RE: No Time For Credibility
Krugman has advocated infrastructure investment...
Krugman has advocated infrastructure investment...
That seems to make sense, until you look at the structure of blind globalization, which he has also, flatly wrongly, also long advocated......
Then, it, domestic infrastructure investment, makes no sense, anymore: then your best investment in infrastructure is where you get the most bang for the buck, but that's not here anymore.
Another little problem Krugman has had is that his zero interest rate advocacy has generated almost zero federally funded infrastructure, except a very small amount of the wrong kind.
On the other hand, it has, once again, generated all kinds of large scale, private sector, bubble like, investments, everywhere in the world.
Another little problem Krugman has had is that his zero interest rate advocacy has generated almost zero federally funded infrastructure, except a very small amount of the wrong kind.
On the other hand, it has, once again, generated all kinds of large scale, private sector, bubble like, investments, everywhere in the world.
Grant objected to zero interest rates, not to discourage good cheap domestic infrastructure investment per se, but rather for other very good reasons, like how can you tell whether a private (or public) sector investment (domestic and or foreign, infrastructure or not) is worthwhile or not, with zero interest rates.
Bottom line: Krugman has long known that his profession is bottomed on pure sophistry, and he cynically plays it that way, having also learned that the average government Joe has no idea whether what he is talking about is true, and has no way of finding out one way or the other for sure from anyone else.
I should acknowledge that I am not a special fan of Grant, either, except that I like his style of exposition and argument, but let us save that story for another post.
No comments:
Post a Comment