Yes you are absolutely right that that these issues are more complex than I was suggesting, and there is some economic justification for what he is saying. However, Krugman largely ignores and never mentions many real causes of these issues that do not fit his decidedly neo-liberal narrative.

His omission of the real cause of inflation I mentioned in my other comment is just one example. Here's a better one:

Krugman wrote in March 2006: "Immigration reduces the wages of domestic workers who compete with immigrants. That's just supply and demand: we’re talking about large increases in the number of low-skill workers relative to other inputs into production, so it's inevitable that this means a fall in wages ... the fiscal burden of low-wage immigrants is also pretty clear."

https://archive.nytimes.com/krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/notes-on-immigration/

Here's Krugman toeing the party line in 2017 with a major flip-flop while the DNC rails Trump for the immigration policies Biden ended up continuing.

Immigration, actually, the evidence suggests that immigrant workers are not for the most part competing with native-born workers. They’re competing with immigrant workers who are already here, more than that ... The immigration thing, although it’s the one that resonated most with with Trump voters, is probably in fact the place where his economics is just wrong.

https://www.econlib.org/archives/2017/12/krugman_talks_s.html

LMAO! 😂

I tell you what, I will grant you I don't think Krugman is a 'bad economist' that was disingenuous. I do think Krugman is 'deployed' by the DNC to write economic justifications to tell the masses what to think with his 'expert opinions' for whatever the fuck they want to do, and Krugman has no fucking integrity, and is more than happy to do the bidding of the neo-liberal machine enriching the 1%.