Economics Ph.D in one lesson if you know difference....

[TakeAStepBack]

I'm aware of at least two posters on this board who have bona fide PhD's in economics. There are another five or six of us who have graduate degrees in economics and teach or have taught economics at four year colleges or universities. Most of us don't bother to post much on economics because we don't want to spoil the fun you guys seem to be having rediculing each other about things you do not understand. It's really hard to take a thread seriously when everyone seems to have the attitude shown on this thread in previous posts.

If there is any desire by anyone to have a serious discussion on economic policy or economic analysis, you have a choice of either self-policing and cleaning up the "Economics" forum or trying the Clean Debate Zone forum which at least starts out more civilly before idiocy sets in.

BTW, I have a serious question: I see frequently posted the claim that Obama has not proposed a budget in X years. I actually read the budget summary and the CBO scoring most every year for the last 40 years or so. Where is this insipid talking point coming from? Is anyone on this board sufficiently brain damaged to actually believe it?

This is a like Paul Krugman column on economics!!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I'm aware of at least two posters on this board who have bona fide PhD's in economics. There are another five or six of us who have graduate degrees in economics and teach or have taught economics at four year colleges or universities. Most of us don't bother to post much on economics because we don't want to spoil the fun you guys seem to be having rediculing each other about things you do not understand. It's really hard to take a thread seriously when everyone seems to have the attitude shown on this thread in previous posts.

If there is any desire by anyone to have a serious discussion on economic policy or economic analysis, you have a choice of either self-policing and cleaning up the "Economics" forum or trying the Clean Debate Zone forum which at least starts out more civilly before idiocy sets in.

BTW, I have a serious question: I see frequently posted the claim that Obama has not proposed a budget in X years. I actually read the budget summary and the CBO scoring most every year for the last 40 years or so. Where is this insipid talking point coming from? Is anyone on this board sufficiently brain damaged to actually believe it?

This is a like Paul Krugman column on economics!!!

yes, the liberals are all so smart and educated but not one of them dares challenge the Austrian concept of mal-investment that led Republicans and libertarians to vote 100% aginast the stimulus and Obamacare.

If that doesn't prove how dead slow liberals are nothing will!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Edward Cabbagehead is so dull and wrong.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Mal-investment and mal-stimulus thy name is Krugman

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Mal-investment and mal-stimulus thy name is Krugman

Yes, the liberals agree with Krugman and it does not even occur to them to have a reason. A liberal simply feels he's right in a bigoted sense; he's a true believer exactly like those who followed Hitler Stalin Mao and Castro!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Cabbagehead shows what the disease of libertarianism leads to: delusion,

 

[Uncensored2008]

I just earned a Ph.D. July before last.

One lesson?

Go fuck yourself.

????

A Ph.D in the migration patterns of Peruvian Sea Slugs?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Do you have a Ph.D in economics or not? Is it a secret?

Only his hairdresser knows for sure...

 

[Uncensored2008]

I thought about getting a Ph.D. but didn't see the practical benefit of it. Plus, I was sick of school and wanted to get on with it.

A Ph.D empowers one to teach, or to become a grant whore. Those are the only practical applications of which I am aware. And most grant whores teach as well as whore for grant funds.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Edward is driveling again.

Jakematters is trolling again. With nothing to offer the discussion, again.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Uncensored can only attack because he has nothing else with which to work.

He works as an adjunct 'grant whore' professor in economics from time to time, he has told us all.

So take his comments with a pound of salt.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I have folks as friends that say Krugman won the Nobel and therefore isn't to be questioned. Every time I point out how insanely wrong his is, it leads to snears and ignoring. It's a following for those who have absolutely no clue on economics.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Uncensored can only attack because he has nothing else with which to work.

He works as an adjunct 'grant whore' professor in economics from time to time, he has told us all.

So take his comments with a pound of salt.

Jakematters thinks that all Universities take federal research grants. Some don't.

 

[Unkotare]

Mal-investment and mal-stimulus thy name is Krugman

Yes, the liberals agree with Krugman and it does not even occur to them to have a reason. A liberal simply feels he's right in a bigoted sense; he's a true believer exactly like those who followed Hitler Stalin Mao and Castro!!

Why oh why won't you answer my question?

 

[JakeStarkey]

No denial that you are a grant whore? OK.

Uncensored can only attack because he has nothing else with which to work.

He works as an adjunct 'grant whore' professor in economics from time to time, he has told us all.

So take his comments with a pound of salt.

Jakematters thinks that all Universities take federal research grants. Some don't.

 

[The Professor]

I'm aware of at least two posters on this board who have bona fide PhD's in economics. There are another five or six of us who have graduate degrees in economics and teach or have taught economics at four year colleges or universities. Most of us don't bother to post much on economics because we don't want to spoil the fun you guys seem to be having rediculing each other about things you do not understand. It's really hard to take a thread seriously when everyone seems to have the attitude shown on this thread in previous posts.

If there is any desire by anyone to have a serious discussion on economic policy or economic analysis, you have a choice of either self-policing and cleaning up the "Economics" forum or trying the Clean Debate Zone forum which at least starts out more civilly before idiocy sets in.

BTW, I have a serious question: I see frequently posted the claim that Obama has not proposed a budget in X years. I actually read the budget summary and the CBO scoring most every year for the last 40 years or so. Where is this insipid talking point coming from? Is anyone on this board sufficiently brain damaged to actually believe it?

I don't recall people complaining that Obama did not submit a budget for 3 years; however, I have read many posts rightfully complaining that the Democratically-controlled Senate has failed to pass a budget in over 3 years. There are articles about this all over the Internet, so I will give you a portion of just one example, an article titled Obama, Democrats not Serious About Passing Budget, written by Ron Johnson, Special to CNN (Updated April 30, 2012).

“On Sunday, April 29, it will be exactly three years since the U.S. Senate passed a budget. Even worse, President Barack Obama and his administration seem to view budgeting as just one more political maneuver. His efforts have been so completely unserious that the President's 2012 budget was rejected by a vote of 97-0 in the Senate. And three weeks ago, when Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-South Carolina, sponsored a budget proposal based on Obama's 2013 budget plan, it lost in the House by a vote of 414-0.

“That's right, not a single member of Congress cast a vote in favor of Obama's last two budgets. That is a stunning repudiation of his leadership. What it really represents is a total abdication of leadership.”

The complete article can be found at the following link:

Obama, Democrats not serious about passing budget - CNN.com

The failure of the Senate to pass a budget in over 3 years is not an "insipid talking point," and those who fault Obama for not taking the matter seriously are not "brain damaged." They are the ones who have taken the time to learn what is going on in the world. Those who actually believe that things are normal with respect to legally mandated budgets are the deluded ones.

When I Goggled the words "no budget in 3 years," I found there were about 354 million sites. I really believe that people on this forum were talking about the failure of the Senate to pass a budget and the failure of Obama to help them. Those who expressed such criticism were correct. When it comes to Obama, I could argue that proposing budgets which were rejected by a Democratically-controlled Senate 97-0, and by a Congress (which includes quite a few Democrats) 414-0, is no better than not proposing budgets at all. It's obvious, at least to lil ol' brain dead me, that Obama isn't the least bit serious about a real budget.

But that is just my own humble opinion (and, yes, I lied about the humble part).

 

[Uncensored2008]

I have folks as friends that say Krugman won the Nobel and therefore isn't to be questioned. Every time I point out how insanely wrong his is, it leads to snears and ignoring. It's a following for those who have absolutely no clue on economics.

A valid retort is; "Obama won a Nobel as well."

The Nobel commission has long viewed the validation of Keynes as the "holy grail" of economics; Krugman provided what the commission desired. I don't begrudge him, he knew his audience and crafted his message to their desires. Krugman is a shlock economist, but a good salesman who marketed himself expertly. "Economies of Scale" are far from a new concept, but leveraging this into a general equilibrium theory restored some credit to Keynes ideas and got the left all a-twitter.

From this standpoint, Krugman is far more deserving than many the Nobel commission see fit to honor.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

He teaches economics, cut him some slack, Professor.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I have folks as friends that say Krugman won the Nobel and therefore isn't to be questioned. Every time I point out how insanely wrong his is, it leads to snears and ignoring. It's a following for those who have absolutely no clue on economics.

A valid retort is; "Obama won a Nobel as well."

The Nobel commission has long viewed the validation of Keynes as the "holy grail" of economics; Krugman provided what the commission desired. I don't begrudge him, he knew his audience and crafted his message to their desires. Krugman is a shlock economist, but a good salesman who marketed himself expertly. "Economies of Scale" are far from a new concept, but leveraging this into a general equilibrium theory restored some credit to Keynes ideas and got the left all a-twitter.

From this standpoint, Krugman is far more deserving than many the Nobel commission see fit to honor.

Sure, if you view the honor on par with a Cracker Jack prize. He's a charlatan selling economic views. And it's rubbish. He should be on late night infomercials instead.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I have folks as friends that say Krugman won the Nobel and therefore isn't to be questioned. Every time I point out how insanely wrong his is, it leads to snears and ignoring. It's a following for those who have absolutely no clue on economics.

Yes, Krugman is primarily a socialist using his status as a economist only to lend credence to his socialism. This is why no liberal will dare defend any substantive conclusion of Krugman's.

On balance its a help to have the greatest lefty economist be an open socialist.