It makes you wonder why so many media outlets (including Krugman's own) write straight new stories that contain an implicit premise that Trump is "better on the economy"
1. Krugman revealed he was pressured to “give both sides of the argument” as I recall 2. Noah Smith last week said WaPo wanted him to write a series (!) of articles steelmanning absurdist policies. 3. See above, Sweeney bat signal, etc.
"My boss tells me that the economy is good when he and all the other bosses get tax cuts, and bosses are people to be admired and emulated."
They hide behind the polls. "Voters think Trump is better on the economy" so there's no need for us to examine the facts behind that assumption.
🖐🖐🖐 ooh!! I know the answer!!!
I’ve been thinking about how ‘what’s good for capitalists/billionaires’ & ‘what’s good for the economy’ aren’t the same. Even though the richest people benefit the most from a good economy, they also want the rest of us to suffer—even if it hurts them too. They’re more anti-labor than pro-wealth.