Krugman Nails GOP Lunatic Hypocrisy

[Oddball]

Whatever.

An increasing budget is not a cut budget.....Period.

 

[Polk]

Where did you get that my free market would have no regulation? You speak of talking points by many here but you make talking points, name some regulations that would have prevented the bubbles from happening or bursting since derivatives made up less than 1% of the losses.

Not allowing commercial banks to roll their loans into worthless investment vehicles would have been a good start.

 

[Polk]

Whatever.

An increasing budget is not a cut budget.....Period.

I don't know how it works in your universe, but in the one the rest of us inhabit, the relevant factor is goods and services delivered, not worthless slips of paper.They could triple the spending on Medicare, but if inflation was 1,000,000,000,000,000%, that tripling wouldn't matter because they'd still get less of it than before.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Where did you get that my free market would have no regulation? You speak of talking points by many here but you make talking points, name some regulations that would have prevented the bubbles from happening or bursting since derivatives made up less than 1% of the losses.

Not allowing commercial banks to roll their loans into worthless investment vehicles would have been a good start.

And the ending of the Federal Government propping up worthless investment vehicles like Freddie and Fannie with our tax dollars would be a good move as well.

 

[Polk]

Where did you get that my free market would have no regulation? You speak of talking points by many here but you make talking points, name some regulations that would have prevented the bubbles from happening or bursting since derivatives made up less than 1% of the losses.

Not allowing commercial banks to roll their loans into worthless investment vehicles would have been a good start.

And the ending of the Federal Government propping up worthless investment vehicles like Freddie and Fannie with our tax dollars would be a good move as well.

Yes and no. The previous system (investment vehicles, but with an unspoken government guarantee) is the worst of all possible worlds. Now, would getting rid of the government guarantee or getting rid of the investment concept underpinning the institution be more useful? That's an open question.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I only got halfway through this thread but I doubt any righty managed to do anything other than attack the messenger for the second half either.

What else is there?

I mean really, the guy points out that politicians are unprincipled, opportunistic whores and Dante wants to give him a pulitzer prize. If that's not a message worthy of derision, what is?

Bagged!

Go back and read the start of this thread. I specifically mention that I am starting to like the guy.

Inference..?

go figure

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I only got halfway through this thread but I doubt any righty managed to do anything other than attack the messenger for the second half either.

true dat

and then we have mani coming out from his sock puppet mode and posting cheerleader stuff.

poor mani, finally comfortable enough to come out as part of the RWL @ USMB.


( I bet mani only pretended to like Obama in 2008 because Obama was not an evil Clinton...that and he was still kissing Ravi's fat white ass.)

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

So we not only get your usual attack on the source and not the arguments, we get an attack on the Original Poster and a Show & Tell of Baruch's English Skill...an English Lesson?



so Baruch is a frustrated/failed academic ..a constipated pedantic?

​

Thats a common technique.

I issue you the same challenge I gave Dante.... Find an actual thesis and argument that we can discuss beyond the level of `Republicans are _______________` (Fill in pejorative de jour. )

Until then, I will respond in kind. Paul Krugman is a Sirocco... A hot dry desert wind that goes on forever and makes for madness.

I am shocked!

I am shocked that USMB's esteemed Professor of English didn't pick up on the fact that I called him a something or other 'pedantic' and not 'pedant'

*grin

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

AND still no repudation of WHAT Krugman said.
I am becoming more convinced he is correct.

But what did he say? If you try and pull an argument out of the OP you get air. It is just like a Dante post.. There are words and they are arranged into grammatical sentences, but as for real discussion, all you have is hot corrosive wind.

It is like building mad libs from refrigerator magnets. We will put Republican at the end of the sentence, put a pejorative adjective in front of that, arrange a predicate, find a animate noun for the subject, and hey, we got a Krugman/Dante argument.

Like so:

"Soybeans are oppressed by homophobic Republicans."

That has the same degree of rationality as what was posted at the front of the topic.

So we not only get your usual attack on the source and not the arguments, we get an attack on the Original Poster and a Show & Tell of Baruch's English Skill...an English Lesson?



so Baruch is a frustrated/failed academic ..a constipated pedantic?

​

what up Baruch? No English lesson from the USMB pedant today?

 

[eagleseven]

As I said before, Krugman is a drunken Keynesian, unable to accept that both Nixon and Obama's administration have disproven Keynesian stimulus theory.

To Krugman, the reason why Obama's attempt at Keynesian stimulus failed is because Obama didn't spend enough. He cannot even imagine that the Austrian school may be correct. Further, Krugman's argument is unfalsifiable...no matter how much we spend in so-called stimulus, Krugman can always claim that "we didn't spend enough". No matter what happens, he's always right, in his mind.


He refuses to accept evidence contradicting his theory and makes unfalsifiable claims...nothing more needs to be said.

Conveniently ignored, eh, Dante?

 

[johnrocks]

Where did you get that my free market would have no regulation? You speak of talking points by many here but you make talking points, name some regulations that would have prevented the bubbles from happening or bursting since derivatives made up less than 1% of the losses.

Not allowing commercial banks to roll their loans into worthless investment vehicles would have been a good start.

You have the benefit of hindsight but what defines a "worthless investment" moving forward and who gets to define and regulate what is and isn't a sound investment?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

As I said before, Krugman is a drunken Keynesian, unable to accept that both Nixon and Obama's administration have disproven Keynesian stimulus theory.

To Krugman, the reason why Obama's attempt at Keynesian stimulus failed is because Obama didn't spend enough. He cannot even imagine that the Austrian school may be correct. Further, Krugman's argument is unfalsifiable...no matter how much we spend in so-called stimulus, Krugman can always claim that "we didn't spend enough". No matter what happens, he's always right, in his mind.


He refuses to accept evidence contradicting his theory and makes unfalsifiable claims...nothing more needs to be said.

Conveniently ignored, eh, Dante?

I can't hear you when you have so much shit in your mouth. Just spit IT out as you always do and maybe I'll be able to make some sense out ofyour shit talking.


D.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

How many times do you have to be told not to take the brown acid?

USMB's Frank Burns stand in (Mash), character utters yet another of his dopey nitwitticisms?

go figure

Wow...You came up with a new, albeit pretty wimpy, insult!

Hope the effort didn't keep you awake at night. z

not really, but yourconcern is touching.

*weep

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Where did you get that my free market would have no regulation? You speak of talking points by many here but you make talking points, name some regulations that would have prevented the bubbles from happening or bursting since derivatives made up less than 1% of the losses.

I apologize for paying less than full attention to you post. This thread has been so filled with idiocies that I did a diservice to your honest effort.

let me try again (in another post).

peace
D.

note: cleaning up the shit

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

AND still no repudation of WHAT Krugman said.
I am becoming more convinced he is correct.

But what did he say? If you try and pull an argument out of the OP you get air. It is just like a Dante post.. There are words and they are arranged into grammatical sentences, but as for real discussion, all you have is hot corrosive wind.

It is like building mad libs from refrigerator magnets. We will put Republican at the end of the sentence, put a pejorative adjective in front of that, arrange a predicate, find a animate noun for the subject, and hey, we got a Krugman/Dante argument.

Like so:

"Soybeans are oppressed by homophobic Republicans."

That has the same degree of rationality as what was posted at the front of the topic.

I have been following a bit of what Krugman has been saying for the last sveral years.
in my opinion he does not have everything correct.
One thing iin his favor with me is he did start seeing the system falling apart before most of the right wing oriented ones did. He has been pretty close on it's effects and cuase and effect as well.

Now with the right haviing difficulty in defeating his statements...
Well... that just gives more evidence in my opinion that he is closer to correct than the right wingers are.

egg-zacktly!

and this what mani and the other douchebaghs fail to see...for they focus on Krugman and moi, instead of what Krugman wrote and what I posted in support of his arguments sounding...well...unlike the shit I constantly hear from the right.

there are a few exceptions like JohnR., who at first appear to be refuting Krugman...and leaving my personality out of IT...but when looked at closely it appears like JohnRocks is more Pebbles than Bam Bamin arguing against a man like Krugman.

John takes a minute part of Krugman's argument and ignores the rest and declares himself King og USMB's BrokeBack Mountain.

 

[eagleseven]

Conveniently ignored, eh, Dante?

I can't hear you when you have so much shit in your mouth. Just spit IT out as you always do and maybe I'll be able to make some sense out ofyour shit talking.

As I suspected, you have no argument.

Perhaps you should avoid discussing topics you clearly do not understand?

 

[Oddball]

I have been following a bit of what Krugman has been saying for the last sveral years.
in my opinion he does not have everything correct.
One thing iin his favor with me is he did start seeing the system falling apart before most of the right wing oriented ones did. He has been pretty close on it's effects and cuase and effect as well.

Now with the right haviing difficulty in defeating his statements...
Well... that just gives more evidence in my opinion that he is closer to correct than the right wingers are.

When your general opinion is that everything is always on the verge of utter collapse, you'll eventually be right.

The broken clock and all that......

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

As I suspected, you have no argument.

Perhaps you ...

yeah right. The little boy genius strikes again.

yawn

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have been following a bit of what Krugman has been saying for the last sveral years.
in my opinion he does not have everything correct.
One thing iin his favor with me is he did start seeing the system falling apart before most of the right wing oriented ones did. He has been pretty close on it's effects and cuase and effect as well.

Now with the right haviing difficulty in defeating his statements...
Well... that just gives more evidence in my opinion that he is closer to correct than the right wingers are.

When your general opinion is that everything is always on the verge of utter collapse, you'll eventually be right.

The broken clock and all that......

tff

you got Dopey Dude to fall back on a trite and tired old response.

One observation I've had is when RWL @ USMB and elsewhere use the 'broken clock' adage...they appear to have this snug and safe feeling inside that tells them it applies to themselves. They imagine they are always right at least twice a day.


.Odd...because almost all of them are as empty of purpose as a digital clock that's been unplugged.

*grin

 

[Oddball]

Ironic how the dweeb who decries the attacks on Krugman suddenly reverts to the tactic when it's her turn.