[SeekAndFind]

Read his arguments. He does NOT concede that he is wrong. In fact he insists he was right.

Krugman observes that after the original stimulus:

* Interest rates DID NOT rise as many feared. He argued that the stimulus was too small. Temporary deficits weren’t a problem as long as the economy remained depressed; we were awash in savings with nowhere to go.

* Inflation did not rise as many feared. Key measures of inflation have fallen from more than 2 percent before the economic crisis to 1 percent or less now, and Japanese-style deflation is looking like a real possibility.

* GDP Growth DID accelerate last year, as the stimulus reached its predicted peak impact, but has fallen off — just as some of us feared — as the stimulus has faded.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE STIMULUS WORKED, BUT IT DID NOT WORK BECAUSE IT WAS NOT APPLIED IN A SUFFICIENT SCALE !!!

ERGO : WE NEED ANOTHER ROUND. A BIGGER ONE AT THAT !!

That’s this Nobel Economics Laureate’s take.

Also, Krugman has lectured that you CANNOT compare a trillion dollar economy to a household budget. That is trying to compare apples with oranges. They are two different things, both in scale and in scope ( not saying I agree with him, just paraphrasing his arguments ).

[hometoroost]

I didn't say he thought he was wrong. But he is wrong he just doesnt' know it. No amount of government spending can create sustained economic growth in the same way that reducing tax rates can. Yes the economy crashed after the stimulus and if the stimulus had been larger the crash would have been bigger and the hole to fill that much larger.

And just because inflation isn't back yet doesn't mean it won't be.