Critical Krugman

Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize winning economist, is definitely liberal in his politics and in his economic analyses -- and he is not shy about putting it in print as a regular columnist for the New York Times and a frequent tv commentator.   But he hits unusually hard today:

The big bad event of last week was, of course, the Supreme Court hearing on health reform. In the course of that hearing it became clear that several of the justices, and possibly a majority, are political creatures pure and simple, willing to embrace any argument, no matter how absurd, that serves the interests of Team Republican. 

But we should not allow events in the court to completely overshadow another, almost equally disturbing spectacle. For on Thursday Republicans in the House of Representatives passed what was surely the most fraudulent budget in American history.

And when I say fraudulent, I mean just that. . . .   it slashes taxes for corporations and the rich while drastically cutting food and medical aid to the needy. Even aside from all that . . . the alleged deficit reduction depends on the completely unsupported assertion that trillions of dollars in revenue can be found by closing tax loopholes. . . .

Krugman then explains that, even in an economy as large as our, that is a lot of loopholes.  So which ones does Ryan propose to plug?

None. Not one. He has, however, categorically ruled out any move to close the major loophole that benefits the rich, namely the ultra-low tax rates on income from capital. . . .

Mr. Ryan talks loudly about the evils of debt and deficits, but his plan would actually make the deficit bigger even as it inflicted huge pain in the name of deficit reduction. But is his budget really the most fraudulent in American history? Yes, it is. . . . 

Krugman goes on to explain that there have been fraudulent budgets before.   For example, George W. Bush's practice of bait and switch, in which he underestimated cost of cuts by pretending that they were temporary -- and then after the budget was adopted demanding that the cuts be made permanent.

This Ryan budget, passed by the House, will not be adopted as long as President Obama is in the White House, but it has been endorsed by Mitt Romney.   Krugman concludes:

But what we learn from the latest Republican budget is that the whole pursuit of a Grand Bargain was a waste of time and political capital. For a lasting budget deal can only work if both parties can be counted on to be both responsible and honest — and House Republicans have just demonstrated, as clearly as anyone could wish, that they are neither. 

Of course, this has been obvious for some time.   But it feels good that one can still read such a hard-hitting, correct analysis of the political news in a major U. S. newspaper, The New York Times.

Ralph