The New York Times’s inveterate Bidenomics apologist Paul Krugman has a knack for reminding the world that former President Donald Trump lives rent-free in his head.
Krugman went on an unhinged rant against Trump, “an actual madman, a former president who tried to overturn an election and may yet destroy U.S. democracy.” It seems Trump set Krugman over the edge with his Aug. 17 Fox Business interview when he suggested a 10 percent tariff on imports from foreign countries and using the revenues “to pay off debt.”
Trump’s plan also included playing a proverbial arm wrestling game by imposing matching tariffs on countries where U.S. exports are likewise hit with exorbitantly high tariffs, such as in India. Krugman devolved into full meltdown mode: “Given the existential threat he poses to America as we know it, Donald Trump’s economic ideas aren’t the first thing on most people’s minds.”
Aside from his nonsensical bluster about Trump supposedly being an “existential threat,” Krugman wore his blatant hypocrisy on his sleeve. While pontificating to his readers, Krugman bypassed the fact that Trump and the current president he shills for like a broken record have similar trade policy stances.
AGF Investments Chief Policy Strategist Greg Valliere pointed out the presidential policy similarities on trade in an Aug. 28 blog. Specifically, Valliere noted that Biden “HAS MAINTAINED much of Trump’s hardline [trade] policies toward Beijing; the Trump tariffs have remained in place.” Valliere concluded that “both [Biden and Trump] are willing to use the tariff weapon as the U.S. seemingly has embraced a tougher trade stance ahead of the 2024 election.”
But according to Krugman, it’s “Trump’s idea [that] isn’t just extreme,” but also “mindless.” [Emphasis added.]
What’s even more ridiculous is that Krugman concedes that Biden isn’t a “free trade purist,” but proceeds to justify his similar hardline trade policies as emblematic of “economic nationalism”:
Biden’s people aren’t free-trade purists; they’re pursuing industrial policies that include significant buy-American provisions — their policies are, in fact, nationalist enough to generate a backlash from some economists and protests from some of our trading partners. But their economic nationalism serves well-defined purposes. Some of it is intended to enhance national security by promoting crucial technologies, some to solidify political support for essential climate action and catalyze private investment in green energy. You may or may not approve of Biden’s break with free-trade orthodoxy (I do), but it’s certainly not stupid, [emphasis added].
Trump’s trade stance, despite demonstrably sharing similarities with Biden’s, “is stupid,” according to Krugman’s inconsistent worldview, but Biden’s is “certainly not stupid.” Sure, Krugman. “It’s hard to see any rationale for [Trump's] tariff beyond the crude idea that imports are bad and that a tariff would reduce the trade deficit (which it probably wouldn’t),” Krugman complained.
George Mason University Distinguished Service Professor of Law and International Trade Stuart Malawer addressed the question of whether Biden’s trade policy stance differed significantly from Trump’s in a 2022 paper. He answered with a resounding “no”:
I consider Biden’s trade policy to be Trump without the tweets. They both rely on unilateral measures and broaden protectionist ones. In fact, Biden not only relies upon Trump’s actions but also has broadened them,” [emphasis added].
Hey Krugman, define the term “double standard.”
Conservatives are under attack. Contact The New York Times at 800-698-4637 and demand it distance itself from Krugman’s shilling for Bidenomics.
