Tornado Alley (PROG)

[B402]

$1.00 an hour labor, no health benefits, no retirement plans, no unions, no environmental regulations.......Boy oh boy this is great!

Krugman crunched the numbers, thats what economists do

Then

In the late 2010s, Krugman admitted that the models that scholars used to measure the impact of globalization in the 1990s underestimated the effect on jobs and inequality in developed countries such as the US.

Just to the tune of about 50 Trillion dollars in a transfer of wealth

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman

Free trade
Krugman's support for free trade in the 1980s–1990s provoked some ire from the anti-globalization movement.[187][188][189] In 1987 he quipped that, "If there were an Economist's Creed, it would surely contain the affirmations 'I understand the Principle of Comparative Advantage' and 'I advocate Free Trade'."[190][191] However, Krugman argues in the same article that, given the findings of New Trade Theory, "[free trade] has shifted from optimum to reasonable rule of thumb ... it can never again be asserted as the policy that economic theory tells us is always right." In the article, Krugman comes out in favor of free trade given the enormous political costs of actively engaging in strategic trade policy and because there is no clear method for a government to discover which industries will ultimately yield positive returns. He also notes that increasing returns and strategic trade theory do not disprove the underlying truth of comparative advantage.

In the midst of the 2009 Great Recession, Krugman made a significant departure from his general support for free trade, entertaining the idea of a 25% tariff on Chinese imports as a retaliation for China's policy of maintaining a low value for the renminbi, which many saw as hostile currency manipulation, artificially making their exports more competitive.[192]

In 2015, Krugman noted his ambivalence about the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership, as the agreement was not mainly about trade and, "whatever you may say about the benefits of free trade, most of those benefits have already been realized" [by existing agreements].[193]

After the 2016 elections, and Trump's moves towards protectionism, he wrote that while protectionism can make economies less efficient and reduce long-term growth, it would not directly cause recessions. He noted that if there is a trade war, imports would decrease as much as exports, so employment should not be strongly impacted, at least in the medium to long run.[194] He believes that the US should not repeat Reagan's 1981 policy on taxes and quotas on imported products,[195] as even if it does not produce a recession, protectionism would shock "value chains" and disrupt jobs and communities in the same way as free trade in the past. In addition, other countries would take retaliatory measures against US exports.[196] Krugman recommended against the abandonment of NAFTA, because it could cause economic losses and disruptions to businesses, jobs, and communities.[197]

In the late 2010s, Krugman admitted that the models that scholars used to measure the impact of globalization in the 1990s underestimated the effect on jobs and inequality in developed countries such as the US.[198][199] He noted that although free trade has harmed some industries, communities, and some workers, it remains a win-win system overall, enriching both parties to the agreement at the national level; a trade war is equivalently negative for the nations involved, even while it may benefit some individuals or industries within each nation.[200]

Immigration
Krugman wrote in March 2006: "Immigration reduces the wages of domestic workers who compete with immigrants. That's just supply and demand: we’re talking about large increases in the number of low-skill workers relative to other inputs into production, so it's inevitable that this means a fall in wages ... the fiscal burden of low-wage immigrants is also pretty clear."[201]

Yeah, Krugman is one of those that sent us down the path......And made a slight underestimation, but at least he understood immigration is just exploitation....Too

And Hell, Milton Friedman won a Nobel Prize too, lol
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman
He just never admitted his 'underestimations'