Krugman vs. Krugman's sources
Another delicious bit of irony (or perhaps cosmic justice) happened recently when Paul Krugman, the lying weasel, attempted to besmirch the efforts of Congressman Paul Ryan to bring some fiscal order to Washington.
Krugman, as is his want, simply declared that Ryan was a fraud and a flimflam man and that he (Krugman) had the backing of the Tax Policy Center for proof.
Those allegations met the usual corrections from people who can do math and most noticeably from Krugman's own source: The Tax Policy Center! (Note also that the TPC is a liberal-leaning organization run by the Urban Institute and Brookings.)
Given that columnist Paul Krugman relied on Tax Policy Center estimates to level claims that Congressman Paul Ryan is a “flimflam man” and that Ryan’s plan to address our fiscal problems is a “fraud,” I think a defense of the Congressman is in order.
First, it is worth citing budget estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). According to CBO, Congressman Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future Act would dramatically reduce the build up of America’s debt. CBO estimates that his plan would result in a debt to gross domestic product ratio (GDP) of 69 percent in 2020, rising to 99 percent in 2040, and then decreasing to 77 percent in 2060. This is in contrast to CBO’s estimates for its alternative fiscal scenario (which assumes a continuation of current policy) where the debt-to-GDP ratio is 87 percent in 2020, and then rises sharply to 223 percent in 2040 and 433 (!) percent in 2060.
Thus not only is Ryan's plan more fiscally sound than Obama's (and anything Krugman has ever put forth) but Ryan isn't lying about his plan reducing the projected deficit. (You had to know something was up when Krugman just pointed to a number, $1.3 trillion, and declared Ryan was lying.)
The article goes on to detail how Ryan isn't lying about anything and has faithfully represented his plan and his numbers. The TPC writer concludes:
Reasonable people can disagree about whether we should close our long-term fiscal gap primarily through spending reductions or tax increases, but Congressman Ryan’s proposal makes a useful contribution to this debate.
The same can't be said for anything Krugman has written in the past 10 years.
Krugman, as is his want, simply declared that Ryan was a fraud and a flimflam man and that he (Krugman) had the backing of the Tax Policy Center for proof.
Those allegations met the usual corrections from people who can do math and most noticeably from Krugman's own source: The Tax Policy Center! (Note also that the TPC is a liberal-leaning organization run by the Urban Institute and Brookings.)
Given that columnist Paul Krugman relied on Tax Policy Center estimates to level claims that Congressman Paul Ryan is a “flimflam man” and that Ryan’s plan to address our fiscal problems is a “fraud,” I think a defense of the Congressman is in order.
First, it is worth citing budget estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). According to CBO, Congressman Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future Act would dramatically reduce the build up of America’s debt. CBO estimates that his plan would result in a debt to gross domestic product ratio (GDP) of 69 percent in 2020, rising to 99 percent in 2040, and then decreasing to 77 percent in 2060. This is in contrast to CBO’s estimates for its alternative fiscal scenario (which assumes a continuation of current policy) where the debt-to-GDP ratio is 87 percent in 2020, and then rises sharply to 223 percent in 2040 and 433 (!) percent in 2060.
Thus not only is Ryan's plan more fiscally sound than Obama's (and anything Krugman has ever put forth) but Ryan isn't lying about his plan reducing the projected deficit. (You had to know something was up when Krugman just pointed to a number, $1.3 trillion, and declared Ryan was lying.)
The article goes on to detail how Ryan isn't lying about anything and has faithfully represented his plan and his numbers. The TPC writer concludes:
Reasonable people can disagree about whether we should close our long-term fiscal gap primarily through spending reductions or tax increases, but Congressman Ryan’s proposal makes a useful contribution to this debate.
The same can't be said for anything Krugman has written in the past 10 years.