by Tom's new post titled 'Self-Protectionist Moment: Paul Krugman Protects Himself and the Establishment' criticizes Krugman's role as an establishment economist and defender of free trade. He says: Paul Krugman has a new op-ed ('A Protectionist Moment?') in which he tries to walk away from his own contribution as an elite trade economist to the damage done by globalization, while also lending his political support to Hillary Clinton and the neoliberal globalization wing of the Democratic Party. His article inadvertently spotlights all that is wrong with the economics profession through the lens of the trade debate. On one hand, Krugman writes 'So the elite case for ever-freer trade is largely a scam, which voters probably sense even if they don’t know exactly what form it’s taking. On the other hand, he writes 'In this, as in many other things, Sanders currently benefits from the luxury of irresponsibility: he’s never been anywhere close to the levers of power, so he could take principled-sounding but arguably feckless stances in a way that Clinton couldn’t and can’t.'Krugman has been a booster of trade and globalization for thirty years: marginally more restrained than other elite economists, but still a booster." Read full post here.
Topics:
Matias Vernengo considers the following as important: Free Trade, Krugman, Palley
This could be interesting, too:
Joel Eissenberg writes The death of free trade?
Matias Vernengo writes Paul Davidson (1930-2024) and Post Keynesian Economics
Matias Vernengo writes Paul Davidson (1930-2024)
Matias Vernengo writes Keynes’ denial of conflict: a reply to Professor Heise’s critique
Paul Krugman has a new op-ed ('A Protectionist Moment?') in which he tries to walk away from his own contribution as an elite trade economist to the damage done by globalization, while also lending his political support to Hillary Clinton and the neoliberal globalization wing of the Democratic Party.
His article inadvertently spotlights all that is wrong with the economics profession through the lens of the trade debate.
Read full post here.On one hand, Krugman writes 'So the elite case for ever-freer trade is largely a scam, which voters probably sense even if they don’t know exactly what form it’s taking. On the other hand, he writes 'In this, as in many other things, Sanders currently benefits from the luxury of irresponsibility: he’s never been anywhere close to the levers of power, so he could take principled-sounding but arguably feckless stances in a way that Clinton couldn’t and can’t.'
Krugman has been a booster of trade and globalization for thirty years: marginally more restrained than other elite economists, but still a booster."