Anwar: I won’t interrupt Dr M, don’t disrupt me when it’s my turn


February 24, 2019

https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/465368

Anwar: I won’t interrupt Dr M, don’t disrupt me when it’s my turn

by Wong Kai Hui

Image result for daim on anwar

SDR Anwar’s self confidence is admirable, but…

SEMENYIH POLLS | PKR President Anwar Ibrahim reiterated that he supports Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s leadership and he will not disrupt his work.

Speaking at a ceramah in Taman Sri Jenaris last night, Anwar stressed that he will not interrupt Mahathir’s affairs and he hoped that he will not be interrupted when he becomes the next prime minister.

“We give our full support (to Tun M), let him do his work. I won’t interrupt because I don’t want to disrupt his work.”

“When it is my turn, let me do my work and don’t disrupt me too. This is our mutual understanding,” added Anwar.

He also rubbished PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang’s claims about the motion of no-confidence against Mahathir in Parliament.

“If I want to fight against someone, I will shout loudly.”

Then, he shouted the slogans of “Lawan tetap lawan” and said that doing things secretly at the back is not his style. A large crowd of about 600 people clapped their hands to show their support.

On Feb 17, PAS Secretary-General Takiyuddin Hassan said the Islamist party has pledged to support Mahathir in the event of a “betrayal” within Harapan.

He said the “draft letter,” signed during a recent meeting between the premier and PAS top leadership in Kuala Lumpur, was a declaration of the party’s support for Mahathir.

Apart from Takiyuddin, other PAS leaders present at the meeting with Mahathir were Hadi and Terengganu Menteri Besar Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar.

Harapan leaders from Bersatu, PKR, DAP and Amanah, however, have dismissed the no-confidence motion.

When asked, Mahathir said that he will wait and see whether PAS will honour its pledge to support him in the event of a no-confidence vote to oust him.

SEMENYIH POLLS | PKR president Anwar Ibrahim reiterated that he supports Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s leadership and he will not disrupt his work.

Speaking at a ceramah in Taman Sri Jenaris last night, Anwar stressed that he will not interrupt Mahathir’s affairs and he hoped that he will not be interrupted when he becomes the next prime minister.

“We give our full support (to Tun M), let him do his work. I won’t interrupt because I don’t want to disrupt his work.”

“When it is my turn, let me do my work and don’t disrupt me too. This is our mutual understanding,” added Anwar.

He also rubbished PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang’s claims about the motion of no-confidence against Mahathir in Parliament.

“If I want to fight against someone, I will shout loudly.”

Then, he shouted the slogans of “Lawan tetap lawan” and said that doing things secretly at the back is not his style. A large crowd of about 600 people clapped their hands to show their support.

On Feb 17, PAS Secretary-General Takiyuddin Hassan said the Islamist party has pledged to support Mahathir in the event of a “betrayal” within Harapan.

He said the “draft letter,” signed during a recent meeting between the premier and PAS top leadership in Kuala Lumpur, was a declaration of the party’s support for Mahathir.

Apart from Takiyuddin, other PAS leaders present at the meeting with Mahathir were Hadi and Terengganu Menteri Besar Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar.

Harapan leaders from Bersatu, PKR, DAP and Amaneh, however, have dismissed the no-confidence motion.

When asked, Mahathir said that he will wait and see whether PAS will honour its pledge to support him in the event of a no-confidence vote to oust him.

SEMENYIH POLLS | PKR President Anwar Ibrahim reiterated that he supports Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s leadership and he will not disrupt his work.

Speaking at a ceramah in Taman Sri Jenaris last night, Anwar stressed that he will not interrupt Mahathir’s affairs and he hoped that he will not be interrupted when he becomes the next prime minister.

“We give our full support (to Tun M), let him do his work. I won’t interrupt because I don’t want to disrupt his work.”

“When it is my turn, let me do my work and don’t disrupt me too. This is our mutual understanding,” added Anwar.

He also rubbished PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang’s claims about the motion of no-confidence against Mahathir in Parliament.

“If I want to fight against someone, I will shout loudly.”

Then, he shouted the slogans of “Lawan tetap lawan” and said that doing things secretly at the back is not his style. A large crowd of about 600 people clapped their hands to show their support.

On Feb 17, PAS secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan said the Islamist party has pledged to support Mahathir in the event of a “betrayal” within Harapan.

He said the “draft letter,” signed during a recent meeting between the premier and PAS top leadership in Kuala Lumpur, was a declaration of the party’s support for Mahathir.

Apart from Takiyuddin, other PAS leaders present at the meeting with Mahathir were Hadi and Terengganu Menteri Besar Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar.

Harapan leaders from Bersatu, PKR, DAP and Amaneh, however, have dismissed the no-confidence motion.

When asked, Mahathir said that he will wait and see whether PAS will honour its pledge to support him in the event of a no-confidence vote to oust him.

Mahathir Using Economic Council to Edge Anwar Out in favour of Azmin Ali?


February 16, 2019

By: Yusoff Rawther

Image result for azmin ali and mahathir

A glance at the newly-announced lineup of Malaysia’s Economic Action Council (EAC) poses more questions than answers. It was formed to respond and take action in addressing economic issues. Objectives include stimulating economic growth, ensuring fair distribution of wealth and improving the well-being of the people as well as focusing on issues related to cost of living, labor, poverty and home ownership.

What is its relevance? It sounds eerily like a cabinet within a cabinet, and at a transitionary period, it looks like a redundant idea that will prove to be merely a political tool.

In less than a year since assuming the premiership, the 93-year-old Mahathir Mohammad has flip-flopped on various issues, most obviously his firmly stated assurance in May 2018 that the victorious Pakatan Harapan coalition would not be accepting turncoats from the losing United Malays National Organization.

Yet, along with the announcement of the creation of the economic action body,  Mahathir happened to embrace seven former UMNO MPs into his own Parti Pribumi Bersatu, an act of betrayal to the people of Malaysia. UMNO was thoroughly discredited as a party corrupt to its very roots – by MPs who were kept loyal to the previous premier, the disgraced Najib Razak, by outright bribes.

Anwar Ibrahim has been unceremoniously left out from the EAC, an indication that Mahathir is once again vying to divert as much power and attention towards the lesser known and underperforming Minister of Economic Affairs, Mohamad Azmin Ali, the former chief minister of Selangor and an ambitious pretender for the leadership of the coalition.

Aside from the fact that the council’s existence shows failure on behalf of the prime minister to appoint qualified people to the cabinet, if we are to accept the premise that the council should exist, the right thing to do is to invite the premier-in-waiting to be a member in a move to demonstrate your confidence in your designated successor to the voters as well as giving Anwar a role to play in contributing to the agenda set forth in the EAC’s charter. Malaysians should beware lest Mahathir smuggles old failings into the mix whilst our attention is held elsewhere.

The political heavy lifting was done by Anwar, who from his prison cell pulled a lax opposition and the complaining class into the fight alongside his supporters to create the conditions for change. Conditions that proved vital in the overthrow of the Barisan Nasional regime.

It is evident that something more than elections are necessary to create a genuine new dispensation of sustainable democratic good governance.

 Creating the EAC and sidelining the PM-in-waiting is not a good indicator of that. Authoritarian rule is not just about figureheads. They use power th to maintain themselves is institutionalized and embedded in deep structures of privilege that corruptly deliver a nation’s bounty into the hands of a chosen few.

If Anwar Ibrahim is the icon for democracy, then Mahathir is the icon and spokesperson of the embedded structures of inequity.

As the principal architect of genuine reform,  to sweep aside the structures of authoritarian control and the inequity they beget, Anwar’s reform agenda seeks to eliminate  corruption, cronyism and nepotism, the elements of a bygone era.

It is the diligence and energy Anwar applies to promoting an alternate vision of good governance, one and of a free and competitive Malaysian economy and harmonious, multiracial society that  made him an important voice not only in Malaysia but around the world. Anwar has spent his career speaking for and articulating an alternative agenda of politics.

As a Deputy Prime Minister during the Asian Financial Crisis I988, Anwar came very close to dismantling the Mahathirist version of crony capitalism when he decided to implement an IMF style austerity program, suspend big-bulge infrastructure investment, and force big businessmen to take care of their own debts.

Anwarnomics promises to do away with state-backed racism. It promises to be inclusive, rules-based and competition-driven with a large, well-funded social safety net and he has reiterated time and again the need for uncompromising reforms.

Here are some of the things he has advocated for, long before the formation of the EAC:

Malaysia’s economic policies should be inclusive and to dismantle obsolete policies such as the New Economic Policy. Positive.

  • discrimination policies must be based on freedom, justice, and equity.
  • A sustainable economy is not one that is mainly driven by consumer spending fueled by high level household debt. “We cannot build a better life for our people if they need two to three jobs just to make ends meet. That is bad economics… even worst social policy.”
  • Affirmative actions taken must be based on needs.
  • It is important to enhance investment, trading and economic ties with China and India which are the engine of growth for global economy.
  • Social protection and poverty eradication remain central to the effort to ensure a better life for all.
  • Greater transparency and public participation is key in ensuring efficiency of social programs, to identify dubious programs, reduce duplication and waste of resources.
  • Economic policies to lure foreign direct investment must not neglect any region or community in the country. It is not a zero-sum game. If we choose to embark on pro-market reforms, it should not be an excessive capitalistic notion ignoring the plight of poor and marginalized.

Given the facts, it is only fair to question Mahathir’s  motives  in creating the EAC while failing to include the next Prime minister.

Malaysia is rich in resources and possibilities. Change will require more than just elections, it requires dismantling the institutional structures of inequity, most of all it will depend upon building the strength and capacity of civil society, the plethora of organizations and associations by which ordinary people hold their governments to account.

Navigating ASEAN’s economic priorities


February 14, 2019

Navigating ASEAN’s economic priorities

By  Kaewkamol Pitakdumrongkit, RSIS

Southeast Asian economies may face major economic headwinds this year amid US–China trade tensions and US Federal Reserve interest rate increases. To help weather the impact, ASEAN member states should prioritise progress on regional economic initiatives.

Image result for ASEAN

 

Some observers think that the 90-day truce between Washington and Beijing could beget better relations between the two powers. But they may be overestimating China’s ability to make concessions that fulfil what the Trump administration wants. Buying more American products is easy, but implementing measures to address ‘unfair’ trade practices to a degree that satisfies the United States is more difficult to achieve within 90 days. More rounds of tariff escalations or other trade-restricting measures could be in the offing.

On the financial front, in December 2018 the US Federal Reserve raised interest rates from 2.25 to 2.50 per cent and forecast the possibility of further increases in 2019. The Fed did so to ensure there will be room for it to use monetary policy and decrease interest rates to fight the next US recession.

Additional hikes could trigger capital pull-outs from Southeast Asian countries as investors move funds to seek higher yields in the United States. If not well-managed, such capital outflows may instigate financial instability in the ASEAN region.

Regional economies must brace themselves for future economic and financial turbulence. While they are unlikely to be able to avoid such headwinds, ASEAN member states can nevertheless cushion the impact through regional initiatives: the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) 2025, ASEAN–Hong Kong Free Trade and Investment Agreements (AHKFTA and AHKIA), Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralization (CMIM).

Policymakers should prioritise the complete implementation of the AEC 2025. This is a regional economic integration project by the 10 ASEAN member states designed to achieve five objectives: a highly integrated and cohesive economy; a competitive, innovative and dynamic ASEAN; enhanced connectivity and sectoral cooperation; a resilient, inclusive, people-oriented and people-centred ASEAN; and a global ASEAN.

Advancing the AEC 2025 will enable businesses to better tap into the integrated market of over 600 million people, rendering regional economies more resilient to the incoming headwinds.

Southeast Asian governments should also ratify the AHKFTA and AHKIA signed in November 2017 so that these treaties can enter into force in early 2019 as expected. The agreements will enhance cross-border flows of goods, services and investment between ASEAN and Hong Kong.

The agreements will not only allow firms to enjoy greater access to goods and services markets and better investment protection, but also enable ASEAN nations to further tighten trade and investment ties with China. The latter will help Southeast Asian economies to recuperate from any damage that future Washington–Beijing trade spats may inflict on them.

ASEAN authorities should also concentrate on wrapping up RCEP talks. If concluded, this 16-economy free trade bloc will encompass a market of 3.6 billion people that contributes to a third of global GDP. It will cover 29 per cent of global trade and 26 per cent of the world’s foreign direct investment flows.

Concluding the negotiation will create more opportunities for businesses to deepen their supply chains, and provide RCEP economies with another means to diversify their economic relations and cushion against the negative effects of future US–China trade war spats.

Finally, ASEAN nations together with China, Japan and South Korea (ASEAN+3) should advance the CMIM, a regional financial safety net under the ASEAN+3 framework. Launched in 2010, the scheme provides financial support through a network of currency swaps to help ASEAN+3 nations weather their balance-of-payments difficulties.

Because future Fed rate hikes could trigger investor panic leading to financial instability and capital flights in certain regional economies, the CMIM can provide financial assistance to alleviate such problems.

Admittedly, the above initiatives face their own challenges. A major hurdle for implementing the AEC 2025 is a lack of coordination among domestic ministries and agencies. Individual ASEAN countries must sort out how to improve coordination among the involved authorities. Certain domestic hurdles must also be cleared for a successful ratification of the ASEAN–Hong Kong treaties.

Planned elections in Australia, India, Indonesia and Thailand in 2019 may delay the conclusion of RCEP negotiations in the first half of 2019. Politicians in these nations will likely prioritise their electioneering over international matters. And if the momentum of RCEP talks picks up in the second-half of the year, the parties’ different positions and preferences will still need to be reconciled to seal the deal.

Regarding the CMIM, while a laudable agreement was signed in December 2018 to create more favourable conditions that will enable the regional financial safety net to better assist in a crisis, efforts to advance other aspects of the CMIM have been lacklustre in recent years.

For one, its size has remained the same at US$240 billion since 2012. With this amount, the scheme can at best provide simultaneous lending support to a few small- and medium-sized economies should they come under a crisis. The participants must push for an expansion of the CMIM’s size.

US–China trade tensions and Fed rate hikes will likely generate undesired effects for Southeast Asian economies this year. Despite the challenges of the above initiatives, ASEAN countries must collectively pursue them to navigate through the coming economic headwinds. Time is running out and policymakers must act fast.

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2019/02/11/navigating-aseans-economic-priorities

Kaewkamol Pitakdumrongkit is Deputy Head and Assistant Professor at the Centre for Multilateralism Studies, S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

 

In defense of the elites


February 5, 2019

In defense of the elites

 

by Dr. Fareed Zakaria

https://fareedzakaria.com/columns/2019/1/31/in-defense-of-the-elites

This year’s World Economic Forum, more than usual, prompted a spirited round of elite-bashing, which has now become the trendy political posture on both the right and left. On one side, President Trump and Fox News hosts slam the out-of-touch establishment that, according to them, has run things into the ground. On the other side, left-wingers decry the millionaires and billionaires who, in one author’s phrase, “broke the modern world.”

Underlying these twin critiques is a bleak view of modern life — seen as a dysfunctional global order, producing stagnant incomes, rising insecurity and environmental degradation. But is this depiction, in fact, true? Are we doing so very badly that we need to bring back the guillotines?

On the simplest and most important measure, income, the story is actually one of astonishing progress. Since 1990, more than 1 billion people have moved out of extreme poverty. The share of the global population living in these dire conditions has gone from 36 percent to 10 percent, the lowest in recorded history. This is, as the World Bank president, Jim Yong Kim, notes, “one of the greatest achievements of our time.” Inequality, from a global perspective, has declined dramatically.

And all this has happened chiefly because countries — from China to India to Ethiopia — have adopted more market-friendly policies, and Western countries have helped them with access to markets, humanitarian assistance and loan forgiveness. In other words, policies supported by these very elites.

Look at any measure from a global perspective and the numbers are staggering. The child mortality rate is down 58 percent since 1990. Undernourishment has fallen 41 percent, and maternal deaths (women dying because of childbirth) have dropped by 43 percent over roughly the same period.

I know the response that some will have to these statistics. The figures pertain to the world in general, not the United States. Things might have improved for the Chinese, but not for the denizens of rich countries. That sense of “unfairness” is what is surely fueling Trump’s “America First” agenda and much of the anger on the right at the international system. (More bewilderingly, the left, traditionally concerned about the poorest of the poor, has become critical of a process that has improved the lives of at least 1 billion of the world’s most impoverished people.)

When criticizing the current state of affairs, it’s easy to hark back to some nostalgic old order, the modern world before the current elites “broke” it. But when was that golden age? In the 1950s, when Jim Crow reigned in the United States and women could barely work as anything more than seamstresses and secretaries? The 1980s, when two-thirds of the globe stagnated under state socialism, repression and isolation? What group of elites — kings, commissars, mandarins — ran the world better than our current hodgepodge of politicians and business executives?

Even in the West, it is easy to take for granted the astounding progress. We live longer, the air and water are cleaner, crime has plunged, and information and communication are virtually free. Economically, there have been gains, though crucially, they have not been distributed equally.

But there have been monumental improvements in access and opportunity for large segments of the population that were locked out and pushed down. In the United States, the gap between black and white high school completion has almost disappeared. The poverty gap between blacks and whites has shrunk (but remains distressingly large). Hispanic college enrollment has soared. The gender gap between wages for men and women has narrowed. The number of female chief executives at Fortune 500 companies has gone from one to 24 over the past 20 years. Female membership in national legislatures of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development member countries has almost doubled in the same period. No countries allowed same-sex marriage two decades ago, but more than 20 countries do today. In all these areas, much remains to be done. But in each of them, there has been striking progress.

I understand that important segments of the Western working class are under great pressure, and that they often feel ignored and left behind by this progress. We must find ways to give them greater economic support and moral dignity. But extensive research shows that some of their discomfort comes from watching a society in which these other groups are rising, changing the nature of the world in which they’d enjoyed a comfortable status.

After 400 years of slavery, segregation and discrimination in the United States, blacks have been moving up. After thousands of years of being treated as structurally subordinate, women are now gaining genuine equality. Once considered criminals or deviants, gays can finally live and love freely in many countries. The fact that these changes might cause discomfort to some is not a reason to pause, nor to forget that it represents deep and lasting human progress that we should celebrate.

(c) 2019, Washington Post Writers Group

Nudging Mahathir into consensus mode


January 17,2019

Nudging  Mahathir into consensus mode

Opinion  |  P Gunasegaram

Published:  |  Modified:

 

QUESTION TIME | Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s current beef is wealth inequality, and so he wants to restart the redistribution of wealth – to Malays (and bumiputeras). This is something which I commented on here. But that’s not even a stopgap measure, because acquired wealth can be sold off. It also reflects the policies of old, which have been discredited.

The only way that wealth can be increased and retained within a community is to increase incomes, rather than to distribute existing wealth, even if it is held by the government. And the only way incomes can be increased is to put in place plans to raise incomes for all Malaysians, since 67 percent of the population is bumiputera, with Malays forming 50.5 percent of the population.

The issue of wealth and income equality comes back eventually to the effectiveness of the government and how successful it has been in narrowing opportunity gaps between rich and poor through well thought out and carefully implemented programmes.

For that to happen, it is necessary for some steps to be taken. I agree that for this to happen, it is not just the duty of Mahathir, but also the partners in the Harapan coalition government, to exert force, for at the end of the day, Mahathir only commands a small minority of MPs in the coalition.

Considering that he is advanced in age and may be lacking in vitality, it is necessary for change to start from his other partners – the leaders in PKR, DAP and Amanah – who had envisioned a different plan and programme than that of Mahathir’s Bersatu, a racial reconstruction of UMNO, where the membership is exclusively restricted to Malays and bumiputeras, with many of its members having come from UMNO.

Exerting influence

Thus, it is incumbent upon other leaders to push Mahathir into change and consensus mode. There are at least two ways this can be done – through the Harapan presidential council and the cabinet. First, Harapan’s presidential council rightly should be the place from which all broad policies for the government should emanate.

 

Image result for mahathir's cabinet

Here is where Harapan’s de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim and his wife and Deputy Prime Minister Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail should exert their influence after discussions with DAP leaders such as Lim Kit Siang and Lim Guan Eng, and Amanah leaders such as Mohamad Sabu, Khalid Abdul Samad and Dzulkefly Ahmad.

Since the other parties are in the vast majority in terms of their number of MPs, their combined weight should hold a lot of sway, and Mahathir can be persuaded that the policies taken should reflect that of the majority view.

If the other Harapan leaders do not take such measures and wait patiently for Mahathir to exit the scene in a year and four months from now, they must also take joint responsibility for any wrong, improper move which delay things towards an open, freer country which moves forward based on government transparency, accountability, good governance and competence.

Pushing for Anwar’s inclusion in the cabinet

 

Image result for mahathir's cabinet

The other thing that the presidential council should do is to push for Anwar’s inclusion in the cabinet and for him to become Deputy Prime minister like in 1998 soonest.

The other thing that the presidential council should do is to push for Anwar’s inclusion in the cabinet and for him to become deputy prime minister soonest. That is the natural thing to do if Anwar is to become prime minister 16 months from now, as agreed by all the coalition partners.

That may pave the way for Wan Azizah to step down from politics, as she has said many times beforehand that she wants to do after Anwar is in the picture.

It would ensure that Anwar has enough time to have a good grasp of everything that happens in the cabinet in the lead-up to him taking over as Prime Minister. It is necessary that Harapan leaders have the gumption, courage and conviction to push for this to take place.

With the presidential council becoming a greater force in making national policy with the input of all leaders, instead of being dominated by a minority leader, even if it is Mahathir, then decision-making is likely to better reflect the true aspirations of the overall Harapan coalition instead of that of Bersatu and Mahathir – as it is now. That would reflect, too, the aspirations of voters.

Get the necessary work done

Next, the cabinet. Cabinet members seem to be waiting for Mahathir’s approval before they do anything, even though it is impossible for Mahathir – or anyone else who is Prime Minister – to understand the full implications of all measures to be undertaken by the ministries.

Thus ministers should seek to take their ministries forward in terms of increased competence, work and efficiency, with full regard at all times to such key issues as integrity, honesty and doing away with patronage in decision-making and implementation. Surely no one, not even Mahathir, would fault them for coming up with good strategies and programmes for implementation that would work.

In other words, ministers should move their butts to get the necessary work done and not wait for orders and instructions from the top, who in this case is Mahathir. If they don’t take the initiative to get things done much better than before, they can’t turn around and blame Mahathir.

It’s their job to get action plans done and present them to the cabinet for approval. If their plans are found to be good and workable, it is unlikely that Mahathir or the other members of the cabinet are going to turn them down.

These are tough times and Mahathir may well need some help to initiate changes. If he is straying from the path the coalition agreed on, who better to tell him than his coalition partners and to steer him back to the right one?

That needs courage, conviction and the willingness to face confrontation, which could eventually lead to a conciliatory path that is more beneficial to the country. After all, is that not the way of consensus, which is how the election was won by Harapan?

Next: 10 ways to increase incomes and raise living standards.


P GUNASEGARAM believes consensus comes out of genuine desire to find the right path. E-mail: t.p.guna@gmail.com

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.

DJT And His Team of Morons


January 15, 2019

DJT And His Team of Morons

DJT And His Team of Morons

by Paul Krugman

There have been many policy disasters over the course of U.S. history. It’s hard, however, to think of a calamity as gratuitous, an error as unforced, as the current federal shutdown.

Nor can I think of another disaster as thoroughly personal, as completely owned by one man. When Donald Trump told Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, “I will be the one to shut it down,” he was being completely accurate — although he went on to promise that “I’m not going to blame you for it,” which was a lie.

Still, no man is an island, although Trump comes closer than most. You can’t fully make sense of his policy pratfalls without acknowledging the extraordinary quality of the people with whom he has surrounded himself. And by “extraordinary,” of course, I mean extraordinarily low quality. Lincoln had a team of rivals; Trump has a team of morons.

If this sounds too harsh, consider recent economic pronouncements by two members of his administration. Predictably, these pronouncements involve bad economics; that’s pretty much a given. What’s striking, instead, is the inability of either man to stay on script; they can’t even get their right-wing mendacity right.

Image result for Kevin Hassett

 

First up is Kevin Hassett, chairman of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers, who was asked about the plight of federal workers who aren’t being paid. You don’t have to be a public relations expert to know that you’re supposed to express some sympathy, whether you feel it or not. After all, there are multiple news reports about transportation security workers turning to food banks, the Coast Guard suggesting its employees hold garage sales, and so on.

So the right response involves expressing concern about those workers but placing the blame on Democrats who don’t want to stop brown-skinned rapists, or something like that. But no: Hassett declared that it’s all good, that the workers are actually “better off,” because they’re getting time off without having to use any of their vacation days.

Then consider what Sean Hannity had to say about taxing the rich. What’s that? You say that Hannity isn’t a member of the Trump administration? But surely he is in every sense that matters. In fact, Fox News isn’t just state TV, its hosts clearly have better access to the President, more input into his decisions, than any of the so-called experts at places like the State Department or the Department of Defense.

Anyway, Hannity declared that raising taxes on the wealthy would damage the economy, because “rich people won’t be buying boats that they like recreationally,” and “they’re not going to be taking expensive vacations anymore.”

Um, that’s not the answer a conservative is supposed to give. You’re supposed to insist that low taxes on the rich give them an incentive to work really really hard, not make it easier for them to take lavish vacations. You’re supposed to declare that low taxes will induce them to save and spend money building businesses, not help them afford to buy new yachts.

 

Even if your real reason for favoring low taxes is that they let your wealthy friends engage in even more high living, you’re not supposed to say that out loud.

Again, the point isn’t that people in Trump’s circle don’t care about ordinary American families, and also talk nonsense — that’s only to be expected. What’s amazing is that they’re so out of it that they don’t know either how to pretend to care about the middle class, or what nonsense to spout in order to sustain that pretense.

So what’s wrong with Trump’s people? Why can’t they serve up even some fake populism?

There are, I think, two answers, one generic to modern conservatism, one specific to Trump.

On the generic point: To be a modern conservative is to spend your life inside what amounts to a cult, barely exposed to outside ideas or even ways of speaking. Inside that cult, contempt for ordinary working Americans is widespread — remember Eric Cantor, the then-House majority leader, celebrating Labor Day by praising business owners. So is worship of wealth. And it can be hard for cult members to remember that you don’t talk that way to outsiders.

Then there’s the Trump effect. Normally working for the president of the United States is a career booster, something that looks good on your résumé. Trump’s presidency, however, is so chaotic, corrupt and potentially compromised by his foreign entanglements that anyone associated with him gets tainted — which is why after only two years he has already left a trail of broken men and wrecked reputations in his wake.

So who is willing to serve him at this point? Only those with no reputation to lose, generally because they’re pretty bad at what they do. There are, no doubt, conservatives smart and self-controlled enough to lie plausibly, or at least preserve some deniability, and defend Trump’s policies without making fools of themselves. But those people have gone into hiding.

A year ago I pointed out that the Trump administration was turning into government by the worst and the dumbest. Since then, however, things have gotten even worse and even dumber. And we haven’t hit bottom yet.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Paul Krugman has been an Opinion columnist since 2000 and is also a Distinguished Professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center. He won the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on international trade and economic geography.

@PaulKrugman

 

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: Donald Trump And His Team Of Morons. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe