and the lowest government spending have the greatest poverty. The States in America, mostly Republican controlled, with the lowest tax rates and lowest rates of investment have the lowest median wages.
Tax cuts create sugar highs, government investments, which we have not made since the 1950's, create long term economic growth and middle class prosperity.
36
I enjoyed this piece. It puts some thought behind the fact that Trump's popularity is the same as Reagan's at the same point in his presidency (or whatever we call this). But I would argue that the only thing that can save Trump, is Americans. His popularity is holding firm at a polling average of 40%. And when I see Dems and the media agonize over "who can beat Trump", I find myself thinking: well, it should be able to be just about anyone. Or a family pet even. But that's not the casee. People are incredibly worried that unless they pick the "right candidate" Trump could win. Now, that's just depressing. Sometimes I think we deserve him.
28
All sorts of mainstream comentators keep talking about Trump's contribution to a strong economy. But it is being achieved at the cost of borrowing $1 Trillion! Trump often says he "loves debt" too true and he also has a history of walking away from debts and leaving others to hold the bag. How long will it take America to retire the debt Trump created after he walks away from the party?
49
And one would think the D party would be talking about that everyday. They don't. They sit in silence while the GOP frames every argument.
24
Be careful Dr,Krugman, Trump can win again because he doesn’t care,
The protect voters are not just voting for Trump but, against the MSM, government, lobbyists,possibly Democrats, no so much the Democrats, unless you put another tainted candidate in the tickets then you put that on the against side.
5
Your record of forecasting the "Trump effect" on the economy started out badly when you forecast economic disaster after Trump's election. It looks like you have learned nothing in the last two years. Hopefully the Democrats will nominate a Warren, Harris, Booker, or Sanders and give Trump a landslide victory. They may choose Biden and lose my a lesser margin.
@lgh
I guess adding another trillion + dollar deficit on a "Conservative" watch is ok? The disaster is when you have to answer your children and grandchildren's question about why they have to pay for the tax cuts to the uber wealthy tomorrow that have given to these people today. And when the stimulus effect of the tax cut is over which way do you think the market will go? Maybe take a look at recent activity for a clue.
8
@lgh The Dems would be stupid to nominate anyone who will even have the appearance of far-leftism. The Dems need to win back the working class, which in 2016 fell for Trump's bravado, lies, and jingoistic bromides. The Dems need someone like Biden (though he himself may be too old)--someone with working-class chops and mainstream appeal who can speak toughly about Trump's corruption, amorality, and chronic lying, which has now yielded 8,000 demonstrable lies.
I don't know about the rest of the country, but here in CT, even trump supporters are aware that the tax cuts were a big pile of ... They are making plans for the larger tax rebate they will be getting this year that do not involve spending for fun, but are more along the lines of preparing for bad times.
13
President Trump wasn't willing to say that he would honor an adverse election result when he was a mere candidate. Intoxicated by power and self-delusional grandeur fueled by a perpetual insulation in which only Fox states truth and only his supporters are real Americans, what are the odds he would even accept a negative electoral verdict?
Why not just declare it a fraud due to all the fake-Americans voting and declare a state of emergency. Who would stop him? He's packed the courts already, and that will continue unabated. And even if the judges say no, why does the President, let alone a President Trump, have to respect the courts? The President has a duty to interpret the constitution to, and I think we know how this President will read it: it says that Trump is right and must rule (how wise of the framers!). Would the Republican party stand up? There is no Republican party--there is the Trump party.
I want to say none of this could ever happen here. But it seems like every several months I find myself realizing that things I thought could never happen here are not just happening, they are the new normal.
38
Coming off the Gold Standard under the Nixon Administration, the Carter years suffered the highest interest rates in US history, it was persistent. There was a short lived dip in 1979, but it continued into the ‘80’s under Reagan who put policies in place to improve the economy, particular accelerating depreciation amortization which encouraged capital spending. Interest rates slowly normalized, the rest is history
Unemployment rates under Obama were persistently higher than normal and GDP growth was feeble, even being declared the “new normal” by this Author/Economist.
That all changed very rapidly by Trump economic policies. And Krugman will continue to resist and complain
1
@hawk
This is simply false.
Please look at the actual numbers
https://www.thebalance.com/unemployment-rate-by-year-3305506
Obama took office in 2008 as the Great Recession was exploding. Unemployment peaked at 9.9 percent in 2009 -- and then plummeted every year for SEVEN consecutive years. He left office with a unemployment rate of 4.7 percent.
In the two years that Trump has been in office, unemployment has fallen to 3.9 percent. That's excellent -- but it's actually a LOWER rate of decline than what occurred in last seven years of Obama's administration.
Which is not to say that presidents determine the economy. Just that your interpretation of the numbers bears no relation to reality.
37
@hawk
Dear Hawk,
Yours may be the most mindless analysis I've ever read. President Obama came into office with an economy on the verge of depression caused by the GOP's mythic belief in trickle down economics.
Jobs were being jettisoned at the rate of 800,000 per month. The auto industry was on the verge of utter collapse. Huge banks were going under. The annual deficit was $1.4 Trillion. President Obama's counter-intuitive and courageous actions weren't perfect but saved the country.
He handed off a sterling economy to his successor, one that produced more jobs in Obama's final 22 months than were produced in Trump's first 22 months. The deficit was down to about $450 Billion.
Now, we're back to a $1 Trillion deficit going forward -- with nowhere near the growth promised: step one in the next GOP trickle down fiasco.
C'mon, man.
29
@hawk
I am sorry but Obama unemployment rates? Those were 2008 Great Recession unemployment rates caused by WHO????
1
Trump is captured by his gov't shutdown. It seems he cannot figure out a face saving way to exit. So it goes on and on. Apparently Mitch McConnell is finally going to make a reappearance to propose some sort of compromise tied to disaster relief. This falls into the same category of recent GOP efforts to tie disaster relief to GOP favored budget cuts. These repeated gov't shutdowns are getting bunched closer and closer together. They obviously are damaging to the public and produce more political partisanship. This recent cynical effort by Trump to rev up his base fall into the same category.
11
I think many of us would agree with Amy Klobuchar that:
"I think it matters when someone makes promises and then time goes on and your life hasn’t changed. So I do think it matters. And when you add disruptions in, and chaos, that makes things hard for you. So I think those things matter. But I think what you’re getting at, which is really values, and it is kind of the argument that I feel in rural—and I think helped me to get support—is that you really have to go to the core of what kind of person you want to have in the White House, that your kids watch on TV when they’re learning their civics lesson and the Pledge of Allegiance in first and second grade."
Looking at the phone book some of us just found out we are still living in rural America... . It's draining all these years latter not to mention dishonest. My opinion is our healthcare system is in crisis.
4
How fast political directives can change in today's world. Are their enough cracks in the ceiling tiles to signal decay and debauchery which finally spells the end of white protestant rule in this country? The variety of presidential hopefuls, could offer choices not seen in years, which might shift the country into a decidedly progressive gear, faster than most think it will. So far the government administration seems to fester problems that could haunt future generations at an increasing rate. Failure to educate and assimilate immigrants will layer on more gun violence and gang affiliation which is unacceptable. Trump's wall is another excuse to avoid looking at helping immigrants assimilate. Captain cutback has accomplished nothing.
6
So long as the jobs reports are positive, Trump is a winner in the eyes of many. There is also a world of difference between the Regan era and 2020. Comparing the 2 without acknowledging the vast differences in the technical, social, and economics environments they governed in makes any analysis worthless. 2016 has proven to us all the reliability of polls! The tax cut put US companies on an equal competing footing as that of foreign companies. You also selectively ignore the impact of the BEAT Tax which prevents a large multinational firm operating in the United States from shifting profits abroad via related-party payments. These payments now may be subject to a new minimum tax. Essentially, you cannot shift profits abroad under the guise of a management fee payment to a foreign subsidiary.
3
@George I wish I shared your optimism that companies wouldn't immediately reorganize and funnel money accordingly to avoid paying whatever taxes are imposed. The tax "cut" was simply a big tax increase imposed squarely on the most convenient people – those currently too young to vote, and the unborn – who will be stuck with attempting to repay it. They won't even have the benefit of modest infrastructure spending to actually grow the economic base they will inherit. Taxation without representation.
On the other hand, I listen to people I know complaining about their lack of prospects, and they blame immigrants and minorities as criminals and moochers. The GOP knows their audience and are the best there is at propagandizing it.
Whistling past the graveyard?
"Trump defeat in the 2020 election is pretty likely actually. He wasn’t a great candidate first time ... and he lost the popular vote. Next time is pretty certain defeat ... "
This complacency isn't going to win the election. Keep in mind that the midterm House swing wasn't as big as it had been in the two previous midterm elections (2010 and 2014), and that the Republicans actually boosted their margin in the Senate.
MAYBE Trump will lose, but not if Democrats are as complacent as this one. It's going to take hard work and a good candidate. If the Times and other news outlets "beat up" every candidate except Elizabeth Warren (as seems to be the plan so far), the Democrats had better hope EW coasts to the nomination. If the winning Democratic candidate has been "bloodied" when he or she goes against Trump in the general election, I wouldn't bet my house on victory. Would you?
7
"...how a cornered Trump might lash out..." and when that might be. Because if Democrats in the House of Representatives do their investigations right, that should create a corner all on its own. Add that to what Mueller might say, that's a deep dark pit for Trump.
That could take a year. In fact that should take a year. We need thoroughness at this point.
And indeed, Trump may or may not realize he has to do something drastic depending on how much warning he gets from those around him. Best case: no one apprises him of his dire situation and he just goes down, tries to resign and get a pardon from Pence, and of course, the scenarios after that are all bad for Trump, beginning with the possibility that Pence won't play.
So, we get the scenario where Trump lashes out (we don't think Aeroflot will take him to Moscow.) There is only one feasible possibility: war with Iran.
But, that would take a lot of cooperation from those around Trump. My bet: in a year, no one will execute Trump's orders. And he just goes down. He had no idea what he was getting himself into with this presidency thing. He just thought it would be fun.
11
"Toto, we aren't in Kansas anymore."
3
@David B. Benson
We are in Kansas. We are controlled by the inspired fear of "others". This president is a "fearmongering" person who plays to the basest beliefs. His rallying cry is all these immigrants wanting to become citizens including the "dreamers" without any basis to inspire this fear. We have more to fear from the 1% whose promise from this president would raise all up to even just a moderate income and way of life. Where are the wages now?
We now have many multimillionaires and billionaires but none are willing to contribute to the earners who gave them this gift. With the congressional shut-down not just federal employees are losing ground. The businesses supported by their wages will never be recovered. I look forward to a rash of personal and small business bankruptcies . The small farmers and business will fail and we will be under control of the mighty republicans . Middle America must rid themselves of bigotry and vote for their own self interests to restore us to the promise of democracy.
@David B. Benson
Mr Krugman, of the failed prediction, offers us is a false statement regarding the President’s popularity and his being re elected. What hogwash. We know by know how polls are accurate, actually they are not. We also know that all the agitation from the media and the left convince voteras that they are unhinged and are anathema to anything good for America.
Don’t discount that the huge deficit Trumps tax cuts helped create may also weigh on growth. It has to be financed somehow, through tax receipts or reduced spending. The latter is unlikely under the Democrats or military-spending inclined Republicans, the former can be expected under democrats...
5
The connection between St Reagan and Trump is more plain. St Reagan was the beginning of the end, Trump is the end.
77
@shrinking food
We can but hope
1
Republicans are marketers (this one literally has been all his wretched life) and Democrats are doers.
Republicans claim credit whether its their due or not and then cast blame on everyone and everything else when it goes wrong (of course Trump would run as a Republican!).
Democrats work hard to fix things and improve them when they can. That can be tedious and a challenge. It's not necessary good immediate PR, but it's necessary to keep the country running.
49
@Will.
Truer words were never spoken. I have seen it over and over. They screwed up the economy with their wars and deregulations on banking that brought us to the 2008 crash, they bailed out the banks and Obama did his best to clean up the mess. Now another unpaid for tax cut for the wealthy only to drive us deeper in debt.
2
You nailed it!!! That’s why I didn’t like marketers!!!
Excellent article in yesterdays paper regarding Trump's business practices where he would ignore board member advice to achieve short term objectives that satisfied his need to nately win(similar to adolescent needs for immediate gratification) regardless of long term consequences. Appears to be his method of operation for his presidency. Unfortunately daddy isn't around to bail him out.
18
Actually, the 1980s is really the decade when corporations decided to transfer (offshore in their jargon) production to Asia en masse. This helped boost their profits which were declining in the 1970s. Reagan and then Clinton benefited from that movement independent of their political behavior. This also helped cheapen wages in the US which have remained flat since the early 1980s. The profit rate increased enormously with Chinese production given the relative abundance of labor power relative to capital investment in buildings, machinery, and technology. Now, the situation is different as this relation has changed with expenditure of labor power being smaller relative to investment in constant capital. As a consequence the rate of profit is decreasing in Asia (or growth as euphemistically this is called) and consequently in the rest of the rich world that transfers value from there (as Apple and other corporations have done for few decades). Trump, Brexit, trade wars, and other world phenomena are just manifestations of this underlying cause.
16
Mr. Krugman believes that popularity is a product of economic performance. But McGovern, Dukakis, Kerry and Hillary all lost elections because they were out of touch with the public. Trump can rebound if Mueller chooses not to charge him and if Trump adopts a more popular political agenda. It won’t matter if unemployment rises 1%. The notion that elections are won on economic minutiae is narrow-minded and dogmatic.
5
@michjas
Both Jimmy Carter and George Herbert Walker Bush would disagree with you. It's not economic minutiae if you don't have money or confidence to buy a car, or you have to skimp on groceries or can't pay the mortgage. Krugman smells big trouble brewing.
Those Dems you sighted are not comparable or equivalent. McGovern did not communicate as well as the dirty-trickster he lost to. Dukakis was a naif vis-a-vis Bush armed with Lee Atwater. Kerry was swift boated. (His book tour now is presidential.)
I will admit that Hillary was out of touch. But she like Trump had no solid plans for a post-industrial economy.
Paul Krugman is right. A success in politics is function of the economy in good measure. There are other factors - like War & Peace, and Law &Order.
But the economy is the main thing, and it currently benefits Trump. Could you imagine the populace putting up with all this White House intrigue and shenanigans if the economy tanked like it did in 2008?
Michjas, just a reminder to pay your State Bar dues by Feb. 1. You seem addled.
I am not convinced that the economy was a key issue in the last two national elections. Unless the economy takes a nosedive between now and then, I suspect this will be the case in 2020.
The GOP diehards will stick with their usual cast of misfits. For the rest, a lot will depend on the person we Democrats select to lead our party.
However, GOP politicians are making a serious miscalculation if they think that the majority of the electorate cares little about integetity, democratic values, fairness, compassion, and many other values that Trump routinely disrespects.
31
A new economic force, politicians running for office who refused corporate or PAC money will see their positions accrue power and gain leverage over the structure and shape of the US economy.
While small in number now, the candidates who win the elections without taking corporate or PAC money are growing. These candidates take positions directly tied to policy and connected to the benefit of communities as a whole, a missing element in Washington's politics. Look at the House financial services Committee. This new political economy is the point of change; don't ignore the paradigm shift.
36
During this celebration of the King holiday, I would ask everyone to judge Trump by the content of his character.
Please use Ocasio-Cortez's standard: is this normal?
49
Worldwide economic downturn can be blamed on Trump...his trade wars. US economic downturn will also be compounded by Trump...shutting down the government and sending hundreds of thousands of families into their an economic crisis. These are his personal decisions. The results of his choices. He will pay the price for it.
39
@Mary
One can only hope Trump will pay the price for the unnecessary uncertainty, stress and hardship Trump has brought to millions of families, not just the government employees , but the millions of small businesses that rely on their patronage. Trump has never had a day in his life were he couldn't buy a Big Mac, Fillet O' Fish or KFC, and it shows. The biggest laugh line joke of his Presidency was when he tried to pretend to express some understanding or empathy for the whose lives he was playing with for nothing more than satisfaction of his ego.
Trump agreed with a unanimous senate vote to keep the government open without wall funding until Coulter, Limbaugh and others called him out. Trump's ego could not handle the conflict between what was good for America and what was good for him.
24
... and if you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out..
History tells us he may start a foreign war. Maybe in Iran, and congress will go along.
41
@Chin Wu
Actually, trump is proving to be quite unique and innovative: instead of blowing up another country, he's blowing up our own.
Truly a 'different kind of president!'
2
I am 82, retired since 2005, my means exceed my needs, and I have wonderful, low cost healthcare. Trump had no influence on my status. I am a retired Air Force Officer, and retired aerospace engineer. I will never support Trump. He has zero decency or integrity. Plus, i was an MIT educated at her officer. Global warming is factual, well established science, and must be taken seriously.
208
@JSK. I meant to write “weather officer”. MIT probably would have been more fun if it had a “her” department. I did actually take a course in Aerodynamics taught by Shiela Widnall, the first female engineering professor granted tenure. She served as Clinton’s Air Force Secretary and was a marvelous teacher.
14
There hasn't been any productivity growth in the economy for about 3 decades. Growth has been an illusion, just bubbles fueled by the Fed.
In the meantime, inequality is growing with the cycles of boom and bust. There's massive inflation in assets and stocks, again irresponsibly fueled by the Fed.
The country is eating their young, by consuming today what future generations will have to pay for later.
38
With no plans, targets, or justifiying data, one million Americans out of work, losing health care, the cycle is wealth and waste.That's the current model--make cuts, deep cuts, and increase the value of equities--including deep troughs to eliminate small investors.
Add tariffs that raised the price of everything. Tariffs are a tax with no purpose except to retard the economy, income, growth and trade.
The tax cut added 1.6 trillion dollars to the national debt. How much did it add to your pocket? And 6 billion for a wall when our human treatment of the thousands who come voluntarily, the families willing to work with children eager to learn needs support. This is the American tradition.
Not Trump's bigotry. Not his slow crashing economy. Not his massive losses of equity. Not his collapse of US agricultural markets. Not his lack of help in housing. Not his intent to destroy Healthcare.
69
@walterhett
I don't usually comment here but your eloquence is rare.
We have to connect with the "patsies" here. They are decent folk looking for a way to a decent life. I don't know what the answer is but it isn't with Ann Coulter or druggie fat boy Rush. Silver lining is that Trump illustrates it and maybe we can kill the Fox scourge while we are at it.
2
I started a company that has a 12:1 maximum to minimum hourly wage. Executives are expected to work 50 hours a week. None of them make their full possible salary yet but someday they will br rich because the minimum is now $25/hour. It beats charity as a model and reduces incentive to overwork too few or underpaid workers at the bottom. The model could be legislated by Democrats when they have all 3 branches in 2021.
23
@Emory
Congratulations!
Finally a man of conscience in America,
well done and keep up the good work.
I wish you all the very best of luck, you deserve it.
2
I think the most significant piece of food for thought in this op-ed isn't the observation Trump is unlikely to be a two-term president, but rather what happens when he isn't?
As Mr. Krugman slipped in towards the end of the article, almost like an afterthought, "if you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention."
Not only am I scared, but I think about this often. There is actually quite a lot to worry about, as I think Trump, like a cornered animal, is capable of anything.
For one, he is almost certain to question the legitimacy of any election he doesn't win. I shudder to think if that was taken to the extreme what effect it might have on our democracy.
Even if Trump went peacefully (unlikely), what further damage (as if he hasn't done enough already) could Trump do to our institutions in the two months between the time he is elected out in November 2020 and a new president is sworn in the following January?
I am not optimistic, but I think the best case scenario is that Trump isn't the Republican candidate in 2020, either because he has been ridden out of town on a rail after the upcoming Mueller report, or because Republicans finally tire of him and someone challenges him and wins in a primary.
62
And just to extend the concern- Trump is defeated in Nov 2020, but Republicans take both houses. That means Trump is president for the first 20 days of ‘21 with a Republican majority! That thought has been crossing my mind since November!
8
@JHM I wish I could be optimistic about the Republican electorate turning on Trump, but I just cannot. Even if the economy should crash does anyone think his rabid base would think it was the President's disorganized and wrong headed administration which brought it on or contributed to it in any way? Does anyone think that a normal Republican candidate running against him will be able to better the attendance at the hate filled rallies that Trump delivers? If Trump makes it to 2020, our only hope is a successful .Democratic candidate.
16
@Lawrence - now I have cramps
2
Mr. Krugman did not factor in the damage that Trump is already doing with an extended government shutdown and threatened trade wars.
22
@DBman no he didn’t, at this point that’s still speculative, and he’s basing his analysis on Trumps best case scenario...most likely and worse case are obviously much worse..
I have read or watched a good number of those 100,000 interviews with Trump's diehard supporters. I've been to many midwestern and southern diners but haven't gotten a meal yet (drat!). There's a common theme: everything that is good that has happened since Trump took the oath of office is directly and unmistakably attributable to Trump himself. The bad stuff? Maybe, maybe not. Some supporters are turning on Trump, most see flowers growing out of rocks and say, "Trump did it!".
The media are filled with these kinds of undying Trump supporters so the media can prove, "See here, we are not biased." Also, they are trying to make up for their ignorance in 2015 and '16 when almost everyone expected Hillary to win. They won't stop doing these set pieces until the winds against Trump start blowing at 140 MPH, with a forecast of heavier winds to follow.
The need to believe that Trump is responsible for the economy shows the amazing power of belief over fact. Everything Obama did was bad, everything Trump does is wonderful. Is it something in the scrambled eggs in those diners that turns smart people into Trump robots?
Sooner or later, it will be game over. The economy will continue to weaken, the impact of the trade wars and the govt. shutdown will hit harder and harder and a few million of his supporters will lose their jobs and their belief in Trump's magical powers. This will be nothing to celebrate, just America facing reality, coming down to earth. The real work will follow.
116
@Doug Terry. You are so right, and yet it’s almost as hard to convince the non-Trump supporters that the Trump supporters are actually still like that and haven’t been disillusioned (the millionaire/billionaire Trump supporters are, of course, making out like bandits).
I’m worried it will take more than another two years for the middle-and-lower income Trump supporters to be impacted enough to really understand they are worse off with Trump.
2
@Doug Terry You are too optimistic! Seriously, you are. After 30 years of this stuff I have stopped looking at the horizon for those chickens on their way back to roost.
2
And the Democratic Party is providing a meaningful alternative? An alternative for the American working class?
Professor Krugman, Trump isn't going to be defeated until the mess that is the Democratic Party experiences significant change. It's not enough for the economy to sink Trump unless there's a viable alternative. Much more is required and it begins with a Democratic Party that doesn't just represent the corporate elites but all classes. Unfortunately, there's no evidence indicating otherwise at this time. Trump is on his way to re-election. Hope I'm wrong...
11
@John Q. Public -- if by "the American working class" you mean low-skilled middle-aged Americans in rural parts of the country, particularly those working in the extractive fossil fuel industries and unwilling to change, the realities are bleak.
Agriculture is relentlessly turning into industrialized agribusiness, operating on ever larger scales and with more mechanization, squeezing out jobs.
The coal industry is dying. Oil and natural gas are OK for the moment but will not last for the next generation.
Is it your idea that somehow Trump actually is doing something for anybody but the corporate elites? Trump is fixing nothing, but is pandering to resentments.
Pandering to resentments seems to be working politically right now, perhaps because there's no easy fix.
49
Are you suggesting that the Democrats are doing anything to help blue collar workers in rural states with coal or farm-based economies? Because they aren't.
Criticizing Trump is not the same thing as providing a better alternative. Numerous op-eds in this very paper have pointed out how the Dems need to offer a real economic alternative to red state voters if they want to win their votes.
10
@John Q. Public Are you saying Republicans don't represent the corporate elite? What have the Republicans done for the working middle class? All progress has been the work of the Democrats, nothing came from the Republicans. They even deny the working people affordable health care, they put all their effort into wrecking public education, SS, affordable housing, consumer protection, family support like affordable quality child care, not even pre-natal care and adequate maternity leave, and so much more. Trump and his people only care about tax cuts for the corporations leaving working people to finance the MIC to fuel all our wars. The social Security TF is funding wars while benefits are being cut and the 401K s may not survive when the market crashes down sooner or later.
Time for the Democrats to find their way and remember what they used to stand for, namely the welfare of the nation. They have lost their way.
38
Krugman focused primarily on aggregate economic activity – growth and unemployment – explaining they are unlikely to have significant, election-altering change. But even if rates become much more favorable for both, it is likely to only affect one small part of his base, rich Republicans. For middle class and poor Trump supporters, the primary concern is income inequality and wage and salary rates. Real wage rates have grown little over the past 50 years for many occupations.
Lower unemployment rates are expected to have some, but not much, effect on wage and salary rates. His massive corporate tax cut will exacerbate inequality and more than offset the effect of the improving economy, which primarily benefits the wealthy. Further, increasing the deficit will increase the balance of trade problem, contributing to the loss of manufacturing and other jobs.
The economic relief many of his supports seek will most likely only be achieved with other programs such as increasing minimum wages and the earned income credit, programs Trump does not seem to support and which would split his base, with low income Republicans for them while high income ones will most likely resist.
8
Barring impeachment trial and conviction, Trump's reelection prospects have less to do with the state of the economy than with the capacity of our fellow Americans to hate their neighbors and those who want to become their neighbors. If he can convince enough of them that Mexicans are illegally crossing our borders to take our jobs, our wives and our daughters while plundering the treasury, voting for Karl Marx and instituting Shariah Law he may very well secure a second term regardless of how many Rust Belt voters are so keyed up on opioids that they fail to notice how little their communities have changed for the better since their Great White Dope moved into the Oval Office.
85
@stu freeman Not to forget the Republican party and party doctrine of the Ayn Rand bible.
@stu freeman That is one classic insult-laden run-on sentence. I commend you!
2
Mr. Krugman is right to point out that what passes for economic policies by Trump and the GOP will harm the economy. The tax cuts rewarded the wealthiest the most, but left the rest of us with the burden of accelerating government debt. On top of that the shutdown ripples economic pain across our society.
Trump with GOP backing has taken direct aim at the middle of the middle class. The government shutdown has stopped 800,000 people from getting paid—even if they are required to stay working. These are not high paying jobs, but until the last month they provided livable salaries and benefits. No more.
If the partial shutdown extends into February and March—a prospect starting to look likelier—the ones of have even less economic security will suffer. Cutting back food assistance payments will cause children, seniors, and those with disabilities to start going hungry, about 40 million people. That includes 7 million pregnant women, new mothers, infants, and children under 5 put at greater risk. The schools that provide low-income children lunches will see cutbacks, housing markets will become unstable as rental assistance ends, preventable deaths won’t be, and public safety will decline as survivors of domestic abuse cannot find federally-supported protection.
Welcome to the New America of walls and shuttered government. In the richest society on Earth, we won’t be able to pay the rent, feed our families, or be safe—literally.
44
@David Potenziani
And don't neglect the shock when people have to pay their taxes in April, and find with the loss of their exemptions and SALT and other deductions, they owe much more and did not properly change their withholding to accommodate these hits. We just did an estimated tax, which we never ordinarily do, and found we owed multiple thousands extra. We are not wealthy people, but if you do not have a corporation tax shelter, but earn your living by wages, you are in for some unpleasant surprises if you live in an area with high local taxes or state income taxes.
6
Earth to this commenter:
"... and with 20% more voter turnout, the GOP might well loose the Senate too."
The GOP increased its Senate margin in the 2018 election. It's now 54-46, I believe (counting Sanders and King as Democrats). Maybe that will turn around in 2020, but one thing for sure: wishing won't make it so. The Democratic Party needs to come up with a strong Presidential candidate, and a reason why voters should pick that candidate over Trump. If the 2020 election were held today, Trump would win easily. A lot can change between now and the 2020 election, of course, and so Trump could lose (and drag down Republican Senators with him). But simply wishing that isn't going to make it so.
6
@MyThreeCents 1) You mean "losing", not "loosing". 2) As for an election being held TODAY, a general election is not held without a primary election, so the scenario isn't applicable. However, with current voter proclivities, I think you could pick a Democrat out of a hat, and she or he would probably beat Trump if an election were held today. The Democrat would EASILY take the popular vote, but our defective electoral system might render that moot.
10
@MyThreeCents - Senate Rs will have 33 seats up for grabs in 2020, many in red states.
But as you say, a lot can change . . .
3
@Ed I was quoting another commenter's comment, and so I didn't change the spelling. You're correct, but one can't change spelling in a quotation.
"If Krugman isn’t expecting a recession over the next two years ... "
Let's not forget two things:
1. Krugman won his Nobel Prize for a paper on international economics, not for any special knowledge about the US economy.
2. Krugman predicted on Election Night 2016 that the economy would tank. Obviously that didn't happen. So Krugman is batting ) for 1 in the prediction department lately. Frankly, it's always baffled me why people seem to take him seriously.
3
@MyThreeCents
He said the economy would tank, and half an hour later he
acknowledged that that was just and emotional stupid reaction on his part. Give him some credit on this.
@MyThreeCents
"Frankly, it's always baffled me why people seem to take [Krugman] seriously."
If you don't take him seriously why do you waste your time reading his column? And spend even more time commenting on it?
@MyThreeCents
He did but retracted that prediction fairly quickly but like others of your ilk I ask... what is happening now to a long running recovery? What did your "deficit hawk" tea party brethren say about the tax cut for those already smothering the middle class?
Why would anyone take a republican seriously about anything? What exactly is your perspective on what "tanked" means?
You don't baffle me at all. Please continue to stand loudly and conspicuously with your president.
If Krugman isn’t expecting a recession over the next two years, that means - let’s hope - that the business cycle will turn down, which it has to eventually, just when the liberal Harris or Warren who whoever is in office, and getting all the blame. We have the possibility to destroy liberalism’s appeal for a generation.
@DRS I hate to say this, but - half of all Americans are more liberal than the other half. I'm honestly not sure why a conservative would think that fair working wages and decent health care are such a terrible thing, but at least half of Americans will want these things more than the other half. I can't see that disappearing in the next 20 years.
39
@DRS
Obama started his presidency on the eve of the 2008 crisis, and still Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million; another 7 million voted Libertarian or Green. During the democratic primaries, Sanders (a self-proclaimed democratic socialist) won 43% of the popular vote.
I'll give you the domain for five data points and you can guess the range and plot a trend line, x: {1619, 1719, 1819, 1919, 2019}. Now ascribe the y. Has society grown more or less progressive over time? More or less dogmatic? More or less equitable? More or less tolerant? Where does 2119 land do you think? (besides underwater)
@DRS
'We have the possibility to destroy liberalism’s appeal for a generation.'
The fact that you would rather see this than sensible policies for the benefit of the nation shows the spiteful, negative and childish mind-set of Republicans.
I was not surprised by your comment, just unbelievably saddened and disgusted at the same time.
Exactly:
"So please, let's not start believing this is already a done deal."
Impeachment (meaning actual removal from office) isn't going to happen. Even if the Senate weren't Republican-controlled (even more so after the 2018 midterm election), most Senators at this point would wait till the 2020 election to see what the voters say about Trump. If he loses in 2020, obviously impeachment won't be necessary. If he wins (despite credible allegations that he committed "high crimes and misdemeanors," most Senators will be afraid to overrule the voters, who will have had the same information in hand when they voted.
Impeachment could happen, but it's highly unlikely. The Democratic Party will need to win the 2020 election to get rid of Trump. At the moment, that's not looking likely. Much can change, of course, but it's not looking likely at the moment – and certainly not a "done deal."
5
@MyThreeCents:
Trump defeat in the 2020 election is pretty likely actually. He wasn’t a great candidate first time when we didn’t know much beyond the hype, and he lost the popular vote. Next time is pretty certain defeat (a base of 35-40% is not enough).
17
@MyThreeCents "Impeachment (meaning actual removal from office) ..."
Stop right there. Impeachment means impeachment. Removal means removal.
I think it is now nearly certain, in a rather glacial way, that Trump will be impeached. We already know of felonies he has committed: conspiracy with Pecker & Cohen to violate FECA, and money-laundering and tax fraud in the payments to Cohen that repaid the pay-off to Cliffords. The latter is also chargeable in New York state; Letitia James may indict him.
I think it is inconceivable that Trump escapes the Mueller investigation and James' investigation of his business practices without discovery of further felonies -- we don't know what those are yet.
Nixon resigned under the threat of removal. I wouldn't be surprised to see Trump go that way.
I agree that at the moment it looks most unlikely that 20 Republican senators would vote to remove him ... but wait and see how bad things get for Trump.
The economy looks good to people who know nothing about economics, or how the country's economy works. The GOP passed a massive tax cut based on a flawed economic theory that had some validity in the 19th century. It says if business makes more profits business will expand and put mote people to work. However a study of business shows that profit margin will regress to the mean. When a sector of business profits more than another, other will migrate to that sector driving down the profit margin as competition expands.
But that has nothing to do with helping Swindler Donald, he has violated almost every cultural norm. In doing so he has accumulated a following of same, people who believe it is smart to stiff contractors, run business scams, falsify records, some of them have become secretaries of important agencies where they can skim money from the taxpayers, and convince some of them it is good for them.
We are seeing a set of the public believing these manufactured "Facts," deluding themselves, suspending their own ability to reason and examine these alternative facts, they believe what they want to believe. It is like a pyramid scheme, get it at the start, and out as soon as the new suckers get in.
We are not sure how long this can go on, I think most of us hope it will run out of patsys before the current scam ends. Will the pigeons fly the coop, or came back for more, has the big con mesmerized them?
25
It's the electoral college that determines who wins the presidency, not the popular vote. And it's the electoral college that represents gerrymandered districts, not the will of the citizens. Wake up to the real problem. Now how do we fix that? The republicans will win the next presidential election because we aren't dealing with the truth about how Trump was elected and may well be re-elected in 2020.
13
@Ellen F. Dobson
Don't forget that in certain swing states, the difference in votes between Trump and Hillary was extremely small, so with a LITTLE more pro Democrats turnout, the electoral college vote would have gone her way rather than his.
And his electoral college vote win wasn't that big either.
Finally, only 50% of eligible voters actually turned out to vote, whereas a clear majority of all eligible voters systematically supports Democrats on about ANY major campaign issue.
So with 10% more voter turnout, Trump should lose, and with 20% more voter turnout, the GOP might well loose the Senate too.
21
@Ana Luisa About 78,000 total votes in 3 states earned trump the Electoral College win.
4
@Ellen F. Dobson, The problem of gerrymandering cannot be left to politicians or to the courts. Rather, it must be addressed directly by the citizens via state referendum. This can be done, as we have shown in Michigan, 2018.
6
The Republicans are using the shutdown to exacerbate homelessness in the country, as millions who depend upon housing and other subsidies are cut off. Elsewhere it is reported that landlords are starting to pressure tenants living on very limited incomes to pay up or face eviction. Because we certainly need more homeless people all over the country, don't we? Especially ones with disabilities and mental health issues. "Well, if they're going to die, they might as well get on with it, and decrease the surplus population," to paraphrase Ebeneezer Scrooge, who has come to embody the Republican party in a nutshell. Trump and his people are all about taking, taking, taking, and giving as little in return as possible: the modern-day billionaire welfare kings and queens of America.
34
Have we already forgotten 2016 when hardly anyone, including Trump, thought he would actually win? Logic - and more importantly, the popular vote - don't always prevail.
The history you cite may be correct, but Democrats will have to mobilize massive voter turnout to remove this cancer from the White House. So please, let's not start believing this is already a done deal.
42
"...if you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention."
I keep going back to how Obama handled the exchange of power and how careful he was to set the proper example. There's no guarantee that's how it goes, but one can always hope.
10
@Erik The Q group is planning a revolt if we try to remove trump from office. They are openly promoting this on twitter. Some in the military are part of this group.
@Erik At best Trump will quit without giving any collaboration to the new administration...I let you imaine what it may happen at worst!Best of luck
'Their small-town eyes will gape at you
In dull surprise when payment due
Exceeds accounts received
At seventeen' (Janice Ian - At Seventeen)
Yes, I know, kind of obvious, but an important message for Donald Trump and those of us without advanced degrees in economics.
And for the record - I don't think anything, other than his resignation, will rescue this economic dilettante.
16
Professor Krugman, a quick serious question about your take on the 2017 tax cuts. Are those cuts akin to a balloon mortgage that was taken out on the economy? It seems that's sort of what you're getting at. I think that's what I'm getting out of all of this.
9
@Bruce Hmm - you know, that's a great way to look at it. What I saw result from balloon mortgages was people buying houses they really couldn't afford, then when the balloon came due at a higher interest rate, they lost the homes. I wonder if they'll call the new communities "Trumpvilles", or if it will occur on the next schlep's watch? At any rate, once the blood has cooled and time has passed, history will show whom the true sucker was.
I seem to remember an enormous amount of deficit spending during the Reagan years and that this helped to spur on a sputtering economy. This struck me at the time as ironic as Reagan campaigned as a limited government conservative yet became quite a liberal spender when it came to saving his political career.
28
Although I believe that voting-out Trump is preferential to impeachment, Mr. Krugman touches upon something that really concerns me;
If indeed Trump is not re-elected on November 3, 2020, the damage that he could inflict by January 20, 2021, purely out of his innate maliciousness and unparalleled greed, could be catastrophic; the blanket pardons alone would constitute an assault on our democracy.
103
That’s why he must be impeached.
2
We shall see whether 2020 reelects Trump or the ultimate presidential nominee of the democratic party. The pollsters the press and the pundits were dead wrong in 2016. I find their credibility has been damaged permanently. Americans will decide whether they are better off than they were 4 years ago and whether the country has been safer and more secure than 4 years ago. Is the world at peace compared to 2016. Yes there are more issues to consider than just the economy. But it is the economy stupid which will be the overriding tie breaker between the equally divided baskets of democrats and Republicans. We the independents will do our due diligence to break the tie one way or the other.
I would not make any sweeping predictions until we find out who the Dem nominee is. If it Biden. Beto, Booker, Bloomberg or Bernie, I would say chances of the next president being a Democrat is as slim as one of us winning the Powerball or Megamillions jackpot. Although two New Yorkers have won successive multimillion dollar jackpots. Seems fishy. But money talks and so of all the candidates with names beginning with the letter B, Bloomberg could have the best chance because he could use his own money and he could for sure carry NY state.
4
@Girish Kotwal
In truth, the polls/press/pundits/etc. (to include Trump himself) were wrong by a whisker in 2016, that being the whisker by which Trump slithered into the WH thanks to an electoral alignment opportune for the Electoral College, despite being spanked to the tune of 3 million popular votes. THAT is your equivalent of winning the lottery, if you care to examine it. Given the geo/demographics and the structural bias of the EC and the Senate, in terms of popular support, the Democrats need to do several % BETTER than the GOP just to break even in the EC, and that's not accounting for voter suppression and gerrymandering.
Of all the things to benefit the incumbent, the economy has been and will continue to be of least inportance, unless it deteriorates. Trump inherited an economy humming with near full employment and low inflation, and even as "Mr. Deficit" and "Mr. Tariff" and "Mr. Shutdown" he hasn't managed to screw it up yet, so he gets neither credit nor blame, and the polls continue to reflect that. In reality, his risk on the economy is all to the down side. On the bright side, his penchant for attention-seeking with his social-issue pandering, self-wrought crises and general buffoonery will continue to distract and detract from even the few legitimate credits he might otherwise have earned.
Sorry if off topic, but I would like to have Dr. Krugman weigh in on raising tax dollars from every stock market transaction.
It probable wouldn't need to be a high percentage, maybe more like a mill levy, but should be able to raise lots of money from people making most of the money, and this could be used to actually put the $ to productive use.
17
All well and good but you're going to have to convince rural voters whose votes count for more in the Electoral College than those in cities.
13
Beyond the economy is the unity of the Democratic Party behind the nominee. While Secretary (and Senator) Clinton was the party nominee, it was clear Senator Sanders believed he could get away with not supporting her because he didn’t truly fear a Trump win. Senator Sanders did not support at the convention and forced the long votes. Not did he support her in key states such as Michigan or others when he had strong influence. His indifference, and in some cases hostility towards Senator Clinton, was a key part of the losses in the key Midwest states which decided the election. If the democrats repeat this and split the party, then Trump wins the electoral college again. If they are aligned, then Trump loses the electoral college.
34
@Nathan Root. You’re absolutely right, and from recent posts by Bernie Supporters, I fear it may happen that way again. A vote for a third party is a vote for Trump.
36
@Nathan Root
Bernie worked hard for Clinton in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania, states she hardly paid attention to. If someone lost the election it was Clinton for many reasons, one of them her taking the midwest for granted. You can still google this if you are interested.
3
@Jan Schreuder
Bernie may have worked hard for Clinton there, (And please do not continuing the lie that Clinton never went to PA (she started her campaign with a state wide bus trip there) Mich or Ohio, but the fact is that Bernie supporters voting Trump gave him PA, Mich and Wis and thus the election. You can google this if you are interested. I did and I also found out that the meme that she never campaigned in PA, Mich, and Ohio was simply untrue. Here, I 'll help you:
3
"Corporations received huge tax breaks, but they mostly used the money to pay higher dividends and buy back stocks, not for investment."
Er, is that all that terrible? One, if corporations paid higher dividends, that benefits even little guys like me with a 401k. And, two, buying back stocks helps others in much the same way, doesn't it?
Not an economist, but it seems logical that money moving, changing hands, as long as it's not all done by and for the 1%, helps much more than it hurts. Capitalism or trade or commerce seems inherently to do some good, although, of course, it can be corrupted, like virtually anything else, and become vulture capitalism.
A well-regulated capitalism seems about the best we can do or hope for. And all these stock activities are part of its operating system, flawed as it may be. Two cheers for capitalism.
2
@Jim Muncy -- buying back stock means the company sees no better investment ... meaning sees no growth opportunity that would yield a better return. Instead buying back stock keeps the price of the stock up, while the company is at best treading water, more likely contracting.
29
@Lee Harrison
Thanks for responding. But if Walmart buys some of its stock back, as a stockholder, aren't I thus enriched by just that much?
(I made a D in Econ 101 so please bear with me.)
1
@Jim MuncySince the tax money given up by the tax cut has been made up by borrowing, assuming that the Fed hasn’t bought the new debt and assuming that foreigners are not buying it, then there would be no new money out there in the economy for a boost. Let’s imagine that the dividends were used by the 1%ers to buys US treasuries.
1
Compare President Reagan to President Trump and say nothing about show business?
The differences you identify are important. But markets and voters are moved by showmen as much as economic realities.
19
@Greg
Except that Trump will have nothing to show for: no repeal of Obamacare or replacing it with something better, no wall, no deportation of 11 million undocumented people, no money from Mexico for the wall, no Iran deal, no North Korea deal, and so many other things that he told them were "so easy" to achieve ... .
The only thing he will have done is weakening the border by not paying border patrol agents for the longest time in history, doubling the deficit (= increasing rather than slowing down debt growth, contrary to what Obama did), and giving people like himself and his millionaire cabinet a huge tax cut.
And it seems as if Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are finally starting to wake up ...
You do need a show before you can be a showman, no ... ?
What about a day of a national retail boycott?
We all can have an impact. We can support the federal workforce.
We can show Trump our power by having a one day long national retail boycott. Repeat as needed until MacConnell and the Republicans allow the government to reopen.
This only needs an announcement by someone or some group
to announce the day.
20
How about the next time the Congress is leaving Washington that all the TSA personnel mysteriously call in sick?
If it’s the “makers” - the entrepreneurs, the inventors, the trendsetters that create growth, this tax plan doesn’t help them. It helps established interests. You see, “makers” tend to be smart, ambitious, usually educated people who have vision and are impatient with what established interests have to offer...
9
@Zenon
Unclear on what the “makers” have done to advance civilization lately, besides find us a slightly more convenient way to book a hotel or call for a taxi.
It's very surprising to see someone as smart as Paul Krugman omitting to mention the obvious REAL reason for the prosperity in the 1980s. He's right that it wasn't because of Reagan or tax-cuts, but the obvious real reason was the emergence of computer/digital technology, which created a huge new sector of the economy AND accelerated and enhanced almost all the sectors which were already there--shopping, medicine, travel, manufacturing, publishing, education, entertainment, even political campaigns-- everything.
Similarly, the "Clinton economy" in the 1990s wasn't really the Clinton economy; it was the internet (plus-lots-of-new-applications-of-biotech) economy. (The "Roaring '20s" were not caused by President Harding, President Coolidge, or President Hoover, either.)
Scientists have much more to do with the performance of USA's economy than any president (although the effect of scientists' work is often delayed).
Giving a president credit for a good economy, or blaming him for a bad one, is almost always an error. So long as the President avoids a catastrophic blunder, it's much more important for him to be lucky than good.
32
@HandsomeMrToad
Dr. K, of course, knows that: He has stressed it before. Granted, though, he didn't mention it here. Don't know why, but maybe he thought he had already covered it enough. He can't say everything in every column.
13
@HandsomeMrToad
You need to read a bit more history. The computer/digital economy was in it’s infancy at the time of the Reagan tax cuts. Krugman is exactly right, it was a real estate/housing boom caused by the lowering of interest rates and the pent up demand coming off a long down business cycle.
In the main, you are absolutely correct, science and technology have a far greater impact on the economy than politics, but major investment in computerization across all sectors of the economy didn’t really take off until the early 90s and it was the impact of that investment that produced the Clinton boom. You could look it up.
10
@Stella Schmaltz
The computer-revolution was n its infancy when Reagan took office, yes, but even in its infancy it was transforming the economy. By 1981, it was already feasible for a small startup company to begin its business proposal for its first round of fundraising with "First, we will buy some small (for the time) computers, and then, we will program them to .... and lease them to .... or use them to provide an essential service to ..." (I know this because I worked for just such a company in 1981 and 1982.) This had not been possible before, because computers were too large and expensive for a small startup to base a proposal on.
1
Corporate tax rates have not been this low since before WW-II. While it’s easy to take shots at major corporations for not doing enough ‘progressive approved’ activities with their tax relief, what’s less understood is how much this benefits the small S or C corporation. Companies such as car dealers, restaurants or small construction companies also benefit from corporate tax relief. Too, the ability to deduct capex as a business expense is enormous - especially for small business.
US GDP is approaching $20 trillion. It’s enormous. The long term effects of the tax change will take years to be fully felt. It’s far too soon to throw in the towel on the Trump economy.
5
@Alan
Here's what a survey after one year of the new tax law shows, when it comes to small businesses:
"in a survey conducted by ZipBooks, 88.3% of small business owners reported no plans to change hiring after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. In fact, nearly 5% actually planned to hire fewer employees. This may explain recent reports that small business hiring has fallen in May and June."
https://www.cpapracticeadvisor.com/news/12429783/how-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-have-affected-small-business-hiring
In the meanwhile, that seems to be confirmed by other studies ...
As to the effect on the debt: the non partisan CBO has shown that it adds a whopping $1.9 trillion to the debt.
How long do you want us to "wait" before you'll understand that nothing good can come out of this, more precisely ... ?
Are you aware of the fact that the GOP is asking us to wait for their "trickle down" miracle to happen for decades already ... ?
Why is it taking so long, and if it takes decades and we still didn't see any effect, what makes you believe that there will ever be one?
And how does this kind of vague beliefs somehow justify massively increasing the debt, rather than for instance making sure that Americans are healthy and as a consequence much more productive? Or highly educated?
51
@Alan....."The long term effects of the tax change will take years to be fully felt. It’s far too soon to throw in the towel on the Trump economy."....Perhaps the most important result of the Trump corporate tax cut is the huge jump in the budget deficit, which will have nearly doubled in three years. It is a problem that will have to be dealt with, which certainly won't help the economy.
20
Small businesses have not even filed their first business tax return under the new law. Many owners have little idea how it will benefit them - neither do most individuals in the middle class.
The ZipBooks survey was a sample size if just 663 respondents. According to the SBA, there are something like 30 million small businesses in America so you’ll forgive me for putting little faith in such a minuscule sample size. It’s almost irrelevant data. They answer ‘no change’ because they do not see the benefit yet.
Meanwhile, the NFIB small business optimism index thru 12/18 remained at near record highs. Pickup truck sales last year were also very robust. Guess who buys the majority of pickup trucks? Small business owners.
Again - way to soon for anyone to wholeheartedly support your position. Too soon to assure I’m correct either. But I am certain it’s too soon to throw in the towel.
3
Donald Trump doesn’t care about the economy. He doesn’t care about anything or anyone but himself. He is fighting to be re-elected in 2020 only to assure that we won’t be sent to prison for at least 4 more years for numerous crimes being investigated by NY State and federal prosecutors.
97
@Kathleen Reilly
He might be strategizing to have a good golden umbrella formula or strategy or payout for him and his family when it becomes clear he is a one-timer.
1
Spot on
1
To only address the question of approval ratings, one should look at 538's charts of Trump's approval/disapproval ratings, and scroll down to the comparison with other presidents since Truman, and click the '4 years' view.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
Three presidents (Truman, Reagan, Clinton) have been more unpopular than Trump *at some point* in their first term and won re-election. The key phrase, though, is "at some point".
The difference is that all three were not *consistently* that unpopular, and at most other times had far higher approval than Trump. Trump has been historically unpopular for his entire term to date, past the first two months of his presidency he has not escaped the general range of -10 to -20 percent net approval (approve minus disapprove). The closest comparison to Trump is Gerald Ford, who stayed pretty unpopular as soon as he pardoned Nixon.
Not that I suggest complacency by any means, but Paul's claim that "Donald Trump is extraordinarily unpopular" is provably accurate, and there's not really much reason to believe he will become any more so before 2020.
18
"Well, by increasing the budget deficit, that cut probably gave the economy some stimulus, temporarily raising growth."
Yet again K tries to make it seem that what was wrong with the Trump tax cut was that it increased the deficit without any explanation. Here are a couple of things that actually were wrong with it.
Suppose we cut poor Joe's taxes $1,000. That gets $1,000 into the private sector because Joe will spend it, and it
will go to help producing jobs for others. But suppose we pay Joe, $1,000 to cut the White House lawn. We still get the $1,000 into the economy, but we ALSO get the lawn cut.
That is why federal spending is always a better way to get money into the private sector than tax cuts.
Trump's bill sends most of the money to the Rich. Money going to the Rich is less useful than money going to the non-rich. The Rich spend a lower percentage of their money. What's a guy or gal who already has so many houses he can't remember how many & an elevator for his horse gonna spend his money on? The answer is he is going to use it to speculate.There is a correlation between inequality & financial speculation. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1661746
Speculation is bad for business. That money has a very low velocity, it does not change hands frequently in domestic commerce.. AND it increases risk which we have seen in 2008 ain't a good thing.
37
@Len Charlap
A good comment.
But Prof K always advocated spending hike to reduce unemployment, when we were in the recession. Very many haven't gotten out of its grip yet.
Federal tax-cut is almost always bad. Most who need help don't pay federal income tax; tax-cut wouldn't help them. If the payroll tax is cut it would help. And payroll tax should be cut on the first $20K to 1-2%. Raise the cap, rather lift the cap but cut it again say, beyond $150K to be less unpalatable to the rich. If the rich are levied the full payroll tax, it just won't fly.
Instead, as AOC suggested raise the marginal rate. Even that may not fly. I would say, at least have another top rate of about 50% on over $10 million or so.
Actually, though many have misunderstood, Bernie Sanders only proposed a top rate 52% on over some $12 million. His tax plan was the right recipe for our economic woes. All of us should fight for it, to have some similar to it.
1
@A.G. Alias- Thank you.
My point is that it is also a good idea to increase spending when the economy is good. History is relentless on this point. All 6 times when we were in a boom and reduced spending and/or raised taxes enough to pay down the debt 10% or more, we have immediately fallen into one of our terrible depression. Ya wanna wreck the economy? Eliminate deficits for a while.
It is not hard to see why. Federal spending send money FROM the federal gov TO the private sector. Taxes take it back, The deficits measures how much us sent to people, businesses, and state & local govs net of federal taxes. No deficit means money is flowing FROM us TO the federal gov. When this gets bad enough, we are forced to borrow from banks. Private debt explodes. Eventually the banking system cannot supply enough money and we have a financial crisis and then a depression.
As for what the best top marginal rate should be, look at https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/4/18168431/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-70-percent.
Here is their last sentence:
Regardless, however, the 70 percent figure isn’t just a random number a young House member plucked from thin air — it represents cutting-edge empirical research on how to maximize federal revenue.
1
Gerrymandering, the electoral college and the right wing tendencies of much of the US electorate make it easier to imagine Trump being re-elected.
The economic situation may not be that much better or worse, but Democrats will promise a bigger federal government with single payer and progressive tax rates. Many of those who might benefit from these policies will reject “Socialism”, and buy the argument that the free market will perform the miracles of low cost healthcare and diminishing inequality, despite evidence to the contrary.
It is my view that trying to sell progressive policies at the national level is hopeless. Those who need the help the most have religious and ideological objections to “Welfare”, and will reject the help. Democrats should just concentrate on the blue states for their best efforts.
9
@Jazz Paw
Depressing!
The fate of 2020 depends as much on who Democrats choose to lead the country. The electorate may not be good in arithmetic, but it votes based on emotions rather than reason.
11
@Alexander K.
Well, if one day we want a government for the people, we'll need a government by the people.
So if we continue to confound presidential elections and a celebrity show, it might take us quite a while before anything changes ...
12
@Ana, I think emotions will always be important. One needn’t be a celebrity to appeal to voters, though, merely a person with charisma, enough to get people excited to vote for him/her. Getting out the vote (and getting them to vote for just one candidate) has historically been a big problem for Democrats.
2
@Jordan F.
With all respect, I wouldn't frame it that way.
Yes, emotions are important. But anti-Trump and anti-GOP emotions are extremely high, and pro-social justice and other crucial Democrat agenda issues, emotions are pretty high too.
What makes getting the vote out for the left so difficult (in the US and elsewhere) is that people need to be politically literate before they understand that they have to go voting, and how to vote.
They have to believe that a government CAN function properly, and CAN enact change. They have to know that in a democracy, all real, lasting, non-violent democratic change is necessarily step by step change, so you can't give up and stay home next time when everything didn't change overnight within on elections.
The right doesn't need all this. Their agenda mainly benefits the wealthy, which they can't publicly admit, so they need very different kind of political emotions: hatred for any type of government, based on the supposition that it will never do anything good, hatred for Democrats depicted as "fascists" just because they believe in government action, etc You can stir up such hatred very easily, as it's build on the cynicism that comes with being politically illiterate. So all you need here is lis and fake news, and that's it, they'll vote, then forget about politics for two years, don't fact-check what you did in DC, and then elect you again.
But that means that we need to focus on literacy, rather then ONE candidate's "celebrity"
"Right now, with unemployment below 4 percent, it’s not clear whether there’s any economic slack at all."
Why should the unemployment rate the most important factor in determining slack in the economy? It seems to me if you consider the economy constrained by the availability of workers, the labor participation rate is more relevant and that ain't so high historically. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/lns11300000
Also if robotics are supposed to be so hot. we shouldn't need so many workers. I see little evidence of a shortage of workers except for very low paying jobs and certain very specialized areas.
It not clear there isn't plenty of slack in the economy. Let's do an experiment. Let's get some money via decent paying jobs to the people who need money and would spend it and see if we get inflation or loads of investment in business.
5
"Actually, even Ronald Reagan was no Ronald Reagan."
A relatively few Americans remember that inflation was whipped and real growth began under the leadership of Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. His work came to fruition during the Reagan administration.
However, Volcker was installed by President Jimmy Carter. He was re-nomimated by Reagan, but then let go because the Republicans felt Volcker was not an adequate de-regulator - and because they did not want Carter to take any credit.
37
Joseph Stiglitz’s opinion. However, I’ve not found any corroboration of this elsewhere.
A key difference is that President Reagan was coming out of a economic downturn and and eventually saw an economic recovery, whereas President Trump is already in, if not economic boom, certainly a period of decent economic growth.
Put another way, if a period of economic growth and low unemployment cannot salvage President Trump's abysmal approval ratings, it is hard to see what will. As more and more comes out about how corrupt and inept he is, and the fact that we are overdue for a economic slowdown, it is not going to get any easier for President Trump.
14
"If you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention"
...not least to his own comments. During the only time he's ever run for office, Mr. Trump said repeatedly that he would accept the results "if I win".
The only way Mr. Trump will go quietly is if he thinks he's inflicting the decision on us, instead of the other way around. If it looks like the marshalls are going to get there soon, he might even invoke the 25th amendment on himself, which could tie up a variety of legal processes already in progress for years.
6
Two years into Mr. Obama's second term, in 2014, it would have been a laugh-line to suggest that Trump was going to be the next president. That's why I am cautious about Trump not pulling this off -- with nothing protecting the American voter system from a worse Russian attack.
Democrats have a history of pulling defeat from the jaws of victory.
18
@Joel826 The electoral college is the thing that has a history of "pulling defeat from the jaws of victory." We would have had a steady string of Democrat presidents since 1992 if not for a ridiculous system that was originally implemented to appease slaveowners, and allowed them to control the federal government until 1861. We might not have slavery anymore, but we certainly have conservatives, and the electoral college has been their only path to presidential victory for years.
16
@RDA
It's arguable that Bill Clinton won in 1992 because the vote was split three ways. George H. W. Bush and Ross Perot captured 56% of the vote. GWB also got more popular votes in 2004. It shouldn't have even been close in 2000.
While the EC doesn't help, Dems DO have a way of shooting themselves in the foot.
I look up and see a typo in my orig post. Two years in would be 2015, not 2014.
Non-payment to 800,000 federal employees certainly isn't winning any popularity contests for Trump. And 800,000 federal employees and their families not eating out, not paying mortgages or rent, not buying gas, not going to movies, not paying child care, returning their Christmas presents for cash, reducing their purchase of groceries, and having to tap into any retirement savings they have, is doing nothing to help the economy.
Trump's shutdown is coming back to bite him...in two different ways. He comes across as uncaring, and he's slowing the economy.
37
@Linda You said it correctly - Bet a lot of them voted for Trumpster!
If only they'll vote against him will he voted out. He has staunch supporters here in SC, even those who aren't in good financial conditions. They'll vote against themselves!
14
President Reagan did tacitly support the Federal Reserve's high interest rates policy of the early 1980s even when it hurt him politically. In my opinion, the reductions in inflation and inflationary expectations that ensued from the tight-money policies helped the economy for years to come once the nadir of that recession was reached in 1982. As for Trump's re-election prospects, that will have much to do with the Democratic nominee.
3
I'm trying to imagine the scene at noon on January 20,2020. Trump has lost the election and is holing up at the White House. He refuses to attend the inauguration of the new President. As of 11 am, he's still President. So what happens at noon? None of the apparatus of government will protect him. Perhaps there'll be a bloody physical confrontation in the Oval Office, with Trump defended by an armed group of his supporters. Still, at that point he will have little or no support from the Army, Secret Service, etc.
22
Some suspect the office of US Attorney General already has prepared a lengthy and legally irrefutable legislative brief to confer President-for-Life status upon current holder of that office should opportunity - er - emergency arise to justify same.
4
@Paul Abrahams. Now imagine that he is still not paying the secret service..
@Paul Abrahams
Why would he be at the White House? Do you think he’s going to break out of prison?
The 2016 Election was little more than the grand re-opening of the original failed, fraudulent, feculent Trump University with shiny new political wrapping.
Most people with a lick of sense wouldn't go near the original Trump U or the new one, but a sizable minority of folks were attracted to the lure of free gold.
It took awhile for the original Trump University to be exposed as pure extra virgin Trumpian Snake Oil, but the truth came out that it was nothing more than a fly-by-night diploma mill that advertised our famous Huckster-In-Chief making this idiotic pledge:
"I can turn anyone into a successful real estate investor, including you."
The original Trump U was sued out of existence; Trump wrote a $25 million check to settle that fraud just after he was 'elected'.
Unfortunately, the 'new and improved' Trump University will do much more damage than the first Trump U.
Trump's talent isn't business; his talent is fraud, fakery, deception, and talking non-stop until everyone's wallets have disappeared before the theater-goers figure out what happened.
Tax welfare for millionaires harms economies, weakens government, weakens infrastructure and weakens healthcare.
Tariff trade wars hurt the economy.
The abandonment of green energy harms a major economic growth sector.
Government shutdowns harm the economy.
The new Trump University will also be shut down, just like the first one, for massive consumer fraud once the idiots realize their wallets and brains are missing.
654
@Socrates - I love it !!
13
@Socrates
Far worse is his harm to the environment and his fueling climate change.
20
@Socrates
"...the idiots realize their wallets and brains are missing."
A bit harsh don't you think. After all, modern wallets are much harder to steal.
Did you see the reference to you in an another article in this paper? I know you want to get into my closet and reorganize it, but, sorry, I love my mess.
- Thucydides
5
I don't want to disagree with a Nobel winner Paul (thuogh this isn't my first disagreement with you), but actually there IS something Trump could do to gain support: launch the long talked about, but perpetually deferred Infrastructure Initiative, creating tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of good paying jobs. This would endear him to the working class to whom he made all those grand promises, but has yet to deliver on them. But what if he did?This is one big card the Democrats still have to play, but if he takes it out of their deck, he kills two birds with one stone.
Sure, the Republicans have blocked this Initiative for years, but Trump is certainly no run of the mill Republican. If I were a betting man, I would wager a large sum that we're going to see Trump propose just such an undertaking.
4
@Kingfish52 i think the infrastructure spending will begin to occur right around the time it helps T get elected. I wonder if he'll allocate more or most of the monies to red states.....ironically, obamacare helped more of the red states
9
There is another element- US demographics are slowly starting to look like Europe and Japan, with one huge caveat. We had more live births 1952-1964, than 1992-2004. We will soon see more retirements and premature deaths per year than 16 year olds entering the workforce. In the past labor shortages were simply taken care of by increased immigration. It is very hard to grow an economy with no new workers, and more than 20% of the civilian population survey greater than 65. An aging society with an inferior safety net will spend more and more on health care and rents, less and less on consumer items and durable goods. We are looking at a decade or more of retail stagnation, if things work out well. If we have a recession, things will get really bad.
27
For the 2020 election, trump will create as much chaos as he can. He believes chaos helps him. Bannon was already looking at either postponing or calling off the 2020 elections if the polls showed him losing. Bannon also said they can make something happen just before the election that will make the people hesitant to change presidents.
I know Bannon is not in the government right now but his minion, Steven Miller is there so I'm sure there is still communication. Bannon was happy if trump could hold his base. He believed that as long as trump held low 40s, he'd be good using the above mentioned tactics.
And I'm sure the russians will be hitting the social media big time.
10
The economy could easily save Trump. All the Republicans need to do is roll back a portion of the recent tax cuts and immediately use the windfall to steal the "Green New Deal" from the progressives.
That's it. That would save Donald Trump via economic boom.
On the bright (dark?) side, pretty sure this will never happen.
7
@Dan
As Van Jones and so many others have shown: what we need most today is a spiritual evolution (both as liberals and conservatives).
Only when going back, each one of us and collectively, to a deeply spiritual life will we understand the importance of AND acquire the tools needed for stopping climate change, creating an economy that works for all citizens, ending all forms of racism, and reducing the income gap.
The GOP today is spiritually entirely dead. Nothing positive can come from such a mindset - apart from the fact that even a broken clock is right twice a day.
8
And Reagan had the advantage that the Cold War was still raging on.
With the Soviet Union still a real menace, whatever party that was in power could count with a pretty much automatic bipartisanship at the of the day. The Soviet shadow was simply to vast and too much a burden for any of the two parties that would be on the opposition to rock the boat. Accordingly, the American people would also tolerate each other and not risk in too much political polarization in order to preserve the capitalist lines against the socialist threat from the Eurasia.
3
Although Dr. Krugman suggests that Trump " might lash out" if he faces defeat in 2020---I don't believe that not being reelected would concern him that much. Actually there is good reason to believe as many analysts have suggested that Trump did not expect to nor really want to win in 2016. The polls were so definite about a Clinton victory that it was assumed by almost all (including Trump) that Hillary would win. Trump wanted the publicity of the campaign and to continue in the business and TV world with greater name recognition.
What Trump fears now is the uncovering of his crimes--the illegal manipulations that he thought he had been able to hide from public view just as he hid his tax returns. But he now fears that his actions will soon be open to all and he faces serious penalties for his crimes.
29
@shimr Regarding Trump's crimes, his one ace in the hole is his presidential pardon power. Trump has to win the next election if he hopes to pardon his crime family, keep various minions quiet, and perhaps, even, test the notion that the President can pardon himself. And if I understand correctly, the statute of limitations run out on some of his crimes during his potential second term. So I do think he cares, and "lashing out" is still to be feared.
7
I am concerned what Trump may do to win re-election in 2020. I also believe that the US economy is approaching the tail end of a growth cycle. My biggest concern is that Trump may involve the US in a military crisis in order to wrap himself in the flag. That is why I was unhappy to hear his announcement to increase spending on missile defense and expand it to preemptive attacks on mobile launchers of opposing countries.
16
Krugman offers a weak argument here, then masquerades it with some very general macroecomic figures to state unequivocally that Trump will not win re-election.
First , you can’t beat something with nothing. If Trump runs for re-election he will be running against an actual opponent, not a hypothetical candidate. This opponent will have flaws and weaknesses, and until we see who it is, it is premature to say Trump cannot win.
Second, as an economist, Krugman sees the world through an economic lens. Were he a political scientist, or had a broader perspective, he would see that voters are not rational, income-maximizing homo economicus beings. As a block, they are fickle, vulnerable to propaganda, and often vote against their own economic interests - at least as described by Krugman.
Finally, the world today is as different from Reagan’s as it is from Abraham Lincoln’s. The country has devolved into sepearate tribes, complete with their own media, the economy is more complex and global, and factors like social media and advanced forms of propaganda mean that predicting outcomes with the certainty of this column are likely to be inaccurate.
What Krugman says here makes sense on the surface, but He has considerd a very narrow range of factprs - all macroeconomic - on which to make his prediction. This is a very shaky foundation upon which to sound so certain.
8
@Space needle I disagree. The only way Trump is going to win in 2020 is with a fantastic economy. Dr. Krugman is just saying that is not going to happen and I agree with him.
21
@Space needle at the end of the day people need to feed their families. It will always boil down to the economy.
"Which raises the question of what he and his party will do if defeat is staring them in the face....I don’t know the answer to that question, and if you aren’t scared about how a cornered Trump might lash out, you haven’t been paying attention....What’s clear, however, is that Trump and his allies are in a deep hole right now — and the economy isn’t going to dig them out of it."
Trump will be cornered on so many fronts, he'll feel like he's living in a hexagon. Not that he cares, because new statistics show how lazy he is in office. The man who was never going to have time for golf, wanders down from his private quarters around 11, and usually spends the next 7 calling friends, and watching TV.
Nice work if you can get it---but since he knows noting about economics, and currently spends more time helping Russians by lifting some sanctions than he does on helping Americans, particularly those who aren't even getting paid,
I suspect his poll numbers may tank even further.
Which should make even more of us more frightened than ever.
14
Personally, I am terrified that t-Rump is going to lash out and create more chaos and difficulty than he already has. Doesn't mean that we should give in to him. We simply must be aware that things could get worse.
13
Do wish we didn't have to deal with Trump any more. I wish he would just go away. I'd like Pence and McConnell to accompany him. I despised Reagan. Not much of this matters as long as we continue to have monopolies and the corporations pay the campaign bills and write the legislation. Until we get rid of Citizen's United and get some stronger lobbying rules, or enforce the ones we have, we will continue to be stuck. And why do we let big banks have money and then borrow it back and they make huge amounts of money on it? Is there something I'm missing here?
31
Paul Krugman continues to live in his own alternative reality. Believing that the economy isn't going to experience any impressive growth, is HIS own crystal ball. Unimpressive growth is what the economy 'lived with' even convincing many that it structurally couldn't grow more than 2%. That has been shattered by Trump policies, tax cuts, deregulation and has a pretty good chance of continuing if the worldwide (Chinese) tariff situation settles down with a true reform by the Chinese. The German car companies have agreed to zero tariffs for goodness sake. That IS real progress.
1
@John Sullivan
Except that your "real progress" didn't happen yet. So WHEN will it?
Average annual GDP growth under Trump is perfectly compatible with what it was under Obama.
Look at all the graphs out there, and you'll see NO Trump dent at all.
The same goes for the evolution of the unemployment rate.
Imho, you're simply new to this debate, and are confounding quarterly growth with annual growth, and then imagine that contrary to what is true, Obama never had 4% quarterly growth ... am I right ... ?
27
@John Sullivan unemployment is extremely low and we're barring immigrant workers at the door. I'm no economist, but where are we going to get growth without labor?
10
@Emma Ess
Plus our population growth rate is about 15% below the replacement rate. We need more immigrants fast.
I thought Paul brought economic expertise to his column and comment. He now sounds like one more tired political pundit beating up on Trump.It is easy to predict that Trump will be a one term president. A careful analysis of the factors leading to that conclusion would be helpful. Elsewise it is simply wishful thinking.
1
@Milton Lewis
There are a lot of links to economical data in this op-ed.
You do have to click on them though, IF you are interested in "economic expertise" ... ;-)
16
The Professor believes that the economy Will Not rescue Trump.
But isn't the Professor making a common error? He seems to be projecting Trump's future by improperly adjusting data into a notationally common scale of alignment. In short, he's normalizing Trump.
We all know that's wrong.
When Trump loses he seems to win, and everyone else takes the loss. Trump is a genius at losing. Not only does everyone else lose but they also get the blame.
My projection is straightforward: the worse the economy is, the more likely will Trump win. For example, if we have a depression in 2020, Trump will win in a landslide.
Trump may be counting on this. In fact it seems that he's been planning it all along.
5
@Fourteen
For the moment, he's only losing though (and even more rapidly now that he decided to no longer pay border patrol agents and unilaterally shut down the government after Ann Coulter tweeted that he's supposed to try to build a wall).
So what makes you believe that that might change?
7
@Ana Luisa
Yes Trump is losing, but not just for the moment.
He's been losing since his first day in office. He's really been losing all his life. And then he became President.
He's losing but 88% of Republicans continue to worship him. The only thing we know for sure about Trump is that he's from an alternate universe and is not normal.
If he were a normal person, he'd be in jail. But we're in uncharted territory. We seem to be living in a Twilight Zone.
So we can't assume that what should happen in 2020 will. Trump has confounded reality his entire life. That he'll be dumped is possible, but it's also possible he'll be President-for-life.
3
@Ana Luisa
Historically, Trump has been a loser. But he's a great loser; a genius at losing. He can't be judged by human standards. Those who do get egg on their faces.
Bankrupt six times yet many millions of people say he's a great businessman and a great dealmaker. Then he becomes President of the United States!
You never know what the next day will bring. Trump has turned the world upside down.
So logically, you have to think different.
"For, you see, so many out-of-the-way things had happened lately, that Alice had begun to think that very few things indeed were really impossible."
Yes, I’m quite scared that Trump would not accept a loss and create a crisis. We have seen how GOP Senators let him do whatever he wants. What happens when he calls on the military to protect him in office?
14
@Anthony One could start with the assumption that the military will follow the law, and not simply act as hired guns for a deposed dictator (e.g. "following orders"). If Trump loses the election but does not want to leave, then he can't even give the military legal order to begin with. The military might actually have to assist in removing him, in the secret service and local law enforcement (or FBI) won't.
5
@David
Yes, but...there is no constitutional way to keep a U.S. president from launching a first strike. The argument "somebody would stop him" relies on the expectation of an extra-constitutional ad hoc effort.
This is a side effect of civilian control of our military, because the idea of an unbalanced president who refuses to leave is counter-normative. A president's diverse collection of powers has traditionally assumed that the leader of the free world has a heart and mind substantially different from what Mr. Trump has shown the first two years.
5
And we must never forget that it was Trump who led this country into the current, historically long government shutdown. He offered Democrats a hollow, temporary gesture in return for a wall he should never have promised. And who is paying the price for his grandstanding? Workers who need and deserve their own paychecks. No person who would create this impasse is any economic genius.
29
@NM
The most scandalous thing here isn't that his "compromise" on immigration reform isn't a compromise at all (the wall is not fact based and highly partisan, whereas DACA is fact-based, bipartisan and supported by 80% of the American people), but the fact THAT the GOP decided to from now on treat border patrol agents' paychecks are mere bargaining chips.
That is totally unacceptable.
So whether you still support a wall or have always rejected it is no longer relevant today.
What is extremely urgent now is to make sure that the GOP NEVER EVER shuts down the government again, and that is only possible by categorically refusing to negotiate during a shutdown, so that the GOP understands that IF they decide to shut down the government, then they'll NEVER obtain ANYTHING.
59
A majority of American voters sent Trump, his republican party, his Russian sponsors, and his wall - packing twice now. The chance of him reaching the end of his only term is somewhere between slim and none. The longer his shutdown lasts, the more republicans will go down with him in 2020. If things get bad enough, it might be the end of the republican party as we know it. Good riddance.
127
@markymark We should underestimate the Republicans power to rig elections through various voter suppression and outright fraudulent means, and then turn loose the lawyer to try and make those efforts stick. We saw in 2018 the impacts of many of those efforts. In 2016 the public wasn't as clued in, but with the extremely thin margins in the few states that he swung to the right, odds are very good those same suppression hit paydirt that year as well. The Dems get cocky and then complacent - a potentially fatal mistake.
5
@markymark It is easy for a liberal in a Deep Blue state to expect and predict the demise of the Republican Party in 2020. But as a liberal in a Deep Red, Tea Party state with a Koch-owned governnment, I am not so sure.
If it gets down to Russo-Republican dirty tricks and gerrymandered Electoral College again, the Democratic Party may be one not surviving 2020.
7
If the economy goes downhill, the Democrats will have a golden opportunity to rescue the country from Trump. But they need to nominate a candidate who can win. Will they?
15
@James Ribe
The whole "candidate who can win" narrative is absurd.
We'll only have a government for the people when it's a government BY the people, in other words when we have candidates just as imperfect as you and I.
Voting has nothing to do with liking this or that candidate personally, and everything with actively moving the country into the direction of the policies that a candidate supports.
As long as "we the people" don't get this, a corrupt minority of super-wealthy international elites will continue to destroy the country only to enrich themselves even more.
14
@James Ribe
"But they need to nominate a candidate who can win. Will they?"
I don't know. Assuming the nominee can speak and say "Trump has wasted your time and money these last four years while personally making himself even wealthier", I would think that person would be a shoo-in to win.
8
@Ana. I respectfully disagree. Voting has Everything to do with whether a candidate gets people excited to vote. You could have 5 candidates, all with great ideas and no obvious moral failings, but if not one of them is articulate, personable, or have charisma, they could all lose to Trump.
1
Never underestimate the power of the Electoral College to thwart the will of the people at large.
This is not just 2016 and other times the electoral college has elected the loser of the popular vote. In 2000, if each state had only the number of electors equal to its number of representative, not the extra two that the senate confers, Al Gore would have won even while Bush took Florida; no recount would have been necessary and SCOTUS would not haven been given the opportunity to intervene and give new meaning to "one man one vote."
This is just arithmetic.
40
How many times are you liberals going to cry about the electoral college? Change it. It only takes a super majority. Go for it, vote, but until? Stop crying. It's tiresome.
@TOM
Good point, but maybe we need this:
https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
"Corporations received huge tax breaks, but they mostly used the money to pay higher dividends and buy back stocks, not for investment."
In the 21st century economy, the bulk of world trade, in terms of the amounts of money circulating, is made up of financial transactions.
In such an economy, it's obvious that a tax cut for big corporations does NOT lead to more investment in their companies, as selling their companies products/services is NOT what most of their profits are coming from, they are coming from financial transactions.
That's how asking taxpayers to come up with a whopping $1.9 trillion as the GOP did, to finance taxes for the wealthiest, literally means asking taxpayers to increase the income of the wealthiest international financial elites, without receiving ANYTHING in return.
It's nevertheless what the GOP did.
And then they turned down a bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill that already got through the Senate with a 68-vote majority, in 2013, even though Democrats agreed to add FULL funding for Trump's wall (as much based on falsehoods as their tax cuts) to it.
And then they decided to no longer pay border patrol agents either.
How can anybody still wonder why Trump's approval ratings are exceptionally low ... ?
24
Donald will reach for some way to remain POTUS, no matter what Mueller, the Supreme Court, Congress and/or voters say.
About 25% or so will agree with him, no matter what.
Thus begins another downward hurtle as we continue to rocket Donald's abyss.
13
All what Prof Krugman says sounds reasonable. Thing is, I just don't trust the millions of low-info voters out there who have absolutely no idea what they are doing. Perhaps Trump's slogan for 2020 will be: 'We need a wall on our northern border, and Canada's gonna pay for it. Mark my words.' I can almost guarantee that a majority of voters will buy that can of goods once more, especially if Democrats let internal dissension tear them apart.
18
@Lesothoman
Well after all, Canada IS a security risk. That's how Trump put tariffs of Canadian steel and aluminum.
@Lesothoman
That's what you think of ordinary Americans and that's what the top 1% thinks. The bums should finish working unpaid overtime at their low paying jobs and spend the remaining hour of their day raising their level of information. Doing what? Watching Fox News? Fox News was created by billionaire Murdoch and similar propaganda is put out by the Billionaire Koch brothers. You spit on their audiences but have no problem with Big Money creating low information voters. Do you have a problem with students staggering under loads of debt for an education? Any problem with corporations importing cheap labor instead of hiring American College students who tried to not be low information voters? What about the increasing percentages of foreign students that pay full fees and are preferred to American students now that funding for education has been cut and cut and cut? No! Not being well educated is, somehow, entirely the fault of the not well educated. I owe them and their kids nothing at all. It's criminal that I have to pay taxes on what I earn and some of it goes to other people.
@Saint999 Actually, I don't disagree with you. What perplexes me is that these low-info voters keep voting for the people who want to keep them in that situation.
A strong economy? Income inequality is a major challenge. Nearly 75% of American households live paycheck to paycheck. Those households have almost nothing in savings. There is no sign that manufacturing and other middle class blue collar jobs are growing. Prof Krugman is right most of the time but a low unemployment rate is not the indicator of a strong economy.
18
@Bascom Hill
All Americans (or at least all White Americans who voted for Trump) know that the middle class has declined because brown skinned people pouring into our country from the southern boarder have taken all the good middle class jobs in fruit picking, meat packing and home health care. Once the wall is up, all those great jobs will be taken by Americans and the middle class will be restored.
I'm surprised to see Dr. Krugman talk about "the economy" in such generic terms without an aside along the lines of "top line economic figures no longer represent the conditions of the majority of Americans."
Under Obama "the economy" recovered miraculously, but not for those who needed it most, or in the rural areas that needed it most. Thus, Trump.
I would like to see Dr. Krugman set out guidelines for how to accurately describe an economy in which gains are distributed with increasing inequality.
In addition to what's pointed out here, if you look at 538's approval tracker you can see two important trends:
The first is that as a reflection of hyper-partisanship Trump's approve/disapprove is incredibly sticky. He won't drop below the high 30s, and he won't rise above the low 40s. Since Gallup and Pew stopped doing frequent approval polls, the remaining outlets (Rasmussen, Ipsos, and YouGov) have rarely fluctuated more than a few points.
Second, if you look at NET approval, rather than approval, you find that Trump is even farther underwater than it seems: while Obama suffered from low approval ratings, his disapproval was never as high as Trump's.
I think Dems would be smart to run on healthcare and the Green New Deal, stressing the importance of creating well-paid jobs and building a 21st Century infrastructure and social safety net.
45
@Josh Wilson
Miraculously?
No, the economy recovered thanks to the Recovery Act and the bank bailout, as CBO analyses at the time predicted.
And the GOP opposed the Recovery Act, so without Obama and the Democrats, the Recovery would never have happened.
And if "we the people" wouldn't have massively given Congress to the GOP in 2010, income inequality would NEVER have become this bad today.
As to what you call "smart": Democrats have not only been running on these things for years, they've systematically moved the country into that direction each time "we the people" gave them control over DC.
The smartest thing to do now is for us to massively turn out to vote in 2020, instead of waiting at home until the perfectly ideal candidate passes by ...
17
@Josh Wilson...Clinton was creaming Trump in the polls into the afternoon of 11/8/2016. The only poll that counts is the one conducted ythe Electoral College....If Dimocrats win on Medicare-for-All, Free College Tuition, Green New Deal, Universal Pre-School/Daycare, Guaranteed Income...there will not be any well-paid jobs created and NO 21st Century infrastructure and social safety net.
Well, I guess that leaves lying & pandering - you know, the usual - the Soul (Sole) of the GOP (on the backs of anyone not in the 0.1 %)
8
I'm no Trump supporter but it's getting a bit tiring to read pieces which basically amount to little more than wishful thinking.
As far as his luck is concerned, trump fell into a big pile of you-know-what when he came out of the womb, and he's been stepping in it ever since.
No, he won't get a big boom courtesy of the Fed lowering rates by 100's of basis points as Reagan did, but we're not going into a recession either. Unemployment figures to stay very low, inflation will be as well, and stocks will probably do OK.
Dem candidates will not be able to make an issue of the economy, and they're not gonna be running as deficit hawks either given that their preferred programs are medicaid/medicare for all and free college tuition.
I wouldn't count on the economy being something Democrats can point to as a reason for not voting or him.
6
@Chris Manjaro I do agree that no one really knows what's coming in the next eighteen months, no one ever does. But the pinnacle issue for voters –even Trump voters– will be whether the Trump economy is making THEIR lives better.
Trump's chances at re-election live or die on that question.
6
@Chris Manjaro, no one knows what's coming in the next year for sure, but global, including U.S., growth is slowing, and corporate debt is looking quite a bit like the time bomb junk mortgages were in 2007.
It's always easy to project the same economic performance continuing, it's not always the case, and fall of 2020 is quite a ways off, time for plenty of surprises. PK is right that there's little reason to expect a rebound like Reagan benefitted from before the next election.
@itsmecraig Not sure I agree with your assessment. It seems to me that Trump's base hate "liberal elites" more than they love their pocketbooks.
Sadly, these predictions about Trump were wrong last time. I remember every major news outlet essentially writing him off. We may be stuck with him longer than we’d like.
8
@Scott D. It depends *a lot* on who the democrats nominate. IF they nominate the person most likely to win, there's a good chance. If they want to "make a statement" with their nominee, well, that's a problem. In any event, incumbency makes it even harder, an advantage he didn't have last time.
4
@Stevenz
"If they want to "make a statement" with their nominee, well, that's a problem."
Not really. Trump is now a known quantity. Everyone in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida that voted for him because he was "an outsider" who might "shake things up" is basically lost to him because of his failures and indifference. What has he done to benefit people who think like that in those states beyond be a generic big-business Republican? And those states are all it will take. He was fighting on Democratic turf last time in order to just slip over the line in those states to win the electoral college. He won't get near the line in 2020. 2020 with Trump would be the best possible year for a full-on Socialist to run.
1
@Jordan, not necessarily. The people in the battleground states that voted for Trump have been giving every sign they think he’s doing a great job, even if their personal situation hasn’t improved.
1
Volker’s monetary policy crushed inflation. But it also gutted the capital of many American banks and virtually all thrifts. The cleanup and recapitalization of American banking in the 90’s taught Wall Street that the rating agencies would slap a AAA on mortgage securities with very little due diligence. That brought on the subprime collapse. What’s next? I’m not that smart.
8
@Scott B
A lot of the savings and loan mess were only indirectly due to monetary policy--it's easy to forget how loose they were with their lending, at times reckless and even fraudulent.
6
Uh. Correct but your timing is off. Volcker’s monetary policy (and the advent of money market mutual funds as an alternative to CD’s) resulted in deposits flooding out of depositories forcing them to sell low note rate loans at deep discounts. Reagan and Bush propped up the thrifts with phony regulatory capital. Fact was, they were busted but still had access to federal funding. So they spent taxpayer money on all manner of whacky schemes.
3
@Scott B...I remember September, 1979 like it was this morning. Paul Volker certainly crushed inflation, but it took years to kill the beast. I don't know where Krugman got the idea that there was a housing boom in the early 80's, but there was no boom in Southern California. I happened to attend Reagan's last campaign stop in Mission Valley, San Diego, just before the election. Walter Mondale was the Democratic opposition. As always, the rest is history.
an interesting difference between the 1980's and today is the unemployment rate. It was around 10 percent in 1981 and today it is below 4 percent. Is this just demographics? In the 1980's the baby boomers were all working age - today many have retired either because they want to or because they took early retirement because they could not find work in their 60's especially after the crash of 2008.
7
I'm starting to wonder, what if Mr Trump is right and he is in fact a very stable genius? His decisions, specifically the trade war with China and the shutdown, is causing a contraction in the economy. His other decisions with the women and children fleeing the situation in Central America, makes me thinks he knows exactly what he needs to do to be reelected and possible hold on to power for longer than 8 years. George W was reelected in part because he frightened enough people into voting for him by preying on their fears and insecurity about the wars he started. Fear and insecurity works for the Daddy Party. I think Trump is far smarter and saner than people give him credit for.
6
@kim
How smart can someone be if they think climate change is a hoax? If they don't think diversity is a strength (ask Nature)? Pumping fear and insecurity may work in the short term, but long term it's not a smart strategy.
@kim That's terrifying!
@kim Go to Wikipedia - look up Narcissist, then look up Dunning Kruger effect. Read closely, twice. That kim is Trump to a T. Not smart, not sane. A genetic defect. But, dangerous and obviously unpredictable. Hide the Nuclear button.
A lot of Wall Street experts and, apparently, op-ed writers, say the economy benefitted in 2018 from an $800 billion federal deficit. But that the stimulus will “wear off” in 2019, when the deficit increases to a trillion. Your analysis might be bailed out by the Fed’s QT unwinding of Obama’s QE. But the extra trillion definitely will have an impact. The new tax law is entering its second year, true. But the fiscal stimulus will persist.
The economy may help Trump, but not by much. His support is not based on policy, or economic matters. It is based on the very real fears of many people about the changes in the nation, the economy, and the world. Cultural, social, and economic change are not caused by intentional policies of the government, or even business, but are a natural result of the world changing, as it always does, as societies evolve. This scares and angers many people who fear being left behind or are not able to adapt, and Trump offered a phony answer, and they bought it. Trump can be defeated if the Democrats do not defeat themselves, as they sometimes do. If the left wing of the Democratic Party succeeds in moving the party too far to the left, Trump will win, popular or not. The United States is at it's heart a centrist society, that evolves gradually, and will not vote for radical change toward the left(or knowingly toward the right).The country needs a strong, stable, moderate path to the future.
16
@NH
The left wing of the Democratic Party is not radical. Democrats were theParty of FDR, whose New Deal ended the Great Depression without any bailouts. He empowered labor, regulated the financial sector and instituted progressive taxation to prevent the accumulation of huge concentrations of money. The Democratic constituency used to be workers and Small Business. Under Bill Clinton the Democratic Party made a big move to the Right, throwing their former constituency under the bus. Bill Clinton cooperated with the GOP to repeal what remained of the New Deal that gave us 70 years of prosperity. BTW the New Deal still works in Northern Europe.
Then American Companies started to offshore and their profits soared due to Cheap Labor. The profit from not paying labor well went right to the top. The economy was hollowed out. The middle Class and workers lost the most. Monopoly and the concentration of money returned. Democrats kept moving to the right.
Bernie Sanders is a New Deal Democrat who beat Trump in every Poll that compared them. He was not offering a "phony answer", he was offering a modern version of an old answer that worked.
4
@NH Well said - history tells us that you are right in your analysis.
@NH What left wing? There are no moderate republicans. What are you talking about?
Years ago, both of Trump's sons bragged that the Trumps were financed by Russians. I hope Mr. Mueller is able to prove that the Trumps are Russian assets, serving Putin and themselves and not America and Americans.
93
@Callie Read "House of Trump,House of Putin". Excellent read, mind boggling, over 30 years of documented involvement with Russians.
11
@Callie i highly recommend a documentary called ACTIVE MEASURES. there is no doubt trump is putin’s puppet.
3
Real GDP minus Potential GDP is now a positive number. That condition has preceded all recessions dating back to 1970 - seven out of seven right. The yield curve is flat. Stock prices in real value, measured by the Wilshire 5000 divided by GDP, are near all-time highs.
Those are metrics which are coldly independent of politics, and they say that the economy has very little upside potential right now.
In the long term, A.I.-driven automation can possibly represent a cross-industry innovation big enough to keep the total economy growing strong, though costing millions of jobs. Socially we are tragically unprepared for that.
And that's "long term", as in decades. Big positive change is not in the cards for next year.
So I agree with Paul Krugman that Trump has an ominous problem building for 2020. And while the president likely doesn't follow macroeconomic logic much, he certainly realizes that he will be indicted once he is out of office. For Trump, it's win at all costs.
Here in Florida (29 Electoral Votes) we have a new governor whose own primary election win was directly attributable to Trump's support. Our legislature is awesomely gerrymandered Republican. I think it would be simple for Trump to declare a national security emergency and "postpone" the 2020 vote here.
It would only take a few states not voting to send the election into the House of Representatives, where the rules would be one vote per state. New York equals Wyoming. Trump would win that.
18
@Greg Shimkaveg Mitch Machiavelli McConnell already figured that out. Kentucky needs to come forward and save our Republic. Dump Trump, Ditch Mitch. Bernie - do not be a spoiler.
Certainly all Republicans have expunged from their memories an even more recent event than Bill Clinton's economy, i.e., Obama's miraculous efforts to prevent the great recession from turning into the second great depression. To this day, apparently even you have forgotten.
128
@James Ricciardi
If Obama and Holder had sent just one Wall Street exec to jail, we might not have Trump. It would have at least demonstrated that the system has a measure of fairness, but apparently, they didn't want to alienate any future associates, partners, or Presidential library sponsors. In contrast to his largess for the financiers, Obama's piddling relief for homeowners also created a great deal of lingering ill will. Many voters rightly saw Clinton as just the continuation of Wall Street's dominance and her Goldman Sachs speeches certainly cemented that impression.
Aside from the well-advised tactic of taking no PAC money, any Democratic candidate for 2020 should announce they will include no one from Wall Street in their cabinet. Amazingly, there are professionals in this country who are not only versed in finance and macroeconomics but have a moral sense. Gary Cohn and Steve Mnuchin should be the last crooked nails in the coffin.
13
@stan continople I agree. Obama failed to give the bankruptcy relief to homeowners he promised during the campaign and treated the shareholders and executives of banks unjustifiably better than he did for those of GM and Chrysler. These were almost inexcusable errors. But there has never been a perfect president nor a perfect person.
11
@James Ricciardi Barack Obama will be treated well by historians - and rightfully so. Trump and Mitch will each get just one page. Those will show: Name, Date of Birth, Date of Death and a brief notation -- "This page left blank intentionally".
2
As many pundits have recently noted, the shutdown is hurting Trump at the polls. In fact, cracks are beginning to show in his own base, a trend of which he is very much aware.
Trump has backed himself into a corner, and the Democrats are taking advantage. If they overplay their hand, however, there's no telling what Trump may do. He could declare a national emergency, against all advice. It would be challenged in court, of course, but do we really want that?
As I see it, the Democrats have no choice but to negotiate. As a negotiating strategy, they could offer a "virtual wall," a smart fence that offers more security for far less money than a physical wall, and is not burdened with the negative symbolism of a wall.
The Times’ Brett Stevens first raised this interesting idea in a recent column on Israel’s smart fence: http://tinyurl.com/yal659ew
5
@Ron
I have commented previously a few times, that Speaker Pelosi and Democrats should pass in the house exactly the same bill that passed the Senate in 2013. (was not brought up for a vote by the republican speaker and house then)
I suspect though that too many want the issue to demagogue going forward to 2020. (even some Democrats) Tis' a sad thing, but true.
As for Democrats HAVING to negotiate, I strongly disagree. Simply continue with the stance that we do not negotiate with hostage takers. Aye, it is hardball to play with so many lives, but it is also the future of the country/world.
Stand firm.
44
@Ron Cohen Negotiation is a two way street. Mr. Trump had $25 billion for his wall last year, but it came with a string attached, serious action on DACA, so he turned it down.
What is Trump offering in exchange for his frivolous vanity project? Action on DACA? A retreat from attacks on the ACA? Funding for universal kindergarten? So far he is offering nothing in return for an expensive border sculpture that will do nothing to address the overwhelming majority of "illegal" aliens who enter through airports and overstay their visas.
Border security is of vital importance. Spending billions on an ineffective make-work art project will do nothing to improve our security.
15
@Ron Cohen A possibility. But, our Republic should not conduct national legislation under a process that is clearly and intentionally driven by the blackmail process. Separate the issues, do not use Federal employees as pawns. This current farce reeks of the Mitch Machiavelli McConnell touch -- to Bundle issues together to get what you want. We are not a country bound by the American Pickers technique of bundling. Our Republic demands that separate issues be considered, legislated and voted on separately. Time for Congress to clean up its act.
9
I remember 1979-1982. Those were lean years, really tough years. A lot of businesses went under, a lot of us lost our dreams. There were times I was working two, three part time jobs and living on lettuce.
Cabbage is better, it is more nutritious, by the way.
Anyway, the Myth of Reagan needs to be lanced once and for all. This was the beginning of a huge corporate takeover of everything and also, the severe and crippling inequality we face today.
And, our foreign adventures were destructive and underlie many of our subsequent problems including the fact that we interceded in Central American affairs, promoting right wing ideologues sometimes over the will of the people. We adventured in Central Asia, trying to play The Great Game and that backfired in spectacular fashion. Entire countries, ancient cultures have been all but destroyed and we are still at war.
Yes the Soviet Union tore down the wall. Congratulations are owed the Russian people.
Maybe they will get rid of their overlord Putin and so can we, along with his disastrous and cruel puppet who is dragging our great country into the Dark Ages.
69
@Sophia
I'm in total agreement with you about the beginning of this demise was Reagan's (or was it his behind-the-scenes speech writers?) "deficits don't matter" and so on.
Are there any wetlands left in America that haven't been covered by parking lots or condominiums? I saw this happen when I was becoming aware in the mid 80s.
BTW, I like your name.
4
@Sophia
If you haven't read "Sleepwalking Through History" by Haynes Johnson, you should--a 1991 factual account that debunks many of the myths about Reagan economic and military policies.
So little discussion of what may be a major determinant in the 2020 election, ie., Russian (and other country) influence. You can be sure that Russian Psychological Warfare techniques have improved since their successes in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and England's Brexit vote. These elections proved that large portions of the electorate are easily manipulated through on line sites or phony media presentations. Political parties as well as nations are now becoming sophisticated in social media manipulation. What kind of preparations are currently being made to counteract such propaganda methods?
20
The main reason for Trump's electoral success was not economic distress, but populist resentment of all-talk no-action establishment politicians. Trump exploited that resentment to win first against establishment Republicans in the primaries, and then against the establishment Democrats in the general election.
While it is certainly true that Trump has little hope of benefiting from a major economic upsurge over the next two years, that is rather beside the point of what is likely to determine the outcome of the 2020 election.
More relevant is that Democrats cannot expect disasters (economic or otherwise), over the next two years, to turn Trump's supporters against him.
Except for temporary catastrophes which he deliberately causes himself, Trump does not particularly thrive on danger and discomfort, and he tends to listen to advice when he gets into problems he cannot talk his way out of. Furthermore, even disasters not his making won't necessarily be associated with him. Depending on the nature of such future disasters, how they unfold, and how establishment politicians react, he may be able to pin blame on them.
The only way to be sure of winning against Trump is for Democratic party leaders to change the tepid, waffling tokenism which cost them the presidency in 2016, and for Republicans to wake up to the longer term costs of Trump having hijacked their party. In short, the GOP needs to rediscover consistent principles, and Democrats to find their lost backbones.
14
So, what do we think his retaliations or defensive maneuvers might be? He could always start a war, since that usually seems to be put starts in many eyes, deluding them into patriotism and support. What cards are there to left to play after terrorism, immigration, or firings? What's left to lie about?
10
@James Igoe
After Trump's approval rating dipped into the mid-30's in the first six months of his presidency, he resorted to basically threatening North Korea instead of continuing in that time-honored US tradition of emphasizing readiness and solidarity with South Korea and Japan. Sure, North Korea was firing off missiles and assassinating members of Kim Jong-Un's extended family, but when have those two things ever not happened?
4
@James Igoe
I fear something awful might happen due to this shutdown - an attack, illness from contaminated food, heaven forbid an incident with a plane.
He could then declare an emergency and seize great power.
1
@James Igoe I agree he’s looking for his Reichstag fire, especially as the investigations circle ever closer, and he may just find one - a reason his talk of “national emergency” is alarming.
1
Trump's a big fan of Putin and will quite possibly imitate him. When Putin's approval ratings dropped a few years ago, he invaded Ukraine and his approval in Russia went sky-high. Putin's ratings have fallen back recently and are now at a dangerously low level for an autocrat, so there is a real worry that Putin will invade Ukraine further or will pick on some other neighbor.
If Trump wants to emulate Reagan, he'll invade some small country in the Caribbean late this year (right on schedule with Reagan's invasion of Grenada in 1983). If Trump wants to emulate Putin, he'll invade Mexico with "volunteers" that are not in uniform. If Trump wants to go big, though, watch out below; we will all be in peril.
19
Thank you.
I appreciate your comparison with the Reagan era and especially your candid mention of how a 'cornered Trump' might lash out.
Of ALL the risks investors face - lowered growth forecasts for the US AND the world, etc it strikes me that the POLITICAL risk the world faces because of our president is enormous.
No matter how much I'd like to participate, there is comfort in cash and I sleep well - at least with respect to our finances.
Other things, not so much.
10
You might be a little optimistic here, Paul. The winds have been blowing in Presidents' favor for 9 years now, but- with the exception of the post World War II boom- corrections to growth rarely fail to occur within a ten year period.
A recession could easily occur before the end of Trump's first term. Potential drivers are numerous: more global warming caused fires and floods, a return to reality in consumer consumption patterns, overseas revulsion of America- caused by Trump- leading to boycotts or disinterest in American products, crop failures, and normal, cyclical corrections in all areas of our economy. Interest rates have goosed growth in the past, but not this time, since they are already low. Response from our oligarchs has been to buy yachts and villas in Europe and the South Pacific.
The Republicans are destroying our "Brand". The United States is now Trump University, full of toxic chemicals and dangerous food and drug exports. Nice going, Donny. You messed us up- and, by blocking global warming action, the whole world.
59
As far as I can tell the majority of Swindler Donald's voters are completely ignorant of his business operations. They believe what he has told them, negative information is considered Liberal bashing, and attacks on him.. His voter base really believes he is bringing them prosperity. They see the employment numbers hear the same mantra many times over, as far as they are concerned it is the liberals and Democrats that are the liars.
His approval rating is from 34% to 40% of the population, with Republican voters in the 80%. His record is of repossessions, bankruptcies, swindling small contractors, investments in losing and illegal schemes like MLMs. The GOP is his enabler, Republicans are getting what they have wanted for decades, smaller government, conservative right wing courts, private contractors taking over traditional government functions, with little oversight.
His administration is being run by corrupt appointees, more being convicted of a felony, than those on the terrorist watch list have crossed the southern border. The GOP Senate has approved of this, they are their kind of guys.
Many people believe the economy is doing great, he tells them so, it is unfathomable why they believe him from what we know, but they do. The GOP actions have produced a short term economic high, they will try to blame any failure on the Democrats.
Facts are for liberals, Republicans have alternative facts, they have to hit the bottom before reality will sink in.
77
@David Underwood
His base all watched Trump's The Apprentice show and believed it to be a real life depiction of how big business works rather than a tiresome reality show with no bearing on real life.
They believe Trump really is a successful self made businessman instead of the failure with 6 bankruptcies and a string of fraud based businesses. Oh and if his father hadn't continually bailed him out financially he'd have been destitute or in jail.
2
@David Underwood And that's what's really scary between the propaganda, the willing ness of Trump's supporters to believe whatever he spoons them and voting manipulation can Democrats ever win again?
1
@David Underwood
The base percentage is not enough to win re-election:
It’s all those other Conservatives/Republicans/ Independencts who know better but continue to support the GOP leadership and their steady destruction of our rule of law, separation of powers, trashing of our air, water, environment, and civil rights. These are the “good men, women” who allow evil to triumph by doing nothing because they feel they are better off under such policies.
I know it’s naive, but, I continue to hope something will soon change for the good and shift so many of us away from our self destructive complacency before the end of our democracy.
All good points. However, a big reason Reagan won big in 1984 is that he was more popular than Mondale who was still carrying the Carter baggage. All it takes is to be more likable than your opponent. It remains to be seen if the Democrats will nominate someone who inspires and gets people to the polls.
14
@Chad. That’s why I want Cory Booker to run, because of all the contenders and might-be-contenders I’ve seen so far, he is the only one with charisma. I like his policies and ideas, but charisma is critical. Would love to see a Booker/Klobuchar ticket. People would get excited about that.
6
"with unemployment below 4 percent, it’s not clear whether there’s any economic slack at all. There’s certainly not enough to allow the 7-plus percent growth rates in real personal income that prevailed in the run-up to the 1984 election"
This confuses economic expansion with who gets paid for what is done.
True, without drawing on the pool of people no longer even counted as unemployed, actual large expansion of economic activity is not likely.
However, labor could be paid more for what it already contributes. Labor shortage causes that. Right now, an extraordinarily large proportion goes to capital, and labor has not shared in the growth of its productivity for 40 years.
There is room there for "growth rates in real personal income," as Krugman called it.
13
Paul, far from saving him, I think that the economy of the next two years will almost certainly sink Trump.
Economic growth in China is slowing - at least partly in response to Trump's trade war - and that can only slow the profits of major multinationals like Apple, which will consequently drive the market lower over the long term.
Consumer confidence can only be compromised by knowing that our President is an overgrown child willing to shut down the government whenever he doesn't get his way.
And Trump's rapidly expanding, utterly unproductive budget deficit cannot be instilling trust in those investors who worry about America's long-term debt.
Paul, I would not be surprised if by the end of Trump's reign of error the stock market were retesting the levels of Election Day 2016, if not plunging through them.
Nothing Americans have seen from this President should inspire confidence in his long-term stewardship of the economy.
39
So apparently, it's the default setting of Republicans to fool themselves about cause and effect and misremember history.
23
Ah, but history’s so inconvenient , Darsan54.
If people keep harping on gosh darn results, they’ll never be able to see what a perfectly sound economic theory it was.
@Darsan54
I think more likely they simply have an alternate agenda.
it is amazing to see conservatives continue to defend Laffer Curve fiscal policy and believe it to be a legitimate theory despite the fact that the economist whose name it bears was and remains a third tier economist.
the economic policies of Ronald Reagan's administration directly led to the decimation of the middle class—from NAFTA to the Laffer Curve mishegas that holds them enthralled to this day.
29
Art Laffer is consulting Kentucky's Governor Matt Bevin on the state of Kentucky's economy. It's too depressing for words.
8
The Laffer curve actually supports liberal fiscal policy. Just go in the opposite direction of the graph, to the left. Some people, if given a negative tax rate, have a greater incentive to work. What is a negative tax rate? Social support programs.
Please send me my Nobel prize.
1
@teoc2
The Laffer curve is perfectly sound economic theory. At 0% tax rates, tax revenue will be zero. At 100% tax rates, tax revenue will be zero too because nobody would work. in between, tax revenue goes up then down. At some high tax rates, 100% for example, lowering the tax rate will increase tax revenue. and at some low tax rates, 0% for example, raising the rate will increase tax revenue. Makes sense and I bet professor Krugman agrees. The problem is the right wingers believe (or pretend) we are on the side of the curve where lowering tax rates will increase tax revenue. They've wrong. They've been proven wrong over and over. But that doesn't mean the Laffer curve isn't sound theory.
"only one other modern president with such a low approval rating two years into his administration"
Trump's approval rating wasn't much better when he was elected. He may have set records for that too.
42
@Mark Thomason: like the U-3 employment rate, maybe the way "popularity" is measured is no longer accurate or realistic.
I know that when called for polls in 2016 (in Ohio, we get a LOT OF polling!)….I never told the truth. I said I was a Pacific Islander and a transgender man who was a Democrat and going to vote for Jill Stein. Why not mess with their heads?
2
Dr. Krugman. Finally a piece that inspires a glimmer of hope. Eitherway, always appreciate a reality check! Thank you
21
I'll never forgive Reagan/Bush and their enablers for purposely sinking the country into debt.
Trump (Reagan without the smile) has made the situation worse.
All for no reason other than for making the rich richer.
Why did we do this to ourselves? Why did we do this to our children?
373
@David Henry
Reading more open comment threads like the Washington Post's, it's amazing how many people come out in defense of oligarchy. Republicans and libertarians' default position to any Democratic or progressive ideas to help people, for example Medicare for All or tax credits for renters (Kamala Harris' idea) is met with chants of "Democrats don't work or pay taxes, they just want free stuff!"
The fact that people are per se of value doesn't impress the right wing. The fact that work is undervalued doesn't seem to register with them at all.
I don't get it. Many on the Right aren't wealthy themselves, many are quite poor, yet they resent any kind of social safety nets or more fair rates of taxation that would benefit us all.
75
"I'll never forgive Reagan/Bush and their enablers for purposely sinking the country into debt. "
David, the country has been in debt ever since it founding except for the period 1835 - 1837 which was followed by our longest (7 years) and worst depression.
In fact, even paying down the debt 10% or more has pushed the economy right into a depression. Yet again:
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits for more than three years, and paid down the debt more than 10% in just six periods since 1776, bringing in enough revenue to cover all of its spending during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 38% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
More recently, while there were many things wrong with the Bush deficits, the worst was that they were too SMALL. The federal deficit adds money to the private sector. The trade deficit takes it out. From about 1996 to 2008 (except for a brief period in 2003) the trade deficit was BIGGER than the federal deficit. Thus the net flow of money was OUT from the private sector.
The cumulative effect of this was the financial crisis of 2008 which would have been a real depression if the FED had not poured TRILLIONS into the banking system to save it.
3
@Len Charlap -- it utterly amazes me that you can ascribe the 2008 meltdown to technical matters of monetary policy with not one word about systematic financial fraud and lack of regulation ... and prosecution.
18
Let's go over it quickly again: America was great at the end of WWII, right? We were half the world's economy and we had a top tax rate of (I think it was around) 80% Much higher than it is now. The middle class was rising big time.
Then Ronald Reagan and the Republicans started selling America on tax cuts. Now every state in the union as well as the union itself have regressive tax systems (favoring the wealthy) and the U.S. is among the most unequal of countries. The infrastructure is crumbling and workers are too unskilled to compete well in the modern world.
IT TAKES SOME SOCIALISM TO MAKE CAPITALISM SUSTAINABLE. PERIOD!
640
actually the top rate was in the mid 90s
19
@Tracy Rupp
Actually it was Kennedy who first cut taxes from the responsible Eisenhower rates. But Reagan then cut on steroids and focused laser sharp on the wealthy. (I remember our taxes went up under Reagan! Never figured out exactly how that happened. But we weren't wealthy so that no doubt had a lot to do with it.)
13
I recall a top income tax rate of 91%. After WW2, we invested in people via the GI Bill, infrastructure via the Interstate Highway system, and labor unions were healthy. Now, we coddle billionaires. I wish every American could experience a ride on a foreign bullet train. My first thought was “Why don’t we have them?”
47
Mr. Krugman I suggest you stick to the economy and let others more astute and experienced predict elections. And saying categorically that he won't be re-elected is just wrong. The economy will be fine, the first two years better than everyone expected, probably even you? The President knows how to make good trade deals (USMCA) and stay out of bad ones (TPP) and this will help the economy. He understands that America's real trade leverage is our buying power that is diluted in multi-nation deals like TPP.
Finally, Trump will run on his record. Besides the 3% GDP, consumer confidence is at a 17 year high and unemployment at 50 year low with minorities at historic lows. North Korea returning hostages, remains, not testing and planning a 2nd Summit. Assad not gassing his people, the missiles worked, we will get out but with protection for Kurds through written agreement with Turkey.
ISIS caliphait is gone and we haven't had any major terrorist attack here since Trump took office. The depleted military is being re-built. Illegal immigration reduced (67%) and with more than 2k felons deported, America is safer.
The VA can offer better Vet services, helped by their ability to fire incompetent, something Obama couldn't do. First Step will be law as is experimental drugs Try It First Act. Lethal weapons supplied to Ukraine, again something Obama wouldn't do. Energy independent, first time energy net exporter, Keystone and ANWAR access in reserve. etc. etc.
6
@Frank Leibold
"Trump will run on his record"
Yes, by then his tax returns will be on the record, not to mention the results of the special counsel's investigation, several NY-state investigations, possibly New Jersey and FL probes, House and Senate oversight (recall what the minority member of the latter's foreign relations committee recently noted) and more.
Besides, if "Illegal immigration reduced (67%)" is true, what's with the so-called crisis at the border?
7
@Frank Leibold how are you defining terrorist attacks? I should think mass shootings by white guys would surely qualify and there have been plenty of those since Trump’s election.
1
@Frank Leibold Trump effect: $1.5 trillion added to the deficit during full employment for tax cuts to him and his rich cronies, environmental deregulation so that dirty coal, oil, frackers etc can dump sludge and chemicals in our water ways and ground without liability, disastrous no plan withdrawal from Syra, alienation of our allies, cozying up to dictators, trade tariff's causing inflated consumer prices and farmers not being able to sell their products, housing market on continuous downward trend, thoughtless government shutdown creating economic havoc for millions. Increased tribalism and divides between electorate. Filled the government with grifters and "loyal" people with zero experience. Frankly, I can't think of a single good thing Trump has done for our country.
1
Excellent evidence-based article. Appreciation of evidence, facts and historical precedent are completely ignored by DJT and his cult of followers. A winning strategy for the Democrats in 2020 will be to drive down over and over facts and evidence. Educate, dismantle and uncover the lies, half- truths, false equivalences and outright lies. This is what America desperately needs and what Mr, Krugman does so well.
14
Mr. Krugman I suggest you stick to the economy and let others more astute and experienced predict elections. And saying categorically that he won't be re-elected is wrong. The economy will be fine, the first two years better than everyone expected, probably even you? The President knows how to make good trade deals (USMCA) and stay out of bad ones (TPP) and this will help the economy. He understands that America's real trade leverage is our buying power that is diluted in multi-nation deals like TPP.
Finally, Trump will run on his record. Besides the 3% GDP, consumer confidence is at a 17 year high and unemployment at 50 year low with minorities at historic lows. North Korea returning hostages, remains, not testing and planning a 2nd Summit. Assad not gassing his people, the missiles worked, we will get out but with protection for Kurds through written agreement with Turkey.
ISIS caliphait is gone and we haven't had any major terrorist attack here since Trump took office. The depleted military is being re-built. Illegal immigration reduced (67%) and more than 2k felons deported, America is safer.
The VA can offer better Vet services, helped by their ability to fire incompetent, something Obama couldn't do. First Step will be law as is experimental drugs Try It First Act. Lethal weapons supplied to Ukraine, again something Obama wouldn't do. Energy independent, first time energy net exporter, Keystone and ANWAR access in reserve. etc. etc.
2
@Frank Leibold, keep dreaming buddy. That’s what we want you to do. Have you been asleep for the last two years? This guy is dismantling our democracy, and we will keep coming to the polls like we did in 2018 until he is banished to the history books as s bad blip in the road.
Maybe a war with Iran will.
Recent aggressive moves explicitly directed against Iran in Syria seemed designed to develop a confrontation that will drag the U.S. into a direct armed conflict.
There is no proof that the Administration has the competence to control the situation.
A war with Iran would invoke the classic Republican use of a mad policy to command "patriotic" loyalty to the political party of the current Commander-in-Chief.
7