Despite my politics is far to the left I have always have a soft spot for Nixon. Maybe it’s because of his opening to China, or his hard nosed politics and realism. Someone like Paul Krugman, a liberal democrat, with policies I have more agreements with, yet I dislike those idealistic cold warriors. This morning professor Krugman got me tee off again. I sent the following letter to the NYT after I read his column “Why We Fight Wars”.
“When Professor Krugman asked the question of “Why We Fight Wars”, and stated the total cost of Iraq War exceed 1 trillion dollars, I thought it would be an examination of U.S. policies of military bases all over the world and defense spending exceeding the next 10 countries combined. I wasn’t expecting his conclusion that maybe low economic growth cause leaders to go to war and China may be the threat because her growth of 7.5% is no longer double digit, and U.S.’s growth of 2% is not a worry.”
Maybe I am a little unfair to professor Krugman as most of his column is about Putin and Russia’s meddling in Ukraine. Only in the end he took a swipe at China. He said,
“And if authoritarian regimes without deep legitimacy are tempted to rattle sabers when they can no longer deliver good performance, think about the incentives China’s rulers will face if and when that nation’s economic miracle comes to an end — something many economists believe will happen soon.”
Note the words, authoritarian regime…..without deep legitimacy…..incentive…..economic miracle….. many economist believe.
I guess what’s happening in Ferguson, Missouri is not authoritarian. With overwhelming majority of black population and a mostly white police force and government is legitimate. The incentive for Chinese government is to provide for the well being of Chinese people, and certainly I don’t think not most, maybe not any economist predicted the Chinese achievement for the last 35 years.