It is peak irony when New York Times economist Paul Krugman accuses fossil fuel defenders of “bad economics.”
The same Krugman who wrongly claimed in 2016 that former President Donald Trump’s election would lead to “a global recession, with no end in sight” has now written a new op-ed headlined: “The Bad Economics of Fossil Fuel Defenders.”
He peddled nonsense: “[C]laims that taking on climate change would be an economic disaster are as much at odds with the evidence as claims that the climate isn’t changing.”
Too bad for Krugman that Transversal Consulting President Ellen Wald Ph.D. reportedly told Axios that President Joe Biden’s climate agenda has kept “‘American [oil] production down.”
Biden’s actions enabled an economic crisis by allowing the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to gain “more leverage over U.S. gas prices, especially Saudi Arabia.”
Biden all but begged OPEC to produce more oil while U.S. production remains stagnant. A climate agenda that hamstrings the U.S. economy by subjecting it to foreign oil cartel manipulation was clearly lost on Krugman.
Krugman railed against the imaginative “inconsistency between conservatives’ expressed faith in the power of private initiative and their assertion that climate policies will paralyze the economy.”
He tried to argue regulations don’t hurt innovation: “Businesses, the right likes to tell us, are engines of innovation and adaptation, rising to meet any challenge. Yet somehow the same people who laud private-sector creativity insist that businesses will shrivel up and die if confronted with new regulations or emission fees.”
Krugman’s logic is like telling someone to find an innovative way to breathe while being strangled. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation noted in 2017 that “federal regulations and their infrastructure are growing and have a disproportionate impact on small business and free enterprise in America.”
The Wall Street Journal noted that Biden’s climate agenda to gut U.S. energy production “means reduced global supply even as demand surges.”
Translation: higher consumer prices, inflation. Gas prices have increased 33.47 percent since Biden took office. Krugman’s own paper admitted in July that rising gas prices were contributing to America’s economic challenges.
National Review Senior Writer David Harsanyi slapped down eco-activists who argue that “going green would be an economic plus.”
Harsanyi questioned what a “complete weaning” from fossil fuels would do to the economy if the slightly higher prices Biden is trying to mitigate are already “threaten[ing] the world’s economic health.”
Harsanyi said that Biden’s “‘net-zero emissions’” plan is in effect “a fantastical, not to mention suicidal, goal.”
Krugman even pivoted off the climate issue to launch an off-topic, fallacious argument that the U.S. economy does better under Democratic presidents than Republican presidents.
Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Brian Riedl recently excoriated a similar notion as “partisan nonsense” and the byproduct of an “ideological cocoon.”
Conservatives are under attack. Contact The New York Times at 800-698-4637 and demand it distance itself from Krugman’s eco-fanaticism.
Read more at NewsBusters
Krugman undoubtedly spends more time cleaning up after soiling himself than he ever knew about any other issue.
The climate movement is a creation of eco wacko activism
https://wp.me/pTN8Y-8be
All those green lunatics hating petroleum fuels should, no, MUST stop using any product used with and by oil and gas RIGHT NOW! No cars, food, medicare, internet, phones or a decent house with cooling or heating.
Show us how you greens can live without those items.
Then, and only then we will talk with you.
Well he would, wouldn’t he. All his investments are renewables ! Hugely. The NY elites and their $pondulax. Never let truth reality and fiscal facts get in the way of media spin to push his investments up!
Once again the New York Slime’s(Al the Sludge that’s Fit to Print)lies to its readers proving again and again why people should just quit reading this liberal leftists rag they have covered up for Stalin and Castro this liberal rag
There is (really) only ONE important point that needs to be discussed in regards to ANY domestic energy transition. Fossil fuels make up 80% of our domestic energy because they are the PREEMMINENT fuel source with the required energy imperatives of energy & power density, required scale & suitable cost. One thing you will NEVER see from guys like Mr. Krugman or other environmental “activists” is a CLEAN, SCALABLE & SUSTAINABLE alternative to REPLACE the fossil fuels they openly “Hate On.” The idea of a “Green Energy” revolution and slogans like “100% renewables by X Date” have no basis in fundamental reality. I have a better “mandate”: Why not openly DEFY GRAVITY by X Date? That is just as valid at this stage. Basic PHYSICS has no regard for ideology.
In summation, this is a HIGH WIRE act without a net. We better start getting some “adults” involved in the energy debate and national policy making. Otherwise, these FANATICS will saw the legs right out from under our domestic economy. HOPE is not a plan. Unfortunately, look no further than the ongoing meltdown in Afghanistan. When you don’t carefully & honestly consider realistic options & formulate a coherent strategy as the overriding themes in your policy prescriptions, you get CHAOS. Without a course change, ultimately, I fear the same fate for the energy arena…