Opinion articles provide independent perspectives on key community issues, separate from our newsroom reporting.

Letters to the Editor

Krugman wrong on view of Obama economic success

President Barack Obama speaks in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington on Dec. 12, 2016. The president on Saturday, Jan. 16, 2016, proposed a set of changes to the U.S. unemployment insurance system that he says would offer more security to out-of-work Americans and encourage experienced workers to rejoin the workforce, even if it means taking a pay cut.
President Barack Obama speaks in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington on Dec. 12, 2016. The president on Saturday, Jan. 16, 2016, proposed a set of changes to the U.S. unemployment insurance system that he says would offer more security to out-of-work Americans and encourage experienced workers to rejoin the workforce, even if it means taking a pay cut. Jacquelyn Martin AP

Paul Krugman (New York Times columnist, Herald publication, Jan. 16) would have us believe, in spite of the facts, that Obama's critics are wrong. But Krugman avoids, like the plague, numbers from Obama's own Bureau of Labor Statistics! Those figures give the lie to Krugman's and Obama's defense of the president's dumpster-fire economy.

Economic growth has been a sickly 2 percent for Obama's seven-year tenure despite $830 billion in stimulus. Household income is down and food stamp participants up by 70 percent. Federal debt will reach $20 trillion under Obama, thereby doubling what was incurred during entire U.S. history.

Unemployment is not improved under Obama's watch. Workforce participation is at a 38-year low: 62 percent, far worse than what he inherited. The 5 percent figure quoted by the lap-dog media only represents those seeking jobs.

Krugman says Obama's tax hikes were positive but results say just the opposite.

Reagan's tax cuts doubled the treasury's take, produced 20 million new wealth-producing jobs and resulted in the highest tax brackets paying a greater portion paid. Why? Because more people got rich and ended up in those brackets. Reagan's growth rate was more than double Obama's, whose 23-quarter "recovery" was dead last compared to all those since 1960.

For the umpteenth time, demand side, Keynesian pump-priming has been proven wrong. Krugman's faculty-lounge falsehoods must be a record for fibs per column-inch.

John Burns

W. Des Moines, Iowa

This story was originally published January 25, 2016 at 12:00 AM with the headline "Krugman wrong on view of Obama economic success ."

Get unlimited digital access
#ReadLocal

Try 1 month for $1

CLAIM OFFER