Krugman rips von Mises up one side & down the other

[Listening]

Reagan's performance looks absolutely dismal.

dear, the Great Moderation was the longest sustained period of economic growth in US history!!

Yeah,

He was just awful.

He wiped Mondale off the map in 1984.....

Just terrible.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Krugman is a good and obedient social Democrat, a leftist theorist who has no interest in the psychology of private business since he's not a big fan of private business.

Theorists are fine, of course, and it's always good to take all reasonable theories under consideration.

But with a big ol' grain of salt, not with genuflection.

.

link? You know how message boards work.

Don't play dumb unless you are an Austrian School cultist THEN we'll take your word for it.

Link to what?

You're not saying Krugman isn't a committed lefty, are you?

.

 

[Bfgrn]

Ironically there is no industrialized nation whose economy is based on "Austrian school" foolishness. ...

This is basically the "question libertarians can't answer" nonsense. And the answer is essentially the same. You can't maintain a large authoritarian state on Austrian economics, nor libertarian political ideology.

The law of the jungle (Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology) is not a form of civilization.

 

[Bfgrn]

Coolidge and Mellon used Austrian economics and dropped unemployment from 12% to 4 in 18 months. When Coolidge left in 1928 you could not find an unemployed person in all of the USA.

FDR took a recession similar to the one Coolidge inherited and used it to give us 8 years of 20% average unemployment. The economy grew under FDR only because the Fed restored some on the money they siphoned out under Hoover in order to cause the crash and the recession in the first place.

FDR's central planned economy was the biggest fail in human history

You're starting to make sense Frank...

Hey Frank, ask the American farmer how great Coolidge was...as their farms were being foreclosed on...

Coolidge's laissez-faire policies LED to the great depression.


FDR and the New Deal were a HUGE success.

Top Five Years for GDP Expansion:

1942, +18.5%
1941, +17.1%
1943, +16.4%
1936, +13.0%
1934, +10.9%

Top Five Years for GDP Contraction:

1932, -13.1%
1946, -10.9%
1930, -8.6%
1931, -6.5%
2009, -3.5%



The greatest yearly increase in GDP occurred during the New Deal, AND, the LARGEST DROP IN UNEPLOYMENT in America history occurred during the New Deal...


Census document HS-29 (available in PDF). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:

ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -9.0
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.7%

ROOSEVELT WWII
1941 Unemployment Rate: 9.9% (5.5 million total unemployed)
1944 Unemployment Rate: 1.2% (670,000 total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -8.7
Total unemployment percentage change: -87.9%

TRUMAN
1945 Unemployment Rate: 1.9% (1.0 million total unemployed)
1952 Unemployment Rate: 3.0% (1.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +1.1
Total unemployment percentage change: +81.0%

EISENHOWER
1953 Unemployment Rate: 2.9% (1.8 million total unemployed)
1960 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (3.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: +110.03%

KENNEDY
1961 Unemployment Rate: 6.7% (4.7 million total unemployed)
1963 Unemployment Rate: 5.7% (4.0 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.0%
Total unemployment percentage change: -13.6%

JOHNSON
1964 Unemployment Rate: 5.2% (3.7 million total unemployed)
1968 Unemployment Rate: 3.6% (2.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: -25.6%

NIXON
1969 Unemployment Rate: 3.5% (2.8 million total unemployed)
1974 Unemployment Rate: 5.6% (5.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: +82.0%

FORD
1975 Unemployment Rate: 8.5% (7.9 million total unemployed)
1976 Unemployment Rate: 7.7% (7.4 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -0.8%
Total unemployment percentage change: -6.6%

CARTER
1977 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (6.9 million total unemployed)
1980 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (7.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.0
Total unemployment percentage change: +9.24%

REAGAN
1981 Unemployment Rate: 7.6% (8.2 million total unemployed)
1988 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (6.7 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: -19.0%

BUSH I
1989 Unemployment Rate: 5.3% (6.5 million total unemployed)
1992 Unemployment Rate: 7.5% (9.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.2
Total unemployment percentage change: +47.2%

CLINTON
1993 Unemployment Rate: 6.9% (8.9 million total unemployed)
2000 Unemployment Rate: 4.0% (5.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change -2.9
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.3%

As you can see, in terms of the unemployment rate - that is, the percentage of the total workforce not working - the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the single largest drop in American history. Yes, I'll say that again for conservatives, just to make sure they get it: The PRE-WWII New Deal era from 1933-1940 - not the WWII era - saw the largest drop in the unemployment rate in American history. And by the way, that even includes the recession of 1937-1938.

Now, it is certainly true that the percentage drop of total unemployed was bigger in WWII than it was in the pre-WWII New Deal era. But as the data show, even by that metric, the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the second largest percentage drop in total unemployed in the 20th century, going from 12.8 million unemployed in Roosevelt's first year in office to 8.1 million unemployed at the end of his second term in 1940. That's a 36.7 percent drop - larger than the Clinton era (36.3%) and, yes conservatives, larger than the Reagan era (a mere 19%). At the absolute minimum, that would suggests the New Deal was a positive - not negative - economic force (and empirically more positive than, say, Reagan's free-market agenda).

These are the hard and fast numbers conservatives would like us all to forget with their claim that history proves massive spending packages like the New Deal will supposedly harm our economy.

The Forgotten Math: Pre-WWII New Deal Saw Biggest Drop In Unemployment Rate in American History

You realize that you are crediting Hitler's conquest of Poland, France and the Lowlands for FDR's economic success

FDR's first 2 terms unemployment AVERAGED 20%

LINK?

 

[gipper]

It would seem that those on the Left who denigrate Mises and Austrian economics, think another world war would be good for the economy. I believe that fool Krugman stated as much...and many believe war is good for the economy. Nothing could be further from the truth.

War is terribly costly, but it benefits big centralized government...that is why they continually push for more war and set up events to dupe the people into going to war.

The Austrians have been right all along...but the power elite will never follow their rules, because doing so would put control of the economy into the hands of the people. Can't have that!

One has to be a complete big government dupe, to think Keynesian/Big Gov economics works.

 

[Bfgrn]

It would seem that those on the Left who denigrate Mises and Austrian economics, think another world war would be good for the economy. I believe that fool Krugman stated as much...and many believe war is good for the economy. Nothing could be further from the truth.

War is terribly costly, but it benefits big centralized government...that is why they continually push for more war and set up events to dupe the people into going to war.

The Austrians have been right all along...but the power elite will never follow their rules, because doing so would put control of the economy into the hands of the people. Can't have that!

One has to be a complete big government dupe, to think Keynesian/Big Gov economics works.

Social Darwinism, survival of the richest is not civilization, it is the law of the jungle

 

[gipper]

It would seem that those on the Left who denigrate Mises and Austrian economics, think another world war would be good for the economy. I believe that fool Krugman stated as much...and many believe war is good for the economy. Nothing could be further from the truth.

War is terribly costly, but it benefits big centralized government...that is why they continually push for more war and set up events to dupe the people into going to war.

The Austrians have been right all along...but the power elite will never follow their rules, because doing so would put control of the economy into the hands of the people. Can't have that!

One has to be a complete big government dupe, to think Keynesian/Big Gov economics works.

Social Darwinism, survival of the richest is not civilization, it is the law of the jungle

This is exactly what we have now. Big government crony capitalism benefits the few who are connected.

Too bad you can't see that.

 

[Bfgrn]

It would seem that those on the Left who denigrate Mises and Austrian economics, think another world war would be good for the economy. I believe that fool Krugman stated as much...and many believe war is good for the economy. Nothing could be further from the truth.

War is terribly costly, but it benefits big centralized government...that is why they continually push for more war and set up events to dupe the people into going to war.

The Austrians have been right all along...but the power elite will never follow their rules, because doing so would put control of the economy into the hands of the people. Can't have that!

One has to be a complete big government dupe, to think Keynesian/Big Gov economics works.

Social Darwinism, survival of the richest is not civilization, it is the law of the jungle

This is exactly what we have now. Big government crony capitalism benefits the few who are connected.

Too bad you can't see that.

And the closer we have moved toward "laissez-faire" and away from a mixed economy that was put in place by Democrats from FDR to LBJ, MORE crony capitalism has occurred.

Too bad YOU can't see that...

"Harry Truman once said, 'There are 14 or 15 million Americans who have the resources to have representatives in Washington to protect their interests, and that the interests of the great mass of the other people - the 150 or 160 million - is the responsibility of the president of the United States, and I propose to fulfill it.'"
President John F. Kennedy

 

[gipper]

Social Darwinism, survival of the richest is not civilization, it is the law of the jungle

This is exactly what we have now. Big government crony capitalism benefits the few who are connected.

Too bad you can't see that.

And the closer we have moved toward "laissez-faire" and away from a mixed economy that was put in place by Democrats from FDR to LBJ, MORE crony capitalism has occurred.

Too bad YOU can't see that...

"Harry Truman once said, 'There are 14 or 15 million Americans who have the resources to have representatives in Washington to protect their interests, and that the interests of the great mass of the other people - the 150 or 160 million - is the responsibility of the president of the United States, and I propose to fulfill it.'"
President John F. Kennedy

Oh brother!!! another Ds good Rs bad...nutter.

Wake up...both parties are the same. They both love big government statism/progressive bullshit.

One would think after all the centuries of failed control of society by a small elite, you big government lovers would wake up....but sadly, NO.

 

[dblack]

Ironically there is no industrialized nation whose economy is based on "Austrian school" foolishness. ...

This is basically the "question libertarians can't answer" nonsense. And the answer is essentially the same. You can't maintain a large authoritarian state on Austrian economics, nor libertarian political ideology.

The law of the jungle (Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology) is not a form of civilization.

It's also not an accurate description of Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology).

 

[Bfgrn]

This is basically the "question libertarians can't answer" nonsense. And the answer is essentially the same. You can't maintain a large authoritarian state on Austrian economics, nor libertarian political ideology.

The law of the jungle (Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology) is not a form of civilization.

It's also not an accurate description of Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology).

It most CERTAINLY is.

PLEASE define the "boundaries"

The pieties of libertarianism and free markets sound pretty, but they cannot withstand even a cursory inspection. Libertarianism does not support democracy; taken to an extreme, it entails the law of the jungle. If government never interferes, we could all get away with murder. Alternatively, if the libertarian position is not to be taken to an extreme, where should it stop? What is the difference between no government and minimal government? Attempts to justify libertarianism, even a less than extreme position, have failed. Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. Just as the negative effects of a high fever do not certify the health benefits of the opposite extreme, hypothermia, the dismal failure of communism, seeking complete government control of the economy, does not certify the economic benefits of the opposite extreme, total economic non-intervention.

 

[dblack]

The law of the jungle (Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology) is not a form of civilization.

It's also not an accurate description of Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology).

It most CERTAINLY is.

Buy a dictionary.

 

[Bfgrn]

It's also not an accurate description of Austrian school economics and libertarian political ideology).

It most CERTAINLY is.

Buy a dictionary.

Grow an adult brain that uses logic over ideology.

Nothing turns out to be so oppressive and unjust as a feeble government.
Edmund Burke

 

[dblack]

It most CERTAINLY is.

Buy a dictionary.

Grow an adult brain that uses logic over ideology.

Nothing turns out to be so oppressive and unjust as a feeble government.
Edmund Burke

You're shadow boxing. I have no interest in defending you from your demented fantasies.

 

[Bfgrn]

Buy a dictionary.

Grow an adult brain that uses logic over ideology.

Nothing turns out to be so oppressive and unjust as a feeble government.
Edmund Burke

You're shadow boxing. I have no interest in defending you from your demented fantasies.

I have no "demented fantasies". I have common sense and logic, not the dogma and extreme ideology that drives you.

Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. It has led to HUGE wealth disparity in this country, and HUGE economic meltdowns like the recent financial crisis Obama inherited. It was NOT caused by government intervention, it was caused by government NON-intervention. It was not caused by lenders following government lending standards, it was PRIVATE lenders operating outside government lending standards. It was PRIVATE entities pursuing personal gain with no regard for the common good of the nation. Government's sole job is to protect the common good. THAT is what our founding fathers created and envisioned.

"Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it."
John Adams, Founding Father and 2nd President; Thoughts on Government, 1776

"The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust."
James Madison, Founding Father and 4th President; Federalist Papers, No. 57, February 19, 1788

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You're starting to make sense Frank...

Hey Frank, ask the American farmer how great Coolidge was...as their farms were being foreclosed on...

Coolidge's laissez-faire policies LED to the great depression.


FDR and the New Deal were a HUGE success.

Top Five Years for GDP Expansion:

1942, +18.5%
1941, +17.1%
1943, +16.4%
1936, +13.0%
1934, +10.9%

Top Five Years for GDP Contraction:

1932, -13.1%
1946, -10.9%
1930, -8.6%
1931, -6.5%
2009, -3.5%



The greatest yearly increase in GDP occurred during the New Deal, AND, the LARGEST DROP IN UNEPLOYMENT in America history occurred during the New Deal...


Census document HS-29 (available in PDF). Quoting directly from Census data, here are the unemployment rates and total number of official unemployed at the beginning and end of the presidential terms since the Great Depression:

ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -9.0
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.7%

ROOSEVELT WWII
1941 Unemployment Rate: 9.9% (5.5 million total unemployed)
1944 Unemployment Rate: 1.2% (670,000 total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -8.7
Total unemployment percentage change: -87.9%

TRUMAN
1945 Unemployment Rate: 1.9% (1.0 million total unemployed)
1952 Unemployment Rate: 3.0% (1.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +1.1
Total unemployment percentage change: +81.0%

EISENHOWER
1953 Unemployment Rate: 2.9% (1.8 million total unemployed)
1960 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (3.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: +110.03%

KENNEDY
1961 Unemployment Rate: 6.7% (4.7 million total unemployed)
1963 Unemployment Rate: 5.7% (4.0 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.0%
Total unemployment percentage change: -13.6%

JOHNSON
1964 Unemployment Rate: 5.2% (3.7 million total unemployed)
1968 Unemployment Rate: 3.6% (2.8 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -1.6%
Total unemployment percentage change: -25.6%

NIXON
1969 Unemployment Rate: 3.5% (2.8 million total unemployed)
1974 Unemployment Rate: 5.6% (5.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: +82.0%

FORD
1975 Unemployment Rate: 8.5% (7.9 million total unemployed)
1976 Unemployment Rate: 7.7% (7.4 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -0.8%
Total unemployment percentage change: -6.6%

CARTER
1977 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (6.9 million total unemployed)
1980 Unemployment Rate: 7.1% (7.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: 0.0
Total unemployment percentage change: +9.24%

REAGAN
1981 Unemployment Rate: 7.6% (8.2 million total unemployed)
1988 Unemployment Rate: 5.5% (6.7 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -2.1%
Total unemployment percentage change: -19.0%

BUSH I
1989 Unemployment Rate: 5.3% (6.5 million total unemployed)
1992 Unemployment Rate: 7.5% (9.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: +2.2
Total unemployment percentage change: +47.2%

CLINTON
1993 Unemployment Rate: 6.9% (8.9 million total unemployed)
2000 Unemployment Rate: 4.0% (5.6 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change -2.9
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.3%

As you can see, in terms of the unemployment rate - that is, the percentage of the total workforce not working - the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the single largest drop in American history. Yes, I'll say that again for conservatives, just to make sure they get it: The PRE-WWII New Deal era from 1933-1940 - not the WWII era - saw the largest drop in the unemployment rate in American history. And by the way, that even includes the recession of 1937-1938.

Now, it is certainly true that the percentage drop of total unemployed was bigger in WWII than it was in the pre-WWII New Deal era. But as the data show, even by that metric, the pre-WWII New Deal era saw the second largest percentage drop in total unemployed in the 20th century, going from 12.8 million unemployed in Roosevelt's first year in office to 8.1 million unemployed at the end of his second term in 1940. That's a 36.7 percent drop - larger than the Clinton era (36.3%) and, yes conservatives, larger than the Reagan era (a mere 19%). At the absolute minimum, that would suggests the New Deal was a positive - not negative - economic force (and empirically more positive than, say, Reagan's free-market agenda).

These are the hard and fast numbers conservatives would like us all to forget with their claim that history proves massive spending packages like the New Deal will supposedly harm our economy.

The Forgotten Math: Pre-WWII New Deal Saw Biggest Drop In Unemployment Rate in American History

You realize that you are crediting Hitler's conquest of Poland, France and the Lowlands for FDR's economic success

FDR's first 2 terms unemployment AVERAGED 20%

LINK?

New Deal was huge success??

a liberal will be so illiterate as to not know that the New Deal was the Great Depression.

 

[Bfgrn]

You realize that you are crediting Hitler's conquest of Poland, France and the Lowlands for FDR's economic success

FDR's first 2 terms unemployment AVERAGED 20%

LINK?

New Deal was huge success??

a liberal will be so illiterate as to not know that the New Deal was the Great Depression.

One of the resident pea brains chimes in. Please continue to parrot what faux news and your handlers feed you.

FDR was elected by WE, the PEOPLE 4 TIMES...but all of America is just stupid, and the parrots know best...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Dear, the New Deal was the Great Depression was the Great Depression that led to 60 million dead in WW2. Depression and world war are not good. Do you understand.

 

[Kimura]

Dispatching rw economists in his spare time: like shootin' fish in a barrell

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/20...Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body

Ludwig von Mises - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Economic historian Bruce Caldwell writes that in the mid-20th century, with the ascendance of positivism and Keynesianism, Mises came to be regarded by many as the "archetypal 'unscientific' economist." In a 1957 review of his book The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality, The Economist said of von Mises: "Professor von Mises has a splendid analytical mind and an admirable passion for liberty; but as a student of human nature he is worse than null and as a debater he is of Hyde Park standard." Conservative commentator Whittaker Chambers published a similarly negative review of that book in the National Review, stating that Mises's thesis that anti-capitalist sentiment was rooted in "envy" epitomized "know-nothing conservatism" at its "know-nothingest."

Whittaker Chambers also dispatched Ayn Rand's scrivenings as well

Libertarianism and Objectivism was so 1995 for me. I was a senior in high school, I got a copy of Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead from my school library. They were marginally decent works of fiction. As an econ and finance major, we did cover von Mises, Rothbard, von Hayek and other heterodox thinkers, which sort of helps econ undergraduates with formulating concepts. The problem with the Austrian Scool, besides the problems inherent with their ideas about the natural rate of interest and the business cycle, is that we're no longer on a gold standard. It's like giving someone an Atari manual to run a Playstation 4.

 

[Kimura]

LINK?

New Deal was huge success??

a liberal will be so illiterate as to not know that the New Deal was the Great Depression.

One of the resident pea brains chimes in. Please continue to parrot what faux news and your handlers feed you.

FDR was elected by WE, the PEOPLE 4 TIMES...but all of America is just stupid, and the parrots know best...

Actually, FDR didn't spend enough when we look at the Depression in the aggregate.