Krugman Won't Comment On Off-The-Record Dinner With Obama

Nobel-Prize-winning economists Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz have been persistent critics of the bailout, serving as thorns in the side of President Obama and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

Obama, who has been criticized for stacking his economic team with proteges of Robert Rubin, the former Clinton Treasury Secretary and former Citigroup chairman considered by many to be partially responsible for fueling Wall Street's obsession with risky investments, even joked about it during a recent New York Times magazine interview.

When columnist David Leonhardt noted that Obama has a "spectrum of Democrats" within his economic policy team, Obama laughed:

"But I don't have Paul Krugman or Joseph Stiglitz."

Later, the president expressed his "enormous respect" for Stiglitz, adding that "I actually am looking forward to having these folks in for ongoing discussion."

On April 27, Obama invited Krugman and Stiglitz to the White House for a roast-beef dinner and to get their input on the financial crisis, reports Newsweek:

Mindful of his predecessor, Barack Obama seems to be trying harder to make sure he hears all sides. On the night of April 27, for instance, the president invited to the White House some of his administration's sharpest critics on the economy, including New York Times columnist Paul Krugman and Columbia University economist Joseph Stiglitz. Over a roast-beef dinner, Obama listened and questioned while Krugman and Stiglitz, both Nobel Prize winners, pushed for more aggressive government intervention in the banking system."

Oh, to be a fly on the wall at that dinner! Ever since, some economic bloggers have been wondering what was actually discussed that night.

Salon's Andrew Leonard wrote:

Not even a whisper of this momentous news made it into Paul Krugman's blog, which seems to me to represent a misuse of the medium. I'm sure the conversation was designated off-the-record, which makes it understandable why we have no blow-by-blow from Krugman, but still: I promise all HTWW readers that if I ever have dinner with the president, I will at least mention it in this blog. What else are blogs for if not to tell people about your cool dinner dates?

Today, Krugman replied with a simple response: None of your business.

Andrew Leonard and Calculated Risk want to know why I didn't blog about dinner at the White House. Um, because the conversation was off the record. [emphasis added]

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[panchovilla]

Off the record is fine with me. Krugman and Stiglitz are citizens with a view that they've made public. There's no presumption that they met with Obama to conspire and rob the U.S. people. (Krugman's blog posts after the dinner are very critical of Obama's government­.) So, if they decide to be discreet about it, that's fine with me.

[Pinchy]

So now all sides means including far left in addition to left wing viewpoints. Great. Wonder how many economissts who support a fiscally conservative approach have Obama's ear?

[mam]

I think Obama now needs to have a dinner with Jonathan Turley, Bruce Fein and John Dean!

[arspar183]

Great point!

[marco01]

I don't think Obama is being "mindful of his predecessor" when he makes a point to listen to a large variety of viewpoints. This implies that he is reacting to Bush, he is not. This is how he operates. It is who he is.

As an American politician, Obama demonstrates a real appreciation and respect for democracy, an appreciation sorely lacking among most Americans and American politicians, esp. Republican politicians. That is to listen to, and really consider, and sometimes even incorporating views you don't agree with in the name of democracy.

[Mauiloa]

It's about friggin' time!

The Obama economic team is so full of Wall Street insiders, they can't see past the forest of bank skyscrapers.

Let's hope that Obama can begin to listen to the many experts who live outside of New York City.

That said, it was many from the so-called "Chicago School" of economist like Milton Friedman who got us into this mess in the first place. So Obama has to ignore these "homies" as well.

[CA4OBAMA08]

The most important thing that needs to happen is we need to get rid of the Federal Reserve. It is a private corporation that has been stealing from American taxpayers since 1913.

www.endthefed.us

Go there. Sign up as a signature collector.

Help restore our nation to its rightful owners. . . . US.!

[Eris23Skidoo]

If you join, you'll get a free tinfoil hat with your membership!

[3M Rocker]

At least he heard them out. Hopefully they convinced him to sack Geithner and Summers. Of course our corporate banking oligarchy probably told Obama they'd take him out if he doesn't play ball.

[LaurieAnn]

I fear you are correct about the corporate banking oligarchy. Our governments in Washington, be they Democratic or Republican, serve only at the pleasure of broad corporate interests. Only an end to corporate personhood will reestablish government for the people and by the people.

[Yanaar Lee]

Agreed. The Corporatacracy is like a multi-tentacled octupus taking everything within reach towards it's mouth. Obama's way of confronting this monstor is to stir up the grasses, to see what snakes are going to slither out, and a few have already shown up.

But, he's in a tough spot,. The Corporatacracy is a viscious foe, and Obama is utilizing all his many interpersonal skills to the max. Listening to Krugman and Stiglitz is a good thing.

[mkellyo]

I'm immensely proud of our president and Paul Krugman and other economists who willingly
meet together to discuss their differences and to listen to each other. No, I don't need to know what was said or discussed. Some conversations benefit from being off the record. But I'm very glad to know that Pres. Obama, Paul Krugman, and Joseph Stiglitz met over a meal to discuss the economy and various strategies to turn the ship around.

[Eris23Skidoo]

Me too.

[Cynth]

Co-signed.

[PSM42]

OVERHEARD

Moles at the restaurant have revealed that they overheard this -

http://exiledonline.com/mobile-execution-bus-fleets-the-solution-to-americas-banker-problem/

Or maybe not. But richly deserved.

[Eris23Skidoo]

I thought their dinner was at the White House....

[ABCD]

Read the article -

On April 27, Obama invited Krugman and Stiglitz to the White House for a roast-beef dinner and to get their input on the financial crisis, reports Newsweek:

[Onepebbleinthelandslide]

Hopefully the President filled Stiglitz and Krugman in on the larger picture, areas that they may or may not have been aware of since they are outside looking in. I’m sure he listened intently to the economists concerns and ideas while providing insights into the administrations overall, long term plans.

Keeping in mind that one of the Presidents many tasks at hand is to re-instill confidence in the markets . . . You can be fairly certain he asked them if they plan to help with that somehow or continue to hinder those efforts.

Nothing like a friendly little chat with the big boss to remind these armchair quarterbacks whose bacon is ultimately in the skillet (who is ultimately responsible for the end results) and whose is not.

[Eris23Skidoo]

Yep.

[HHarvey]

Thank you for the post. I'm glad someone said it. There are many things that perhaps Krugman and Stiglitz were not privy too and maybe just maybe they were made aware of these at this "off the record" white house dinner. I look forward to further posts from Krugman to see what he will say in the future.

[gleeold]

Paul Krugman learns to respect and appreciate the ways Obama handleing those difficult issues. The solutions to the paradoxical policy , some time, cannot be black and white . it could be gray.
It may take time to mature...

You can be sure that , certainly, Presdient Obama has mutual understandings with Paul concerning the economics. Down the road, Paull will do more comments in favor of this administration.

[TJCole]

God, I hope Krugman got through to the President, and how he can decide to serve the people and the general prosperity, and end this banking culture or better cult and predation upon our nation and it's people...!

[mjc]

Too bad it was/is off the record because the transparency that Obama forecast for his administration could be very helpful to those of us who wonder about what happened to the campaign promises. Was Obama criticized to his face? Encouraged to tamp down some of his Wall St representatives on the economic team? Now we know. At least the more progressive approach to solving an economic crisis WAS heard....e­ven if it is not followed by President Obama.

[MossyOak]

Transparency doesn't mean we are privy to every conversation he has.

[jgirl]

MossyOak : You are very right.

[jsgaetano]

I'm curious... what would you have done differently had you known Obama and Krugman were dining together?

Do you feel that transparency in government is a complete and total sham unless Obama discloses who he has dinner with, what they have, where it's served, and what temperature it's served at?

[HHarvey]

Not me. I couldn't give a damn about something trivial like that!

[Harmony1812]

It was a good thing. In order for the president to get open unabashed advice some things are necessary to remain off the record.

[lwaldmann]

I dont care what they said, what they ate or what they drank, I just thank God they had the dinner. No better two men to eat and discuss they economy exist.

Lary Waldman

[teacheng]

Hear hear!

[Estreet1964]

Exactly. There are questions about this whole bailout business that I've been dying for someone to ask Obama. I'm sure those two gentlemen asked them along with about two dozen better ones.

But I still can't believe a guy as smart as Obama listens to Summers, Geitner and Ruben. Hopefully Stiglitz and Krugman were able to enlighten him to be cautious of the counsel of such dubious advisers.

[DoTheMath]

The president and the columnist are both intelligent people, but it seems to me that the president has a more complete, well-rounded awareness of the political reality in which his economic policies must be carried out. I doubt President Obama was unaware of Krugman's ideas before the dinner. I also doubt that Krugman was clueless about the president's political concerns. The area where I suspect some real ground might have been broken is in analyzing the chain of events that would most likely result from taking various approaches. Imagine the two playing a sort of economic chess - if we move this way, Congress will move that way, the markets will move this way, consumers will move that way, etc. Although I suspect that President Obama has already conducted this sort of analysis extensively, I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them gained some perspective from engaging in this type of exercise together.

[pragmaticdallasite]

Indeed!! I think that's exactly what happened, an analysis of the chain of events. Great post, you took the words out of my mouth. (Actually I'm not smart enough to have actually formulated and organized my thoughts that well, but basically.­... yeah that's what I was thinking!!)

[Eris23Skidoo]

Don't forget Joe Stiglitz was there too. You know, the guy who is in agreement with Krugman but less likely to throw a tantrum about it?