Krugman says stimulus, and Keynesian economics, is a complete failure

Discussion in 'Education' started by Quantum Windbag, Jul 12, 2011.

  1. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/11/opinion/11krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

    OK, I admit that is not what he intended to say, but when you contrast that to what he said about the stimulus two years ago it adds up to him admitting that the stimulus is full of shit.

    What the centrists have wrought - NYTimes.com

    That's right folks, the part of the stimulus that was the most needed because it prevents spending cuts and most effective because it would actually be spent is the part that "wasn’t the kind of job-creation program we could and should have had."

    He is trying to blame it on the tax cuts, but the truth is that it had no chance from the beginning. Even if Krugman had personally designed the stimulus plan to cover exactly what he knows it needed to cover it wouldn't have worked because it would not do what he claimed.

    I would love to say that Keynesian economics is dead, but some idiots will never learn. That list obviously includes Paul Krugman.
     
  2. Wiseacre
    Offline

    Wiseacre Retired USAF Chief Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,025
    Thanks Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,194
    Krugman basically wants to spend 2 or 3 times as much as the original stimulus bill, maybe 2-3 trillion more which would entirely be borrowed (debt). I appreciate that he wants to improve unemployment and kickstart the economy, but I believe if the business climate remains as is then however much stimulus you spend will be temporary. You fix roads and bridges, great; we get jobs for awhile but if we don't have an enironment that encourages growth then it'll be just another cash for clunkers except much bigger. We cannot afford to blow another two or three trillion and end up where we are now but with more debt.
     
  3. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    Ah..so you are willfully misrepresenting what Krugman is writing about.

    Hmm..what is that called?

    Oh yeah.

    Lying.
     
  4. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,432
    Thanks Received:
    12,698
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,887
    His complaint all along is that we haven't stimulated the economy enough.

    Your title is a lie.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,626
    Thanks Received:
    4,860
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,539
    Do you believe that spending more money we don't have is the only way to do so?
     
  6. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    Naw.

    The OP lied.

    Simple as that.
     
  7. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,277
    Thanks Received:
    14,924
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +37,090
    Krugman: We needed $900B ....$2 trillion... $3 Trillion...no! 8 Trillion in Stimulus. YES! $18 Trillion

    Face it, It failed during the FDR Depression and it Failed Finally and Permanently Under Obama.

    Oh, where was Clinton's Big Deficit Stimulus?
     
  8. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    Well except FDR didn't fail. Unless of course you consider the rise of a real American Middle Class a failure.

    The United States did not have a big middle class (or any really) prior to FDR.

    The United States was pretty much a wretched place to live prior to FDR for all except the extremely wealthy.
     
  9. CitizenPained
    Offline

    CitizenPained Dissident-Jude

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,151
    Thanks Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Denver
    Ratings:
    +138
    Krugman has always been skeptical of Obama's social economics (not sure how else to phrase that). I remember his case for Senator Clinton in the primaries re: healthcare.
    *sigh*
     
  10. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,277
    Thanks Received:
    14,924
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +37,090
    FDR was the Biggest Failure until Obama. How anyone calls 15% unemployment over 8 years good for the Middle Class can only be ascribed to some brain washing.

    Thank Hitler for invading France for ending the FDR Depression
     

Share This Page