Filed Under: Anything Peaceful
Tags: Balanced Budget • deficit spending • great depression • Herbert Hoover • New York Times • Paul Krugman
Shame on You, Paul Krugman
We are certainly used to the fallacious Keynesian “economics” that pours forth from most of Paul Krugman’s New York Times columns. That’s bad enough. But dishonesty too? What’s the excuse for that? In a recent column called “Fifty Herbert Hoovers,” Krugman expressed fear that the nation’s governors would follow in the footsteps of Hoover, with devastating consequences for the economy. And what did Hoover do that has Krugman so concerned? He writes:
No modern American president would repeat the fiscal mistake of 1932, in which the federal government tried to balance its budget in the face of a severe recession….But even as Washington tries to rescue the economy, the nation will be reeling from the actions of 50 Herbert Hoovers — state governors who are slashing spending in a time of recession…. [Emphasis added.]
Krugman here leads his readers to believe that Hoover tried to balance the budget by slashing spending. In fact, Hoover did not reduce spending. On the contrary, he increased it. If he aimed at balancing the budget, it was through tax increases not spending cuts. For example, the top marginal income-tax rate jumped from 24 to 63 percent. Anyway, he actually ran large budget deficits. In this, as in many other areas, Hoover anticipated Franklin Roosevelt. (See my article, “Bad Deal,” in The American Conservative, Jan. 12.)Does anyone believe that Krugman is unaware of that fact?Cross-posted at Free Association.
Comment by Brent on 5 January 2009:
Good point, but does anyone actually believe Krugman isn’t a chronic liar? (Political hacks either don’t care if they have to “fudge” the truth a little or they take refuge in the “doing it for the greater good” rationale.)
Comment by Steve Hogan on 5 January 2009:
When you’re a big government shill, as Krugman is, no amount of lying and deception is considered beyond the pale. The man is embarrassing. And to think this snake oil salesman won the Nobel Prize! Astonishing.
Comment by Bill Anderson on 5 January 2009:
If there is one thing we can count on twice a week, it is a series of howlers from Paul Krugman. The man is shameless, a true charlatan. Great comments on your part, Sheldon!
Comment by Eric Provost on 10 January 2009:
The Nobel Prize once had value. We have gone from a prize worthy of Milton Friedman to Paul Krugman and Al Gore winning the prize. It means less than nothing if Al Gore and his silly movie are worthy.
Comment by Sean Hastings on 12 January 2009:
Now to be fair, Al Gore and the IPCC received the Nobel “Peace Prize”, not one of the several Nobel prizes for any actual science, nor even the Nobel “Prize in Literature” for writing some sort of plausible fiction.The 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Al Gore and the IPCC for “their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change”Now, it might not seem immediately obvious what this has to do with promoting peace. But please consider the that logical end goal of environmentalism is to eliminate everything artificial (made by man). And that this is a goal which can only really be accomplished by eliminating all human beings.Furthering the environmentalist cause, by stirring up irrational fears which open the door for greater government restrictions of economic freedoms, is another step in the direction of a world in which we (all of us) shall “Rest In Peace.”So it actually makes sense.
Comment by Doug Thorson on 18 January 2009:
Thank you Mr. Richmond for exposing yet another lie. As our nation drives off the cliff of socialism its guys like Krugman who are providing the fuel. Keep up the great work at FEE.