|
08-08-2012, 02:44 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Victoria TX
42,661 posts, read 83,788,485 times
Reputation: 36577
|
|
|
No, he has better things to do than to argue with every Fox News economist who rants and raves for publicity. And he also knows that such a debate would turn out exactly the way presidential election debates do. Both sides express their well-known and oft-repeated talking points without answering any direct questions, and then everyone goes home still believing everything they started out with. Furthermore, both their points are theoretical, and neither can present any empirical evidence to support their positions. Nor would 99% of their potential audience on a national telecast have any idea what they are talking about, unless one of them addresses the contents of an e-mail chain letter in large bold colorful font.
Does anybody believe that, after hundreds of years of economic throrizing and hypothesizing, that all will suddenly be illuminated once and for all by a two-man media circus and error finally laid to rest? They have both already succinctly and intelligibly stated their positions, which are there for any debate-goers to read. What more remains to be said?
There is a difference between "dignity" and "cowardice".
Last edited by jtur88; 08-08-2012 at 03:02 PM..
|
|
08-08-2012, 02:55 PM
|
|
|
|
2,553 posts, read 2,345,890 times
Reputation: 1350
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
No, he has better things to do than to argue with every Fox News economist who rants and raves for publicity. And he also knows that such a debate would turn out exactly the way presidential election debates do. Both sides express their well-known and oft-repeated talking points without answering any direct questions, and then everyone goes home still believing everything they started out with.
Does anybody believe that, after hundreds of years of economic throrizing and hypothesizing, that all will suddenly be illuminated once and for all by a two-man media circus and error finally laid to rest?
There is a difference between "dignity" and "cowardice".
|
Well said. 1up. |
|
08-08-2012, 04:05 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Beavercreek, OH
2,194 posts, read 3,673,716 times
Reputation: 2353
|
|
Hi all--
John Maynard Keynes would be rolling over in his grave right now if he saw what people like Paul Krugman and Richard Posner advocate. Because Keynes advocated increasing government spending - stimulus, if you will - only in times of recession, and the spending would be promptly scaled back and the deficits paid off. In essence, government intervention was supposed to be timely, targeted, and temporary. (We can debate the merits of Keynesianism endlessly; I think a well-target stimulus package could have worked nicely: not the boondoggle that came out of the Senate in 2009, though.)
The current Federal programs are neither timely, targeted, nor temporary. And in any case Keynes never advocated the continuation of massive structural deficits ad infinitum like the CBO projects under Obama's 2013 budget, especially with regards to the explosion in size of SSI, DI, OASI, SNAP, WIC, TANF, LIHEAP, PPACA, and the rest of the alphabet soup government programs. 
Krugman is not a Keynesian. Krugman is a progressive. There's a difference. Keynesianism is purely focused on economic matters. Progressivism, on the other hand, seeks to use the power of government, via social engineering, to force people to change their behaviors to better-fit the progressive mindset of 'utopia'. And Krugman's endless advocacy (and following in the NY Times) of this social engineering shows that quite a few people subscribe to that belief. |
|
08-08-2012, 04:19 PM
|
|
|
|
3,612 posts, read 4,872,703 times
Reputation: 5590
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hensleya1
Hi all--
Krugman is not a Keynesian. Krugman is a progressive. There's a difference. Keynesianism is purely focused on economic matters. Progressivism, on the other hand, seeks to use the power of government, via social engineering, to force people to change their behaviors to better-fit the progressive mindset of 'utopia'. And Krugman's endless advocacy (and following in the NY Times) of this social engineering shows that quite a few people subscribe to that belief.
|
Excellent post!
Krugman needs to be uncovered for what he truly is: poster-boy for Obamanomics. |
|
08-08-2012, 04:27 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: NJ/NY
17,980 posts, read 14,173,110 times
Reputation: 13675
|
|
Arrogant? Yes, but I dont know if I would call him a coward. From everything I have seen of him, he is very good at lecturing and making intelligent, well thought out points. Not that I necessarily agree with him, but he is thought provoking.
What he is not very good at is being challenged. While he is good at making arguments, he is not very good at making counter-arguments. He expects his word to be the authority, and anyone who questions him is beneath him. Nobody else knows what they are talking about, except him, so he will not "waste his time" in such matters.
Sorry if this has already been posted. You can forward to the English parts. It is well worth a look
Here is just one example.
This is not an isolated incident either. When I have more time, I can find some more examples. |
|
08-08-2012, 04:36 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
17,544 posts, read 23,817,625 times
Reputation: 9965
|
|
|
This thread belongs in Politics and Nonsense.
|
|
08-08-2012, 04:41 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: NJ/NY
17,980 posts, read 14,173,110 times
Reputation: 13675
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa
This thread belongs in Politics and Nonsense.
|
This could be said for almost any thread in economics. You cant separate the two. |
|
08-08-2012, 06:47 PM
|
|
|
|
20,375 posts, read 18,500,795 times
Reputation: 8025
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hensleya1
Hi all--
John Maynard Keynes would be rolling over in his grave right now if he saw what people like Paul Krugman and Richard Posner advocate. Because Keynes advocated increasing government spending - stimulus, if you will - only in times of recession, and the spending would be promptly scaled back and the deficits paid off. In essence, government intervention was supposed to be timely, targeted, and temporary. (We can debate the merits of Keynesianism endlessly; I think a well-target stimulus package could have worked nicely: not the boondoggle that came out of the Senate in 2009, though.
|
Now here is someone who has at least a basic understanding of Keynes. I don't see anything remotely Keynesian. What I was was some rapid, psychotic, puss infected form of Monetarism where da guberment did no such thing to stimulate the economy. They handed money over to the banks who were magically supposed to lend.
Quote:
|
The current Federal programs are neither timely, targeted, nor temporary. And in any case Keynes never advocated the continuation of massive structural deficits ad infinitum like the CBO projects under Obama's 2013 budget, especially with regards to the explosion in size of SSI, DI, OASI, SNAP, WIC, TANF, LIHEAP, PPACA, and the rest of the alphabet soup government programs.
|
He did expect the commodity that backed the money to rise. You cannot apply Keynes theory
directly because the money changed. We have a purely debt based money system which means that an expanding economy will need the expansion of da guberment debt. Of course that may be done with tax cuts.
Quote:
|
Krugman is not a Keynesian. Krugman is a progressive. There's a difference. Keynesianism is purely focused on economic matters. Progressivism, on the other hand, seeks to use the power of government, via social engineering, to force people to change their behaviors to better-fit the progressive mindset of 'utopia'. And Krugman's endless advocacy (and following in the NY Times) of this social engineering shows that quite a few people subscribe to that belief.
|
Progressive are not what they used to be. They were pretty handy when it came to the robber barons at the turn of the century. Don't let the Heather has two mommies, rainbow bus, hot tub party, gimmie dat, food stamp, housing stamp, caddy stamp, house on the beach stamp, gimmie sa more, day time TV sex with my step sister freaks claim that title. Regressive Lumpen-proleism |
|
08-08-2012, 08:45 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Victoria TX
42,661 posts, read 83,788,485 times
Reputation: 36577
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teak
Krugman needs to be uncovered for what he truly is: poster-boy for Obamanomics.
|
Krugman published his first book on economics when Obama was working for a volunteer organization in Chicago, and won the prestigious Clark award for economics when Obama was a second-year student at Harvard. With that kind of clairvoyance, no doubt Krugman was also instrumental in having Obama's phony birth announcement placed in the Honolulu paper, too.
If one wants to call Obama a poster boy for Krugmanomics, one might have some credibility. |
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
