Only $120.4 billion, or 15 percent of the gigantic $787-billion stimulus has been spent and some on the left, including Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, are already calling for Stimulus, Part II.
In an interview with CNBC Asia from the World Capital Market Symposium on the Aug. 10 broadcast of "Squawk Malaysia" Krugman said the stimulus that passed earlier this year was inadequate.
"We should be doing something to give the world, well give each of the major economies more of a jolt," Krugman said. "I mean, we've had these stimulus packages, but they were all inadequate. The United States, it was clear from day one that this wasn't going to be big enough."
One of these "jolt"-producing government actions would come in the form of cap-and-trade according to Krugman, although even some in the news media admit that cap-and-trade would result in cost increases. Other critics say it will be like a tax on American people and hurt the economy.
"I actually think that environmental policies - the, uh a clear-cut target for emissions reduction would actually lead to a lot of business investment to change things," Krugman said.
The Times columnist said it would be appropriate to "forcefully" experiment with "a lot of things."
"We have to I think, try a lot of things, but we need to try them forcefully," Krugman added.
A second stimulus could mean higher taxes or hyperinflation according to Jerry Bowyer. Bowyer wrote that, "Ben Bernanke has managed to make inflation hawks of us all. An unprecedented explosion of the monetary base has driven the federal-funds interest rate from 5.25 percent all the way down to 0 percent. So much money is sloshing around the system that banks are now lending to one another for free." Bowyer cited others worried about inflation including Larry Kudlow and Forbes publisher Rich Karlgaard.
However, Krugman disagreed claiming the government could take the unprecedented measure of reversing such a large spending program.
"I think that's the old line from the Great Depression - crying ‘fire, fire amid Noah's flood,'" Krugman said. "I mean we have no sign of inflation on the horizon. There's nothing in there that would be inflationary. You have to understand that right now putting money into the system, it just sits there. And, it's quite easy to pull it out again if inflation starts to loom. So I think the real challenge is that you announce an inflation target and you fail to achieve it."




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Simply Wow...
August 10, 2009 - 16:18 ET by FuzzlenutterAnd this idiot actually
won the Nobel Prize for Economics?? I think he deserves a boobie rrize instead...
prize?
August 11, 2009 - 03:54 ET by m1xramAl Gore has a Nobel. What significance can a Nobel have? They're not handed out for honesty.
He has already failed... his country.
Perfect stimulus: Repeal
August 10, 2009 - 16:20 ET by mattmPerfect stimulus: Repeal every liberal policy implemented (by either party) in the last 45 years.
A Good Start!
August 10, 2009 - 16:34 ET by JustAlI have long fantasized about a party who's platform is to bring more liberty by promising to repeal at least one law per month while in power (one per day would be better). So let's start with the liberal non-sense ones like "hate crimes" and racist "affirmative action" and then go to the stupid conservative ones like "war on drugs." Let's give the people back the control of thier own lives and bodies, with an even chance to win or loose all on their own.
Novel idea, let's have the government provide for the common defense (including the borders), print a common currency (which the non-government Fed does now), and oversee (not monopolize) interstate (only interstate) commerce, now that would be a grand experiment indeed.
Come on Krugman. Remember
August 10, 2009 - 16:30 ET by rbosqueCome on Krugman. Remember Econ 101? I do. Advanced Macroeconomic Theory???
He's not an sound economist but a political hack.
He's not an sound economist but a political hack.
August 10, 2009 - 22:09 ET by Galvanic. . . which certainly qualifies him as a Nobel Prize winner.
Would some reporter PLEASE,
August 10, 2009 - 17:04 ET by GregEWould some reporter PLEASE, when Krugman starts saying the stimulus wasn't enough, PLEASE ask him, "how much money do YOU think the stimulus should have been?" And let the boob hang himself. I would be willing to BET that he would NOT give a number, if he was asked.
I've read about controversy
August 10, 2009 - 17:08 ET by GregEI've read about controversy on whether the Nobel Prize for Economics should even exist. The controversy is that economics isn't a science and the Nobel Prize makes people look to that person as some kind of economic prophet, yet an economy can do exactly the opposite of what an economist predicts, so using the Nobel Prize as a credential creates a false sense when listening to these winners. They can be great economists, no doubt, but the Nobel Prize should not be a category. (and I don't think it's an "official" one, I think there's something there too, I just can't remember)
Krugman is a clear "case in point" of the need to just drop the Nobel Prize distinction for economists.
On Economists
August 10, 2009 - 18:17 ET by FeynmanFanI once heard that there are only two economists in the world who actually understand how economies work. They are both in Washington, DC. They disagree with each other. ;)
Slam Dunk for 2010-12
August 10, 2009 - 17:30 ET by RpeggioI almost want to say let the lib-dems hang themselves, let them pass their ideologically driven craziness, healthcare, cap & tax, 2nd stimulus etc. and as businesses flee and lines for Doctors form and horror stories mount, and GDP declines and unemployment goes up, we can easily point to their stupid anti-competition anti-capitalistic programs as the fault and then easily vote-in a Romney business minded type to clean things up in 2012. (or whomever, just not Palin, her presence would take the focus off the Dem failures).
But seriously, I think Pelosi and team are so ideologically blind and pretty stupid as well, and they are setting up a slam dunk for the GOP come 2010 and 2012. It's simply insane how much money they've spent and even more insane how much they would have spent or will spend if the GOP and American people don't continue to speak-up and revolt to one degree or another. It'll be easy to run against them in 2010 and 2012, just say we need to stop spending the american taxpayers money, and their children's children's money....I'd love to run against a Dem in 2010 or 2012.
Rp... '10 & '12 are
August 10, 2009 - 17:39 ET by bigtimerRp...
'10 & '12 are looking pretty rich for the right side of life right about now, I hope it stays that way.
I don't want Cap and Trade, or OCare etc to take place though, we won't be able to undo the damage I fear.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
Hey Krugman
August 10, 2009 - 17:42 ET by jacktheripperyou sure that "prize" didn't come out of a cracker-jack box?
"I LOVE DEAD KENNEDY'S"
The problem with "letting"
August 10, 2009 - 19:06 ET by GregEThe problem with "letting" the Dems slam in all their programs is that government programs never go away, so it's not at all worth it.
As an analogy, I've always equated liberalism with Islamic radical terrorism (no, not THAT way, so any lib reading this can just pipe down). What I mean is this.......
As America defends itself against terrorism, we must be correct 100% of the time to stop terror cells. If they are correct ONE TIME, hundreds and thousands of people can die, so though we may be onto every single other time, the ONE TIME is deadly and the previous successes are of little or no comfort.
In the realm of politics, the conservative must win 100% of the time on stopping a massive government liberal nanny program. The liberals will continue to bring the issue back and try to launch a government program, over and over, and there's a day that it wins - ONE TIME. But, that's all that's needed. The massive liberal program only has to win ONE TIME, because once the program is in, it's in, and it creates citizenry dependencies that protect the program itself from ever going away, and in many cases from every being mentioned for reform unless the one mentioning it is ok with his own political suicide.
Just
August 10, 2009 - 18:16 ET by justbob223Another road to tyranny.
typical long-term con artists
August 10, 2009 - 21:12 ET by konoTheir mental narrative must be going something like this: "Dang... the people are starting to catch on to the ruse. Think we can sneak one more by 'em before the rest of our credibility is totally shot?"
They already bought off the financial markets, took over the most "American" of industries, 'stimulated' new-car sales for years by destroying the pool of re-sellable used cars, put the entire energy economy in the hands of Warmism bureaucrats, and are in the process of getting dictatorial control over people's day to day life choices under the guise of 'health care equality'. But people are starting to wake up. So how about one more "for the environment", for old time's sake?
The cancer of intrusive government is crossing the threshold of malignancy. The wheels of oppression are positioned and ready to start rolling over all who resist. But what say do we have any more?
The Nobel prize committee
August 10, 2009 - 21:25 ET by d1carterThe Nobel prize committee must have been doing some "forceful experimentation"....when they gave this fool an award.
...or a bad
August 10, 2009 - 21:29 ET by bigtimer...or a bad drug-trip.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
Krugman is a
August 11, 2009 - 08:40 ET by jessieHKrugman is a fool. The people want to stop the insane spending. Congress hasn't earned any respect.