krugman twitter

Estonian President revisits Krugman tweetsknow as you know and again most of you,know what this mean

Don Wall

Updated on Jan 16,2023

Estonian President revisits Krugman tweets

know as you know and again most of you,know what this means president Dilma's,was born in Stockholm because his,parents have fled communism in the,second world war for Estonia and then,they moved to New Jersey he grew up in,New Jersey he was elected to the,European Parliament with the largest,number of votes that any Estonian,politician has ever received to any in,any election and then in 2006 he was,elected president which has been since,then and he is of course the tireless,promoter of Estonia and it is a great,pleasure for all of us I'm sure that,president Dilma's will now speak to us,today,there's been this ongoing political,battle in the United States between the,issue of austerity and quantitative,easing and in order to make a case for,one side there's a New York Times,columnist named Paul Cartman who insists,on bashing whoever he can find too vast,to prove his case for the domestic,politics for the United States and so as,it happened last year he decided to,cherry six some data which I understand,his problem place they selectively,presenting these data just say about a,lot of nasty things about my country and,because I don't really big axe to grind,on most area policy I just don't like my,country being insulted I did tweet so I,did all I did was write six hundred and,forty characters but the result 840,sorry six tweets 140 characters and the,net result was that I beat people wanted,to argue with me constantly on austerity,versus growth where we have agreed upon,certain rules and I get to those if you,follow the rules they're not actually,that dumb these rules I mean basically,you shouldn't have a deficit more than,three percent you shouldn't borrow more,than sixty percent of your GDP and if,you don't do that you gen and won't get,into trouble and all the countries that,have that are currently and that you see,in in Europe in trouble they violated,one or the other of those rules or they,have closed the rise and to what their,banks are doing and then don't follow,back Engels and we didn't do that we,just call the rules you know because,small guys like us you survive,if you follow the rules mate but one,thing's for sure is that if you're small,and you don't follow the rules you're,gonna get in trouble,and so we being sort of conservative,northern peasant people decided that,it's the rule of law that is that is,that what we believe in having having,been so successful in coming out of the,Soviet Union we then we became so,successful that we had an overheated,economy and it was bound to collapse,sometime or another and so we had this,massive economic downturn at which point,the government decided that it would,bite the bullet this is where the whole,austerity and the growth debate comes in,because Estonia was outside of the,eurozone we did not have we did not have,anyplace to borrow from at any kind of,normal race I mean we could afford at,11% interest or something but that's,what it self defeating so there we were,there was nothing no one is coming to,help us we're outside of eurozone and so,what is the option well if you're a,farmer peasant type you just cut your,expenses and that's what our farmer,peasant government did with cut expenses,which of course leads to unemployment,and did you have to hire people and,there we were with a 80% decline in the,economy and nowhere to really borrow,money from and with the IMF safety value,evaluatee value which was also advice to,Paul Krugman kept that's where usually,we came,sort of came into his radar screen his,kept saying where did devalue we,couldn't do that even because all of our,people had borrowed it borrowed well the,people that bought their house have,borrowed much of the money for their,houses program in Euros and we are not,we didn't have the diamond at the value,we basically would have we would have,wiped out the middle class we will wipe,that all those people who cracked up the,risk to buy their own home and so we,could not face that we could not do that,to the most didn't like the risk taking,part of society and so we simply bit the,bulletin decreased expenses and so,that's that's how we came out of it by,austerity I mean it worked we did also,do some key key reforms in the labor,market which would we liberalize labor,market actually analogous to the hearts,reform so here my shredder so we came,out of it and we ended up well what's,after this trough we then had eight,point six percent growth than they did,for that would point six percent and,we're coming out of it and we're over,where we're past where we were in 2007,and where we were in 2007 wasn't real,anyway because sustainable so today in,Europe we have probably the soundest,soundest economies the best fundamentals,with with a zero point minus 0.5 desk,deficit so we're in the red at 0.5,percent,have a percentage where because we're,supposed to be on the street there only,a few governments that are under three,these days then and when it comes to,indebted the public debts the goal is,you have to be

The above is a brief introduction to krugman twitter

Let's move on to the first section of krugman twitter

Let Tikstar's experts help you find the best TikTok product on your Shopify business!

Find Influencer (It's Free)
No difficulty
No complicated process
Find influencer
3.5K Ratings


Tikstar has the world's largest selection of social media to choose from, and each social media has a large number of influencer, so you can choose influencer for ads or brand marketing without any hassle.

The Year and a Half of Inflation Infamy by Paul Krugman

The Year and a Half of Inflation Infamy by Paul Krugman

foreign,topic to talk about,um but look,obviously everybody's all focused on,inflation uh if the events of the past,year and a half haven't made you,question some of what you thought you,knew then you aren't paying attention,um it's it's been a really wild time,everybody I mean I certainly uh uh have,at least my fair share of bad calls on,this but I think everybody has had a lot,of bad calls and what I want to do,is mostly talk about what it looks like,how did this happen uh and then but also,uh how much should this change the way,we teach uh the way we we teach uh,inflation uh in in the textbooks uh and,in class,um so so first of all um so inflation,after having been you know pretty,solidly fluctuating around two percent,not much either way for a long long time,shot up to well annual basis eightish,percent depends a bit on what index you,use,um underlying inflation I'll get to that,in a second because that's one of the,things that we we really want to know,and are finding it hard to pin down,um there are two stories that I hear,um if you like they're sort of coming,from the left and from the right no the,one I get from the left is this is all,Global events and really not the result,of any sort of it's it's not the U.S,power policy it's look inflation is,higher in the Euro Zone than it is in,the United States I just saw the,headline Dutch inflation just hit 17,percent uh so this is a global,phenomenon and and not a U.S thing,um the um,the alternative view is this is all,because the uh the U.S uh spent too much,money that we had at excessive fiscal,stimulus in in 2021.,um I don't think either of those views,is sustainable once you look at it at,the you know little a little bit under,the surface Europe is a mess but it's a,mess in part because,um the because of uh basically uh Russia,Ukraine natural gas uh it just turns out,that there are you know most raw,materials Commodities are globally,traded but it turns out that gas is only,easily shipped by pipelines and so uh,there is a a very specific European,shock which is huge on energy and and so,that's why their inflation is as high as,it is and if we try to until the Putin,shock hit European inflation was running,a couple of points below U.S inflation,so it was up but uh there is a,distinctive lovely there's something,going on here that is probably not just,Global shocks on the other hand the,funny thing about,um the uh you know we had the these,debates uh last year,um about how worried should we be about,the size of the U.S fiscal stimulus and,my view was that you know it was a big,stimulus but we're probably going to,have a pretty low multiplier and I,wasn't too worried about the U.S economy,overheating that much and if you had,told me then what the current U.S,unemployment rate would be what cure a,current level of employment would be,what the level of real GDP would be I,would have said c like I told you uh GDP,is about what pre-pandemic projection,said it would be employment is below the,unemployment rate is about what it was,pre-pandemic but somehow we have all of,this inflation so it's not just the,demand demand didn't grow all that much,it's been strong but but something,happened on the supply side which is why,this is such a a tricky thing to make,sense of,um foreign,I said underlying inflation,um one of the things that generally,speaking one of the minor but uh,significant annoyances of crises is that,you end up having to learn details that,you thought you never had to know,um and one of the things we've been,learning a lot now is uh is more about,what goes into inflation measures a,little bit you know it's the old line,when people the two things people should,not should never know is it what what,goes into sausage and what goes into,Political decisions,um well you said we can add inflation,measures to that now,um the um for a long time it was good,enough to focus on core inflation which,excluded food and energy,uh that has not really that has really,not looked like a a very solid measure,it turns out there's all kinds of other,things that are clearly just volatile,prices I actually do notice of old fed,hands and they apparently when they,originally came up with core inflation,they thought of including used car,prices as excluding used car prices but,they said oh that's never going to be,big enough an issue to matter and in,recent months it has mattered a lot,um but the um what it turns out I think,the bigger issue at which somehow we,never really focused on is that,any measure whether it's if you exclude,food and energy or you exclude extreme,movements what you basically end up with,is housing,core inflation is basically the price of,housing uh housing is 32 percent of the,CPI uh it's 40 percent of core CPI,um and then if you actually start to,look at housing you realize that the way,we measure it it's not that the people,at the BLS are falling down on the job,they're doing their best but you know,most of housing is owner's equivalent,rent so it's n

After seeing the first section, I believe you have a general understanding of krugman twitter

Continue the next second section about krugman twitter

Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman isn't typically thought of,as a development economist in the narrow,sense but his work has had a big impact,on how people think about economic,development so we're not going to give,you an overview of Krugman's entire,career either as an academic or writing,for the New York Times but we look just,at a few of his ideas which relate to,economic development,one of Krugman's core economic ideas is,the notion that specialization is an,important mode of for trade and in,particular international trade the more,dominant theory of comparative advantage,which we cover in another video unit,under that title stress is the idea that,in relative terms one person may be more,productive at doing something than,another person and therefore the two,parties should do different things in,trade that's all fine and well but,specialization is a somewhat different,motivation for trade that is even if two,people at first were equally productive,in all endeavors if the two would,specialize overtime each would become,more productive doing something and it,would then make sense for them to,specialize and trade of all varieties on,international trade,Krugman is probably the one who gives,the clearest and most insightful,explanation of how the specialization,motive for trade differs from the,comparative advantage motive for trade,Krugman also has written a great deal,about increasing returns and this notion,of increasing returns holds in a number,of contexts for instance a firm may,become more productive as it becomes,larger and that means that larger,markets will tend to support the most,productive firms but also there can be,increasing returns from clustering a lot,of economic activity in a given region,for instance that region might be a city,Krugman in general has done a lot to,refocus the attention of economists on,economic geography and the importance of,place and that also means the importance,of the economic role of cities because,cities can lead to increasing returns to,scale and they can encourage economic,specialization and make individuals more,productive so if we're asking,big-picture questions about how do these,features fit together,like where you put economic activity,what's the importance of a city what,happens to productivity as firms cluster,and their activities scale up in terms,of size and how does this affect,specialization will Krugman is the,writer who probably has done the most to,tie together these different ideas in an,appealing and accessible framework in,terms of concrete economic issues,Krugman offered a very early and very,clear discussion of how a governmental,trade policy can improve welfare think,back to this notion of increasing,returns to scale some firms become much,more productive as they operate with a,larger number of units being produced a,classic example given by Krugman would,be bowing and Airbus the world's two,leading makers of large planes they're,each very productive but they become,productive by making a large number of,planes based on some kind of fixed base,of capacity for output and a company,that tried to be as productive but,making say only a few planes per year,couldn't possibly succeed so we know,there'll be a small number of firms,making planes if you have a lot of,experience making a lot of planes you,will be more productive and that then at,least potentially gives rise to the,notion that if there's some kind of,government policy that encourages the,making of planes in your region and if,your region has the potential to succeed,at making those planes well this can,make your country wealthier by giving,you a kind of first mover advantage and,helping you take advantage of those,economies of scale from making a lot of,different planes at a high level of,output Krugman himself always stressed,however that although this was a,theoretical argument for why government,intervention might improve domestic,welfare that he thought in practice free,trade was generally the best idea that,the notion that governments might get,strategic trade policy wrong because of,bad information or because of the,influence of special interest groups and,corruption or simply the notion that if,one government starts strategic trade,policy and other government will,retaliate and for all of those reasons,Krugman gave both a good theoretical,argument for why strategic trade policy,might work but also very good practical,arguments why in the actual,real world we are usually ill-advised to,attempt strategic trade policy when it,comes to economic geography Krugman,wrote a seminal piece on why it is that,manufacturing firms tend to cluster near,high demand and why those clusters of,manufacturing firms over time tend to,develop high productivity if you're,analyzing an issue like well why is so,much economic activity shifting to China,and East Asia Krugman's work in this,area is considered quite important in,the 1990s Krugman was known as being,somewhat of a skeptic about the,so-called Asian economic miracle

After seeing the second section, I believe you have a general understanding of krugman twitter

Continue the next third section about krugman twitter

'Brexit is a mistake but it is not a catastrophe' - Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman

'Brexit is a mistake but it is not a catastrophe' - Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman

hello and welcome to ways to change the,world I'm Krishnan guru-murthy and this,is the podcast in which we talk to,extraordinary people about the big ideas,in their lives and the experiences that,have helped shape them my guest today is,a lightweight thinker who doesn't have a,clue who has caused huge economic damage,to his followers pocketbooks if he,believed Donald Trump Paul Krugman is of,course also a Nobel prize-winning,economist a long-standing columnist at,the New York Times and his latest book,and he's the author of a couple of dozen,or more,it's called arguing with zombies,economics politics and the fight for a,better future and it's taken from a lot,of his columns and expanded the zombies,being bad arguments that's right they're,zombies in the book are zombie ideas,ideas that should have been killed by,evidence that have been proved false,repeatedly but just keep shambling along,eating people's brains,now of course Donald Trump any,supporters are trying to turn it around,on you and say well you're the zombie,thinker yeah the light way because you,predicted global recession yeah I made a,bad economic call on election night 2016,which I retracted three days later and,apologized for letting my emotions cloud,my judgment and went on to say that if,anything bigger budget deficits and,Trump might give the economy a boost,which is sort of what happened but Trump,I have no idea what prompted that remark,because I hadn't even written anything,about him lately but who knows well he,doesn't like criticism and you criticize,him a loss yeah but so do other people I,have no idea I mean I I've gotta,appreciate him you know I seem to occupy,quite a lot of space in his head,rent-free so I guess that's that's kind,of a privilege I mean that that's not,the only time though you've you've been,on the sort of the down side of,predictions I mean you did warn of the,risks you didn't say it would happen but,you thought there was a good chance of,of recession over last year as well,going into this I thought there was some,chance but as did lots of people as did,the markets the some of the data were,pointing pretty weak by now I didn't,make an outright recession call because,I thought the data were not solid enough,for that and it turns out that that it,didn't happen,and what why not well I mean the biggest,thing to say is that in practice it's,Trump has but sort of been pretty,Keynesian I mean he took a budget,deficit of less than six hundred billion,a year and ran it up to a trillion a,year and even though it's very poorly,designed economic stimulus nonetheless,in effect he's done you know what many,of us were pleading with pleading for,during the Obama years which is more,support for an economy which which still,seemed to be well short of full,employment so you don't criticize him,for running a high deficit oh no the,deficit I mean I criticize what he's,running the deficit for I mean hundreds,of billions in corporate tax cuts which,don't do very much and no infrastructure,plan and cutbacks on aid to poor,children and so on so the the,composition is wrong but the deficit is,just not a front rank issue and it never,has been did you think the same things,are likely to happen over here me I,don't know it does look a little bit as,if Boris Johnson may at least in that,respect be a bit like Trump that is he,would be a de facto Keynesian even while,protesting that he is no such thing so,there may be some of that relaxation of,spending restraint taking place despite,the official ideology but by Keynesian,for those who don't know what it means,what does that mean to you well,Keynesian view is that when the economy,is depressed it's usually not because,people are bad workers or any deep,structural problem but just because,there isn't enough spending for whatever,reason the private sector isn't willing,to spend enough to keep the factories,running and to keep the shops full and,that in such times there is a valuable,role for the government to do the,spending of the private sector won't so,the government can pump up the economy,by running budget deficits if necessary,and that that can be a very good thing,for the economy so that's just budget,deficits are good when the economy is,depressed might be a crude way of,summarizing Keynesianism now I mean,you're always introduced as sort of the,Nobel Prize winning economist but what,do you think of yourself as I mean,because you are hugely influential,essentially as a columnist yeah I mean,I've had two careers I spent,several decades as an economist,economist doing papers that I think,we're pretty good I guess the Swedes,thought were pretty good that were read,by a few thousand people but I always,did a little bit of public writing on,the side and for the past twenty years,now I've been a regular columnist for,The New York Times there's obviously,some relationship in my mind between the,two of them but I'd have tried to to,reach out to this broader audience I,mean to be a columnist an opin

After seeing the third section, I believe you have a general understanding of krugman twitter

Continue the next fourth section about krugman twitter

How did the supply chain break down? │ Paul Krugman │ World Knowledge Forum

How did the supply chain break down? │ Paul Krugman │ World Knowledge Forum

Let me start by talking about where we were,just a few years ago.,Turn the clock back to 2019.,We were, we had created an extraordinarily  tightly integrated world economy.,To a degree that we'd never seen before.,There was a, in many ways,,there was a global economy already in 1913,,which was then torn apart  by war, as it turned out.,And up until about the 1980s,,all we really did was to  reconstruct that global economy,through a gradual process of trade liberalization,and a long stretch of peace,but between something like 1985  and over the next 25 years or so,,something extraordinary happened.,We developed a system of incredibly  complex global supply chains,that had never existed before.,And that was made possible largely by technology,,often rather prosaic technology,,not so much that information  technology as container shipping,although aided by IT, which helped you  to coordinate these complex operations.,It was a combination of new  forms of organizing production,,reduced shipping costs, better communications,made it possible to have this  highly integrated economy,The question all of this now is, are we about  to see not just a plateauing but a retreat?,We had come to take it for granted that a  complex, multi-stage production taking place,you know, where is this made?,And the answer is that's a  complicated question, right?,The last stop is China but its components  come from many places along the way.,We come to take it for granted  that that was a process that  ,could be counted upon to work smoothly.,Already even before recent events,,there were starting to be questioned.,There was a limited movement  of international corporations,to move production closer to markets,because they were starting to believe  that they'd gotten overextended,that their logistics were too fragile.,With the coming of Covid-19,,all of a sudden, we realize that the logistics  were far more fragile than anyone had realized.,Nobody's really talked about  supply chains except people in,,whom it was their job until 2020.,But then all of a sudden,  we realized that in fact,,these complex production networks depend upon  a quite very specific set of of facilities.,They depend upon a limited  number of containers, of ports.,Any major shock to the system  can produce disruptions and so,during the pandemic, consumption  shifted from services to goods.,You couldn't go out to a restaurant,so you bought yourself better cooking  equipment for your home, that sort of thing,,and the supply chains couldn't  handle that shift in demand.,So we discovered that the logistical system  was far more fragile than we realized.,We also had a clear increase  in geopolitical tensions.,Political risk was already  starting to become a concern.,You can say that the conflict,,the trade conflict between the US  and China was very idiosyncratic,but still we live in a world  of growing nationalism.,We live in a world, in which  there is no clear global hegemon,to enforce the rules in the way there used to be.,So, there were concerns.,And then came the war.,The economics of the war  have been full of surprises,and many of the initial assumptions,,I mean obviously many of the  initial assumptions about,how it would go militarily  have been proved totally wrong.,Many of the assumptions that we had about  the economics have been proved wrong as well.,Right after the Russian invasion of Ukraine,,most of the discussion was about the possibility  of Western or I should say generally democracy,,the Democratic allies of the world being able to  impose effective sanctions against Russian exports,and starving Putin's regime of cash.,That has not succeeded.,There have been some impacts but  basically it has not been effective.,The commodities that Russia  exports are too fungible.,Too easily sold to different markets so,it doesn't matter if the United States  decides it won't buy any Russian oil.,It doesn't matter, India will buy it instead.,It's been, just has not been possible  to effectively embark out the exports.,Surprisingly, what has happened is that,sanctions on the other side have  been surprisingly effective.,The Western world, I should say the Allied world,because Korea is actually very much part of this.,The democratic powers have  managed to curtail sales of,,particularly of strategic  or crucial inputs to Russia.,So instead of having a collapse of exports,,Russia had a collapse of imports.,It found itself flush with  cash and unable to spend it.,Now it's starting to become somewhat more porous,but the effective economic sanctions have  been against Russia's ability to import.,So it's been an effective embargo on  Russia's supply of crucial inputs.,On the other hand, there was a  great deal of discussion early on,,whether we can get European nations together  to agree to stop buying Russian natural gas.,And we never got anywhere on that.,But that didn't matter because in fact  there is an embargo on Russian natural gas,,which is imposed by the Russian

After seeing the fourth section, I believe you have a general understanding of krugman twitter

Continue the next fifth section about krugman twitter

Paul Krugman on Inflation, Climate Spending, Interest Rate Hikes, and the Future of the Economy

Paul Krugman on Inflation, Climate Spending, Interest Rate Hikes, and the Future of the Economy

dr paul krugman is the recipient of the,nobel prize in economics a distinguished,professor of economics at the city,university of new york and an opinion,columnist for the new york times dr,krugman welcome to the climate pod,hi there great to be on,well one of the biggest stories of the,year has been about the rising price of,just about everything as long time,followers of your work we know where you,stood on the threat of high inflation,last year but you recently wrote an,op-ed in the new york times titled i was,wrong about inflation so let's start,there what did you get wrong,okay partly of course i didn't,anticipate that,uh vladimir putin would invade ukraine,which has been a pretty big contributor,to this uh and in general i didn't,anticipate a lot of the,the worldwide forces i mean inflation is,up everywhere uh you know the the number,of countries in the world with less than,two percent inflation right now is zero,every every country in the world is,experiencing serious inflation but also,um,i thought that although we were putting,a lot of money into the economy,that it was not likely to,cause the economy to seriously overheat,and,it's turned out that the economy's,capacity,uh appears to be somewhat less than we,thought it was um and so a combination,of early retirements uh you know covet,related stuff that has led to a reduced,workforce uh possibly just the kind of,disruptions and in the way we work and,the things we buy so,things ended up being,overheated now the that part is only,probably a third or less of the of the,rise in inflation but it's the part that,is you know it was a policy mistake and,uh so look uh predictions are hard,especially about the future and if you,never if you never make a bad prediction,you aren't taking enough risks,well do you think the inflation that,we're experiencing now is kind of the,you know traditional classic economic,model for inflation um where it is that,mix of you know bad fiscal and monetary,policy that that led us here or,are is it more reflective of external,shocks that are that are driving these,prices,similar to what we saw in the 70s,okay as best we can tell i mean actually,a lot of work is going into trying to,sort this out and uh um a rough a rough,estimate is that maybe one-third,is too much money chasing too few goods,and two-thirds is external shocks,the external shocks will go away,and the um the,they're not as fast as we hope but they,are kind of going away um and the too,much money chasing too few goods is also,going away because policy has changed,because the federal reserve has raised,interest rates and,um and you can see this,it's not just you know that's just,that's not just my opinion you see a lot,of evidence in the sort of high,frequency data the monthly surveys the,uh,that someone that says that inflation,pressures are abating and the markets,there are a number of ways that you can,infer what investors think is going to,have to inflation and,inflation expected inflation a few,months ago the markets thought that we,were going to have five percent,inflation over the next year now they,think it's more like two percent,so,so you know this is a an ugly episode,but it's very much looking like,it's going to be in the rearview mirror,pretty soon,well according to the latest consumer,price index overall prices are up about,9.1 percent,over this time last year but energy,prices are up almost 42 percent how much,are high energy costs driving overall,price increases,there are a large factor not not less,than half on on an annual basis but,they're a large factor,um and but it's also by the way again,rear view mirror right the,what you have is numbers for june which,is when gasoline prices hit their peak,and gas is now 70 cents a gallon cheaper,than it was in the middle of june,um and um,food is also a,an issue and and from a global point of,view actually the food the food price,inflation is uh is more serious than the,energy prices because not not everybody,in the world has a car but everybody,needs to eat and so for poorer countries,this is really important so um you know,this is,food and energy it you know it is a,standard practice to look at inflation,stripping out food energy and it's a,depending on who's there are different,measures of inflation but depending on,which measure the so-called core,inflation which strips out the food and,energy is,is running substantially lower probably,at this point around,four percent uh we'll get a better,reading on that in the next few days,after we record this um but um which is,higher the target for that is about two,uh so it's above target but it's nothing,like as extreme as the headlines you're,seeing,yeah this might be a little wonky but,with core inflation obviously it strips,out those the commodity costs of energy,and food but still just about every,product that is produced or or ship,shipped relies on energy right and you,know how much are high transport costs,uh due to high gas and diesel prices as,well as

After seeing the fifth section, I believe you have a general understanding of krugman twitter

Continue the next sixth section about krugman twitter

Dr Paul Krugman | Full Q&A at The Oxford Union

Dr Paul Krugman | Full Q&A at The Oxford Union

thank you so much for joining us here,today we're delighted to have you at,Oxford I wanted to start by asking about,your new book can you just start by,telling us a bit about it what your,motivation was for writing it and what,impact you hope it will have okay so,this is the book is mostly a collection,of columns so things I've written over,the past 15 years a few earlier pieces,but assembled to tell a story with with,and it was it was a way well partly it,was just a way of getting this stuff out,also it's an election year in the United,States and I thought it was important to,get across the extent to which political,debate in the u.s. is not actually,between ideas that are held in good,faith there there are actual you know,debates about real issues where,reasonable people take reasonable,positions but those are almost never the,important ones the important ones are,almost always ones where where one side,is arguing in clear bad faith it's just,clearly dishonest and evidence doesn't,matter how often evidence refutes what,they're claiming they just stay with the,same argument for a variety of reasons,and I had picked up some many years ago,actually from a paper on Canadian health,care of all things what the they used,very useful term zombi ideas so a zombie,idea as an idea that should have been,killed by evidence many times but it,just keeps on shambling along eating,people's brains and so that gave me the,inspiration let's let's do a book that,that takes columns that I've written,over the past 15 years to talk about the,the role of zombie ideas and in our,political discourse and maybe help,people little think a little bit more,clearly as we head into this very,crucial election in America,so two of the main zombie ideas that you,outline in the book are climate change,denial and cutting taxes for the wealthy,yeah how have these ideas translated,into policy and effect of the economy,for the past four years and if allowed,to continue how will they affect the,economy of the years to come well okay,so just stay with the in u.s. politics,the the clearly the dominant zombie idea,is the idea that cutting taxes on rich,people does Meera's has miraculous,economic impacts and pays for itself,because the economy grows so much that,revenues actually increase and we've,tested that over and over again we've,tested it with with the Reagan tax cuts,the Bush Bush the younger tax cuts the,the Trump tax cuts tax cuts in Kansas,you know we've done this again and again,and again and it's never it has been,wrong every time what it does is it is,it does lead to budget deficits although,I think that those are not nearly as,scary as people think but what there's a,kind of a two-step that goes on a bait,and switch where first the Conservatives,in the US rammed through these tax cuts,that explode the deficit you're claiming,that they'll pay for themselves and then,the deficit goes up and they say Oh in,that case we must cut we must basically,eliminate medical care for the poor,right it's a so this it's it's a it's a,process by which you you sell tax cuts,on false pretenses and then use the,deficits as an excuse to basically make,the most vulnerable societies of the,most vulnerable members of society worse,off,that's the been the big effect of that,zombie the other one is climate change,and you know at this point no rational,person can deny that we have a really,really big problem it's the the evidence,has become absolutely overwhelming but,sixty percent of Republican members of,Congress outright deny the climate,change is happening they simply refuse,say it's not happening at all and the,rest almost without exception oppose any,actual significant action to deal with,climate change you ask how can they,happen that happen well it's a,there's a tremendous tree of climate,change denial which people buy into the,buy into conspiracy theories there's,this vast international conspiracy of,scientists to perpetuate the hoax that,the climate that the planet is getting,warmer and you know and then,consequences obviously are that that you,know without the United States,significant climate change action,doesn't happen globally and this is,existential this could be the end of,civilization so this is you know hugely,important and it's it's clear at this,point that the the debate is not one in,which that's susceptible to evidence,you're not going to convince people who,are essentially in the pay of the fossil,fuel interests that that they need to,change their position just because,Australia is burning so like you said,people continue to believe these zombie,ideas how can we argue with zombies and,have a constructive dialogue with those,who refuse to accept believe no in fact,no you can't have an R you cannot have a,constructive dialogue with the people,who are firmly wedded to these ideas,that's unfortunately that's one of those,same P people tell me why don't you try,to reach out to trump supporters and,that's that's not sorry that there's if,if if we

After seeing the sixth section, I believe you have a general understanding of krugman twitter

Continue the next seventh section about krugman twitter

(中字) 習近平到底是如何透過紅衛兵思想摧毀中國經濟奇蹟成果?Paul Krugman嘆中國今不如昔!大摩亞洲前主席羅奇指本年是樂觀中國經濟主義輓歌!中國經濟衰退有三重因素?

(中字) 習近平到底是如何透過紅衛兵思想摧毀中國經濟奇蹟成果?Paul Krugman嘆中國今不如昔!大摩亞洲前主席羅奇指本年是樂觀中國經濟主義輓歌!中國經濟衰退有三重因素?

各位網友,這段影片出的時候應該是聖誕翌日,首先我要再表示多謝大家,過去一年各方面的支持,無論在我的YouTube頻道,或者Facebook、Twitter,或者新聞連線,元宇宙,各方面活動的支持,還有過年的蕭貓貓的禮盒全部賣光了,剩下很少很少幾個項目,我記得好像其中一個是烏魚子,還有,剩下很少,其他都沒有,先多謝大家,但anyway不用失望,過年前我們人超還有驚人的大優惠推出,也有些牽涉到台灣的東西,我在台灣的東西預備了一個,在香港人超做一個超特價的優惠,1月幾號後大家就會收到訊息,我提提大家訂這些糕,年年都不夠賣,到最後就沒有了,訂了之後那個時間去拿,其實是這樣的,我們是新鮮製造的,取的時間是一個星期,1月13日至1月20日,你訂到1月9日,早鳥優惠1月9日,現在買4盒糕還送一盒手打蝦子麵,我們的蘿蔔糕,芋頭糕也是出名好吃的,而且用大廚臘味的,好,我們看看Paul Krugman寫的一篇文章,我說了,Paul Krugman是我奉以為師的人,很多人都奉以為師,最近我在看張忠謀,張忠謀我連認他做師父都不敢,因為他那些是講半導體的,我連他的徒孫輩都不敢比喻,但經濟學,Paul Krugman有兩件事可以學,他的經濟學的看法,第二就是他寫文章,真的寫得非常好,世界上,這篇文章的角度特別好,有兩個最頂尖的領導人,這一年他的運氣完全逆轉了,以前有一部西片叫《豪門孽債》,是講打官司的,他又說有兩個人,2022年初,一個被人踐踏得很厲害,Joe Biden是一個很失敗的總統,他已經沒辦法推進新的立法程序,被人卡住了,因為參議院有一個人不同意他這樣花錢,於是他通過不了參議院,然後美國的通脹很厲害,拜登是一個失敗者,老朽昏庸,估計中期選舉會大敗,對民主黨將是毀滅性,另外有一個人很厲害,如日中天,那個就是習近平,現在先講拜登,到年底是怎樣的呢?,被他搞定了,通過了減少通脹法案,幾個法案通過了,半導體法案,減少通脹法案,資助電動車,改變遊戲規則,改善天氣,而那些人覺得共和黨會大勝的,紅色浪潮,結果只是一個ripple,一個漣漪,好像扔一塊石頭下去,雖然很多人預測經濟衰退,但並沒有,經濟衰退就是要整個經濟活動的下降,就業始終強勁,現在通脹正在減少,不過端看速度是如何,現在很多,我親自經歷的,很支持川普,當日很討厭拜登的人,都讚揚他的外交政策,就算在另一方面不同意他也好,他的外交政策確實,在這方面比川普好,他是連結了所有盟友,在圍堵中國,就算連荷蘭也加入了,不賣深紫外光刻機給中國,這是很厲害的,因為他作出了實質上的讓步,日本就會加入,中國11月的半導體設備輸入下降四成,我想到1月會下降了七、八成,是這麼嚴重的,只有兩個地方還在運送半導體設備過去,而美國一定想辦法截止的,一個是韓國,一個是新加坡,反過來,拜登只是陪襯,今年年初習近平如日中天,他覺得抗疫是習近平最大的功勞,今年年初,他覺得動態清零,控制新冠疫情是他最大的功績,這証明了共產黨的體制,比資本主義任何國家都好,它的死亡人數比別國少,而它衰退的期間最短,是2020年第一季下降2%而已,而去年強勁復甦,好了,中國這種集中力量辦大事的管理方法,顯明是成功的,而它將會繼續讓中國去領導世界,好,眾所周知,現在習近平已經結束了清零政策,其實是因為它敵不過Omicron,這是真正的原因,Omicron變種去到BF7,傳染力太厲害了,你計算一下就知道,中國的清零政策是繼續不了的,在數學上已經繼續不了,而這個就是我說,兩個月前?,其中一個情景,我講了四個情景,就是the dam is burst open,結果水壩被沖毀,住院和死亡人數大幅度增加,剛好我今天看到一個驚人的數字,一日之內,中國社科院死了9名院士,中國社科院有多少院士呢?,700人,中國學術界最高地位,不是,科學院中科院,702人,一日死9名,今年死了60名,但一日死了9名,平時一年死32名,如果以這種速度死亡,北京死亡快要到高峰而已,還沒到高峰,一個星期左右到高峰,很容易死了一百多二百個,這個是多嚴重,30%的這些80歲以上的老人,而北京有多少80歲以上的老人?,而社科院的院士已經得到很好的醫療照顧,北京100萬人,死了30%,中國的醫療保險壓力到了極限,經濟未來三年有重大問題,中國經濟增長長期預測被下調,中國已經再不是以前這樣,為什麼呢?,Paul Krugman說,我也承認,中國前兩年,如果你純粹以病毒控制來説,中國最成功的,死的人數最少的,當然這個是用犧牲人權來獲得的,犧牲自由來獲得的,而且去年經濟反彈是最厲害的,似乎經濟代價也最少的,一種不用理會公共意見,覺得對就去做,這種政權似乎有優越性,但是他做事完全沒有想過,隨後怎樣呢?,what next,你清零之後,全世界不清零,圍住你,那你怎樣呢?,這個就是四、五個月前我所説的免疫鴻溝問題,中外之間有一堵圍牆隔著,他不肯用最有效的疫苗,其中一個真正的原因就是,他還是用舊那套,用高鐵那套,要別人把知識產權給他,別人不肯,他不知道,以前可行的那套,14億人市場,你把方法給我,你來教我們做吧,別人不肯,你學了就跟我競爭,它先和BNT談崩了,就想著找Moderna,結果Moderna也不肯,結果沒有這些疫苗,這個就是凸顯了專制政府最大的弱點,就是什麼?,沒有人敢跟領導人說他不喜歡聽的話,除了即將前來的慘淡前景,中國的宏觀經濟到了一個臨界點,這個我會說的,最後我會作出我自己的結論,中國經濟有著驚人的增長歷史,我已經把圖表讀熟了,其實是從96年開始,這個增長,高速增長是1996年,一直增長到2014年左右,其實增長了18年、20年,超高速增長,這個就好像東亞四小龍,也是有過這麼高速的增長,香港六幾年一直到八幾年,就用這樣的增長,沒有人說中國經濟沒有增長,但是中國經濟是失衡的,就某種意義來說,我告訴大家是什麼,就是工資佔GDP的比率,中國是全世界最差的三個地方之一,其中一個很重要的原因,大家知道為什麼,政府佔了很多,世家也佔了很多,結果有很多人是中下的收入,貧富懸殊嚴重,而且政府沒有做好教育、醫療、退休三件事,人們不敢花錢,無論如何強推,消費也只有GDP的45%,內部經濟,內部消費佔了GDP的45%,而香港、美國這些先進經濟是差不多八成,沒有辦法追上來,這個數字永遠都推不上去,於是這個數字推不上去,轉用鋼筋水泥來補救,過去十年硬用鋼筋水泥,包括搞基建和蓋房,結果這個在,我2017年,我說我退休了,2018年,我68歲那年,我說我不再說了,我臨別贈言那裡我說了一件事,中國經濟不可能持續增長,因為如果靠投資基建的話,這個世界有一個叫邊際效用遞減法則,你越搞基建,回報越小,投資回報率嚴重下降,於是企業不肯投資新的設備,我舉個例給大家聽,這個是多荒謬呢?,中國的鋼鐵產量是世界57%,你GDP是世界18%,水泥也是超過一半,煤也是超過一半,這些是做什麼呢?,再建造這些?,高鐵全部虧本,是不是要繼續建造多些?,不要緊,再繼續虧更多,在這條旁邊平行建多兩條,這樣就更壞,好了,在過去10年,2021年之前,還是充分就業,其中一扣的就是地產,不斷無緣無故建很多房子,中國地產的泡沫是人類歷史上第一次見到的,這麼大數量,是多少呢?,我說它的地產總值,是450萬億人民幣,等於美國加上歐盟,中國的地產數量,而別人是世界GDP的40%多,建房佔了GDP的29%,這個投資比例,是美國樓宇最泡沫時候,最嚴重時的兩倍,比日本1989年的時候嚴重一倍,日本的樓宇泡沫最嚴重的時候,這個是不可以持續的,經濟學家經常引用斯坦定律,有一個叫斯坦定律,我第一次聽到,所以真的學到東西,如果一件事是不能永遠做下去的話,它就會自動停止,舉個例,你可不可以不斷吹氧氣球呢?,不可以,於是你就想想什麼時候停止,是不是?,除非那件事可以永遠做下去,你就繼續做下去,不用考慮停止,舉例子,經濟增長,年年想辦法增長,耕田就年年耕田,那件事是可以持續的,但房地產泡沫,450萬億,你是不是可以到達45,000億呢?,這個不可以持續,於是它要停止,中國泡沫幾時結束呢?,不清楚,可能是急劇放緩,也可能是一段低質量的增長時期,可能是急劇,沒有增長得這麼快,或者它繼續支撐著,但基本上是基於一條假數,同時掩飾問題的真實程度,無論什麼都不會是一件好事,但Paul Krugman說真正讓他震驚的是分析師,在下調他們對經濟增長的長期預測,全世界所有人都看出,全世界都看到中國的經濟放緩,我都說這些事情,是自我實現的預言,只要全世界都放緩,相信中國會放緩,就會減少投資到中國的錢,中國就真的會放緩,首先,沒有人可以預測長期增長的,麻省理工學院經濟學家羅伯特·索洛說過一句名言,意圖解釋國家增長率的差異,結果是以業餘社會學的狂熱告終,就是當你去預測這個會快一些,那個快一點,然後那些經濟學家就用業餘社會學者的原因來解釋,日本經濟很厲害,因為它的架構是怎樣,他們的文化永遠不解僱員工的,那時候稱讚得天上有地下無,中國的體系很好的,因為儒家文化,結果是用業餘社會學者的狂熱來解釋經濟,衡量國家經濟規模時候,你知道GDP有兩個價值,一個是世界銀行,一個是國際貨幣基金組織,國際貨幣基金組織的叫做購買力評價,這個是對低收入經濟體更加高,因為生活成本低,在後者方面,它估計中國2016年超過美國,但在地緣政治影響力,美元衡量外匯標準更加重要,因為你買東西的時候,要看你的外匯價格,購買力評準就是用來看生活水準,高盛把這一日推遲到2035年,之前它估計20年左右就是世界第一,日本經濟研究中心,我和大家講過,中國會在2028年,2033年成為世界領導者,第一次估計2028年,然後改為2033年,今年改為幾十年內都不會發生,這個分析情況永遠不會發生,為什麼會有悲觀呢?,一部分出自人口結構,這個我不明白,他們的預測,人口結構是十幾年前你已經知道的,中國沒有採取政策去改變,這件事我講了十幾年,勞動人口一直下降,要靠生產率的增長,人口數目不增加,生產率增加,依然可以增加得很快,每個人生產多少東西,中國的政策失誤,強化了中國進入中等收入的陷阱,中等收入陷阱是一種,你看到它是實在存在的,很多國家陷入了中等收入陷阱,永遠跳不出來,世界上極少國家能夠到達先進經濟體,我解釋給大家聽,有些貧窮國家可以快速增長,去到某一點它就停止了,它永遠追不到經濟發達體,我解釋給大家聽,當你很窮那一刻,其實你是工業化,工業化你就把耕田的人,農業人口轉成工業人口,抄別人的技術,這個叫城市化,我都說,耕田的生產率很低,中國我記得80年的時候,一個人耕田一年,是賺1000元人民幣,他去深圳打工,就算是1000元也好,一年12,000元,是10倍,而且不止,工廠也賺了很多錢,所以這一刻經濟增長一定很快,而且,你是學一些很舊的技術,別人不介意讓你學,到這裡,中國現在用盡了人口,中等收入陷阱有兩條線,這條最低線就是人口轉工業化、城鎮化,於是這一段問你,學別人的知識學到什麼程度,你可以學到人家五年前的知識,舉個例子,你學到九成,你就來到這裡,但過了這一點就不同了,不可以學人,要自己發明,這麼短時期的東西不能學的,要自己創作很難,所以多數國家卡在這個階段裡面,這些不是說貶低中國過去40年經濟的提升,中國經濟生長是很快,那又如何?,so what,儒家文化每個經濟增長都很快,1945年打完第二次世界大戰,哪個國家不是一窮二白,最糟的就是日本,被人炸到爛融融,日本第一個崛起,然後四小龍,儒家文化全部都發達了,最後才是大陸,有什麼好奇怪的,現在不是否定中國已經成為一個經濟超級大國,中國因為人多,數字加起來一定是經濟超級大國,但要讓中國經濟變了主導,可能要等很久,中國已經今非昔比,不是從前了,這就是他說的,我最後會給大家一個總結論,羅奇,這是摩根的亞洲區前主席,他是25年都看好中國經濟的樂觀主義者,他近日在《Project Syndicate》發表懺悔文,他承認自己全錯了,這個是第二次發表懺悔文,俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭之後,習近平和普丁結盟,然後又堅持動態清零,引致抗議浪潮,其實是來自習近平的專制和對權力控制的癡迷,第一,迷信權力,這個是真的,覺得有權力是什麼都做得到,不用

Congratulation! You bave finally finished reading krugman twitter and believe you bave enougb understending krugman twitter

Come on and read the rest of the article!