Paul Krugman to Roger Ailes "FOX is Full of Deliberate Misinformation"

[Bastiat90]

It's rather funny to hear Paul Krugman calling someone a liar when his pronouncements on Keynesianism are full of 'deliberate misinformation,' such as his claim that Hoover was a free market fundamentalist who slashed spending and deepened the depression. Krugman was once an honest scholar, whose writings on trade theory deserve a wide audience. But he let his politics define his work and that straitjacket has pushed him towards deceit and ill thought out prognostications based on fantasy.

[ftlqed]

Fox is really funny, why not cinisism, why not rage and swass, omfg, sermon on trust, try a neutron sandwitch, for damn real, please trade you four 4=mile ilsla nd.

[MrTreantHugger]

MSNBC is full of Deliberate Misinformation.

[mpc91]

Deliberate misinformation, like Krugman using household income instead of per capita income to show an increase in the income gap?

[ktchong]

@mpc91 Actually, if you used per capita income instead of household income, the income gap would be even larger.

[mpc91]

@ktchong - That's just an absolute lie. But I hope it made you feel better about yourself to tell that lie.

But the other half of the misinformation is the lack of mention of income mobility. The data tracks categories, not people.

[ktchong]

@mpc91 Just use some brains: a few decades ago, a household usually had one income earner. Nowadays, a household usually had at least two income earners, yet real household income has not improved. That means the two persons' real income (from the same household) now is not better than one person's real income from from thirty or forty years ago.

[ktchong]

@mpc91 You use some simple logic, and you will realize: shit, our per capita income has declined. Now it takes two persons (from the same household) to earn as much as one person did for a household thirty or forty years ago.

[mpc91]

@ktchong - That's not logic, it's pure nonsense. It would make sense if household size was increasing, and per capita income was shrinking... but it isn't.

Per capita income has increased. And not just a little. Adjusted for inflation, it's almost doubled since 1970. In 1970, median per capita income was $15,920. In 2010 it was $26,487.

Household size is shrinking too. In 1970, only 17% of Americans lived alone. In 2007 it was 27%. Overall it went from 3.1 in 1970 to 2.6 in 2007. Sorry.

[mpc91]

Krugman is unhappy about anyone other than him spreading deliberate misinformation, because he is eventually looking for a monopoly in that particular field.

[aj1918]

Right ON!

[ngv03]

i mean all of those aspects are similar to republicans

[ngv03]

obama gives a bad name to liberals. real liberals are progressives like krugman and I that want everyone to be happy, but realize that the wealthy minority are oppressing everyone else. then u have neoliberal people like the clintons and obama that want to continue wars, mandate private insurance like republicans and sell out to corporations and wall street.

[aj1918]

@ngv03 Obama is a huge disappointment! I want leadership "for the people!"

[mpc91]

@ngv03 - Do you really believe that people who disagree with you want people to be miserable?

Do I need to believe in a state-run economy in order to want people to be happy?

Can I not be in favor of limited government AND desire a greater happiness for my fellow man?

Are you that arrogant to believe that anything other than that is the case? Because I see progressivism as a threat to liberty, prosperity and the happiness of man. Progressivism is tyranny wearing a shiny disguise of populism

[Sappyspartan]

@ngv03 Obama wants to continue wars? Mandate private insurance? What the hell are you talking about? You're the epitomy of what this video is talking about.

[kevhun1]

roger ailes worked for nixon,president nixon had him working on a project to create news etc.this is public record if you search hard enough. we know what happened with nixon but ailes never forgot his mission.now we have fox news,the american propoganda machine.i just don't understand why no one stands against them

[shannkaray]

roger ailes is a blowfish.

[TimeWarp66]

Paul Krugman is an idiot. He just wants to control people's lives and human activity through government.

[s5b678]

@TimeWarp66 What in the hell gives you that idea? Because he thinks some things should not be run as a for profit operation? I agree with Krugman 100% on that, guess that means I am an idiot.

[GnomesAmok]

@TimeWarp66

Paul Krugman is a fucking genius and Im glad he has detractors like you

[TimeWarp66]

@GnomesAmok

Was Karl Marx a genius too?

[pixID4]

george will's my boy!

[JediDude38]

Ummm ... Mr. Will ... do you know NOW why the President "dissed" that ruling by the Supreme Court? The time when your opinion meant anything ended years ago but you're more than welcome to keep "bringing the stupid" with every word out of your mouth. Look up the word PROPAGANDA in the dictionary ... you'll find a "shocking" definition ... every word broadcast on FOX News ...

[gohomewetback1]

@JediDude38 agree.

I actually have freinds stupid who only watch Fox news becuase they think everyone else is lying to them. BAHAHAHAHAHAA

FUCKING IGNORANT SHILLS NEED TO BE PUT THE FUCK DOWN.

[TimeWarp66]

@gohomewetback1

I think you need to be put the fuck down.

[slapshot01j]

I'm glad I didnt fall asleep while george will was talking, so that I got to see the good stuff.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

How can someone claim to be both a socialist and a liberal? A digression from the spirit of the video but one I can't resist. I hope you realize that liberal implies freedom of the private sector as much as the public. If you mean to describe yourself as a progressive rather than a liberal then I would point out that the two terms are not synonyms. However if you are a socialist then simply call yourself that,. It is a self contained political ideology.

[SocialistLiberal]

@GaiusIuliusTaberna So are you suggesting that most liberals are pro-capitalism and anti-socialism? The two political philosophies are supportive of one another.

If that were the case, which it is not, then a "socialist" liberal would only identify freedom of socialism, which it does not. I'm for "balanced" capitalism and socialism, but since the U.S. is flagrantly leaning to the right (you know, all those capitalist conservatives) I advocate on stronger socialistic policies to offset it.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

@SocialistLiberal No I'm suggesting that because socialism is based on the principle that the means of production should be collectivity owned and because liberalism is based on protecting and expanding the rights of individuals they tend to cut in very different directions.

The so called free market conservatives are less liberal than they are agrarian, corporatist and oligarchical. However so called liberals are less liberal and more a halfway point between conservatism and progressivism.

[mythicronus]

@SocialistLiberal In most western countries, the 'liberal' party is considered the right wing party opposed to the usual labor party. The problem is in America, you guys dont have a labor party, both your factions are right wing parties that serve the interests of business people. There has never been any substantial labour movement in the US to have even consider having a labor party of its own. A liberal in its proper term is somebody who advocates the free market and property rights.

[AroundSun]

@SocialistLiberal "So are you suggesting that most liberals are pro-capitalism "

Real liberals are. Classical liberals.  Jeffersonian concept of liberal and liberty. Not the progressive collectivist socialist morons that call themselves liberals. We have to call ourselves libertarians now because collectivists hijacked the term.

[lees200222]

Krugman is not intelligent, he's just a unproven statement maker.

[samson5791]

@lees200222 Yea I guess they just hand out noble prizes to anyone

[truthslap]

@lees200222 I can GUARANTEE that next to Paul Krugman, you are much less than an intellectual dwarf. Why don't you rebut something he's said? In your words, FOX is an "unproven statement maker".

[TheKevinWalker]

@lees200222 Have you read ANY of his books? They're all thoroughly researched, and they all make commonsense points and reccomendations, not super-leftsist overhauls of everything. Such is the nature of an Economist's mind, they are forever bound by the possible. Scarcity.

[samson5791]

@lees200222 Are you kidding? He is very intelligent- writes many college textbooks used today

[Gerkinstock]

Odd that Paul Krugman-- who recently flat out lied and stated that Newt Gingrich spoke out in opposition to the Civil Rights Act when in fact Gingrich spoke out against The Great Society in a column titled "Fear Strikes Out" -- feigns opposition to "deliberate misinformation." When it's The NY Times, LA Times, MSNBC, et al, he seems to think nothing of deliberate misinformation at all. He even contributes to it.

[fomastephanovitch]

How the hell did Krugman win a nobel prize for economics?

It's like giving the prize for science to a homeopath!

Keynesians are the single man standing on the beach with a bucket ready to fight the tide that is market forces.

[samson5791]

@fomastephanovitch Keynesian Economics was implemented after WWII and created an enormous amount of wealth for the US- and there is no end in sight

[fomastephanovitch]

@samson5791

Post hoc ergo propter hoc huh?

I guess you know little about the 1970s and monetarism...

[samson5791]

@fomastephanovitch have my degree in Economics...studied it all

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - It created a great deal of paper money, but it didn't create wealth. It impeded wealth, and justified an awful lot of government plunder and corruption. It has extended poverty, and led to a great deal of suffering, and allowed people to pretend to care, without actually helping anyone.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 It rebuilt europe and created infrastructure here in the us, several gov. departments, the list goes on

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - I refer you to Fredrich Bastiat's Broken Window Theory. Yes, Keynesians have SPENT a lot of money, but that isn't the CREATION of wealth, it's a really big diversion of wealth from people who have created it, to the politically connected. Theft is not wealth creation.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 Infrastructure development creates enormous wealth through jobs- everyone knows that!

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - No, many people are smarter than that. Building a road does create jobs, but what about the opportunity cost. What might those resources have done if they weren't used to build a road?

Again, this in not the creation of wealth, just the shifting of wealth from one area of the economy to another.

I have a question for you, is crime good for the economy? By extension of your logic, it is.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 No thats silly- it creates wealth plain and simple.  Opportunity cost has absolutely no application in this conversation

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - Do you know what opportunity cost actually it? It is central to the conversation. If I take money and resources from a group A, and give it group B and group B builds a road, you trumpet wealth as having been created. But what would group A have done with it if it? Might they have done something with it?

watch?v=QG4jhlPLVVs - This does a fairly good job explaining Bastiat's Broken Window Fallacy.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 I know exactly what an opportunity cost is- I have my degree in economics. It is a foregone opportunity and it has no rhyme or reason in this conversation. Are you asking what else besides infrastructure could the gov have spent the money on?

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - You have wasted your money, or someone claiming to teach you economics has seriously ripped you off. To think that opportunity cost is irrelevant to a discussion of government spending is beyond arrogant.

No, I'm not asking what else besides infrastructure the gov't could have spent the money on, I'm asking what else could the people who actually earned the wealth could have spent it on. You assume the theft, you assume fallacies. Very Keynesian.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 Your statements are incoherent and difficult to follow. I am not sure what you are assuming or even asking on the subject. I have a masters in economics and also teach

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - Of course you think they are difficult to follow. They make sense, and they aren't in lockstep with your beliefs.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 Unless you have an actual degree in economics, have performed complex analysis on these very subjects, or were around during ww2 this conversation is a waste of time. The problem with so many on youtube is they google some article (eg. Window fallacy) and all of a sudden- wow! They are now an expert in economic theory- it is all too common on here. Now if you have an actual question for me I would be more than happy to address opportunity costs, etc. if not please do not waste my time

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - Why would I have a question for you? You assume that I didn't know about Bastiat before I saw the video, how arrogant. You have a level of arrogance that is only matched by your ignorance. Do you know who Bastiat is? Understand the fallacy? Have you ever read Henry Hazlitt? Know who he was? I've read Keynes.

There is a level of arrogance in Keynesians unmatched in society. You don't debate, you just name call. Anyone who disagrees is dismissed out of hand. But with no discourse.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 I am welcome to intelligent discourse. You were first insulting by stating that my "degree is a waste of money". Talk about arrogance- that is arrogant- not keynes!. Once again you are out of your range/leauge in economic dicussion so unless you have an actual question or would like to form some presupposition on a particular subject I am not interested in you statements. Too many people make economic statements without good sound fundamentals in place.

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - So you teach economics, yet your best response so far was fitting of a third grade debater. "Uh unh"? Not really impressive.

"Are you asking what else besides infrastructure could the gov have spent the money on?" I answered - no. Anyone reading my previous post would have garnered that that was not my question. The question is, what might the private (voluntary) sector of the economy done with the money and resources used to build the road?

[samson5791]

@mpc91 You do not sound very bright or open to learning- so I am not interested in helping. Sounds like you are the type that likes to tell people what you think you know, while lacking sound fundamentals- those are the worse! Unless you have a degree in economics I consider your opinion not helpful.

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - Again with the third grade arguments. For all your masters degrees, the best you can do is "you're stoopid". Is your economics class the same way? Do you just insult your students? Do they accept, "Cause I said so" as a backing up of an argument?

I'm guessing that you're as full of it in the classroom as you are here.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 Once again, unless you have an actual well thought out question (rather than telling me what you think you know)...I cannot help you. Best wishes.

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - Once again, why should I ask you a question when clearly your bravado outranks your actual knowledge? Why would I think your well of knowledge would run deeper than the "is not", insults and self-flattery I'm sorry, but you say you are welcome to intelligent discourse, but nothing you've written is above that of a sixth grade history textbook. You then go right back to insults. You assume fallacies, and ignore reasoned rebuttal. So I can't help you.

[samson5791]

@mpc91 PS- Yes, I have read all of that mentioned previously as an undergraduate- nothing impressive

[mpc91]

@samson5791 - Of course they don't impress you. They don't assume a massive role for government in manipulating the economy.

[samson5791]

@fomastephanovitch He is very intelligent. Wrote several college textbooks regarding international trade that is standard in many areas.

[giggleman]

americans are both stupid (thanks to the poor public schools) and misinformed (thanks to the media)

[hallmobility]

@giggleman BOTH the public schools and the MSM have the mission to disinform!

[kyokogodai]

@giggleman I am an American.....and overall, you are correct. The majority of Americans (those that are born/naturalized citizens) only care about their own little piece of whatever it is that they have, and want more! They are ingnorant, much to do with public schools and media. You are correct!

[MrLecam21]

@giggleman this is the problem actually. In democracy you expect people to be able to decide, but if they have no education and are misinformed then you are heading toward a disaster. In the us the disaster seems to be a plutocracy.

[gunsandbullhorns]

The New York Times will NOT tell you what you need to know.

[mefisto706]

Paul Krugman makes me wonder if human live is overrated

[Roystah]

@mefisto706 Roger Ailes makes me feel the same way. I guess that means we're both pro-choice. LOL

[really12345]

It is called propaganda! agreed

what a festival of asses!

[agitcam]

Ya, the best Supreme Court that Corporate America can buy.

[burntonion05]

roger ailes needs to get beat to a pulp