Economist Paul Krugman on the Future of Capitalism and Democracy in America

For more than forty years Nobel laureate, bestselling economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has fought for a fair, just and liberal future.
Widely considered the voice of 21st century liberal thought both in the United States and across the globe, 2008 Nobel laureate for Economics Paul Krugman combines the erudition and insight of a renowned scholar with the immediate relevance, clarity and originality of thought expected of a columnist at the New York Times.
A former professor at LSE, Princeton, Yale and MIT, perhaps the world’s leading theorist of international trade relations, and a passionate advocate of a fairer and more democratic world, he joined the How To Academy to present his insights into the economics driving our public policy decisions.
In this talk with Tortoise editor, Guardian columnist and author Matthew d'Ancona, Krugman debunks the economic myths and lies that cloud political debate. Incisive, authoritative and accessible, this talk will arm you with a far richer understanding of the competing ideas and ideologies playing out behind the headlines.

[@MI2003]

Wonderful title, I bet Professor John Quiggin is loving it. He wrote "Zombie Economics" several years ago about exactly the same topics.

[@AfshinHaghgoo]

this was 39 days ago… just a little over a month… I feel I've time travelled 20 years.

[@nassimsabba8922]

This is more like space travel. We have crashed earth into hell, Trump was just an orange warning sign.

[@westthumbfilms1850]

God yes....There must be a Rip Van Winkle metaphor here somewhere...

[@billytheweasel]

The rampant betrayals of democracy seem so quaint now.

[@carlosreyes5371]

@Anthony Joseph He is...makes me wish the Einsatzgruppen were still around...

[@cutl00senc]

Anthony Joseph bigs words for a guy with little intelligence

[@billykobilca6321]

It's so true... past few quarters highest 3 job categories hiring... Home health care (26k), healthcare aid then hospitality all low wage low benefits ...

[@billykobilca6321]

@Alan Hardcastle family ? Kids?

[@BlakeZeb]

Alan Hardcastle What does that have to do with the statement billy made

[@hjander]

Very informative, thanks.

[@paulbrown1222]

Can we explain away the Bail out to industry, and corporations to postpone growth when we could put the investment into the hands of the consumer and gifts should be to provide disposable income for economy as a whole.

[@user-bv5xn4bh7r]

49:37 “You can queue, obviously.” 😂

[@KFCJones]

First questioner both referred to and sounds like Malcolm Gladwell.

[@maxheadrom3088]

The western world ... the group of land masses not entirely in the west but surely north of the equator.

[@neomagneto84]

Except for Australia.

[@maxheadrom3088]

@@neomagneto84 Australia is a funny place ... (in this regard) ... since it's complete in the east and south of the equator. I just don't know how it would fit here ... I believe we could put them above the equator. My country, Brazil, is also weird ... a large economy but still a poor country ... and a Latin American country that does not speak Spanish - and contrary to Reagan's belief, Buenos Aires is not our capital ... it's not even in Brazil! lol Good point, Reason!

[@dylanrieck6671]

"once prejudice and hate start spreading, we're always next in line"

[@jackfrosty4674]

Be sorry when Jesus comes and takes his Christians and Jews away. Then only the evil ones and fence sitter will be left. Then they will truly live in evil world they created. Call on JESUS and be save today. Join the good side.

[@zachariahkerner7896]

I was playing WoW as he made the WoW reference XD.

[@tungtjockis]

That guy askinga question referring to malcolm gladwell sounds excactly like gladwell, so much that i suspect he actually is gladwell indisguise.

[@billytheweasel]

he's so quiet.

[@woodsywerks]

I thought exactly the same thing!

[@lytlechamberlain761]

49:50 Is it just me, or does the guy asking about Malcolm Gladwell sound exactly like Malcolm Gladwell?

[@NickHanson]

Yes, he do.

[@danielm5161]

lol for real

[@danielm5161]

omg I thought it was really him until the camera went on him

[@andybaldman]

Jesus, totally.

[@lytlechamberlain761]

@@andybaldman Someone needs to check if he's done a podcast episode on becoming a master of disguise at the Sherlock Holmes level.

[@sealinski]

P. Krugman 1998, “The growth of the Internet will slow drastically, as the flaw in ‘Metcalfe’s law' becomes apparent: most people have nothing to say to each other! By 2005, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s”

[@TesterBoy]

Shows how ignorant and arrogant he is.

[@berntengdahl1519]

Actually, most of Krugman's economic predictions are good. He has a very good understanding of how economics works, and it shows in his discussions. Sometimes he makes predictions that later turn out to be wrong, but it's rare, and when it happens he usually admits it. Unfortunately, some people try to discredit Krugman by digging up old quotes where he says things that are wrong, and ignore all the predictions that were spot on. Like you just did here.

[@cv4809]

@@berntengdahl1519 what predictions did he get right?

[@davidtyrrell6572]

@@cv4809 He predicted there would be internet trolls.

[@donrastar1579]

There is only one bottom line to economics. The bottom line is that a nation needs capital.

[@Laurence2000]

10:30 “It’s 2020, and the US has 3.5 percent unemployment.” Yikes, how the tables have turned.

[@gmshadowtraders]

haha, worse than the great depression. Get this hack Krugman back on, I wanna hear his retort.

[@aztro1]

gmshadowtraders its a fucking pandemic. No one saw this coming and the economic impact will be temporary. The economy will bounce back next year

[@BlakeZeb]

Jack Jack Yeah, I mean wether the economy does or doesn’t bounce back, to act like he was a hack for not seeing the damage coming from a pandemic is pretty silly. Do better.

[@advocate1563]

Jack Jack and sadly one year further on i suspect the cost of lockdown as the "one size fits all" response to the pandemic will be highly discedited. Now that was a zombie idea.

[@jackfrosty4674]

@@aztro1 Since it is all planed it is getting worse according to un plan 21. Wake up.

[@StanKindly]

...and just days later everything changed 😬

[@andrewkent8470]

I agree never forget the opium wars

[@rd264]

PK is has some good insights and at the same time hes not overreaching and is careful to avoid pretension.

[@geoffreynhill2833]

Flamin' excellent! 😉

[@davidingleby7341]

Eric Lonergan is the first economics person I googled who doesn't have an IMDB page... Poor guy...

[@maxheadrom3088]

The US Philosopher John Searle has an argument that Zombies are logically impossible. Zombies are good to show how the living react to extreme situations - no good zombie movie is about zombies.

[@TeaParty1776]

Zombies symbolize the mind-body split of mysticism.

[@rexstout8177]

This is the fault of 'liberalism' and the psychology of its adherents. During the hight of the financial crisis, the economist magazine used to claim that fiscal stimulus was an experimental new idea that wouldn't work and has always failed. Greece is what the UK would look like they claimed. They obviously knew better, so it could only have been political.

[@stevengarland697]

And this is why I should trust elites i.e. one's betters?

[@danielscheinhaus5210]

When will the English get rid of that expression "one's betters"? There isn't nor was there ever any "one's betters". The expression is a representation of a terrible notion that the English nobility instilled into their serfs, thus enslaving their minds.

[@stevengarland697]

@@danielscheinhaus5210 It was sarcasm.

[@gregrichey840]

Does macro economic conditions ever play into the thought process or is it all based on political beliefs and feelings? If the opportunities are there the money will follow. If you stifle opportunity the money will leave. I feel like Paul Krugman is far too polluted by politics to be rational. Politicians right and left are driven by special interests. Sometimes that works for me personally and sometimes it works against me.

[@chrismack3327]

Off base. If you build a society where people will want to live and enjoy living within, then the money will flow there regardless of the cost up to a certain point. There is reason to be in New York or London or Paris or Los Angeles, and it actually costs more to do business there accompanied with more red tape.

[@gregrichey840]

@@chrismack3327 with no opportunity no one would want to live in those places.

[@chrismack3327]

@@gregrichey840 Power also plays a role in every day life. Government, wields power as does business and corporations depending on their strength. Money is the proverbial rat in society. It flows to the path of least resistance and abandons ship at the first sign of turbulence. The key to governing for the masses is to control the outflow of money from society. Taxation is a balance game. Too little and you cant provide a vibrant and viable society. Too much and you stifle investment. But let there be no doubt there is such a thing as a public good, and even though all wont use it, it benefits all, hence it should and will be funded. You will find in the near future that the vast majority of skilled people will move towards communities that strike the best balance between public services and infrastructure and ability to work and live peacefully.

[@paulparker7191]

Greg Richey based on what research?

[@gregrichey840]

@@chrismack3327 I absolutely agree. Government wields a lot of power. Power to increase opportunity or kill it.

[@markschuette3770]

cheap dirty energy is what is competing against human organic labor- its also the main factor in the concentration of wealth into the hands or the few. the solution is a carbon tax- yes everyone will need to sacrifice, but eventually human labor will will be in demand and increase in value. and this is also the direction we need to go for environmental/climate sustainability.

[@TeaParty1776]

> human organic labor slaves without tools producing almost nothing on the bright side, nobody is focused on reality.

[@annieshedden1245]

@@TeaParty1776 you are misinterpreting. gas is too cheap, and causes suburbs and hollow cities. cargo ships are permitted to burn bunker oil. overfishing would happen less if fuel wee more expensive. farming would be more organic or holistic/less-polluting.

[@TeaParty1776]

@@annieshedden1245 Anti-humanist nihilism is your hidden context. Man survives with his independent , focused, sacred mind, not with his mind in chains.

[@DucksDeLucks]

Warren Buffett is successful partly because he has contempt for economics as a predictive science or even as an explanation of what makes a company valuable.

[@roym1444]

What metrics do you use in valuation ?. Im all ways curious to find out other people approaches

[@asusmctablet9180]

This is because from the 1970s to the 2000s, most American economists were just spouting off nonsense Republican propaganda for the Koch brothers. So outside of a few real economists (who were constantly hated and slandered by everyone else in the field), nobody had anything useful for Buffett.

[@Kredeidi]

51:30 this is a wild theory ... in what way does the average person in Poland get to be inhibited by any European elite? I think he grossly overestimates the cultural influence the Euro top has :s Anyone knows what he is talking about?

[@barraqali336]

Enlightening!

[@jlindsay]

Paul Krugman lives in la la land

[@justz00t48]

Wait, is this the fax machine guy?

[@maxheadrom3088]

Paul ... don't tell people you stole the Nobel too! (this is a joke) I disagree a bit (who am I!) with his criticism of "austerity". My country cannot have deficit because we're a developing nation and deficit means very high interest rates. Now, the only country that can print money and not have inflation complaining about deficit .... (Economics has an important lesson: it's more complicated than we think and nobody knows everything)

[@C3yl0]

Please educate yourself! He didn’t won the Nobel Prize! He won the The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences which is an economics prize administered by the Nobel Foundation. While it is not one of the Nobel Prizes, which were established by Alfred Nobel's. 2 different things!

[@ronaldlogan3525]

I come away from this lecture profoundly skeptical that economists do any good at all. Unless waving your hands counts for being helpful.

[@jennyfrost1340]

In feudalism they had priests. In capitalism we have economists. What we need is to overthrow capitalism globally. As Robespierre famously said "We will not be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest!"

[@johnetro8806]

@@jennyfrost1340 fu*king crank lmaooo

[@cv4809]

@@jennyfrost1340 imagine unironically quoting Robespierre

[@billytheweasel]

Good to hear a more egalitarian economist after listening to Mises/Austrian economists.

[@johnetro8806]

Right wing cranksters who cherry pick a couple of facts to show it was governments fault for depression and 2008? Always dat government fault. LMAOOO

[@jonguyen4411]

MC has a nice English accent, it is quite British.

[@peredavi]

Probably because he is British.

[@woxnerw]

This Guy is pretty good at dissecting American Politics from the Democratic point of view.. Now, for me, it might be interesting for him to hear him comment on Politics from the Republican, point of view..

[@platoman3810]

How refreshing to hear disciplined knowledge and clear sincerity eloquently expressed.

[@zeke8701]

Economics is not a science. In science, an experiment can be run, then it must be duplicated. It has to work every time. Economics is different each person you talk to. Economics is an educated opinion.

[@zygi22]

You can’t go back in time and repeat an experiment when it comes to testing economics. But you can still use reason and logic (aka praxeology) and apply those towards economic theories. By the way, Krugman i an evil charlatan and he knows it. The question is how he manages to live with himself.

[@Padtedesco]

@@zygi22 Reason and logic are not experiments. To use data and experiments on economics you need to add science on it, you will go to empirical economics or keynesianism.

[@Syncopator]

@@zygi22 The problem is, if you can't test whether or not your "logic" is correct, you consequently have no way of knowing if it is or not.

[@user-bv5xn4bh7r]

Yeah, tell that to Kansas.

[@annieshedden1245]

you have never taken an econ course.

[@Mohawkmonkey360]

All I heard for at least the 1st 10 minutes was ad hominem attacks and insistence of theories without evidence. Not a sexy start.

[@ricardodiazdeleon134]

Hayek would mop the floor with this guy.

[@patriciomalbran3737]

good exposition, he just need to learn about economy

[@cacosta560]

lol this made me laugh, Krugman is an example that the nobel prize is nothing but a socialist club for the leftist elite.

[@patriciomalbran3737]

​@@cacosta560 haha the worst part is that retards buy that shit

[@berntengdahl1519]

And you need to learn English grammar and spelling.

[@saraahmad5236]

Economics suffers badly from the fact that it is a science that lacks the protection from the prestige gained from aging, as is the case with physics which results from repeating experimentation every time which emphises the foundations of that science in different, varied, and surprising ways. And all reinforce that science. The author Walid Ahmed Kamal Al-Hababi, in his book "The Economic Risk Theory" (the Islamic Macroeconomic System), deals with achieving maximum benefit, detailing the new economic system, which is called the "risk" system in which wealth is distributed to everyone, as it is a stable and more efficient system than the system of free market. In his book "The Theory of Economic Risk" (The Islamic Macroeconomic System), the author believes that the basic idea of ​​this book is to clarify the idea of ​​how to use the principle of time preference in imposing taxes, in order to motivate everyone to invest and raise productivity through tax. He also touched on the state's duties regarding its implementation and the extent of its participation in the market accurately. The author spoke of the zakat banks as the state budget, while the state budget remains the most controversial point among policy makers in countries. At the same time, the writer believes that while economic writings are scarce from a total point of view, there is no writer who spoke about a holistic Islamic economy as a previous system; So this is the only writing, up to the moment. You cannot change a system by fighting the existing truth, as Muslim economists always do, but to change something, you must create a model that makes the current system an outdated system. furthermore If we know that this system achieves the highest rate of spending in a country without need for other economic resources - without taxes or anything else - thus we can see that we are facing unique writings. Whereas, it lays out clear features for the Islamic economy that distinguish it completely from the socialist and capitalist economies, and not a fabrication to be similar to either of them. And he affirms that with this system, other systems will not be able to catch up with our economic progress, no matter what efforts are made, except to implement it. On the other hand, he believes that we will not be able to catch up with the West economically with the current systems, no matter what we try. Finally, the author asserts, that economics is the only thing that clarifies the purpose of Islamic customs and rituals apart from their devotional meaning in human life. So that it can be proven without doubt that it is indispensable for a person to perform it such as Hajj, Zakat, prayer ... etc. He also confirms that all of this is found in the book (The Theory of Economic Risk) in this book issued by the House of “Yemeni Books” for printing, publishing and distribution within 305 pages and distributed in three main chapters, that this Islamic macroeconomic system is; He is the one who will bring us the maximum benefit يعاني علمُ الاقتصادِ بشدةٍ من أنه العلمُ الذي يفتقدُ إلى الحمايةِ التي تُؤمنها الهَيبة المكتسبة من تقادم العمر، كما هو الحال مع علمِ الفيزياءِ الناتج عن ترسيخ التجربة المتكررة في كلِ مرة للأسس بطرقٍ مختلفةٍ، ومتنوعةٍ، و مدهشةٍ. وجميعها تعززُ مكانة ذلك العلمِ. وتناول المؤلف وليد أحمد كمال الحبابي، في كتابه" نظرية المخاطرة الاقتصادية" (النظام الاقتصادي الكلي الإسلامي) تحقيق المنفعة القصوى، إيراد تفاصيل النظام الاقتصادي الجديد ، والذي يسمى نظام "المخاطرة" والذي تتوزع فيه الثروة على الجميع ، باعتباره نظاماً مستقراً أكثر كفاءة من نظام السوق الحر. ويرى المؤلف في كتابه" نظرية المخاطرة الاقتصادية" (النظام الاقتصادي الكلي الإسلامي) تحقيق المنفعة القصوى، أن الفكرة الأساسية لهذا الكتاب تكمنْ في توضيح فكرة كيفية استخدام مبدأ التفضيل الزمني في فرض الضريبة، وذلك لتحفيز الجميع على الاستثمار ورفع الانتاجية من خلال الضريبة. كما تطرق الى واجبات الدولة بخصوص تطبيقه ومدى اشتراكها في الأسواق بدقه . وتحدث المؤلف عن أن مصارف الزكاة تعتبر هي موازنة الدولة، فيما تظل موازنة الدولة هي النقطة الاكثر جدلا بين صانعي السياسات في البلدان. وفي الوقت نفسه يرى الكاتب أنه فيما تندر الكتاباتُ الاقتصاديةِ من ناحيةٍ كلية، ولا يوجد كاتبٌ تحدث عن اقتصادٍ إسلامي كلي كنظام سابقًا؛ وبالتالي فهذه هي الكتابة الوحيدة، حتى اللحظة. ويضيف لا يمكنك تغيير نظام بمحاربة الحقيقة القائمة، كما يفعل ذلك الاقتصاديون المسلمون دوما ، ولكن لتغيير شيءٍ، يجب عليك وضع نموذج يجعل النظام الحالي نظام عفا عليه الزمان؛ فإذا علمنا أن هذا النظام يحقق أعلا معدل إنفاق في دولة بلا موارد اقتصادية_ دون اللجوء إلى ضرائبٍ، أو غيرها_ فحينها يمكن أن نرى أننا أمام كتاباتٍ فريدةٍ من نوعها؛ حيثُ أنها تضع للاقتصاد الإسلامي ملامحًا واضحةً تميزهُ تمامًا عن الاقتصادين الاشتراكين و الرأسمالين، وليس تلفيقًا ليشابه أحدهما. ويؤكد أنه بهذا النظام لنْ تتمكن الأنظمةُ الأخرى من اللحاقِ بتقدمنا الاقتصادي مهما بذلت من جهود سوى تطبيقه. وعلى الجانب الآخر يرى أننا لن نتمكن نحنُ من اللحاق بركب الغرب اقتصاديًا بالنظم الحالية مهما حاولنا. وأخيرًا يجزم المؤلف، إن الاقتصاد هو الشيء الوحيد الذي يوضح الغرض من العاداتِ والعباداتِ الإسلامية بعيدًا عن معناها التعبدي في حياة الإنسان؛ بحيث يثبت بما لا يدع للشكِ أنه لاغنى للإنسان عن القيام بها من حج، وزكاة، وصلاة... الخ. كما يؤكد أن كل ذلك نجدهُ في كتاب ( نظريةُ المخاطرةِ الاقتصاديةِ) في هذا الكتاب الصادر عن دار "الكتب اليمنية" للطباعة والنشر والتوزيع ضمن 305 صفحة وموزع على ثلاثة أبواب رئيسية ، أن هذا النظام الاقتصادي الكلي الإسلامي؛ هو الذي سيحققُ لنا المنفعة القصوى.. .. ,,لتنزيل نسخة مجانية من الكتاب www.mediafire.com/file/tvpyra7ojgvocbc/الاقتصاد+الكلي+الاسلامي.pdf/file لمشاهدة لقاء مع المؤلف حول موضوع الكتاب يرجى زيارة الرابط التالي kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZ-piJp6od-KqpI ارجوا ان يتم وضعه كمادة تدرس في المنهج الدراسي لطلبة الاقتصاد في الفصل القادم وشكرا.. .. ... . And thanks alot . ....

[@cameronwilliamloomis]

"By 2005, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s” -Paul Krugman

[@oscarhr01]

Trump quote in 2005 - ""I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”"

[@Laurence2000]

In 1998 - when Paul made the cheeky “prediction” in an article for an obscure, now-defunct magazine about economists’ poor track record for predicting the future - fax machine was almost ubiquitous, and the Internet was one of a number of shiny new things. One would think Paul’s detractors would address more substantial predictions, such as when he bet against the market that the 2008 Recession would be an L-shaped recovery because he figured out that there were likely two distinct categories of recessions: those where the Fed pumps the brakes to curb inflation and those where the market overextends.

[@cameronwilliamloomis]

@@Laurence2000Thanks for the reply. Looking back at this comment I made, it's easy to see that cheap jabs like these merely serve as red meat for today's reactionaries and accelerationists. I'd trust Krugman with the economy every day of the year over another trickle-down sicaphant like Art Laffer. I'm more of a Stiglitz follower, however.

[@Laurence2000]

@@cameronwilliamloomis A star-studded duo of Nobel laureates. Love ‘em both.

[@chrisdavis463]

@@cameronwilliamloomis Just reading through the comments, I really appreciate this reply, comment sections are full of wild statements and no recognition. cheers to recognizing your comment.

[@paulwarren796]

I AM NOT PRIORITIZED EDUCATED IN ECONOMICS , SO I DON.T KNOW ABOUT CAPITALISM NEARLY AS MUCH AS I SHOULD . HOWEVER IF THE FUTURE OF ANYTHING IS IN QUESTION IT IS THE COUNTRY -THE UNITED STATES . pww

[@josehawkins4276]

The only sector of the economy expanding is finance, and in particular, an inflating stock bubble. The bailouts continue playing out as stock buybacks and other asset inflating gimmicks.🤫 The real economy is shrinking, where supply relentlessly extorts ever vanishing pockets of liquidity, through compulsory rent and debt inflation.😬 Instituting a passive income and/or intangible capital accumulation tax, debt cancellation, a job guarantee, and redirecting the bailouts to States and households will put money in our hands, spending it on the goods and services we need and want, creating immediate demand that directly translates into an inclusive, productive and sustainable economy.😁

[@Binkoro]

As a scientist who respects empiricism, I have to say that Paul Krugman is always driven by data, which I respect. Contrast that with neoclassical economics that have unsophisticated and hilarious assumptions about human behavior built into it (which always makes behavioral scientists laugh) and all the theorizing is done based on logic and math rather than on empirical testing. It’s baffling why people still continue to believe non-empirical neoclassical economics, which has had such a horrific track record for making accurate predictions.

[@Lenny1337i]

Neoclassical economics is data driven. Just consider Friedman who would go into that camp. You rather refer to the Austrian school of economics. However the Austrians don't make generell assumptions about behavior so your argument falls pretty much apart.

[@Lenny1337i]

HeyMildred well now I’m confused haha, if you mean to say that neoclassical is right, I would disagree. I think what has lifted people out of poverty for most part is globalization. As far as the theory is concerned, I would say that Keynesians can definetly spend themselves out of poverty but only temporarily. I think their economic policies aren’t sustainable. For neoclassical I think they make wrong assumptions about behavior and therefore policies. I truely believe after first thinking monetarism is the right thing, that Austrian economics is the best we have.

[@Lenny1337i]

HeyMildred I think by now a lot of their ideas have become congruent/ the same, such as fighting recessions actively. I would say keynesians are by intuition ‘more correct’ but neoclassical by figures. However I disagree with both haha

[@Binkoro]

​@@Lenny1337i I think you are cherry picking a bit about neoclassical economics being data driven. On the whole, it still is not. Granted, I do think the younger economists are more data driven, but unfortunately, economics will probably only progress one funeral at a time. I am a behavioral scientist now, but as an undergraduate almost 30 years ago, I doubled majored in economics and psychology. Back then, most of the economists in the economics departments and many today, completely ignore(d) empirical data or data driven economics such as experimental economics, behavioral economics, and neureconomics. My observation is that many of econ department faculty members at universities have said (and still say) that whenever reality does not map on to their perfect free world market (humans are perfectly rational) economics, then the conclusion was that reality was an anomaly (think about the how they got the 2008-9 housing bubble wrong, how trickle-down economics is totally has never worked as a stimulant, how tax cuts on the rich never works as a stimulant, etc.). It was so obvious to me that psychology was driven by scientific testing and neoclassical economics was largely not. I often laughed in my econ classes about how poorly their models made accurate predictions, especially about human behavior! They (my econ profs) would often talk about "proofs," which was a dead giveaway that they were not doing science. Scientists talk about testing and disproving, not proving. Proofs are mathematical and philosophical concepts. I believe much of econ departments at universities are still that way based on my conversations with econ professors today, although it is improving very slowly.

[@Binkoro]

One more thing, the TV economists are the worst and most dishonest of them all. They only talk about plausible explanations, but never cite data. The point of science is to test all logical and plausible explanations to see which one maps on to empirical reality the best, even if all the explanations are equally logical and plausible. Providing plausible and logical explanations alone is just philosophy and definitely not science.

[@pipster1891]

"What if, for argument's sake, in a couple of weeks there was a global crisis - a pandemic for example - causing markets to crash?" Economist: Well, that's something we would never predict because we never predict anything correctly.

[@jackfrosty4674]

IT was predicted as is really a pLANdemic.

[@hamishcounsell5579]

i am still waitng for krugman to debate the murph it will happen one day

[@radioactivebeans8724]

We can only hope, austrian boys will strike back

[@cacosta560]

​@Laurent Hayek, Mises and Rothbard would destroy Krugman in one minute.

[@sleepyjoe1703]

Someone who has almost zero success ratio in economic prediction can’t and shouldn’t be called an economist, let alone a nobel laureate!

[@berntengdahl1519]

Actually, Krugman's predictions are usually very good. Sometimes he fails, though, and people who want to discredit him bring up those cases again and again while ignoring the rest. Kinda sad.

[@sspoonless]

Health insurance costs are costing jobs.

[@mireillelebeau2513]

Economists are not fortune teller, Though I want to know what happen when an economy is an hostage to the 1% and that 99% of us just trying to survive?

[@user-bv5xn4bh7r]

Yes, no, things were great before. Back in the day when it was Count’s vote that mattered and not your vote that counted. And why oh why haven’t all problems been immediately solved in one of the narrowest windows of time in human history.

[@georgehatzimanolakis1904]

@@user-bv5xn4bh7r bro please, you are too logical and nobody likes it when you tell the truth ok? Anyways, I gotta go, my mom is making me dinner and then I have to play wow all day because the struggle is real. god i hate rich people who sacrificed everything to get there, am I right?

[@MesRevesEnRose]

Once they no longer need us for labour because of automation the elites will kill us obviously? There already is an 'over-population' problem. Or more likely, leave us to die of environmental causes and disease.

[@logic52]

Redistribution of income/wealth is supported by three reasons: 1) Moral. That is, if rich were themselves poor they would have liked to be helpped by rich. 2) Security for rich themselves. Since better distribution means more peaceful society. 3) Efficiency. Since one dolar value/MU is infinitly higher for any else ibdividual than, examplely, Jeff Bezos, according to decreasing MU of money/consumption. Besides, in competitive market system, redistribuion not really confflicting with the efficiency/pie size, since it will just transfers purchasing power/consumption from some markets to another and new efficient maket equilibrium, P=MC=MU. But, even greater "TSU/SNB/Pie", given that there will be more increase of consumption by poorers than reduction of IT by rich.

[@echo1174]

I have to say this, and No I was not "Pro-Brexit", but the issue only became about immigration or Race when the exact same News papers who told the British people, for a whole generation, that Europe and single currency was an issue to be concerned over then U-Turned all of a sudden claiming it a "Right-Wing" issue to do with "Anti-Imigration". Blair only won the '96 election promising a referendum and it was people like Tony Benn and the "Left" who were suspicious about Europe. The same people who supported Brexit in the '80's and '90's attacked Tony Blair for wanting I.D. cards and wanting to throw Eastern Europeans and other immigrants out of the country with out due process. This was the Labour Party, saying things way more ugly and anti-immigration than you hear today. Leaving Europe was mainstream politics long before todays immigration issues even existed. It just does not add up. The issue of immigration was used to attack the movement and then after that fact all the "Why don't you go home?" xenophobic idiots jumped on the band wagon. It's a shame, because the "Divide" we see in Britain and America is largley manufactured by Politicains who have nothing real to offer people and now have to pander to extreme idealism on Left and Right to whip up a contraversial campaign in order to get any attention at all. It's ALL ugly. It's ALL false. It's ALL rubbish to keep policy moving in the same direction by keeping people distracted and at each others throats. Sad. That's why Politically I'm an extreme Materialist and Empiricist first and foremost. Idealism begins and ends with self deceit.

[@spencer5028]

Krugman is an open borders gl0balist, except when it comes to a country habitated by people who share his ethnicity. He actively advocates the replacement of ethnic European Americans

[@anasalaffas3679]

@@spencer5028 Why do you go on the internet and chat shit with no evidence?

[@mariemanella5874]

PG --- There are Lies, Then there ARE Darn Lies● Inflation now, 12/21 = FACTCHECK

[@logic52]

"Unlimited public deficit/"of just tones of printed papers" with no Use Value "incorrectely named money" , by simple logic, I suppose only posible luxurely for countries with international currency like particularly USA, but not for countries with just local currency. Because, in the last case, it will only spikes the inflation or even hyperinflation. So, generally, I don´t really see any sustainable way to justify such hypothesis. Besides, any object to arrives the real quality of money/medium of exchange, first itself should be a commodity with use value, and other qualities such as divisibilty, materially sustainabile and deposit of value. Which all are perfectly contained in the gold and other precious metals.

[@patrickdehertogh2080]

I'm not trying to knock what any of these speaker points and if it makes sense in this state of disrepair. About the minimum wage. At 15 an hour is still a joke. You tell me where living on your own without any assistance . You can get a studio apartment. In Boston. Nevermind a single bedroom. And you have to pay 50 to 60 for healthcare a week. Nevermind a car . Insurance and upkeep. And eat. In this state of bombardment Of what you look like what you got and what you do in your free time. It's going to be very difficult to control a population of people who work to death to just barley have the basics. Of course you got cannabis and alcohol. Which help. The whole system is broken corrupted the money whores could not control themselves. Now we got this. It's time to stop reassess what the minimal requirements are to survive and not stress out and work less. Anywhere on this planet. And be able to retire at 62. This is very possible. But not on the ways of thinking from the past. What debt. To who. Why? Sick of it don't want to play your game anymore. We can make are own reality. Don't have to play there's. Untill there's only electronic money then it will become a harder problem to deal with. My intent was to ridicule the 15 dollar a hour joke that's been floating around for about a decade. You need way more. I'll give you 15 an hour you go find a place to live in Boston. Good deal.?

[@SevenFootPelican]

You mention Boston. One of the most expensive cities to live in the world. But what about rural Arkansas? Does 15 an hour make sense there? I agree minimum wages need to go up, but how do we approach it with such a big and diverse country where standard of living isn't uniform across the board. And raising it like that could disrupt local and smaller communities.

[@patrickdehertogh2080]

@@SevenFootPelican I have no good answer. Like I said (I think) Everything is out of wack. It seems like the system worked no to badly from 1945-75 or somewhere about and then one thing after another was exploited so the basic common needs have become harder to get. From real estate. To healthcare. I had my first trade job in 1982 I worked at small family auto dealership. As a beginning mechanic. I started at 5.50 an hour. Minimum wage was in the 3 dollar range think 3.75. And I had fully paid healthcare. It cost me 3 dollar a visit and 1 dollar for meds. Say it was a 3 visit problem. It only cost 3 for a problem. And everything else was covered in full. So what has happened since then? What occured? Could it be how it was run? And has it become a profit motivated business and how profitable is this new way. Is this right? How things are done maybe its not really right. For the majority. I just think the subject that 15 dollars an hour is kinda sickly humorous. Or maybe they are worried that if they dont raise the wage that maybe there could be civil unrest. My opinion everything needs overhaul. This is just a band-aid.

[@celestialteapot309]

'Saving the planet is technologically easy?'

[@squamish4244]

Yes. We have the technology to do it. The political will is lacking.

[@SirKks1]

@@squamish4244 CRAP. Name it if you can. Very easy to just assert it. And puleeze, do not make it all hinge on decreasing CO2 production (by the whole world !) to mid 1800s.

[@squamish4244]

Okay. To wit: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eqendXegbKyen68 If these guys can afford to do it, world governments certainly can. You didn't think I had a response, did you :P I've been studying this subject for 25 years. You picked the wrong fight.

[@squamish4244]

Of course it includes nuclear!!! XD I am pro-nuclear all the way. The environmental movement's proscription of nuclear power is ridiculous. Of course, the government has been proscribing it too, so it's not just the Green's fault. But we are past the point of no return in terms of the CO2 that's already out there. Even if we stopped all CO2 emissions tomorrow, the earth would keep heating for 40 years, which is WAY too much considering the thresholds we may be crossing in the next decade. So we have no choice but to embark on a massive carbon dioxide capture and sequestration program to buy us time. Giant projects in the Sahara, in Iceland, and in other places that already have carbon-neutral sources of energy to power the carbon-capture technology would do it, and if we use enhanced weathering techniques, we will not need a source of energy at all. The cost would be approximately what the American congress has already spent on two stimulus packages in the last month.

[@gabrielonibudo5566]

@@squamish4244 This is probably the worse response you could have given, not once in that video did he talk about any technological solutions he only said that billionaires should put their money to it, he literally mentioned zero technological solutions. You wasted 4 minutes of my life I thought I could actually learn something.

[@ignatziusturret5641]

I know such "unemployment statistics". When you look which ppl. are left out from one definition or another you can just laugh about it. Truth is 15-20% of the ppl. in most "developed" countries are jobless or working in fields they did not education in and do not want to work in for much less money they actually would earn in their original work field. On paper everything is ok- let`s see, who is doing these statistics?!

[@thetawaves48]

IMO, social security should be doubled (politically improbable) - every dime would be spent back into the economy, and fewer elderly people would fall into homelessness.

[@abbynguyen5923]

No

[@gavinreadman]

minor job losses, tell that to the father, mother with no job

[@gavinreadman]

No just the people who having be warning us since ebola and Sara and mers, sadly not listen ed too

[@gavinreadman]

@Max S TJust ed talks Larry Brilliant 2006 Ted Prize Winner, Laurie Garett 2007, Pulitzer Prize winner, TED Speaker Ellen 't Hoen 2012 Bill Gates 2015 just google it, a documentary on Netflix well before all of this about pandemics, the doctors after ebola thought we would do something, sadly it did not happen, people were crawling into the hospital courtyard to get away from their families during ebola to protect them and they died there in a court yard overnight before they had enough staff to be able to help them. Its not surprising really we are humans we spend billions more on defence and killing people than we do on saving or preventing loss, that seems to be part of our nature Simple example get fast-food chains to stop selling corn syrup derivatives, with salt and sugar and reduce beef would save more of us on the earth than all the wars together, won't happen, that is our choice, we chose not to prepare, we are paying the price and that I know personally too, as I am sure may are as well and we are all regretting it.

[@gavinreadman]

@Max S ah found it Pandemic: How to Prevent an Outbreakon Netflix Series filmed 2018-2019

[@paulwarren796]

WE SHOULD MOVE BERKLEY TO VANCOUVER....

[@C3yl0]

To make better arguments and take conscious decisions it is imperative to listen to all the sides of the stories. Then, apply critical analysis and pick the one(s) that best resonates. However, his visions ain’t resonates with mine.

[@samuelarthur887]

Is Krugman pro-debt? If so, how it is good if resources from economic growth are used to service the debt? Isn't it better in this scene to be pro-surplus?

[@thecharlieramirez]

That is a Republican viewpoint based on what he said in the video.

[@mehdighazanfari5871]

under current capitalism system a huge concentrated wealth is in hand of 1%. how can this be fixed without adding socialism. that is where Liberal socialism sound an evolution for capitalism to me.

[@philipclock]

Given FREEDOM some people CHOOSE not to accumulate wealth; others make it a priority, AND INVEST, SPEND, SAVE AND DONATE, NOT AS POLITICIANS AND THE SWAMP, BUT AS THEY SEE FIT! You DO believe in freedom, don't you? Or are you a socialist and hand you, your family's and your community's keys to POLITICIANS AND THE SWAMP??

[@Playsitloud1]

Have you ever been paid by a poor person? No, no you havent. Do you think new technology just falls out of the sky? It takes rich people being able to invest money into things. Take the money from them and technology advances die because nobody has money to fund them Stop worrying about what others have. That is pure envy talking. The politics of envy are dangerous.

[@mehdighazanfari5871]

@@Playsitloud1 what you are assuming is not suggested by me. I don't see the point to argue about those. My aim is this. We are taxinging everyone to pay for shared programs that benefit all. Is it make since to tax people equily when one person income is equil to million people in same comunity. That one person did not work all by him/her self to earn all of that money. That wealth made by work of people in that comunity too. And that cumunity deserve a *fair* share of that profit.

[@mehdighazanfari5871]

@@philipclock you are throwing some stuff from yourself. I didn't say a lazy person should be pay equily to a hard working person. Libral socialism is diffrent from pure socialism. Look it up and let me know where it come short to capitalism.

[@philipclock]

@@mehdighazanfari5871 "Libera" socialism is...SOCIALISM!! Big Government rips off wealth/earnings of those that EARNED IT FROM THE FRUITS OF THEIR LABOR, and "redistribute" it to those that DID NOT EARN IT WITH THEIR HARD EARNED LABOR! It is ABUSING THE MONOPOLY POWER OF GOVERNMENT RUN BY POLITICIANS AND THE SWAMP FOR FORCED REDISTRIBUTION AND HANDOUTS TO THEIR CRONIES! That has NEVER worked to advance freedom and prosperity, or the miracle of the United States, the most free, most prosperous and most generous nation in history, lifting more people out of poverty than ever before.

[@joea363]

Isn’t religion the ultimate zombie idea? Ever try to argue with a true believer. If you can believe in God and you can believe in any other zombie idea.

[@ironeagle9850]

How do you believe that life began? Sincere question.

[@justmyopinion9883]

I hope Mr. Paul Krugman will do a video explaining the 6 trillion dollar stimulus bill that Congress and President Trump recently passed.

[@onemsizonemsiz4348]

xd

[@brucehutchinson9527]

Don't worry you're hero Joe Biden and the Democrat left Marxist party that runs him has taken care of America and bring it back to its Glory Days. "Let's go Paul Krugman"

[@RahulChauhan-wo1io]

Isn't he the same guy who told internet will have no impact on world economy..

[@nachannachle2706]

He probably meant that the Internet would not change one bit of the Financial system. He was both correct (the Commercial banks still preside like overlords over our investments) and wrong (the blockchain developments are building alternative cryptomarkets).

[@bosalinas6357]

@@nachannachle2706 yeah, and how many, whether presidents or newspapers, claimed Covid was nothing, less than the flu - why is it everyone wants to predict that which they have no idea about it? just say "I dont know"

[@docsavage8323]

Well, i generally really want to listen intently to opinions that are different than my own. I got through about 30 mins of this and that's all i could take. He just keeps making statements but doesn't really explain the basis for each conclusion. Oh well.

[@AfricanLitany]

Wholeheartedly agree with you. Nothing here of value. A whole lot of babble.

[@berntengdahl1519]

You're right, but it's not Krugman's fault. In order to understand why he is correct you have to actually study economics. You know, reading textbooks and peer-reviewed papers. He can't give you all the evidence in an interview.

[@cerimite7674]

It is a shame that more working class and/anyone that is not at least a millionaire hasn't watched this. For anyone that in this economic status voting for Republicans is insane. I just don't get it.

[@georgehatzimanolakis1904]

Bangladesh is very poor put they tripled their growth. So They went from making 10 cents an hour to 30 cents an hour. How difficult is it to make that kind of improvement?

[@paulwarren796]

TORONTO WITH NEW YORK CITY WOULD BE A BOON OF A COMBINATION , & OTTAWA IS A MUCH BETTER , CLEANER , BETTER RUN CAPITAL THAN D.C. PWW

[@seasidesue816]

Paul Krugman’s predictions has proved that he does NOT know what he is taking about!!!!’

[@IronMaidenDoD]

Paul Krugman is another know nothing keynesian

[@DJ-bj8ku]

Susan B Says two conservative morons who know better than a Nobel Prize winner. Stick to comic books.

[@IronMaidenDoD]

@@DJ-bj8ku i guess ill have to stick to fax machines cause theyll have a bigger impact than the internet, huh?

[@IronMaidenDoD]

@@DJ-bj8ku lol nobel prize winner. Wasnt obama a nobel prize winner, or was he a nominee? That tells you everything you need to know about those circle jerk award winning shit shows. "Nobel prize winner". LOL!!!

[@TeaParty1776]

He does not have to know anything because he is paid by the Leftist NYT.

[@GETJUSTICE4U]

The NHS has been hollowed out by Thatcher and mitigated by every government much as possible since. Gordon Brown increased spending on the NHS by 50% which increased productivity by an embarrassing 1%. 99% of the billions went on higher wages for managers and top consultants, useless management consultancy fees, and outsourced maintenence, construction, services, eqiment, etc. costs. The NHS pays over £2m for each hospital bed. That money would buy two hand-built Bugatti super cars. Brown'S massive increased "investment in the NHS" was in reality a transfer of £ billions of tax payers earnings onto the balance sheets of private limited companies. Milton Friedman, the arch capitalist of terror-con-nomics must have been very proud of Brown's investment acumen.

[@cacosta560]

Hayek, Mises and Rothbard would destroy Krugman in one minute.

[@maxhristov8964]

CA Costa idk man historical consequences of Austrian thinking in the States and Britain destroy Hayek themselves

[@michelveul7296]

please elaborate

[@johnetro8806]

@@michelveul7296 oh I don’t know. Maybe the depression and 2008? WAIT. I’m ready for a couple of cherry picked facts how it’s MUH govornment fault! Market good! Gov bad! Alway!

[@TeaParty1776]

@@johnetro8806 Im ready for statist cherry picked facts. Govt gun good. Independent mind bas.

[@widehotep9257]

Krugman AND the Austrians are wrong about how banks work and wrong about money creation. Krugman thinks banks only loan out the deposits of savers. The Austrians preach the debunked "Fractional Reserve" banking model. Richard Werner proved them all wrong in 2014 by studying banks during the loan creation process. He proved that banks create 100% new money when they issue loans with no prior need for deposits or reserves. And he concluded that 97% of the money supply is created by private banks, NOT government.

[@kobajughashvili3444]

Krugman is a good man, and once he gets behind Bernie he will understand

[@zygi22]

Koba Jughashvili At least Bernie is a clear cut communist. Krugman, on the other hand, as manipulative and arrogant as he is, knows that capitalism and free market work best for humanity but pretends otherwise. He’s a control freak who wants power.

[@user-bv5xn4bh7r]

Michigan said, “No.”

[@berntengdahl1519]

@@zygi22 Bernie Sandes is not a communist, he's a Social Democrat who (for some reason) refers to himself as a socialist. And Krugman is not against the free market, he's basically center-right, as are most economists.

[@nelsontragura1441]

These economists are still inside their cocoons. Maybe try to travel your own countryside, you will find solutions that you cannot sell, and will greatly help yourselves and your families - like a miracle.

[@killamv1]

He lost me as soon as he spoke about anyone who doesn't buy the "carbon causes all the climate change" argument as working for the oil sector. What about all the money that goes into environmental research; there is definite bias there too and it's considered politically correct. If the environment is so complex, how is carbon a magic bullet? I think he needs to study the real costs of the environmental movement and how it's been hijacked and manipulated.

[@ronaldlogan3525]

Using some pretty broad strokes to paint a picture whereby automation is not a major factor for job losses. I would suggest he does not understand the nature of how fast technology is advancing and what it will mean. The past is not an accurate predictor on this score. Too bad old people are so ignorant and tend to believe only what they want to believe.

[@lisariggio6916]

If we raise the minimum wage- wont the economists simply raise prices to balance it- leaving us where we started?

[@andresherrera7664]

This is actually not true. We live in period of low inflation because a lot of factor like technology, globalization, competition and small gdp growth. If we raise minimum wage I would be a small contraction of capital gains but overall it will stimulate consumption and help the economy.

[@brucehutchinson9527]

Paul Krugman you hate capitalism and this constitutional republic.

[@seanechoarmando6528]

The alert methane additonally smell because slipper inversely record round a noisy footnote. imminent, fluttering hail

[@kt-ey7po]

Clearly, he is driven by personal interest. SSDD. Same stuff different day.

[@gmshadowtraders]

Economists are a total joke. Or maybe the joke is on us, for listening to and holding them in high regard.

[@CarlyonProduction]

I disagree with this. Sure, many of the prominent economists of the last 30 years have been totally full of crap. But that doesn’t mean that every economist in existence is. The problem is, the kind of economist that gets mainstream attention tends to be the type of economist that favours a system that benefits the wealthy owners of media/industry.

[@gmshadowtraders]

@@CarlyonProduction Ok that's fair, there may be some economists who live outside of the bubble they create themselves and whom we should listen to. And yes, we only hear of the ones in the pockets of politicians and other big business interests. What you can't deny is this is a horrible mess. He has the audacity to call those who criticize him 'zombies'. When it's his own bankrupt keynesian ideas and policies which have allowed countless presidents, on both sides, to hold the country, and even the world, hostage. It's socialism for the very top, and cut-throat capitalism for the rest.

[@cruzerk100]

David Carlyon Who do you think are good and trustworthy economists?

[@weighs-n-means]

Only fools take the advice of the likes of the most CONservative of the commenters in this thread. Hint of advice, do the opposite of whatever trolls and shills recommend. They have the insight of rocks.

[@DoctorMandible]

Court jester

[@spencer5028]

He is an open borders gl0balist clown

[@patrickpaez5078]

Wow. Painful watching him try to painfully rationalize why he didnt see things coming

[@spencer5028]

Krugman is an open borders gl0balist, except when it comes to a country habitated by people who share his ethnicity. He actively advocates the replacement of ethnic European Americans

[@MesRevesEnRose]

@@spencer5028 Smart of him because 'Ethnic Europeans' will be replaced anyways because they do not birth enough children. The future is Asian and Brown. 👋🏾

[@CAM-fq8lv]

"Saving the planet is technologically easy?" Did he really say that? I went back. Yes, he did. Then I just stopped listening.

[@TesterBoy]

Shows you how ignorant he is even about economics!

[@berntengdahl1519]

Actually, he's right. It's possible, given our current technology, to reduce carbon emissions to zero and at the same time maintain our economic standard of living. We don't have to produce less, we only have to change HOW we produce.

[@flbe6000]

Krugman is the genius that predicted the immediate and world wide financial collapse if Trump were elected. Such insight.

[@jazzfan7491]

flbe6000 How are you liking the stock market the past week?

[@Bill_Woo]

@@jazzfan7491 Were you out sick the day they taught the word "honesty?" Google "honest discourse" and keep your mouth shut until you've achieved at least 1% proficiency therein.

[@jazzfan7491]

@@Bill_Woo How's your 401K doing Mr. Woo? Is honesty giving you a big financial boost? 🤣

[@Bill_Woo]

@@jazzfan7491 I'm quite fat and happy thank you. The reason for my snarkiness is because the implication of your post seemed rather juvenile and rhetorical. As to the market, I'm doing fine because I am proactive, not reactive; I think entirely marginally; I trade for the future and not the past; and I sure don't dicklessly say that the dumbass fool Krugman had anything to do with it. But if that's why you jumped in here, to imply that Krugman had the slightest thing to do with last week's market, I wish you the best of fun wallowing in inane speculations. Now if you want to talk seriously, there's a wilder casino this week than in any other in history, because the Fed is picking the winners and losers, not proper market forces. You're betting against their acts, which are multiplied by the unfathomably huge frontrunning that they will impel by winking and nodding to their friends - undetectably, unprosecutably. So if you buy any large cap you are at the mercy of whether the firm blows in Blackrock or the Fed's or the Treasury's ear and are selected as one of the chosen people in their pick-the-winners-orgy, or whether they don't. The same applies for shorting except the stakes are far more massive - think about shorting a cruise line or airline when you're basically betting against the whims of the Fed/Treasury/Blackrock as they again pick who they're going to massively enrich -- or to bankrupt. But hey, if you're all over this, you can get rich by not stepping into those fires. You're welcome. No charge. On the other hand, if you're just shit lucky by following the herd and singing "Happy Times are here again" - you're going to be dancing with fire. "Oh shits" are going to be in there too. Have fun!

[@jazzfan7491]

@@Bill_Woo Good for you. The original point here of course, was the usual blather from the right that Krugman predicted we'd have economic trouble if Trump became president. The right said that was all wrong. Taken a look at projections for GDP this year? Turns out Krugman was more right than any of us could have imagined. Cheers.

[@MichaelEdelman1954]

Paul Krugman, 1998: “The growth of the Internet will slow drastically, as the flaw in ‘Metcalfe’s law’-which states that the number of potential connections in a network is proportional to the square of the number of participants-becomes apparent: most people have nothing to say to each other! By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s.” Krugman hasn’t contributed anything of consequence to the economics literature since his 1977 PhD thesis. He has built his career largely on political appointments and popular writing. He is no longer invited to economics conferences thanks to his reputation for insulting other participants and throwing tantrums.

[@annieshedden1245]

i'm not sure why you are interpreting that quote as wrong. Take Twitter. Please.

[@berntengdahl1519]

Krugman was arguably right in that prediction. He's talking about the impact of the economy, not on society as a whole. And you forgot to mention Krugman's textbooks which have been used to educate thousands of new economists over decades. That's consequential.

[@AniishAu]

(39:00) Democracy has come to such a dogmatic two-party stronghold that Krugman suggests that we blindly follow starkly different democratic candidates, without pausing to suggest that capitalism and democracy in the US is deeply flawed.

[@spencer5028]

Flawed because the globalists are iimporting a new indentured class of Third World voters who reliably vote democrat and bigger government

[@AniishAu]

@@spencer5028 Flawed because voters have a choice between two equally pathetic candidates, both of whom have been screened by the capitalist status quo. Neither the "indentured class" nor any other class have any meaningful input into the president of the capitalist empire.

[@johnvaughan7096]

First question completely long winded.

[@marcusimpresario7724]

Ugga Mugga! Hate Trump! Hate Trump! Hate Trump! Orange man bad! Ugga Mugga Wugga!

[@kenzong8427]

George Carlin - Owners of the country ,10 mins only, much better than this, LOL

[@h1tm4n26]

"almost no leftist billionaires" lol ok bro

[@h1tm4n26]

@Jesus él McNuggetCunt riiiiiiiiiigght. ok.....

[@h1tm4n26]

@Jesus él McNuggetCunt im sorry but there are literally registered millionaires and billionaires that vote and support democrats... i dont know how ignorant you are not to know that. Warren buffet, jeff bezos, Ray Dalio, all filthy rich democrats...... just to name a few..........

[@gonewithreefer3484]

Paul is a typical centrist and doesn't deserve the fawning deference the audience gives him. His answer on GDP was awful. He claimed governments don't maximize GDP yet the fact is that GDP is considered synonymous with the economy and the media will crush any government that doesn't genuflect before the economy.

[@thomasgeorge3241]

If Governments can print infinite amount of money then why not do that and make every one rich.

[@widehotep9257]

banks create all money, not government. Richard Werner proved this empirically in 2014. If government could create money, why would they borrow and run up the nation debt to almost 30 trillion dollars?

[@user-ev9to4xx2o]

A.zombìè.is.à living dead.

[@BernardPech]

"If you go back to the nineteen thirties, you will find a lot of people saying this modern technological economy requires skills that workers don't have, and the idea that you can restore full employment with something like what this crazy person John Keynes says by having government spending is insane; it is a problem of technology and skills; and then along came a large fiscal stimulus, otherwise known as world war II and all of the sudden we have full employment". ... with some 16 million male Americans serving in the United States Armed Forces out of a population of working age (15-65) male population of 42 millions or 38%. That for sure helped unemployment! This ideas that Krugman expresses may or may not be right, but his thinking is fuzzy and does not make the point. He is what I would call a "political economist" whose agenda undermines his credibility, unless you are one of the faithful agreeing with his political views. What happened to the clear enlightening Nobel price winner academic who made his living on reason and well articulated arguments? His emotions have taken away the best of him.

[@andrewbaumann2661]

If you were trying to show Keynesian counter-cyclical spending is a flawed policy, you failed. Also, name one economist who does not have an agenda, i.e., which economists are not influenced by their political views/emotions?

[@cowoffun3545]

Bernard, I think you agree with Krugman on this one. You are showing that government spending can increase demand for labor which reduces unemployment, which is what he argues at 10:11

[@paulwarren796]

WILL ANYBODY CONSIDER ANY OF MY IDEAS??

[@julianbelfrage8768]

If Paul Krugman ran for President then the West Wing would come true! 😂

[@sealinski]

What’s with these academics and scientists running around spreading half truths?

[@thecharlieramirez]

Well, if they're half truths, how much do we expect the common person to know?