Krugman kicks von Mises acolyte while he's down

[EdwardBaiamonte]

He supported a negative income tax.

so?????? Do Krugman and other very well knowm liberals think of Friedman as lib commie progressive or just you, dear. See why we are positive a liberal will be slow? What other conclusion is possible?

 

[Kimura]

He supported a negative income tax.

so?????? Do Krugman and other very well knowm liberals think of Friedman as lib commie progressive or just you, dear. See why we are positive a liberal will be slow? What other conclusion is possible?

I'm saying your one-size-fits-all description of Milton Friedman comes across as retarded.

 

[kwc57]

First Ryan (R) put forward his budget that was universally decried/derided by the Catholic church for punishing the Poor while simultaneously showering tax cuts on the Rich.

THEN, the von Mises acolyte ran on the last Repub ticket and lost

Now Krugman calls him out for his rw/psychotic libertarian failings:


Fiscal Flimflam, Revisited
(snip)

As I and others pointed out at the time, when you looked at the substance of what Ryan was proposing, it didn’t at all match up to his supposed deep concern over the deficit. Specifically, in the first decade he proposed savage cuts in aid to the poor, but he also proposed huge tax cuts for the rich — and the tax cuts for the rich were bigger than the aid cuts for the poor, so that the specifics of the plan were actually deficit-increasing, not deficit-reducing.

So how did he claim otherwise? By declaring that he would make his tax cuts deficit-neutral by closing loopholes — but he refused to say anything about which loopholes he would close; and by claiming that he would make huge cuts in discretionary spending, again without specifying what he would cut. So the budget was essentially a con job.

Way to go Paul Keep exposing those rw snake oil salesmen who just happen to be, sadly, in republican leadership positions

Krugman, like Obama is an highly educated idiot. It's all academic theory and zero practical experience for both of them. What has Krugman ever actually produced other than words on a page?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

He supported a negative income tax.

so?????? Do Krugman and other very well knowm liberals think of Friedman as lib commie progressive or just you, dear. See why we are positive a liberal will be slow? What other conclusion is possible?

I'm saying your one-size-fits-all description of Milton Friedman comes across as retarded.

not surprising from a 100% fool who thinks Friedman is a lib commie progressive when thats the last way he would describe himself or the last way other well know economists would describe him!! Slow?

 

[Kimura]

so?????? Do Krugman and other very well knowm liberals think of Friedman as lib commie progressive or just you, dear. See why we are positive a liberal will be slow? What other conclusion is possible?

I'm saying your one-size-fits-all description of Milton Friedman comes across as retarded.

not surprising from a 100% fool who thinks Friedman is a lib commie progressive when thats the last way he would describe himself or the last way other well know economists would describe him!! Slow?

I never said he was a "lib commie progressive".

Wow.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I'm saying your one-size-fits-all description of Milton Friedman comes across as retarded.

not surprising from a 100% fool who thinks Friedman is a lib commie progressive when thats the last way he would describe himself or the last way other well know economists would describe him!! Slow?

I never said he was a "lib commie progressive".

Wow.

so then what was he?? Are you afriad to say??

 

[Dot Com]

First Ryan (R) put forward his budget that was universally decried/derided by the Catholic church for punishing the Poor while simultaneously showering tax cuts on the Rich.

THEN, the von Mises acolyte ran on the last Repub ticket and lost

Now Krugman calls him out for his rw/psychotic libertarian failings:


Fiscal Flimflam, Revisited
(snip)

As I and others pointed out at the time, when you looked at the substance of what Ryan was proposing, it didn’t at all match up to his supposed deep concern over the deficit. Specifically, in the first decade he proposed savage cuts in aid to the poor, but he also proposed huge tax cuts for the rich — and the tax cuts for the rich were bigger than the aid cuts for the poor, so that the specifics of the plan were actually deficit-increasing, not deficit-reducing.

So how did he claim otherwise? By declaring that he would make his tax cuts deficit-neutral by closing loopholes — but he refused to say anything about which loopholes he would close; and by claiming that he would make huge cuts in discretionary spending, again without specifying what he would cut. So the budget was essentially a con job.

Way to go Paul Keep exposing those rw snake oil salesmen who just happen to be, sadly, in republican leadership positions

It's really not difficult to point out the multiple problems with the Austrian School. The problem I have is most our self-appointed economic geniuses on the forum have never taken an economics class, unless you count rereading axioms by a dead Austrian sociologist.

And this guy:

why do they cling to these theories even after they're shown to have been based on a hunch rather than facts-based. scientific inquiry?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

First Ryan (R) put forward his budget that was universally decried/derided by the Catholic church for punishing the Poor while simultaneously showering tax cuts on the Rich.

THEN, the von Mises acolyte ran on the last Repub ticket and lost

Now Krugman calls him out for his rw/psychotic libertarian failings:


Fiscal Flimflam, Revisited
(snip)


Way to go Paul Keep exposing those rw snake oil salesmen who just happen to be, sadly, in republican leadership positions

It's really not difficult to point out the multiple problems with the Austrian School. The problem I have is most our self-appointed economic geniuses on the forum have never taken an economics class, unless you count rereading axioms by a dead Austrian sociologist.

And this guy:

why do they cling to these theories even after they're shown to have been based on a hunch rather than facts-based. scientific inquiry?

dear, the free market is not a hunch. China just switched to it and instantly eliminated 40% of world poverty and saved 60 million from slow starvation! Why did they switch? Because they saw the USA with its Freidman /Adam Smith free markets doing 10 times better. Do you get it now?

 

[Dot Com]

I'm saying your one-size-fits-all description of Milton Friedman comes across as retarded.

not surprising from a 100% fool who thinks Friedman is a lib commie progressive when thats the last way he would describe himself or the last way other well know economists would describe him!! Slow?

I never said he was a "lib commie progressive".

Wow.

This is why I had to put that low-IQ troll on ignore. Nothing personal, just he doesn't know what he's supposed to be debating > 1/2 the time.

As to Krugman, he justified why he calls-out the libertarian economist hack/cranks:
from OP source (snip)

Now, when I say things like that, people start howling about lack of civility. But I wasn’t insulting someone for the sake of insult; if you didn’t understand the essential dishonesty of the plan, you weren’t getting the story right. Yes, I could have used diffident language — but why? Readers deserve to be told clearly what is going on.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

not surprising from a 100% fool who thinks Friedman is a lib commie progressive when thats the last way he would describe himself or the last way other well know economists would describe him!! Slow?

I never said he was a "lib commie progressive".

Wow.

This is why I had to put that low-IQ troll on ignore. Nothing personal, just he doesn't know what he's supposed to be debating > 1/2 the time.

As to Krugman, he justified why he calls-out the libertarian economist hack/cranks:
from OP source (snip)

Now, when I say things like that, people start howling about lack of civility. But I wasn’t insulting someone for the sake of insult; if you didn’t understand the essential dishonesty of the plan, you weren’t getting the story right. Yes, I could have used diffident language — but why? Readers deserve to be told clearly what is going on.

Kimura is still tryng to decide what Friedman stood for. Hint: Krugman hated him!

 

[Kimura]

not surprising from a 100% fool who thinks Friedman is a lib commie progressive when thats the last way he would describe himself or the last way other well know economists would describe him!! Slow?

I never said he was a "lib commie progressive".

Wow.

so then what was he?? Are you afriad to say??

Yeah, Ed, I'm afraid to say. I just wasted another hour of my life trying to engage you in meaningful dialogue. I wanted them fucking back, give me those sixty minutes of my life back.

 

[Kimura]

First Ryan (R) put forward his budget that was universally decried/derided by the Catholic church for punishing the Poor while simultaneously showering tax cuts on the Rich.

THEN, the von Mises acolyte ran on the last Repub ticket and lost

Now Krugman calls him out for his rw/psychotic libertarian failings:


Fiscal Flimflam, Revisited
(snip)


Way to go Paul Keep exposing those rw snake oil salesmen who just happen to be, sadly, in republican leadership positions

It's really not difficult to point out the multiple problems with the Austrian School. The problem I have is most our self-appointed economic geniuses on the forum have never taken an economics class, unless you count rereading axioms by a dead Austrian sociologist.

And this guy:

why do they cling to these theories even after they're shown to have been based on a hunch rather than facts-based. scientific inquiry?

It's what inevitably happens when you base your worldview around nonsense.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I never said he was a "lib commie progressive".

Wow.

so then what was he?? Are you afriad to say??

Yeah, Ed, I'm afraid to say. I just wasted another hour of my life trying to engage you in meaningful dialogue. I wanted them fucking back, give me those sixty minutes of my life back.

dear, cut the BS and tell us what a libertarian progressive is, and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It's what inevitably happens when you base your worldview around nonsense.

please give us your most substantive example of nonsense or admit you cant defend what you say.

 

[Kimura]

so then what was he?? Are you afriad to say??

Yeah, Ed, I'm afraid to say. I just wasted another hour of my life trying to engage you in meaningful dialogue. I wanted them fucking back, give me those sixty minutes of my life back.

dear, cut the BS and tell us what a libertarian progressive is, and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive.

It's someone who leans progressive on some issues and someone who leans libertarian on other issues. This isn't exactly difficult to understand.

And please stop referring to people as dear.

 

[Kimura]

It's what inevitably happens when you base your worldview around nonsense.

please give us your most substantive example of nonsense or admit you cant defend what you say.

I've spent countless threads debating the ABCT, Praexology, the natural rate of interest, Say's Law, etc, etc, etc.

The forum has a search function, Einstein.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yeah, Ed, I'm afraid to say. I just wasted another hour of my life trying to engage you in meaningful dialogue. I wanted them fucking back, give me those sixty minutes of my life back.

dear, cut the BS and tell us what a libertarian progressive is, and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive.

It's someone who leans progressive on some issues and someone who leans libertarian on other issues. This isn't exactly difficult to understand.

And please stop referring to people as dear.

"and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive"???? Come on dear you must have several well know fellow travelers??

 

[Kimura]

dear, cut the BS and tell us what a libertarian progressive is, and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive.

It's someone who leans progressive on some issues and someone who leans libertarian on other issues. This isn't exactly difficult to understand.

And please stop referring to people as dear.

"and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive"???? Come on dear you must have several well know fellow travelers??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It's someone who leans progressive on some issues and someone who leans libertarian on other issues. This isn't exactly difficult to understand.

And please stop referring to people as dear.

"and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive"???? Come on dear you must have several well know fellow travelers??

"and who that we all would know is a fellow libertarian progressive"???? Come on dear you must have several well know fellow travelers?

 

[jasonnfree]

I never said he was a "lib commie progressive".

Wow.

so then what was he?? Are you afriad to say??

Yeah, Ed, I'm afraid to say. I just wasted another hour of my life trying to engage you in meaningful dialogue. I wanted them fucking back, give me those sixty minutes of my life back.

The funniest comment yet, made my day.