Perhaps it's his Nobel Prize, but for some reason people still listen to Paul Krugman. We'd like to enumerate some of the things that call into question the credibility of the former Enron advisor.
Answer by Ricipedian
In June 2010, Krugman had this to say about deficit hawks like Germany :
Many economists, myself included, regard this turn to austerity as a huge mistake. It raises memories of 1937, when F.D.R.’s premature attempt to balance the budget helped plunge a recovering economy back into severe recession. And here in Germany, a few scholars see parallels to the policies of Heinrich Brüning, the chancellor from 1930 to 1932, whose devotion to financial orthodoxy ended up sealing the doom of the Weimar Republic.
So let's compare the experience of the United States, where the Keynesians won out a with the massive TARP stimulus package, with that of the benighted Germans :
- "That 30's Feeling," The New York Times, June 17, 2010.
- John Lott and Grover Norquist, Debacle, 2012, p. 93.
Answer by Don Tillman
Oh goodness, Krugman is responsible for so many blazing falsehoods that it's really hard to tally. Possibly every column.
There is the Krugman In Wonderland Blog , that's highly recommended, but it's certainly not complete.
Just recently, in his Feb 20 column, Krugman specifically claimed that President Herbert Hoover made "savage spending cuts" to the federal budget. This stuff is easy to look up; Hoover actually increased federal spending by 50%. That's especially significant because federal spending had been absolutely flat for the 6 years before that. It was a major increase.
There's an important meta-issue here; should we consider Krugman's writings as serious economics analysis, or as performance art? I mean, just because he's got an economics background and some Scandinavian award doesn't mean that he can't write gibberish. Or comedy. Or Marxist propaganda.