CANR
WORK TITLE: Arguing with Zombies: Economics, Politics, and the Fight for a Better America
WORK NOTES:
PSEUDONYM(S):
BIRTHDATE:
WEBSITE: http://krugmanonline.com/
CITY:
STATE:
COUNTRY: United States
NATIONALITY: American
LAST VOLUME: CANR 256
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman
RESEARCHER NOTES: Book title from Norton site says “Better Future” not “Better America”; Also, WorldCat does not list the title with “Better America” in it.–DP
PERSONAL
Born February 28, 1953, Albany, NY; married Robin Wells (an economist).
EDUCATION:Attended Yale University, B.A.; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Ph.D., 1977.
ADDRESS
CAREER
Writer, economist, columnist, editor, consultant, and educator. Yale University, New Haven, CT, former professor of economics; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, former Ford International Professor of Economics; Stanford University, Stanford, CA, professor of economics, beginning 1994; Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, professor of economics and international affairs, then emeritus professor, 2000—; London School of Economics, centenary professor City University of New York, professor emeritus. President’s Council of Economic Advisors, senior international economist, 1982-83; National Bureau of Economic Research, research associate. Consultant for international economic organizations such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and for countries such as Portugal and the Philippines.
MEMBER:Econometric Society (fellow); Group of Thirty.
AWARDS:John Bates Clark Medal, American Economic Association; Prince of Asturias Award, Prince of Asturias Foundation, Spain, 2004; Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (Nobel Prize), 2008, for his analysis of trade patterns and economic activity; Distinguished Economist Award, Economic Policy Institute, 2011; Gerald Loeb Award for Commentary, 2011; James Joyce Award, Literary and Historical Society of the University College Dublin, 2014, for outstanding contribution to the economic sciences.
WRITINGS
Contributor to books, including U.S. Foreign Policy and the Third World—Agenda 1985-86, Transaction Books (New Brunswick, NJ), 1985. Contributor to periodicals, including the New Republic, Foreign Policy, Newsweek, New York Times magazine, and Slate. Contributor to professional journals, including American Economic Review; Journal of International Economics; Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking; Journal of Political Economy; and the Quarterly Journal of Economics.
SIDELIGHTS
Paul Krugman is a prolific and influential economist, writer, editor, and columnist. He is the author of many works on international trade, markets, the self-organizing economy, globalization, and the inequality of nations. He helped found the “new trade theory,” which describes the consequences of increasing returns and imperfect competition for international trade. In his columns and articles, particularly those in the New York Times, Krugman communicates his economic theories to the non- economist and also promotes his political views.
Krugman grew up in the New York suburbs and entered Yale as an economics major with an interest in history. During his junior year he accepted a position as a teaching assistant with economist William Nordhaus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Krugman wrote in an essay titled “Incidents from My Career,” archived at the Wayback Machine website, that he found appealing “the MIT style: small models applied to real problems, blending real-world observation and a little mathematics to cut through to the core of an issue.” In 1976, with a group of MIT students, Krugman worked for the central bank of Portugal, assessing policy models and theories in the wake of revolution and an attempted coup.
Krugman began teaching at Yale and soon developed the vision that he said continues to guide his research—the importance of increasing returns and imperfect competition in trade. In his essay “Incidents from My Career,” Krugman comment on this and other topics. Although Krugman has admitted to cynicism of the circuit, he allowed that the members “constitute a true, and wonderfully unpretentious, elite.” He noted that the settings and formality of conferences ranged considerably; and he often found “more real insight” with “young economists in blue jeans, not famous officials in pinstripes, who really have interesting things to say.” In the summer of 1982 Krugman took a leave of absence from MIT to accept the position of chief staffer for international economics of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors with the Reagan administration. As a defender of the welfare state, Krugman’s views were directly opposed to the majority in the administration. He observed that policy decisions in Washington tend to be based on the advice of advisors who generate a comfort level, rather than that of “those who will force them to think hard. That is, those who really manage to influence policy are usually the best courtiers, not the best analysts.” Krugman considers himself a good analyst, but a bad courtier. He wrote much of the 1983 Economic Report of the President.
Market Structure and Foreign Trade: Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition, and the International Economy, which Krugman wrote with Elhanan Helpman of Tel-Aviv University, set forth their “new trade theory,” the result of ten months of “total immersion.”
Krugman referred to The Age of Diminished Expectations: U.S. Economic Policy in the 1990s, published in 1990, a kind of sureptitious textbook. The book was reprinted and updated several times. Denise Demong noted in Business Week that the original edition was praised for its readability. Demong called it “Economics 101 made relevant to today’s world.”
Krugman published many papers on economic geography with the intent of establishing it as a branch of economics. Like the new trade theory, it addresses increasing returns and multiple equilibria. Geography and Trade represents three lectures at the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium, in October of 1990. “The underlying theme of the book is that a collusion of imperfect market structures and ‘geography’ creates (and is reinforced by) a cumulative process of regional and international income divergence,” wrote Alan MacPherson in Economic Geography. “A related theme, and one that recurs throughout the book, is that regional growth and decline can be traced to a mixture of unique local conditions and historical accidents.” MacPherson felt that the book “will disappoint those who would like economists to know more about the state of the art in economic geography. A further problem with the book is that it covers a good deal of ground that has already been well trodden by others.” MacPherson, however, went on to note: “To be fair, however, Geography and Trade is a worthwhile contribution to the field, if only because a number of simple models and illustrations are presented that clearly depict the role of space in regional and international trade.” Choice contributor J. McDonald observed that, based on the most recent of Krugman’s geographic citations in that book, his work takes “little notice of the twenty-five years of solid work that geographers have produced since” 1966. McDonald nonetheless called Krugman’s style “literate and engaging” and the book “readable and stimulating.”
As an editor, Krugman drew from a 1989 National Bureau of Economic Research conference in Trade with Japan: Has the Door Opened Wider? Paul Shepard wrote in the Journal of Economic Literature that the “ten substantive papers are designed to shed light on the accuracy of … conventional wisdom,” adding: “Several of the contributions contain results or arguments that will stimulate further debate.” Shepard also commented: “While this volume leaves some key questions unanswered, it does represent a valuable body of economic analysis of the ‘Japan’ issue. The three lessons identified by the editor—that Japan is different, that this difference contributes to trade tensions, but that the difference also appears to make sense in the Japanese business context … warrant the serious attention of the professional and policy community.”
In Has the Adjustment Process Worked?, Krugman evaluates the balance-of-payments approach and whether this mechanism worked during the 1980s. Currencies and Crises discusses exchange rates, the debt crisis, balance-of-payments, speculation and exchange rates, and the international monetary system. As editor with Marcus Miller, Krugman incorporated ten papers and discussions from a conference organized by the Centre for Economic Policy Research and the National Bureau of Economic Research, held at the University of Warwick in July 1990 for Exchange Rate Targets and Currency Bands.
Industry Week contributor Daniel J. McConville wrote that in Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in the Age of Diminished Expectations: Krugman “declares flat-out that the American ‘obsession with competitiveness’ is the prime source of our trade deficit. The highly respected new-age trade guru (though little known by the business community) says this obsession drives down the American standard of living and skews the tax structure to make the rich richer and shortchange the poor.” McConville wrote that Krugman’s solutions are “less emphasis on exports and more on raising productivity. Hike taxes, do away with farm subsidies, reform health care, develop market- driven ways to control pollution, and increase government spending to fight poverty and improve education.” “Among professional economists, Paul Krugman’s reputation as an innovator is unrivaled,” wrote an Economist reviewer. “Although he is still thirty years too young for the Nobel prize he already deserves, the record of this professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is remarkable,” adding: “His papers have either developed entirely new ideas or extended old ones in marvelously revealing ways. In each case, his work has formed the basis for research for scores of other economists.” The reviewer called Peddling Prosperity “partly an apology for economic science. But, more memorably, it is a furious attack on the hucksters … who bring economic science into disrepute.” Leonard Silk wrote in the New Leader that Krugman “has a talent for creating simple mathematical models that enrich and freshen old concepts. And he can write clearly and engagingly for the general reader.”
Masahisa Fujita wrote in the Journal of Economic Literature that Development, Geography, and Economic Theory is a “fascinating little book. Professor Krugman presents a series of lively ‘meditations’ on the nature of modern economic theory. His main focus is on the recent history of two disciplines—development economics and economic geography—both of which have been surprisingly unsuccessful in influencing mainstream economic thought,” and also noted: “The timing of this book could not be better. Given the rapid rise of economic interactions within our increasingly borderless world economy, the need for spatial economic analysis has never been stronger.” “This is a book that should be read by all economists, not merely by those with particular interests in development economics and economic geography,” wrote Roger E. Backhouse in the Economic Journal.
In reviewing The Self-Organizing Economy in Reason, Steven Postrel called Krugman “an interesting case. His work as an elite economist injected increasing returns to scale into trade theory. That helped beget the deadly mutant spawn ‘industrial policy,’ which he has since tried to kill with vigorous popular writing. He does not suffer fools gladly, and is happy to puncture the pretensions of pseudo-thinkers like Lester Thurow or William Greider.” Postrel called the book “a piece of serious popular science writing; the author tries to be engaging and clear but is not afraid to use a little mathematics,” and went on to note: “As a set of lectures aimed at people with backgrounds in economics, it also includes some technical sections that would be hard going for the uninitiated. Fortunately, these can be skipped with little loss of meaning.” A.R. Sanderson wrote in Choice that Krugman extends to economies and economics “the tendency of some complex physical and biological sciences systems to evolve from seeming disorder into order and stability.” Sanderson noted the extensive references and felt the book would be “important” for economic scholars in economics as well as for interdisciplinary research.
Pop Internationalism is a collection of Krugman’s articles, previously published in publications that include the Harvard Business Review, Foreign Affairs, and Scientific American. A Publishers Weekly contributor called them “stimulating, maverick essays.” “Nobody who writes about economics does it better than Krugman,” wrote Steven Pearlstein in the Washington Post Book World. Pearlstein wrote that Pop Internationalism reveals “why competitiveness matters for companies but really not for countries; why genuinely free trade benefits all countries, even trade between rich countries and poor; why globalization isn’t really anything new; and why the recent emergence of Asian economies like Singapore and South Korea wasn’t really as miraculous as it may have seemed.” Michael Hirsh commented in Newsweek that Krugman “writes eloquently and simply for the public.” Hirsh said Krugman “has debunked the conventional wisdom on nearly every hot-button issue dear to Washington—not to mention the Pat Buchanan parade.” Hirsh noted that Krugman feels the trade deficit with Japan is unimportant; that the impact of cheap Third World labor on jobs in the United States is “hugely overstated”; and that Krugman disagrees that an economic war has taken the place of the cold war or that nations are in competition. “You could think of Krugman as a sort of highbrow version of James (The Amazing) Randi, the magician who goes around telling the real story of how rivals bend spoons,” noted Hirsh. “Krugman doesn’t short-sell America’s economic problems. He is alarmed at the country’s widening income gap.” Hirsh also remarked: “He was also among the first to warn of the blue-and white-collar backlash against corporate layoffs.” Krugman is a proponent of improving and strengthening health care and education for children and would like to see the administration put a fraction of the effort it expends increasing trade with Japan into preventing American kids from falling into poverty.
In The Accidental Theorist: And Other Dispatches from the Dismal Science, Krugman targets former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, French President Jacques Chirac, Newt Gingrich, George Soros, William Greider, and the editors of the Wall Street Journal, who declined printing his article “Supply Side’s Silly Season,” which is one of the pieces included in the book. Among the topics discussed are the free market, the relationship between productivity growth and job capacity, economic growth and recession, and taxation and property rights. Library Journal contributor Norman B. Hutcherson noted that Krugman points out that it is the actions of Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Board, rather than Keynesian economics, “that drive the public’s liquidity preference.” Hutcherson commented: Krugman makes economics “comprehensible and exciting,” and remarked that he “brings a ray of sunlight to the dismal science of economics.”
Krugman is the recipient of a number of prestigious awards for his writing and economics work. These include the John Bates Clark Medal, given by the American Economic Association. This award, given every two years to a top economist under the age of forty, is considered a precursor to the Nobel Prize. He was given the Prince of Asturias Award by Spain’s Prince of Asturias Foundation 2004. True to earlier predictions, Krugman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (Nobel Prize) in 2008 for his analysis of trade patterns and economic activity.
The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century is “a scathing (and, to some minds, well placed) collection of critiques” of the administration of former president George W. Bush, reported Susan Hurst in Library Journal. In this collection of Krugman’s New York Times columns, he squarely addresses the economic malfeasance of the Bush administration. “No one tells it like it is as ably, intelligently and convincingly as he does in a time when too few tell it like it is at all,” remarked Jeff Madrick in the American Prospect. “To his benefit, he has shorn some of the natural caution of his discipline. And he has shown an exceptional gift for fine writing, often clarifying a complex economic issue in only a single deft sentence,” Madrick observed. In this collected work, Krugman explores how Bush-proposed tax cuts would primarily benefit the wealthy; how the costs of privatizing Social Security would be staggeringly huge; and how the members and supporters of the administration’s economic chicanery concealed information, manipulated data, and, when necessary, simply lied about the subject at hand, all in an attempt to justify their policies and ensure their enactment. “When criticism of Bush policy was associated with near treason, Krugman was calling the administration out on its battle against terrorism, the Iraq War and a wide range of radical domestic policies,” Madrick stated.
“As a first-rate economist, Krugman knows how to parse the White House’s figures to get at the underlying reality,” observed John Cassidy, writing in the New Yorker. Business Week contributor Gene Koretz noted “the book’s unifying thesis is that the Administration’s deliberate obfuscations reflect a hidden agenda to radically transform the nation’s economic and political institutions.” A Publishers Weekly writer commented: “Many readers will find Krugman very persuasive as to how our present government has done us wrong.”
Business Economics contributor Brandon Dupont stated that Krugman’s The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade, written with Masahisa Fujita and Anthony J. Venables, “will likely become the cornerstone of the revitalized field of economic geography.” The authors “bring together a variety of disparate models in an effort to bring geography and space back into the vocabulary of the economist,” Dupont wrote. “In no way is this book aimed at a popular audience or for any kind of typical undergraduate course,” observed Thomas J. Holmes, writing in Southern Economic Journal. Holmes continued: “Nevertheless, those who have come to expect excellent writing in any manuscript with Krugman’s name on it will not be disappointed. Serving the equations up along-side nicely written prose makes the equations easier to swallow.”
With The Return of Depression Economics, Krugman “is not predicting another depression, just the revival of a school of thought dealing with the question of how to prevent another depression,” reported Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., in the National Review. He considers issues such as the unexpectedly widespread and catastrophic impact of the devaluation of the Thai currency, the baht, on financial markets in Asia and Russia. He also looks at how such turmoil could have been prevented. In this work, Krugman suggests that insufficient demand for products has created a tremendous danger to the world economy. He further notes that, although this situation mirrors in many ways the conditions that led up to the Great Depression, policymakers throughout the world are ignoring the potential economic devastation that could result if the troubles continue to expand. This book demonstrates that “today’s high-speed global economy can confront countries with sudden unexpected threats that require creative, unconventional responses to stave off disaster,” noted a Business Week contributor.
The Business Week contributor called The Return of Depression Economics a “lucid exposition of how economies work, grow, get into trouble, and—one hopes—get out of it. Economists are not known for making complex ideas accessible to the general reader, but Krugman accomplishes this with effortless grace and style.” A Publishers Weekly contributor remarked: “Krugman proves himself not only comprehensible but also well worth comprehending,” commented a Publishers Weekly writer.
In Fuzzy Math: The Essential Guide to the Bush Tax Plan, Krugman offers a “slim but energetic polemic against the tax-cut proposal that George W. Bush made the centerpiece of his 2000 presidential campaign,” noted Tod Lindberg in Commentary. The book was not published in time to help prevent the tax cut from being signed into law, but his work nonetheless “demystifies the economic arrangement, which lies buried and unexamined at the heart of the social and political and cultural arrangement,” commented Lee Siegel in Harper’s magazine.
The Conscience of a Liberal contains Krugman’s detailed exploration of the origins of income inequality in the United States. Within his analysis, he considers how influences such as the decline of the power of unions and the rise of free trade affected the widening income gap. He alleges, however, that income inequality has largely grown due to race-based political strategies applied by Republicans. The post-WWII middle class, Krugman notes, was created through reform and social programs, through the rising power of unions, and through high taxes on the wealthy. These policies narrowed the income gap and created an economic boom. “Krugman argues that the downward distribution of income associated with the New Deal necessarily meant that poor blacks benefited strongly, stirring racial antagonisms,” observed London Guardian reviewer Jay Parini. These types of racial issues, Krugman believes, have continued to influence conservative politics, beginning at the point in the United States when whites in the South began to vote Republican. He claims that Republican policies and political goals have gradually worked to reverse long-term gains by the middle class, poorer, and minority segments of the American population.
Krugman further puts forth his controversial opinion that political conservatives are determined to reverse social advances such as those afforded by the New Deal, and are trying to eliminate social aid programs that help the needy under the assumption that those programs primarily exist to provide support to minorities. Statements such as these have led to charges from conservative quarters that Krugman has strayed from objective economic analysis to partisan political commentary.
Salon.com contributor Andrew Leonard called the book a “cogent, economically grounded, generally calm analysis of the way things are that can’t be dismissed out of hand.” Writing in Booklist, Vanessa Bush found it to be an “eye- opening book for Americans of whatever political philosophy,” while a Publishers Weekly writer called it a “compelling historical defense of liberalism and a clarion call for Americans to retake control of their economic destiny.”
In a review of End This Depression Now! in American Prospect, Robert Kuttner begins with the thesis that Krugman has been largely ignored by U.S. policymakers. Their unwillingness to entertain his views and implement his policy proposals, according to Kuttner (and to Krugman himself) is in large part responsible for the ongoing U.S. financial slump that began in 2008 and continued well into the new decade. Kuttner summarizes the book by noting that, with the book’s publication in 2012, it is a “primer on how Keynesian economics applies to today’s circumstances,” one that “offers a smart explanation of why the dynamics of this slump are reminiscent of the 1930s, with a downward spiral of depressed purchasing power reinforced by debt overhangs, especially in housing.” Kuttner goes on to note that Krugman “unpacks the central role of deregulated finance and exotic speculation in the current crash, drawing on the late economist Hyman Minsky’s work on the fragility of financial systems. Krugman argues that a moderate dose of inflation would be preferable to prolonged depression, and he’s right.” Matthew Bishop, in a review of the book in the New York Times Book Review, felt differently, citing Krugman’s belief that a round of modest inflation would help the economy as “debatable” and pointing out the damaging effects inflation can have on the domestic economy and world trade. Bishop wrote that “it would have made for a better book if [Krugman] had offered a fuller discussion of the potential consequences of his policies, rather than evading it by citing Keynes’s famous observation that ‘in the long run we are all dead.’”
End This Depression Now! is thus a clarion call. Even though by the time of its publication economists were pointing to signs of stabilization and even improvement in the financial markets and the U.S. economy, Krugman argues that people are still suffering, noting that stabilizing a financial system does not ensure prosperity. The book is a call for strong leadership that will gather support for expansive stimulus policies, including large-scale job creation and debt relief. In making this argument, Krugman responds to three major objections: that government stimulus programs do not have the desired effects, that increasing government budget deficits undermines business confidence, and that not enough quality projects exist in which the government can invest. He concludes that if the private sector is not making investments, then government spending is the solution to economic malaise.
Krugman bases his beliefs on the macroeconomic theory of Keynes dating back to the 1930s, and he believes that those who oppose Keynesian theory do so for political or ideological reasons. He also cites the work of the recent generation of economists that purport to show that government intervention has ended depressions in the past. In sum, according to Mark Allen in Finance & Development, “The book’s analysis is squarely in the mainstream of macroeconomics, which quite clearly establishes that government action can affect the level of demand in the economy. Krugman has the courage of his convictions when he argues that the government (and the Federal Reserve) not only can—but should—provide the stimulus necessary to offset the weakness in private demand.” A Kirkus Reviews contributor called the book “an important contribution to the current study of economics and a reason for hope that effective solutions will be implemented again.”
In Arguing with Zombies: Economics, Politics, and the Fight for a Better Future, published in 2020, Krugman discusses many of the major policy issues and debates in the United States, from healthcare and social security to tax reform. Krugman largely focuses on misunderstandings concerning these policies and reform. Krugman calls the misinformed ideas that will not die and lead to ongoing misinformed policies “zombie economics.” In an opinion article for the New York Times titled “The Zombie Style in American Politics,” Krugman noted that many policy arguments, such as climate change denial and insistence that lower taxes for the rich will bolster the economy and help the middle and lower classes “become intellectual zombies that should be dead but just keep shambling along.” Krugman goes on in the same article to note: “The public deserves to know that the big debates in modern U.S. politics aren’t a conventional clash of rival ideas. They’re a war in which one side’s forces consist mainly of intellectual zombies.”
Arguing with Zombies addresses many public misunderstandings about policies arguments and issues in short chapters accessible to the general reader. Krugman is good at “lucidly explaining often confounding economic issues,” wrote a Kirkus Reviews contributor. The book is broken up into eighteen sections, and the chapters are drawn from ninety of Krugman’s columns in the New York Times. Each section begins with an overview of the policy issue or issues discussed. In addition to climate change, the chapters focus on ideas that should have died connected with social security, health care, tax cuts, trade wars, inequality, the 2008 financial crisis, and the economic problems faced in Europe. He particularly pays attention to what he calls myths that are stated as facts by politicians and others who support what Krugman views as harmful policies.
Krugman pays close attention to the administration of President Donald Trump. In Krugman’s estimation, Trump’s administration and its enablers continue to primarily serve the interests of the wealthy, such as the idea that cutting taxes for the rich really bolsters the economy. Krugman also has complaints against previous administrations as well. He derides the idea that was offered up by the administration of former President George W. Bush to privatize Social Security. He also accuses the Bush administration of being duplicitous in its reasoning and evidence for invading Iraq in 2003. Overall, Krugman repeatedly points out that conservative arguments about policy issues are often not based on science, as in the case of climate change, or other factual evidence. Rather, Krugman argues that they feature whatever ideas that can be thought up to benefit the wealthy while doing little or nothing to help working Americans.
“Progressive partisans will cheer Krugman’s plain-spoken, bare-knuckled, and persuasive ripostes to conservative orthodoxy,” wrote a Publishers Weekly contributor. A Kirkus Reviews contributor stated that Arguing with Zombies contains “shrewd, witty, informed essays that are much needed in our anti-intellectual age.”
BIOCRIT
PERIODICALS
America, October 28, 1995, Paul D. McNellis, review of Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in the Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 26.
American Prospect, December, 2003, Jeff Madrick, “The Unraveler,” review of The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century, p. 60; July-August, 2012, Robert Kuttner, “The Unheeded,” review of End This Depression Now!
Barron’s, July 4, 1994, Edward Yardeni, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 39.
Booklist, February 1, 1994, Gilbert Taylor, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 984; November 1, 2007, Vanessa Bush, review of The Conscience of a Liberal, p. 9.
Business America, November 4, 1991, review of Geography and Trade, p. 24.
Business Economics, October, 1989, Donna Hill, review of Market Structure and Foreign Trade: Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition, and the International Economy, p. 61; January, 1991, W. Steven Barnett, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations: U.S. Economic Policy in the 1990s, p. 66; April, 1996, Susan Doolittle, review of The Self- Organizing Economy, p. 71; October, 1996, Gerald L. Musgrave, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 71; January, 2000, Brandon Dupont, review of The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade, p. 84.
Business Week, May 6, 1991, Denise Demong, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 34; April 18, 1994, Howard Gleckman, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 20; July 11, 1994, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 21; June 26, 1995, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 18; May 31, 1999, “The Dangers Lurking in the Global Economy,” review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 22; September 29, 2003, Gene Koretz, “An Economist’s Call to Arms,” review of The Great Unraveling, p. 22.
Canadian Business, June, 1994, Peter Foster, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 158.
Choice, February, 1992, M. McDonald, review of Geography and Trade, p. 937; July-August, 1994, M. Perelman, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 1766; May, 1996, A.R. Sanderson, review of The Self-Organizing Economy, p. 1525.
Christian Century, June 2, 2009, James Halteman, “How the Boom Went Bust,” review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 32.
Commentary, August, 1996, Christopher Caldwell, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 110; July, 2001, Tod Lindberg, review of Fuzzy Math: The Essential Guide to the Bush Tax Plan, p. 59.
Commonweal, May 3, 1991, John Feffer, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 297.
Economic Geography, April, 1992, Alan MacPherson, review of Geography and Trade, p. 216.
Economic Journal, September, 1995, Roger E. Backhouse, review of Development, Geography, and Economic Theory, p. 1355; November, 1996, review of Development, Geography, and Economic Theory, p. 1832; January, 1997, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 268.
Economist, October 12, 1991, “Has the Adjustment Process Worked?,” p. 69; April 30, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 17; June 15, 1996, review of Pop Internationalism, p. S9; July 17, 1999, “Economics,” review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 8.
Electronic News, August 1, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 24.
Finance & Development, December, 1999, Paul R. Masson, review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 51; June, 2012, Mark Allen, “Letting Reason Prevail,” review of End This Depression Now!, p. 55.
Foreign Affairs, summer, 1990, Lucy Edwards Despard and William Diebold, Jr., review of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States, p. 174; annual, 1992, review of Trade with Japan: Has the Door Opened Wider?, p. 173.
Fortune, December 31, 1990, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 113.
Guardian (London, England), March 22, 2009, Jay Parini, “Conspiracies and Theories,” review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
Harper’s, September, 2002, Lee Siegel, “Consuming Culture: When Our Critics Won’t Turn Off the TV,” review of Fuzzy Math, p. 75.
Inc., August, 1999, “Face to Face,” interview with Paul Krugman, p. 60.
Independent (London, England), January 30, 2009, Boyd Tonkin, review of The Return of Depression Economics.
Industry Week, November 21, 1994, Daniel J. McConville, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 41.
Journal of Economic Literature, June, 1992, review of Geography and Trade, p. 1029; September, 1992, Paul Shepard, review of Trade with Japan, p. 1515; December, 1992, Gavin Wright, review of Geography and Trade, p. 2185; March, 1993, review of Currencies and Crises, p. 312; December, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 1891; December, 1995, Masahisa Fujita, review of Development, Geography, and Economic Theory, p. 1987; June, 1996, review of Development, Geography, and Economic Theory, p. 937; September, 1996, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 1429; December, 1996, Fujita Masahisa, review of Development, Geography, and Economic Theory, p. 2003; June, 1997, Drusilla K. Brown, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 787.
Kirkus Reviews, February 1, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 118; January 15, 1996, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 116; April 15, 2012, review of End This Depression Now!; October 15, 2019, review of Arguing withy Zombies: Economics, Politics, and the Fight for a Better Future.
Library Journal, September 1, 1990, Richard C. Schiming, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 232; February 15, 1994, Richard C. Schiming, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 170; June 15, 1998, Norman B. Hutcherson, review of The Accidental Theorist: And Other Dispatches from the Dismal Science, p. 89; August, 1999, Harry Frumerman, review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 110; October 1, 2003, Susan Hurst, review of The Great Unraveling, p. 91; November 15, 2007, Thomas A. Karel, review of The Conscience of a Liberal, p. 73.
Monthly Labor Review, March, 1989, Richard M. Devens, Jr., review of Strategic Trade Policy and the New International Economics, p. 46; November, 2000, Todd Wilson, review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 41.
Monthly Review, October, 1992, Paul Burkett, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 18.
National Review, August 30, 1999, Holman W. Jenkins, “Anti-Depressant,” review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 50.
NBER Reporter, summer, 2000, review of Currency Crises, p. 53.
New Leader, May 9, 1994, Leonard Silk, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 16.
New Statesman, July 12, 1999, Christopher Huhne, review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 45; October 20, 2003, Adam Wishart, “A Lone Contrarian,” review of The Great Unraveling, p. 53; March 17, 2008, Yo Zushi, “War on Want,” review of The Conscience of a Liberal, p. 59.
Newsweek, April 4, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 46; March 4, 1996, Michael Hirsh, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 40; November 19, 2007, Daniel Gross, “Quick Read,” review of The Conscience of a Liberal, p. E2.
New Yorker, September 15, 2003, John Cassidy, “Goodbye to All That,” review of The Great Unraveling, p. 92.
New York Review of Books, October 20, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, Benjamin M. Friedman, p. 14.
New York Times Book Review, March 13, 1994, Sylvia Nasar, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 24; May 22, 1994, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 48; June 5, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 26; December 4, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 68; March 24, 1996, Peter Passell, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 11; October 1, 2007, David M. Kennedy, “Malefactors of Megawealth,” review of The Conscience of a Liberal; June 17, 2012, Matthew Bishop, “What Would Keynes Do?,” review of End This Depression Now!, p. 20.
New Zealand Management, April, 2004, Reg Birchfield, “Unraveling and Revealing,” review of The Great Unraveling, p. 22.
Political Science Quarterly, summer, 2008, James A. Morone, review of The Conscience of a Liberal, p. 330.
Publishers Weekly, January 24, 1994, review of The Age of Diminished Expectations, p. 53; February 14, 1994, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 76; January 29, 1996, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 93; March 3, 1997, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 72; April 26, 1999, review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 62; August 18, 2003, review of The Great Unraveling, p. 72; September 17, 2007, review of The Conscience of a Liberal, p. 46; October 14, 2019, review of Arguing with Zombies, p. 57.
Reason, May, 1991, Paul Craig Roberts, “The Age of Diminishing Economists,” p. 64; May, 1997, Steven Postrel, review of The Self-Organizing Economy, p. 58; October, 1999, David R. Henderson, “Artful Dodger,” review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 66.
Reference & Research Book News, February, 2008, review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
Southern Economic Journal, October, 2000, Thomas J. Holmes, review of The Spatial Economy, p. 491.
Technology Review, April, 1995, Robert J. Crawford, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 75.
Time, December 22, 2008, Andrea Sachs, “The Skimmer,” review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 19.
Times Literary Supplement, September 13, 1996, Edward N. Luttwak, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 28.
Wall Street Journal, May 26, 1994, Judy Shelton, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. A12.
Washington Monthly, September, 1996, Dante Ramos, review of Peddling Prosperity, p. 58; July, 1999, Jonathan Chait, review of The Return of Depression Economics, p. 55; July, 2001, Walter Shapiro, review of Fuzzy Math, p. 49.
Washington Post Book World, March 17, 1996, Steven Pearlstein, review of Pop Internationalism, p. 5.
ONLINE
Anarchist Writers, http://anarchism.pageabode.com/ (December 22, 2008), review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
Blogcritics, http://blogcritics.org/ (September 4, 2008), Dan Schneider, review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
BuzzFlash, http://www.buzzflash.com/ (October 4, 2009), review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
Daily Kos, http://www.dailykos.com/ (January 20, 2008), Dana Houle, review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
Grasping Reality with Both Hands, http://delong.typepad.com/ (October 10, 2007), Ed Glaeser, review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
HSM Web site, http://us.hsmglobal.com/ (October 4, 2009), biography of Paul Krugman.
New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/ (April 29, 2019), Paul Krugman, “The Zombie Style in American Politics.”
Paul Krugman, http://krugmanonline.com (November 20, 2019).
Princeton University, http://www.princeton.edu/ (November 20, 2019), faculty profile.
Salon.com, http://www.salon.com/ (October 15, 2007), Andrew Leonard, “Good Times for Liberals,” review of The Conscience of a Liberal.
Unofficial Paul Krugman Archive, http://www.pkarchive.org/ (January 10, 2013), archives of transcripts and video links.
Wayback Machine, https://web.archive.org/web/20160304091416/http://www.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/incidents.html (November 20, 2019), Paul Krugman, “Incidents from My Career.”
About Paul Krugman
Paul Krugman has at least three jobs: he is professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton University, Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and, perhaps, his best-known job, as an op-ed columnist for The New York Times. In recognition of his influence The Washington Monthly called him "the most important political columnist in America."
In addition, Krugman's reputation extends well beyond the U.S. The Asia Times recently called him "the Mick Jagger of political/economic punditry." The Economist said he is "the most celebrated economist of his generation." In December 2008, Mr. Krugman received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for 2008, honoring his work in international trade patterns. Previously he was awarded what is understood to be the European Pulitzer Prize, the Asturias Award given by the King of Spain.
Krugman is the author or editor of 23 books and more than 200 professional journal articles, many of them on international trade and finance. In recognition of his work, he received the John Bates Clark Medal from the American Economic Association, an award given every two years to the top economist under the age of 40.
For more than 20 years, Krugman has written extensively for non-economists, including a monthly column, "The Dismal Science," for the on-line magazine Slate. He has also been a columnist for Fortune and has published articles in The New Republic, Foreign Policy, Newsweek, and The New York Times Magazine, before joining The New York Times.
Prior to his appointment at Princeton, Krugman served on the faculty of MIT; his last post was Ford International Professor of Economics. He has also taught at Yale and Stanford Universities, and prior to that he was the senior international economist for the President's Council of Economic Advisers, under Ronald Reagan. (Yes, he served under a conservative President.)
He is a Fellow of the Econometric Society, a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and a member of the Group of Thirty. He has served as a consultant to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations, as well as to a number of countries including Portugal and the Philippines.
His most recent book is End This Depression Now! His previous work, The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008 was highly praised and became a New York Times bestseller in both hardcover and paperback.
Krugman and his wife live in the Princeton area with their two cats.
Paul Krugman is the recipient of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Economics. He writes a twice-weekly op-ed column for the New York Times and a blog named for his 2007 book "The Conscience of a Liberal." He teaches economics at Princeton University. His books include "The Accidental Theorist," "The Conscience of a Liberal," "Fuzzy Math," "The Great Unraveling," "Peddling Prosperity," and two editions of "The Return of Depression Economics," both national bestsellers.
Paul Krugman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
"Krugman" redirects here. For the surname, see Krugman (surname).
Paul Krugman
Krugman in 2008
Born
Paul Robin Krugman
February 28, 1953 (age 66)
Albany, New York, U.S.
Institution
City University of New York
Princeton University
London School of Economics
Field
International economics
Macroeconomics
School or
tradition
Neo-Keynesian economics
Alma mater
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Yale University
Doctoral
advisor
Rüdiger Dornbusch
Influences
Avinash Dixit
Rudi Dornbusch
John Maynard Keynes
Paul Samuelson
Joseph Stiglitz
Contributions
International trade theory
New trade theory
New economic geography
Awards
John Bates Clark Medal (1991)
Princess of Asturias Awards (2004)
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (2008)
Information at IDEAS / RePEc
Paul Robin Krugman (/ˈkrʊɡmən/ (listen) KRUUG-mən;[1][2] born February 28, 1953)[3] is an American economist who is the Distinguished Professor of Economics at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, and a columnist for The New York Times.[4] In 2008, Krugman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography.[5] The Prize Committee cited Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic distribution of economic activity, by examining the effects of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.[6]
Krugman was previously a professor of economics at MIT, and later at Princeton University. He retired from Princeton in June 2015, and holds the title of professor emeritus there. He also holds the title of Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics.[7] Krugman was President of the Eastern Economic Association in 2010,[8] and is among the most influential economists in the world.[9] He is known in academia for his work on international economics (including trade theory and international finance),[10][11] economic geography, liquidity traps, and currency crises.
Krugman is the author or editor of 27 books, including scholarly works, textbooks, and books for a more general audience, and has published over 200 scholarly articles in professional journals and edited volumes.[12] He has also written several hundred columns on economic and political issues for The New York Times, Fortune and Slate. A 2011 survey of economics professors named him their favorite living economist under the age of 60.[13] As a commentator, Krugman has written on a wide range of economic issues including income distribution, taxation, macroeconomics, and international economics. Krugman considers himself a modern liberal, referring to his books, his blog on The New York Times, and his 2007 book The Conscience of a Liberal.[14] His popular commentary has attracted widespread attention and comments, both positive and negative.[15]
Contents
1
Early life and education
2
Academic career
2.1
New trade theory
2.2
New economic geography
2.3
Agglomeration and economies of scale
2.4
International finance
2.5
Macroeconomics and fiscal policy
2.6
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences
2.7
Awards
3
Author
4
Commentator
4.1
East Asian growth
4.2
U.S. economic policies
5
Economic views
5.1
Keynesian economics
5.2
Free trade
6
Political views
6.1
U.S. race relations
6.2
On working in the Reagan administration
6.3
On Gordon Brown vs David Cameron
6.4
On Iraq War
6.5
On Donald Trump
7
Personal life
8
Published works
8.1
Academic books (authored or coauthored)
8.2
Academic books (edited or coedited)
8.3
Economics textbooks
8.4
Books for a general audience
8.5
Selected academic articles
9
See also
10
References
11
External links
Early life and education[edit]
Paul Krugman, Roger Tsien, Martin Chalfie, Osamu Shimomura, Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Masukawa, Nobel Prize Laureates 2008, at a press conference at the Swedish Academy of Science in Stockholm.
Krugman was born to a Russian and Jewish family,[16][17] the son of Anita and David Krugman. In 1922, his paternal grandparents immigrated to the United States from Brest, Belarus, at that time a part of Poland.[18] He was born in Albany, New York, and grew up in Merrick, a hamlet in Nassau County.[19] He graduated from John F. Kennedy High School in Bellmore.[20] According to Krugman, his interest in economics began with Isaac Asimov's Foundation novels, in which the social scientists of the future use a new science of "psychohistory" to try to save civilization. Since present-day science fell far short of "psychohistory", Krugman turned to economics as the next best thing.[21][22]
Krugman earned his B.A. [23] summa cum laude in economics from Yale University in 1974, and went on to pursue a PhD in economics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). In 1977, he successfully completed his PhD in three years, with a thesis titled Essays on flexible exchange rates. While at MIT, he was part of a small group of MIT students sent to work for the Central Bank of Portugal for three months in the summer of 1976, during the chaotic aftermath of the Carnation Revolution.[24]
Krugman later praised his PhD thesis advisor, Rudi Dornbusch, as "one of the great economics teachers of all time" and said that he "had the knack of inspiring students to pick up his enthusiasm and technique, but find their own paths".[25] In 1978, Krugman presented a number of ideas to Dornbusch, who flagged as interesting the idea of a monopolistically competitive trade model. Encouraged, Krugman worked on it and later wrote, "[I] knew within a few hours that I had the key to my whole career in hand".[24] In that same year, Krugman wrote "The Theory of Interstellar Trade", a tongue-in-cheek essay on computing interest rates on goods in transit near the speed of light. He says he wrote it to cheer himself up when he was "an oppressed assistant professor".[26]
Academic career[edit]
Krugman giving a lecture at the German National Library in Frankfurt in 2008.
Krugman became an assistant professor at Yale University in September 1977. He joined the faculty of MIT in 1979. From 1982 to 1983, Krugman spent a year working at the Reagan White House as a staff member of the Council of Economic Advisers. He rejoined MIT as a full professor in 1984. Krugman has also taught at Stanford, Yale, and the London School of Economics.[27]
In 2000, Krugman joined Princeton University as Professor of Economics and International Affairs. He is also currently Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and a member of the Group of Thirty international economic body.[4] He has been a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research since 1979.[28] Krugman was President of the Eastern Economic Association in 2010.[8] In February 2014, he announced that he would be retiring from Princeton in June 2015 and that he would be joining the faculty at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.[29]
Paul Krugman has written extensively on international economics, including international trade, economic geography, and international finance. The Research Papers in Economics project ranks him among the world's most influential economists.[9] Krugman's International Economics: Theory and Policy, co-authored with Maurice Obstfeld, is a standard undergraduate textbook on international economics.[30] He is also co-author, with Robin Wells, of an undergraduate economics text which he says was strongly inspired by the first edition of Paul Samuelson's classic textbook.[31] Krugman also writes on economic topics for the general public, sometimes on international economic topics but also on income distribution and public policy.
The Nobel Prize Committee stated that Krugman's main contribution is his analysis of the effects of economies of scale, combined with the assumption that consumers appreciate diversity, on international trade and on the location of economic activity.[6] The importance of spatial issues in economics has been enhanced by Krugman's ability to popularize this complicated theory with the help of easy-to-read books and state-of-the-art syntheses. "Krugman was beyond doubt the key player in 'placing geographical analysis squarely in the economic mainstream' ... and in conferring it the central role it now assumes."[32]
New trade theory[edit]
Prior to Krugman's work, trade theory (see David Ricardo and Heckscher–Ohlin model) emphasized trade based on the comparative advantage of countries with very different characteristics, such as a country with a high agricultural productivity trading agricultural products for industrial products from a country with a high industrial productivity. However, in the 20th century, an ever-larger share of trade occurred between countries with similar characteristics, which is difficult to explain by comparative advantage. Krugman's explanation of trade between similar countries was proposed in a 1979 paper in the Journal of International Economics, and involves two key assumptions: that consumers prefer a diverse choice of brands, and that production favors economies of scale.[33] Consumers' preference for diversity explains the survival of different versions of cars like Volvo and BMW. However, because of economies of scale, it is not profitable to spread the production of Volvos all over the world; instead, it is concentrated in a few factories and therefore in a few countries (or maybe just one). This logic explains how each country may specialize in producing a few brands of any given type of product, instead of specializing in different types of products.
Graph illustrating Krugman's 'core-periphery' model. The horizontal axis represents costs of trade, while the vertical axis represents the share of either region in manufacturing. Solid lines denote stable equilibria, dashed lines denote unstable equilibria.
Krugman modeled a 'preference for diversity' by assuming a CES utility function like that in a 1977 paper by Avinash Dixit and Joseph Stiglitz.[34][35] Many models of international trade now follow Krugman's lead, incorporating economies of scale in production and a preference for diversity in consumption.[6][36] This way of modeling trade has come to be called New Trade Theory.[32]
Krugman's theory also took into account transportation costs, a key feature in producing the "home market effect", which would later feature in his work on the new economic geography. The home market effect "states that, ceteris paribus, the country with the larger demand for a good shall, at equilibrium, produce a more than proportionate share of that good and be a net exporter of it."[32] The home market effect was an unexpected result, and Krugman initially questioned it, but ultimately concluded that the mathematics of the model were correct.[32]
When there are economies of scale in production, it is possible that countries may become 'locked into' disadvantageous patterns of trade.[37] Krugman points out that although globalization has been positive on a whole, since the 1980s the process known as hyper-globalization has at least played a part in rising inequality.[38] Nonetheless, trade remains beneficial in general, even between similar countries, because it permits firms to save on costs by producing at a larger, more efficient scale, and because it increases the range of brands available and sharpens the competition between firms.[39] Krugman has usually been supportive of free trade and globalization.[40][41] He has also been critical of industrial policy, which New Trade Theory suggests might offer nations rent-seeking advantages if "strategic industries" can be identified, saying it's not clear that such identification can be done accurately enough to matter.[42]
New economic geography[edit]
It took an interval of eleven years, but ultimately Krugman's work on New Trade Theory (NTT) converged to what is usually called the "new economic geography" (NEG), which Krugman began to develop in a seminal 1991 paper, "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography", published in the Journal of Political Economy.[43] In Krugman's own words, the passage from NTT to NEG was "obvious in retrospect; but it certainly took me a while to see it. ... The only good news was that nobody else picked up that $100 bill lying on the sidewalk in the interim."[44] This would become Krugman's most-cited academic paper: by early 2009, it had 857 citations, more than double his second-ranked paper.[32] Krugman called the paper "the love of my life in academic work."[45]
The "home market effect" that Krugman discovered in NTT also features in NEG, which interprets agglomeration "as the outcome of the interaction of increasing returns, trade costs and factor price differences."[32] If trade is largely shaped by economies of scale, as Krugman's trade theory argues, then those economic regions with most production will be more profitable and will therefore attract even more production. That is, NTT implies that instead of spreading out evenly around the world, production will tend to concentrate in a few countries, regions, or cities, which will become densely populated but will also have higher levels of income.[6][11]
Agglomeration and economies of scale[edit]
Manufacturing is characterized by increasing returns to scale and less restrictive and expansive land qualifications as compared to agricultural uses. So, geographically where can manufacturing be predicted to develop? Krugman states that manufacturing's geographical range is inherently limited by economies of scale, but also that manufacturing will establish and accrue itself in an area of high demand. Production that occurs adjacent to demand will result in lower transportation costs, but demand, as a result, will be greater due to concentrated nearby production. These forces act upon one another simultaneously, producing manufacturing and population agglomeration. Population will increase in these areas due to the more highly developed infrastructure and nearby production, therefore lowering the expense of good, while economies of scale provide varied choices of goods and services. These forces will feed into each other until the greater portion of the urban population and manufacturing hubs are concentrated into a relatively insular geographic area.[46]
International finance[edit]
Krugman has also been influential in the field of international finance. As a graduate student, Krugman visited the Federal Reserve Board, where Stephen Salant and Dale Henderson were completing their discussion paper on speculative attacks in the gold market. Krugman adapted their model for the foreign exchange market, resulting in a 1979 paper on currency crises in the Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, which showed that misaligned fixed exchange rate regimes are unlikely to end smoothly: instead, they end in a sudden speculative attack.[47] Krugman's paper is considered one of the main contributions to the 'first generation' of currency crisis models,[48][49] and it is his second-most-cited paper (457 citations as of early 2009).[32]
In response to the global financial crisis of 2008, Krugman proposed, in an informal "mimeo" style of publication,[50] an "international finance multiplier", to help explain the unexpected speed with which the global crisis had occurred. He argued that when, "highly leveraged financial institutions [HLIs], which do a lot of cross-border investment [. ... ] lose heavily in one market ... they find themselves undercapitalized, and have to sell off assets across the board. This drives down prices, putting pressure on the balance sheets of other HLIs, and so on." Such a rapid contagion had hitherto been considered unlikely because of "decoupling" in a globalized economy.[51][52][53] He first announced that he was working on such a model on his blog, on October 5, 2008.[54] Within days of its appearance, it was being discussed on some popular economics-oriented blogs.[55][56] The note was soon being cited in papers (draft and published) by other economists,[57] even though it had not itself been through ordinary peer review processes.
Macroeconomics and fiscal policy[edit]
Part of a series on
Macroeconomics
Basic concepts
[show]
Policies
[show]
Models
[show]
Related fields
[show]
Schools
[show]
People
[show]
See also
[show]
Money portal
Business portal
vte
Krugman has done much to revive discussion of the liquidity trap as a topic in economics.[58][59][60][61] He recommended pursuing aggressive fiscal policy and unconventional monetary policy to counter Japan's lost decade in the 1990s, arguing that the country was mired in a Keynesian liquidity trap.[62][63][64] The debate he started at that time over liquidity traps and what policies best address them continues in the economics literature.[65]
Krugman had argued in The Return of Depression Economics that Japan was in a liquidity trap in the late 1990s, since the central bank could not drop interest rates any lower to escape economic stagnation.[66] The core of Krugman's policy proposal for addressing Japan's liquidity trap was inflation targeting, which, he argued "most nearly approaches the usual goal of modern stabilization policy, which is to provide adequate demand in a clean, unobtrusive way that does not distort the allocation of resources."[64] The proposal appeared first in a web posting on his academic site.[67] This mimeo-draft was soon cited, but was also misread by some as repeating his earlier advice that Japan's best hope was in "turning on the printing presses", as recommended by Milton Friedman, John Makin, and others.[68][69][70]
Krugman has since drawn parallels between Japan's 'lost decade' and the late 2000s recession, arguing that expansionary fiscal policy is necessary as the major industrialized economies are mired in a liquidity trap.[71] In response to economists who point out that the Japanese economy recovered despite not pursuing his policy prescriptions, Krugman maintains that it was an export-led boom that pulled Japan out of its economic slump in the late-90s, rather than reforms of the financial system.[72]
Krugman was one of the most prominent advocates of the 2008–2009 Keynesian resurgence, so much so that economics commentator Noah Smith referred to it as the "Krugman insurgency."[73][74][75] His view that most peer-reviewed macroeconomic research since the mid-1960s is wrong, preferring simpler models developed in the 1930s, has been criticized by some modern economists, like John H. Cochrane.[76] In June 2012, Krugman and Richard Layard launched A manifesto for economic sense, where they call for greater use of fiscal stimulus policy to reduce unemployment and foster growth.[77] The manifesto received over four thousand signatures within two days of its launch,[78] and has attracted both positive and critical responses.[79][80]
President George W. Bush poses for a photo with Nobel Prize winners Monday, Nov. 24, 2008, in the Oval Office. Joining President Bush from left are, Dr. Paul Krugman, Economics Prize Laureate; Dr. Martin Chalfie, Chemistry Prize Laureate; and Dr. Roger Tsien, Chemistry Prize Laureate.
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences[edit]
Wikinews has related news: American Paul Krugman wins Nobel prize for economics
Krugman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (informally the Nobel Prize in Economics), the sole recipient for 2008. This prize includes an award of about $1.4 million and was given to Krugman for his work associated with New Trade Theory and the New Economic Geography.[81] In the words of the prize committee, "By having integrated economies of scale into explicit general equilibrium models, Paul Krugman has deepened our understanding of the determinants of trade and the location of economic activity."[82]
Awards[edit]
Play media
Paul Krugman accepts EPI Distinguished Economist Award (2011)
1991, American Economic Association, John Bates Clark Medal.[83] Since it was awarded to only one person, once every two years (prior to 2009), The Economist has described the Clark Medal as 'slightly harder to get than a Nobel prize'.[84]
1992, Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAAS).[28]
1995, Adam Smith Award of the National Association for Business Economics[85]
1998, Doctor honoris causa in Economics awarded by Free University of Berlin Freie Universität Berlin in Germany
2000, H.C. Recktenwald Prize in Economics, awarded by University of Erlangen-Nuremberg in Germany.
2002, Editor and Publisher, Columnist of the Year.[86]
2004, Fundación Príncipe de Asturias (Spain), Prince of Asturias Awards in Social Sciences.[87]
2004, Doctor of Humane Letters honoris causa, Haverford College[88]
2008, Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for Krugman's contributions to New Trade Theory.[89] He became the twelfth John Bates Clark Medal winner to be awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize.
2011, EPI Distinguished Economist Award.[90]
2011 Gerald Loeb Award for Commentary[91]
2012, Doctor honoris causa from the Universidade de Lisboa, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa and Universidade Nova de Lisboa[92][93]
2013, Doctor of Laws, honoris causa conferred by the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada [94]
2014, recipient of the Literary and Historical Society (University College Dublin)'s James Joyce Award in recognition of his outstanding contribution to the economic sciences.[95]
2014, recipient of the Green Templeton College, Oxford's Sanjaya Lall Visiting Professorship of Business and Development, Trinity Term 2014, in recognition of his outstanding international reputation in scholarship and research in the field of Development Economics and Business.[96][97]
2016, Doctor of Letters, honoris causa conferred by the University of Oxford, Oxford, UK[98]
A May 2011 Hamilton College analysis of 26 politicians, journalists, and media commentators who made predictions in major newspaper columns or television news shows from September 2007 to December 2008 found that Krugman was the most accurate. Only nine of the prognosticators predicted more accurately than chance, two were significantly less accurate, and the remaining 14 were no better or worse than a coin flip. Krugman was correct in 15 out of 17 predictions, compared to 9 out of 11 for the next most accurate media figure, Maureen Dowd.[99]
Foreign Policy named Krugman one of its 2012 FP Top 100 Global Thinkers "for wielding his acid pen against austerity".[100]
Author[edit]
Krugman at the 2010 Brooklyn Book Festival.
In the 1990s, besides academic books and textbooks, Krugman increasingly began writing books for a general audience on issues he considered important for public policy. In The Age of Diminished Expectations (1990), he wrote in particular about the increasing US income inequality in the "New Economy" of the 1990s. He attributes the rise in income inequality in part to changes in technology, but principally to a change in political atmosphere which he attributes to Movement Conservatives.
In September 2003, Krugman published a collection of his columns under the title, The Great Unraveling, about the Bush administration's economic and foreign policies and the US economy in the early 2000s. His columns argued that the large deficits during that time were generated by the Bush administration as a result of decreasing taxes on the rich, increasing public spending, and fighting the Iraq War. Krugman wrote that these policies were unsustainable in the long run and would eventually generate a major economic crisis. The book was a best-seller.[84][101][102]
In 2007, Krugman published The Conscience of a Liberal, whose title refers to Barry Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative.[103] It details the history of wealth and income gaps in the United States in the 20th century. The book describes how the gap between rich and poor declined greatly in middle of the century, and then widened in the last two decades to levels higher even than in the 1920s. In Conscience, Krugman argues that government policies played a much greater role than commonly thought both in reducing inequality in the 1930s through 1970s and in increasing it in the 1980s through the present, and criticizes the Bush administration for implementing policies that Krugman believes widened the gap between the rich and poor.
Krugman also argued that Republicans owed their electoral successes to their ability to exploit the race issue to win political dominance of the South.[104][105] Krugman argues that Ronald Reagan had used the "Southern Strategy" to signal sympathy for racism without saying anything overtly racist,[106] citing as an example Reagan's coining of the term "welfare queen".[107]
In his book, Krugman proposed a "new New Deal", which included placing more emphasis on social and medical programs and less on national defense.[108] In his review of Conscience of a Liberal, the liberal journalist and author Michael Tomasky credited Krugman with a commitment "to accurate history even when some fudging might be in order for the sake of political expediency."[104] In a review for The New York Times, Pulitzer prize-winning historian David M. Kennedy stated, "Like the rants of Rush Limbaugh or the films of Michael Moore, Krugman's shrill polemic may hearten the faithful, but it will do little to persuade the unconvinced".[109]
In late 2008, Krugman published a substantial updating of an earlier work, entitled The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008. In the book, he discusses the failure of the United States regulatory system to keep pace with a financial system increasingly out-of-control, and the causes of and possible ways to contain the greatest financial crisis since the 1930s. In 2012, Krugman published End This Depression Now!, a book which argues that looking at the available historical economic data, fiscal cuts and austerity measures only deprive the economy of valuable funds that can circulate and further add to a poor economy – people cannot spend, and markets cannot thrive if there is not enough consumption and there cannot be sufficient consumption if there is large unemployment. He argues that while it is necessary to cut debt, it is the worst time to do so in an economy that has just suffered the most severe of financial shocks, and must be done instead when an economy is near full-employment when the private sector can withstand the burden of decreased government spending and austerity. Failure to stimulate the economy either by public or private sectors will only unnecessarily lengthen the current economic depression and make it worse.[110]
Commentator[edit]
Martin Wolf has written that Krugman is both the "most hated and most admired columnist in the US".[111] Economist J. Peter Neary has noted that Krugman "has written on a wide range of topics, always combining one of the best prose styles in the profession with an ability to construct elegant, insightful and useful models."[112] Neary added that "no discussion of his work could fail to mention his transition from Academic Superstar to Public Intellectual. Through his extensive writings, including a regular column for The New York Times, monographs and textbooks at every level, and books on economics and current affairs for the general public ... he has probably done more than any other writer to explain economic principles to a wide audience."[112] Krugman has been described as the most controversial economist in his generation[113][114] and according to Michael Tomasky since 1992 he has moved "from being a center-left scholar to being a liberal polemicist."[104]
From the mid-1990s onwards, Krugman wrote for Fortune (1997–99)[28] and Slate (1996–99),[28] and then for The Harvard Business Review, Foreign Policy, The Economist, Harper's, and Washington Monthly. In this period Krugman critiqued various positions commonly taken on economic issues from across the political spectrum, from protectionism and opposition to the World Trade Organization on the left to supply-side economics on the right.[115]
During the 1992 presidential campaign, Krugman praised Bill Clinton's economic plan in The New York Times, and Clinton's campaign used some of Krugman's work on income inequality. At the time, it was considered likely that Clinton would offer him a position in the new administration, but allegedly Krugman's volatility and outspokenness caused Clinton to look elsewhere.[113] Krugman later said that he was "temperamentally unsuited for that kind of role. You have to be very good at people skills, biting your tongue when people say silly things."[115][116] In a Fresh Dialogues interview, Krugman added, "you have to be reasonably organized ... I can move into a pristine office and within three days it will look like a grenade went off."[117]
In 1999, near the height of the dot com boom, The New York Times approached Krugman to write a bi-weekly column on "the vagaries of business and economics in an age of prosperity."[115] His first columns in 2000 addressed business and economic issues, but as the 2000 US presidential campaign progressed, Krugman increasingly focused on George W. Bush's policy proposals. According to Krugman, this was partly due to "the silence of the media – those 'liberal media' conservatives complain about ..."[115] Krugman accused Bush of repeatedly misrepresenting his proposals, and criticized the proposals themselves.[115] After Bush's election, and his perseverance with his proposed tax cut in the midst of the slump (which Krugman argued would do little to help the economy but substantially raise the fiscal deficit), Krugman's columns grew angrier and more focused on the administration. As Alan Blinder put it in 2002, "There's been a kind of missionary quality to his writing since then ... He's trying to stop something now, using the power of the pen."[115] Partly as a result, Krugman's twice-weekly column on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times has made him, according to Nicholas Confessore, "the most important political columnist in America ... he is almost alone in analyzing the most important story in politics in recent years – the seamless melding of corporate, class, and political party interests at which the Bush administration excels."[115] In an interview in late 2009, Krugman said his missionary zeal had changed in the post-Bush era and he described the Obama administration as "good guys but not as forceful as I'd like ... When I argue with them in my column this is a serious discussion. We really are in effect speaking across the transom here."[118] Krugman says he's more effective at driving change outside the administration than inside it, "now, I'm trying to make this progressive moment in American history a success. So that's where I'm pushing."[118]
Krugman's columns have drawn criticism as well as praise. A 2003 article in The Economist[119] questioned Krugman's "growing tendency to attribute all the world's ills to George Bush", citing critics who felt that "his relentless partisanship is getting in the way of his argument" and claiming errors of economic and political reasoning in his columns.[84] Daniel Okrent, a former The New York Times ombudsman, in his farewell column, criticized Krugman for what he said was "the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults."[120][121]
Krugman's New York Times blog is "The Conscience of a Liberal", devoted largely to economics and politics.
Five days after 9/11 terrorist attacks, Krugman argued in his column that calamity was "partly self-inflicted" due to transfer of responsibility for airport security from government to airlines. His column provoked an angry response and The New York Times was flooded with complaints. According to Larissa MacFarquhar of The New Yorker, while some people[who?] thought that he was too partisan to be a columnist for The New York Times, he was revered on the left.[122][123] Similarly, on the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 on the United States Krugman again provoked a controversy by accusing on his New York Times blog former U.S. President George W. Bush and former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani of rushing "to cash in on the horror" after the attacks and describing the anniversary as "an occasion for shame".[124][125]
Krugman was noteworthy for his fierce opposition to the 2016 presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders. On January 19, 2016, he wrote an article which criticized Bernie Sanders for his perceived lack of political realism, compared Sanders' plans for healthcare and financial reform unfavorably to those of Hillary Clinton, and cited criticisms of Sanders from other liberal policy wonks like Mike Konczal and Ezra Klein.[126] Later, Krugman wrote an article which accused Sanders of "[going] for easy slogans over hard thinking" and attacking Hillary Clinton in a way that was "just plain dishonest".[127]
On the 12 July 2016, Krugman tweeted "leprechaun economics", in response to Central Statistics Office (Ireland) data that 2015 GDP grew 26.3% and 2015 GNP grew 18.7%. The leprechaun economics affair (proved in 2018 to be Apple restructuring its double Irish subsidiaries), led to the Central Bank of Ireland introducing a new economic statistic, Modified gross national income (or GNI*) to better measure the Irish economy (2016 Irish GDP is 143% of 2016 Irish GNI*). The term leprechaun economics has since been used by Krugman,[128][129] and others,[130][131] to describe distorted/unsound economic data.
Krugman has harshly criticized the Trump administration.[132] He has also remarked several times on how the depth of his disapproval of Trump tempts him to just assume the worst, such that he has to be careful to check his personal beliefs against the weight of evidence. Following Trump's election, Krugman suggested that "we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight." [133] Within two days, he retracted that statement, characterizing it as a lapse in judgment due to having been horrified and depressed by the outcome of the election.[134][135]
East Asian growth[edit]
In a 1994 Foreign Affairs article, Paul Krugman argued that it was a myth that the economic successes of the East Asian 'tigers' constituted an economic miracle. He argued that their rise was fueled by mobilizing resources and that their growth rates would inevitably slow.[136] His article helped popularize the argument made by Lawrence Lau and Alwyn Young, among others, that the growth of economies in East Asia was not the result of new and original economic models, but rather from high capital investment and increasing labor force participation, and that total factor productivity had not increased. Krugman argued that in the long term, only increasing total factor productivity can lead to sustained economic growth. Krugman's article was highly criticized in many Asian countries when it first appeared, and subsequent studies disputed some of Krugman's conclusions. However, it also stimulated a great deal of research, and may have caused the Singapore government to provide incentives for technological progress.[137]
During the 1997 Asian financial crisis, Krugman advocated currency controls as a way to mitigate the crisis. Writing in a Fortune magazine article, he suggested exchange controls as "a solution so unfashionable, so stigmatized, that hardly anyone has dared suggest it."[138] Malaysia was the only country that adopted such controls, and although the Malaysian government credited its rapid economic recovery on currency controls, the relationship is disputed.[139] An empirical study found that the Malaysian policies produced faster economic recovery and smaller declines in employment and real wages.[140] Krugman later stated that the controls might not have been necessary at the time they were applied, but that nevertheless "Malaysia has proved a point – namely, that controlling capital in a crisis is at least feasible."[141] Krugman more recently pointed out that emergency capital controls have even been endorsed by the IMF, and are no longer considered radical policy.[142][143][144]
U.S. economic policies[edit]
In the early 2000s, Krugman repeatedly criticized the Bush tax cuts, both before and after they were enacted. Krugman argued that the tax cuts enlarged the budget deficit without improving the economy, and that they enriched the wealthy – worsening income distribution in the US.[102][145][146][147][148] Krugman advocated lower interest rates (to promote investment and spending on housing and other durable goods), and increased government spending on infrastructure, military, and unemployment benefits, arguing that these policies would have a larger stimulus effect, and unlike permanent tax cuts, would only temporarily increase the budget deficit.[148][149] In addition, he was against Bush's proposal to privatize social security.[150]
In August 2005, after Alan Greenspan expressed concern over housing markets, Krugman criticized Greenspan's earlier reluctance to regulate the mortgage and related financial markets, arguing that "[he's] like a man who suggests leaving the barn door ajar, and then – after the horse is gone – delivers a lecture on the importance of keeping your animals properly locked up."[151] Krugman has repeatedly expressed his view that Greenspan and Phil Gramm are the two individuals most responsible for causing the subprime crisis. Krugman points to Greenspan and Gramm for the key roles they played in keeping derivatives, financial markets, and investment banks unregulated, and to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed Great Depression era safeguards that prevented commercial banks, investment banks and insurance companies from merging.[152][153][154][155]
Krugman has also been critical of some of the Obama administration's economic policies. He has criticized the Obama stimulus plan as being too small and inadequate given the size of the economy and the banking rescue plan as misdirected; Krugman wrote in The New York Times: "an overwhelming majority [of the American public] believes that the government is spending too much to help large financial institutions. This suggests that the administration's money-for-nothing financial policy will eventually deplete its political capital."[156] In particular, he considered the Obama administration's actions to prop up the US financial system in 2009 to be impractical and unduly favorable to Wall Street bankers.[121] In anticipation of President Obama's Job Summit in December 2009, Krugman said in a Fresh Dialogues interview, "This jobs summit can't be an empty exercise ... he can't come out with a proposal for $10 or $20 Billion of stuff because people will view that as a joke. There has to be a significant job proposal ... I have in mind something like $300 Billion."[157]
Krugman has recently criticized China's exchange rate policy, which he believes to be a significant drag on global economic recovery from the Late-2000s recession, and he has advocated a "surcharge" on Chinese imports to the US in response.[158] Jeremy Warner of The Daily Telegraph accused Krugman of advocating a return to self-destructive protectionism.[159]
In April 2010, as the Senate began considering new financial regulations, Krugman argued that the regulations should not only regulate financial innovation, but also tax financial-industry profits and remuneration. He cited a paper by Andrei Shleifer and Robert Vishny released the previous week, which concludes that most innovation was in fact about "providing investors with false substitutes for [traditional] assets like bank deposits," and once investors realize the sheer number of securities that are unsafe a "flight to safety" occurs which necessarily leads to "financial fragility."[160][161]
In his June 28, 2010 column in The New York Times, in light of the recent G-20 Toronto Summit, Krugman criticized world leaders for agreeing to halve deficits by 2013. Krugman claimed that these efforts could lead the global economy into the early stages of a "third depression" and leave "millions of lives blighted by the absence of jobs." He advocated instead the continued stimulus of economies to foster greater growth.[162]
In a 2014 review of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century he stated we are in a Second Gilded Age.[163]
Economic views[edit]
Keynesian economics[edit]
Krugman identifies as a Keynesian[164][165] and a saltwater economist,[166] and he has criticized the freshwater school on macroeconomics.[167][168] Although he has used New Keynesian theory in his work, he has also criticized it for lacking predictive power and for hewing to ideas like the efficient-market hypothesis and rational expectations.[168] Since the 1990s, he has promoted the practical use of the IS-LM model of the neoclassical synthesis, pointing out its relative simplicity compared to New Keynesian models, and its continued currency in economic policy analysis.[169][170][171]
In the wake of the 2007–2009 financial crisis he has remarked that he is "gravitating towards a Keynes-Fisher-Minsky view of macroeconomics."[172] Post-Keynesian observers cite commonalities between Krugman's views and those of the Post-Keynesian school,[173][174][175] although Krugman has been critical of some Post-Keynesian economists such as John Kenneth Galbraith – whose works The New Industrial State (1967) and Economics in Perspective (1987) Krugman has referred to as not "real economic theory" and "remarkably ill-informed" respectively.[176] In recent academic work, he has collaborated with Gauti Eggertsson on a New Keynesian model of debt-overhang and debt-driven slumps, inspired by the writings of Irving Fisher, Hyman Minsky, and Richard Koo. Their work argues that during a debt-driven slump, the "paradox of toil", together with the paradox of flexibility, can exacerbate a liquidity trap, reducing demand and employment.[177]
Free trade[edit]
Krugman's support for free trade in the 1980s–1990s provoked some ire from the anti-globalization movement.[178][179][180] In 1987 he quipped that, "If there were an Economist's Creed, it would surely contain the affirmations 'I understand the Principle of Comparative Advantage' and 'I advocate Free Trade'."[181][182] However, Krugman argues in the same article that, given the findings of New Trade Theory, "[free trade] has shifted from optimum to reasonable rule of thumb ... it can never again be asserted as the policy that economic theory tells us is always right." In the article, Krugman comes out in favor of free trade given the enormous political costs of actively engaging in strategic trade policy and because there is no clear method for a government to discover which industries will ultimately yield positive returns. He also notes that increasing returns and strategic trade theory do not disprove the underlying truth of comparative advantage.
In 2015, Krugman noted his ambivalence about the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership, as the agreement was not mainly about trade and, "whatever you may say about the benefits of free trade, most of those benefits have already been realized" [by existing agreements].[183]
In 2009, Krugman made a significant departure from his general support for free trade, entertaining the idea of a 25% tariff on Chinese imports as a retaliation for China's policy of maintaining a low value for the renminbi, which many saw as hostile currency manipulation, artificially making their exports more competitive.[184]
More recently he has written, in keeping with his long-term support for trade (while emphasizing that it is not the only or even most-important economic issue) that protectionism does not directly cause recessions, but can make economies less efficient and reduce long-term growth. Indeed, if there is a trade war, imports would decrease as much as exports, so employment should not be strongly impacted, at least in the medium to long run.[185] He considers that the United States should not repeat Reagan's 1981 policy on taxes and quotas on imported products.[186] Even if it does not produce a recession, protectionism would shock "value chains" and disrupt jobs and communities in the same way as free trade in the past. In addition, other countries would take retaliatory measures against US exports.[187] Krugman recommended against the abandonment of NAFTA, because it could cause economic losses and disruptions to businesses, jobs, and communities.[188] He noted that although free trade has harmed some industries, communities, and some workers, it remains a win-win system overall, enriching both parties to the agreement at the national level; a trade war is equivalently negative for the nations involved, even while it may benefit some individuals or industries within each nation.[189]
Political views[edit]
Krugman describes himself as liberal, and has explained that he views the term "liberal" in the American context to mean "more or less what social democratic means in Europe".[103] In a 2009 Newsweek article, Evan Thomas described Krugman as having "all the credentials of a ranking member of the East coast liberal establishment" but also as someone who is anti-establishment, a "scourge of the Bush administration", and a critic of the Obama administration.[121] In 1996, Newsweek's Michael Hirsh remarked,
Say this for Krugman: though an unabashed liberal ... he's ideologically colorblind. He savages the supply-siders of the Reagan–Bush era with the same glee as he does the 'strategic traders' of the Clinton administration.[113]
Krugman has at times advocated free markets in contexts where they are often viewed as controversial. He has written against rent control and land-use restrictions in favor of market supply and demand,[190][191] likened the opposition against free trade and globalization to the opposition against evolution via natural selection (1996),[179] opposed farm subsidies,[192] argued that sweatshops are preferable to unemployment,[40] dismissed the case for living wages (1998),[193] and argued against mandates, subsidies, and tax breaks for ethanol (2000).[194] In 2003, he questioned the usefulness of NASA's manned space flights given the available technology and their high financial cost compared to their general benefits.[195] Krugman has also criticized U.S. zoning laws[196] and European labor market regulation.[197][198] He calls current Israeli policy "narrow-minded" and "basically a gradual, long-run form of national suicide", saying that it's "bad for Jews everywhere, not to mention the world".[199]
Krugman endorsed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in the run-up for the 2016 U.S. presidential election.[200]
U.S. race relations[edit]
Krugman has criticized the Republican Party leadership for what he sees as a strategic (but largely tacit) reliance on racial divisions.[201][202][203] In his Conscience of a Liberal, he wrote:
The changing politics of race made it possible for a revived conservative movement, whose ultimate goal was to reverse the achievements of the New Deal, to win national elections – even though it supported policies that favored the interests of a narrow elite over those of middle- and lower-income Americans.[204]
On working in the Reagan administration[edit]
Krugman worked for Martin Feldstein when the latter was appointed chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers and chief economic advisor to President Ronald Reagan. He later wrote in an autobiographical essay, "It was, in a way, strange for me to be part of the Reagan Administration. I was then and still am an unabashed defender of the welfare state, which I regard as the most decent social arrangement yet devised."[24] Krugman found the time "thrilling, then disillusioning". He did not fit into the Washington political environment, and was not tempted to stay on.[24]
On Gordon Brown vs David Cameron[edit]
According to Krugman, Gordon Brown and his party were unfairly blamed for the late-2000s financial crisis.[205] He has also praised the former British Prime Minister, whom he described as "more impressive than any US politician" after a three-hour conversation with him.[206] Krugman asserted that Brown "defined the character of the worldwide financial rescue effort" and urged British voters not to support the opposition Conservative Party in the 2010 General Election, arguing their Party Leader David Cameron "has had little to offer other than to raise the red flag of fiscal panic".[205][207]
On Iraq War[edit]
Krugman opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He wrote in his New York Times column: "What we should have learned from the Iraq debacle was that you should always be skeptical and that you should never rely on supposed authority. If you hear that ‘everyone’ supports a policy, whether it's a war of choice or fiscal austerity, you should ask whether ‘everyone’ has been defined to exclude anyone expressing a different opinion."[208]
On Donald Trump[edit]
Krugman has been a vocal critic of Donald Trump and his administration.[209] His criticisms have included the president's climate change proposals, economic policy,[210] the Republican tax plan and Trump's foreign policy initiatives. Krugman has often used his New York Times Op-Ed column to set out arguments against the President's policies.
Personal life[edit]
Krugman has been married twice. His first wife, Robin L. Bergman, is a designer. He is currently married to Robin Wells, an academic economist who received her BA from the University of Chicago and her PhD from the University of California, Berkeley.[211] She, as did Krugman, taught at MIT. Together, Krugman and his wife have collaborated on several economics textbooks. Although rumors began to circulate in early 2007 that Krugman's "son" was working for Hillary Clinton's campaign, Krugman reiterated in his New York Times op-ed column that he and his wife are childless.[212][213][214]
Krugman currently lives in New York City.[215] Upon retiring from Princeton after fifteen years of teaching in June 2015, he addressed the issue in his column, stating that while he retains the utmost praise and respect for Princeton, he wishes to reside in New York City and hopes to focus more on public policy issues.[216] He subsequently became a professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and a distinguished scholar at the Graduate Center's Luxembourg Income Study Center.[216][217]
Krugman reports that he is a distant relative of conservative journalist David Frum.[218] He has described himself as a "Loner. Ordinarily shy. Shy with individuals."[219]
Published works[edit]
Academic books (authored or coauthored)[edit]
The Spatial Economy – Cities, Regions and International Trade (July 1999), with Masahisa Fujita and Anthony Venables. MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-06204-6
The Self Organizing Economy (February 1996), ISBN 1-55786-698-8
EMU and the Regions (December 1995), with Guillermo de la Dehesa. ISBN 1-56708-038-3
Development, Geography, and Economic Theory (Ohlin Lectures) (September 1995), ISBN 0-262-11203-5
Foreign Direct Investment in the United States (3rd Edition) (February 1995), with Edward M. Graham. ISBN 0-88132-204-0
World Savings Shortage (September 1994), ISBN 0-88132-161-3
What Do We Need to Know About the International Monetary System? (Essays in International Finance, No 190 July 1993) ISBN 0-88165-097-8
Currencies and Crises (June 1992), ISBN 0-262-11165-9
Geography and Trade (Gaston Eyskens Lecture Series) (August 1991), ISBN 0-262-11159-4
The Risks Facing the World Economy (July 1991), with Guillermo de la Dehesa and Charles Taylor. ISBN 1-56708-073-1
Has the Adjustment Process Worked? (Policy Analyses in International Economics, 34) (June 1991), ISBN 0-88132-116-8
Rethinking International Trade (April 1990), ISBN 0-262-11148-9
Trade Policy and Market Structure (March 1989), with Elhanan Helpman. ISBN 0-262-08182-2
Exchange-Rate Instability (Lionel Robbins Lectures) (November 1988), ISBN 0-262-11140-3
Adjustment in the World Economy (August 1987) ISBN 1-56708-023-5
Market Structure and Foreign Trade: Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition, and the International Economy (May 1985), with Elhanan Helpman. ISBN 978-0-262-08150-4
Academic books (edited or coedited)[edit]
Currency Crises (National Bureau of Economic Research Conference Report) (September 2000), ISBN 0-226-45462-2
Trade with Japan: Has the Door Opened Wider? (National Bureau of Economic Research Project Report) (March 1995), ISBN 0-226-45459-2
Empirical Studies of Strategic Trade Policy (National Bureau of Economic Research Project Report) (April 1994), co-edited with Alasdair Smith. ISBN 0-226-45460-6
Exchange Rate Targets and Currency Bands (October 1991), co-edited with Marcus Miller. ISBN 0-521-41533-0
Strategic Trade Policy and the New International Economics (January 1986), ISBN 0-262-11112-8
Economics textbooks[edit]
Economics: European Edition (Spring 2007), with Robin Wells and Kathryn Graddy. ISBN 0-7167-9956-1
Macroeconomics (February 2006), with Robin Wells. ISBN 0-7167-6763-5
Economics, first edition (December 2005), with Robin Wells. ISBN 1-57259-150-1
Economics, second edition (2009), with Robin Wells. ISBN 0-7167-7158-6
Economics, third edition (2013), with Robin Wells. ISBN 1-4292-5163-8
Microeconomics (March 2004), with Robin Wells. ISBN 0-7167-5997-7
International Economics: Theory and Policy, with Maurice Obstfeld. 7th Edition (2006), ISBN 0-321-29383-5; 1st Edition (1998), ISBN 0-673-52186-9
Books for a general audience[edit]
End This Depression Now! (April 2012) ISBN 0-393-08877-4
A call for stimulative expansionary policy and an end to austerity
The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008 (December 2008) ISBN 0-393-07101-4
An updated version of his previous work.
The Conscience of a Liberal (October 2007) ISBN 0-393-06069-1
The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century (September 2003) ISBN 0-393-05850-6
A book of his The New York Times columns, many deal with the economic policies of the Bush administration or the economy in general.
Fuzzy Math: The Essential Guide to the Bush Tax Plan (May 4, 2001) ISBN 0-393-05062-9
The Return of Depression Economics (May 1999) ISBN 0-393-04839-X
Considers the long economic stagnation of Japan through the 1990s, the Asian financial crisis, and problems in Latin America.
The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008 (December 2008) ISBN 0-393-07101-4
The Accidental Theorist and Other Dispatches from the Dismal Science (May 1998) ISBN 0-393-04638-9
Essay collection, primarily from Krugman's writing for Slate.
Pop Internationalism (March 1996) ISBN 0-262-11210-8
Essay collection, covering largely the same ground as Peddling Prosperity.
Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in an Age of Diminished Expectations (April 1995) ISBN 0-393-31292-5
History of economic thought from the first rumblings of revolt against Keynesian economics to the present, for the layman.
The Age of Diminished Expectations: U.S. Economic Policy in the 1990s (1990) ISBN 0-262-11156-X
A "briefing book" on the major policy issues around the economy.
Revised and Updated, January 1994, ISBN 0-262-61092-2
Third Edition, August 1997, ISBN 0-262-11224-8
Selected academic articles[edit]
(2012) 'Debt, Deleveraging, and the Liquidity Trap: A Fisher-Minsky-Koo Approach' The Quarterly Journal of Economics 127 (3), pp. 1469–513.
(2009) 'The Increasing Returns Revolution in Trade and Geography' The American Economic Review 99(3), pp. 561–71.
(1998) 'It's Baaack: Japan's Slump and the Return of the Liquidity Trap' Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1998, pp. 137–205.
(1996) 'Are currency crises self-fulfilling?' NBER Macroeconomics Annual 11, pp. 345–78.
(1995) (with AJ Venables) (1995). "Globalization and the inequality of nations" (PDF). Quarterly Journal of Economics. 110 (4): 857–80. doi:10.2307/2946642. JSTOR 2946642.
(1991) 'Increasing returns and economic geography'. Journal of Political Economy 99, pp. 483–99.
(1991) Krugman, P. R. (1991). "Target zones and exchange rate dynamics" (PDF). Quarterly Journal of Economics. 106 (3): 669–82. doi:10.2307/2937922. JSTOR 2937922.
(1991) 'History versus expectations'. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106 (2), pp. 651–67.
(1981) 'Intra-industry specialization and the gains from trade'. Journal of Political Economy 89, pp. 959–73.
(1980) 'Scale economies, product differentiation, and the pattern of trade'. American Economic Review 70, pp. 950–59.
(1979) 'A model of balance-of-payments crises'. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 11, pp. 311–25.
(1979) 'Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade'. Journal of International Economics 9, pp. 469–79.
Paul R. Krugman
Edit My Profile »
Add Research Publication »
Professor of Economics and International Affairs, Emeritus
Office:
Offsite
Email:
pkrugman@princeton.edu
External Website:
http://www.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/
Area(s)
International Trade/Finance
Urban Economics
Japan
Biography
Biography
The author or editor of dozens of books and several hundred articles, primarily about international trade and international finance, Krugman is also nationally known for his twice-weekly columns in The New York Times and his monthly columns in Fortune Magazine and Slate. He was the Ford International Professor of International Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and has served on the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers. He was the recipient of the 1991 John Bates Clark Medal, an award given every two years by the American Economic Association to an economist under 40. Ph.D. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The Zombie Style in American Politics
Why bad ideas just won’t stay dead.
By Paul Krugman
Opinion Columnist
April 29, 2019
1002
Russia didn’t help Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. O.K., it did help him, but the campaign itself wasn’t involved. O.K., the campaign had a lot of Russian contacts and knowingly received information from the Russians, but that was perfectly fine.
If you’ve been trying to follow the Republican response to revelations about what happened in 2016, you may be a bit confused. We’re not even talking about an ever-shifting party line; new excuses keep emerging, but old excuses are never abandoned. On one side, we have Rudy Giuliani saying that “there’s nothing wrong with taking information from Russians.” On the other side, we have Jared Kushner denying that Russia did anything beyond taking out “a couple of Facebook ads.”
It’s all very strange. Or, more accurately, it can seem very strange if you still think of the G.O.P. as a normal political party, one that adopts policy positions and then defends those positions in more or less good faith.
But if you have been following Republican arguments over the years, you know that the party’s response to evidence of Russian intervention in 2016 is standard operating procedure. On issue after issue, what you see are multiple levels of denial combined with a refusal ever to give up an argument no matter how completely it has been discredited.
I first encountered this style of argument a long time ago, over the issue of rising inequality. By the early 1990s it was already obvious that growth in the United States economy was becoming ever more skewed, with huge gains for a small minority at the top but lagging incomes for the middle class and the poor. This was an awkward observation for a party that, then as now, wanted to slash taxes for the rich and dismantle the social safety net. How would conservatives respond?
The answer was multilayered denial. Inequality wasn’t rising. O.K., it was rising, but that wasn’t a problem. O.K., rising inequality was unfortunate, but there was nothing that could be done about it without crippling economic growth.
You have 7 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
You might think that the right would have to choose one of those positions, or at least that once you’d managed to refute one layer of the argument, say by showing that inequality was indeed rising, you could put that argument behind you and move on to the next one. But no: Old arguments, like the wights in “Game of Thrones,” would just keep rising up after you thought you had killed them.
And this is still going on. Even as you read about the superrich buying $240 million apartments and demanding ever-bigger mega-yachts, there’s a whole industry of people denying that inequality has gone up.
You see the same thing on climate change. Global warming is a myth — a hoax concocted by a vast conspiracy of scientists around the world. O.K., the climate is changing, but it’s a natural phenomenon that has nothing to do with human activity. O.K., man-made climate change is real, but we can’t do anything about it without destroying the economy.
As in the case of inequality, refuted climate arguments never go away. Instead, they become intellectual zombies that should be dead but just keep shambling along. If you think Republican arguments on climate have gotten more sophisticated, wait for the next snowstorm; I guarantee you’ll hear the same crude denialist arguments — the same willful confounding of climate with daily weather fluctuations — we’ve been hearing for decades.
What the right’s positioning on inequality, climate and now Russian election interference have in common is that in each case the people pretending to be making a serious argument are actually apparatchiks operating in bad faith.
What I mean by that is that in each case those making denialist arguments, while they may invoke evidence, don’t actually care what the evidence says; at a fundamental level, they aren’t interested in the truth. Their goal, instead, is to serve a predetermined agenda.
Thus, inequality denial is about using whatever argument comes to hand to defend policies that benefit the rich at the expense of working Americans. Climate denial is about using whatever argument comes to hand to defend fossil fuel interests. Russia denial is about using whatever argument comes to hand to defend Donald Trump.
All of this is or should be obvious. After all, it’s a pattern that goes back decades. But my sense is that the news media continue to have a hard time coping with the essential fraudulence of most big policy debates. That is, reporting about these debates typically frames them as disputes about the facts and what they mean, when the reality is that one side isn’t interested in the facts.
I understand the pressures that often lead to false equivalence. Calling out dishonesty and bad faith can seem like partisan bias when, to put it bluntly, one side of the political spectrum lies all the time, while the other side doesn’t.
But pretending that good faith exists when it doesn’t is unfair to readers. The public deserves to know that the big debates in modern U.S. politics aren’t a conventional clash of rival ideas. They’re a war in which one side’s forces consist mainly of intellectual zombies.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
Krugman, Paul ARGUING WITH ZOMBIES Norton (Adult Nonfiction) $29.95 1, 28 ISBN: 978-1-324-00501-8
Penetrating analyses of urgent, controversial problems.
Krugman (Economics/City Univ. of New York; End This Depression Now!, 2012, etc.), winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, gathers more than 90 articles, most from his New York Times columns, lucidly explaining often confounding economic issues. Prefacing each of 18 sections with a cogent overview, the author takes on topics that include social security, health care, the 2008 financial crisis and its aftermath (essays that comprise more than a third of the book), the myths of austerity, Europe's economic problems, tax cuts, trade wars, inequality, climate change, and, not least, the damage being inflicted by Donald Trump and his enablers. Many of the pieces are hard-hitting arguments against zombie ideas, "an idea that should have been killed by evidence, but refuses to die." Zombie ideas, Krugman asserts, are put forth by "influential people" who "move in circles in which repeating" such ideas "is a badge of seriousness, an assertion of tribal identity." Alternatively, ideas such as climate change denial, which persist despite prolific evidence, are "better described as cockroach ideas--false claims you may think you've gotten rid of, but keep coming back." There are plenty of villains in Krugman's crosshairs: the "anti-labor" extremist Brett Kavanaugh, "flimflam man" Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Bernie Madoff, George W. Bush and his "fraudulent march to war," and Ronald Reagan, to name a few. Many essays focus on the current president. "It's not just that Trump has assembled an administration of the worst and dimmest," writes the author. "The truth is that the modern GOP doesn't want to hear from serious economists, whatever their politics. It prefers charlatans and cranks, who are its kind of people." Krugman is a serious economist who detailed his intellectual focus and style in a 1993 essay, "How I Work." He cites four rules that guide his research: listen to intelligent views; question the question; "dare to be silly"; and "simplify, simplify." All serve him--and his readers--admirably.
Shrewd, witty, informed essays that are much needed in our anti-intellectual age.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2019 Kirkus Media LLC
http://www.kirkusreviews.com/
Source Citation
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
"Krugman, Paul: ARGUING WITH ZOMBIES." Kirkus Reviews, 15 Oct. 2019, p. NA. Gale General OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A602487718/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=ITOF&xid=4e71ad01. Accessed 10 Nov. 2019.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A602487718
Arguing with Zombies: Economics, Politics, and the Fight for a Better America
Paul Krugman. Norton, $29.95 (416p) ISBN 978-1-324-00501-8
Nobel Prize-winning economist and liberal pundit Krugman (End This Depression Now.') attacks conservatives' policies--and morals--in these smart, tough essays. Selecting from his New York Times column and other writings, Krugman covers 1 5 years of "zombie ideas" that "keep shambling along, eating people's brains" because they serve the interests of the rich. These include George W. Bush's "snake-oil" scheme to privatize Social Security, Republican claims that Obamacare isn't working, and conservative dogma that cutting taxes on the wealthy helps the economy. Krugman occasionally resorts to charts and wonkery to refute such pretenses, but mainly exercises his great talent for translating economics into plain English: "My spending is your income and your spending is my income," he writes in a critique of recessionary budget cuts. "If we both slash spending, both of our incomes fall." Krugman's biting prose impugns character as well as doctrine--the persistence of climate change denial, he asserts, means "Republicans don't just have bad ideas; at this point, they ate, necessarily, bad people"--and sometimes lapses into derangement syndrome, as when he characterizes the GOP as "an authoritarian regime in waiting." Progressive partisans will cheer Krugman's plain-spoken, bare-knuckled, and persuasive ripostes to conservative orthodoxy. (Jan.)
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2019 PWxyz, LLC
http://www.publishersweekly.com/
Source Citation
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
"Arguing with Zombies: Economics, Politics, and the Fight for a Better America." Publishers Weekly, 14 Oct. 2019, p. 57. Gale General OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A603319017/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=ITOF&xid=e451081e. Accessed 10 Nov. 2019.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A603319017