Abstract: Krugman plays the uncertainty game with the effects of the stimulus that has, as yet, failed to stimulate anything but the egos of the leftist Democrats. The goal here is to squeeze as much money out of the taxpayer as possible, make excuses for the misadventures, and then regrub for endless tax increases using fear and bullying.  They only non debatable option here is stimulating the job market by cutting taxes for small corporations. Tax cuts always ‘cost too much’ and are ineffective in stimulating the economy despite the successes of JFK, LBJ and RWR. Qualified economics experts, like House Chief Economist Christiana Romer who disagreed and predicted an economic turnaround by the end of July, and also Warren Buffett who predicts massive inflation as a solution to our federal debt are ignored in this propaganda piece. This is a classic example of leftist propaganda from a master in the art.

Tax whoring, the only profession that allows the far left the privilege of having enough money enough to eat and affording some modern conveniences like a warm place to take a good dump, is more an art than a science. The quest for other people’s money [OPM] is a parasitic adventure similar to leprosy only heightened in enormity, adorned with pretty speeches and song and based on simple slogans that attract the attention of a simple mind.[1] Thus to survive, the left must pander and slither through the mystical alleyways for platitudes that encourage losers to endorse their phony economic programs. It isn’t enough that we watched the USSR for 74 years play this silly game which resulted in the complete collapse of the brightest leftist empire the world has even seen. It was not enough to see much of Marxian Asia dump these policies after brief tests that showed that liberalism’s views on socialism are a failure.

So, we are treated to another plug for more loot by our wonderful  Dr. Krugman of the Walter Duranty Papers: [2]  In the spirit of an academic inspection of this work let us look for the usual slogans and propaganda elements required to generate such a preposterous notion that we need another failing stimulus and see what kind of score we can give the good doctor:

 We begin:

“O.K., Thursday’s jobs report settles it. We’re going to need a bigger stimulus. But does the president know that?

Let’s do the math.”[3]-- That ’30s Show By Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published: July 2, 2009 [Emphasis is mine in all quotes unless specifically indicated as in the original.]

I thought we were in recovery and ready to celebrate Obama’s wise economic program?? Yes, by all means. We would like to hear how Obama was able to save 3 million jobs with the first round of stimuli and how successful that measure turned out to be so we can be pleased that we can save another 3 million and maybe more with some liberal economic efficiency. [Would tax cuts and fewer regulations for small businesses produce more hiring thus lowering unemployment?]

“Since the recession began, the U.S. economy has lost 6 ½ million jobs … Once you take into account the 100,000-plus new jobs that we need each … we’re about 8 ½ million jobs in the hole.”-- Paul Krugman July 2, 2009

I seem to remember, recently, asking what the first stimulus—not to mention the 1.8 trillion dollar deficit in the Obama budget—has done to reduce job loses. Didn’t I ask that?? Maybe we can find it later in this article:

“So what do we have to counter this scary prospect? We have the Obama stimulus plan, which aims to create 3 ½ million jobs by late next year.”-- Paul Krugman July 2, 2009

This video sums up the grim facts that Obama promises failed and we lost 1 million more jobs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJu0DgpiK8c

Apparently we lost 1 million more jobs than if we had done nothing at all given the Obama numbers. Now, that is liberalism at its finest. [Would tax cuts and fewer regulations for small businesses produce more hiring thus lowering unemployment?]

Now, I wonder where this “late next year” stipulation came from. Did Obama, this Feb, tell us that the 3 million jobs would be saved by late in 2010???

Off topic and revisionist:

“All of this is depressingly familiar to anyone who has studied economic policy in the 1930s. Once again a Democratic president has pushed through job-creation policies that will mitigate the slump but aren’t aggressive enough to produce a full recovery. Once again much of the stimulus at the federal level is being undone by budget retrenchment at the state and local level.”-- Paul Krugman July 2, 2009

This constant whine is also depressingly familiar and consistent with the NYT and their articles that call for massive tax hikes for any old occasion since the 1930s. [Would tax cuts and fewer regulations for small businesses produce more hiring thus lowering unemployment?]

But, now, we have the excuse [mentioned by Obama when he brayed and honked for a quickie stimulus??] that the states now sandbagged his program? Oh, can we blame California, New Jersey, Maryland and other states now teetering on the rusty edge of default for truncating the wonderful Obama Plan?? Gee, why didn’t Obama just mention this as a stipulation in Feb 2009 and then poop up the stimulus to, say, a few odd trillion? He can still save California with the printing press.

Well Obama did predict this:

“"None of this will be easy," he said.” The road to recovery will not be straight. We will make progress, and there may be some slippage along the way."”[4]—AP President Obama Feb. 17, 2009

Okay, we can consider this to be some ‘slippage’ that happened “along the way” to the poor house. So, Krugman is technically correct when he places a firm date on political mush. That is good economics, or, to be fair, a good example of how they operate.

More taxes!! More spending!! Print more money!!

“What I don’t know is whether the administration has faced up to the inadequacy of what it has done so far.

So here’s my message to the president: You need to get both your economic team and your political people working on additional stimulus, now. Because if you don’t, you’ll soon be facing your own personal 1937.”-- Paul Krugman July 2, 2009

A prediction from Krugman from Feb 17, 2009:

“The $787 billion stimulus is not nearly enough to fill the "well over $2 trillion hole" in the economy, Krugman said. "A fair bit of the bill is not really stimulus," he adding, noting that just about $650 billion would actually spur consumer spending and other types of stimulus.”[5]-- Paul Krugman: Stimulus Too Small, Second Package Likely (VIDEO)

Fair enough. Krugman is consistent. So, can we blame Obama for NOT following Krugman’s obvious advice as PK did predict that this wouldn’t work?  Can we forgive Krugman for criticizing the stimulus and revealing the facts that much of it is not stimulus? Probably not.

What we have here is the same form of logic and theater that we find in the phony Global Warming Follies: We must do something to avoid a disaster and if that something is the wrong recipe for success then we just haven’t spent enough money on that wrong recipe. The threat that the Great Depression will gobble up our financial resources before the oceans boil from CO2 pollution is part of the same problem: we haven’t spent enough money on projects that don’t seem to be sound or are just plain phony so let’s spend some more! The importance here is not any solution to any problems, social or financial—the objective is just spending and taxation and bigger government.

Missing from the Krugman essays today is the absence of any way to pay back the debt. He does mention inflation in the same sentence with deflation thus nullifying the prospect that our currency may collapse from too much printing press excitement and a world-wide boycott of the dollar. Even Warren Buffett predicts massive inflation.[6]

Would tax cuts and fewer regulations for small businesses produce more hiring thus lowering unemployment?

This is a well-constructed propaganda piece[7][8][9][10] that focuses in on the finality and absolutism of big government at all costs. This is typical of the left and their nostrums of governance. This piece points out a legitimate danger to our economy, ignores several alternatives to mere mindless taxation, debt and wanton printing of money.  An accepted remedy in the guise of a stimulus was the correct idea but was not sufficient in magnitude to be successful. The objective was to build government at any cost. More printing of money, higher taxes and bigger spending are thus indicated given the lack of progress noted since Feb 2009. Salient facts about debt, deflation, inflation[11] and the impact of such debt on other generations are confidently omitted here.

We are saddened to report a conflicting message that White House Chief Economist Christiana Romer had endorsed the Obama Plan and predicted:

“Romer stated, “We have put in place the biggest, boldest recovery package in history....incredible medicine for economy, and we fully expect it to work.” She maintained that the fundamentals of the U.S. economy are sound[12] and continues to expect a turnaround in the second half of the year. “We have our eyes on the fundamentals....the day-to-day ups and downs of the stock market are a bad way to judge policy,” she said, voicing one of the Obama administration’s mantras.”[13]-- White House Chief Economist Christina Romer Mar 15, 2009.

But, she has no Nobel Prize.

This is a fine and well-crafted propaganda piece.  It ignites the fires of fear and frustration among the unwashed and mentally disnimble, conceals the obvious caveats and pitfalls of the present course, obfuscates the notion that a financial recovery is really important to leftists and denigrates the Republicans. It also ignores the predictions from many leftist quarters that this thing would work by July end, just a few days away.  The views of experts like Romer and Buffett are omitted as they contribute only unhandy truth to this piece. .

We should salute Paul Krugman for another fine example of how to construct a proper propaganda piece and thank him for the instruction. He will change his views about economics about the same time Katie Couric decides to wash her hair or when Whoopie Goldberg peroxides her mouth. The liberals are firmly committed to disaster and we can watch Krugman calmly blame Bush for everything that happens even if it takes two or three decades more.  But, to be fair, they couldn’t succeed in capitalism anyway so what the heck.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com