Krugman is a joke, who blew his credibility long ago. The only reason he is listened to is simply because is so far to the Left. If a right-wing economist tried spewing the lies, personal attacks, distortions, etc...Krugman does, their career would end.
As for the Nobel Prize, folks, in economics, the Nobel Prize is a joke. Many have called for the abolishment of the Nobel Prize in economics even, because it is too inaccurate of a science.
Most economists are a form of applied mathematician. The economists who saw this crises coming from a mile away, in the greatest number, were the Austrian School economists, the folks whose ideology (deregulation, limited government) is being blamed for this current crises.
As for Krugman, his specialties are trade economics, currencies, and economic geography. He has done nothing in macroeconomics.
You might as well have an electrical engineer who designs radar systems commenting on how to build nuclear reactors. Sure, both are fields of engineering, but both are vastly different. Same with the different fields of economics.
The policies Krugman recommends are what almost destroyed New York City during the 1970s (it almost went bankrupt), have now destroyed California, the world's 7th largest economy, are destroying the United Kingdom, and are going to wreak havoc with all of America eventually at this current rate of spending.
As for whether "Reagan caused it," that is grossly over-simplifying the crises. This crises had many causes, deregulation probably being the least.
Good grief, the most UNREGULATED financial institutions, the private equity funds and hedge funds, are the only funds NOT asking for bailouts of help. They had nothing to do with causing the crises, they are just now suffering the effects.
The much more regulated investment banks, insurance companies, mortgage companies, commercial banks, and mutual funds, on the other hand, now they are all asking for help and in trouble.
As for the financial system prior to deregulation, that topic is like an entire book unto itself. Believe you me, our financial system was no wonderful thing prior to deregulation.
Regulation is needed, but OVER-REGULATION is also a problem.
As for the current regulations, they are plenty adequate, one problem is simply the regulatory agencies, like the SEC, lack the manpower to keep track of all the information put forward by the regulations. The SEC, as is, only has the ability to keep track of about 17% of the financial markets.
In other words, you can regulate until you're blue in the face, it wouldn't make a difference right now.
Regulation and oversight are two different things.
Deregulation INCREASED oversight of many corporations overall. It did not lead to a decrease in oversight, as many believe. The reality is that prior to deregulation, things like shareholder accountability and shareholder value were a complete and total joke.
Wall Street itself was a closed place to rich white guys. Deregulation is what helped LIBERALIZE Wall Street, where we saw the first African-American CEO and the first women on Wall Street and such. None of this would have been possible without deregulation.
