President Trump unleashed a fiery rebuke on Truth Social, targeting Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman. The sharp words came after Krugman criticized Trump’s sweeping new tariffs. The clash highlights a deeper divide over trade policy and economic priorities.
The New York Post reported that Trump’s post on Sunday night called Krugman a “deranged bum” for his tariff critiques. Krugman, a former New York Times columnist who recently moved to Substack, had earlier that day labeled Trump’s tariffs “clearly illegal.”
Krugman’s Substack piece argued that Trump’s tariffs, ranging from 10% to 50%, harm middle and lower-income Americans.
He claimed these policies favor the affluent, particularly the top 10% of earners. His critique frames Trump’s trade war as class warfare in disguise.
“Paul Krugman of the New York Times has been predicting Doom and Gloom ever since my great election success in 2016,” Trump wrote.
He’s not wrong to point out Krugman’s long-standing skepticism. But markets hitting record highs undermine the economist’s dire warnings.
Trump’s tariffs, which took effect last week, target dozens of trading partners. Krugman argues they reverse nearly a century of tariff reductions. Yet Trump insists these measures protect American workers and boost the economy.
“In other words, he has been wrong for YEARS, as ALL markets have been hitting new HIGHS,” Trump declared. His confidence in the market’s strength is clear. Krugman’s predictions, in Trump’s view, have misled investors and cost them opportunities.
Krugman’s Substack article didn’t mince words, calling Trump’s tariffs a policy favoring the wealthy. “Not to be coy about it, what I’ll argue in today’s post is that Trump’s trade war should be seen as part of a package of policies that amounts to class warfare,” he wrote. This accusation ignores the broader goal of leveling the trade playing field.
Krugman’s claim that tariffs disproportionately hurt lower-income Americans' demands is scrutinized. Higher tariffs can raise consumer prices, but they also aim to protect domestic industries. The trade-off isn’t as simple as Krugman’s class warfare narrative suggests.
Trump’s response didn’t engage with Krugman’s legal arguments. Instead, he pointed to the stock market’s performance as proof of his economic success. The disconnect between the two men’s worldviews couldn’t be starker.
“People stayed out of the ‘BEST MARKET IN HISTORY’ [sic] because of this Trump Deranged BUM,” Trump posted, urging followers to “sue them!”
His frustration is palpable, but the call to legal action feels more like rhetoric than a plan. Krugman’s influence, while significant, doesn’t control market behavior.
Krugman’s departure from the New York Times after over two decades marked a shift to independent platforms. His Substack gives him the freedom to critique without editorial filters. But that freedom doesn’t make his tariff analysis gospel.
Trump’s tariffs, while controversial, aim to prioritize American jobs and industries. Krugman’s assertion that they’re “clearly illegal” raises questions about enforcement and international trade law. Yet such debates often get lost in political posturing.
The clash between Trump and Krugman isn’t just personal—it’s philosophical. Trump’s tariffs reflect a protectionist stance, rooted in putting America first. Krugman, meanwhile, sees them as regressive and economically harmful.
Krugman’s long career as an economist lends weight to his critiques, but his track record isn’t flawless. Trump’s point about market highs challenges Krugman’s pessimism. The truth likely lies in a messy middle that neither fully acknowledges.
This feud underscores a broader battle over America’s economic direction. Trump’s supporters see tariffs as a bold stand against globalism, while critics like Krugman warn of unintended consequences. Both sides have points worth hearing, but the noise of personal attacks risks drowning out the policy debate.
