Paul Krugman explains economics for us hysterical conservatives
In addition to being an insufferable leftist, Paul Krugman is a world-renowned economist. He even has a Nobel Prize to prove it.
I’m just a retired engineer who refuses to keep my opinions to myself. I shouldn’t be able to ridicule him on economic matters, but he just makes it so danged easy. It’s seems clear that our Nobel laureate is either economically illiterate or just plain dishonest. I doubt he’s economically illiterate, but I’ll let you decide.
Krugman recently ran an article entitled “The Progressive Case for Bidenomics.” Apparently, he didn’t get the memo. The left isn’t attaching old Joe’s name to the economy anymore. They seem to think it may be unhelpful next year. I, however, continue to use “Bidenomics” with reckless abandon, as I think it will be extremely helpful.
I knew Krugman’s piece was going to be a doozy, right from the first paragraph.
There are two big questions right now about the U.S. economy. One is why it’s doing so well. The other is why so many Americans insist that it’s terrible.
That must be why Joe’s sycophants are backing away from the whole “Bidenomics” thing, because the economy is doing so darned well. Maybe Joe doesn’t like to brag. We need only ignore little things like mortgage payments doubling in the last three years, and loan defaults reaching a ten-year high, to see the genius behind Bidenomics.
Krugman gets to the meat of his case by noting that conservatives are slaves to their emotions, while progressives (i.e., commies) are receptive to reasoned arguments. Try to hold your laughter for a moment. You really need to read his next statement about progressives.
[T]his group, at least, might be willing to listen to arguments that President Biden has accomplished more than they realize, as well as the proposition that half a loaf is better than none and much better than what Biden’s opponents will do if given the chance.
Ignoring the implication that Republicans want to starve everyone, let me translate the rest.
gaslightargue this with enough positive spin, we should be able to convince the spoiled children of the left that Bidenomics is a huge success, because Joe has screwed them out of only half a loaf, and not the whole thing.
Krugman hopes his side will learn a little “glass half full” optimism, since “half a loaf” is the normal state in any socialist worker’s paradise.
Krugman then moves on to some productivity good news. Noting that productivity is up 5.2 percent, he writes:
It’s too soon to call it a trend, but there is increasing reason to hope that our economy is capable of growing considerably faster than we previously thought.
Hope is a wonderful thing — and a necessary mindset if one is a socialist. While progressives are hoping that crushing regulations and skyrocketing interest rates won’t hurt productivity long-term, perhaps they could also hope that flooding the highways with E.V.s, and then trying to keep them charged with windmills, solar panels, and wishful thinking, won’t crash our electric grid.
Our Nobel laureate continues with the good news.
Oh, and unit labor costs are up only 1.6 percent over the past year, another indicator that inflation is coming under control.
What Paul doesn’t mention is that unit labor costs taper off if production efficiency is up and fewer workers are needed, or if salary increases are declining. Declining unit labor cost means that either fewer people have jobs or wages aren’t keeping pace with inflation. Leveling off unit labor cost helps inflation because prices stabilize when enough people run out of money. Companies don’t raise prices when they can’t sell products to people who are broke. It’s that supply and demand thingy that I learned about in high school economics. I’m sure Krugman understands it, too, but saying it that way doesn’t quite fit his narrative, does it? Instead, he’s trying to convince progressives to avoid fretting over their impending eviction or repossession, because the economy is unbelievably healthy. Heck, it’s time to celebrate Joe’s accomplishment of putting us on a path to defeat the inflation he created — once we’ve suffered enough.
Krugman then notes that businesses are recovering from our pandemic psychotic break.
Another report showed that unfilled job openings are down.
“Unfilled job openings are down” happens just before the “no job openings” signs show up in windows. That means we’re moving from an employee’s market to an employer’s market. It’s a transition from a place where employers compete for workers to a place where workers compete for jobs. To make it sporting, old Joe just added 3.8 million “asylum seekers” to the competition. That’s enough people to populate Los Angeles, dumped into the job market, and willing to work for minimum wage. That is indeed exceptional news — for businesses. Maybe that unit labor cost thing hasn’t even bottomed out yet.
Krugman then gives us a little demonstration of Nobel-level analysis. He notes that inflation is an issue of not prices, but perception.
As I wrote not long ago, there has to be some statute of limitations on how far back people look for their sense of what things should cost.
Let me translate: This is the new normal. Deal with it.
Perhaps Paul should give Joe Biden a remedial class on inflation. Joe still thinks it’s a price thing, saying:
Let me be clear, to any corporation that has not brought their prices back down, even as inflation has come down ...
Did you get that? Inflation is down, but prices aren’t. That’s some higher-level analysis there. Joe and Paul should debate the issue. Whoever wins gets a Nobel Prize. Maybe they’d let Sean Hannity moderate if Fox promises to forgo the laugh track.
The huge gap between favorable economic indicators and grim public perceptions is unique to the United States, where people believe many bad things about the economy that simply aren’t true.
I know he was dying to add: Because you entitled Americans have an unreasonable expectation of prosperity. That’s not how socialism works — just ask the Europeans.
And it wouldn’t be a Krugman article without some gratuitous insults (which is why I feel justified in poking him back). He asserts that debating with conservatives is pointless.
Point out that Americans are more likely than not to express positive views about their family’s own financial situation and that strong consumer spending belies claims that families are suffering, and they’ll say you’re a snob telling people how to feel.
At least he didn’t call us semi-fascist MAGA Republicans, but I still must object. I would never call him something I couldn’t substantiate. Besides, it isn’t necessary when it’s so easy to expose his prevarications.
Krugman is engaged in his usual practice of “applying lipstick to a pig” — the pig being Bidenomics. Progressives probably believe every word of his drivel. Fortunately, we conservatives are too emotional to
fall for accept his reasoned analysis.