I love how people are like "The stimulas failed" when it was working and then it was just cut in the middle of it all.
Solution to economic troubles in America:
Cut all wars (including war on drugs), cut military spending, focus more on entitlements and education, pay back loans, force politicians to not be able to receive any donations more than 10$ a person, Jail people who fucked the economy in 2008, Make a 2 year freeze on repossessing property, Give people making less than 100k a stimulis.
@Stephaniemroin > Ideologue: An often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology. But you are a fellow citizen who obviously cares enormously about the issues and adheres religiously to the frameworks established by a powerful lineup of libertarian intellectuals that includes Ayn Rand, Hayak, Milton Friedman, Carl Rove, the Koch brothers, Peter Schiff, and on. I respect you for your passion. The worst I can say about you is that you’re wrong.
@stephaniemroin The problem is that we have been pursuing the boneheaded and historically disproven positions that Krugman spouts for far too long. Spending has NEVER created a "timulus" to improve the economy at any time in history (and we're still waiting for the "tidal wave of inflation" he said was inevitable in the wake of the Reagan tax cuts). The demagogues are those, like Krugman, pushing a nonsensical "theory" that jsutifies their further economic intervention that makes things worse.
@ThatBlackPanda Spending bills originate inthe House (which passed more than Reagan wanted every year) while federal revenues exploded. Your "history" is hilarious.
Paul Krugman has yet to be correct on anything. And economists are STILL waiting for the first case of "stimulus" working. It has NEVER happened.
Cutting spending of ALL kinds works; interfering in the econoy never has. And jailing the governors of the Federal Reserve won't help now.
@ThatBlackPanda Spending bills originate inthe House (which passed more than Reagan wanted every year) while federal revenues exploded. Your "history" is hilarious.
Paul Krugman has yet to be correct on anything. And economists are STILL waiting for the first case of "stimulus" working. It has NEVER happened.
Cutting spending of ALL kinds works; interfering in the econoy never has. And jailing the governors of the Federal Reserve won't help now.
Ok... heres a game. Let us compare countries who interfere in the free market to countries whom do not.
Somalia, the symbol of Libertarian Values
vs
Norway, The symbol of Socialist Values.
Somalia- HAS FUCKING PIRATES (how awesome is that) along with poverty death and disease and all those things made by those damn liberals (cause fuck those guys).
Norway- happiest country in the world... meh. THEIR STILL FUCKING SOCIALISTS!!
@ThatBlackPanda Ok ... here's a game. How do you identify a talking point moron with no grasp of the issues? Wait for him to describe Somalia as libertarian or Norway as a success! Somalia, as anyone with a single surviving brain cell knows, is charcterized by warlords (small STATE groups) fighting for control. "Happiness" is entirely subjective and the ONLY reason Norway isn't much poorer than the US is its MASSIVE oil exports.
Money does not equal happiness. I mean look at other countries which are rich but it's population is unhappy *cough cough America cough cough*.
Now... you can make up excuses, but when you look at countries that are called socialist... they do much better than countries which aren't call socialist... wouldn't you say (I say called socialist based on America's term of socialist).
@ThatBlackPanda Since, as everyone scientist using the data knows, so many factors go into relative happiness (primarily expectations) that comparing country "happiness" levels is useless (and an admission that the argument is lost). While money does not equal happiness it is widely agreed that a) lack of money means less happiness and b) there is NO causal or associative link between the economic system and happiness levels.
@ThatBlackPanda I think you are confusing free market capitalism with anarchy. To be a libertarian society you have to have things like strict private property laws, a functioning court system. Does that sound like Somalia to you? And you may want to do your homework on Norway. They are capitalists. Free trade is the rule of the day. In fact they depend on it. They have less stringent labor laws too. Norway is much more libertarian than Somalia. Cheers.
@mixmastermeeks Norway: Schools? All state owned. Hospitals? All state owned Medicine? Socialized Absurdly progressive tax rate? Check Biggest "welfare state" in the world. Yessir and the coup de grace EXTREME REGULATION!!!!! List goes on and on alright. Now, the meaning of socialism has been all but lost due to the Cold War due to America and the USSR sandwiching in the term socialism... But Norway is sure as hell not Libertarian, at least not your definition of Libertarian.
@ThatBlackPanda Actually, Norway has school choice (a libertarian staple), free trade (ditto) and since nothing about Somalia is even remotely libertarian (by any definition), Norway is certainly more so. That it has a large welfare state is because it is paid for entirely by oil exports (without which the country's living standards would drop by about a quarter and it couldn;t afford it). And Norway isn't close to the largest welfare state, ranking 12th in the OECD and lower still worldwide.
Oh, so your saying that big government is good if you can pay for it... ok then.
I guess I am a libertarianism by the American definition.
Cause what I know of Norway, they hold very close to the libertarian socialist view of Noam Chomsky, but his views of libertarianism is much different than the new cooperate owned definition... which pretty much means we get rid of all government safety nets. If you are closer to Noam Chomsky than Ron Paul then I may be able to agree with u
@ThatBlackPanda No, big government is NOT good under any circumstances. Norway is already slowly dismantling its welfare system because it cannot maintain its oil output and without those resources the welfare state is unsustainable. You apparently know NOTHING of Norway as it resembles Noam Chomsky's idiocy about as much as a space shuttle resembles a platypus. In fact, Chomsky's libertarianism more resembles the Great Pumpkin than anything that ever has or can exist in reality.
@ThatBlackPanda Right ... except Norway has been slowly reducing the level of welfare support in real terms and has been reducing its size in terms of GDP (as is easily checked). That you have the opportunity to visit relatives in Norway is wonderful. That your anecdotal experience has any value in comparison to economic realities and official statistics is hilarious.
@AndroidPolitician Yes, PLEASE go whatch his video. Then go to the "Should We Tax the Rich More?" video by shanedk and see the actual exchange that shows how complertely dishonest his video is (he is so convinced of his argument that he has blocked me from respondiong - what intellectual courage!!!).
Yes, go wathc his video. And tell him how much I appreciate his attempts to make me look like Einstein, Adam Smith and Aristotle all rolled into one by comparison.
@stephaniemroin - Paul Krugman is sensible? He called for the housing bubble in first place (in the New York Times in 2002)
On a video for a stimulus THAT DID NOT WORK, you claim Krugman is sensible. Wasting trillions is good for the economy?
His solution for the failed stimulus, was too claim that it needed to be twice as big. It's the definition of insanity. It doesn't work, so let's try it again, only bigger this time.
Economics is a social science, which requires human motivation and action to be taken into effect. Can't say so much for guys like Krugman, who think everything can be put into demonstrations and mathematical models that have been proven to be inefficient. Lets just set up the Philips Curve to maintain full employment Krugman! And we'll employ the labor theory of value to sell goods and services by the states gun..I am sure he would love that!!
@DeDeepEnd1 That moron Krugman said: We didn't spend enough! HAHAHA...Morons like this shill are the reason for the financial crisis. Krugman never debates anyone. He sits in his ivory tower and writes for the New York Slimes. He can't counter argue anyone else's criticism. He is just a liberal Keynesian Owe Bama poster boy.
@DeDeepEnd1 Sigh... Those who don't like what economic science tells them and don't understand its precepts frequently wish to pretend that it's merely belief so that that they can cling to their own ideological religious beliefs. Your comments reflect that, ironically enough.
Paul Krugman, as often, has been so true so early. A great visionary but of course never really listened to by politicians who are bought by lobbies. GOP and many Democrates becomes the party of the lobby, the oil cartel, and the ultra-rich. The difference is that GOP politicians are TRAITORS who claim to be patriot...
@stephaniemroin To the contrary, he didn't predict it until LATE while Austrians like Peter Schiff predicted it well in advance and before that he was explicitly advocating lower mortgage rates and encouraging housing investment!. Since economic stimulus has never worked in all of human history (prolonging the Great Depression), how exactly would "making it bigger" not make things worse?
There's a reason no one in the profession takes this nut serioiusly.
"economic stimulus has never worked in all of human history (prolonging the Great Depression)" the BIGGEST lie ever. Yo, the crazy ultra, you really wanted to re-write history. NO, these lies even repeated thousand times won't become a truth. Hoover has been president THREE years after the Great Depression and his solutions (i.e. your "solutions") have been catastrophic. FDR has been re-elected 3 times w/ marvellous years and a clear correlation... LIAR
@stephaniemroin I am not responsible for your ignorance. The vast majority of economists and even a majority of historians now accept the overwhelming volume of research demonstrating that FDR prolonged the Great Depression, destroying crops, killing pigs, creating regime uncertainty, passing the Wagner Act, while the more serious recession in 1920 ended in a whopping 18 months by comparison. And FDR ran against Hoover's intervention and then TOPPED it!
Again lies and lies: a majority of Austrians say that ... that's the BIG difference. Economy is ABSOLUTELY NOT a real hard science (I'm a physicist w/ rather high impact factor). There are many economists (starting by Keynesians who also received "Nobel" prizes) who also "demonstrated" that FDR had done a great work and Hoover a horrible one. Moreover Occam's razor is on FDR side. Austrians in economy are the new Lysenkoists... pure ideologues and not pragmatists. Pfff
@stephaniemroin Yes, you're telling lies and lies. In actual fact there are NO studies showing FDR did great wrok and most KEYNESIANS concede that FDR was disastrous for the economy. That's not terribly hard to believe when you know that Lord keynes himself criticized FDR's economic policies. Economics is a social science, but that doesn't make it any less valid (or make your baton twirling skills an understanding of physics).
Peuh peuh among many others you can scholar google Gauti B. Eggertsson.
But even more stupid is the second part. Of course social sciences are far less predictive than hard sciences! The prediction powers and accuracies are so incomparable. That's 101 in epistemology... you are displaying your ignorance to an infinite scale! It is pathetic but funny. Thanks to make me laugh!!
@stephaniemroin Seriously, Eggertsson? Compared to Higgs, Vedder, Galloway, Rothbard, Friedman, Hayek, Powell... THAT is hilarious! I have no doubt that you are capable of laughter. I'm more at a loss how you use a keyboard with your sleeves tied in the back. I am quite aware of the differences between the predictive abilities in controlled and uncontrolled environments. Had that undermined so much as a word I said that would have demonstrated ignorance on my part ... rather than yours.
@stephaniemroin Note as Eggertsson points out: His "conclusion is contrary to the one reached by a large previous literature, e.g. Cole and Ohanian (2004), that argues that the New Deal was contractionary." In the final analysis, it comes down to the validity and acceptability of Eggertsson's model (which has not been demonstrated) and refers only to a very small part of the New Deal as opposed to the disastrous whole.
You're not going to win an economic research argument with me.
Losing an economic argument with someone who thinks economics is comparable to physics (which is the most stupid epistemological mistake I've ever heard, even now, it make me smile again!)... if you think so you're so pathetic. Maybe in your own crazy world because you're an ideological fool totally blind-sided and brain-washed by a "science" which is in the same stage than physics 20 centuries ago!! And dor the record DJB Mitchell, Krugman, Stiglitz etc.
@stephaniemroin Since I never argued that economics was "comparable" to phsyics, it's clear that your reasoning skills are on par with your grasp of economics and epistemology. If your skills in physics are comparable, I look for ward to your article in The Flat Eartj Review on why M theory is wrong becasue the letter M is just "too darn squiggly". You're losing the argument because you keep demonstrating such glaring ignorance.
@stephaniemroin Further, neither Krugman nor Stiglitz havd done any research demonstrating the effectiveness of the New Deal. In fact, Krugman's glaring ignorance of economic history (Hoover was a laissez faire guy) has made him a laughingstock in the profession (just like self-proclaimed socilaist Stiglitz). I've never heard of Mitchell, though there is a Dan Mitchell whose done good work. I'm surprised you didn;t mention Brad Delong who has likewise done no such research and is laughed at,
And let me repeat what you missed: the huge majority of economists are Lysenkoists. Their % of prediction over the last century is less than tossing a coin. And MANY Austrians made huge mistakes and haven't seen the crisis come. It's the opposite situation than in physics. You, pathetic economists you don't have the minimum self-awareness and humility to recognize that your "science" is in infancy and you pretend imposing "solutions" you absolutely don't master...
@stephaniemroin You are part right. A virtual totality of keynesian economists are Lysenkoists. We are still waiting for Krugman's predicted "tidal wave" of inflation after the Reagan tax cuts. And we appreciate that he predicted a housing bubble (long after the majority of Austrians identified a bubble) after he had insisted that pumping up the housing market was a good thing.
And finally, the rare times Physics is not able to predict sth, it is the sign of a new era and of new discoveries and even more powerful prediction ( of course, there is always a time of denial but the huge difference is that it never lasts more than a decade contrary to economy). Maybe in a thousand years, economy will have the same quality, but now it is more or less in an Antiquity state... I'm always flabbergasted by the lack of humility of a so often wrong "scientists".
@stephaniemroin Economics, like any science, has its established laws and its areas of discovery (largely because - like M theory - discovery occurs in those areas that cannot be controlled in a laboratory). Economists fully understand this. The physical sciences have many more cases where such controls can be imposed ut tht still doesn't provide full certainty else the shift from Newtonian to Einsteinian phsics could never have occurred.
@stephaniemroin Oddly, you keep arguing from the pretense of knowledge accruing to yourself a level of understanding and intellectual superiority that you have demonstrated beyond question does not exist. You begin by defending Keynesians (whose predictive record compares favorably only with the Marxians) and then proceed to bash the science in its entirety by building straw men and then misapplying epistemological concepts to them. It's pretty tragic when you leave such straw men unscathed.
We agree. The huge differences: economics as an adolescent science is far less advanced than physics WHEREAS it imposes far more "solutions" disguised as a hard science to poltics, citizens, and democracy...
@stephaniemroin No, it has nothing to do with the maturity of the science and everything to do with the level of contriol and experimentation that the observer can engage in. Still, as with every other science, theories must be judged on their ability to explain and their ability ti conform to the available facts. On that basis, Krugman would be thrown out of any other science so fast one's head would spin, which is why he is not taken at all seriously in the profession.
Please note that my book Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Shaped Modern Economics is published by W.W.Norton in October.
Professor John B.Taylor says that: “Nicholas Wapshott brings the Keynes-Hayek fight of the 20th century back to life, making the clash both entertaining and highly relevant for understanding economic crises of the 21st century.”
Read an extract at: sites.google.com/site/wapshottkeyneshayek/
Rather than tell you what I think, I sent a video response. - It's way past time to throw out everything we think we know about economics, politics, and comunication; and reinvent: A rational process is possible... (vdeo is: The Petition - planetjordan youtube)
Here is why I don't like Austrian economists. They claim that we have a RIGHT to property. Why is that? How is this a right more then anything else? We do not however, have a right to health care. I don't understand why property is any more a right then anything else. That idea is simply a stubborn cultural meme. It's all bullshit. Bunch of greedy scum bags. One system is as fucked as the rest if property is the only sacred right they can come up with. Flame me Ron Paulites. Please.
@jimbobanalbeats Property is derived from a man's labor and ideas. When you steal a man's property, you are in essence stealing his labor. A man who is forced to work for another against his will is a slave.
lmao, thank you for that. The insult actually wasn't ad hominem, but it was nonetheless enjoyable. Indeed I would rather not exist in a society that resembles the late 1800's in America. If that makes me a statist, so be it. I would like American society to resemble that of Norway. Socialist scum with their higher standard of living! I'm not going to debate you because I've already gone through my Ron Paul phase and have thus heard it all. You have a nice day as well. Don't be so angry.
Stimulus bills do not work. They do not create capital or financial capital. It just takes money from everyone and redistributes it into the form of earmarks. Even if you spend it, businesses know that it's only temporary, since it's only a short increase in demand. You can't trick the free market into thinking it needs to create more jobs. This is why the bill did not work, and why any other stimulus bill will never work. Confidence in the economy makes people spend, not gov intervention.
Paul Krugman has ONE agenda - the complete Socialization of America. If you can't SEE it, it's because you choose NOT to. He's an agent-provocateur for the Global takeover - and eradication of personal liberty. I don't know what they promised him - maybe YOUR house. Maybe a parcel of land in Ohio. Something. Whatever it was, he is COMPLETELY sold-out to the END of this nation- with emphatic finality.
So, Krugman thinks that the peasants are to be blamed for their short-sightedness because they cut back and save money when times get tough? If all that matters is the mechanical process of spending and the peons can't be trusted, why even bother putting money in their hands in the first place? Why doesn't govt. just print-up/borrow a ton of money, buy a bunch of stuff and destroy it? This will boost aggregate demand, right? (If this idea makes sense to you, please jump off a bridge.)
So Krugman was right; he predicted this recession and he's done well anticipating how the "recovery" would come along. Peter Schiff always says they're be a recession--always--and you guys take him serious. He has been completely wrong 99% of the time.
Also deficit spending worked: Euro zone ran deficits, on average, of 6.5% of GDP and saw a decline of 4% in GDP in 2009. US ran deficit of 11% of GDP and had 2% decline. Hoover ran surpluses. Meaning stimulus worked, just not big enough.
Peter Schiff was right vid. Austrian economics. Central government Keynesian economics got us into the hole we are in now. What creates more wealth and opportunity: a job created by the government or a job created by the private sector? It's about control. It's a huge power play that we the people are all going to end up paying for..
Study finds Paul Krugman is the most partisan economist. Krugman was the only economist to "significantly" change his stances for partisan reasons. Krugman has even gone so far as to contradict his own findings to bash Republican politicians. - Brett Barkley, Econ Journal Watch, May 2010
@islandmuffin The peer-reviewed research was published in May 2010 issue of the Econ Journal Watch (EJW), edited by Daniel B. Klein. Seven Nobel laureates are members of the EJW Advisory Council.
He seems like a nice guy, but come on.... People didn't spend the money because we already overconsumed so we either paid off debt or held onto it for fear of the future.... The stimulus was just more alcohol on an already drunk economy from interest rates kept artificially low without real savings.... You have to save to invest, but what Krugman preached was inflate, inflate, inflate.....
@soliloqy The stimulus was greatly needed for a couple of reasons, but obviously the most important one was to fight unemployment. And there also was the chance of deflation, which is far more dangerous than inflation. This might be hard for you to understand how there could be deflation when the Fed was keeping interest rates low, but the problem was that the banks weren't lending. So because the Fed couldn't save us, even with nearly 0% interest rates, we needed fiscal policy to save us.
@keynesian42 I appreciate your respectful debate, but disagree with the fundamentals of your assertions. Deflation is the contraction of credit, as the bubble burst, which would be good for people who saved their money and didn't overconsume, but bad for those looking to flip property. Deflation also occurs when resources become more abundant like air and water and less like like a scarce resource such as a bulldozers.
@soliloqy You are right. Sorry, for not being specific on what kind of deflation that I was talking about. What I should have said was deflation was imminent in 2009, as a result of a credit crunch, and the best way to fight that chance of deflation was to pump money into the economy through stimulus.
Taking productive taxpayer money and giving it to a government slush fund to dole out to state and federal union employee to prop up their failed pension funds is a failed way to stimulate anything. The government certainly does not know how to spend your money fr economic result better then you do.
@detox4u I'm not normally in favor of fiscal stimulus because I believe that it is rather sloppy. However, when there is a liquidity trap, then fiscal stimulus is greatly needed. And even the pork in the stimulus bills, which usually isn't as large as many conservatives make it look like, can still help boost aggregate demand because you are putting money in the hands of people who will usually spend a pretty good portion of that money on consumer goods.
@detox4u Furthermore, I think it is false to assume that the private sector will always spend its money better than the public sector. Look at the housing boom, for example, many people were living beyond their means and buying stuff that they really did not need.
@keynesian42 im a little tenative to buy into even discussing a liquidity trap as its a keynes specific term which can be misapplied. Certainly interest rates arnt going any lower more by de fact then de jure so its somewhat of a non-sequitor.
The main mistake you are making is that if your actually going to hold the tenant the the public sector is in any way an efficient allocator of goods or money as compared to the private sector. If you really belive that then I would say you are pretty far to the left of what keynes originally proposed which at the time was considered “liberal” but today his ostensible followers like Krugman have taken it to a level he has never endorsed.
@detox4u The public sector is good at allocating goods, but it depends on the sector of an economy. For example, the public sector is not really that efficient at operating factories, but the public sector is efficient at allocating health care.
Many european countries that have adopted universal health care have done so with much success. Their costs of health care are lower and life expectancies are higher compared to the United States.
@keynesian42 Thats a completely specious ipso facto argument. Among first world countries we are in the middle of the life expectancy charts which is more related to the heterogeneous genetic makeup of the states then any simple correlation with health care repayment methods, but if you think socialized health care and big government is efficient then we arnt going to come to any agreement.
@keynesian42 So your saying that the health rationing European model is cheaper then the current American system? I absolutely agree. However if we didn't have a perverse State imposed employer tax incentive which lead to the third party payer fiasco, and ridiculous punitive tort system our current health care would be cheaper then your socialized and rationed European system.
@keynesian42 The Good news for a big brother Stateist like yourself, is that with Obamacare we retain these two unique destructive elements of the current American system while adding in some Euro-style health care rationing. So we are going to have all the problems of a state controlled, rationed care system with none of the cost savings – Wonderful!
@keynesian42 That's why at the recent G20 most of Europe is about to make major entitlement spending cuts so they don't go completely bankrupt like Greece. Krugman is a total moron. To quote Dennis Hopper "it's a fact"
@biggerturtle Krugman is not a moron, dummy. And to cut spending and raise taxes would be very destructive in Europe because it will slow down their economies. It's been tried before with no success.
@biggerturtle The problem with the US's financial position is healthcare costs are out of control, so Medicare will be super expensive. That's what needs to be fixed.
Obama's stimulus has a multiplier effect of about 1.4, so, if government taxes at 25% it gets 35 cents back for every dollar it spends. That covers the cost of a short term T-bill's interest and then some.
If you paid attention to Greece and Ireland you'd notice the price they paid for austerity.
@crambo0349 You are so incorrect. Forget the simplistic math for a minute. Greece is BANKRUPT and probably Ireland, Spain , Portugal and a half a dozen other countries because of their completely out of control entitlement spending combined with the general malaise inherent in their cultures derived in part from corrupt unions. There's a wonderful Peter Seller's movie from many years ago "I'm All Right Jack" by the Boulting brothers. Funny as hell but right on the mark. You should check it out
@biggerturtle I'd be carful with "inherent in their culture" comments. Anyway, why don't we stimulate the economy (because it's working), AND fix entitlement spending. You can do both...
The problem with the US's long term budget isn't stimulus; it's healthcare costs. Fix that! And, by the way, our long term budget is already more sound than it was two years ago.
@crambo0349 Are you on drugs? The long term budget is so weak the CBO warned most recently that we are on an unsustainable course. California is an example of where the entire country will be very soon: bankrupt because of idiotic policies. Cut entitlements, cut spending, cut government and cut taxes and you will see real growth and renewed prosperity.
@biggerturtle The way you solve the budget problem is to deal with what's causing it, in our case that's healthcare. I read the latest CBO report (obviously you didn't), assuming current law our debt will more or less stabilize at 80% of GDP. That's not good, but doesn't mean we'll go bankrupt. Fix the long term budget problem AND stimulate the economy.
By the way, taxes in California are relatively low. Do your homework, particularly regarding prop. 13.
@CurtHowland Well it's a fact that taxes are not exponentially high in California. They're in the upper middle, as far as state ranking.
It's also a fact that the most expensive universal healthcare system in the word (France's) costs, per capita, less than two-thirds of the US system's, per capita. But, even so, the French live much longer, have lower infant mortality rates, and have faster emergency care and comparable non-emergency care speeds.
@crambo0349 Thank you for retracting your comment about taxes in California.
Now, if you go back and check the statistics, you will see that the US "healthcare system" is expensive because of Medicaid and Medicare, tight regulation and licensing. France's system also, like the US post office, has many of their costs hidden by accounting tricks like leaving out the costs of their buildings and retirement accounts.
@CurtHowland LOL you think the "upper middle" is an example of draconian taxation... Why aren't high tax states having the budget problems?
Old people spend more on medical care, but overhead for Medicare is ~5%, while private insurance is ~15%.
It's funny that you blame "accounting tricks". Can you name a few significant ones? BTW, France is the most expensive UHCS: every UHCS is cheaper than the US's.
Anyway, I would love to see some facts. You're only giving cheesy talking points.
@CurtHowland This is going nowhere... I Googled it and I didn't see anything about accounting tricks, though a lot of people made the point that Medicare has an unfair advantage because of economies of scale and high elderly medical costs. It's a good point. Nonetheless overhead is ~3% in Medicare and private insurance is 15-25% (from anti-Medicare info). No explanation of why every UHCS has costs around half of the US's HCS. All you've given are conspiracy theories, so I'm done playing w/ you
True. Neither your bogus numbers, nor my magnificent logic are going to convince the other, since you believe you're right and I know I am.
"All you've given are conspiracy theories"
The inherent inefficiency of bureaucratic management is not a conspiracy theory. There is nothing govt does that is not done better, cheaper, or both, by voluntary interaction of interested people. That's why basic medicine used to be cheap.
@crambo0349 And as far as malaise having become inherent in their (and now our) culture I am absolutely correct. There is a lazy dependence on government programs and subsidy. Only half of the U.S. now pay taxes; are you a Marxist who believes that those who work hard should support those who don't?
The Austrian viewpoint would be to limit the force of government to the minimum necessary to protecting the lives, liberty and property of it's citizens. In a fascist system, private industries are controlled or directed or given advantages over competitors by government. Austrians are opposed to this.
Fascism is just another failed brand of socialism.
@JohnRinNoHo The Austrian's are a neo confederate organization founded by the racist lew rockwell who helped Ron Paul with his racist newsletters for the 30 years they were circulated among the white supremacist and christian identity militias.
You can say whatever you like about what they are supposed to believe, but their actions speak louder than words, even when the words come from people like DiLorenzo who wrote a book claiming Lincoln was a tyrant and that the south should have won.
@obtree Considering that is a stupid right wing attack on Obama, I don't think you are in a position to judge. Of course Obama never actually espoused the ideas of Alinsky, Ron Paul made his views very clear in the "ron paul survival report. Google it if you don't believe me.
@obtree No he founded the Mises institute, among other neo confederate organizations. The southern poverty law center and the Jewish anti deformation league have pages of material on it, and if you actually listen to the lectures given about history on the Mises channel, they all but admit to the worst accusations I could make.
@GaiusIuliusTaberna I'm subscribed to the mises channel. All of your accusations are bullshit. The SPLC goes out of its way to accuse conservatives and libertarians of racism.
I don't think I have mentioned Obama at all, so I don't know how I could have attacked him. I was accusing YOU of Alinsky tactics, mainly the tactic of accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being racist and fascist.
Why don't you read about Austrian libertarianism before you start slinging shit next time.
@Sivels Well since you admitted to being a secessionist I hardly have a reason to debate you further. You've come out as a traitor and an enemy of the republic. What more could I say about you?
I hope there is a second civil war, reconstruction wasn't properly conducted, we should have leveled every city and killed many more rebel dogs than we did. If I were Sherman you'r forefathers would have been made to kneel to a statue of Lincoln 5 times a day. Vae Victis
@GaiusIuliusTaberna are u kidding me...? The father of Austrian Economics was Ludwig Von Mises and his writings form the basis for Austrian Economics and Libertarianism... THE GUY WAS JEWISH!!! Why would a racist base his views on his works and how can TRUE Austrian Economics be some weird supremacist movement ? Ron Paul's racism newsletters were allegedly the work of ghost writers anyway. He's hardly an outspoken racist and it's hard to believe considering the entire foundation of his views.
@neb967 Mises was long dead when lew rockwell founded the Mises institute, what he did or did not believe is irrelevant. The Austrians are a neo confederate front, that is the only point of contention here.
The Ghost writer... was in fact Lew Rockwell, hence why I brought him up in the first place. Look it up if you don't believe me, just bear in mind a partisan blog for Ron Paul is not a good place to find objective facts about him.
@GaiusIuliusTaberna Wait wait so a racist fascist founded a school named after a famous Jewish economist in order to put into place some weird neo confederate movement....? That doesnt really make sense. Also Lew Rockwell was never proved to be the ghost writer but only the VP of the company that published those letters. I dont follow Ron Pauls blogs so I dont know any reason you would bring that up. I just happen to have made some lucrative decisions through the principles Aus Eco has taught me
I listen to Krugman talk about micro, and he seems so smart. When he gets into the "yay government" thing, though, I just cringe.
Foma is right... this whole, "Liquidity Trap", "Multiplier", "Paradox of thrift" bag of tricks is just confusing enough to stop most people from trying to untangle the deceptions.
Most people just nod their head and try to forget.
I agree, he's just another jew flim flam man. You shd see new article in the new yorker magazine. he loves asimov's foundation book cuz of the sick hero who controls whole world w statistics. gross
Presumably this is not the type of world where women have no road accidents, but are the leading cause of them because they drive too slowly in the outside lane?
@fomastephanovitch When someone says shit like "some group"=bad, they are foolish.
It's better than a passive aggressive insult, at least. "How does one assume such a role?"
"Judge not lest ye be judged", even if your judgment is couched in clever passive phraseology. Yes, I'm judging you, but it isn't passive. I'm judging you for judging MrJLT3 for judging BemusedTiger... that's a lot of work.
At least you're a straight talker, gotta give you credit for that.
I was aiming for irony and came crashing to the floor it seems.
Still thinking that the homeopath on the shore fighting a tide of market forces is the best way to stigmatize the soon-to-be out-group Keynesians.
Noting that the resurgence of Keynesian ideas is due to populist bullying rather than a verification of the concept of liquidity trap, my a-holeness seems fair :)
You can't have an export-led recovery (e.g. Korea in late 1990s) if you're in a global slump, and also the largest economy in the world by a land slide.
@njedinjedi Or... optionally... just hand it to the next generation!!! Yay, Government... Mortal men can not steal things from people that haven't been born... that takes SUPER powers... Guvernin' Powers.
Who is going to invest in anything to produce when there's no demand? The private market is on its back. It's the government that needs to spur demand by putting money out there in the form of stimulus. We need to put people to work. Private industry is not doing that; it makes more sense for them to continue to lay people off or not hire. However, the more that happens the less people have jobs, which means they spend less and growth becomes nearly impossible.
Where is the US going to get the money from? It's broke.
The state and federal governments must slash spending now that property tax revenue has nosedived. Even before the bursting of the bubble, government spending was unsustainable.
You combat recessions by doing a number of things: lowering interest rates, increasing government spending, cutting taxes.
You can't lower interest rates if they're at zero. Reagan-esque tax cuts will increase the deficit but won't stimulate the economy (people will save money, not spend it). So you increase government spending to improve GDP, which will increase revenue. Unfortunately we didn't save during the fat years, so now that we're in the lean years we don't have the resources we need.
Re; interest rates, in the US rates must be raised to put a floor under the dollar. The dollar will have to fall to reflect its fundamental value, but without an increase in interest rates and an end to the huge deficits, the dollar is heading somewhere in the direction of zero.
GDP is a useless measure. Sure, Obama and the Fed juiced the economy with cheap money, so we get statistical positive GDP for a quarter, big deal.
You raise interest rates to cool down booming economies, not to combat recessions. It's unfortunate that interest rates are so low because that's one less tool in our arsenal.
Fixed currencies aren't magical. Countries came off of the gold standard in this order: Japan, Britain, Germany, America, France. Subsequently thereafter, countries enjoyed booms in industrial output in this order: Japan, Britain, Germany, America, France.
only example of free-market capitalism=Bush deritatives market
Sorry Xlilxandyx, fiscal stimulus is wrong-if you need to FORCE people to spend by confiscation, what does that show? That the house-of-cards economy made by central banks imposed by law and not market choice, has to collapse.
Liberty IS pernicious for the central banking system because it's inherently unstable as it's meant to facilitate govt control of monetary policy-invented by a scotsman to help finance the Navy basically: hence it makes bubbles, hence banks with FRB are unstable.
All it does is transfer the money from one perception to another. Its like getting a credit card, spend it to the max and then repay the debt later. Damm gov.
leave the free market alone?? how do you think America developed in the first place-------massive government intervention...protected markets, infant industry protection and on and on!!!!
the only place the free market reigns is places where they have had it rammed down their throats!!
Krugman is a weak version of Toohey. I'm tired of the blob; can we get a real villain up in here, please?
Attritive 3 weeks ago
Krugman is a propagandist. Fuck you Krugman.
bladeproject1 1 month ago
I love how people are like "The stimulas failed" when it was working and then it was just cut in the middle of it all.
Solution to economic troubles in America:
Cut all wars (including war on drugs), cut military spending, focus more on entitlements and education, pay back loans, force politicians to not be able to receive any donations more than 10$ a person, Jail people who fucked the economy in 2008, Make a 2 year freeze on repossessing property, Give people making less than 100k a stimulis.
ThatBlackPanda 1 month ago
Paul Krugman = a big bitch
Riddlerx333x 1 month ago
I just want to slap him in the face so hard
LordoftheKaty 1 month ago
@Stephaniemroin > Ideologue: An often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology. But you are a fellow citizen who obviously cares enormously about the issues and adheres religiously to the frameworks established by a powerful lineup of libertarian intellectuals that includes Ayn Rand, Hayak, Milton Friedman, Carl Rove, the Koch brothers, Peter Schiff, and on. I respect you for your passion. The worst I can say about you is that you’re wrong.
bnvogen 2 months ago
The current problem of USA is that sensible and intelligent guy like Paul Krugman are not listened any more.
The demagogues who shout and who are bought by Oil business and big companies are the one we are listening... pretty lame in fact.
Go on USA and democracy and do not let the Repukes lie again and again.
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin The problem is that we have been pursuing the boneheaded and historically disproven positions that Krugman spouts for far too long. Spending has NEVER created a "timulus" to improve the economy at any time in history (and we're still waiting for the "tidal wave of inflation" he said was inevitable in the wake of the Reagan tax cuts). The demagogues are those, like Krugman, pushing a nonsensical "theory" that jsutifies their further economic intervention that makes things worse.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Reagan increased the US deficit to astronomical levels.
I was originally skeptical of the validity of Paul Krugman... buy you just proved it.
Paul Krugman speaks truth.
Thanks bro.
ThatBlackPanda 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda Spending bills originate inthe House (which passed more than Reagan wanted every year) while federal revenues exploded. Your "history" is hilarious.
Paul Krugman has yet to be correct on anything. And economists are STILL waiting for the first case of "stimulus" working. It has NEVER happened.
Cutting spending of ALL kinds works; interfering in the econoy never has. And jailing the governors of the Federal Reserve won't help now.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda Spending bills originate inthe House (which passed more than Reagan wanted every year) while federal revenues exploded. Your "history" is hilarious.
Paul Krugman has yet to be correct on anything. And economists are STILL waiting for the first case of "stimulus" working. It has NEVER happened.
Cutting spending of ALL kinds works; interfering in the econoy never has. And jailing the governors of the Federal Reserve won't help now.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
Ok... heres a game. Let us compare countries who interfere in the free market to countries whom do not.
Somalia, the symbol of Libertarian Values
vs
Norway, The symbol of Socialist Values.
Somalia- HAS FUCKING PIRATES (how awesome is that) along with poverty death and disease and all those things made by those damn liberals (cause fuck those guys).
Norway- happiest country in the world... meh. THEIR STILL FUCKING SOCIALISTS!!
Ok... Fight!
Somalia wins, FREE MARKETALITY!!!!
:D
ThatBlackPanda 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda Ok ... here's a game. How do you identify a talking point moron with no grasp of the issues? Wait for him to describe Somalia as libertarian or Norway as a success! Somalia, as anyone with a single surviving brain cell knows, is charcterized by warlords (small STATE groups) fighting for control. "Happiness" is entirely subjective and the ONLY reason Norway isn't much poorer than the US is its MASSIVE oil exports.
Did you wih to proclaim your ignoance so loudly?
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom
Money does not equal happiness. I mean look at other countries which are rich but it's population is unhappy *cough cough America cough cough*.
Now... you can make up excuses, but when you look at countries that are called socialist... they do much better than countries which aren't call socialist... wouldn't you say (I say called socialist based on America's term of socialist).
France, Canada, Norway, Denmark, Germany etc.
vs America, Somalia, India, Mexico etc.
ThatBlackPanda 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda Since, as everyone scientist using the data knows, so many factors go into relative happiness (primarily expectations) that comparing country "happiness" levels is useless (and an admission that the argument is lost). While money does not equal happiness it is widely agreed that a) lack of money means less happiness and b) there is NO causal or associative link between the economic system and happiness levels.
Still waiting for a VALID argument from you.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda I think you are confusing free market capitalism with anarchy. To be a libertarian society you have to have things like strict private property laws, a functioning court system. Does that sound like Somalia to you? And you may want to do your homework on Norway. They are capitalists. Free trade is the rule of the day. In fact they depend on it. They have less stringent labor laws too. Norway is much more libertarian than Somalia. Cheers.
mixmastermeeks 1 month ago
ThatBlackPanda 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda Actually, Norway has school choice (a libertarian staple), free trade (ditto) and since nothing about Somalia is even remotely libertarian (by any definition), Norway is certainly more so. That it has a large welfare state is because it is paid for entirely by oil exports (without which the country's living standards would drop by about a quarter and it couldn;t afford it). And Norway isn't close to the largest welfare state, ranking 12th in the OECD and lower still worldwide.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom
Oh, so your saying that big government is good if you can pay for it... ok then.
I guess I am a libertarianism by the American definition.
Cause what I know of Norway, they hold very close to the libertarian socialist view of Noam Chomsky, but his views of libertarianism is much different than the new cooperate owned definition... which pretty much means we get rid of all government safety nets. If you are closer to Noam Chomsky than Ron Paul then I may be able to agree with u
ThatBlackPanda 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda No, big government is NOT good under any circumstances. Norway is already slowly dismantling its welfare system because it cannot maintain its oil output and without those resources the welfare state is unsustainable. You apparently know NOTHING of Norway as it resembles Noam Chomsky's idiocy about as much as a space shuttle resembles a platypus. In fact, Chomsky's libertarianism more resembles the Great Pumpkin than anything that ever has or can exist in reality.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom
Right... except Norway is not dismantling it's welfare system.
I heard no where about Norway dismantling it's welfare system... and right now I am in Norway with my Norwegian relatives.
ThatBlackPanda 1 month ago
@ThatBlackPanda Right ... except Norway has been slowly reducing the level of welfare support in real terms and has been reducing its size in terms of GDP (as is easily checked). That you have the opportunity to visit relatives in Norway is wonderful. That your anecdotal experience has any value in comparison to economic realities and official statistics is hilarious.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
Just dropping by so everyone sees @FletchforFreedom 's idiocy en mass.
watch?v=rSfO6LGYCvE
@ThatBlackPanda @mixmastermeeks @Riddlerx333x @bnvogen @stephaniemroin @mpc91 @AroundSun @Shanedk @jjenson2006 @DeDeepEnd1 @nhwapshott @planetjordan @yuri35435
AndroidPolitician 1 month ago
@AndroidPolitician Yes, PLEASE go whatch his video. Then go to the "Should We Tax the Rich More?" video by shanedk and see the actual exchange that shows how complertely dishonest his video is (he is so convinced of his argument that he has blocked me from respondiong - what intellectual courage!!!).
Yes, go wathc his video. And tell him how much I appreciate his attempts to make me look like Einstein, Adam Smith and Aristotle all rolled into one by comparison.
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom
Congrats on sinking to a new level of psychosis where you're now lying that I blocked you.
I challenge you to record yourself trying to post on a comment on my videos or trying to subscribe etc., seriously you're not fooling anyone.
@ThatBlackPanda @mixmastermeeks @Riddlerx333x @bnvogen @stephaniemroin @mpc91 @AroundSun @Shanedk @jjenson2006 @DeDeepEnd1 @nhwapshott @planetjordan @yuri35435
AndroidPolitician 1 month ago
@AndroidPolitician As literally ANYONE can chck on shane's video and elsewhere, I am certainly not shy about staing my opinion on any video...
...and yet there is no such comment on your own primarily because each attempt has met with "You have been blocked by the owner of this video."
Is your lying pathological or are yo really stupid enough to think anyone will actually believe you at this juncture?
FletchforFreedom 1 month ago
@FletchforFreedom
That's weird because I never blocked you and am not shy about accusations of it like people like Lee Doren.
So put up or shut up, record yourself posting on my video with "You have been blocked by the owner of this video" to come up.
If I blocked you I wouldn't be responding to the accusation.
@ThatBlackPanda @mixmastermeeks @Riddlerx333x @bnvogen @stephaniemroin @mpc91 @AroundSun @Shanedk @jjenson2006 @DeDeepEnd1 @nhwapshott @planetjordan @yuri35435
AndroidPolitician 1 month ago
@stephaniemroin - Paul Krugman is sensible? He called for the housing bubble in first place (in the New York Times in 2002)
On a video for a stimulus THAT DID NOT WORK, you claim Krugman is sensible. Wasting trillions is good for the economy?
His solution for the failed stimulus, was too claim that it needed to be twice as big. It's the definition of insanity. It doesn't work, so let's try it again, only bigger this time.
Keynesianism is disproved.
mpc91 2 months ago
Economics is a social science, which requires human motivation and action to be taken into effect. Can't say so much for guys like Krugman, who think everything can be put into demonstrations and mathematical models that have been proven to be inefficient. Lets just set up the Philips Curve to maintain full employment Krugman! And we'll employ the labor theory of value to sell goods and services by the states gun..I am sure he would love that!!
AroundSun 3 months ago
@DeDeepEnd1 That moron Krugman said: We didn't spend enough! HAHAHA...Morons like this shill are the reason for the financial crisis. Krugman never debates anyone. He sits in his ivory tower and writes for the New York Slimes. He can't counter argue anyone else's criticism. He is just a liberal Keynesian Owe Bama poster boy.
AroundSun 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeDeepEnd1 Sigh... Those who don't like what economic science tells them and don't understand its precepts frequently wish to pretend that it's merely belief so that that they can cling to their own ideological religious beliefs. Your comments reflect that, ironically enough.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Paul Krugman, as often, has been so true so early. A great visionary but of course never really listened to by politicians who are bought by lobbies. GOP and many Democrates becomes the party of the lobby, the oil cartel, and the ultra-rich. The difference is that GOP politicians are TRAITORS who claim to be patriot...
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
He was SO right... we should have done it bigger.
Paul Krugman predicted the crisis caused by Bush (one of the few economists to do so). He deserves credit for that.
stephaniemroin 5 months ago
@stephaniemroin He deserves credit for CREATING the housing bubble!
jjenson2006 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stephaniemroin He deserves credit for CREATING the housing bubble!
jjenson2006 4 months ago
@stephaniemroin To the contrary, he didn't predict it until LATE while Austrians like Peter Schiff predicted it well in advance and before that he was explicitly advocating lower mortgage rates and encouraging housing investment!. Since economic stimulus has never worked in all of human history (prolonging the Great Depression), how exactly would "making it bigger" not make things worse?
There's a reason no one in the profession takes this nut serioiusly.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
"economic stimulus has never worked in all of human history (prolonging the Great Depression)" the BIGGEST lie ever. Yo, the crazy ultra, you really wanted to re-write history. NO, these lies even repeated thousand times won't become a truth. Hoover has been president THREE years after the Great Depression and his solutions (i.e. your "solutions") have been catastrophic. FDR has been re-elected 3 times w/ marvellous years and a clear correlation... LIAR
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin I am not responsible for your ignorance. The vast majority of economists and even a majority of historians now accept the overwhelming volume of research demonstrating that FDR prolonged the Great Depression, destroying crops, killing pigs, creating regime uncertainty, passing the Wagner Act, while the more serious recession in 1920 ended in a whopping 18 months by comparison. And FDR ran against Hoover's intervention and then TOPPED it!
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Again lies and lies: a majority of Austrians say that ... that's the BIG difference. Economy is ABSOLUTELY NOT a real hard science (I'm a physicist w/ rather high impact factor). There are many economists (starting by Keynesians who also received "Nobel" prizes) who also "demonstrated" that FDR had done a great work and Hoover a horrible one. Moreover Occam's razor is on FDR side. Austrians in economy are the new Lysenkoists... pure ideologues and not pragmatists. Pfff
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin Yes, you're telling lies and lies. In actual fact there are NO studies showing FDR did great wrok and most KEYNESIANS concede that FDR was disastrous for the economy. That's not terribly hard to believe when you know that Lord keynes himself criticized FDR's economic policies. Economics is a social science, but that doesn't make it any less valid (or make your baton twirling skills an understanding of physics).
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Peuh peuh among many others you can scholar google Gauti B. Eggertsson.
But even more stupid is the second part. Of course social sciences are far less predictive than hard sciences! The prediction powers and accuracies are so incomparable. That's 101 in epistemology... you are displaying your ignorance to an infinite scale! It is pathetic but funny. Thanks to make me laugh!!
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin Seriously, Eggertsson? Compared to Higgs, Vedder, Galloway, Rothbard, Friedman, Hayek, Powell... THAT is hilarious! I have no doubt that you are capable of laughter. I'm more at a loss how you use a keyboard with your sleeves tied in the back. I am quite aware of the differences between the predictive abilities in controlled and uncontrolled environments. Had that undermined so much as a word I said that would have demonstrated ignorance on my part ... rather than yours.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin Note as Eggertsson points out: His "conclusion is contrary to the one reached by a large previous literature, e.g. Cole and Ohanian (2004), that argues that the New Deal was contractionary." In the final analysis, it comes down to the validity and acceptability of Eggertsson's model (which has not been demonstrated) and refers only to a very small part of the New Deal as opposed to the disastrous whole.
You're not going to win an economic research argument with me.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Losing an economic argument with someone who thinks economics is comparable to physics (which is the most stupid epistemological mistake I've ever heard, even now, it make me smile again!)... if you think so you're so pathetic. Maybe in your own crazy world because you're an ideological fool totally blind-sided and brain-washed by a "science" which is in the same stage than physics 20 centuries ago!! And dor the record DJB Mitchell, Krugman, Stiglitz etc.
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin Since I never argued that economics was "comparable" to phsyics, it's clear that your reasoning skills are on par with your grasp of economics and epistemology. If your skills in physics are comparable, I look for ward to your article in The Flat Eartj Review on why M theory is wrong becasue the letter M is just "too darn squiggly". You're losing the argument because you keep demonstrating such glaring ignorance.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin Further, neither Krugman nor Stiglitz havd done any research demonstrating the effectiveness of the New Deal. In fact, Krugman's glaring ignorance of economic history (Hoover was a laissez faire guy) has made him a laughingstock in the profession (just like self-proclaimed socilaist Stiglitz). I've never heard of Mitchell, though there is a Dan Mitchell whose done good work. I'm surprised you didn;t mention Brad Delong who has likewise done no such research and is laughed at,
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
And let me repeat what you missed: the huge majority of economists are Lysenkoists. Their % of prediction over the last century is less than tossing a coin. And MANY Austrians made huge mistakes and haven't seen the crisis come. It's the opposite situation than in physics. You, pathetic economists you don't have the minimum self-awareness and humility to recognize that your "science" is in infancy and you pretend imposing "solutions" you absolutely don't master...
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin You are part right. A virtual totality of keynesian economists are Lysenkoists. We are still waiting for Krugman's predicted "tidal wave" of inflation after the Reagan tax cuts. And we appreciate that he predicted a housing bubble (long after the majority of Austrians identified a bubble) after he had insisted that pumping up the housing market was a good thing.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
And finally, the rare times Physics is not able to predict sth, it is the sign of a new era and of new discoveries and even more powerful prediction ( of course, there is always a time of denial but the huge difference is that it never lasts more than a decade contrary to economy). Maybe in a thousand years, economy will have the same quality, but now it is more or less in an Antiquity state... I'm always flabbergasted by the lack of humility of a so often wrong "scientists".
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin Economics, like any science, has its established laws and its areas of discovery (largely because - like M theory - discovery occurs in those areas that cannot be controlled in a laboratory). Economists fully understand this. The physical sciences have many more cases where such controls can be imposed ut tht still doesn't provide full certainty else the shift from Newtonian to Einsteinian phsics could never have occurred.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin Oddly, you keep arguing from the pretense of knowledge accruing to yourself a level of understanding and intellectual superiority that you have demonstrated beyond question does not exist. You begin by defending Keynesians (whose predictive record compares favorably only with the Marxians) and then proceed to bash the science in its entirety by building straw men and then misapplying epistemological concepts to them. It's pretty tragic when you leave such straw men unscathed.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
We agree. The huge differences: economics as an adolescent science is far less advanced than physics WHEREAS it imposes far more "solutions" disguised as a hard science to poltics, citizens, and democracy...
stephaniemroin 3 months ago
@stephaniemroin No, it has nothing to do with the maturity of the science and everything to do with the level of contriol and experimentation that the observer can engage in. Still, as with every other science, theories must be judged on their ability to explain and their ability ti conform to the available facts. On that basis, Krugman would be thrown out of any other science so fast one's head would spin, which is why he is not taken at all seriously in the profession.
FletchforFreedom 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please note that my book Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Shaped Modern Economics is published by W.W.Norton in October.
Professor John B.Taylor says that: “Nicholas Wapshott brings the Keynes-Hayek fight of the 20th century back to life, making the clash both entertaining and highly relevant for understanding economic crises of the 21st century.”
Read an extract at: sites.google.com/site/wapshottkeyneshayek/
Nicholas Wapshott
nhwapshott 7 months ago
Rather than tell you what I think, I sent a video response. - It's way past time to throw out everything we think we know about economics, politics, and comunication; and reinvent: A rational process is possible... (vdeo is: The Petition - planetjordan youtube)
planetjordan 7 months ago
His free market purism is very impressive.
yuri35435 8 months ago
@yuri35435 Free market purism? LOL Free markets mean there is NO stimulus.
jjenson2006 4 months ago
Look Ma, its a fucking moron.
HandyMan101 8 months ago
Here is why I don't like Austrian economists. They claim that we have a RIGHT to property. Why is that? How is this a right more then anything else? We do not however, have a right to health care. I don't understand why property is any more a right then anything else. That idea is simply a stubborn cultural meme. It's all bullshit. Bunch of greedy scum bags. One system is as fucked as the rest if property is the only sacred right they can come up with. Flame me Ron Paulites. Please.
jimbobanalbeats 9 months ago
@jimbobanalbeats trolling.....
neb967 9 months ago
@jimbobanalbeats Property is derived from a man's labor and ideas. When you steal a man's property, you are in essence stealing his labor. A man who is forced to work for another against his will is a slave.
obtree 9 months ago
Yeah Yeah. Ad hominem libertarian shit. I got it. Thanks.
jimbobanalbeats 9 months ago
Comment removed
obtree 9 months ago
lmao, thank you for that. The insult actually wasn't ad hominem, but it was nonetheless enjoyable. Indeed I would rather not exist in a society that resembles the late 1800's in America. If that makes me a statist, so be it. I would like American society to resemble that of Norway. Socialist scum with their higher standard of living! I'm not going to debate you because I've already gone through my Ron Paul phase and have thus heard it all. You have a nice day as well. Don't be so angry.
jimbobanalbeats 9 months ago
WHEN DID THE AUSTRIAN CRANKS TAKE OVER YOUTUBE???!! It's driving me nuts!
MomSaysImCool 11 months ago
Stimulus bills do not work. They do not create capital or financial capital. It just takes money from everyone and redistributes it into the form of earmarks. Even if you spend it, businesses know that it's only temporary, since it's only a short increase in demand. You can't trick the free market into thinking it needs to create more jobs. This is why the bill did not work, and why any other stimulus bill will never work. Confidence in the economy makes people spend, not gov intervention.
groam6666 1 year ago
Paul Krugman has ONE agenda - the complete Socialization of America. If you can't SEE it, it's because you choose NOT to. He's an agent-provocateur for the Global takeover - and eradication of personal liberty. I don't know what they promised him - maybe YOUR house. Maybe a parcel of land in Ohio. Something. Whatever it was, he is COMPLETELY sold-out to the END of this nation- with emphatic finality.
BBCater 1 year ago
i just love how you people chant "free market" without knowing the slightest what that would mean...
Darusdei 1 year ago
Paul Krugman looks like a duck
hyylo 1 year ago
Krugman is not loud enough! He needs to shout down all the Tea Party and Republican idiots (See:Supply side economics or Horse and Sparrow Economy)
Vidar1979 1 year ago
I wonder what religion Paul Krugman is. Hmmmm.....
thotkrime 1 year ago
@thotkrime Keynesianism.
Omroon 1 year ago
krugman is a communist wanker!
astro7894 1 year ago
Paul Krugman is... flimflam. An intellectual midget next to great economists such as Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek.
ErikNikolai 1 year ago
I haven't heard so much BS in just over a minute and a half for a loooong time!
shortybla 1 year ago
Krugman should move to Venezuela and advise Chavez.
We don't need his Marxist class warfare crap here.
Leutchik 1 year ago
@Leutchik "Krugman should move to Venezuela and advise Chavez."
They'd be broke within a year.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@Leutchik Krugman was on Reagan's economic advisor committee and is special advisor to Exxon corporation
kevin80k2000 1 year ago
So, Krugman thinks that the peasants are to be blamed for their short-sightedness because they cut back and save money when times get tough? If all that matters is the mechanical process of spending and the peons can't be trusted, why even bother putting money in their hands in the first place? Why doesn't govt. just print-up/borrow a ton of money, buy a bunch of stuff and destroy it? This will boost aggregate demand, right? (If this idea makes sense to you, please jump off a bridge.)
gergenheimer 1 year ago
So Krugman was right; he predicted this recession and he's done well anticipating how the "recovery" would come along. Peter Schiff always says they're be a recession--always--and you guys take him serious. He has been completely wrong 99% of the time.
Also deficit spending worked: Euro zone ran deficits, on average, of 6.5% of GDP and saw a decline of 4% in GDP in 2009. US ran deficit of 11% of GDP and had 2% decline. Hoover ran surpluses. Meaning stimulus worked, just not big enough.
crambo0349 1 year ago
Peter Schiff was right vid. Austrian economics. Central government Keynesian economics got us into the hole we are in now. What creates more wealth and opportunity: a job created by the government or a job created by the private sector? It's about control. It's a huge power play that we the people are all going to end up paying for..
fiatalfa1 1 year ago
krugman = JOKE
teltelamont 1 year ago
Study finds Paul Krugman is the most partisan economist. Krugman was the only economist to "significantly" change his stances for partisan reasons. Krugman has even gone so far as to contradict his own findings to bash Republican politicians. - Brett Barkley, Econ Journal Watch, May 2010
islandmuffin 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@islandmuffin The peer-reviewed research was published in May 2010 issue of the Econ Journal Watch (EJW), edited by Daniel B. Klein. Seven Nobel laureates are members of the EJW Advisory Council.
islandmuffin 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@islandmuffin The peer-reviewed research was published in May 2010 issue of the Econ Journal Watch (EJW), edited by Daniel B. Klein.
Seven Nobel laureates are members of the EJW Advisory Council.
islandmuffin 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@islandmuffin The peer-reviewed research was published in May 2010 issue of the Econ Journal Watch (EJW), edited by Daniel B. Klein.
Seven Nobel laureates are members of the EJW Advisory Council.
islandmuffin 1 year ago
He seems like a nice guy, but come on.... People didn't spend the money because we already overconsumed so we either paid off debt or held onto it for fear of the future.... The stimulus was just more alcohol on an already drunk economy from interest rates kept artificially low without real savings.... You have to save to invest, but what Krugman preached was inflate, inflate, inflate.....
soliloqy 1 year ago
@soliloqy The stimulus was greatly needed for a couple of reasons, but obviously the most important one was to fight unemployment. And there also was the chance of deflation, which is far more dangerous than inflation. This might be hard for you to understand how there could be deflation when the Fed was keeping interest rates low, but the problem was that the banks weren't lending. So because the Fed couldn't save us, even with nearly 0% interest rates, we needed fiscal policy to save us.
keynesian42 1 year ago
@keynesian42 I appreciate your respectful debate, but disagree with the fundamentals of your assertions. Deflation is the contraction of credit, as the bubble burst, which would be good for people who saved their money and didn't overconsume, but bad for those looking to flip property. Deflation also occurs when resources become more abundant like air and water and less like like a scarce resource such as a bulldozers.
soliloqy 1 year ago
@soliloqy You are right. Sorry, for not being specific on what kind of deflation that I was talking about. What I should have said was deflation was imminent in 2009, as a result of a credit crunch, and the best way to fight that chance of deflation was to pump money into the economy through stimulus.
keynesian42 1 year ago
@keynesian42
Taking productive taxpayer money and giving it to a government slush fund to dole out to state and federal union employee to prop up their failed pension funds is a failed way to stimulate anything. The government certainly does not know how to spend your money fr economic result better then you do.
detox4u 1 year ago
@detox4u I'm not normally in favor of fiscal stimulus because I believe that it is rather sloppy. However, when there is a liquidity trap, then fiscal stimulus is greatly needed. And even the pork in the stimulus bills, which usually isn't as large as many conservatives make it look like, can still help boost aggregate demand because you are putting money in the hands of people who will usually spend a pretty good portion of that money on consumer goods.
keynesian42 1 year ago
@detox4u Furthermore, I think it is false to assume that the private sector will always spend its money better than the public sector. Look at the housing boom, for example, many people were living beyond their means and buying stuff that they really did not need.
keynesian42 1 year ago
@keynesian42 im a little tenative to buy into even discussing a liquidity trap as its a keynes specific term which can be misapplied. Certainly interest rates arnt going any lower more by de fact then de jure so its somewhat of a non-sequitor.
detox4u 1 year ago
The main mistake you are making is that if your actually going to hold the tenant the the public sector is in any way an efficient allocator of goods or money as compared to the private sector. If you really belive that then I would say you are pretty far to the left of what keynes originally proposed which at the time was considered “liberal” but today his ostensible followers like Krugman have taken it to a level he has never endorsed.
detox4u 1 year ago
@detox4u The public sector is good at allocating goods, but it depends on the sector of an economy. For example, the public sector is not really that efficient at operating factories, but the public sector is efficient at allocating health care.
Many european countries that have adopted universal health care have done so with much success. Their costs of health care are lower and life expectancies are higher compared to the United States.
keynesian42 1 year ago
@keynesian42 Thats a completely specious ipso facto argument. Among first world countries we are in the middle of the life expectancy charts which is more related to the heterogeneous genetic makeup of the states then any simple correlation with health care repayment methods, but if you think socialized health care and big government is efficient then we arnt going to come to any agreement.
detox4u 1 year ago
@detox4u Government is very efficient at allocating health care and the statistics back up what I'm saying.
In belgium, for example, they spend 9.5% on healthcare as a percentage of GDP and we spend around 15%.
Also, their total expenditures on health care per capita is 3,183 and for us it's 6,737.
I can go on and on showing how their health care system is superior to ours, but I don't want to waste anymore time.
keynesian42 1 year ago
@keynesian42 So your saying that the health rationing European model is cheaper then the current American system? I absolutely agree. However if we didn't have a perverse State imposed employer tax incentive which lead to the third party payer fiasco, and ridiculous punitive tort system our current health care would be cheaper then your socialized and rationed European system.
detox4u 1 year ago
@keynesian42 The Good news for a big brother Stateist like yourself, is that with Obamacare we retain these two unique destructive elements of the current American system while adding in some Euro-style health care rationing. So we are going to have all the problems of a state controlled, rationed care system with none of the cost savings – Wonderful!
detox4u 1 year ago
@keynesian42 That's why at the recent G20 most of Europe is about to make major entitlement spending cuts so they don't go completely bankrupt like Greece. Krugman is a total moron. To quote Dennis Hopper "it's a fact"
biggerturtle 1 year ago
@biggerturtle Krugman is not a moron, dummy. And to cut spending and raise taxes would be very destructive in Europe because it will slow down their economies. It's been tried before with no success.
keynesian42 1 year ago
@biggerturtle The problem with the US's financial position is healthcare costs are out of control, so Medicare will be super expensive. That's what needs to be fixed.
Obama's stimulus has a multiplier effect of about 1.4, so, if government taxes at 25% it gets 35 cents back for every dollar it spends. That covers the cost of a short term T-bill's interest and then some.
If you paid attention to Greece and Ireland you'd notice the price they paid for austerity.
crambo0349 1 year ago
@crambo0349 You are so incorrect. Forget the simplistic math for a minute. Greece is BANKRUPT and probably Ireland, Spain , Portugal and a half a dozen other countries because of their completely out of control entitlement spending combined with the general malaise inherent in their cultures derived in part from corrupt unions. There's a wonderful Peter Seller's movie from many years ago "I'm All Right Jack" by the Boulting brothers. Funny as hell but right on the mark. You should check it out
biggerturtle 1 year ago
@biggerturtle I'd be carful with "inherent in their culture" comments. Anyway, why don't we stimulate the economy (because it's working), AND fix entitlement spending. You can do both...
The problem with the US's long term budget isn't stimulus; it's healthcare costs. Fix that! And, by the way, our long term budget is already more sound than it was two years ago.
crambo0349 1 year ago
@crambo0349 Are you on drugs? The long term budget is so weak the CBO warned most recently that we are on an unsustainable course. California is an example of where the entire country will be very soon: bankrupt because of idiotic policies. Cut entitlements, cut spending, cut government and cut taxes and you will see real growth and renewed prosperity.
biggerturtle 1 year ago
@biggerturtle The way you solve the budget problem is to deal with what's causing it, in our case that's healthcare. I read the latest CBO report (obviously you didn't), assuming current law our debt will more or less stabilize at 80% of GDP. That's not good, but doesn't mean we'll go bankrupt. Fix the long term budget problem AND stimulate the economy.
By the way, taxes in California are relatively low. Do your homework, particularly regarding prop. 13.
crambo0349 1 year ago
@crambo0349 Wrong on every count.
Medicare and Medicaid, govt regulation and programs, have increased medical costs. More of the same will only do more of the same.
Prop 13 is a sham. Govt quickly found their way around it, and taxes as as high as ever. They're still broke because they won't stop SPENDING.
Fix the budget, by stopping SPENDING. Just stop.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@CurtHowland Well it's a fact that taxes are not exponentially high in California. They're in the upper middle, as far as state ranking.
It's also a fact that the most expensive universal healthcare system in the word (France's) costs, per capita, less than two-thirds of the US system's, per capita. But, even so, the French live much longer, have lower infant mortality rates, and have faster emergency care and comparable non-emergency care speeds.
crambo0349 1 year ago
@crambo0349 Thank you for retracting your comment about taxes in California.
Now, if you go back and check the statistics, you will see that the US "healthcare system" is expensive because of Medicaid and Medicare, tight regulation and licensing. France's system also, like the US post office, has many of their costs hidden by accounting tricks like leaving out the costs of their buildings and retirement accounts.
The infant mortality rates are also bogus.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@CurtHowland LOL you think the "upper middle" is an example of draconian taxation... Why aren't high tax states having the budget problems?
Old people spend more on medical care, but overhead for Medicare is ~5%, while private insurance is ~15%.
It's funny that you blame "accounting tricks". Can you name a few significant ones? BTW, France is the most expensive UHCS: every UHCS is cheaper than the US's.
Anyway, I would love to see some facts. You're only giving cheesy talking points.
crambo0349 1 year ago
@crambo0349 "you think the "upper middle" is an example of draconian taxation"
Yes. So is "Upper", "Lower", and "Middle". All taxation just is armed robbery with a badge.
"overhead for Medicare is ~5%"
Only because their operating costs, like buildings, salaries, pensions, etc, are hidden to make them look more efficient. Look it up.
"every UHCS is cheaper than the US's."
For exactly the same reason used to hide the real costs of Medicare.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@CurtHowland This is going nowhere... I Googled it and I didn't see anything about accounting tricks, though a lot of people made the point that Medicare has an unfair advantage because of economies of scale and high elderly medical costs. It's a good point. Nonetheless overhead is ~3% in Medicare and private insurance is 15-25% (from anti-Medicare info). No explanation of why every UHCS has costs around half of the US's HCS. All you've given are conspiracy theories, so I'm done playing w/ you
crambo0349 1 year ago
@crambo0349 "This is going nowhere."
True. Neither your bogus numbers, nor my magnificent logic are going to convince the other, since you believe you're right and I know I am.
"All you've given are conspiracy theories"
The inherent inefficiency of bureaucratic management is not a conspiracy theory. There is nothing govt does that is not done better, cheaper, or both, by voluntary interaction of interested people. That's why basic medicine used to be cheap.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@crambo0349 "so I'm done playing w/ you"
That could be the difference between us right there: I'm not playing.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
@crambo0349 And as far as malaise having become inherent in their (and now our) culture I am absolutely correct. There is a lazy dependence on government programs and subsidy. Only half of the U.S. now pay taxes; are you a Marxist who believes that those who work hard should support those who don't?
biggerturtle 1 year ago
Paul Krugman is the leading proponent of the Zimbabwe School of Economics.
JohnRinNoHo 1 year ago 2
@JohnRinNoHo Pathetic Strawman.
funisverygood 1 year ago
@JohnRinNoHo The Austrian economic theory is that we should practice the economics of the 11th century...
You people are a joke, a fascist joke, which makes one question just whether one should laugh, for be concerned.
GaiusIuliusTaberna 1 year ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna
The Austrian viewpoint would be to limit the force of government to the minimum necessary to protecting the lives, liberty and property of it's citizens. In a fascist system, private industries are controlled or directed or given advantages over competitors by government. Austrians are opposed to this.
Fascism is just another failed brand of socialism.
JohnRinNoHo 1 year ago
@JohnRinNoHo The Austrian's are a neo confederate organization founded by the racist lew rockwell who helped Ron Paul with his racist newsletters for the 30 years they were circulated among the white supremacist and christian identity militias.
You can say whatever you like about what they are supposed to believe, but their actions speak louder than words, even when the words come from people like DiLorenzo who wrote a book claiming Lincoln was a tyrant and that the south should have won.
GaiusIuliusTaberna 1 year ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna Keep throwing shit, and eventually something will stick, eh? Common Alinsky tactics.
obtree 11 months ago
@obtree Considering that is a stupid right wing attack on Obama, I don't think you are in a position to judge. Of course Obama never actually espoused the ideas of Alinsky, Ron Paul made his views very clear in the "ron paul survival report. Google it if you don't believe me.
GaiusIuliusTaberna 9 months ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna And lmao. Lew Rockwell founded Austrian economics?! You fucking retard. Look up Hayek and Mises.
obtree 11 months ago
@obtree that guy is proof why abortion should be legalised...
neb967 9 months ago
@obtree No he founded the Mises institute, among other neo confederate organizations. The southern poverty law center and the Jewish anti deformation league have pages of material on it, and if you actually listen to the lectures given about history on the Mises channel, they all but admit to the worst accusations I could make.
GaiusIuliusTaberna 9 months ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna I'm subscribed to the mises channel. All of your accusations are bullshit. The SPLC goes out of its way to accuse conservatives and libertarians of racism.
I don't think I have mentioned Obama at all, so I don't know how I could have attacked him. I was accusing YOU of Alinsky tactics, mainly the tactic of accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being racist and fascist.
Why don't you read about Austrian libertarianism before you start slinging shit next time.
obtree 9 months ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna austrian economics was coined by carl menger .. Obviously you know nothing about it. and yes,,, full secession rights!.
Sivels 10 months ago
@Sivels Well since you admitted to being a secessionist I hardly have a reason to debate you further. You've come out as a traitor and an enemy of the republic. What more could I say about you?
I hope there is a second civil war, reconstruction wasn't properly conducted, we should have leveled every city and killed many more rebel dogs than we did. If I were Sherman you'r forefathers would have been made to kneel to a statue of Lincoln 5 times a day. Vae Victis
GaiusIuliusTaberna 9 months ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna You're right, no reason to argue with some sick fuck who has infantile violent fantasies...
Sivels 9 months ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna are u kidding me...? The father of Austrian Economics was Ludwig Von Mises and his writings form the basis for Austrian Economics and Libertarianism... THE GUY WAS JEWISH!!! Why would a racist base his views on his works and how can TRUE Austrian Economics be some weird supremacist movement ? Ron Paul's racism newsletters were allegedly the work of ghost writers anyway. He's hardly an outspoken racist and it's hard to believe considering the entire foundation of his views.
neb967 9 months ago
@neb967 Mises was long dead when lew rockwell founded the Mises institute, what he did or did not believe is irrelevant. The Austrians are a neo confederate front, that is the only point of contention here.
The Ghost writer... was in fact Lew Rockwell, hence why I brought him up in the first place. Look it up if you don't believe me, just bear in mind a partisan blog for Ron Paul is not a good place to find objective facts about him.
GaiusIuliusTaberna 9 months ago
@GaiusIuliusTaberna Wait wait so a racist fascist founded a school named after a famous Jewish economist in order to put into place some weird neo confederate movement....? That doesnt really make sense. Also Lew Rockwell was never proved to be the ghost writer but only the VP of the company that published those letters. I dont follow Ron Pauls blogs so I dont know any reason you would bring that up. I just happen to have made some lucrative decisions through the principles Aus Eco has taught me
neb967 9 months ago
I listen to Krugman talk about micro, and he seems so smart. When he gets into the "yay government" thing, though, I just cringe.
Foma is right... this whole, "Liquidity Trap", "Multiplier", "Paradox of thrift" bag of tricks is just confusing enough to stop most people from trying to untangle the deceptions.
Most people just nod their head and try to forget.
But then comes youtube... hmm...
ParrhesiaJoe 1 year ago
This guy is a homeopath standing on the shore with a bucket trying to hold back the tide that is market forces.
Friedman, Hayek and Rothbard are heart-surgeons where this guy is a mountebank selling cancer-salve and magic beans.
fomastephanovitch 1 year ago
I agree, he's just another jew flim flam man. You shd see new article in the new yorker magazine. he loves asimov's foundation book cuz of the sick hero who controls whole world w statistics. gross
BemusedTIger 1 year ago
Presumably this is not the type of world where women have no road accidents, but are the leading cause of them because they drive too slowly in the outside lane?
Nice to see it working out so well for him ;p
fomastephanovitch 1 year ago
jews = bad
BemusedTIger 1 year ago
You are a fool, I am not saying this in defense of Krugman, but because you must resort to slander and vitriol against someone you disagree with.
MrJLT3 1 year ago 2
@MrJLT3
And you react by resorting to slander and vitriol in turn?
It's nice to know we have stalwarts of the internet community to arbitrate decency online.
How does one assume such a role - three years at Yale? I might have to reassess my career plans...
fomastephanovitch 1 year ago
@fomastephanovitch When someone says shit like "some group"=bad, they are foolish.
It's better than a passive aggressive insult, at least. "How does one assume such a role?"
"Judge not lest ye be judged", even if your judgment is couched in clever passive phraseology. Yes, I'm judging you, but it isn't passive. I'm judging you for judging MrJLT3 for judging BemusedTiger... that's a lot of work.
I should rest.
ParrhesiaJoe 1 year ago
@ParrhesiaJoe
Oh god! Derrida and Keynes in one sitting!
At least you're a straight talker, gotta give you credit for that.
I was aiming for irony and came crashing to the floor it seems.
Still thinking that the homeopath on the shore fighting a tide of market forces is the best way to stigmatize the soon-to-be out-group Keynesians.
Noting that the resurgence of Keynesian ideas is due to populist bullying rather than a verification of the concept of liquidity trap, my a-holeness seems fair :)
fomastephanovitch 1 year ago
@fomastephanovitch I'm always the first to stick my foot in my mouth =)
ParrhesiaJoe 1 year ago
You can't have an export-led recovery (e.g. Korea in late 1990s) if you're in a global slump, and also the largest economy in the world by a land slide.
historyboy12 1 year ago
stimulate yourself, you idiot. get off your keynesian hands from economy!
igorolech 2 years ago
I wonder if a quadrillion dollar stimulus would make Krugman happy? Could build a big bridge with that. Worry about servicing the debt later.
njedinjedi 2 years ago
@njedinjedi Or... optionally... just hand it to the next generation!!! Yay, Government... Mortal men can not steal things from people that haven't been born... that takes SUPER powers... Guvernin' Powers.
A theft bridge to the future!
ParrhesiaJoe 1 year ago
lol "we need the money spent"
No, we need to save and produce.
njedinjedi 2 years ago
Who is going to invest in anything to produce when there's no demand? The private market is on its back. It's the government that needs to spur demand by putting money out there in the form of stimulus. We need to put people to work. Private industry is not doing that; it makes more sense for them to continue to lay people off or not hire. However, the more that happens the less people have jobs, which means they spend less and growth becomes nearly impossible.
gummoboy69 2 years ago
There's "no demand" because the American consumer is tapped out and needs to save.
This stimulus is wasteful and creates false signals. All the government borrowing also crowds out sound private enterprises who seek credit.
Construction and retail workers need to be laid off, and a viable economy reconstructed, not an economy built on consumer debt.
njedinjedi 2 years ago
exactly. Its so simple. You should have been given the nobel prize. Produce products to sell to the world and save
Seano71 2 years ago
no...we need the money spent. no spending=no recovery. then save.
xlilxandyx 2 years ago
Where is the US going to get the money from? It's broke.
The state and federal governments must slash spending now that property tax revenue has nosedived. Even before the bursting of the bubble, government spending was unsustainable.
njedinjedi 2 years ago
You combat recessions by doing a number of things: lowering interest rates, increasing government spending, cutting taxes.
You can't lower interest rates if they're at zero. Reagan-esque tax cuts will increase the deficit but won't stimulate the economy (people will save money, not spend it). So you increase government spending to improve GDP, which will increase revenue. Unfortunately we didn't save during the fat years, so now that we're in the lean years we don't have the resources we need.
xlilxandyx 2 years ago
Re; interest rates, in the US rates must be raised to put a floor under the dollar. The dollar will have to fall to reflect its fundamental value, but without an increase in interest rates and an end to the huge deficits, the dollar is heading somewhere in the direction of zero.
GDP is a useless measure. Sure, Obama and the Fed juiced the economy with cheap money, so we get statistical positive GDP for a quarter, big deal.
njedinjedi 2 years ago
You raise interest rates to cool down booming economies, not to combat recessions. It's unfortunate that interest rates are so low because that's one less tool in our arsenal.
Fixed currencies aren't magical. Countries came off of the gold standard in this order: Japan, Britain, Germany, America, France. Subsequently thereafter, countries enjoyed booms in industrial output in this order: Japan, Britain, Germany, America, France.
only example of free-market capitalism=Bush deritatives market
xlilxandyx 2 years ago
Sorry Xlilxandyx, fiscal stimulus is wrong-if you need to FORCE people to spend by confiscation, what does that show? That the house-of-cards economy made by central banks imposed by law and not market choice, has to collapse.
Liberty IS pernicious for the central banking system because it's inherently unstable as it's meant to facilitate govt control of monetary policy-invented by a scotsman to help finance the Navy basically: hence it makes bubbles, hence banks with FRB are unstable.
Nintendomanwill 2 years ago
print money ? borrow from China ?
bilgueits 2 years ago
Whoo! Go Keynes! I love Keynesian Economics! Whoooo! Deficit Spending to increase aggregate expenditure during downturns! Yeah!
Televator223 2 years ago
All it does is transfer the money from one perception to another. Its like getting a credit card, spend it to the max and then repay the debt later. Damm gov.
ntn1987 2 years ago
History has proven that Keynesian economic policy is a completely failure. Just leave the free market alone.
ntn1987 2 years ago
leave the free market alone?? how do you think America developed in the first place-------massive government intervention...protected markets, infant industry protection and on and on!!!!
the only place the free market reigns is places where they have had it rammed down their throats!!
tonybonez 2 years ago
What history? The history of ntn1987?
Did your mommy subsidize you and yet your broke?
GoldeneBremm 2 years ago
Actually, theres no need to learn history, just look at the Obama's administration and his plan to "save" America.
ntn1987 2 years ago
I quote:
ntn1987: "History has proven ..."
ntn1987: "...theres no need to learn history..."
I made my point
GoldeneBremm 2 years ago
You forgot the word "actually". (Actually, theres no need to learn history). Stop making smart comment.
ntn1987 2 years ago
How can a nobel prize winning economist discuss tax cuts without mentioning for which group/s such tax cuts would apply. Yeah,