Search for a command to run...

Timestamps are as accurate as they can be but may be slightly off. We encourage you to listen to the full context.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman joins Prof G Markets to discuss his concerns about the 2025 economy, describing it as "a very bizarre economy" driven by the collision of massive tariffs with an AI boom. (09:23) Krugman explores the affordability crisis, revealing that while real income has technically increased since pre-pandemic levels, Americans face significant challenges with housing costs, interest rates, and a frozen job market where finding new employment has become extremely difficult. (12:07) He warns about America's massive deficit spending of $2 trillion annually and questions whether the country remains a "serious" nation capable of fiscal responsibility. (22:21)
Paul Krugman is the distinguished professor of economics at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and was a columnist for The New York Times from 2000 to 2024. In 2008, he won the Nobel Memorial Prize in economic sciences for his contributions to new trade theory and new economic geography, and was previously a professor at MIT and Princeton University.
Scott Galloway is a professor of marketing at NYU Stern School of Business, serial entrepreneur, and host of multiple podcasts including Prof G Markets. He recently appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show and was recognized early in his career when he attended Davos at age 29.
Ed Elson is co-host of Prof G Markets and was recently named to Forbes' 30 Under 30 list. He also co-hosts another podcast called "Rage of Moderates" and brings a younger perspective to economic analysis and market trends.
Krugman identifies two major artificial supports: massive deficit spending ($2 trillion annually) and AI capital expenditure that represents 1-2% of GDP. (32:47) While these forces are keeping the economy afloat, they create dangerous dependencies. The deficit spending occurs during what should be normal economic times, not during war or recession, suggesting underlying economic weakness. Meanwhile, AI CapEx decisions by roughly "10 guys" can dramatically impact the global economy, creating unprecedented concentration of economic power.
Despite real income being slightly up since pre-pandemic levels, Americans face a genuine affordability crisis in key areas that define middle-class status. (11:37) Housing costs for first-time buyers have skyrocketed, interest costs are significantly higher, and the job market has become "frozen" - existing workers are fine, but finding new employment is extremely difficult. These factors matter more than traditional poverty measurements, which Krugman describes as outdated bureaucratic tools rather than meaningful economic indicators.
Unlike the optimistic 1990s tech boom, today's AI investment surge lacks public enthusiasm and is driven largely by "billionaires whose best days are behind them." (37:58) Tech leaders who were once celebrated as liberation tools are now viewed as "greedy monopolists," leading them to seek AI as a path back to former glory. This creates a bubble mentality without the supporting consumer sentiment that sustained previous booms, making it more fragile and politically unpopular.
Krugman observes there's "nobody to talk to" in terms of actual economic policy within the current administration - no one is seriously thinking about AI's economic implications. (34:47) Instead, policy has been replaced by tech billionaires offering "gifts" and seeking favor through what amounts to bribery on an unprecedented scale. This represents corruption "on a different scale" from even the Gilded Age, with "billions of dollars in personal rewards for the first family" being something new in American history.
While countries like Britain managed 250% debt-to-GDP ratios successfully, it was because markets believed they were "serious" nations "run by people who are not idiots." (20:56) Krugman applies "Stein's law" - "if something cannot go on forever, it will stop" - but warns that America's changing governance character raises questions about whether historical assumptions about US fiscal responsibility still apply. The debt becomes dangerous not at any specific number, but when markets lose confidence in America's seriousness.