Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman has delivered one of his sharpest public attacks on Elon Musk, accusing the billionaire of overseeing an 'evil' dismantling of US foreign aid that he argues could have devastating humanitarian consequences.
Speaking on his podcast, Krugman said Musk's influence while leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) extended far beyond efforts to reduce government spending. He argued that sweeping cuts to the US Agency for International Development (USAID) have already caused immense suffering and could ultimately contribute to millions of preventable deaths.
'Evil Incompetence'
Krugman reserved little of his criticism. 'I think Elon Musk is a horrible, terrible person,' he said, describing Musk as 'the second most powerful man in America' for much of last year because of the influence he wielded over federal spending.
According to Krugman, that influence produced what he called 'a track record of evil incompetence'.
He argued that Musk 'fed USAID to the wood chipper' and 'more or less personally set out to destroy this aid agency', dismantling programmes that provided healthcare, nutrition and other essential assistance to vulnerable communities around the world.
'He did so callously, carelessly,' Krugman said. 'I mean, really evil and really incompetent on enormous scales, and why aren't people talking about it more?'
The comments mark one of Krugman's strongest personal condemnations of Musk, extending beyond criticism of economic policy to challenge the judgement and consequences of his decisions in government.
The USAID Debate
Krugman's criticism centres on the dismantling of USAID, which for decades served as the principal US agency responsible for overseas humanitarian assistance and development programmes.
He argued that the agency's work should not be viewed as an abstract budget line but as a system delivering food, medical care and emergency support to some of the world's poorest communities.
'USAID was the principal channel for aid to the most desperate, poorest people in the world,' Krugman said. He further claimed the cuts have 'led to millions of unnecessary deaths, including millions of children,' citing academic research, public-health modelling and field reports examining the impact of reduced international aid.
Among the research cited by critics is a 2025 Lancet study projecting that deep reductions in USAID funding could contribute to more than 14 million additional preventable deaths globally by 2030, including approximately 4.5 million children under the age of five if programmes are not restored.
While those projections remain the subject of ongoing debate, the study has become one of the most frequently cited pieces of research by those arguing that large-scale aid reductions carry significant humanitarian consequences.
Power and Accountability
Krugman argued that Musk's political influence fundamentally changed the level of responsibility attached to his decisions.
Rather than portraying Musk simply as a wealthy entrepreneur with political opinions, he described him as someone who exercised extraordinary influence over federal policy while serving inside the Trump administration.
He also suggested Musk struggles to accept the scrutiny that accompanies such influence.
🚨 BREAKING: Elon Musk indicates he's SUING Rep. Ro Khanna (D) after Khanna said Elon needs to answer for '4.5 million kids dying' because of DOGE cuts
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) June 22, 2026
ELON: "Time to sue this liar."
"The reality is that money was being sent to corrupt politicians under the guise of aid! Liars… pic.twitter.com/cg00ccHGDt
Krugman compared Musk's response to criticism with that of President Donald Trump, saying the billionaire is 'very much like Trump, somebody who can dish it out, but can't take it, can't even handle the kind of criticism that any public figure should expect to receive'.
The comparison reflects Krugman's broader argument that political influence inevitably brings greater public accountability.
A Debate Beyond Economics
Krugman's remarks arrive as Musk continues to face scrutiny over DOGE's restructuring of federal agencies and the long-term consequences of USAID reductions.
The comments also reflect a broader debate over the influence wealthy private individuals can exercise inside government, particularly when policy decisions affect humanitarian programmes reaching millions of people beyond US borders.
As one of the world's best-known economists and a Nobel laureate, Krugman's intervention is likely to resonate well beyond partisan politics. His criticism shifts the conversation from the size of government cuts to the human consequences critics say followed them.
Ultimately, Krugman's argument is straightforward. He contends that Musk's tenure in government should be judged not primarily by the money saved, but by the humanitarian impact of the policies implemented under his watch. Whether that assessment persuades the wider public remains a matter of political debate, but it adds another prominent voice to the growing scrutiny surrounding Musk's role in Washington.
