Krugman yells "I told you so" as stimulus fails. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

The left's favorite Nobel prize winning liberal economist is busy on the propaganda trail in a vain attempt to bolster his own image.   Where shall we start?  It is no secret that Krugman is one of the most prominent and well known economists pushing for the Stimulus back in 2008.   With the architect of the Stimulus, Christina Romer, now admitting defeat - the left is mobilizing marketing forces to explain the failure.

In Krugman's recent diatribe, our hero explains the failure and like a 5 year old school boy proudly announces "I told you!".  This little ego stroke points to a previous article where Krugman warns America that the Stimulus appears to be small and therefore could fail.   This is of course fascinating because central planning always fails, so Krugman positions himself in a very fortunate situation, he can always say "I told you" as a stimulus of any size will fail.  Yet, just two months before, he wrote on November 10, 2008.

So we need a fiscal stimulus big enough to close a 7% output gap. Remember, if the stimulus is too big, it does much less harm than if it’s too small. What’s the multiplier? Better, we hope, than on the early-2008 package. But you’d be hard pressed to argue for an overall multiplier as high as 2.

When I put all this together, I conclude that the stimulus package should be at least 4% of GDP, or $600 billion.

Yet in January contradicts himself and determines that his original estimate is not only too small, but Obama's 787 is not big enough? So not only is Krugman never wrong, even though his own predictions were, but the final number is always a function of ever changing economic variables that are constantly being revised! No matter what the final number Krugman produces he can always go back and retroactively point out that the GDP changed or unemployment jumped or the output gap shifted. Do you see the follies of central planning?

Are we really prepared to place our fate into an economic recovery that consists of spending the 'right amount' of money? Whenever an economy relies on a group of intelligent people to contrive the perfect amount of billions to spend, the margin of error is as great as their collective arrogance. In 1759 Adam Smith explained how the invisible hand controls the economy, do we still not get it?

Yet despite these glaring contradictions and almost amusing propaganda tactics, Krugman enjoys immense popularity among those Americans that still believe big government can save us. Save us from problems big government has often a very big role in creating.

Stimulus failed, yes, because instead of coming to terms with America's insane appetite for debt, curbing spending, contracting credit and purging our excesses we spend more, took on more debt and expanded our excesses. A Noble prize winning economist's conclusion? We should have spent even more and taken on even more debt.

Our first step is to discard these Keynesian follies, look past the propaganda and marginalize Krugman's dangerous ideas. As long as Krugman continues to maintain a sizable audience and the ears of politicians eager to comply with spending as the panacea, America will continue to struggle.