Krugman: "policy makers are in denial"

[Procrustes Stretched]

Krugma tales the administration to task, but he alos offers solutions. I tend to agree with him, because I remember even conservative economists saying they thought the "stimulus was too small" while saying they ideologically opposed a stimulus to begin with.

Most credible economists admitted early on to being for or against the stimulus on principle.

let's start with criticisms.
quotes:

Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary, says that “we’re on the road to recovery.” No, we aren’t.

we’re not in a classic recession, in which everything goes down. But so what?

We need about 2.5 percent growth just to keep unemployment from rising, and much faster growth to bring it significantly down. Yet growth is currently running somewhere between 1 and 2 percent, with a good chance that it will slow even further in the months ahead.

Will the economy actually enter a double dip, with G.D.P. shrinking? Who cares? If unemployment rises for the rest of this year, which seems likely, it won’t matter whether the G.D.P. numbers are slightly positive or slightly negative.
​

but the end does not have to be near. courage. we need courage.

What will Ben Bernanke, the Fed chairman, say in his big speech Friday in Jackson Hole, Wyo.?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We need more government stimulus the same way the Titanic needed to hit a second iceberg to plug the hole caused by the first.

 

[johnrocks]

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

We need more government stimulus the same way the Titanic needed to hit a second iceberg to plug the hole caused by the first.

your reasoning and your analysis is worthy of a used piece of toilet tissue.

can't challenge a premise? why am I not surprised?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

Excuse?

reading and comprehension is not your strong suit, and your ability to engage in argument is most definitely not even in the running.

note: the first two responses from USMB TROLLS are two classic examples of conservative nitwits who cannot argue without talking points

 

[CrusaderFrank]

As much as I miss The Far Side and Calvin and Hobbes, I'm glad Krugman is still publishing stuff that makes me laugh

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The economy will start to rebound once we take the gavel from Nancy's hand and halt the Progressive Jihad on free enterprise

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

As much as I miss The Far Side and Calvin and Hobbes, I'm glad Krugman is still publishing stuff that makes me laugh

go hijack another thread with your useless attacks.

 

[kwc57]

I tend to ignore Krugman for two reasons. One, he is an ideologue. Two, he has never dirtied his hands. He has no practical knowledge or experience. It is all intellectual exercise and theory. If I'm having an operation, I want a doctor who has actually had his hands in someone's gut before, not a guy who has read all the textbooks. Krugman is the ultimate economic armchair quarterback.

 

[johnrocks]

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

Excuse?

reading and comprehension is not your strong suit, and your ability to engage in argument is most definitely not even in the running.

note: the first two responses from USMB TROLLS are two classic examples of conservative nitwits who cannot argue without talking points

Your one to call others ditwits or trolls, attacking the poster is a great example of losing an argument, I knocked the idiot Krugman's theory, you in turn want to insult me and Frank.


His theory;using another analogy that I'm sure will fly over your head; is akin to a kid with a bicycle pump frantically pumping a tire with a gaping hole in it.

Government intervention caused the problems, more government isn't going to solve it and btw, me and Frank are from two different schools of thought, I think supply side economics is as full of holes as demand side economics, Austrian is the way to go

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

Excuse?

reading and comprehension is not your strong suit, and your ability to engage in argument is most definitely not even in the running.

note: the first two responses from USMB TROLLS are two classic examples of conservative nitwits who cannot argue without talking points

Your one to call others ditwits or trolls, attacking the poster is a great example of losing an argument, I knocked the idiot Krugman's theory, you in turn want to insult me and Frank.


His theory;using another analogy that I'm sure will fly over your head; is akin to a kid with a bicycle pump frantically pumping a tire with a gaping hole in it.

Government intervention caused the problems, more government isn't going to solve it and btw, me and Frank are from two different schools of thought, I think supply side economics is as full of holes as demand side economics, Austrian is the way to go

We might differ, but we can agree you rock!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I tend to ignore Krugman for two reasons. One, he is an ideologue. Two, he has never dirtied his hands. He has no practical knowledge or experience. It is all intellectual exercise and theory. If I'm having an operation, I want a doctor who has actually had his hands in someone's gut before, not a guy who has read all the textbooks. Krugman is the ultimate economic armchair quarterback.

Name a conservative economist that you would consider to be NOT an ideologue?




another idiot?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

Excuse?

reading and comprehension is not your strong suit, and your ability to engage in argument is most definitely not even in the running.

note: the first two responses from USMB TROLLS are two classic examples of conservative nitwits who cannot argue without talking points

Your one to call others ditwits or trolls, attacking the poster is a great example of losing an argument, I knocked the idiot Krugman's theory, you in turn want to insult me and Frank.


His theory;using another analogy that I'm sure will fly over your head; is akin to a kid with a bicycle pump frantically pumping a tire with a gaping hole in it.

Government intervention caused the problems, more government isn't going to solve it and btw, me and Frank are from two different schools of thought, I think supply side economics is as full of holes as demand side economics, Austrian is the way to go

The resurrection of the Austrian way has been fringe for so long it's being resurrected does not even qualify as a horror movie anymore.

and the Austrian way is not ideological?

your attack on Krugman is not an attack on his argument.

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

your attack is on Krugman.

 

[johnrocks]

Excuse?

reading and comprehension is not your strong suit, and your ability to engage in argument is most definitely not even in the running.

note: the first two responses from USMB TROLLS are two classic examples of conservative nitwits who cannot argue without talking points

Your one to call others ditwits or trolls, attacking the poster is a great example of losing an argument, I knocked the idiot Krugman's theory, you in turn want to insult me and Frank.


His theory;using another analogy that I'm sure will fly over your head; is akin to a kid with a bicycle pump frantically pumping a tire with a gaping hole in it.

Government intervention caused the problems, more government isn't going to solve it and btw, me and Frank are from two different schools of thought, I think supply side economics is as full of holes as demand side economics, Austrian is the way to go

The resurrection of the Austrian way has been fringe for so long it's being resurrected does not even qualify as a horror movie anymore.

your attack on Krugman is not an attack on his argument.

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

your attack is on Krugman.

My point was, my attack was on Krugman; so what; it wasn't on you so;unless your giving him head every morning, me attacking that stupid, socialist idiot shouldn't be getting your hormones out of balance.

How is Austrian "fringe" yet someone who identifies with the European SOCIALIST DEMOCRATS mainstream or do you think he's mainstream?

We're all ideologals, that wasn't the reason I thanked the other poster, anyone who curses and knocks the likes of Krugman is A-OK in my book

 

[kwc57]

I tend to ignore Krugman for two reasons. One, he is an ideologue. Two, he has never dirtied his hands. He has no practical knowledge or experience. It is all intellectual exercise and theory. If I'm having an operation, I want a doctor who has actually had his hands in someone's gut before, not a guy who has read all the textbooks. Krugman is the ultimate economic armchair quarterback.

Name a conservative economist that you would consider to be NOT an ideologue?




another idiot?

You need to get a new schtick, this one is getting stale.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I tend to ignore Krugman for two reasons. One, he is an ideologue. Two, he has never dirtied his hands. He has no practical knowledge or experience. It is all intellectual exercise and theory. If I'm having an operation, I want a doctor who has actually had his hands in someone's gut before, not a guy who has read all the textbooks. Krugman is the ultimate economic armchair quarterback.

Name a conservative economist that you would consider to be NOT an ideologue?




another idiot?

You need to get a new schtick, this one is getting stale.

you criticize an economist, a nobel prize winner, for being an ideologue.

hello?

you cannot name an economist you appreciate, nobel prize winner or not, who is NOT an ideologue, and you tell me to what?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Your one to call others ditwits or trolls, attacking the poster is a great example of losing an argument, I knocked the idiot Krugman's theory, you in turn want to insult me and Frank.


His theory;using another analogy that I'm sure will fly over your head; is akin to a kid with a bicycle pump frantically pumping a tire with a gaping hole in it.

Government intervention caused the problems, more government isn't going to solve it and btw, me and Frank are from two different schools of thought, I think supply side economics is as full of holes as demand side economics, Austrian is the way to go

The resurrection of the Austrian way has been fringe for so long it's being resurrected does not even qualify as a horror movie anymore.

your attack on Krugman is not an attack on his argument.

Krugman has a Nobel...reason I no longer take the Nobel seriously. His excuse is basically, government has not spent enough, I could have gotten a 5th grade drop out from the inner city to say and believe that crap.

your attack is on Krugman.

My point was, my attack was on Krugman; so what; it wasn't on you so;unless your giving him head every morning, me attacking that stupid, socialist idiot shouldn't be getting your hormones out of balance.

How is Austrian "fringe" yet someone who identifies with the European SOCIALIST DEMOCRATS mainstream or do you think he's mainstream?

We're all ideologals, that wasn't the reason I thanked the other poster, anyone who curses and knocks the likes of Krugman is A-OK in my book

fringe is on the ends of a spectrum.

the rest of your post cannot be addressed without getting back into my hazmat suit.

later

dD

 

[johnrocks]

Nobel prize winner is just someone elected by others, hell, Bush,Carter and Hoover were elected

Personally, I like people like Jim Rogers,Peter Schiff(who warned of this meltdown years ago) and Walter Williams over people who have more in common with Karl Marx than they do our Founding Fathers.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Nobel prize winner is just someone elected by others, hell, Bush,Carter and Hoover were elected

Personally, I like people like Jim Rogers,Peter Schiff(who warned of this meltdown years ago) and Walter Williams over people who have more in common with Karl Marx than they do our Founding Fathers.

I'll take the above as proof you know little to nothing about the Founders.


note: yet t hear a credible or rational argument taking Krugman on.

par for the course at the new USMB

 

[editec]

This ongoing debate about what to do about the economy is, or so we are informed, also raging within the governors of the FEDERAL reserve.

In my opinion, the stimulus was:

1. Misdirected in the sense that it rewarded the miscreants who helped create the mess in the first place, and the money was NOT directed in ways that would create REAL wealth; and

2. It was too damned small to solve the problem, anyway.

The problem, folks is that we (meaning the Austrian school economic thinkers who have been running this natuion for the last couple decades) have rewarded the SUPPLE SIDE to the detriment of the DEMAND side of the economic balance.

One of the ways we did that was by creating this insance NINJA loans that forced up the price of RE beyond the incomes of average people.

Another way we've done this is by allowing the SUPPLY side to move industry off shore, (FREE TRADE POLCIES) thus driving down the value of American labor to the point where its purchasing power couldn't keep up with the inflating amounts of money that was going mostly into the hands of the already well off.

And then finally our mistake was granting tax breaks to the SUPPLY SIDE (read the very affluent) who naturally took that spare cash and did what with it?

INVEST IN THE SUPPLY SIDE.

Again and again and again, we tipped the scales in favor of the supply side, and now we're wondering how to fix it?

I do NOT believe this is an accident.

I think the plan is, and has been to bankrupt the nation...in fact the plan is to bankrupt ALL nations, folks.

The 21 century is the century when the one world government is being etablished.

It will come to us covertly, of course, but it will be as real as rain.

That's in part why I am sympathetic to the TEA PARTY partisipants even though they are mostly blaming the wrong people for the problem

They sense the problem, but are being mislead into thinking that the source of the problem is something other than what it is.

FWIW the extreme lefties are likewise mislead, but the narrative they're being told is likewise a load of hooey.

The masters of our economic universe are going to win, BTW. Nothing but a revolution leading to anarchy is going to stop them.

The age of the nation state (which is really only about 500 years old) is pretty much over.

It will go the way of the monarchist states which the nation states replaced, incidently.

We'll keep the form of nations, naturally, since they'll serve as the local system of governance, but the national governments themselves will be nothing more than tools to keep the populations in check.