Quote:
Originally Posted by DMACM
Here is a quote from 2001-2002 when 'Keynesian' Krugman uses the word 'bubble' to describe his belief in stimulus:
I must be missing it but I thought he is saying a speculative bubble need not lead to a recession if certain technocratic measures are taken, and then he complains that the technocrat did not take those steps.
"B does not need to happen as a consequence of A" is not an endorsement of A.
Just like "economic growth looks mediocre for the future unless [x]" is not necessarily an endorsement of [x] particularly when the GOP controlling POTUS, Senate and the House rules out other alternatives to [x] like more traditional stimulus.
though like I said maybe there is something I am missing in that piece you linked.
edit: btw I think I was mistaken before to say Krugman was predicting a double-dip, he was more generally saying things looked mediocre for the future. His predictions seem to be consistent with either a double-dip recession OR just meh growth.