So am I saying that Mr. Trump is better and more serious than he’s given credit for being? Not at all — he is exactly the ignorant blowhard he seems to be. It’s when it comes to his rivals that appearances can be deceiving. Some of them may come across as reasonable and thoughtful, but in reality they are anything but.
Mr. Bush, in particular, may pose as a reasonable, thoughtful type — credulous reporters even describe him as a policy wonk — but his actual economic platform, which relies on the magic of tax cuts to deliver a doubling of America’s growth rate, is pure supply-side voodoo.
And here’s what’s interesting: all indications are that Mr. Bush’s attacks on Mr. Trump are falling flat, because the Republican base doesn’t actually share the Republican establishment’s economic delusions....
September 7, 2015
Krugman: "Trump Is Right on Economics."
That'll get links, including mine. Halfway into it:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
122 comments:
magic of tax cuts to deliver a doubling of America’s growth rate, is pure supply-side voodoo.
Dog whistles.
It seems that name calling only helps Trump.
OMG, Trump has Krugman fooled too. Closing a loophole deduction used for the Wall Street Hedge Funds is "raising taxes."
All Trump has to do is announce realistic policy as he coasts into the Presidency. Dewey/Bush is a year late taking The Donald seriously.
Krugman isn't great on economics either.
The smugness with which Krugman dispenses his pearls of economic wisdom, as if economics was a "predictive" science, never ceases to amaze me.
That many people take his prognostications seriously amazes me even more.
At one time you had a lot of people who hadn’t had any economics saying foolish things. Now you have well-known economists saying foolish things.
Regardless of the players, Krugman is only going to be about one thing, partisan progressive politics under the guise of a Nobel Prize winner. He's so freakin' smart.
Krugman is the stupidest winner of the Nobel prize. He once did fineceork in a very obscure branch of economics, but is out of touch on most others. He's a blowhard, too.
The man just keeps proving he's an idiot. He thinks Trump is popular because the Republican base doesn't share the party's "economic delusions."
Right, because the GOP base REALLY supports his and Zero's "economic delusions."
Yeah, that's the ticket. We really want Trump so he will carry on the Dems policies.
Good grief!
Being praised by Krugman is the kiss of death.
I'll have to take another look at Trump's economic platform. Remember, Krugman hated Latvia's austerity, and hated it even more when Latvia's economy recovered. He loved the Keynesian approach that Greece took.
"So what actually happened? As of last month, the U.S. unemployment rate, which was 7.8 percent when Mr. Obama took office, had fallen to 5.1 percent. "
Krugman must know this is absurd. The "unemployment rate" is artificial and has been manipulated by the D of L which ignores the actual number of employed and, especially, employed full time.
Krugman is just dishonest and is supporting his political party with lies.
"That many people take his prognostications seriously amazes me even more"
Remains to be seen if, together, Trump and Krugman can refute the third leg of the pseudo-Lincolnian "prognostication" that said you could not fool all of the people all of the time.
Maybe in the Trump administration Krugman can be one the Top Men that are so good they will make your head spin.
But NOBEL PRIZE IN ECONOMICS!!!
So he can't possibly be just a blathering hyper partisan crank.
Um.
Bush's attacks on Trump are falling flat. True.
But it's got absolutely nothing to do with beliefs about economic theory.
which ignores the actual number of employed and, especially, employed full time.
I can't believe Krugman is such a drama queen. It's embarrassing, or ought to be, for a grown man at the New York Times.
An economic disagreement is a "delusion". A policy proposal is "voodoo".
And yet, over and over, his side is proven wrong when it comes to the practical matter of creating jobs and economic growth. But they just want to try more of the same moribund, sclerotic government intervention.
amielalune: The man just keeps proving he's an idiot. He thinks Trump is popular because the Republican base doesn't share the party's "economic delusions."
Right, because the GOP base REALLY supports his and Zero's "economic delusions."
Yeah, that's the ticket. We really want Trump so he will carry on the Dems policies.
Yup. True enough that the base doesn't share the GOPe's delusions about certain matters economic. But the delusions they don't share are the ones that are of a piece with the Dems' economic delusions.
To agree with Michael K, I challenge the Obama lovers among us to calculate the inflation rate and unemployment rate for Barack Obama the way they were calculated back when Carter was President. You might learn something about the true unemployment rate.
Watch Carly use Krugman's praise of Trump to her advantage in the next debate.
You read it here first.
Angelyne: That wasn't my point. Trump is not the frontrunner because the base doesn't like the GOP's "economic policies" (except, as you said, where they are identical to the Dems). He is the frontrunner because a lot of the base hates politics-as-usual and he represents a break with that.
There are two men in a hot air balloon. And the wind blows across the countryside and they get completely lost. They look down. They're drifting low over a field. And they see standing in the road beneath them a chap in a suit. And so they call down, they say excuse us, excuse us, where are we? The guy in the suit looks up and says you're in a balloon. So one of the men in the balloon calls down and says, you're obviously an economist. The economist calls up and says you're right, I am an economist. How do you know? The guy in the hot air balloon calls down and says because your answer is precisely true and utterly useless.
Krugman has been right on the stimulus (too small to fill the gaping hole in aggregate demand caused by the financial crisis), right on Obamacare (cheaper than we thought and finally bringing some sanity to our out control health care industry), right onto income inequality (the great moral issue of our times) and right on how stupid and brutal austerity is in Europe (and exceeding dangerous to the European Project). He's been right on just about every major economic issue. Mr. Krugman was also right on the Iraq War and 9-11. You know in your hearts that "W" was a brutal, worthless man. But he's dead wrong on immigration. We can't have a welfare state and open borders. We can't have growing wages and a more equal distribution of income with open borders. We can't have unions and lines of desperate migrants seeking work, any work at any wage.
We need Trump in the White House! We don't need morons and entitled losers like Jeb or his clones.
If you think that Obama or Trump or anyone else can tell the Fed what to do I have a bridge for sale. The Fed is the true ruler of America and Krugman is one of their biggest cheerleaders. You want to really change America? Kill the Fed.
Krugman's solution for getting out of debt? Spend more money!
Heh. Now that the pairing has come up, Krugman definitely reminds me of Trump. But as blowhards go, Trump has accomplished a good deal more than Krugman.
Krugman believes one can do economics with only the Demand Curve. It is little wonder his prescriptions are always wrong.
@Spiros, Krugman (and therefore you!) was wrong about the stimulus -- the problem wasn't its size but where and how it the money was spent. Krugman and you were wrong on Obamacare -- the curve is now bending up, as saner economists predicted. Income inequality is and has always been a bogus issue -- and the proof thereof is that Krugman has not chastised Obama for policies that make the obscenely wealthy even more wealthy. As to austerity, it worked in Iceland, Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, and Latvia. Greece talked about austerity, but increased government spending. Portugal is another that claims to be practicing austerity, but it's a strange austerity when government spending is increasing.
Your comment about Dubya constitutes fighting words.
And then you get one right. Sort of like a blind pig hunting for acorns.
So a blowhard businessman is not any worse than reasonable, thoughtful looking politician. Yay! isn't that what people like me have been saying since Trump stole the limelight from the politicians?
The Krugman lie is going to be hard to sell to anyone who can use the internet.
right on Obamacare (cheaper than we thought and finally bringing some sanity to our out control health care industry),
Quite a list of bullshit there, pal.
pm317:
"Not any worse than... (a) politician" is damming with the harshest faint praise ever. You should be ashamed.
amielalune: That wasn't my point. Trump is not the frontrunner because the base doesn't like the GOP's "economic policies" (except, as you said, where they are identical to the Dems). He is the frontrunner because a lot of the base hates politics-as-usual and he represents a break with that.
Wasn't disagreeing with your general point. Trump's popularity comes from a lot more than economic issues. But I do think a lot of ordinary people, even if they don't understand much about economics, sense that there are deep structural problems with the national economy, and that neither party's off-the-shelf economic nostrums are going to address them. Trump, like Sanders, has appealed to that.
I'm sure that hidden somewhere deep within these angry threads and the minds of the cranks who have left them, there is much insight and actual reporting into the positions actually held by either Krugman or Trump.
What's Krugman talking about?
Seems to me Trump's tax plan is based on supply-side tax cuts and simplification. Not a flat tax but one much less graduated than the current rate schedule.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Donald_Trump_Tax_Reform.htm
The man who wrote in early 2002 that "maybe Bush needs to create a housing bubble" (what could go wrong?) should be taken seriously as economist? Krugman's Nobel Prize in Economics is just as meaningful as Obama's Nobel Peace Prize.
One thing that I like about Trump is that he keeps hitting hard on deficit spending and the debt. Under Obama, it exploded, with him incurring nearing half of all debt incurred by American Presidents. And why? Obviously not toovercome his Recession - the last time it took this long to recover from a downturn, it was WW II that pulled us out. Still, he massively bought votes with the money we had to borrow to fund prolifigate Dem policies and programs. We now have a massive dependency class, the hoped for permanent Dem majority.
And Trump keeps pointing out that this can't continue. All the Republican candidates, except maybe Huckleberry, realize this, but Trump says it best. (And, Krugman still doesn't seem to understand this). Interest rates have been bought down by massive monetary intervention by the fed to hide this problem. But that has its own problems, notably likely inevitable inflation, which will blow up budgets as far as we can see.
One of the things that MBAs learn that lawyers do not is a bit of economics. Think of it this way - I had to take as much economics in B School as I had to take Contracts, Torts, or Con Law in Law School (I actually took a it more Econ than I needed). Trump likely had to do the same or more for his Warton MBA. And then used it more as he made and lost billions in huis storied career. Look at the other side - Hiilary and Biden have law degrees, and Sanders is a socialist, which means he probably has even less economic knowledge. No doubt they all think that borrowing money at the rate we continue to do is just fine. And Sanders might use listen to Krugman and borrow even more.
Since when is Krugman opinions on economics valid?
Michael K said...
The Krugman lie is going to be hard to sell to anyone who can use the internet.
Especially since the brilliant prognosticator got the internet wrong, too:
https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/640902100260651008
Not at all — he is exactly the ignorant blowhard he seems to be.
Then there are the highly educated well credentialed blowhards, like Krugman.
I consider the credentialed ones far more dangerous.
Meanwhile nearly every one of Hillary's economic proposals is debunked by chapter 8 in the Ec01 textbook.
Here is more Krugman on Trump.
it’s also possible that we’ll see the rise of a movement that needs a better name. Hmm. How about National Social Democracy? Any problems with that?
Is he joking?
Rhythm and Balls, unable to state a serious point, accuses anonymous commenters of anger. This assumes anger is wrong. This assumes anger within these comments. This assumes anybody will care what others think.
Assume a fucking can opener next time. You economist, you.
If faced with an admission against political interest or abandonment of intellectual integrity, Paul Krugman always chooses his short-term political preferences. For me, Krugman's problem is not so much that he is a bad Keynesian economist, but that he so much prefers to be a nasty political hack.
This almost suggests that Trump's policies are not consistently conservative.
Spiros Pappas: "Krugman has been ..... right on Obamacare"
This comment is laughable. Absolutely farcical. Every family saving $2500/year????? Cost me $6K more per year. I know of no one that saved $2500/year. Not one soul.
The big lie continues.
I'll bet Krugman thinks that the Joker's choice of purple as a favorite color is what has made him Batmans' greatest villain.
I'll bet Krugman thinks that the Joker's choice of purple as a favorite color is what has made him Batmans' greatest villain.
Krugman is a liar, plain and simple. However, he is an unusually skilled liar that has convinced NY Times editors to uncritically publish his work for decades.
I can't stand to read about or hear from Trump ANY more. To think there's more than a year of this political and media gaming ahead.
We are kidding ourselves if we think our vote matters.
Paul Krugman is a coprophage. You can see it in his face. I saw a horrible picture once of a fat woman with what purported to be feces in her mouth. She had such an expression on her face. I can't tell you how reminds me of commence old and white photo. He changed it recently but you can still see the signs. Boy howdy, I'd like to have his NSA intercepts. And an emesis basin, extra large.
Neither do should we share Krugman's delusions of devaluing capital and labor, shifting costs.. around the world, sponsoring corruption through conflation, reducing the problem set (e.g. "planning"), replacing/expanding demand through immigration, etc.
JoyD:
Your hope of suppressing voter turnout is noted.
Krugman's analysis is correct in the sense the boomer generation will continue to enslave their grandchildren, or their neighbor's grandchildren, while bitching about how they the boomers got screwed over and are history's victims. It was taught them by learned men and nothing can counteract the indoctrination. Many of these cretins still believe nobody rich pays taxes, only the little guy. GE not paying federal income taxes is the thin shred of truth needed to override all stats by the IRS confirming who pays what currently in our progressive taxation system.
All of our ruling class are Keynesian in the most immoral sense: They are old enough to stare death in the face daily and, untraditionally, don't care about what they leave behind, only that they get their's while being ablt to bitch about how mistreated they are. In the long run death comes before the first turn when you're 70 years old and as fat as Barb Mikulski or Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, so why do they care what's lies up ahead on the track? Barb and Hill and other fogies want to be known as fierce warriors standing up for equality and in that light, who (decent) could care if they bankrupted the city/state/nation? It was for a good cause, them feeling good about themselves.
I called Mike Rosen, who worked in Reagan's admin. and hosted for Rush way back in the day, and tried to explain the frustration with budgets always going up and up and up no matter who is elected.
Rosen told me I don't understand continuing resolutions and how spending happens in D.C. Which is accurate as there are many, many things to learn about the extent of corrupton and deceipt resulting in unimaginable pain and suffering when it comes to D.C.
But Rosen and his ilk are unwilling to comprehend the true horror, in fact he even joked actual spending cuts "were never an option" under a GOP congress and POTUS or Leftist congress and GOP POTUS (Reagan) and it was naive to think in terms like that, that Rosen and his ilk are incorporting Keynes' policies while saying how much worse it would be if Pelosi were in charge. The argument is "you should be happy we are only $18T in debt and John Boehner is the single greatest spender in the history of mankind, for with Pelosi as Speaker it would be worse."
Again, true, but not the solution to any problem. In fact, it is submission to economic madness.
Therefore, as Krugman's column last week begs to be beleived, the old predicitable "Debt is good and we need more asap" argument along with the "austerity* is the cause of any and all economic problems" lies come along again.
*austerity doesn't mean what Krugman thinks it means. It's not borrowing more and more and more and more while promising to someday make changes so borrowing isn't needed unless prayer's hoping for three or four decades of 8%, or higher, returns on any and all investments are realized.
Here's Krugman engaging in the delusion that his finger is on the pulse of the Republican base.
BAG: Convincing the NYTimes editors to publish your work if they coincide with Pinch's world view is not difficult. The Gray Lady is no longer the paper of record under Pinch.
Of course, per Krugman, we can always raise taxes on "the rich." Let me know if he's still employed after Pinch Sulzberger realizes that the Ochs-Sulzberger family are considered wealthy.
About the article: the usual ad hominem-studded anti-Trump nonsense. “Implicit” racist, “vicious and absurd, ignorant blowhard” are gleefully thrown into the pro-Democrat, anti-GOP opinion hit-piece. Writers such as this one haven’t a clue what’s happening.
Trump – how to analyze the totally unique phenomenon that is Trump. I listened to him on a phone-in a couple of days ago on Morning Joe. They mostly spent the time up to the interview dismissing Trump’s ascendance in the Polls.
But once the interview started Trump completely charmed them! He had them laughing like a comedian doing stand up. He had them nodding in agreement. They all LIKED him. Matthew Dowd was on the panel and said emphatically that he thinks Trump has the nomination in the bag.
Trump’s delivery reminds me of Jackie Mason. The intonation, the timing; to be funny requires impeccable timing. Trump has that.
Trump is not a conservative and he’s not a liberal. He’s a moderate, a middle of the road-er, a practical politician with an amalgam of mostly moderate stances on the issues. Everyone keeps repeating that he wants to “tax the rich.” No, it’s only the hedge fund managers that he has said he wants to raise taxes on, not ALL rich folks - but obfuscation is the calling card of the anti-Trumpsters.
Understand this: My favorite is Carly, with Cruz second and Trump third. And I like Carson, too; he’s obviously a good person with an inspiring background but I think he has no chance against a Democrat nominee in the general election. So until Carly or Cruz equals or surpasses Trump, I support Trump.
I’m hoping Carly gets a big boost in the polls after the next debate(all of which are really just interviews of gathered candidates all at once).
One last point: Many critics are overlooking Trump’s wide appeal. Of all the GOP candidates he has the most potential of gaining significant amounts of crossover votes in a general election. He leads all GOP nominees in Latino polling. He has the blue collar white man vote locked up, a perennial problem for the Democrat Party, a demographic the Democrats lost for good years ago. Trump is an alpha and the ladies love the alphas so I think Trump will do well enough with the female vote. The only question is can Trump attract the independents?
If it is a Hillary vs Trump election I think Trump will win handily. But a Biden/Warren ticket could beat the eventual GOP nominee.
Tom Coburn spent years documenting fraud and waste, during which time every candidate for national office seemingly ran against such expenditures, and they remain.
The answer as to why is because "fraud and waste" to you and I are "money bitch" to the people that get paid. This includes the politicians and the lobbyists they hire as well as the direct recepiants of any largesse.
They don't care if children starve or aren't rescued from abuse because of budget constraints, that's not their problem. Their problem is getting elected, it takes money to do that, and oh yeah, that other gal that would replace our gal is worse.
Way, way worse.
Like totally.
So, the answer starts with kicking the Greatest Spender of All Time, Speaker Boehner, out of office and into the bar he so richly deserves to be spending his time at. Being led by the leader of deficit, debt, and overall spending in Earth's history isn't something most Republicans have any problem whatsoever with though, for reasons stated above.
More delusional and out of touch criticism. Obamacare has bent the cost curve. Fact! When Trump passes a public option, medical inflation will fall further. You people are spending more on health care because Mexicans get sick and you need to pay!
I am Greek and a shocked at the miserable nonsense Americans (and Germans) believe in. Austerity has failed. Greece is the only country that really tried austerity. And what a sick failure! Krugman isn't the only voice, many Nobel Laureates have expressed outrage at the stupidity of austerity, but Mr. krugman's voice is an important one.
I hope Me. Trump wins! And I hope Golden Dawn wins too!
"in fact he even joked actual spending cuts "were never an option" under a GOP congress and POTUS or Leftist congress and GOP POTUS (Reagan)"
That is at the base of Trump's appeal to many. They (we) think we have been lied to all these years. Reagan had a Democrat Congress and, thanks to Dole, even had a GOP Senate for only two years. He was never going to get them to agree to reduce spending and his first priority was to do two things. One was was defeat the USSR and the other was to get the economy going again by cutting taxes. The real culprits are the GOP Congress that was elected in 1994.
Gingrich made a good start but quickly "grew in office" and got enamored of his book deal. The Democrats got revenge on him by creating myriads of ethics charges that kept him distracted. Bill Clinton outwitted him on the shutdown and the rest was a dreary litany of business as usual.
Bush got sidetracked by 9/11 and the dot com bust and the Congress ended up in the hands of Hastert, the real villain in my opinion. The tie in the 2000 election, which I blame on Rove who allowed or encouraged Bush to conceal his old DUI, crippled him from the start.
Now, we have Trump and politics as circuses.
"I am Greek "
There's our answer. Why aren't you in a kitchen somewhere ?
Spiros Pappas: "Austerity has failed. Greece is the only country that really tried austerity."
Sometimes it is not possible to keep yourself from laughing.
No one in Greece pays their taxes. Everyone gets to retire at an early age. Everything in Greece was "free". Then Greece ran out of it's own money. Then Greece ran out of everyone's else's money.
Then Greece elected some more communists.
Times are tough in Greece.
Unexpectedly.
Meanwhile, in the Peoples Paradise of Venezuela they can't keep the lights on or food and toilet paper on the shelves.
Unexpectedly.
"Republican base doesn’t actually share the Republican establishment’s economic delusions...."
This is true when viewing Bush's "voodoo economics" attack on Reagan and the results, as well as immigration, and many things John McCain, Mitch McConnel, Eric Cantor, Denny Hastert, Tom Delay, Kevin McCarthy, et al support this very day.
Any grain of truth Krugman can cling to to sell a lie will do; he's not trying to date the prom queen here.
Drago you're wrong. Google Krugman or Stigitz (both Nobel winners) who tried, unsuccessfully, to warn Merkel and her pack of thieves from destroying Europe.
As for Mr. K's racist comments, we typically own the restaurant, the surrounding property, our homes, etc. That's a big deal! But unfortunately for me, George Bush, your hero, destroyed a ton of wealth during his vicious reign. I should get a tax credit for all my lost profits! We need a man who understands the way business works. No more stupid, lazy Bushes!
Shame on those thieving Germans who won't give more money to Greece.
If only the Greeks could borrow some money for a gyro today, they will gladly pay you on Tuesday.
Greeks are a race? Given the number of conquerors through the years, that is stretching a definition a bit too far, even for a collectivist.
I was in rural Tennessee the last couple of days. I mean chicken coop in the backyard for the grandkids 4H project, go to the co-op to buy dewormer medicine, 45 minute ride to the nearest WalMart rural.
Saw handmade Trump signs.
Krugman is the stupidest winner of the Nobel prize.
It's a tough competition!
Le Duc Tho (who declined the peace award on the grounds that he wasn't finished killing people)
Yasser Arafat
Al Gore
Barack Obama
Kofi Annan
Myron Scholes
Dr. Antonio Caetano de Abreu Freire Egas Moniz
(I also think of Henry Kissinger as a dummy but he passes the smarter-than-Krugman test).
Spiros Pappas: Very interesting comment. So Greece has tried austerity and it has failed. What should Greece do now? Depend on the EU to give them money forever? You do realize they probably won't do that, correct? Are you okay with leaving the EU and fending for yourselves? Are you sure that won't require "austerity?"
I hope Me. Trump wins! And I hope Golden Dawn wins too!
I can't tell you how happy I am that we are getting the same crazy shit that Europe has been getting for a while now. I just hope that our National Social Democrats will start wearing brown shirts so I know who to punch in the street brawls.
"I can't tell you how happy I am..."
Because the effort is too much?
Or is something (else) lacking?
The fact is I know your work, I used to comment as notquiteunBuckley alright, and I know you know (we both know) you could tell him how happy you are/were if such were your inclination.
So let's cut the crap and move onto cheese.
"The 25 percent mark is of some interest: It’s about where Donald Trump stands in the most recent Republican primary poll and where Bernie Sanders stands in Democratic primary polls."
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/422919/donald-trump-bernie-sanders-national-socialism-immigration
Son, Bill has left the building.
It isn't August 23rd and posting an article in hingsight that looks even stupider to bolster you and your point isn't working.
You must try harder, and I have provided you the damn blueprint. Look at his Twitter, as novel a concept as that might be to you.
Attack Trump for freedom of speech hobgoblins. That is your ticket, my good man.
"As for Mr. K's racist comments, we typically own the restaurant, the surrounding property, our homes, etc."
That was a joke but your comments are pretty stupid. I was going to Greece this week but changed with all the anarchy going on. Among other things, I read that Greek restaurants are not accepting credit cards. I assume they must be having trouble with the banks which I assume are intermediaries. I didn't want to be walking around with a thousand Euros in a money belt so I am going to Belgium instead.
Greece will be decades digging out of this. I've been there before and like it but you must know that the economy is a joke and has been since WWII.
So Paul Krugman and Captain Kelo agree on economics. Hell, I'm sold. /sarc
Michael K. -- Belgian gyros suck, but the beer is mostly better.
According to Diana Furchtgott-Roth, former chief economist at the Labor Department, if America today had as high of a labor force participation rate as we had in 2006, then “last year’s average unemployment rate would have been 11.4 percent instead of 6.2 percent.” - The Washington Times 9/6/15
Krugman is either a fool or a tool.
Quaestor, you don't count unpersons.
Birkel, they're a race like cockapoos are a species, said the Irish/Danish guy.
Ding ding ding: Bill has left the building.
Or, like someone of your stats might appreciate, the Billding.
Ding ding ding.
The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie. - Jim Clifton, Chairman and CEO of Gallup
Bruce Hayden please trademark the Billding and any and all potential variations for us and Althouse.
Everybody wins.
...you don't count unpersons.
How thoughtless of me! Emmanuel Goldstein must be controlling my brain.
We are going to the Waterloo battlefield and I might have a beer or two.
I was going to see Philip's tomb but that is up near Thessalonika and that is full of "migrants" I fear. I'd been planning this trip for ten years but I'm too old to deal with anarchy.
"Krugman is either a fool or a tool."
Well I do delcare the boldness or your being inpires uprisings worthy of the name Christian. But that's just me.
Krugman is a tool who uses most every person he has ever seen or considered as a tool.
"Both" is a bullputtuty answer when something more accurate is gestalt verified.
Is a chain a tool?
Then what of Chain, Chain, Chain,
Chain of Fools?
Damn Racists.
"Greece is the only country that really tried austerity."
Really? How much has government spending been cut?
Belgian gyros suck, but the beer is mostly better.
They ain't too good with Italian good, either. There is a little known law of Nature, a consequence of Werner Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, know as the Pasta Corollary, which states that a given European culture cannot simultaneous produce good pizza and good beer, which in turn explains why pizza is always better with Anker Pils than with Birra Moretti.
An infinity of monkeys typing away at keyboards for an infinity amount of time cannot produce the works of Shakespeare, however any Guildofcacconballs comment is well within their capability.
Spiros Pappas said...
More delusional and out of touch criticism. Obamacare has bent the cost curve. Fact! When Trump passes a public option, medical inflation will fall further. You people are spending more on health care because Mexicans get sick and you need to pay!
I am Greek and a shocked at the miserable nonsense Americans (and Germans) believe in. Austerity has failed. Greece is the only country that really tried austerity. And what a sick failure! Krugman isn't the only voice, many Nobel Laureates have expressed outrage at the stupidity of austerity, but Mr. krugman's voice is an important one.
I hope Me. Trump wins! And I hope Golden Dawn wins too!
9/7/15, 1:13 PM "
Some crowd Althouse is attracting, in this instance a neo-Nazi and all around fool.
If I thought Krugman was serious, that would the kiss of death for Trump in my mind. Except Krugman is just a hack, so he probably said it to get conservatives to dump Trump. But it's no biggie, because I don't think Trump is a serious option for president anyway.
Krugman engages in category error, at a vigorous clip, one major problem with the stimulus, was it wasn't really geared to major infrastructure programs, no matter the expense, the general proposition, is they haven't learned from Japan's lost decade,
Does anybody know how many NYT subscription sales have ended this year? I'd guess 50.
Yahoo puts them in the spam folder.
"Krugman is the stupidest winner of the Nobel prize. "
PB, hate to burst your bubble but Obama is a Nobel prize winner to.
Must they compete for the title?
Interesting article that suggests Trump is clearing a path for Ben Carson.
narciso:
The Japanese "Lost Decade" that continues apace 26 years in...
And I was predicting the same outcome for the U.S. when the federal government decided to follow the same stupid policies as Japan. A course correction like that spurred by Paul Volkher and President Reagan cannot get here soon enough.
Oh, that we could find leadership overseas like Thatcher, Walesa and John Paul II.
Spiros, I thought your handle was based upon a character in a Nero Wolfe story, but that's your actual name, I see. I am relieved to find that such as you is not a Rex Stout fan.
@Spiros, it's pretty sad to come upon a Greek who thinks Greece really has been through austerity. Recommend you compare notes with a Latvian.
You are right, however, about Obamacare bending the healthcare cost curve. The trouble is, however, that it's bending the curve in an upwards direction. I don't know where you get your facts, but you might try some reality next time.
@Nichevo, "Spiros Pappas" is the Greek equivalent of "John Smith" in an English-speaking country.
Lol, that's probably how Stout picked the name.
"any Guildofcacconballs comment is well within their capability."
And you could never make a serious attempt to prove that, yet believe it with all your might.
Fair enough.
Well, drunky, it seems the way to bet.
The "Republican establishments economic delusions" are nearly identical to the democrat establishments economic delusions, and that's why the republican base dismisses them.
"Greece tried austerity."
Hate to break this to you Spiros, but no country "tries" austerity. It is generally shoved down their throats because their government has run of out of money.
Krugman calling Trump an "ignorant blowhard." Pot calling kettle "black."
(Krugman, of course, is not ignorant - just wrong.)
true, but some models work better than others, the Russian version was a strict shell game, transferring assets from the nomenklatura, party overclass to the oligarchs and the Russian mob, who were mostly the same people, cutting out the lion's share of the people, the Chilean model which was more freemarket was the pinnacle, but was difficult to replicate for various reasons,
This comment is laughable. Absolutely farcical. Every family saving $2500/year????? Cost me $6K more per year. I know of no one that saved $2500/year. Not one soul.
Well I did (actually more). So fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
Freder I decided your (*%^*(%&*( butthole is cheaper than me (*&^ *&(^(*^ to the (O*&^((* *(&^*)(,'.
I am glad our economic discussions are unvacuuous.
And the only numbers we can trust are from non/unbiased sources paid by taxpayers for reasons justifieable even when not thinking about happy fun folks having good times in the woods and whatnot for our benefit.
If you look at the Greek austerity measures, there are some government spending reductions (though even here these are indicative of a problem: reduction in Christmas bonuses, abolition of 13th and 14th month salaries) most of the measures are tax increases. IOW, the government is unwilling to reduce outlays. No wonder it isn't working.
It's all gonna be fine. Don't worry. It's gonna be great.
It'll be just like Greece. And the Romans. And England. No worries. Send money, guns, and lawyers.
Starving people are fun to talk to. They keep it real. They laugh at almost everything you say.
I tell them, just go to the ATM. They get a big kick out of that.
Freder: "Well I did (actually more)."
Well, that helps explain why you were clueless that it's actually possible to negotiate perks and benefits along with salary in employment.
Any credit Paul Krugman may have once earned for his opinions on economics has long ago been squandered when he decided to go the partisan hack route. Anyone with even a basic understanding of economics would know better than to try and credit a president with a drop in the unemployment rate as if the recovery was due to a president's action. At this point Krugman's thoughts on the economy are worth about as much as Rachel Maddow's.
The sad fact is our economy is affected by forces far greater than any particular presidential administration. We've been having a long-term decline in manufacturing, and are facing a real challenge with the labor-force participation rate due in part to Boomer retirements and the growing cost of labor (which is at least in part due to state/local/federal government regulation of labor, but also affected by higher standards of living, efficiency gains, and cheaper technology). It means our presidents and congresses will have to address these challenges, but blaming or crediting them for things largely out of their control is like blaming or crediting them for the Redskins sucking.
But hey, in Krugman's low-information voter world, much better to stick with the formula of "Republicans always ruin economies, Democrats always fix them." It goes well with a sense of smug.
"Well I did (actually more). So fuck you and the horse you rode in on."
Was the cost of the policy less before subsidies or after?
Original Mike:
Nice try at engagement. But you are missing the larger point, which is that Freder is lying or stupid or both.
Just because Freder has paid less out of pocket (assuming that lie is true) does not make it less expensive.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul's bills will have the support of Paul, so long as Paul is shortsighted and has no moral center.
"Any credit Paul Krugman may have once earned for his opinions on economics has long ago been squandered when he decided to go the partisan hack route."
To credit Krugman is to discredit keynesian economics. Any economist will tell you that a tax cut is as much of a keyensian stimulus as deficit spending.
While it is not possible for a president to fine tune the American economy, he or she can still be pro-growth or anti-growth. Obama's policies are distinctly anti-growth. He doesn't even bother to talk about growing the economy anymore. He is all about wealth transfer these days. So, for that matter, are Hillary and Biden. I wonder when the NYT will publish a long article explaining to its readers that a pro-growth Democratic centrist (like Bill Clinton) couldn't get nominated for president in today's Democratic Party?
Terry typed: "He is all about wealth transfer these days."
Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence.
Blogger Birkel said...
Terry typed: "He is all about wealth transfer these days."
Who knows what is in the man's heart (if anything)? In 2009 the Obama administration bragged about the terrific growth the stimulus was going to create. When it didn't appear, Obama simply stopped talking about GDP growth as a positive measure of the economy and shifted his rhetoric towards income inequality and global warming.
Terry,
So far I have an unblemished record predicting what Obama would attempt to do, as President. All I have to do is assume he is a collectivist who wants to consolidate as much power as possible to the Executive Branch as Congress and the Courts allow.
You are welcome to assume otherwise and be wrong at every turn.
Post a Comment