Krugman Worried Obama Doesn't Have 'Enough Stuff To Spend On'

Photo of Noel Sheppard.

As Americans across the fruited plain worry about their jobs and how they're going to make ends meet during the current recession, Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman showed Sunday morning just how separated from reality and the common man he actually is.

Appearing on ABC's "This Week," the New York Times columnist said that he wasn't worried about how expensive president-elect Barack Obama's economic rescue plan might get, but instead that the problem will be "finding enough stuff to spend on."

How'd you like to have that problem this holiday season?

With total disregard for what Americans are going through, and an almost unthinkable ignorance of the government's current budget, Krugman responded to host George Stephanopoulos's question about whether he's sticking to the $600 billion economic recovery spending projection he offered on the program a month ago:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: My number will be going up. My problem is that the actual constraint is not going to be political will. No. The actual constraint is going to be finding enough stuff to spend on. Try to find that much (laughter from panel)...No. The words here are shovel ready. Now, how much is shovel ready? How much can you actually get going in time to help this year and this coming year?

GWEN IFILL, PBS: The governors came to town to Philadelphia and they met with the president-elect and they say we have a lot of shovel ready projects.

KRUGMAN: Yeah, but again, what's a lot? I mean, even with their full wish list you have trouble getting up to 100 billion. So now you start doing other stuff, and you start saying, well, you know, but it's, it is not that easy, believe it or not, even Washington can't spend $600 billion in a year very easily. So, to push north of that is hard to do. 

Amazing. The average American is tightening his belt, the 2009 deficit looks like it could be over $1.5 trillion, and this so-called economist is worried that government can't find enough things to spend money on.

Beyond the astounding insensitivity on display here was an almost unimaginable ignorance concerning the U.S. budget. Well, given that this was Krugman, who often makes stuff up to fit his agenda, maybe not.

Regardless, "our" government has figured out a way to spend an extra $550 billion on-budget (meaning not including Social Security and Medicare) since 2005 (projected FY 2009 on-budget spending is $2.61 trillion versus $2.06 trillion in 2005), and this doesn't include any bailout money.

As such, suggesting "Washington can't spend $600 billion in a year very easily" is pretty addle-minded...even for Krugman.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The shovels are ready to

The shovels are ready to start digging the bottomless pit which the money will be thrown into!

The 'money pit' is a great

The 'money pit' is a great definition of Obama's policies and spending habits.

 

 "Forget change, I want improvement!"

So such thing....

There is no such thing as 'not enough to spend' when it comes to Democrats in Congress.  Our $10T debt is testament to the fact that they can always spend money in good times and bad (and especially bad).

Better use for that shovel

That should use that shovel on all of the BS coming out of the Obama camp, transparancy my arse.

While Krugman worries about Obama

While Krugman worries about Obama spending money maybe he can help the NYT find some money to spend...hahahahahaha! 

I wanted Rudy and you gave me McLame...next time we need Mitt so please don't pull the same...Next Please!

"finding enough stuff to

"finding enough stuff to spend on"

OMG!!

Duct tape, truck loads, My head is going to explode!!!!!........... 

 

 

Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.

Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.

 

Here's an idea

If he's having trouble finding enough stuff to spend it on, just send me a cool, tax-free million. 

There.  Problem solved!

 

"If we conservatives moved to those seven non-existent States, the government couldn’t find us and tax us to death!" 

Oh wait, here's something

Oh wait, here's something he can spend our money on!!  More BS.  And he's gotta do it, Al Gore says so.   Must be true.

http://apnews.myway....

I swear these morons are going to drive America in the ground if they get what they want.  Pure idiots.

Al Gore and Obama meeting

Al Gore is hitting the panic button.   He's not

getting any money because the climate is not

warming (according to 695 scientists).    He

wants Obama to panic and start promoting the

global warming hoax as fast as he can so Al Gore

can collect his money before its all spent on

bail outs.

I saw this early this

I saw this early this morning..I would have laughed if he hadn't won the prize in the Cracker Jack Box earlier this year...he is totally in La-La-Land...period.

For anyone in their right mind that is over 30 to not know that Washington will never have any trouble spending 600 billion if that is their desire...well, they just aren't all there.

Btw...McC on earlier was just a real winner...as he likes to say..."with all due respect" in that phony baloney voice of his regarding Mike Duncan and his memo that was put out regarding Blago/O mess...he just loves throwing the RNC under the bus...again.

I despise him.

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

Btw...McC on earlier was

Btw...McC on earlier was just a real winner

I agree, bt....in another thread I posted a link to the story of him telling the RNC to lay off.

Warning....duct tape your head first...just the headline will cause it to explode!

 

Have the US Govt give me a call

They can have my RTN and account #'s!

This is beyond silliness.  I think what he really meant  is how fast can [Obama] actually get the spending [programs] going?  At the pace of a beaurocracy ... about 3-5 years too late and by then they will be so entrenched they will be cumbersome, bloated and basically inextricable.  Better to do things that will immediately affect the public.  Like oh I dunno... cut taxes... but I am no economist.

"part of what I'm hoping to introduce as the next president is a new ethic of [government enforced] responsibility" - B. Obama

Radical idea for Liberals

Instead of taking money from taxpayers (current and future) to "stimulate" the economy and bail out businesses, why doesn't the Congress give the entire country a federal tax holiday (income, corporate, and FICA) for two months and let the PEOPLE decide how to spend it?  The Onion News Network did a fantastic spoof of the Liberals' plan and it would really be funny if it weren't true: http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_should_the_government

that video is great!

and the worst part is we're actually paying multiple tiers of administrators to do it. 

"part of what I'm hoping to introduce as the next president is a new ethic of [government enforced] responsibility" - B. Obama

Krugman: "How much can you

Krugman: "How much can you actually get going in time to help this year and this coming year?"

I'm sick of this mindset.  How much can we spend to get going?  How about HOW MUCH SPENDING CAN WE FREAKIN CUT??????  THAT'S what should be said asked.  Let me see, if I'm floundering for my next dollar, do I look around for places to spend money, or do I use my brain and realize overspending got me there in the first place?

The road we're economically on is due to over spending, by government, by individuals, by anyone and everyone who thinks they have to have everything and they have to have everything RIGHT now.  "We're entitled!"  No, you're freakin entitled to see opportunities and go after them, that's all you're "entitled" to.  I'm tired of the stupid mindset that has permeated our nation.  Liberalism (not Republican, not Democrat, but liberalism, period) is a mental disease, so much so that those causing the problems are stupid enough to not know it, AND to suddenly be in charge of fixing it and think that's the best thing for America?  And that's OK with most Americans?

God help us all.

I thought that a Nobel

I thought that a Nobel laureate meant you were smarter than my Dad?

Krugman

Like Bludo, Hey Paulie stay on your Meds...

Obama's Last Day 1-20-2013

Every time I see this

Every time I see this illiterate commenting on economic policy, I'm reminded of just how worthless the Nobel Prize designation is.  After all, Arafat, Trimble and that fat parasite Al Gore are also recipients.

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan

fitzfong.blogspot.com

I forgot about Arafat having

I forgot about Arafat having been honored with the Nobel. All I could think of was how he used to wear those Ray Charles shades and his bandana with an AK47 in tow from his days as a PLO terrorist, that's when it was regarded as a terrorist group.

Profiles in stupidity,

Paul Krugman .

Paulie is worried that

Paulie is worried that Obambi is an empty suit, but I bet he voted for him...  Didn't you, Paulie? You hypocrite!

Did you ever notice...

Krugman always looks paranoid as hell? I think he's afraid someone is gonna sneak up behind him and give him an atomic wedgie!

Krugmanomics...AKA...Mad-Hatter Economics

And this is one of the neo-COMMS that has TheOne's ear!

Just what the hell was the Nobel committee smoking when they gave Krugman & Gore prizes

The world has lost it's mind... 

_________________________ 

Long Live...THE REPUBLIC !

OK, wait a minute. We all know Krugman is nuts.

And we all know he is on the unicorn and skittles path to Nationalism. But, I actually think he is trying to say that he is worried there won't be enough actual shovel-ready type jobs to spend the money on right? Well, spending the money is no problem. Our government is the original "Money Hole." But he is probably right that if the idea is to start the jobs ASAP, then there won't be enough to stimulate the economy. Of course, since there is so little in the porkulus that is stimulative, anyway, I am not sure why that concerns him. O.K., I am getting a headache trying to follow this logic, so I will let some of the smart guys on NB see if they can figure out what Paulie is really trying to say.

 

 

All a Democrat needs is the upper-story window of public attention and the chamber pot of rhetoric. How else to explain the rise of Joe Biden?  P.J. O' Rourke