Nobel Prizewinning Economist Paul Krugman Spanking Opponents Again?

[midcan5]

It would seem the Harvard business school and economic professors are as clueless now as they were in thirties. There is a reason the great depression lasted so long, the infrastructure was for the rich only, business principles were non-existent, and the speculative nonsense which was very similar to the craziness before the 08 crash. Hoover reduced taxes and tried to balance the budget, austerity in a word, it failed. He failed, the republican policy of Harding Coolidge and Hoover failed. Even FDR tried the budget balancing in 1937 with similar poor results. Only infrastructure spending and war spending, plain old Keynesian economics, eventually ended the depression. Today we have a similar situation, there just aren't enough one percenters to support the nation. The loss of the middle class starting in the seventies and eighties has again made America a plutocracy of money with a large following of economic clowns. Follow the money it manages America today. Check the quotes below for the Harvard record of incompetence. Just as off base today. Comfort brings out the stupid in people it seems.

"The Harvard Economic Society, it will be recalled, had come up to the summer of the crash with a valuable reputation for pessimism. This position it abandoned during the summer when the stock market kept on rising and business seemed strong. On November 2, after the crash, the Society concluded that "the present recession, both for stocks and business, is not the precursor of business depression." On November 10 it made its notable estimate that "a serious depression like that of 1920-21 is outside the range of probability." It repeated this judgment on November 23 and on December 21 gave its forecast for the new year: "A depression seems improbable; [we expect] recovery of business next spring, with further improvement in the fall." On January 18, 1930, the Society said, "There are indications that the severest phase of the recession is over"; on March 1, that "manufacturing activity is now - to judge from past periods of contraction - definitely on the road to recovery", on March 22, "The outlook continues favorable"; on March 9, that "the outlook is favorable"; on April 19, that "by Mayor June the spring recovery forecast in our letters of last December and November should be clearly apparent"; on May 17, that business "will turn for the better this month or next, recover vigorously in the third quarter and end the year at levels substantially above normal"; on May 24 it was suggested that conditions "continue to justify" the forecasts of May 17; on June 21, that "despite existing irregularities" there would soon be improvement; on June 28 it stated that "irregular and conflicting movements of business should soon give way to sustained recovery"; on July 19..."

[..]and on and on these fools went till "...and on August 50, 1930, the Society stated that "the present depression has about spent its force." Thereafter the Society became less hopeful. On November 15, 1930, it said: "We are now near the end of the declining phase of the depression." A year later, on October 31, 1931, it said: "Stabilization at [present] depression levels is clearly possible." Even these last forecasts were wildly optimistic. Somewhat later, its reputation for infallibility rather dimmed, the Society was dissolved. Harvard economics professors ceased forecasting the future and again donned their accustomed garb of humility."

You go Harvard! LOL Does the quote below sound familiar. LOL

Reason two for Great Depression: "The bad corporate structure, In November 1929, a few weeks after the crash, the Harvard Economic Society gave as a principal reason why a depression need not be feared its reasoned judgment that "business in most lines has been conducted with. prudence and conservatism." The fact was that American enterprise in the twenties had opened its hospitable arms to an exceptional number of promoters, grafters, swindlers, impostors, and frauds. This, in the long history of such activities, was a kind of flood tide of corporate larceny." Quotes from 'The Great Crash 1929' John Kenneth Galbraith from the Aftermath chapters.

Read the book, read the book. And if you want to understand the present read this one. 'The Betrayal of the American Dream' by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele


"There is no historical evidence that tax cuts spur economic growth. The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent. During this period, the general tax rate climbed as well, but it reached a plateau in 1969, and growth slowed down five years later. Almost all rich nations have higher general taxes than the U.S., and they are growing faster as well." Tax cuts spur economic growth
The Idolatry of Ideology-Why Tax Cuts Hurt the Economy by Russ Beaton
Spending Cuts Vs. Tax Increases at the State Level, 10/30/01
The rich get rich because of their merit.

Larry Summers: Harvard
Bernanke attended Harvard University
Henry (and interestingly John) Paulson: Harvard
Rubin: Harvard
and throw in Columbia and Chicago and we have the evil empire

No argument there, throw in these fools and add Clinton moving right in the nineties and and you have the making of the great recession. Add Bush Jr and the mix is complete.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...-america-s-best-president-16.html#post7311573

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...naires-are-obligated-to-give.html#post7173896

No Rich Child Left Behind - NYTimes.com



"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy." Proverbs 31:8-9

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

back on topic, but the last few posts are all the right wing kooks have left in their tool box. no arguments, no ability to deal with the context of an argument, just alarmist and whacko bullshit

no arguments?? 100% of what liberals say is that taxing and government spending works. Conservatives say when you tax someone he then cant spend so a net gain in spending is exactly 100% and perfectly impossible.

See why we are 100% positve a liberal will be slow, very very slow??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. "If you tell DC to lower the taxes on my millions, we'll all get rich."

correct you are!!! All economic growth from the stone age to here comes from new inventions from the private sector so the more money they have the more likely and able they are to continue growing the economy.

Wealth trickles down, not up. If it trickled up we could give tax breaks and subsidies to the poor and wait for the inventions to flow up- right? What the left really wants is even more trickle down welfare that buys votes and cripples people.