Paul Krugman (credit, debt, borrowing, buy)

[Novadhd5150]

This guys has been around along time. He was on Cspan this morning preaching more spending and borrowing to get us out of a recession.
He claims it worked in WW11 and beyond but those were different times.
Hid ideology seems pretty far left..I dont believe more debt will get us to a better company despite having low inflation./ interest rates.

[Jesse276]

I've heard of him & read a couple of his columns. Out of that, I get that he's saying that the economy is in trouble because of a lack of demand. Businesses won't expand (hire people) because they aren't sure there's going to be a payoff. So, people are out of work & can't purchase... the cycle repeats.

As far as I can tell, he's not saying that spending is the answer to all recessions, but to this one specifically.

If you want to ignore him, you could probably just assume he's a tax & spend (insert epithet here)... I think just the political idiots do that, they're afraid of real debate & ideas.

Anyone else have any thoughts on his writing?

[cdelena]

I think the guy lives in his own world where he interprets history and economic data through his own bias and desires. I have so little respect for his recommendations that I discount most of what he says.

[jm31828]

Originally Posted by Novadhd5150

This guys has been around along time. He was on Cspan this morning preaching more spending and borrowing to get us out of a recession.
He claims it worked in WW11 and beyond but those were different times.
Hid ideology seems pretty far left..I dont believe more debt will get us to a better company despite having low inflation./ interest rates.

He actually makes a lot of sense. He says all you have to do is look at the struggling nations in Europe right now that have decided to try to "cut" their way out of this economic crisis- all it has done is sink them deeper into trouble because there is even less investment going on to spark any kind of a come-back. What he's saying is that investment is what spurs growth.

[las vegas drunk]

Originally Posted by cdelena

I think the guy lives in his own world where he interprets history and economic data through his own bias and desires. I have so little respect for his recommendations that I discount most of what he says.

I agree with you with the exception that I discount all of what he says.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by jm31828

He actually makes a lot of sense. He says all you have to do is look at the struggling nations in Europe right now that have decided to try to "cut" their way out of this economic crisis- all it has done is sink them deeper into trouble because there is even less investment going on to spark any kind of a come-back. What he's saying is that investment is what spurs growth.

Krugman chooses his data carefully. Interestingly enough France and most European countries have NOT cut spending. They have slowed growth in spending. There is a big difference.

Krugman doesn't talk about investment. He talks about GOVERNMENT investment. Somehow he thinks the federal government, by spending more taxpayer funds that don't exist, will spur growth. He discredits the impact massive debt (not "ordinary" almounts of debt) has on the economy, both locally and globally.

[Novadhd5150]

Originally Posted by jm31828

He actually makes a lot of sense. He says all you have to do is look at the struggling nations in Europe right now that have decided to try to "cut" their way out of this economic crisis- all it has done is sink them deeper into trouble because there is even less investment going on to spark any kind of a come-back. What he's saying is that investment is what spurs growth.

just like all the investing and spending has made the US economy come back?
OK, maybe corporations are sitting on more cash but they still really are not hiring and unemployment still high.

[shmoov_groovzsd]

Krugman is recognized and has some interesting points of view.

But this is the role of an Economist isnt it? or rather an Economics Prof? Point out flaws based on bias whilst leaning on data to support it?

It makes for interesting reading, but doesnt affect my daily life. My feeling is most people dont make any decisions based on anything he says except maybe buy a subscription to the NY Times because their click count went over the free allotment LOL

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by cdelena

I think the guy lives in his own world where he interprets history and economic data through his own bias and desires. I have so little respect for his recommendations that I discount most of what he says.

Exactly. He's a very intelligent person, yet he's an idiot. It just goes to show that there are a lot of intelligent people out there with no common sense.

He talks about how we spent a lot during WW2, but he ignores the fact that we didn't have huge liabilities like Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid at that time. Heck, those medical programs didn't even come into existence until the 1960s.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by jm31828

He actually makes a lot of sense. He says all you have to do is look at the struggling nations in Europe right now that have decided to try to "cut" their way out of this economic crisis- all it has done is sink them deeper into trouble because there is even less investment going on to spark any kind of a come-back. What he's saying is that investment is what spurs growth.

Sure, investment spurs growth. But if he's talking government "investment" well I think that term is badly abused by liberals. Most government spending isn't an "investment".

Austerity alone will not fix Europe's troubled economies...that much is true. They have a lot of rigid labor market rules and other regulations that stifle economic growth that need to be revised. Germany got rid of some of it's stifling labor market rules and it's economy is doing better than the rest of the Eurozone. Other European countries need to do the same.