"you are trying to go back 150 years"
"and you are trying to go back 1,500 years"
Don’t Know Much About (Ancient) History
The things I do for book sales. I debated, sort of, Ron Paul on Bloomberg.Video here. I thought we might have a discussion of why the runaway inflation he and his allies keep predicting keeps not happening. But no, he insisted (if I understood him correctly) that currency debasement and price controls destroyed the Roman Empire. I responded that I am not a defender of the economic policies of the Emperor Diocletian.
Actually, though, appeals to what supposedly happened somewhere in the distant past are quite common on the goldbug side of economics. And it’s kind of telling.
I mean, history is essential to economic analysis. You really do want to know, say, about the failure of Argentina’s convertibility law, of the effects of Chancellor Brüning’s dedication to the gold standard, and many other episodes.
Somehow, though, people like Ron Paul don’t like to talk about events of the past century, for which we have reasonably good data; they like to talk about events in the dim mists of history, where we don’t really know what happened. And I think that’s no accident. Partly it’s the attempt of the autodidact to show off his esoteric knowledge; but it’s also the fact that because we don’t really know what happened — what really did go down during the Diocletian era? — you can project what you think should have happened onto the sketchy record, then claim vindication for whatever you want to believe.
It’s funny, in a way — except that this sort of thinking dominates one of our two main political parties.
On the Uselessness of Debates
A bit of meta on my “debate” with Ron Paul; I think it’s a perfect illustration of a point I’ve thought about a lot, the uselessness of face-to-face debates.
Think about it: you approach what is, in the end, a somewhat technical subject in a format in which no data can be presented, in which there’s no opportunity to check facts (everything Paul said about growth after World War II was wrong, but who will ever call him on it?). So people react based on their prejudices. If Ron Paul got on TV and said “Gah gah goo goo debasement! theft!” — which is a rough summary of what he actually did say — his supporters would say that he won the debate hands down; I don’t think my supporters are quite the same, but opinions may differ.
Tales of historical debates in which one side supposedly won big — like the Huxley-Wilberforce debate on evolution — are, in general, after-the-fact storytelling; the reality is that that kind of smackdown, like Perry Mason-type confessions in court, almost never happens.
So why did I do it? Because I’m trying to publicize my book, which does have lots of data and facts — but those data and facts don’t matter unless I get enough people to read it.
Really? The Roman Empire? That's the talking point?
he predicted this thread.If Ron Paul got on TV and said “Gah gah goo goo debasement! theft!” — which is a rough summary of what he actually did say — his supporters would say that he won the debate hands down
Krugmans followers whining about the moderator of the debate
having to blog about your debate and follow up and get encouragement from your wall street buddies.
that's for pussies and assholes
Speaking of followers.having to blog about your debate and follow up and get encouragement from your followers.
that's for pussies and assholes
Krugman is a wall street follower? Really?
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/legend.htmlTales of historical debates in which one side supposedly won big — like the Huxley-Wilberforce debate on evolution — are, in general, after-the-fact storytelling
Is Krugman not a big goverment believer and rate fixer?
thread = fail lol
" Dear Mom and Dad,
You are the best. Thank you for taking good care of me. Thank you for buying all of my toys. Thank you for taking me to ausome places. I love you very much. And Happy Valentine's Day."
I think more emoticons would help bolster your point.
However I didn't see the slam dunk or spike the ball moment like the op stated. seemed normal libertarian v. liberal socialist argument to me.
Gone, But Not Forgotten:
Attack Troop 1-61 Cav
Bayonette Troop 1-61 Cav
Comanche Troop 1-61 Cav
Really now, explain to me how Krugman is a buddy of Wall Street please.
I'm especially curious as to how wanting to extend banking regulation makes him a friend to Wall Street.
This is where the discussion abruptly ends, Manny.
I doubt it. There are certainly more emoticons to follow.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)