As I said in today’s column, nobody who thought Trump would be a disaster should change his or her mind because he won the election. He will, in fact, be a disaster on every front. And I think he will eventually drag the Republican Party into the abyss along with his own reputation; the question is whether he drags the rest of the country, and the world, down with him.
But it’s important not to expect this to happen right away. There’s a temptation to predict immediate economic or foreign-policy collapse...
America has a vast stock of reputational capital, built up over generations; even Trump will take some time to squander it.
The true awfulness of Trump will become apparent over time. Bad things will happen, and he will be clueless about how to respond; if you want a parallel, think about how Katrina revealed the hollowness of the Bush administration, and multiply by a hundred. And his promises to bring back the good old days will eventually be revealed as the lies they are.
But rather than just being clueless on how to respond, I suspect at just the wrong time Trump will act anyway in a decisive manner that will be extremely destructive---with bad advisers goading him.
And, of course, my view on what needs to be done in the place of Trump actions differs dramatically from those of Krugman in almost every area. Still, I'd rather have Krugman as president rather than Trump.
-RW
You should have appended "Regarding economics..." on that last sentence, otherwise it's one of the dumbest things you've ever said.
ReplyDelete.
DeleteTrump will be a disaster at what ?
Is it possible to make Obamocare worse ?
Is it possible to increase the strength of ISIS more that Obamo has ?
Is it possible to kill more people / civilians with drones ?
Could you have a worse relationship with Russia ?
Could you make TPP even more terrible, or more secretive ?
Could he run the debt up faster than Obamo administration has ?
Could student loans and college costs increase faster during Trump Administration ?
Could FHA and VA issue more bad ( subprime ) mortgages ?
Could the auto companies issue more bad ( subprime ) car loans ?
.
Could he take away more from the savers, retirees, and responsible persons
by stealing their interest on their savings ?
Could the FED borrow more and support corporation Stock Buy Backs ( artificial economy ) even more ?
.
What exactly will Trump make worse ?
.
.
What exactly will Trump make worse ?
/
/
So, we need to go back to Bush in 2005 for a parallel? There were no such parallels during the reign of St. Obamao? It's kind of ironic how Krugie is using Trump's designated descriptor, "disaster." Trump must've used that word 100 times in the debates to describe the current administration and Killary's policies.
ReplyDeleteAs despicable and wrongheaded as the left-wing establishment is, I at least take some comfort in the notion that they're mostly aware that they're parasites, and have enough sense not to kill the golden goose that sustains them. Even if it might pain their progressive sensibilities, they've often confined their economic meddling to "nudging" so as not to upset the gravy train, and as a result have become a sort of bulwark against Sandersite central planning insanity.
ReplyDeleteTrump I THINK will be similarly prudent in avoiding carrying out the hamfisted interventionism he's alluded to during his campaign, but I'm less confident of it.
Krugman is a tool. What purpose does this tool serve? I'd expect this blog to point out Krugman's flip-flop on debt, deficits and government programs now that a Republican is in office. It doesn't matter if Krugman is right or wrong in his analysis. It just matters whether he's consistent with his previous statements and why he's changed his mind when politically convenient. The leftist and "independent" consumers who gobble up Krugman's BS need to be aware he is a politically motivated rat who is consistently wrong on economics and world affairs. This is the way to change who people listen to. RW, however, spends more time calling out Peter Schiff than Paul Krugman. Now is the time to make Krugman eat his words and expose him for the shill that he is.
ReplyDeleteNow he says: "It’s at least possible that bigger budget deficits will, if anything, strengthen the economy briefly." implying that we should be wary of bigger deficits in the long term and using weasel language to describe the short term.
Here's what he said in his column "Debt is Good" when Rand Paul decried US debt and deficit levels 18 months ago:
"One answer is that issuing debt is a way to pay for useful things, and we should do more of that when the price is right. The United States suffers from obvious deficiencies in roads, rails, water systems and more; meanwhile, the federal government can borrow at historically low interest rates. So this is a very good time to be borrowing and investing in the future, and a very bad time for what has actually happened: an unprecedented decline in public construction spending adjusted for population growth and inflation."
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/opinion/paul-krugman-debt-is-good-for-the-economy.html
Why would Krugman be against Trump's public infrastructure program?
Evan Smiley has apparently not heard of Obamacare, Common Core, the Federal Reserve, the EPA, the FCC, etc. etc.
If you follow this blog, Wenzel trashes almost everything Krugmam says. He definitely understands he's a hack. Its just that whenever he halfway agrees with him on anything, he points it out because it is so rare.
Delete"Still, I'd rather have Krugman as president rather than Trump."
ReplyDeleteOn that point, I'll have to disagree. Through having been a businessman, Trump has at least some grasp of reality. What has Krugman ever done besides masturbate with words? The man is a complete and total idiot.
It could be that RW would merely rather see Krugman holding the bag than a supposed "capitalist businessman," when the cycle turns.
ReplyDelete