THE MONEY CULTURE

'Depression Economics'

Nobel Prize-winner Paul Krugman on America's financial crisis

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Vigilance @ 04/01/2009 1:00:41 PM

    Raise, and stabilize, the interest rates. It sounds counterintuitive, but most of the money in the system is concentrated at the top right now. Lenders need an incentive to lend, and borrowers need an incentive to make sure they don't take on foolish loans at teaser rates.

  • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 12/12/2008 10:38:02 AM

    Hey, Yanks. Give the bailout to me, and I will fix everything! No, really. Simply deposit the money, care of Horrible Bastard, in the First Bank of the Terrible Marching Powder, Medellin, Columbia, and I'll take it from there. Hey, it will do exactly as much good as giving the money to AIG, right?

    Act now! If you don't give me a bailout, the economy will collapse, gays will get married, and terrorists will kill you and make your children GAY! For God's sake, HURRY!

  • Posted By: Tan Boon Tee @ 12/07/2008 11:45:45 PM

    Paul Krugman may have been right all this while.

    The November 2008 employment report says with more than half a million jobs lost in the month, the unemployment rate has gone up by 0.2% to 6.7%. Indeed, even without the current financial eclipse, many jobs could have been redundant.

    Inflating unnecessarily to expand the base of employees and growth of infrastructure so as to bloat the image of corporate during the so called ???good times??? in past decades, a good number of companies are over-employing. Now, in bad times, superfluous staff would certainly have to go first. And compulsory reduction of work force will follow gradually. This is the price to be paid in a recession induced depression, as Krugman might want to put it.

    Things can only get worse, at least for the year 2009. There is no need to pretend to be optimistic. Reality is both ugly and cruel. Just face it with calm and dignity.
    (Tan Boon Tee)

  • Posted By: ctc828 @ 12/07/2008 2:30:45 PM

    No bailing out anyone, no blaming presidents, senates, congress just ourselves. We did this now we pay the piper stand up, quit whining and deal with it.

  • Posted By: life2go @ 12/05/2008 8:00:31 AM

    I believe we are in this situation because of greed and some perverted since that people "deserve" everthing they want, not to mention a TOTAL LACK OF RESPONSIBILTY. Housing problem is a perfect example. We had a whole lot of people that bought out of range of what they could afford, and the greed of the lendings as long as they made a buck. Some people got into a crunch because of illness or job loss, but I don't believe that that is the majority. They feel justified that even though they got themselves into the situation, that it isn't their fault and our government should get them out. We were suppose to be the land of opportunity not the land of give me everything I think I should have and not have to work for or take responsibilty for. Then of course there are the CEOs and even politicians drowning in greed and excess. We might be able to put a bandaid on and stop the bleeding, but that won't fix what is wrong with our society.

    A perfect example is the articles on the inaugration. If more now then ever before I would like to see a president who is able to step back realize how economically crippled we are as a nation and realize that spending MILLIONS if not more on a ceremony might not be the best example. Don't ask me to donate money, when every night we are hearing stories about jobloss and the homeless situation. If they didn't have to have such elaborate ceremonies maybe they wouldn't NEED to turn to the lobbyist and the rich for the money, especially since nothing ever comes without strings attached. When did being HUMBLE become such a bad idea?

    I'm not saying I'm not in debt like most of the country, but I take responsibilty for it. It is no ones fault but my own, no one held a gun to my head and made me do it. Peer pressure and trying to keep up with the Jones is not a valid excuse.

  • Posted By: Robert A. Eubanks @ 12/03/2008 3:32:25 PM

    When the titanic is sinking you evacuate and get on a new ship. Our economy would be better off if we allowed new corporations to replace the old broken ones. If our government must fund corporations, I say we fund new ones that can operate fundamentally different than the dinosaurs on the verge of extinction we have now. There has to be a consequence to running your company poorly. I have seen how government bailouts (welfare) destroys the initiative in the lives of everyday people. Once we begin to have corporations in our society with a welfare mentality, we should all watch out.

    • Posted By: er123 @ 12/04/2008 7:32:48 AM

      Many died in the sinking Titanic because the Captain did not bother to bring enough small boats for all the passengers, thinking it was unsinkable. Out in the sea, time was short and those not on the boats would surely die as it did.

      As with our economy, we are not out in the sea but inland. We have time to correct it if we change our ways quickly and work together.

      But as we are always warned whenever hurricanes comes, we have to prepare food, water and others for at least three days before relief comes. Naturally, those who prepared for economic crisis may survive. As hurricane makes a touchdown, people hunker down and wait it to pass by, surviving with their food storage. Bailouts will take long time to take effect. When the hurricane passed by, it is time to go out and and rebuild.

      But you are right. The government must fund new corporations and not give new money to the old and corrupt corporations.

      A wise man says, 'And no man put new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But the new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved."

      Giving new money (bailouts) to the failed and corrupt financial firms will only corrupt them more and waste the money. Like the AIG, that as soon as they got the $87 billion from the government, they spent almost half million in a resort hotel with food and wine.

      But the government and Wall St firms are friends. What are friends for?

    • Posted By: jzy02v @ 12/03/2008 4:36:09 PM

      Your analogy of comparing our current situation to the sinking of the Titanic is not a good one primarily because the Titanic was not old and obsolete. It was brand new, it was on its maiden voyage, it was the very latest technology of its time, but it was defective, nevertheless. The more usefull lesson from the Titanic analogy is that: although we may replace the old ship with a new one, we are just as likely to be faced with something that is also defective, just in a different way perhaps. Hence, we have just as good a chance of fixing things by just fixing what's wrong with the old ship as we do by replacing it and with potentially a whole lot fewer unforeseen consequences.

      • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/03/2008 4:50:13 PM


        There is a point in time when all hands are bailing out the old ship( S.S. Unreliable ) ; yet, the old girl continues to sink.

        There is a point in time when Captain CEO is known to be a loser.

        Robert is correct !

  • Posted By: Greg the Third @ 12/04/2008 4:40:35 AM

    One of the most distressing problems I see here is the complete vacuum of leadership from our Congress and Executive. In order to restore confidence they need to show that they understand what went wrong, punished the culprits responisble, and then write intelligent regulation to prevent this from ever happening again. This 10 trillion dollar shadow financial system collapsed because it was an unregulated bubble that imploded upon itself. It should not have been a shadow system abd it should have been regulated. But even now I do not see that any steps have been taken to reign in this process so that it does not re-create itself. Worse yet the same insitution and corporate managers are largely still running their ships even after they have been run into the ground and bailed out by the government to keep them afloat.

  • Posted By: leepdx @ 12/04/2008 2:23:01 AM

    Although there is much mention of the fact that our economy has been based on Americans going shopping for years now, there has been little thought as to what would happen when we stopped shopping. Either because materialism has become an unsatisfying lifestyle or we no longer have the money to spend this day was bound to come.

  • Posted By: nawawimohamad @ 12/03/2008 11:39:46 PM

    The problem with the US economy is the US administration itself. Since Bush is a lame duck, he is not eager to really give full attention and commitment on the economy. Leave the s** to Obama. But unfortunately his interests in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are still haunting him, he has no qualms in spending and doing whatever necessary on the wars to try to safe whatever legacy that still exist.

  • Posted By: dspencer14 @ 12/03/2008 3:03:48 PM

    I think the federal government should take the 700 billon and devide it up between all tax pax payers over the age of 18.You have to make less than 75,000 single or 120,000 married. The rule is you have to spend all of it and you have to purchase 1 new car. I think it would stimulate the economy better than just bailing out company's if people had in the neighborhood of $100,000 to blow then that would put people back to work because somebody wold have to replentish all the products everyone is buying. God Bless America!!!!

    P.S. It's time to bring our jobs from China!

    • Posted By: Texas Jake @ 12/03/2008 7:00:59 PM

      First, the amount is not 700B, it is 813Bafter pork was added to corrupt the hold-outs, Then, the money is half gone now, and no oversite committee in sight... The money went to buying up small banks, and not to fortify lending credit as perscribed and agreed upon. Please do not waste any more time wishing our government will do the right thing. Lastly, I will not buy another car or truck until I am offered alternate fuel options.

    • Posted By: RandyHiggins @ 12/03/2008 3:40:45 PM

      'Our' jobs in China pay about 50 cents an hour, is that okay with you? Not too many people are going to work for that in the USA.

  • Posted By: BerryLane @ 12/03/2008 6:30:42 PM

    Professor Krugman, this is right-on-the money: "The most obvious thing is capital requirements, which is basically limits on the degree of leverage. " The problem is that the banks, investment banks and traders (including hedge funds) don' t want any part of it and will do all they can to avoid de-leveraging. Of course, it's counter-productive as far as recovering from this debacle is concerned; but, it's the name of the game and has been for a long, long time.
    The Fed could raise Reg. T margin requirements but, surprisingly, hasn't done so.

  • Posted By: VoiceOne @ 12/03/2008 6:01:34 PM

    ...............................It is interesting that the state of the economy was not called a Recession until this month, almost a whole year after it was diagnosed that America was in Recession. It is obvious that the failed Bush Administration was being protected by economists who were politically biased. But if the "R Word" was used that would have made the Republican McCain Campaign totally unecessesary because the GOP would not been able to go over the 45% vote percentage no matter how much deception they threw at us!!!

  • Posted By: bannister @ 12/03/2008 5:23:49 PM

    This is the man who gave economic advice to Enron and he's given a Nobel Prize? Someone please tell this ideologically bankrupt Socialist to keep his nose out of our affairs and just GO AWAY...

  • Posted By: efcondon @ 12/03/2008 3:43:51 PM

    Isn't it a joke to throw money at a problem? It's not funny when someone tells you to toss your money. And I would get down right violent if someone took thousands of dollars from me and tossed it in. So why is it OK for the Government to throw our money at a BANKS problem. The way they gouge the working poor and middle class, they should be rolling in money. But since they can't take more directly from us, they want to take our tax money.

  • Posted By: RandyHiggins @ 12/03/2008 3:37:16 PM

    This is clear and comprehensible. I hope the book is required reading for every congressman. Why all the drama by politicians and rich beggars? I am convinced that Angelo Mozillo is the worst banker, and he persuaded too many people to pick up a condo in Las Vegas or Florida so that they could reap the profits in the not too distant future. That's it, no more to be said. We're going to have to deal with all the get rich form reat estate consequences now.

  • Posted By: dewcooper @ 12/03/2008 2:35:00 PM

    The financial institutions need to be allowed to fail, to be responsible fore their own ineptness, and the billions of dollars that the fed is handing out needs to go back to its rightfull owners - the US taxpayer. Why should we reward Citigroup and Lehman for being total idiots? The ideal that we just need to keep throwing money at a problem, whether it is healthcare, education or banking HAS NEVER WORKED.

    • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/03/2008 3:33:22 PM

      The government helps all; except , the American tax payer.

      The government steals from the poor and gives to the rich.

  • Posted By: djwilljames13 @ 12/03/2008 2:56:32 PM

    Um???..no. The solution is to buy these companies. Why are we negotiating with them for 20, 25, 30 billion or whatever, when the companies current market share is around a measly 3 billion dollars. Just buy the companies for 3 billion and let ???the people??? who are saving these companies (the taxpayer) thus own these companies. Appoint a CEO with a philanthropist interest to run the company for the next 3 years with a modest salary (75K?) over the next 3 years. Guess what? There are actually people out there ready to step up to turn our economy around ??? but we continue to haggle with self-serving greedy individuals. Just buy these auto companies and cut these people out of the equation. We can???t let these companies fail unfortunately, letting the market run its course with throw us into a depression like we have never seen before.

    • Posted By: tired and old @ 12/03/2008 3:31:04 PM

      WHY ?

      The government would only screw it up.

  • Posted By: Tea6 @ 12/03/2008 3:28:09 PM

    CALLING ANDREW JACKSON !!!
    Hank Paulson, aka Nicholas Biddle, is trying to turn the middle class of this country into a peasant class.
    Instead of bank wars and hard money, we have free trade fanatics trying to outsource everyones job. At the same time they are using the government trough to get rich with bailouts. Time to horse whip some people and take our country back.

  • Posted By: gamediva2112 @ 12/03/2008 3:28:09 PM

    Estimated Pop on July 1, 2007 was 301,621,157 according to the US census bureau. If you divide that into 700 billion that would come out to about $2,310 a person, regardless of age or income, or about $9,240 for a family of four. Please check my math. If my math is correct, that is about 1/3 of a car per family. My family would definitely spend that money over the course of six months to a year, but probably not on a car. I just lost my job at a GMC-NISSAN-CHRYSLER dealership and we would use that to supplement us until I find a decent job again. The problem is right now that there is a HUGE number of low wage jobs around $7.00 but very few above that. I am reluctant to take one of those because of the possibility of getting stuck there. While that may be inevitable, such a stimulus would certainly prolong that inevitable for my family.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse