This one is a doozy. Krugman called for low interest rates in 2001 precisely to stimulate housing, even calling for a housing bubble (this was "a joke," he later claimed). Now he says the artificial stimulus to housing had to do with crooked Wall Street shenanigans, and had nothing to do with the Fed or government policy at all.
We ain't having it.
The Paris agreement on climate may have saved civilization, says Paul Krugman. The usual fact-free analysis then follows. But as you know, Paul Krugman is the bologna, and Contra Krugman is the slicer.
Krugman says the economy isn't really so bad! And the good parts are due -- of course! -- to what little Keynesian policy the stupid American rubes have permitted. You think he's going to get away with that, with Contra Krugman around?
Krugman correctly identifies one of the reasons housing is so expensive in New York. What else could the explanation be if not the salutary influence of Contra Krugman?