Politics determines who has the power, not who has the truth.
Paul KrugmanRead
The great thing about fiscal policy is that it has a direct impact and doesn't require you to bind the hands of future policymakers.
Interpretation
Fiscal policy can be effectively altered to influence the economy without constraining future policies.
In this quote, Paul Krugman highlights the flexibility of fiscal policy in making immediate economic changes. Unlike policies that create rigid frameworks for future decision-making, fiscal policy can be adjusted by current leaders to address economic issues directly, allowing for adaptive governance in response to changing circumstances.
In practice
This quote can be used in a presentation discussing the effectiveness of current fiscal policies in the economy.
Politics determines who has the power, not who has the truth.
Our popular economics writers, however, are not in the business of giving their readers a ringside seat on the research action; with no exception I can think of, they use their books to do an end run around the normal structure of scholarship, to preach ideas that few serious economists share. Often, these ideas are not just at odds with the professional consensus; they are demonstrably wrong, and sometimes terminally silly. But they sound good to the unwary reader.
The raw fact is that every successful example of economic development this past century ... has taken place via globalization.
Wealthy Americans who benefit hugely from a system rigged in their favor react with hysteria to anyone who points out just how rigged the system is.
It’s not about the budget; it’s about the power...So will the attack on unions succeed? I don’t know. But anyone who cares about retaining government of the people by the people should hope that it doesn’t.
The economics profession went astray because economists, as a group, mistook beauty, clad in impressive-looking mathematics, for truth.
Regulation has gone astray. . . . Either because they have become captives of regulated industries or captains of outmoded administrative agencies, regulators all too often encourage or approve unreasonably high prices, inadequate service, and anticompetitive behavior. The cost of this regulation is always passed on to the consumer. And that cost is astronomical.
I've never believed protectionism of that kind will lead us anywhere. I think you can have certain specific rules for engaging with India.. for example, not allowing mineral resources to be taken out of the country.. but there is not a shred of doubt in my mind that when you open an economy you should do it in totality. Foreign investment adds a sense of competition; we should see this as a wake-up call to modernise and upgrade. Companies that do not will undoubtedly die.
All systems are capitalist. It's just a matter of who owns and controls the capital -- ancient king, dictator, or private individual. We should properly be looking at the contrast between a free market system where individuals have the right to live like kings if they have the ability to earn that right and government control of the market system such as we find today in socialist nations.
If farming were to be organised like the stock market, a farmer would sell his farm in the morning when it was raining, only to buy it back in the afternoon when the sun came out.
If you don't talk about families, then it's easy to disembody subprime mortgages and asset securitization and unemployment rates without remembering that every one of those numbers is a million families.
Economic policies absorb almost the entire attention of government, and at the same time become ever more impotent. The simplest things, which only fifty years ago one could do without difficulty, cannot get done any more. The richer a society, the more impossible it become to do worthwhile things without immediate payoff.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.