Krugman drives it home again

[Dot Com]

honor your wager welchboi

 

[Listening]

honor your wager welchboi

Kiss my ass.

 

[Rshermr]

Krugman is a brilliant economist in his field, but his ideology clouds his judgement.

to an extent perhaps but he nailed this argument long and hard

from the OP:

So a slack economy could in effect serve as a coordinating device for firms; one way to think about it is that it keeps firms from competing too hard for workers, enabling them to exert more monopsony power. This effect would have to be weighed against the direct adverse effect of slack demand on profitability, but there’s no rule saying that firms have to do worse in a depressed economy; they could actually do better. (I’m going to try some formal modeling on all this, but if anyone else wants to jump in, be my guest.)

Posting it again hasn't made it any less retarded than when it was posted the first time. I have never, ever heard anyone in business say that they mind recessions, except maybe bill collectors.

Krugman is a hack. It's bizarre and unworthy coming from a Nobel Laureate.

Really??? I think you made a bit of an error in saying what I highlighted in bold. But your endorsement of the idaho nut case, Harley Brown, gubernatorial candidate (actually, just one of the many in Idaho) proves you have no ability to make rational judgments about people. Period. Perhaps you are simply trying for humor. Because for the majority of the human population who have been introduced to harley, he is simply another nut case. Just what Idaho needs (I say lovingly, as a person who loves the state, but can not imagine the politicians that the populace elects (remember mr. wide stance???)).

 

[Rshermr]

Posts by tools like Listening and Percyshine and others are meant to kill this thread. They are tools who do not want discussions of economic truth to exist. Kills their agenda. So they use the only tool that they have, since they can not make rational economic arguments. Ant that is the standard conservative tool, the 24/7 attack on whatever the bat shit crazy conservative web sites tell them to attack. The con tool has no other intent than to support what they are told.
That, and a couple people who are still stuck believing in a Libertarian favored economic system that has never existed as a successful economy for more than a year or two (in feudal times). But whom, none the less, keep pushing the libertarian agenda. Because, well, they like it.

So, you come to this thread and try to find the point, and you have to go back a couple pages to find what it is about. And what it is about is a rational argument, worthy of consideration. So, relative to that, I would like to add a couple of thoughts:
1. Recovery from this recession (The Great Republican Recession of 2008) has been slow for reasons being discussed in other threads. It is absolutely obvious that the recovery has been very strong for the corporations, with record profits being recorded and record stock prices. It has not been as successful a recovery for the rest of the population, as wages have been stagnant and employment levels have yet to get to where they need to go.
The why is the question, and the answers are obvious:
1. Right wing politicians in congress have done everything possible to stop stimulative spending, and have been quite successful at it.
2. Corporations have more monopoly power than ever before and are able to minimize US hiring and minimize wages as a result .
3. The economy has become a financial economy, not a production economy.
So, we get great GNP numbers but mediocre unemployment numbers and lousy worker earnings numbers. A Libertarian (read republican today) dream.

 

[Dot Com]

Posts by tools like Listening and Percyshine and others are meant to kill this thread. They are tools who do not want discussions of economic truth to exist. Kills their agenda. So they use the only tool that they have, since they can not make rational economic arguments. Ant that is the standard conservative tool, the 24/7 attack on whatever the bat shit crazy conservative web sites tell them to attack. The con tool has no other intent than to support what they are told.
That, and a couple people who are still stuck believing in a Libertarian favored economic system that has never existed as a successful economy for more than a year or two (in feudal times). But whom, none the less, keep pushing the libertarian agenda. Because, well, they like it.

So, you come to this thread and try to find the point, and you have to go back a couple pages to find what it is about. And what it is about is a rational argument, worthy of consideration. So, relative to that, I would like to add a couple of thoughts:
1. Recovery from this recession (The Great Republican Recession of 2008) has been slow for reasons being discussed in other threads. It is absolutely obvious that the recovery has been very strong for the corporations, with record profits being recorded and record stock prices. It has not been as successful a recovery for the rest of the population, as wages have been stagnant and employment levels have yet to get to where they need to go.
The why is the question, and the answers are obvious:
1. Right wing politicians in congress have done everything possible to stop stimulative spending, and have been quite successful at it.
2. Corporations have more monopoly power than ever before and are able to minimize US hiring and minimize wages as a result .
3. The economy has become a financial economy, not a production economy.
So, we get great GNP numbers but mediocre unemployment numbers and lousy worker earnings numbers. A Libertarian (read republican today) dream.

^ that

Obama has turned out to be too much of a moderate for me. Maybe its because he's doing the "go along to get along" w/ the banking cartels due to Repubs rigging the electoral process w/ Citizens United & McCutcheon

 

[Rshermr]

Posts by tools like Listening and Percyshine and others are meant to kill this thread. They are tools who do not want discussions of economic truth to exist. Kills their agenda. So they use the only tool that they have, since they can not make rational economic arguments. Ant that is the standard conservative tool, the 24/7 attack on whatever the bat shit crazy conservative web sites tell them to attack. The con tool has no other intent than to support what they are told.
That, and a couple people who are still stuck believing in a Libertarian favored economic system that has never existed as a successful economy for more than a year or two (in feudal times). But whom, none the less, keep pushing the libertarian agenda. Because, well, they like it.

So, you come to this thread and try to find the point, and you have to go back a couple pages to find what it is about. And what it is about is a rational argument, worthy of consideration. So, relative to that, I would like to add a couple of thoughts:
1. Recovery from this recession (The Great Republican Recession of 2008) has been slow for reasons being discussed in other threads. It is absolutely obvious that the recovery has been very strong for the corporations, with record profits being recorded and record stock prices. It has not been as successful a recovery for the rest of the population, as wages have been stagnant and employment levels have yet to get to where they need to go.
The why is the question, and the answers are obvious:
1. Right wing politicians in congress have done everything possible to stop stimulative spending, and have been quite successful at it.
2. Corporations have more monopoly power than ever before and are able to minimize US hiring and minimize wages as a result .
3. The economy has become a financial economy, not a production economy.
So, we get great GNP numbers but mediocre unemployment numbers and lousy worker earnings numbers. A Libertarian (read republican today) dream.

^ that

Obama has turned out to be too much of a moderate for me. Maybe its because he's doing the "go along to get along" w/ the banking cartels due to Repubs rigging the electoral process w/ Citizens United & McCutcheon

Mostly, dems of any kind are going to have problems with the filibuster, and with the republicans owning the house. Repubs are most interested in the failure of the economy as long as there is a dem in the presidency. Their interest is in feeding the wealthy, who own them. Just the facts of our broken political system. Then there is redistricting, and add to it the general money in politics, and you have a real problem for any dem who does not want to be owned. Great for the wealthy, dog food for the working man.

I was in a box store last week talking to a clerk. He mentioned that there were many, mostly older people who bought dog food there to eat. Only in america among industrialized nations.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/research/papers/ecaf_2077.pdf

"This article is a response to Paul Krugman’s New York Times Magazine article,
‘How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?’ Krugman’s attack on modern economics –
and many adhominem attacks on modern economists – display a deep and highly
politicised ignorance of what economics and finance is really all about, and a
striking emptiness of useful ideas."

Krugman is often wrong in the trillions column, which explains why he is the Americans Left's favorite "economist"

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Krugman is sometimes the funniest thing in the paper since Berkeley Brethed and Bill Watterson retired.

Most of the time, not so much.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Krugman is sometimes the funniest thing in the paper since Berkeley Brethed and Bill Watterson retired.

Most of the time, not so much.

LOL!!!

He is!

Krugman going to class

 

[Toro]

to an extent perhaps but he nailed this argument long and hard

from the OP:

Posting it again hasn't made it any less retarded than when it was posted the first time. I have never, ever heard anyone in business say that they mind recessions, except maybe bill collectors.

Krugman is a hack. It's bizarre and unworthy coming from a Nobel Laureate.

Really??? I think you made a bit of an error in saying what I highlighted in bold. But your endorsement of the idaho nut case, Harley Brown, gubernatorial candidate (actually, just one of the many in Idaho) proves you have no ability to make rational judgments about people. Period. Perhaps you are simply trying for humor. Because for the majority of the human population who have been introduced to harley, he is simply another nut case. Just what Idaho needs (I say lovingly, as a person who loves the state, but can not imagine the politicians that the populace elects (remember mr. wide stance???)).

You're the smartest person who has ever posted on the Internet.

 

[Rshermr]

Posting it again hasn't made it any less retarded than when it was posted the first time. I have never, ever heard anyone in business say that they mind recessions, except maybe bill collectors.

Krugman is a hack. It's bizarre and unworthy coming from a Nobel Laureate.

Really??? I think you made a bit of an error in saying what I highlighted in bold. But your endorsement of the idaho nut case, Harley Brown, gubernatorial candidate (actually, just one of the many in Idaho) proves you have no ability to make rational judgments about people. Period. Perhaps you are simply trying for humor. Because for the majority of the human population who have been introduced to harley, he is simply another nut case. Just what Idaho needs (I say lovingly, as a person who loves the state, but can not imagine the politicians that the populace elects (remember mr. wide stance???)).

You're the smartest person who has ever posted on the Internet.

Certainly not my claim. And if it were yours, it would simply show you do not get out much. But then I get it, another attempt at conservative humor.
But Harley Brown??? Really, me boy.

 

[Listening]

Posts by tools like Listening and Percyshine and others are meant to kill this thread. They are tools who do not want discussions of economic truth to exist. Kills their agenda. So they use the only tool that they have, since they can not make rational economic arguments. Ant that is the standard conservative tool, the 24/7 attack on whatever the bat shit crazy conservative web sites tell them to attack. The con tool has no other intent than to support what they are told.
That, and a couple people who are still stuck believing in a Libertarian favored economic system that has never existed as a successful economy for more than a year or two (in feudal times). But whom, none the less, keep pushing the libertarian agenda. Because, well, they like it.

So, you come to this thread and try to find the point, and you have to go back a couple pages to find what it is about. And what it is about is a rational argument, worthy of consideration. So, relative to that, I would like to add a couple of thoughts:
1. Recovery from this recession (The Great Republican Recession of 2008) has been slow for reasons being discussed in other threads. It is absolutely obvious that the recovery has been very strong for the corporations, with record profits being recorded and record stock prices. It has not been as successful a recovery for the rest of the population, as wages have been stagnant and employment levels have yet to get to where they need to go.
The why is the question, and the answers are obvious:
1. Right wing politicians in congress have done everything possible to stop stimulative spending, and have been quite successful at it.
2. Corporations have more monopoly power than ever before and are able to minimize US hiring and minimize wages as a result .
3. The economy has become a financial economy, not a production economy.
So, we get great GNP numbers but mediocre unemployment numbers and lousy worker earnings numbers. A Libertarian (read republican today) dream.

If you start you posts with personal attacks, you lose what little credibility you might have had. If you'll notice, the right keeps bumping this thread in the hopes of bringing closure to the discussion. However, not the closure you'd like and since you can't support your yappings, you resort to the use of name calling. Got it.

There has been much discussion around the failures of so called "stimulative" spending. Please feel free to join in those threads and make your point.

Beyond that, please keep in mind that it was the left that propped up GM who now does what you claim in number 2 (and with which I fully agree), and both parties at the federal level depend on these coprorations and keep the goodies flowing.

To your point number 3, it is very difficult to see our way clear of what you call out (and with which I mostly agree). However, it the incessant regulation mode that creates barriers to entry for those seeking to cut in on the profits of the uberlarge corps. So, again, getting to the point where manufacturing is meaningful does not mean tariffs as much as it means finding ways to allow others to enter the fray. The day won't be far off where Chinese workers will want wages that will make them uncompetative in the global marketplace. And as the age wave passes through, new dynamics will also take a stronger position in the whole manufacturing discussion.

As to "tools"....Dot Com is the best of the best. She's a moron who posts nothing to support her claims and never provides rational arguments in favor of her pathetic positions. Looking for the first to "turn and burn" (run away) when things get thick......Dot Com is your woose.

Have a day.

 

[Listening]

Mostly, dems of any kind are going to have problems with the filibuster, and with the republicans owning the house. Repubs are most interested in the failure of the economy as long as there is a dem in the presidency. Their interest is in feeding the wealthy, who own them. Just the facts of our broken political system. Then there is redistricting, and add to it the general money in politics, and you have a real problem for any dem who does not want to be owned. Great for the wealthy, dog food for the working man.

I was in a box store last week talking to a clerk. He mentioned that there were many, mostly older people who bought dog food there to eat. Only in america among industrialized nations.

If you think it is just federal republicans who want to feed government, you are living in a fantasy land. Do you think Harry Reid is really that good a businessman.

How Did Harry Reid Get Rich? | National Review Online

I don't trust the GOP at the federal level either.

Oh, and I talked to someone who works in Box Store (I won't go there on principle), who said the elderly buy steaks by the dozens. I'm sure you are buying that one too .

 

[Rshermr]

Mostly, dems of any kind are going to have problems with the filibuster, and with the republicans owning the house. Repubs are most interested in the failure of the economy as long as there is a dem in the presidency. Their interest is in feeding the wealthy, who own them. Just the facts of our broken political system. Then there is redistricting, and add to it the general money in politics, and you have a real problem for any dem who does not want to be owned. Great for the wealthy, dog food for the working man.

I was in a box store last week talking to a clerk. He mentioned that there were many, mostly older people who bought dog food there to eat. Only in america among industrialized nations.

If you think it is just federal republicans who want to feed government, you are living in a fantasy land. Do you think Harry Reid is really that good a businessman.

How Did Harry Reid Get Rich? | National Review Online

I don't trust the GOP at the federal level either.

Oh, and I talked to someone who works in Box Store (I won't go there on principle), who said the elderly buy steaks by the dozens. I'm sure you are buying that one too .

The right I am talking about simply tries to kill discussions. And I said nothing about anyone feeding government. Get a grip.
And no, you did not. I doubt that you talk to working stiffs, me boy.
And, if you want any credibility, try finding impartial sources for your backup. I mean, National review online is about as bat shit crazy a con site as moveon.org is a bat shit crazy lefty site. Get a grip, me boy, you are loosing any credibility you think you may have. You see, I would not use either site, as I have interest in keeping my credibility. But you.........

 

[Listening]

Mostly, dems of any kind are going to have problems with the filibuster, and with the republicans owning the house. Repubs are most interested in the failure of the economy as long as there is a dem in the presidency. Their interest is in feeding the wealthy, who own them. Just the facts of our broken political system. Then there is redistricting, and add to it the general money in politics, and you have a real problem for any dem who does not want to be owned. Great for the wealthy, dog food for the working man.

I was in a box store last week talking to a clerk. He mentioned that there were many, mostly older people who bought dog food there to eat. Only in america among industrialized nations.

If you think it is just federal republicans who want to feed government, you are living in a fantasy land. Do you think Harry Reid is really that good a businessman.

How Did Harry Reid Get Rich? | National Review Online

I don't trust the GOP at the federal level either.

Oh, and I talked to someone who works in Box Store (I won't go there on principle), who said the elderly buy steaks by the dozens. I'm sure you are buying that one too .

The right I am talking about simply tries to kill discussions. And I said nothing about anyone feeding government. Get a grip.
And no, you did not. I doubt that you talk to working stiffs, me boy.
And, if you want any credibility, try finding impartial sources for your backup. I mean, National review online is about as bat shit crazy a con site as moveon.org is a bat shit crazy lefty site. Get a grip, me boy, you are loosing any credibility you think you may have. You see, I would not use either site, as I have interest in keeping my credibility. But you.........

O.K. Thanks for showing me that you really are nothing more than a hack.

If you've got something to dispute the easily checked claims of NRO, then be my guest. Otherwise you are of the same cloth as Ed Shultz.

You can't keep what you don't have.

 

[Rshermr]

If you think it is just federal republicans who want to feed government, you are living in a fantasy land. Do you think Harry Reid is really that good a businessman.

How Did Harry Reid Get Rich? | National Review Online

I don't trust the GOP at the federal level either.

Oh, and I talked to someone who works in Box Store (I won't go there on principle), who said the elderly buy steaks by the dozens. I'm sure you are buying that one too .

The right I am talking about simply tries to kill discussions. And I said nothing about anyone feeding government. Get a grip.
And no, you did not. I doubt that you talk to working stiffs, me boy.
And, if you want any credibility, try finding impartial sources for your backup. I mean, National review online is about as bat shit crazy a con site as moveon.org is a bat shit crazy lefty site. Get a grip, me boy, you are loosing any credibility you think you may have. You see, I would not use either site, as I have interest in keeping my credibility. But you.........

O.K. Thanks for showing me that you really are nothing more than a hack.

If you've got something to dispute the easily checked claims of NRO, then be my guest. Otherwise you are of the same cloth as Ed Shultz.

You can't keep what you don't have.

Yes, but then, you have no integrity. Back to the bat shit crazy con web sites, me boy. As a tool, that is where you need to be.
Here is the concept that you don't understand, me boy. I do not go to bat shit crazy web sites of either stripe because I do not feel that anyone should have to vet claims any more than required. If I use moveon, for instance, first I would have to vet their claims, then the reader would. Same with NRO. I have enough respect for everyone that I not want to do that. No one with integrity uses such a source without saying up front that the source is partial. Which tells everyone that you have an agenda that you are pushing, obviously. Which tells me, of course, to put you on ignore.

 

[bedowin62]

Krugman is a laughable idiot; about as trustworthy as obama. both of them have Nobels they dont deserve


libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[HenryBHough]

Krugman driving it home?

If I knew he were driving anything anywhere I'd keep the kids and pets indoors!

 

[Rshermr]

Krugman is a laughable idiot; about as trustworthy as obama. both of them have Nobels they dont deserve


libs are losers who lie to themselves

That would be your opinion. And you know how much we value your opinion.
As a con tool, you do not believe in science or studies like rational people. But for those who do, here is an actual study of Republicans that states:

A recently released study finds conservative Republicans paranoid, delusional, and living in an alternative reality.
Study finds Republican base paranoid, delusional - Portland Progressive | Examiner.com

Read it and learn, me poor ignorant con tool.

 

[Zander]

Krugman drives it home again....