The USA - the strongest trading Country has NOT Been taken advantage of- that is laughable. ... maybe by China some ...but the USA does not have "clean hands" either....who would ever believe even one word out of his odd shaped mouth ?
Yes, clarity of purpose is invigorating. If Bernie wants to help, he can become a democrat. Obamacare is a vast improvement as his addled octogenarian successor hot mic proclaimed, "A big fucking deal". China built a wall to protect itself that worked for a time but in the end was a disaster. Seventy-six years ago, they acted on lessons learned. Amazing what people can do when focused.
Not long after Obamacare was instituted, lifespan in America started to decrease for the first time in history (ex war and epidemics). Folks have their own pet theories about why this is (drug overdoses is the favorite excuse), but lifespan is a prime metric. Krugman did an essay on that recently, with the curves. Obamacare has made it possible for the disadvantaged to find poor medical care.
If we were to institute a healthcare system that allowed all of us equal right to life, maybe we'd catch up to the rest of the world.
Kettles and pots will no doubt each have points to make about it. I do recall we were and apparently still are ready to destroy many over the question. The idea that an impoverished agrarian society could challenge the preeminent economic system in the course of one lifetime is unpresented in human history.
Who built all that capacity? This is in no way to point to any intrinsic ethnic qualities, but "China" didn't just sprout all that "economic marvel" miraculously.
When tou say A, please say the B and the rest. Myopic soap boxing is... dismissible.
You said exactly what I’ve been saying…a baby pounding at a busy box…pulling levers, turning dials all to see what happens…no end goal in sight…just dazed fascination at the power to manipulate his environment.
Professor, your article is an excellent antidote to the angst Boy Wonder Ezra Klein induced in me with his one-sided screed against Biden in today's Times. He blamed Biden, inter alia, for not passing a new law to expedite his infrastructure programs without mentioning that opposition by every GOP legislator--and perhaps Manchin and Sinema--render his suggestion laughable. He unhelpfully pointed out that such legislation was possible because something similar had happened in the 70's. His whole article is premised on the assumption that Democrats sua sponte put up roadblocks to their own programs with only minor interference from the GOP. I think it would do the Young Man no harm if you were to dedicate a newsletter to a point-by-point refutation of his naive posturings.
Klein lives in a bubble that doesn't allow him to truly investigate the facts. In a democracy, it's THE MEDIA's responsibility to make sure that everyone knows the most relevant facts, when it comes to what an administration is doing and what effect it has on "the state of the union".
It's never the job of politicians. Their job (which is already a more than full-time job if you want to do it well) is to GOVERN.
The NYT (and so many other legacy media) decided long ago that they'd go for clickbait headlines instead. Result? While the GOP has now a well-oiled neofascist propaganda machine lying to its own voters 24/7, pro-democracy media literally left the field and cynically reduced reporting on politics (the issues that matter to "the polis", namely us!) to the horse race.
Last summer, there were NO articles about the economy (only op-ed, which are supposedly subjective), only POLLS about how people PERCEIVED the economy (mostly falsely, it turned out, week after week), and then articles cynically trying to GUESS politicians personal ambitions and intentions behind whatever they say, rather than focusing on policy details, their history and context.
Result? The most ill-informed electorate ever. The NYT and Klein are co-responsible for this, for sure...
Finally, his entire "abundance" idea skips THE basic characteristic of the democratic process: it ALWAYS takes time. The only way to do things fast is to have a dictator decide everything on a whim. But that's how you break things, never how you make or build things...
Your criticisms of NYT are somewhat valid. But come on, do you really think the majority of Americans based their voting (or even got their news) on what was written in The Times???
Ohh, come on, this is crude misunderstanding of Ezra Klein's column - his book on the subject called Abundance has just been published. What Ezra said is that there are too many political - oppositional and bureaucratic roadblocks in putting legislation into practice, that prevent to bring well intended and even well thought out projects to fruition. Ezra demonstrated that Biden and the Democrats legislated many good industrial policies and allocated resources for their realization - on infrastructure, chips manufacturing, sustainable growth industries etc. - , but the policy process did not come to fruition because there were too many delays, the project were not realized before the end of his term so that the voters could not see the results. Without desired final outcomes, great legislated projects can be condemned as failure, especially by ruthless opposition. Ezra's argument is that Democrats have to simplify the proceedures and speed up the execution of the projects in industrial policies. Ezra is of course right, and now is no time for inner bickering.
We have big red signs in Seattle listing Donald J Trump as provider of infrastructure projects authorized and funded by Biden and democrats. Projects by the way that would have never seen the light of day under republicans.
Look, Mr. Alphabet Soup, you and Ezra fail to address the fundamental fact that there is a fascist infrastructure that all but prevents anything good from happening in this country. Biden's only hope was to (very artfully) squeeze some decent projects through the legislature and hope for re-election. To suppose, as you and Ezra blithely do, that he had the option of passing "fast" projects and bypassing all those pesky procedures despite uniform GOP opposition shows nothing more than your naivete. (Although in Ezra's case, it is probably a calculated career move.)
No one takes anyone seriously who calls a democratically elected president a fascist. Democrats will continue to lose until the overboard Robert Reich type come back to reality
Benito Mussolini's Fascists won a landslide victory in Italy in April 1924 with a whisker under 65% of the vote. But I wonder if he'd have polled so highly if Italians had known that this would be their last truly free election until after WWII more than two decades later?
Thus debunking Shawn Martin's notion that no one can be a fascist if they won an election. The only interesting question is what is this Fox-addled nitwit doing on Pr. Krugman's Newsletter?
Pretty goofy. It was Biden who forced Americans to endure an invasion of the 3rd world, encouraged school districts to accept boys into girls sports, and on and on.
None of that in any way fits the definition of "Fascist". Trump's policies, however, are pretty much textbook, an impression that's firmly being reinforced with each successive day.
By which I mean *actual* Fascism in the Mussolini/Hitler/Franco sense, not what George Orwell was talking about when he ruefully observed in 1946 that "the word 'Fascism' has now no meaning except insofar as it signifies 'something not desirable'".
If you want to resist the unlawful and unconstsitutional behavior of present administration and prevent Orban style or Erdogan style or Putin style .... complete state capute, which cannot be named too politely as illiberal democracy, or too softly soft fascism, or too nicely dictatorship, what is coming to US is brutal tyranny - pure and simple! - then you need a coalition of all "the good people" form left and right, from conservatives to liberals, who are presently aware that the policies of the present day administration lead to total disaster for too many people and who are prepared to do something against it. So no bickering, no blame game, we need all the people - and Ezra Klein, imperfect as he is, is certainly not the right addess for your indiscriminate and vile quasicritical denunciation.
Ezra is the right adess [sic] for my anger. He has decided to take the Bill Maher approach (albeit less obnoxiously) of telling the Right, "Look at me! I'm blaming the liberals!" It may sell books, but it is highly counter-productive for what's left of our democracy. He is aiding and abetting the falsehood that the peccadillos of the Left are as worthy a topic of discussion as the monstrosities of the Right. Think about it: He wants to talk about the shortcomings of the previous administration while the present regime is in the process of destroying the world economy, the federal government, and the rule of law in real time. The last thing we need at this time is the distraction of Ezra's nitpicking the good guys.
I enjoyed your discussion I think you (Stacy) probably were more convincing than Andrej. However, your mocking of your counterpart's name spelling and highlighting an irrelevant typo was unnecessary and hurts the message you want to convey.
Biden projects which would come to fruition under the next president were allowed by the Republicans. Ones which would benefit people during Biden’s term were opposed.
There is the argument that if Biden was half as aggressive and Democrats half as united as Republicans, more could easily have been done. But I don't think anything Biden did mattered. Harris and Walz lost, making them a mistake.
Industrial policy has become an unregulated doom loop of consumerism.
Nothing Biden did mattered. Democrats ran a weak good person against a strong bad person, and strong won. Same as 2016. A different message from the DNC and a different candidate would have mopped the floor with Trump. Appearances are everything. Strong but bad beats weak but good in these brutal, dangerous times.
Manchin and his ilk delayed and delayed and prevented any aid for our older people to use to stay in their homes as long as will be reasonable. Much of Biden's best legislative advances were never appreciated since they were so very slow to get to the consumers and citizens. Justice and programs delayed can be invisible unless well publicized.
I disagree. I don't take Ezra Klein's criticism of liberal shortcomings at "getting things done" as a shot at Biden in particular. He clearly states in his writings that the legislation under Biden was excellent, but the execution of the legislation was so bogged down in bureaucratic process that at best it wouldn't have gotten done for years.
If Trump wasn't so incompetent and corrupt he would have done nothing and sat back to take credit for Biden's work. When the book Abundance was finished, that was what they expected would happen. Trump would take the credit. Most of us didn't expect Trump to take a wrecking ball to everything.
What Klein doesn't do is go on and on about how awful MAGA is. (His criticism is there, just not first, foremost and always.) Why bother jumping on the bandwagon? There's plenty of us doing that. Paul Krugman is doing an excellent job on the economics everyday, for which I'm grateful.
Klein is pointing out a liberal problem...and it's real. He/they are pointing out possible solutions, and we need that. I agree that government is critical to a healthy society and we need to judge it on whether things get done or not.
Obviously, MAGA is a mess. But voters might have noticed the Biden Administration was doing well if the new manufacturing plants were up and running in 2024.
Do you actually believe that even in the best of cases Biden could have presented the country with all those projects wrapped in ribbons in time for the elections? Do you realize what it takes to fast track a factory, even with support from across the political spectrum? Besides, the road and transportation projects hit the ground running running across the country, and no one noticed despite the Biden administration’s best efforts.
No I don't believe Biden could have done that. But getting things done in a timely/costly from a governmental regulatory standpoint is an area that liberals need to work on. MAGA won't do it because they want to destroy effective government.
Government has a critical role in promoting good policies. Try reading Abundance. They have some good points. It's much more about how to improve things than tearing things apart.
Klein stabbed Biden in the back every chance he got, and never acknowledged the many good policies he enacted. He's a whiner at best, and an enemy at worst.
👆👆🎯 I did love "Bobo" Brooks writing a book on "How to live a moral life" while he was having an affair with his research assistant. That disqualified his credibility forever. And his stupid viral post about his $80 airport meal, blaming Biden's economy, when the restaurant chimed in and said it was a 14 dollar burger, the rest was his bar tab!
I'm going to go against the popular opinion and exclaim: "Jeez people. Ezra may not have everything button down and beautiful, but you all are so knee jerk defensive against anything criticizing Democrats that you miss some astoundingly good points."
Ezra just handed to us a truth very few are talking about. There are huge consequences with over-regulation, and one of the problems is exactly the one Ezra raises - whether Biden could have done anything about it or not. The people voting for change are not seeing those changes actually happen until it is forgotten that a law was even passed. And they are frustrated with this. Along comes Trump, and at the very least, people are seeing changes that were voted for (and a lot that were not), even though he's doing all this illegally. The fact this appeals to people should be a bigger deal to Democrats if they want credit for things that they do, and Ezra is right that democracy needs smarter regulation so that cause(votes) and effect(changes due to laws) are more closely coupled. These are profoundly important insights, and should be people's take away from Ezra's article. It shouldn't all the defensive, virulent reactions to the fact he criticized a Democrat. Good heavens.
Democrats lost the last election, and there is more to it than the idea everyone who voted for Trump is a moron. You'll have to get used to some criticism if we're going to save democracy.
Matt, true! Criticizing the Democrats is like farting in church in some circles. I myself was cancelled merely for pointing out that the Dems’ student loan forgiveness policy was dumb politics since the taxes of the 60pc of Americans who did NOT attend college would be used to subsidise the 40pc who did. Cue outrage. Or, mocking Biden’s Day One EO authorising “gender affirmative” policies while waiting for over two years to do anything to stem the flow of illegal immigrants, because open borders is a “progressive” leitmotif. As one other poster here said, where the Democrats have controlled the legislature (eg, California), have they done what they are asking Trump to do now? Often, no, because they too are captive to their own donors and “blackmailers”: the teachers’ unions; Silicon Valley; the defense industry. Ezra is goring some oxes, and good for him. If that makes Democrat ideologues uncomfortable, well good!
I am totally "Team Democrat" in this horrible two party system. But, to me that means open self-criticism is even more important. "Dissent is patriotic" especially when it is within your own 'team'.
I happen to agree with your insight on student loan forgiveness. Furthermore, it provides at least moral cover for the extralegal nature of Trump's efforts that Democrats are facing now. I said this long ago when Obama created DACA, too, even though I very much agreed with the aims and outcomes of the program. I decried it as lawless, and Democrats took me as being against helping Dreamers. And now Trump is lawless in the same way, but in the opposite direction and with a vengeance. Project 2025 took DACA, the way it was implemented, the way it survived, the way it foreclosed on options, and vastly expanded on the tactics of it to create the monster we have now. I wonder if they would have ever dreamed up the strategy if it hadn't been for that program.
And my own take on gender affirmation is that you have to show you care about and respect the 50% of Americans without college degrees in order to have their alliance on trans rights, which I actually care about very much. If you're dismissing, condescending to, and gaslighting that 50%, they're going to unsurprisingly turn against otherness. Yes, trans people have a far harder time just existing than most people without college degrees. But, that doesn't mean dismissiveness is going to be persuasive.
As far as Democrats in California: It is interesting that they partially did exactly what Ezra suggested in trying to come up with solutions to the housing crisis. Basically tried to avoid letting the perfect get in the way of the good enough of swift creation of housing. Sadly, it hasn't met up to expectations, though housing creation has increased. But, yes, you're right. Dems don't usually do what is needed even when they have a majority.
The charge that forgiving student debt is paid by the non college educated is a myth. Student loan forgiveness would largely be forgiveness of an accumulation of compound interest, plus these college graduates continue to pay their taxes on a higher average income than their poorer less educated fellow citizens, so it’s like arguing whose piece of popcorn the pigeon ate.
I disagree that you can divide up who pays for what out of the revenues taken in by the Federal Government in this way. Endless good arguments about how to say whose money has paid for what can be made. For me, everything the government pays for is divided in proportion over every taxpayer's total tax input from all revenue sources. So, if you pay 100 in taxes, and the government uses 1% of its resources to pay for student loan forgiveness, then 1 dollar is used from your taxes to pay for the forgiveness. This seems to me, in my sole opinion, to be the best way to calculate. Lots of other opinions will be out there, and each one will be based on the values of each of the 350 million people who form their opinion on the matter.
You're just the kind of cat's paw Ezra wants to sell books to. The GOP is the problem. To blame the Dems for failing to defeat the most ruthless, well-financed fascist organization since the Third Reich is, to put it chariably, counterproductive.
Even the largest state remains part of the United States of (at this point) Trumpistan. California’s size does not free it from the fascism in national politics. And no one is saying a Democratic Party majority is Nirvana. But adhering to the rule of law and Constitutional principles is a fundamental basis for western Democracy that we are losing at the moment. And that is the point The Dems and Biden accomplished what they did with the thinnest of majorities especially considering how often the Manchin Sinema tag team ran interference.
Clearly you didn't read the book. As Ezra has said in many interviews, the main question prompting the book is "What's wrong with California?" We have many states where the fascism of the GOP is basically irrelevant, since the Democrats have supermajorities in their legistlatures, and yet we have not enacted liberal utopia in those states. The Republicans being terrible explains part of what's wrong, but not everything.
I worked in economic development back in the 1990s in western MI when they were trying to woo a new manufacturing facility. Everyone got annoyed with me when I warned the company that they would struggle to recruit as people considered manufacturing jobs bad, dirty jobs. The council commissioned a $5000 study to prove me wrong. The company started up, and told me I had been right. Same thing about pulling manufacturing back from China. As CEO of Apple recently pointed out, it is not cheap labor there—it is highly skilled labor that the US doesn’t have. Tariffs do not address that, and neither does closing the Department of Education.
I went back to university on my own dime at 50, to retrain myself because the Internet ate my career.
I see it all the time in high tech, where companies say, "we have to bring in this (ultra cheap) H1B because there are no Americans with these special skills," where it would take less than 6 months to retrain a dozen Americans for a whole department of jobs. It's cheaper to bring in an H1B than it is to train an American with decades of related but not exactly perfect experience. Companies USED to train people on the job. Now they don't. Junior level developer jobs are now "internships," where you learn on the job for a month or two and then do the job of someone getting 2-4x your wage and no benefits for the next 18 months where upon they *might* hire you, or might trade you in for another desperate junior level developer needed to get a start.
Believe me, it's not that people don't want to work, or cannot retrain. They can and would, if it were offered.
The problem in terms of chip production is discussed in this BBC article. And for those doubting the trainability of all Americans, keep in mind 44% still think Trump is doing a good job.
This gets us into the difference between "industrial policy" (good) and "import substitution" (bad). The distinction should be that the former creates jobs where Americans can do the job well, efficiently, and at competitive cost, just given some support. Ideally, the product should then be able to compete on the global market. The latter creates jobs where for reasons of culture, education, training, physical abilities, Americans will never be able to compete on the global market. Subsidizing this creates inefficiency, shoddy consumer products, laziness, and corruption ("we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us.")
But how do we tell in advance? Some cases are easy. Japan famously refused to subsidize its infant auto industry because it believed it could never compete globally. The sad truth is that because of the wreckage of the US educational system, successful use of industrial policy today would be very limited.
Having worked in shoe factories and high-tech production labs my considered opinion is that there is a difference. I recall Clinton touting retraining during the NAFTA debate.
NAFTA was a huge mistake. All Nafta and admitting China into the WTO did was cause large closures of factories, declining real wages for men, and subsequently exploding profits for corporations. It was a huge gift to the top 10%. The share of GDP going to the top 5% rose by 33% over the past 35 to 40 years.
I beg to differ. I think NAFTA was great for the economies of North America. Involving China was also a good move since they stopped being communist which was the goal. However efficiency means cutting down costs. A Mexican was more productive than an American in certain industries and there was Americans who could out compete Mexicans in others. Clinging to these losses I believe is a mistake and one should focus on the gains. That type of focus is what looks to the future.
China is still 100% a communist country politically and only half the economy is privately owned. So I think you are confused. You are also making a major error concerning the benefits of trade. If the product is high value it would be better to make it in the USA. That way at least workers would get a high wage. You do realize that the dominant market structure in the USA is oligopoly. With so little competition imports are priced close to acceptable US retail. Gains from trade mostly go to the importer.
I think you’re misunderstanding what communism actually is. Communism, by definition, seeks to create a classless, stateless society where all property and resources are collectively owned, there’s no private ownership or profit motive. While it’s true that communist movements have historically resulted in authoritarian regimes, authoritarianism isn’t part of the definition, it’s a result of how those systems were implemented. Modern China, with its market economy, private businesses, billionaires, and wealth inequality, clearly doesn’t fit that definition. Calling China “communist” today is more about political branding than ideological reality.
I won’t admit to an error quite yet. The products no longer hold the same major value is my point. And your point that workers make more money just because of the value of the product is exactly what Krugman pushes back against in the article. He just gave you the example of a Dane making more at McDonalds than an autoworker in Alabama!
👏👏👏 to every word of this, and particularly this: “What this comparison tells us is that institutions that empower workers are more important in determining workers’ pay than what sector they work in. Two-thirds of Danish workers are represented by unions, while auto workers in Alabama aren’t unionized. Empowering service sector workers can make their jobs good; disempowering manufacturing workers can make their jobs bad.”
Yes. This was the case also with clothing and textiles, back when I worked with ACTWU. We were based in NYC, but the jobs had all moved to the SE US, to avoid unions. So, we chased them down there, had some success unionizing, but then, the mfrs moved the shops overseas.
Some industries SHOULD be allowed to compete or die all by themselves, such as shoe manufacturing; textiles, and furniture. Protection and subsidies to preserve jobs are a fool’s errand. And if American industry asks the government for taxpayer protection, except in very limited and short-term situations, it should be told to compete harder and shown the door. Union vs non-union is a distraction, except to protect work conditions and safety.
Yes, and I think this relates back to Krugman’s point, which I had quoted initially: “What this comparison tells us is that institutions that empower workers are more important in determining workers’ pay than what sector they work in. Two-thirds of Danish workers are represented by unions, while auto workers in Alabama aren’t unionized. Empowering service sector workers can make their jobs good; disempowering manufacturing workers can make their jobs bad.”
Because, despite what Krugman writes here, the salaries at the transplant plants are very close to the UAW plants. And those transplant automakers aren’t crippled by the years of UAW legacy benefit cruft the way the Big 3 were.
"GM is a health care company with an auto company attached."
But without some help from Washington trade policies the moment labor extracts middle to high incomes the plant will have closed and gone to Mexico. In Middle Tennessee we lost some very high paying central heat and air unit manufacturers because of NAFTA. We are STILL bleeding them. United Tech just sent another tool and die shop to Mexico and Goodman recently shut down their plant in Fayetteville TN. Why won't we actually put quotas on the number of high value imports like cars, appliances, heat and air units. Tractors etc and then give manufacturers federal subsidies to make here? Seems foolish to put broad tariffs on low value profucts and inputs coming in from China but we still keep bleeding the highest paying jobs
I do not know Bernie's mind with regard to the incracies of his " abandoned the working class", but what I do know is that income inequality and attacks on unions have had a devestating impact on working class Americans. They have felt abandoned. Part of course is a gut emotional reaction and part the nature of our society that stresses wealth and accumulation of goods, keeping up with the Jones'.
So Bernie and AOC tap into the underlying angst and show empathy, a good thing. Also, and I hope ALL congress folks see this, drawing huge crowds. We are all tired of the system that supports a minority of Americans. Wish it weren't true. My only bone to pick with Paul. Great analysis btw.
Income inequality was coming down under Biden and wages were growing faster than inflation with the greatest gains going to the lowest income levels. And because jobs were readily available the previously unemployed were able to participate in those gains. In fact unemployment for African American men was at a record low (of course low paid African Americans are not what the media means by working class so that doesn’t count). The mainstream “liberal” media was too busy obsessing over the price of eggs and inflation “vibes” to bother informing voters of those facts.
It is definitely true that health care provides good jobs. In the early 50s my family moved from NYC to a small town in Appalachia because there was a medical center that was expanding and my physician father wanted to be involved in that kind of operation. (Also both my parents wanted a small town life.) Back then there were also good manufacturing jobs to be had in that area but those jobs disappeared a few decades back. However the medical center remained and grew, especially after LJB’s war on poverty created not only Medicaid and Medicare but also subsidies for rural medical centers. Today that medical center is thriving and has added satellite centers in the region so people don’t have to drive an hour or more for care. It is the largest employer by far but that is something Republicans will wreck with their Medicaid cuts.
Also thanks to Biden’s programs manufacturing is also being revived in the area. A new, cutting edge steel rolling plant is being built nearby. The Biden administration provided the infrastructure funds needed to upgrade the sewer system and roads in that county; the state provided other incentives. All of the media coverage I have seen credits the state government for winning that plant but said nothing about the critical role the Biden funds played. After all that would undermine one of the media’s favorite frames — that Democrats don’t care about the working class. That framing goes hand and hand with their decades of pushing the blatantly false narrative that Republicans are better for the economy and are the fiscally responsible party.
It was inevitable that the GOP would try to take credit for all the great jobs and economic gains from IRA, CHIPS and Infrastructure--all of which they overwhelmingly opposed.
But from what I see, they aren't trying to take credit, they're trying to destroy it. WSJ had a good article about manufacturing plants under construction that are being destroyed by the tariffs raising their construction costs and killing their business models. One was a plant to recycle plastics. Government support was being cut out and their cost of construction was going up. They would have employed 200 people.
The GOP Rep from that particular district can just pretend that Biden/Dem plant never existed. Two hundred workers were never fired, so nothing to see, right? Besides, if FOX News doesn't cover it, 85% of Trump voters will never know that plant had ever been under construction.
Krugman himself has adequately explained why people whose wages were ostensibly outpacing inflation wouldn't recognize they were better off (in many past writings). Nevertheless, I believe it is a strategic mistake to think these people would have been convinced of Biden's good works by a media telling them they were better off, even if it was true. Instead, I believe Sherry is correct to go ahead and acknowledge Democratic fault for the four plus decades in which they participated in the weakening of unions and everything else for the working class. I believe acknowledging fault is a far better way to convince them you care, and only then point to Biden's good works to convince them of what is possible.
Ignored? Depends on what you mean. I certainly heard about them through the media, so clearly 'the media' did report on them. I do think people didn't know enough about them, but whether this is because it wasn't emphasized by the media or whether it was because people disregarded it as not being their experience of things, I don't know. Perhaps both, with the latter helping to feed the former.
Ask yourself if these people were likely to have known someone personally who was positively affected by new jobs under Biden. My answer would be 'unlikely'. But, plenty of them know people personally who were impacted by the four plus decades of neglect. I do, and I don't even move in working class circles any more in my life, being a solidly white collar worker.
It takes a while to rebuild trust once it is lost. It isn't going to happen with the abstract idea that Biden did a bunch of stuff to create jobs for them, but it is a start.
The jobs mostly had not yet been created, and until they are actually created in substantial numbers, they are an abstract forecast based on the anticipated effect of the law. Additionally, they are abstract in the sense that they are something reported on, not something with which a person has experience themselves. I meant it in both senses.
I believe the Biden jobs are coming, or rather believed it until Trump began to create chaos. But, people are going to be all 'show me' rather than 'forecast for me' in these times because there have been a LOT of broken promises across the political spectrum. The ironic thing is they don't want to be fooled again, yet they've been fooled by the biggest con man ever to grace our nation. I am saying I understand why. I can see why they don't trust anyone and why they have fallen prey to the very person they should trust the least.
Ezra Klein, adversely mentioned by many others in this comments section, does have at least one good point in his recent article despite people's criticism: The regulation regime developed over the recent decades makes it so that the benefits of government action don't come until several years after the law that makes them possible. Whatever our disagreements with him, we should all be able to see the truth of at least this.
Please tell me how those folks voted. Having been materially helped by Democrats over a number of years - how does that area vote? Did propaganda override reality? Or did a majority vote to continue their support from Democrats?
I don't really agree that they were 'materially helped by Democrats over a number of years' in the way you most likely mean it. Many people believe that Democrats have been effective champions of these people, and I simply disagree. I believe that for four plus decades, Democrats occasionally tried to help them, but more often than that, let them be neglected. Sure, Republicans were worse, but Democrats were no shining alternative.
According to the last election, the working class shifted across demographics toward Trumpists. Perhaps you're wondering why they would vote for Trumpists when Republicans have always been worse than Democrats for the working class. But, you would not be seeing things from their perspective. They don't see Trumpists as normal Republicans. They see Trumpists as critics of normal Republicans. And they are right, most of them are. So, in their mind, they aren't voting for the "Republicans" who contributed to their misery. They are voting for Trump's Republicans, who might be saving them. They are wrong about this part, but it is understandable why they are wrong.
I was asking how the area in Appalachia that Theodora30 described, voted. It's a simple question. I'm not sure why you're trying to complicate it with a lot of misunderstandings or assumptions. I'm not assuming any social or economic class, or political persuasion to that area - because I don't know. I live on the other edge of the country in WA state. I know how, and mostly why, people voted here, in my very purple county. Majorities in this county tip back and forth. Outsiders might assume that because I'm in WA state, the whole place is bluer than blue. They would be wrong. So I just wanted to know how the area, or county, that Theodora30 described, ended up voting in the last election.
This is what Theodora30 said above: "It is definitely true that health care provides good jobs. In the early 50s my family moved from NYC to a small town in Appalachia because there was a medical center that was expanding and my physician father wanted to be involved in that kind of operation. (Also both my parents wanted a small town life.) Back then there were also good manufacturing jobs to be had in that area but those jobs disappeared a few decades back. However the medical center remained and grew, especially after LJB’s war on poverty created not only Medicaid and Medicare but also subsidies for rural medical centers. Today that medical center is thriving and has added satellite centers in the region so people don’t have to drive an hour or more for care. It is the largest employer by far but that is something Republicans will wreck with their Medicaid cuts.
Also thanks to Biden’s programs manufacturing is also being revived in the area. A new, cutting edge steel rolling plant is being built nearby. The Biden administration provided the infrastructure funds needed to upgrade the sewer system and roads in that county; the state provided other incentives. All of the media coverage I have seen credits the state government for winning that plant but said nothing about the critical role the Biden funds played. After all that would undermine one of the media’s favorite frames — that Democrats don’t care about the working class. That framing goes hand and hand with their decades of pushing the blatantly false narrative that Republicans are better for the economy and are the fiscally responsible party."
If you don't know the answer to my question, that's fine. Don't blow it up into something it's not.
Bernie seems to have tapped into the perception (not entirely wrong) that, since 1980, Democrats have capitulated to the GOP time and time again, even when they had an overwhelming majority. This same perception includes the apparent heavy promotion of "cultural" issues, while utterly ignoring the exponentially increasing wealth gap iniquity.
Ronald Reagan won a true landslide of epic proportions in 1980. He ran on a whole platform of “government isn’t the solution, it’s the problem” and voters ate it up with a spoon.
And from that time on, with few exceptions, the country voted for the GOP over and over and over again to their own detriment. Yet Dems get blamed for “abandoning the working class.” Americans themselves did that. It’s been a moving three steps back and two steps forward every time Dems get back into office. Constantly left to clean up the mess from the previous GOP administration. And when things don’t get done fast enough or perfect enough for the childish American electorate, they vote the very people who cause the problems back in. I have watched this for nearly five decades. And with each passing year Dems get blamed more. That they have lower approval rating right now than the monster in the WH says it all. Only they have worked to help the lives of regular Americans. Yet they don’t get recognition, only scorn.
I am so tired of it and tired of pundits like Klein and a host of others. It’s always attack attack attack Dems while giving lip service to the real problem and its perpetrators.
This is all totally true. The key victory of the "Reagan Revolution" was the perfection of propaganda. The St. Reagan campaign took pages from McCarthy's red scare, Nixon's "Southern Strategy" along with ideas that Orwell intended to be cautionary rather than a blueprint, and, of course, Goebbels, and it worked. This combined with the never ending drone of reichwing media that came into prominence, such as Limbaugh and Coulter.
That left Democrats floundering for a "message". We ended up with the "New Kind of Democrat" that turned to Wall St. for donations - and gave up influence in return. Clinton with his "welfare as we know it is over" speech. Chuck Schumer pushing through "opt out" 401k's - a giant gift to Wall St., all while pushing the "cultural" issues hard, treating them as if they were the most urgent issues facing the country.
It is true that pundits have bent over backwards to appear "fair and balanced" in the face of the Faux Newspeak monster, but they weren't totally wrong, and neither is Sanders.
In the final analysis, we need to hold >both< party's feet to the fire.
the union buster Reagan because be promised them he’d do everything he could to make sure that black Americans would continue to be oppressed and white Americans would continue to have economic, legal, and political advantages over the rest of Americans. The Democrats did not abandon the working class. The white working class abandoned their unions to support the continuation of systemic white supremacist policy.
That is true, but St. Reagan didn't just come right out and say it. He used dog whistles like "law and order" and "welfare queens", etc., to sucker them, and it worked. They got suckered, and would remain that way until a sudden catastrophe shocked them out of it.
That catastrophe has arrived. That gives us an opportunity to take the country - and Democracy - back. We have to exploit this crack we've been waiting for over forty five years to appear. Now that it's here, let's not blow it.
I was watching closely during that period and didn’t see people being fooled. I saw them clamoring for more of the same. You’re right that this is a chance for change, but we probably don’t see the odds the same way. If the Supreme Court hadn’t cheated in the direction of the elderbush’s nitwit son to reverse the outcome of the election, things might have gone a better direction. But theh installed the nitwit, and this is the result. I’m doing all I can to get Democrats elected, but it appears to me that the magats are holding most of the cards, and elections a still far away.
I just finished Klein's book Abundance and it isn't attack, attack, attack. It's - this is good - but in order to be successful we need to consider....
I see it as loyal opposition.
There is a problem called MAGA. Propaganda is a big part, lies are a big part...but the timely execution of good policy is also responsible.
You forget that Bill catipulted to Nafta and China. The way he pushed this country towards globalization was one one of the most masochistic, self damaging political moved of the 20 th century. Never should we have abandoned workers like we did then. I find it amazing how undergrad economics textbooks blindly assume that it is consumers who get all the gains from free trade. As an econ teacher who also imports products I can't believe the idiocy of such modeling. Probably 80% of all gains from trade go to the importer. Importers will always push to price products to the highest tolerable price point possible given the richer country's price level. In a country full of oligopolies rarely ever do consumers truly gain from trade unless the item is simply too labor intensive.
And yet Bernie’s general position is “tariffs are good, but trump’s tariffs are bad.” If he followed Dr. Krugman’s advice about industrial policy and eschewed tariffs, his message would be way more logical and clear.
Did Bernie say that? He shouldn't have. Neither should Whitmer. You're right, Democrats really need to stay on message. Prof. Krugman doesn't entirely eschew >targeted< tariffs with specific goals either. Just the bizarre, extreme, blanket, on again off again, kind of tariffs that the Jackass in Chief is leveling.
So, while Bernie, Whitmer and Prof. Krugman are right that small targeted tariffs with specific goals have their place, nobody should be talking about that right now. The message to stick to is:
"What King Krasnov is doing is asinine. Period. Full Stop."
True, but Hillary never suggested defunding the police. That was something promoted by a small but vocal cadre of extremists - and given more press than was warranted.
You wrote that it was "promoted by a small but vocal cadre of extremists." And I wrote that it's some elected Democrats. If they are elected officials, they are not "extremists."
Don't get Paul's attack on Bernie Sanders..."driving away allies", or "playing tRump's game". Sanders and AOC are the strongest out-there advocates for a revitalized Dem party, and taking the fight against tRump authoritarianism right to the public. There have been far, far greater responses to the Sanders/AOC messaging than Ezra Klein and his "Abundance" book tour, so please, Paul, cut Bernie some slack already!
Bernie and AOC should systematically add that Democrats CONSTANTLY fight for the working class whereas the GOP and GOP only systematically does whatever it can to destroy it. Attacking Democrats for not moving fast enough when "we the people" repeatedly give them a Congress controlled by the GOP is not helpful, to say the least...
One problem is that media define "working class" as "not college educated." This puts petit bourgeois (e.g. used car dealers) and lumpenprols into the same pot as the real WC. If we define WC by the narrow "union member," Felon 2024 got the same % as Reagan in 1984. Understanding this changes all the terms of the debate.
Bill Bryson wrote an excellent book about growing up in middle America. In it, he says that when people are asked when were the good old days, they tend to point to the 1950s. He then points out that at that time United States was the only major industrial country that had not been devastated by World War II. Europe, Russia, Japan, Korea and China were all recovering from the effects of the war. The United States was booming. Consequently, we had a period of time when we were the top manufacturer of almost everything, because there literally was no real competition. That scenario will never return. We need to figure out how to compete and live in the modern world.
And of course the good times of the American 50s were not evenly distributed. Married women could not get bank loans, or renew mortgages, or obtain credit cards in their own name (when such cards became popular) without their husband's signature. Blacks were deprived of all sorts of rights. Gays had to keep their closet doors tightly closed. So white men of particular national backgrounds had it very good. Others ... ?
To those who think the 50s were the good old days never bothered to talk to females and other people with any pigment or gays. Nothing was “good” for them.
Bryson's "The Life and Times of the Torpedo Kid" was also a hilarious account of growing up in the 50's. Caught myself laughing out loud throughout the book.
Something similar is true for drug prices. Rather than putting tariffs on drugs, in the hope that production will move to the US and that this will magically make the drugs cheaper, none of which is guaranteed, it makes much more sense to follow direct strategies such as maximally exploiting collective bargaining. It works in the rest of the world so it will work in the US as well.
That would be sane...as where do the INGREDIENTS for the drugs come from, other countries ?? And at the American workers wages ...there go the prices up + the capital included for a new factory (if remotely feasible which it is not ) Unless the USA is a 100 % pariah of the world ... which might be the plan ??? it is not physically possible to manufacture now..in 5-6 years to completion maybe. And what sane CEO will invest their capital to build a new building / machinery with this INSANE administration - on again off again? And IF the election is free and fair..and that is very unlikley now ie Russia ! Then trumps insanity would/should be curtailed in 2026 - this is the biggest issue ....4 years and a 3rd term he plans to STEAL from the people.....aggghhhh. Wake up
I’d like to know the full story on pharma. “Fine chemicals” are active ingredients, “excipients” are the supposedly inert/benign ingredients that are added too make a pill, tablet, gelcap…whatever. Throw in tax havens and the “miracle” of transfer pricing and the industry starts to resemble the auto industry, with fine chemicals, excipients and final product formulation taking place in different countries. I’ve been out of touch with pharma for a few decades now, like since Ireland and Puerto were the tax havens of choice for fine chemicals and/or finished product formulation. So: does China now have a lock on fine chemicals or are they made somewhere else and exported to China (with a huge mark up) for final formulation? I have some sympathy for Senator Warren’s defence of tariffs but mostly I side with Prof Krugman’s argument for industrial policy. I would just add that industry policy has to be industry specific and it can’t be approached without a hard look at tax policy and, for that matter, the possible use of tariffs.
Oh, while I’m at it: doesn’t “explaining” Bernie amount to a kinder, gentler form of sanewashing?
"And you know who did try to boost manufacturing with targeted subsides, and had a lot of success? The Biden administration:
Biden also pursued quite tough policies against China that, unlike Trump’s, didn’t punish our own economy at least as much as they punished China’s."
Biden's policies, (remember those:policy) improved the safety and prosperity of the country at large, promoting many new jobs in manufacturing and construction (good paying jobs) and fair taxation, that had it continued, would have increased the redistribution of wealth in America from the billionaire class toward the working class thereby closing the gap further of wealth inequality (prosperity for more people).
Thank you, Dr. Krugman, for all your posts, but specifically yesterdays and todays. Much to think about.
I guess Krugman isn't reading the NYT on vacation and so is missing the war part of the war on tariffs. China cut off the supply lines of heavy rare earth magnets and heavy rare earth materials last week to the world and is establishing licenses the keep them out of American manufacturing plants. All other economic and political analysis pales in comparison. China has a monopoly on refining heavy rare earth materials and close to a monopoly on the heavy rare earth magnets that the world needs to make weapons systems, drones, cars, AI, smart phones, rockets, and more.
Why would China give American manufacturing facilities access to their heavy rare earth magnets without large concessions?
Because the mining and processing of rare earth minerals are so environmentally destructive, only China processes them. Our environmental concerns created a national security problem decades ago that we and the world have ignored. The irony is that the national security rational for Trump's tariff actions is the exact opposite of what he has done. Trump should never have started a trade war with China and has now released the dragon of China's power over critical industries around the world. America has been officially dethroned. (Though China passed us in purchasing power parity years ago.) It's hard to see how Trump's ego will allow him to back down. When it comes to trade war with China, China holds all the cards.
Do you think America should have found a way to bypass the environmental concerns? Not sure any country should be outsourcing its polluting industries, but it sounds like that was the calculation. Research into less destructive mining and processing seems like a good idea, and I think it is happening.
“Rare earths” in fact are not all that rare; they are found all over the world. What IS rare is China’s capacity (& now near monopoly) to process them. It’s not totally true that this has occurred because China accepts lower environmental standards than Western countries; a large part is because the Chinese government saw the strategic importance of these critical metals and pushed to establish a domestic capacity. The West was asleep and now is hostage. Only Lynas Corp has a lithium and precious metals plant (in Malaysia using Australian-mined lithium). It’s this myopic and short-sighted behaviour by Western governments that is the scandal and rather than fret about tariffs and industrial policy to “stop” China, we should have a coherent plan to put our own strategic house in order.
China would likely have blocked export of heavy rare earths irregardless of Trump's idiocy, as they're facing unprecedented global fence-raising in response to China Shock II. The rest of the world wishes to prevent their remaining manufacturing capacity from being sixed by China's ultra-subsidized new trade offensive.
The Ukraine has extensive deposits of minerals including lithium, titanium and other rare earth minerals that are critical to modern technology. Russia's war against the Ukraine is likely intended to secure future Russian access to those minerals.
I live in a purple state where only moderate Democrats win except in the deep blue inner cities. We have repeatedly elected moderate Dems to the be governor even though our state legislature is deep red and gerrymanders the heck out of our state.
Yeah, that's the thing. For all the people crying for a new FDR, the fact is that the economic radicals like Bernie Sanders and AOC, much as I love them, only win in deep blue territory. In purple states or states that've turned red, the only Democrats who win are the centrist types.
The fact that in West Virginia, which used to be ground zero for labor radicalism, the only Democrat who's been able to win is an economic royalist like Manchin says a lot.
It says a lot for the effectiveness of GOP propaganda since 1980. Government could be the solution if the electorate voted out the ones who think government should be destroyed and "the market" should control everything.
There’s a new “Biden wing” which combines the best of both the traditional “conservative small-government” democrats and “progressive pro-worker” democrats. Bernie has all the bad features of the latter.
The nostalgists obviously have never worked on an assembly line. In the late 90s, early 2000s I worked in sales for a supplier to the auto industry, calling on engine and transmission plants. The plants were dirty, loud, populated with people who were bored and counting days to retirement when they were only in their 40s. The Chrysler engine plant parking lot was littered with small plastic alcohol bottles that workers imbibed before, during and after work. The times when I was called to work on a line (because of quality issues with our parts), I left at the end of the day greasy, dead tired and head aching from the machinery noise. The men-in-suits who are calling for a return to this environment clearly have never gotten their hands dirty.
I’m not sure the men in suits actually believe humans will be employed on the assembly lines. They probably think automated factories in the US will make them more dollars and will be easier to control. The ongoing question is who will consume the products when unemployment is high thanks to AI and automated factories, and the US economy remains based on trading labor hours for access to goods and services? If the economy shifted to Universal Basic Income there might still be enough consumers to buy the manufactured products, but at this rate there won’t be enough consumers left if we stick with the old labor hours system.
After serving in WWII, my father worked in a factory that manufactured mechanical calculators. When electronic calculators were introduced, his company considered them a fad. The company diversified into other manufactured items (like golf carts), moved some manufacturing to Mexico, and eventually went out of business. This "golden age" of manufacturing left much to be desired. Even if we succeeded in reintroducing manufacturing to that level, the same unresolved issues would arise. Without retraining programs, strong unions and many other supports, workers would face the same problems in a great-again economy.
Because of shortsightedness in American management culture.
GM & Chrysler shortly before their bailouts each had something like *fourteen* levels of management. That still couldn't after thirty years build cars to equal the Japanese.
Manufacturing jobs will not come back to the US due to tariffs.
The jobs will come back ONLY if the US becomes a cheaper place to manufacture, and cheap labour is not the issue.
US is an expensive place to do business. A factory takes a lot longer to construct in the US than in any part of Asia, mainly due to layer upon layer of rules and requirements at municipal, county, state and then federal levels. It's like peeling an onion - it makes your eyes water. And thanks to local corruption and entitled local officials, it's a rotting onion.
The cost of infrastructure is astronomical in the US. An Economist article two years ago suggested that a mile of highway or new railroad takes 4X in the US compared to Germany and 5-6X compared to Italy. The cost is 15-20X compared to developing Asia.
Further, no country can compete internationally when it's healthcare costs are approaching 20% of GDP and yet the health outcome is at the bottom of OECD, where the average healthcare cost is about half of the US.
These last two points might not matter at a micro level, but as an economy, everyone has to pay for these inefficiencies.
Address the macro concerns.
Bridging the labour cost differential through tariffs will NOT bring back manufacturing to the US.
Fully agree that this is not just a labor cost issue.
You might have stopped after "Manufacturing jobs will not come back to the US" as most of the "shortcomings" you list are not going to disappear. They are part of the cost of being a "developed country".
Brexiteers were arguing that relaxation of regulations (employment related, environmental, permits in general, etc) will sort of "make UK great again".
I believe only a small minority in the USA and UK would consider to accept lowering the standards of making business to Asian developing country levels.
The same Economist article named UK as the most expensive country to build infrastructure and the problems with national healthcare system, which accounts for almost 13-14% of GDP are well known.
In the UK, the current Labour government is focused on lowering the cost of doing business which does not necessarily mean deregulation, but rather "regulations that work". Britain's regulatory environment have given her some of the highest costs of energy, sub-standard transportation system, incredibly high labour costs of dubious productivity etc. A majority of the country now believes that Brexit was an error.
The US is a more dynamic economy than Britain. And I reiterate, that the country would do well to address a number of other structural issues. But for that to happen, the discussion around tariffs and manufacturing jobs needs to get beyond the relative labour costs, which are amongst the least important factor in determining the location of such jobs - Germany being a good example of a very high wage country with a fairly competitive manufacturing sector.
Whitmer's statement that she understood DT's motivation is not the same as saying his tariffs have a point. These are two separate ideas, and I'm surprised you would equate the two. I can understand DT's motivation in deporting immigrants to a Salvadoran gulag; there is no way I would say that DT has a point in doing so. Motivation is one thing; execution (yes, I chose that word deliberately) is quite another.
I've said it again and again: in discussing DT's constantly shifting economic policies we're seeking to find logic where none exists. With DT it's all about showmanship, bombast and revenge for perceived wrongs, not logic. We keep trying to build a house on a pile of feces; DT is a deeply flawed individual who is not driven by morals or logic - his only goal is to promote his brand. In that respect, he has been hugely successful, at least up until now, when the consequences of his behavior or so enormous.
Short and sweet — exactly!
“So Democrats don’t have to be purists who rule out all tariffs. But they can and should say that tariffs are not how you build a better economy.”
The USA - the strongest trading Country has NOT Been taken advantage of- that is laughable. ... maybe by China some ...but the USA does not have "clean hands" either....who would ever believe even one word out of his odd shaped mouth ?
Horatio Alger is Chinese.
Yes, clarity of purpose is invigorating. If Bernie wants to help, he can become a democrat. Obamacare is a vast improvement as his addled octogenarian successor hot mic proclaimed, "A big fucking deal". China built a wall to protect itself that worked for a time but in the end was a disaster. Seventy-six years ago, they acted on lessons learned. Amazing what people can do when focused.
Not long after Obamacare was instituted, lifespan in America started to decrease for the first time in history (ex war and epidemics). Folks have their own pet theories about why this is (drug overdoses is the favorite excuse), but lifespan is a prime metric. Krugman did an essay on that recently, with the curves. Obamacare has made it possible for the disadvantaged to find poor medical care.
If we were to institute a healthcare system that allowed all of us equal right to life, maybe we'd catch up to the rest of the world.
Ketchup is a vegetable.
Reaganomics 101. But Horatio Alger?
Was that the best way to go?
Kettles and pots will no doubt each have points to make about it. I do recall we were and apparently still are ready to destroy many over the question. The idea that an impoverished agrarian society could challenge the preeminent economic system in the course of one lifetime is unpresented in human history.
Who built all that capacity? This is in no way to point to any intrinsic ethnic qualities, but "China" didn't just sprout all that "economic marvel" miraculously.
When tou say A, please say the B and the rest. Myopic soap boxing is... dismissible.
The god with the clock in his stomach did it!
Trump and tariffs is like a little kid with a hammer. He doesn’t know what he’s doing but he’s having fun banging away at everything in sight.
And there’s zero adult supervision in this administration.
You said exactly what I’ve been saying…a baby pounding at a busy box…pulling levers, turning dials all to see what happens…no end goal in sight…just dazed fascination at the power to manipulate his environment.
Professor, your article is an excellent antidote to the angst Boy Wonder Ezra Klein induced in me with his one-sided screed against Biden in today's Times. He blamed Biden, inter alia, for not passing a new law to expedite his infrastructure programs without mentioning that opposition by every GOP legislator--and perhaps Manchin and Sinema--render his suggestion laughable. He unhelpfully pointed out that such legislation was possible because something similar had happened in the 70's. His whole article is premised on the assumption that Democrats sua sponte put up roadblocks to their own programs with only minor interference from the GOP. I think it would do the Young Man no harm if you were to dedicate a newsletter to a point-by-point refutation of his naive posturings.
The fact that Ezra is still employed and given so many column inches in the NYT says a lot about the NYT, and it ain't good.
👆🎯
Klein lives in a bubble that doesn't allow him to truly investigate the facts. In a democracy, it's THE MEDIA's responsibility to make sure that everyone knows the most relevant facts, when it comes to what an administration is doing and what effect it has on "the state of the union".
It's never the job of politicians. Their job (which is already a more than full-time job if you want to do it well) is to GOVERN.
The NYT (and so many other legacy media) decided long ago that they'd go for clickbait headlines instead. Result? While the GOP has now a well-oiled neofascist propaganda machine lying to its own voters 24/7, pro-democracy media literally left the field and cynically reduced reporting on politics (the issues that matter to "the polis", namely us!) to the horse race.
Last summer, there were NO articles about the economy (only op-ed, which are supposedly subjective), only POLLS about how people PERCEIVED the economy (mostly falsely, it turned out, week after week), and then articles cynically trying to GUESS politicians personal ambitions and intentions behind whatever they say, rather than focusing on policy details, their history and context.
Result? The most ill-informed electorate ever. The NYT and Klein are co-responsible for this, for sure...
Finally, his entire "abundance" idea skips THE basic characteristic of the democratic process: it ALWAYS takes time. The only way to do things fast is to have a dictator decide everything on a whim. But that's how you break things, never how you make or build things...
I suspect Ezra and the co-author of this book are Musk fanboys at heart.
Bingo.
Thank you, ever so much this^^^.
Your criticisms of NYT are somewhat valid. But come on, do you really think the majority of Americans based their voting (or even got their news) on what was written in The Times???
Ohh, come on, this is crude misunderstanding of Ezra Klein's column - his book on the subject called Abundance has just been published. What Ezra said is that there are too many political - oppositional and bureaucratic roadblocks in putting legislation into practice, that prevent to bring well intended and even well thought out projects to fruition. Ezra demonstrated that Biden and the Democrats legislated many good industrial policies and allocated resources for their realization - on infrastructure, chips manufacturing, sustainable growth industries etc. - , but the policy process did not come to fruition because there were too many delays, the project were not realized before the end of his term so that the voters could not see the results. Without desired final outcomes, great legislated projects can be condemned as failure, especially by ruthless opposition. Ezra's argument is that Democrats have to simplify the proceedures and speed up the execution of the projects in industrial policies. Ezra is of course right, and now is no time for inner bickering.
We have big red signs in Seattle listing Donald J Trump as provider of infrastructure projects authorized and funded by Biden and democrats. Projects by the way that would have never seen the light of day under republicans.
UGH!
I'll have to swing by and see if the local artists had anything to add.
Look, Mr. Alphabet Soup, you and Ezra fail to address the fundamental fact that there is a fascist infrastructure that all but prevents anything good from happening in this country. Biden's only hope was to (very artfully) squeeze some decent projects through the legislature and hope for re-election. To suppose, as you and Ezra blithely do, that he had the option of passing "fast" projects and bypassing all those pesky procedures despite uniform GOP opposition shows nothing more than your naivete. (Although in Ezra's case, it is probably a calculated career move.)
No one takes anyone seriously who calls a democratically elected president a fascist. Democrats will continue to lose until the overboard Robert Reich type come back to reality
Benito Mussolini's Fascists won a landslide victory in Italy in April 1924 with a whisker under 65% of the vote. But I wonder if he'd have polled so highly if Italians had known that this would be their last truly free election until after WWII more than two decades later?
Thus debunking Shawn Martin's notion that no one can be a fascist if they won an election. The only interesting question is what is this Fox-addled nitwit doing on Pr. Krugman's Newsletter?
You are incorrect. Among the educated, Trump’s fascism is taken for granted. If Trump isn’t a fascist, no one is.
Pretty goofy. It was Biden who forced Americans to endure an invasion of the 3rd world, encouraged school districts to accept boys into girls sports, and on and on.
None of that in any way fits the definition of "Fascist". Trump's policies, however, are pretty much textbook, an impression that's firmly being reinforced with each successive day.
By which I mean *actual* Fascism in the Mussolini/Hitler/Franco sense, not what George Orwell was talking about when he ruefully observed in 1946 that "the word 'Fascism' has now no meaning except insofar as it signifies 'something not desirable'".
We Catholics believe in transubstantiation.
If you want to resist the unlawful and unconstsitutional behavior of present administration and prevent Orban style or Erdogan style or Putin style .... complete state capute, which cannot be named too politely as illiberal democracy, or too softly soft fascism, or too nicely dictatorship, what is coming to US is brutal tyranny - pure and simple! - then you need a coalition of all "the good people" form left and right, from conservatives to liberals, who are presently aware that the policies of the present day administration lead to total disaster for too many people and who are prepared to do something against it. So no bickering, no blame game, we need all the people - and Ezra Klein, imperfect as he is, is certainly not the right addess for your indiscriminate and vile quasicritical denunciation.
Ezra is the right adess [sic] for my anger. He has decided to take the Bill Maher approach (albeit less obnoxiously) of telling the Right, "Look at me! I'm blaming the liberals!" It may sell books, but it is highly counter-productive for what's left of our democracy. He is aiding and abetting the falsehood that the peccadillos of the Left are as worthy a topic of discussion as the monstrosities of the Right. Think about it: He wants to talk about the shortcomings of the previous administration while the present regime is in the process of destroying the world economy, the federal government, and the rule of law in real time. The last thing we need at this time is the distraction of Ezra's nitpicking the good guys.
I enjoyed your discussion I think you (Stacy) probably were more convincing than Andrej. However, your mocking of your counterpart's name spelling and highlighting an irrelevant typo was unnecessary and hurts the message you want to convey.
You are right, Juan. My apologies to Andrej.
Biden projects which would come to fruition under the next president were allowed by the Republicans. Ones which would benefit people during Biden’s term were opposed.
There is the argument that if Biden was half as aggressive and Democrats half as united as Republicans, more could easily have been done. But I don't think anything Biden did mattered. Harris and Walz lost, making them a mistake.
Andrej, Everything you and Ezra Klein stipulate assumes that Democrats have a large Congressional majority which they did not.
Industrial policy has become an unregulated doom loop of consumerism.
Nothing Biden did mattered. Democrats ran a weak good person against a strong bad person, and strong won. Same as 2016. A different message from the DNC and a different candidate would have mopped the floor with Trump. Appearances are everything. Strong but bad beats weak but good in these brutal, dangerous times.
A+++ comment.
So why were all the inefficient union labor and diversity requirements in the IRA in the first place? Republicans put them there?
You are Cinna the assassin not the poet.
Hahaha good one, gotta give you a like for that
Manchin and his ilk delayed and delayed and prevented any aid for our older people to use to stay in their homes as long as will be reasonable. Much of Biden's best legislative advances were never appreciated since they were so very slow to get to the consumers and citizens. Justice and programs delayed can be invisible unless well publicized.
I disagree. I don't take Ezra Klein's criticism of liberal shortcomings at "getting things done" as a shot at Biden in particular. He clearly states in his writings that the legislation under Biden was excellent, but the execution of the legislation was so bogged down in bureaucratic process that at best it wouldn't have gotten done for years.
If Trump wasn't so incompetent and corrupt he would have done nothing and sat back to take credit for Biden's work. When the book Abundance was finished, that was what they expected would happen. Trump would take the credit. Most of us didn't expect Trump to take a wrecking ball to everything.
What Klein doesn't do is go on and on about how awful MAGA is. (His criticism is there, just not first, foremost and always.) Why bother jumping on the bandwagon? There's plenty of us doing that. Paul Krugman is doing an excellent job on the economics everyday, for which I'm grateful.
Klein is pointing out a liberal problem...and it's real. He/they are pointing out possible solutions, and we need that. I agree that government is critical to a healthy society and we need to judge it on whether things get done or not.
Obviously, MAGA is a mess. But voters might have noticed the Biden Administration was doing well if the new manufacturing plants were up and running in 2024.
Do you actually believe that even in the best of cases Biden could have presented the country with all those projects wrapped in ribbons in time for the elections? Do you realize what it takes to fast track a factory, even with support from across the political spectrum? Besides, the road and transportation projects hit the ground running running across the country, and no one noticed despite the Biden administration’s best efforts.
No I don't believe Biden could have done that. But getting things done in a timely/costly from a governmental regulatory standpoint is an area that liberals need to work on. MAGA won't do it because they want to destroy effective government.
Government has a critical role in promoting good policies. Try reading Abundance. They have some good points. It's much more about how to improve things than tearing things apart.
Ezra Klein is out to lunch.
Hope you commented on the article.
Alas, the comments were closed by the time I read the piece. Happily, Pr. Krugman gave me the opening to respond.
Klein stabbed Biden in the back every chance he got, and never acknowledged the many good policies he enacted. He's a whiner at best, and an enemy at worst.
Ezra Klein, David Brooks, NYT, raw sewage, wharf rats - who cares?
👆👆🎯 I did love "Bobo" Brooks writing a book on "How to live a moral life" while he was having an affair with his research assistant. That disqualified his credibility forever. And his stupid viral post about his $80 airport meal, blaming Biden's economy, when the restaurant chimed in and said it was a 14 dollar burger, the rest was his bar tab!
I'm going to go against the popular opinion and exclaim: "Jeez people. Ezra may not have everything button down and beautiful, but you all are so knee jerk defensive against anything criticizing Democrats that you miss some astoundingly good points."
Ezra just handed to us a truth very few are talking about. There are huge consequences with over-regulation, and one of the problems is exactly the one Ezra raises - whether Biden could have done anything about it or not. The people voting for change are not seeing those changes actually happen until it is forgotten that a law was even passed. And they are frustrated with this. Along comes Trump, and at the very least, people are seeing changes that were voted for (and a lot that were not), even though he's doing all this illegally. The fact this appeals to people should be a bigger deal to Democrats if they want credit for things that they do, and Ezra is right that democracy needs smarter regulation so that cause(votes) and effect(changes due to laws) are more closely coupled. These are profoundly important insights, and should be people's take away from Ezra's article. It shouldn't all the defensive, virulent reactions to the fact he criticized a Democrat. Good heavens.
Democrats lost the last election, and there is more to it than the idea everyone who voted for Trump is a moron. You'll have to get used to some criticism if we're going to save democracy.
Matt, true! Criticizing the Democrats is like farting in church in some circles. I myself was cancelled merely for pointing out that the Dems’ student loan forgiveness policy was dumb politics since the taxes of the 60pc of Americans who did NOT attend college would be used to subsidise the 40pc who did. Cue outrage. Or, mocking Biden’s Day One EO authorising “gender affirmative” policies while waiting for over two years to do anything to stem the flow of illegal immigrants, because open borders is a “progressive” leitmotif. As one other poster here said, where the Democrats have controlled the legislature (eg, California), have they done what they are asking Trump to do now? Often, no, because they too are captive to their own donors and “blackmailers”: the teachers’ unions; Silicon Valley; the defense industry. Ezra is goring some oxes, and good for him. If that makes Democrat ideologues uncomfortable, well good!
I am totally "Team Democrat" in this horrible two party system. But, to me that means open self-criticism is even more important. "Dissent is patriotic" especially when it is within your own 'team'.
I happen to agree with your insight on student loan forgiveness. Furthermore, it provides at least moral cover for the extralegal nature of Trump's efforts that Democrats are facing now. I said this long ago when Obama created DACA, too, even though I very much agreed with the aims and outcomes of the program. I decried it as lawless, and Democrats took me as being against helping Dreamers. And now Trump is lawless in the same way, but in the opposite direction and with a vengeance. Project 2025 took DACA, the way it was implemented, the way it survived, the way it foreclosed on options, and vastly expanded on the tactics of it to create the monster we have now. I wonder if they would have ever dreamed up the strategy if it hadn't been for that program.
And my own take on gender affirmation is that you have to show you care about and respect the 50% of Americans without college degrees in order to have their alliance on trans rights, which I actually care about very much. If you're dismissing, condescending to, and gaslighting that 50%, they're going to unsurprisingly turn against otherness. Yes, trans people have a far harder time just existing than most people without college degrees. But, that doesn't mean dismissiveness is going to be persuasive.
As far as Democrats in California: It is interesting that they partially did exactly what Ezra suggested in trying to come up with solutions to the housing crisis. Basically tried to avoid letting the perfect get in the way of the good enough of swift creation of housing. Sadly, it hasn't met up to expectations, though housing creation has increased. But, yes, you're right. Dems don't usually do what is needed even when they have a majority.
The charge that forgiving student debt is paid by the non college educated is a myth. Student loan forgiveness would largely be forgiveness of an accumulation of compound interest, plus these college graduates continue to pay their taxes on a higher average income than their poorer less educated fellow citizens, so it’s like arguing whose piece of popcorn the pigeon ate.
I disagree that you can divide up who pays for what out of the revenues taken in by the Federal Government in this way. Endless good arguments about how to say whose money has paid for what can be made. For me, everything the government pays for is divided in proportion over every taxpayer's total tax input from all revenue sources. So, if you pay 100 in taxes, and the government uses 1% of its resources to pay for student loan forgiveness, then 1 dollar is used from your taxes to pay for the forgiveness. This seems to me, in my sole opinion, to be the best way to calculate. Lots of other opinions will be out there, and each one will be based on the values of each of the 350 million people who form their opinion on the matter.
In any case, I disagree, and I get one vote.
I’ve been disappointed by so many so called liberals it’s insane.
You're just the kind of cat's paw Ezra wants to sell books to. The GOP is the problem. To blame the Dems for failing to defeat the most ruthless, well-financed fascist organization since the Third Reich is, to put it chariably, counterproductive.
Even the largest state remains part of the United States of (at this point) Trumpistan. California’s size does not free it from the fascism in national politics. And no one is saying a Democratic Party majority is Nirvana. But adhering to the rule of law and Constitutional principles is a fundamental basis for western Democracy that we are losing at the moment. And that is the point The Dems and Biden accomplished what they did with the thinnest of majorities especially considering how often the Manchin Sinema tag team ran interference.
Clearly you didn't read the book. As Ezra has said in many interviews, the main question prompting the book is "What's wrong with California?" We have many states where the fascism of the GOP is basically irrelevant, since the Democrats have supermajorities in their legistlatures, and yet we have not enacted liberal utopia in those states. The Republicans being terrible explains part of what's wrong, but not everything.
I worked in economic development back in the 1990s in western MI when they were trying to woo a new manufacturing facility. Everyone got annoyed with me when I warned the company that they would struggle to recruit as people considered manufacturing jobs bad, dirty jobs. The council commissioned a $5000 study to prove me wrong. The company started up, and told me I had been right. Same thing about pulling manufacturing back from China. As CEO of Apple recently pointed out, it is not cheap labor there—it is highly skilled labor that the US doesn’t have. Tariffs do not address that, and neither does closing the Department of Education.
Labor here could be trained.
Companies don't want to spend the money.
That's nonsense. People don't want to be trained.
Kindly taken, but B_LLSH_T.
I went back to university on my own dime at 50, to retrain myself because the Internet ate my career.
I see it all the time in high tech, where companies say, "we have to bring in this (ultra cheap) H1B because there are no Americans with these special skills," where it would take less than 6 months to retrain a dozen Americans for a whole department of jobs. It's cheaper to bring in an H1B than it is to train an American with decades of related but not exactly perfect experience. Companies USED to train people on the job. Now they don't. Junior level developer jobs are now "internships," where you learn on the job for a month or two and then do the job of someone getting 2-4x your wage and no benefits for the next 18 months where upon they *might* hire you, or might trade you in for another desperate junior level developer needed to get a start.
Believe me, it's not that people don't want to work, or cannot retrain. They can and would, if it were offered.
The problem in terms of chip production is discussed in this BBC article. And for those doubting the trainability of all Americans, keep in mind 44% still think Trump is doing a good job.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9ljwgg9y0o
Most Americans want to be trained to do a. Job well but also want to get paid well.
This gets us into the difference between "industrial policy" (good) and "import substitution" (bad). The distinction should be that the former creates jobs where Americans can do the job well, efficiently, and at competitive cost, just given some support. Ideally, the product should then be able to compete on the global market. The latter creates jobs where for reasons of culture, education, training, physical abilities, Americans will never be able to compete on the global market. Subsidizing this creates inefficiency, shoddy consumer products, laziness, and corruption ("we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us.")
But how do we tell in advance? Some cases are easy. Japan famously refused to subsidize its infant auto industry because it believed it could never compete globally. The sad truth is that because of the wreckage of the US educational system, successful use of industrial policy today would be very limited.
Having worked in shoe factories and high-tech production labs my considered opinion is that there is a difference. I recall Clinton touting retraining during the NAFTA debate.
NAFTA was a huge mistake. All Nafta and admitting China into the WTO did was cause large closures of factories, declining real wages for men, and subsequently exploding profits for corporations. It was a huge gift to the top 10%. The share of GDP going to the top 5% rose by 33% over the past 35 to 40 years.
I beg to differ. I think NAFTA was great for the economies of North America. Involving China was also a good move since they stopped being communist which was the goal. However efficiency means cutting down costs. A Mexican was more productive than an American in certain industries and there was Americans who could out compete Mexicans in others. Clinging to these losses I believe is a mistake and one should focus on the gains. That type of focus is what looks to the future.
China is still 100% a communist country politically and only half the economy is privately owned. So I think you are confused. You are also making a major error concerning the benefits of trade. If the product is high value it would be better to make it in the USA. That way at least workers would get a high wage. You do realize that the dominant market structure in the USA is oligopoly. With so little competition imports are priced close to acceptable US retail. Gains from trade mostly go to the importer.
I think you’re misunderstanding what communism actually is. Communism, by definition, seeks to create a classless, stateless society where all property and resources are collectively owned, there’s no private ownership or profit motive. While it’s true that communist movements have historically resulted in authoritarian regimes, authoritarianism isn’t part of the definition, it’s a result of how those systems were implemented. Modern China, with its market economy, private businesses, billionaires, and wealth inequality, clearly doesn’t fit that definition. Calling China “communist” today is more about political branding than ideological reality.
I won’t admit to an error quite yet. The products no longer hold the same major value is my point. And your point that workers make more money just because of the value of the product is exactly what Krugman pushes back against in the article. He just gave you the example of a Dane making more at McDonalds than an autoworker in Alabama!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9ljwgg9y0o
👏👏👏 to every word of this, and particularly this: “What this comparison tells us is that institutions that empower workers are more important in determining workers’ pay than what sector they work in. Two-thirds of Danish workers are represented by unions, while auto workers in Alabama aren’t unionized. Empowering service sector workers can make their jobs good; disempowering manufacturing workers can make their jobs bad.”
Auto workers in the Midwest rarely comment on manufacturing jobs that moved, not to Mexico, but to southern states with anti-union policies.
Yes. This was the case also with clothing and textiles, back when I worked with ACTWU. We were based in NYC, but the jobs had all moved to the SE US, to avoid unions. So, we chased them down there, had some success unionizing, but then, the mfrs moved the shops overseas.
We had several clothing manufacturers including one in my small TN town but NAfta killed those plants off.
Some industries SHOULD be allowed to compete or die all by themselves, such as shoe manufacturing; textiles, and furniture. Protection and subsidies to preserve jobs are a fool’s errand. And if American industry asks the government for taxpayer protection, except in very limited and short-term situations, it should be told to compete harder and shown the door. Union vs non-union is a distraction, except to protect work conditions and safety.
Yes, and I think this relates back to Krugman’s point, which I had quoted initially: “What this comparison tells us is that institutions that empower workers are more important in determining workers’ pay than what sector they work in. Two-thirds of Danish workers are represented by unions, while auto workers in Alabama aren’t unionized. Empowering service sector workers can make their jobs good; disempowering manufacturing workers can make their jobs bad.”
Shoes, Furniture, Clothing whole industries hopped, skipped and finally jumped from the north to the south to elsewhere. See Norma Rae.
I suspect you might appreciate this. Perhaps it should be required viewing in schools: https://www.c-span.org/program/american-history-tv/the-inheritance/511547
Yup. I was part of the Norma Rae campaign.
To be fair, some auto manufacturers also located in my anti-union state of Indiana.
Because, despite what Krugman writes here, the salaries at the transplant plants are very close to the UAW plants. And those transplant automakers aren’t crippled by the years of UAW legacy benefit cruft the way the Big 3 were.
"GM is a health care company with an auto company attached."
Don’t even start on the old Jobs Bank.
What does that tell you about the US health system?
Non-union plants raised their wages when unions won wage increases for their members. Seems like unions benefit even those who aren't members.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automakers-with-non-union-workforce-race-bump-pay-after-uaws-record-deals-2023-11-21/
The 8-hour day and weekends are union introduced present day realities.
Child labor laws which are now being overturned is another union program that helped all workers.
💯💯💯
💯💯💯
But without some help from Washington trade policies the moment labor extracts middle to high incomes the plant will have closed and gone to Mexico. In Middle Tennessee we lost some very high paying central heat and air unit manufacturers because of NAFTA. We are STILL bleeding them. United Tech just sent another tool and die shop to Mexico and Goodman recently shut down their plant in Fayetteville TN. Why won't we actually put quotas on the number of high value imports like cars, appliances, heat and air units. Tractors etc and then give manufacturers federal subsidies to make here? Seems foolish to put broad tariffs on low value profucts and inputs coming in from China but we still keep bleeding the highest paying jobs
I do not know Bernie's mind with regard to the incracies of his " abandoned the working class", but what I do know is that income inequality and attacks on unions have had a devestating impact on working class Americans. They have felt abandoned. Part of course is a gut emotional reaction and part the nature of our society that stresses wealth and accumulation of goods, keeping up with the Jones'.
So Bernie and AOC tap into the underlying angst and show empathy, a good thing. Also, and I hope ALL congress folks see this, drawing huge crowds. We are all tired of the system that supports a minority of Americans. Wish it weren't true. My only bone to pick with Paul. Great analysis btw.
Income inequality was coming down under Biden and wages were growing faster than inflation with the greatest gains going to the lowest income levels. And because jobs were readily available the previously unemployed were able to participate in those gains. In fact unemployment for African American men was at a record low (of course low paid African Americans are not what the media means by working class so that doesn’t count). The mainstream “liberal” media was too busy obsessing over the price of eggs and inflation “vibes” to bother informing voters of those facts.
It is definitely true that health care provides good jobs. In the early 50s my family moved from NYC to a small town in Appalachia because there was a medical center that was expanding and my physician father wanted to be involved in that kind of operation. (Also both my parents wanted a small town life.) Back then there were also good manufacturing jobs to be had in that area but those jobs disappeared a few decades back. However the medical center remained and grew, especially after LJB’s war on poverty created not only Medicaid and Medicare but also subsidies for rural medical centers. Today that medical center is thriving and has added satellite centers in the region so people don’t have to drive an hour or more for care. It is the largest employer by far but that is something Republicans will wreck with their Medicaid cuts.
Also thanks to Biden’s programs manufacturing is also being revived in the area. A new, cutting edge steel rolling plant is being built nearby. The Biden administration provided the infrastructure funds needed to upgrade the sewer system and roads in that county; the state provided other incentives. All of the media coverage I have seen credits the state government for winning that plant but said nothing about the critical role the Biden funds played. After all that would undermine one of the media’s favorite frames — that Democrats don’t care about the working class. That framing goes hand and hand with their decades of pushing the blatantly false narrative that Republicans are better for the economy and are the fiscally responsible party.
It was inevitable that the GOP would try to take credit for all the great jobs and economic gains from IRA, CHIPS and Infrastructure--all of which they overwhelmingly opposed.
But from what I see, they aren't trying to take credit, they're trying to destroy it. WSJ had a good article about manufacturing plants under construction that are being destroyed by the tariffs raising their construction costs and killing their business models. One was a plant to recycle plastics. Government support was being cut out and their cost of construction was going up. They would have employed 200 people.
The GOP Rep from that particular district can just pretend that Biden/Dem plant never existed. Two hundred workers were never fired, so nothing to see, right? Besides, if FOX News doesn't cover it, 85% of Trump voters will never know that plant had ever been under construction.
Too bad Biden wasn’t out there boasting about these accomplishments. Things would be different.
Krugman himself has adequately explained why people whose wages were ostensibly outpacing inflation wouldn't recognize they were better off (in many past writings). Nevertheless, I believe it is a strategic mistake to think these people would have been convinced of Biden's good works by a media telling them they were better off, even if it was true. Instead, I believe Sherry is correct to go ahead and acknowledge Democratic fault for the four plus decades in which they participated in the weakening of unions and everything else for the working class. I believe acknowledging fault is a far better way to convince them you care, and only then point to Biden's good works to convince them of what is possible.
You do have to admit the media ignored the legislation and projects started under Biden.
Ignored? Depends on what you mean. I certainly heard about them through the media, so clearly 'the media' did report on them. I do think people didn't know enough about them, but whether this is because it wasn't emphasized by the media or whether it was because people disregarded it as not being their experience of things, I don't know. Perhaps both, with the latter helping to feed the former.
Ask yourself if these people were likely to have known someone personally who was positively affected by new jobs under Biden. My answer would be 'unlikely'. But, plenty of them know people personally who were impacted by the four plus decades of neglect. I do, and I don't even move in working class circles any more in my life, being a solidly white collar worker.
It takes a while to rebuild trust once it is lost. It isn't going to happen with the abstract idea that Biden did a bunch of stuff to create jobs for them, but it is a start.
It was not an abstract idea. It was a fucking fact.
The jobs mostly had not yet been created, and until they are actually created in substantial numbers, they are an abstract forecast based on the anticipated effect of the law. Additionally, they are abstract in the sense that they are something reported on, not something with which a person has experience themselves. I meant it in both senses.
I believe the Biden jobs are coming, or rather believed it until Trump began to create chaos. But, people are going to be all 'show me' rather than 'forecast for me' in these times because there have been a LOT of broken promises across the political spectrum. The ironic thing is they don't want to be fooled again, yet they've been fooled by the biggest con man ever to grace our nation. I am saying I understand why. I can see why they don't trust anyone and why they have fallen prey to the very person they should trust the least.
Ezra Klein, adversely mentioned by many others in this comments section, does have at least one good point in his recent article despite people's criticism: The regulation regime developed over the recent decades makes it so that the benefits of government action don't come until several years after the law that makes them possible. Whatever our disagreements with him, we should all be able to see the truth of at least this.
Please tell me how those folks voted. Having been materially helped by Democrats over a number of years - how does that area vote? Did propaganda override reality? Or did a majority vote to continue their support from Democrats?
I don't really agree that they were 'materially helped by Democrats over a number of years' in the way you most likely mean it. Many people believe that Democrats have been effective champions of these people, and I simply disagree. I believe that for four plus decades, Democrats occasionally tried to help them, but more often than that, let them be neglected. Sure, Republicans were worse, but Democrats were no shining alternative.
ok. so how did that area vote?
What do you mean? Which area? The working class?
According to the last election, the working class shifted across demographics toward Trumpists. Perhaps you're wondering why they would vote for Trumpists when Republicans have always been worse than Democrats for the working class. But, you would not be seeing things from their perspective. They don't see Trumpists as normal Republicans. They see Trumpists as critics of normal Republicans. And they are right, most of them are. So, in their mind, they aren't voting for the "Republicans" who contributed to their misery. They are voting for Trump's Republicans, who might be saving them. They are wrong about this part, but it is understandable why they are wrong.
I was asking how the area in Appalachia that Theodora30 described, voted. It's a simple question. I'm not sure why you're trying to complicate it with a lot of misunderstandings or assumptions. I'm not assuming any social or economic class, or political persuasion to that area - because I don't know. I live on the other edge of the country in WA state. I know how, and mostly why, people voted here, in my very purple county. Majorities in this county tip back and forth. Outsiders might assume that because I'm in WA state, the whole place is bluer than blue. They would be wrong. So I just wanted to know how the area, or county, that Theodora30 described, ended up voting in the last election.
This is what Theodora30 said above: "It is definitely true that health care provides good jobs. In the early 50s my family moved from NYC to a small town in Appalachia because there was a medical center that was expanding and my physician father wanted to be involved in that kind of operation. (Also both my parents wanted a small town life.) Back then there were also good manufacturing jobs to be had in that area but those jobs disappeared a few decades back. However the medical center remained and grew, especially after LJB’s war on poverty created not only Medicaid and Medicare but also subsidies for rural medical centers. Today that medical center is thriving and has added satellite centers in the region so people don’t have to drive an hour or more for care. It is the largest employer by far but that is something Republicans will wreck with their Medicaid cuts.
Also thanks to Biden’s programs manufacturing is also being revived in the area. A new, cutting edge steel rolling plant is being built nearby. The Biden administration provided the infrastructure funds needed to upgrade the sewer system and roads in that county; the state provided other incentives. All of the media coverage I have seen credits the state government for winning that plant but said nothing about the critical role the Biden funds played. After all that would undermine one of the media’s favorite frames — that Democrats don’t care about the working class. That framing goes hand and hand with their decades of pushing the blatantly false narrative that Republicans are better for the economy and are the fiscally responsible party."
If you don't know the answer to my question, that's fine. Don't blow it up into something it's not.
🎯👆👆👆👆👆👆
Real wages rising? With 15% inflation a year? I never experienced in TN the 8% peak inflation that the CPI claimed
Bernie seems to have tapped into the perception (not entirely wrong) that, since 1980, Democrats have capitulated to the GOP time and time again, even when they had an overwhelming majority. This same perception includes the apparent heavy promotion of "cultural" issues, while utterly ignoring the exponentially increasing wealth gap iniquity.
Ronald Reagan won a true landslide of epic proportions in 1980. He ran on a whole platform of “government isn’t the solution, it’s the problem” and voters ate it up with a spoon.
And from that time on, with few exceptions, the country voted for the GOP over and over and over again to their own detriment. Yet Dems get blamed for “abandoning the working class.” Americans themselves did that. It’s been a moving three steps back and two steps forward every time Dems get back into office. Constantly left to clean up the mess from the previous GOP administration. And when things don’t get done fast enough or perfect enough for the childish American electorate, they vote the very people who cause the problems back in. I have watched this for nearly five decades. And with each passing year Dems get blamed more. That they have lower approval rating right now than the monster in the WH says it all. Only they have worked to help the lives of regular Americans. Yet they don’t get recognition, only scorn.
I am so tired of it and tired of pundits like Klein and a host of others. It’s always attack attack attack Dems while giving lip service to the real problem and its perpetrators.
This is all totally true. The key victory of the "Reagan Revolution" was the perfection of propaganda. The St. Reagan campaign took pages from McCarthy's red scare, Nixon's "Southern Strategy" along with ideas that Orwell intended to be cautionary rather than a blueprint, and, of course, Goebbels, and it worked. This combined with the never ending drone of reichwing media that came into prominence, such as Limbaugh and Coulter.
That left Democrats floundering for a "message". We ended up with the "New Kind of Democrat" that turned to Wall St. for donations - and gave up influence in return. Clinton with his "welfare as we know it is over" speech. Chuck Schumer pushing through "opt out" 401k's - a giant gift to Wall St., all while pushing the "cultural" issues hard, treating them as if they were the most urgent issues facing the country.
It is true that pundits have bent over backwards to appear "fair and balanced" in the face of the Faux Newspeak monster, but they weren't totally wrong, and neither is Sanders.
In the final analysis, we need to hold >both< party's feet to the fire.
It was the white working class that elected
the union buster Reagan because be promised them he’d do everything he could to make sure that black Americans would continue to be oppressed and white Americans would continue to have economic, legal, and political advantages over the rest of Americans. The Democrats did not abandon the working class. The white working class abandoned their unions to support the continuation of systemic white supremacist policy.
That is true, but St. Reagan didn't just come right out and say it. He used dog whistles like "law and order" and "welfare queens", etc., to sucker them, and it worked. They got suckered, and would remain that way until a sudden catastrophe shocked them out of it.
That catastrophe has arrived. That gives us an opportunity to take the country - and Democracy - back. We have to exploit this crack we've been waiting for over forty five years to appear. Now that it's here, let's not blow it.
I was watching closely during that period and didn’t see people being fooled. I saw them clamoring for more of the same. You’re right that this is a chance for change, but we probably don’t see the odds the same way. If the Supreme Court hadn’t cheated in the direction of the elderbush’s nitwit son to reverse the outcome of the election, things might have gone a better direction. But theh installed the nitwit, and this is the result. I’m doing all I can to get Democrats elected, but it appears to me that the magats are holding most of the cards, and elections a still far away.
I just finished Klein's book Abundance and it isn't attack, attack, attack. It's - this is good - but in order to be successful we need to consider....
I see it as loyal opposition.
There is a problem called MAGA. Propaganda is a big part, lies are a big part...but the timely execution of good policy is also responsible.
🎯
You forget that Bill catipulted to Nafta and China. The way he pushed this country towards globalization was one one of the most masochistic, self damaging political moved of the 20 th century. Never should we have abandoned workers like we did then. I find it amazing how undergrad economics textbooks blindly assume that it is consumers who get all the gains from free trade. As an econ teacher who also imports products I can't believe the idiocy of such modeling. Probably 80% of all gains from trade go to the importer. Importers will always push to price products to the highest tolerable price point possible given the richer country's price level. In a country full of oligopolies rarely ever do consumers truly gain from trade unless the item is simply too labor intensive.
And yet Bernie’s general position is “tariffs are good, but trump’s tariffs are bad.” If he followed Dr. Krugman’s advice about industrial policy and eschewed tariffs, his message would be way more logical and clear.
Did Bernie say that? He shouldn't have. Neither should Whitmer. You're right, Democrats really need to stay on message. Prof. Krugman doesn't entirely eschew >targeted< tariffs with specific goals either. Just the bizarre, extreme, blanket, on again off again, kind of tariffs that the Jackass in Chief is leveling.
So, while Bernie, Whitmer and Prof. Krugman are right that small targeted tariffs with specific goals have their place, nobody should be talking about that right now. The message to stick to is:
"What King Krasnov is doing is asinine. Period. Full Stop."
True, but Hillary never suggested defunding the police. That was something promoted by a small but vocal cadre of extremists - and given more press than was warranted.
The entire Squad was in favor of defunding the police.
"The entire Squad" is not the entire Democratic party.
You wrote that it was "promoted by a small but vocal cadre of extremists." And I wrote that it's some elected Democrats. If they are elected officials, they are not "extremists."
Don't get Paul's attack on Bernie Sanders..."driving away allies", or "playing tRump's game". Sanders and AOC are the strongest out-there advocates for a revitalized Dem party, and taking the fight against tRump authoritarianism right to the public. There have been far, far greater responses to the Sanders/AOC messaging than Ezra Klein and his "Abundance" book tour, so please, Paul, cut Bernie some slack already!
Bernie and AOC should systematically add that Democrats CONSTANTLY fight for the working class whereas the GOP and GOP only systematically does whatever it can to destroy it. Attacking Democrats for not moving fast enough when "we the people" repeatedly give them a Congress controlled by the GOP is not helpful, to say the least...
One problem is that media define "working class" as "not college educated." This puts petit bourgeois (e.g. used car dealers) and lumpenprols into the same pot as the real WC. If we define WC by the narrow "union member," Felon 2024 got the same % as Reagan in 1984. Understanding this changes all the terms of the debate.
Bill Bryson wrote an excellent book about growing up in middle America. In it, he says that when people are asked when were the good old days, they tend to point to the 1950s. He then points out that at that time United States was the only major industrial country that had not been devastated by World War II. Europe, Russia, Japan, Korea and China were all recovering from the effects of the war. The United States was booming. Consequently, we had a period of time when we were the top manufacturer of almost everything, because there literally was no real competition. That scenario will never return. We need to figure out how to compete and live in the modern world.
And of course the good times of the American 50s were not evenly distributed. Married women could not get bank loans, or renew mortgages, or obtain credit cards in their own name (when such cards became popular) without their husband's signature. Blacks were deprived of all sorts of rights. Gays had to keep their closet doors tightly closed. So white men of particular national backgrounds had it very good. Others ... ?
To those who think the 50s were the good old days never bothered to talk to females and other people with any pigment or gays. Nothing was “good” for them.
Bryson's "The Life and Times of the Torpedo Kid" was also a hilarious account of growing up in the 50's. Caught myself laughing out loud throughout the book.
Something similar is true for drug prices. Rather than putting tariffs on drugs, in the hope that production will move to the US and that this will magically make the drugs cheaper, none of which is guaranteed, it makes much more sense to follow direct strategies such as maximally exploiting collective bargaining. It works in the rest of the world so it will work in the US as well.
That would be sane...as where do the INGREDIENTS for the drugs come from, other countries ?? And at the American workers wages ...there go the prices up + the capital included for a new factory (if remotely feasible which it is not ) Unless the USA is a 100 % pariah of the world ... which might be the plan ??? it is not physically possible to manufacture now..in 5-6 years to completion maybe. And what sane CEO will invest their capital to build a new building / machinery with this INSANE administration - on again off again? And IF the election is free and fair..and that is very unlikley now ie Russia ! Then trumps insanity would/should be curtailed in 2026 - this is the biggest issue ....4 years and a 3rd term he plans to STEAL from the people.....aggghhhh. Wake up
I’d like to know the full story on pharma. “Fine chemicals” are active ingredients, “excipients” are the supposedly inert/benign ingredients that are added too make a pill, tablet, gelcap…whatever. Throw in tax havens and the “miracle” of transfer pricing and the industry starts to resemble the auto industry, with fine chemicals, excipients and final product formulation taking place in different countries. I’ve been out of touch with pharma for a few decades now, like since Ireland and Puerto were the tax havens of choice for fine chemicals and/or finished product formulation. So: does China now have a lock on fine chemicals or are they made somewhere else and exported to China (with a huge mark up) for final formulation? I have some sympathy for Senator Warren’s defence of tariffs but mostly I side with Prof Krugman’s argument for industrial policy. I would just add that industry policy has to be industry specific and it can’t be approached without a hard look at tax policy and, for that matter, the possible use of tariffs.
Oh, while I’m at it: doesn’t “explaining” Bernie amount to a kinder, gentler form of sanewashing?
I don't think anyone high up in this administration has read any science paper. And certainly not on Economics.
If they've read anything at all.
If they read, it is in the way that someone's eyes pass over the writing on the cereal box at breakfast, without thought or comprehension.
Except for Pete Heghead. He's too hung over most of the time to do even that much.
"And you know who did try to boost manufacturing with targeted subsides, and had a lot of success? The Biden administration:
Biden also pursued quite tough policies against China that, unlike Trump’s, didn’t punish our own economy at least as much as they punished China’s."
Biden's policies, (remember those:policy) improved the safety and prosperity of the country at large, promoting many new jobs in manufacturing and construction (good paying jobs) and fair taxation, that had it continued, would have increased the redistribution of wealth in America from the billionaire class toward the working class thereby closing the gap further of wealth inequality (prosperity for more people).
Thank you, Dr. Krugman, for all your posts, but specifically yesterdays and todays. Much to think about.
I guess Krugman isn't reading the NYT on vacation and so is missing the war part of the war on tariffs. China cut off the supply lines of heavy rare earth magnets and heavy rare earth materials last week to the world and is establishing licenses the keep them out of American manufacturing plants. All other economic and political analysis pales in comparison. China has a monopoly on refining heavy rare earth materials and close to a monopoly on the heavy rare earth magnets that the world needs to make weapons systems, drones, cars, AI, smart phones, rockets, and more.
Why would China give American manufacturing facilities access to their heavy rare earth magnets without large concessions?
Because the mining and processing of rare earth minerals are so environmentally destructive, only China processes them. Our environmental concerns created a national security problem decades ago that we and the world have ignored. The irony is that the national security rational for Trump's tariff actions is the exact opposite of what he has done. Trump should never have started a trade war with China and has now released the dragon of China's power over critical industries around the world. America has been officially dethroned. (Though China passed us in purchasing power parity years ago.) It's hard to see how Trump's ego will allow him to back down. When it comes to trade war with China, China holds all the cards.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/business/china-rare-earths-exports.html
Do you think America should have found a way to bypass the environmental concerns? Not sure any country should be outsourcing its polluting industries, but it sounds like that was the calculation. Research into less destructive mining and processing seems like a good idea, and I think it is happening.
“Rare earths” in fact are not all that rare; they are found all over the world. What IS rare is China’s capacity (& now near monopoly) to process them. It’s not totally true that this has occurred because China accepts lower environmental standards than Western countries; a large part is because the Chinese government saw the strategic importance of these critical metals and pushed to establish a domestic capacity. The West was asleep and now is hostage. Only Lynas Corp has a lithium and precious metals plant (in Malaysia using Australian-mined lithium). It’s this myopic and short-sighted behaviour by Western governments that is the scandal and rather than fret about tariffs and industrial policy to “stop” China, we should have a coherent plan to put our own strategic house in order.
I had heard that there wasn’t an economic case for mining and processing them. I wonder how quickly it can be done. Dragons all around.
I am not a mining expert but mining in general is inherently destructive.
China would likely have blocked export of heavy rare earths irregardless of Trump's idiocy, as they're facing unprecedented global fence-raising in response to China Shock II. The rest of the world wishes to prevent their remaining manufacturing capacity from being sixed by China's ultra-subsidized new trade offensive.
The Ukraine has extensive deposits of minerals including lithium, titanium and other rare earth minerals that are critical to modern technology. Russia's war against the Ukraine is likely intended to secure future Russian access to those minerals.
https://theconversation.com/us-ukraine-deal-highlights-ukraines-wealth-of-critical-minerals-but-extracting-them-isnt-so-simple-250996
Sorry but Bernie has it right. Until the dems get rid of the Clinton-Obama wing they will continue to lose.
I live in a purple state where only moderate Democrats win except in the deep blue inner cities. We have repeatedly elected moderate Dems to the be governor even though our state legislature is deep red and gerrymanders the heck out of our state.
Yeah, that's the thing. For all the people crying for a new FDR, the fact is that the economic radicals like Bernie Sanders and AOC, much as I love them, only win in deep blue territory. In purple states or states that've turned red, the only Democrats who win are the centrist types.
The fact that in West Virginia, which used to be ground zero for labor radicalism, the only Democrat who's been able to win is an economic royalist like Manchin says a lot.
It says a lot for the effectiveness of GOP propaganda since 1980. Government could be the solution if the electorate voted out the ones who think government should be destroyed and "the market" should control everything.
Sounds like my state.
There’s a new “Biden wing” which combines the best of both the traditional “conservative small-government” democrats and “progressive pro-worker” democrats. Bernie has all the bad features of the latter.
The nostalgists obviously have never worked on an assembly line. In the late 90s, early 2000s I worked in sales for a supplier to the auto industry, calling on engine and transmission plants. The plants were dirty, loud, populated with people who were bored and counting days to retirement when they were only in their 40s. The Chrysler engine plant parking lot was littered with small plastic alcohol bottles that workers imbibed before, during and after work. The times when I was called to work on a line (because of quality issues with our parts), I left at the end of the day greasy, dead tired and head aching from the machinery noise. The men-in-suits who are calling for a return to this environment clearly have never gotten their hands dirty.
I’m not sure the men in suits actually believe humans will be employed on the assembly lines. They probably think automated factories in the US will make them more dollars and will be easier to control. The ongoing question is who will consume the products when unemployment is high thanks to AI and automated factories, and the US economy remains based on trading labor hours for access to goods and services? If the economy shifted to Universal Basic Income there might still be enough consumers to buy the manufactured products, but at this rate there won’t be enough consumers left if we stick with the old labor hours system.
After serving in WWII, my father worked in a factory that manufactured mechanical calculators. When electronic calculators were introduced, his company considered them a fad. The company diversified into other manufactured items (like golf carts), moved some manufacturing to Mexico, and eventually went out of business. This "golden age" of manufacturing left much to be desired. Even if we succeeded in reintroducing manufacturing to that level, the same unresolved issues would arise. Without retraining programs, strong unions and many other supports, workers would face the same problems in a great-again economy.
Because of shortsightedness in American management culture.
GM & Chrysler shortly before their bailouts each had something like *fourteen* levels of management. That still couldn't after thirty years build cars to equal the Japanese.
Manufacturing jobs will not come back to the US due to tariffs.
The jobs will come back ONLY if the US becomes a cheaper place to manufacture, and cheap labour is not the issue.
US is an expensive place to do business. A factory takes a lot longer to construct in the US than in any part of Asia, mainly due to layer upon layer of rules and requirements at municipal, county, state and then federal levels. It's like peeling an onion - it makes your eyes water. And thanks to local corruption and entitled local officials, it's a rotting onion.
The cost of infrastructure is astronomical in the US. An Economist article two years ago suggested that a mile of highway or new railroad takes 4X in the US compared to Germany and 5-6X compared to Italy. The cost is 15-20X compared to developing Asia.
Further, no country can compete internationally when it's healthcare costs are approaching 20% of GDP and yet the health outcome is at the bottom of OECD, where the average healthcare cost is about half of the US.
These last two points might not matter at a micro level, but as an economy, everyone has to pay for these inefficiencies.
Address the macro concerns.
Bridging the labour cost differential through tariffs will NOT bring back manufacturing to the US.
Fully agree that this is not just a labor cost issue.
You might have stopped after "Manufacturing jobs will not come back to the US" as most of the "shortcomings" you list are not going to disappear. They are part of the cost of being a "developed country".
Brexiteers were arguing that relaxation of regulations (employment related, environmental, permits in general, etc) will sort of "make UK great again".
I believe only a small minority in the USA and UK would consider to accept lowering the standards of making business to Asian developing country levels.
With respect, I disagree.
The same Economist article named UK as the most expensive country to build infrastructure and the problems with national healthcare system, which accounts for almost 13-14% of GDP are well known.
In the UK, the current Labour government is focused on lowering the cost of doing business which does not necessarily mean deregulation, but rather "regulations that work". Britain's regulatory environment have given her some of the highest costs of energy, sub-standard transportation system, incredibly high labour costs of dubious productivity etc. A majority of the country now believes that Brexit was an error.
The US is a more dynamic economy than Britain. And I reiterate, that the country would do well to address a number of other structural issues. But for that to happen, the discussion around tariffs and manufacturing jobs needs to get beyond the relative labour costs, which are amongst the least important factor in determining the location of such jobs - Germany being a good example of a very high wage country with a fairly competitive manufacturing sector.
Whitmer's statement that she understood DT's motivation is not the same as saying his tariffs have a point. These are two separate ideas, and I'm surprised you would equate the two. I can understand DT's motivation in deporting immigrants to a Salvadoran gulag; there is no way I would say that DT has a point in doing so. Motivation is one thing; execution (yes, I chose that word deliberately) is quite another.
I've said it again and again: in discussing DT's constantly shifting economic policies we're seeking to find logic where none exists. With DT it's all about showmanship, bombast and revenge for perceived wrongs, not logic. We keep trying to build a house on a pile of feces; DT is a deeply flawed individual who is not driven by morals or logic - his only goal is to promote his brand. In that respect, he has been hugely successful, at least up until now, when the consequences of his behavior or so enormous.