As argued below, Paul Krugman' mastery of words matches his mastery of data (not he got the not really Nobel prize in economics for mastery of theoretical constructs which are neither words nor data). So it is with great schadenfreude that I note that the title of his latest post is infelice.
"A Structral Blast from the Past" is yet another article about how WW II totally blew away the arguments heis fighting. Devastated them, left them a pile of wreckage etc.
I am iTyping in a neighborhood of Rome which was bombed durin WW II (why did we bomb Rome ???). I can't hear the echo of those blasts from the past, and my dad lived in DC at the time ( my mom in Cleveland and don't dare laugh). I won't pretend to be offended, but I will note that Krugman's argument is liquidated when its specious quality is revealed (that means clarified when its scrupulously valid character is revealed - it is a challenge to translate 18 th century English into modern iEnglish).