The politician vs. the economist
When Morning Joe debated a Nobel Prize winner, the economist was unprepared for the politician's aggressive style
Topics: Paul Krugman, Joe Scarborough, Economics, Federal Deficit, deficit hawks, Charlie Rose, Politics News
It was billed like a prize fight — “one night only!” Politico wrote — with liberal New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman versus conservative-esque MSNBC host and former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough. The venue: Charlie Rose. FIGHT!
While Krugman was the early favorite among liberals, he seemed unprepared for Scarborough’s aggressive debate style. While the economist seemed to expect an academic and substantive discourse, the former congressman came prepared with opposition research on Krugman’s past statements and debated his foe like he would an opposing candidate in an election. Scarborough was on the attack from the beginning and didn’t let up, even mocking the Nobel laureate at times, and occasionally misrepresenting his own or Krugman’s arguments to make a point.
“Why don’t we try to argue about the substance and not play gotcha?” Krugman said exasperated.
But this was a typical thrust of Scarborough’s. “This is what you said in 2005, ‘Medicare and Medicaid are going to sharply increase the deficit in 2010,’” Scarborough said at one point. “’The deficit might well exceed 8 percent of GDP sometime in the next decade. That’s a deficit that will make Argentina look like a model of responsibility.’”
“Well, I’ve learned a few things since then too,” Krugman had to acknowledge.
Essentially, Krugman said, the recession intervened and now getting back to full employment is more important than fixing the debt. But Scarborough kept at it, bringing up more historic quotes from Krugman to throw in his face.
At one point, the camera revealed a nervous looking Krugman, leaning back in his chair and fiddling with his hands, as Scarbrough quoted Krugman back to him. “You predicted that in ’97,” Scarborough said. He continued, quoting the economist: “‘Why worry about deficits? There’s a huge army on the march; baby boomers are getting older, the enormous generation is going to be turning 65 in 2010, their ranks will swell, the aging population will create huge foreseeable budget problems.’”
Krugman laid out his core argument: Deficits are not an immediate concern, and the government should thus be spending more money to address the real problem of unemployment. “If it wasn’t for me and a few people who are loudly saying, ‘the deficit is not a problem,’” he said, “I don’t think this message that spending cuts are hurting the economy would be getting across at all,”
Alex Seitz-Wald is Salon's political reporter. Email him at aseitz-wald@salon.com, and follow him on Twitter @aseitzwald. More Alex Seitz-Wald.





Sarah Palin Packs Chew, Threatens To Start Dipping On NRA Stage
CUNY Students Not Excited For David Petraeus To Join Faculty
MSNBC Host And 9/11 Truther Toure Rants Against Government Conspiracy Theory
Comments
65 Comments