we also caught up with paul krugman. he rejects the threat of inflation getting out of control. take a listen. >> this always comes back to this fundamental asymmetry, where interest rates are at zero. if fiscal policy falls short, than the fed has a very hard time making up for that. if fiscal policy over shoots, the fed mechanically has very easy tools to use to bring ed in. we are into the question of whether the fed will be afraid to do what is necessary should this turnout to be a really huge boom. i am not particularly worried they will fall short. annmarie: you can watch more from that interview, plus a conversation with larry summers, on "wall street week." joining us is the senior portfolio manager at state street. thank you for joining us. i want to see if you can thread these stories together for us. all these banks saying they will tolerate higher bond yields. this has to do with them seeing economic growth and the world coming out of the recovery. do you think the central banks are getting it right? guest: w

with senator maisie hirono and paul krugman. jelani cobb on the staft a republican party that didn't lift a finger for an american rescue. all that and big news on the new covid treatment and new cdc guidance for people who have already been vaccinated. when "all in" starts right now. >>> good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. well, it looks like it is really actually happening. the most shockingly aggressive rescue bill of my lifetime is now very likely to be signed into law. saturday after an all-night session, senate democrats passed the $1.9 trillion covid relief package in a strict party line vote. democrats all voted yes. republicans all voted no. because senators made some changes to the bill, it now has to go back to the democratic controlled house which is expected to pass the identical senate version this week, possibly as early as tomorrow. so the bill would then go to the president, president biden for his signature. take a step back. we're in the early part of march. right? we're not at the 100-day marker yet.

paul krugman won the 2008 nobel peace prize. he is now columnist of the "new york times".and he worked under president obama. what i am struck by i think in my adult lifetime this is the first fiscal policy where benefits go primarily to the poor. >> yeah, this is definitely -- i can't think of anything like this. maybe you have to go back to the new deal to see anything like this. we really don't have a fiscal expansion on this scale, a spending expansion on this scale. you have to go back to the korean war to find anything of this magnitude, and of course that was about a war and this one, the benefits are concentrated in the bottom half, and to an important extent, the bottom half of the distribution. >> larry, you have dealt with the politics of this kind of thing, both under the obama and clinton years, and i'm thinking of the obama stimulus which got not a single republican vote. what do you think the calculus of republicans is here? two-thirds of the country seems to approve it. what's going on? >> i'm not going to try to speak for republicans, fareed. look, there i

i'll talk to two of the world's foremost economists, larry summers and paul krugman. then, what is the quad? president biden met with the leader of japan, india and australia, a new block focused on deterring china. will it work? i'll talk to an expert. and the biotech revolution brought us to the covid 19 vaccines more swiftly than anyone imagined possible. it is given us the ability to edit genes to cure diseases and the innovations on the horizon are even more extraordinary. i will ask walter isaacson to describe what is next. >>> but first, here is my take. within hours of being inaugurated, president biden began to roll back donald trump's most egregious immigration policies including the so-called muslim ban which biden called a stain on our national conscience. he signed six actions geared toward a more humane and generous policy and outlined a proposal for comprehensive immigration reform including a path to citizenship for more than 10 million undocumented migrants living and working in america. the biden administration has begun the work of reversing literal

not entirely, but there are some elements of the arguments of paul krugman which proved to be right.nd thus the member states, the member states and thus the european commission, were too budget—conscious, which is quite normal because in normal times, the commission, as was always the case, is accused of spreading money away without taking into consideration what is happening on the ground. so the european union was too budget—conscious whereas others were not because they wanted to fight against the pandemic development, which the european union did not do to the full extent. but it's always the same story — the commission is accused to be... ..to spread helicopter money around, and that's why the european commission had inside her brain this budget break. and that was a major mistake, which should not have happened. but it happened. let's get to the vexed issue of relations between the eu and britain in the light of the vaccine roll—out. there was a very interesting headline some weeks ago — i'm sure you saw it — in germany's leading newspaper, bild, which said, "brits, we envy yo

sounds like paul krugman circa 2009. it is this.of the day if we overdo it a little bit, downside risk is minimal. if we underdo it, the downside risk is enormous. that did sink in broadly past just like little -- you know, the corp.er of econ twitter where people debate this. >> i have to say, i spent moets of my career as a pundit, you know, making arguments that turn out -- not always right but arguments that turn out to be right and vindicated in principal but never have it right in realtime. this time the democrats actually acted on it. people actually learned the lesson. and did the right thing. so i mean, it is -- i'm pinches myself wondering if this is a dream because we are responding more or less adequately to the crisis at hand. >> one thing i think about now as we watch the vaccinations which are right around 2.2 million a day, we conceive of a herd immunity and the rescue money, i'm not an economic prognosticator but the second half of the year could be really good. >> yeah. >> there's pent-up demand. it is not a natura

problem of this what what the real issue is here because a lot of people the new york times like paul krugman say don't worry about it's just money we owe ourselves can explain what the problem is and yeah go ahead and write so in order to sustain this huge debt load you have to keep interest rates near 0 percent and the access to those 0 percent interest rates it's a political. it has to pen's i clipped political connections and that's the transformation of america from a market led economy a free market lot of qana me to crony capitalism because the entire economy sense it's mostly debt as you're pointing out 234500000 percent debt to g.d.p. it's all about who has access to the cheap interest rates the 0 percent interest rates and that increasingly are this oligarchies of kleptocrats and they and the what they do with that with that credit availability at 0 percent is that they would buy other competing companies and up with a huge concentration of wealth you know great examples the e.c.b. right they loan the head of louisville toll l v m h money from the central bank at 0 percent interest

there's a new york times column by paul krugman. he was talking about how just because there is a boom from the stimulus doesn't mean there will be structural, longer-term change out of this secular stagnation without additional spending. this is the debate front center. jon: it's the tug-of-war between that and the longer-term story on whether we return to crack -- twined -- trend growth. and one is that around 2%? ? tom: we will go to michael jp morgan. another phrase for it is potential gdp. no one has a clue what the when of it is. cdc headline came out about double vaccines and i was sitting in a restaurant that is barely getting by, the number two value meal yesterday, but they were almost in tears over what the cdc said yesterday. that is the good news driving this. lisa: the idea they came out with such a timid guidance here. it goes to the stick and carrot you have been talking about repeatedly, this idea of if you tell people it is all clear and they can live their life, people get vaccinated so we can end this sooner. if

paul krugman wrote a piece, i think in "the new york times," and the title of it was, "will stagnation follow the biden boom?" he talked about the fact that once this big spending program, these programs are behind us, we will be back to stec killer -- back to secular stagnation. do you see a kind of souffle economy where we pump it up, it rises, and once the hot air has departed, everything basically falls flat? mark: that can happen, especially if you embark on a big spending program and then it ends. of course you're going to have a slowdown. you have employment and all of the rest of it. but just remember, these infrastructure programs take years, and that is the good news. it will continue for quite some time. guy: got to ride that one then, maybe. got to be in the right place. we have already started to discuss the impact on emerging markets. probably should dig in more detail into what is happening in china. mark mobius of mobius capital partners is going to stay with us. we will talk about what is happening in china. you saw the impact overnight. the csi down again despite the

paul krugman saying this alone not enough to get us out of secular stagnation, an argument that is hotly debated and there will need to be follow on spending. that is where the emphasis will be. at 1:00 p.m., the treasury department is starting their bonanza of debt -- this -- debt sales. the key question, jon, who will be the buyers? will it be the fed? will he be local investors? will it be foreigners? who will come in and have the opportunity at 6% gdp plus or to the moon? potentially 9%, 10% gdp in the u.s.. are we justified for these incredibly low yields given the huge disparity in growth? tom: they are all going to show up. jon:, i want -- jon, i want to talk about the big move. weaker, 2.9 standard deviation. that is a big move. jonathan: southern europe, the dollar-there are -- dollar-lire, 3% move. a stronger turkish lira. dollar-lire, growth equities, treasuries, still in the same bucket, the same trait over the last 12 months. tom: gdp numbers are going to come out, reshape earnings, and to me and to our guests here, the mystery is q3 and q4. jonathan: let's bring in our gues

let's listen to what nobel prize-winning economist paul krugman told chris hayes tonight about this legislation. >> i'm pinching myself, wondering if this is some kind of a dream, because we really are actually responding, more or less, adequately to the crisis at hand. >> congresswoman dean, that is just something economists are not used to seeing. >> no, we don't hear that. and we don't talk about the poor often enough, so i appreciate that last conversation you just had. when you and rachel were talking a moment ago, i could see in you a sort of joy that you are getting to do the job you are here to do. i feel that very same way. in passing, in crafting, in honing this legislation and fighting for it and passing it, this is the stuff i came to d.c. to do. we saw what the trump administration tried in their huge tax break to the wealthy with the hope that that would invest somehow in greater growth, in gdp down the road and trickle down to those who were less fortunate. that didn't work. now we get to do what we progressives came to d.c. to do, which is to invest at the bottom, and that will

with senator maisie hirono and paul krugman.ani cobb on the staft a republican party that didn't lift a finger for an american rescue. all that and big news on the new covid treatment and new cdc guidance for people who have already been vaccinated. when "all in" starts right now. >>> good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. well, it looks like it is really actually happening. the most shockingly aggressive re

>> you know my intro to macroeconomics professor was paul krugman in the 90s. he was out there when he taught that class. even he doesn't go for the modern monetary theory because it is going to catch up with you at some point. i know inflation has been low. inexplicably low for some of us for quite some time but we've gone from deficit 4% of our gdp, to a deficit like 30% of our gdp. i wonder if it is like a sugar high, or caffeine high, if we don't spend another $6 trillion next year, what is it like to come down for the economy? you mentioned the city of cincinnati. every city has a money hole. theirs is a streetcar and, maybe they will bail out their streetcar but every community like county governments are seeing one year their annual revenues, i'm afraid they will build ballparks. then governors say you can't even play in the ballparks. charles: but here, the reality is, though, as you say, another 6 trillion next year maybe they will! let me play devil's advocate for a moment because i like to ask gop guests how they counter the message of free money. ta

politics, and more than that, i think the people, the reason that you see steve so excited and paul krugman who was just on my show, is that it feels like we drove a stake through a certain kind of antiwelfare austerity politics that was incredibly powerful for four to five decades, you know, from reagan's welfare queen to this bill, that the good guys, for lack of a better word, won the intellectual, ideological and political fight about what government can do when we are underutilizing our resources. and in some ways, it's both the details of this bill, fact that it's going to cut child poverty in half, the fact that adult dependents will be able to get checks, which is massively helpful for people. there's help for pension funds that were going to be in trouble and state and local vaccination, all that stuff. but the kind of marking of an era of transition to the politics of government support and investment to me is as significant as anything that i've seen in the time of current politics. >> government actually being expected to help and doing so in a way that is meaningful and targete

look at this, from paul krugman, professor paul krugman, "new york times" op-ed opinion writer.2010, 2011 scare. look who is here? larry kudlow is with us. larry we have a 26% increase in the money supply year on year. we propose to spend $5 trillion pretty quickly right out there. what do you think about inflation? shouldn't we be worried? >> you know, stu, first of all i discuss wanted to say your riff was terrific. i couldn't have said it better myself. in fact i do say it almost every evening on "kudlow." i just want to put that in. i am with you 100%. i don't want to transform america. i don't want to make america green, et cetera, et cetera. regarding krugman and inflation, this really pains me, this really pains me but i have to basically agree not with all of his analysis but with his conclusions. any inflation, it is individual prizes running up, commodities supply shortages. it will be transitory and temporary. i don't see any fundamental inflation. i would offer this point, watch the value of the dollar. if the dollar starts falling rapidly, that is going to be inflat

anna: that was ray dalio, founder of bridgewater associates, speaking first, and paul krugman, nobelze-winning economist commenting on inflation as the debate rebels on. you can watch more -- rumbles on. you can watch more on wall street week tonight, 10 of 5 p.m. london time, 6:00 p.m. if you -- 10:00 p.m. london time, 6:00 p.m. if you are in new york. mark, the boj now saying they don't have a plan to widen the yield bands now. whether they did or didn't, they don't have a plan to do so from where we find ourselves at this point, bringing there was some live pictures from tokyo of governor kuroda holding that press conference. do you think markets have been brother confused? it seemed something moved the equity markets lower a little bit earlier. mark: kuroda seems to want to make very clear that this isn't a minor step, in any way, hawkish. he wants to make clear they are being dovish, able to cut rates, and therefore say we are not widening the band. the initial interpretation was this was a hawkish step, or at least a more flexible step, not like front and policy. that's were eq

today's numbers offer no clues on either we won't know anything important for a few months, so, paul krugmanhat everything resolves around the government, and nothing resolves around businesses reopening people really going back to work the world they live in they would be happy with forever pandemic. >> he has been getting this wrong for years isn't that fright james freeman. >> yeah, you go back i mentioned 2009 stimulus, which he was -- the idea thought wonderful, late 2008 obviously, didn't meet any employment goals he kind of arrive history later to say he actually didn't like that plan so, you can go back, clinton years, is -- estimates under shooting on economic growth he is not really -- an indicator of future results. we should say [laughter]. maria: jump in your reaction ? >> i mean this is to the point this is big problem for nancy pelosi and chuck schumer, get money out the door then block buster report showing the economy is taking off -- ought to if rationale people would say wait a minute may be we don't need 1.9 trillion maybe should be 400 or 500 billion i don't think the ec