Ron Paul destroys Paul Krugman

[cheguevara]

:lol "professor Krugman"

:lmao Princeton

jEmKIRqz9AI

[cheguevara]

"you are trying to go back 150 years"

"and you are trying to go back 1,500 years"

:lol owned

[Th'Pusher]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/30/dont-know-much-about-ancient-history/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto


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.

[cheguevara]

:lmao all butthurt on his own blog

[Th'Pusher]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/on-the-uselessness-of-debates/


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.

[ChumpDumper]

Really? The Roman Empire? That's the talking point?

[ChumpDumper]

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:lol he predicted this thread.

[cheguevara]

:lol Krugmans followers whining about the moderator of the debate

:lmao epic meltdown

:lmao having to blog about your debate and follow up and get encouragement from your wall street buddies.

that's for pussies and assholes

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Krugmans followers whining about the moderator of the debate

:lmao epic meltdownJust like Paul supporters whine about moderators of debates.


:lmao having to blog about your debate and follow up and get encouragement from your followers.

that's for pussies and assholesSpeaking of followers.

[Th'Pusher]

:lol Krugmans followers whining about the moderator of the debate

:lmao epic meltdown

:lmao having to blog about your debate and follow up and get encouragement from your wall street buddies.

that's for pussies and assholes

Krugman has you pegged.

[cheguevara]

Ron Paul has me pegged.

[ChumpDumper]

Gah gah goo goo.

Ownage!

[MannyIsGod]

Krugman is a wall street follower? Really?

[cheguevara]

he cried about it in his blog :cry

[MannyIsGod]

Krugman is a wall street follower? Really?

[Winehole23]

Tales of historical debates in which one side supposedly won big — like the Huxley-Wilberforce debate on evolution — are, in general, after-the-fact storytellinghttp://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/legend.html

[cheguevara]

Is Krugman not a big goverment believer and rate fixer?

[George Gervin's Afro]

thread = fail lol

[cheguevara]

I'm taking my ball and bat and going home

:lmao

[Blake]

:lol :lol :lol

[MannyIsGod]

Is Krugman not a big goverment believer and rate fixer?

Its very clear you're not familiar with Krugman's arguments and in fact just here to say stupid shit.

Carry on.

[cheguevara]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics

[MannyIsGod]

Its very clear you're not familiar with Krugman's arguments and in fact just here to say stupid shit.

Carry on.

[cheguevara]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics

[Spurminator]

I think more emoticons would help bolster your point.

[spursncowboys]

Its very clear you're not familiar with Krugman's arguments and in fact just here to say stupid shit.

Carry on.

I'm familiar with Krugman's arguments and che is spot on.

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.

[MannyIsGod]

Really now, explain to me how Krugman is a buddy of Wall Street please.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm especially curious as to how wanting to extend banking regulation makes him a friend to Wall Street.

[ChumpDumper]

This is where the discussion abruptly ends, Manny.

[MannyIsGod]

I doubt it. There are certainly more emoticons to follow.

[boutons_deux]

I destroy Ron Paul with:

:rollin :rollin :rollin :lol :lol :lol :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

Randian Paul will never recover from my conquering eloquence.

[cheguevara]

I'm familiar with Krugman's arguments and che is spot on.

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.

great points, but who is crying in their blog? Who is saying "debates are worthless" after getting his ass handed to him?

the answer: a crybaby that when he was a child would take his ball and bat and go home crying to momma

[cheguevara]

btw the only reason Krugman stepped up to the plate to get struck out is because he is promoting his book

big surprise there

[boutons_deux]

Randian Paul is promoting himself, and his ideological fantasies, eg, that self-regulation always works. He's shilling for the predatory 1%.

[cheguevara]

I'm especially curious as to how wanting to extend banking regulation makes him a friend to Wall Street.

please post a video of Krugman warning about the 2008 housing bubble. thanks.

and this guy won a nobel? :lmao

[boutons_deux]

Krugman, Rubini, and few others were saying there was a housing/credit bubble in the early 2000s. Is text good enough for you, or do really need video?

Nearly all professional economists depend on the Fed's good graces for their careers and incomes, so none of those will ever cross the Fed. Greenspan was a fucking disaster.

[cheguevara]

:lmao now all of a sudden everyone was warning about the bubble

why did it still happen then? let me guess you gonna blame it on Bush?

[boutons_deux]

you said "everyone", I said Krugman, Rubini and a few others.

btw, dubya's OCC did use an obscure rule to shutdown 19 states (including their target Spitzer) that wanted the Feds to crack down on predatory lending (a major component of the housing bubble), a shutdown that kept the predatory lending housing bubble off the news and roaring along full steam.

[velik_m]

Both are idiots for bringing up post ww2 economy and policies. Unless they plan to have another world war where all the other major economies of the world will destroy each other and their economic potential, it's completely irrelevant.

[cheguevara]

:lol Nobel prize

:lmao former Enron adviser

924tOs-FStU

[cheguevara]

A marvelous thing happened over on Paul Krugman's blog at the New York Times last week. Krugman effectively conceded defeat on a range of economic debates. Who defeated him? People who posted comments on his New York Times blog. Mere commenters.

:lol


For those who do not know, Paul Krugman is one of the few who still claim that Keynesian progressivism is the answer to America's (and Europe's) problems, not their cause. He repeats that claim many times each month. Amid these repeated expressions of his "progressive" faith, he now also repeatedly expresses grim despair because his progressive policy prescriptions are being accepted less and less in the public square, even by the Obama administration.

Krugman is an academic. He has never run a company. He has never created a job. The closest contact he evidently ever had to "business" was as an adviser to Enron, where (in his own words) he was paid $50,000 to help build Enron's "image."

This, perhaps, explains the dozen or so points that Krugman makes over and over. Here are a few: Obama's stimulus was too small. Debt is good. Austerity is bad. Deflation is coming. Ken Rogoff, Greg Mankiw, Alberto Alesina (all at Harvard), and other serious economic scientists do not understand economics as well as he does. Those who do not agree with him are "mass delusional." And perhaps Krugman's favorite line: "I was right, of course."

Befitting his ideology, Krugman has only one policy to propose, regardless of topic: Transfer more resources from the discipline and dynamism of markets to the inefficiency and cronyism of government.

Government-run health care. Government-controlled banks. Government bailouts. High taxes. High spending. Krugman wants it all, just like in Europe (which, in 2008, he called "the comeback continent"). And Krugman has no problems denying economic science and current events to advocate it.


Krugman had also had enough. On July 23, Krugman showed that he was clearly no longer "in love" with his commenters. Now he called them "ranters" and "trolls." On July 28, Krugman changed his comment moderation policy. Claiming that "ranters ... say the same thing every time," Krugman announced that he was going to throw away posts longer than "three inches." His thinking must have been thus: Three inches are sufficient to write "Krugman is brilliant," but not sufficient to present a documented and persuasive rebuttal to whichever of Krugman's standard arguments he was peddling that day.

Within 24 hours, those outside the Times had taken notice. Stephen Spruiell at the NRO noted the absurdity of Krugman's complaint that bloggers might use the same responses to rebut Krugman's repeated statements of the same ideology. Wrote Spruiell:

This [is] from the guy who has spent the entire summer rewriting the same blog post", Spruiell went on to point out that "Krugman's sycophants ... also say the same thing every time." "Krugman's policy seems geared to limit comments to "Yay Dr. K!" "Way to go!" "Keynes was right!" etc.

Of course not. It is his blog. But it is newsworthy that after years of allowing 5,000-character responses consistent with Times policy, Krugman pulled the plug just as he was so obviously losing the debate. The academic world and the business world share something: They both view this as an admission of defeat.

Krugman is also "losing the audience." Eighteen months ago, Krugman's progressive ideology that was the consensus of the president, the House, the Senate, and not a few Republicans. Now, the Obama administration is evidently worried that it bought economic snake oil from Keynesians like Krugman. Even Ezra Klein is beginning to question the Keynesian economic models of Blinder and Zandi that "got it so wrong."

And so a six-month episode of enlightening economic debate has come to a close. Will Krugman respond to posts on other blogs? We do not know, but routinely in the past, he simply refuses to do so. He is clearly unable to do so, and, surrounded now sycophants and acolytes who tell him how brilliant he is, why should he even bother to try?

:lol forming an Executive Commitee of 1 in his blog

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/paul_krugman_gives_up_1.html

[MannyIsGod]

Told you there were more emoticons to come.

[boutons_deux]

"Transfer more resources from the discipline and dynamism of markets to the inefficiency and cronyism of government."

A Lie

For the largest corps that dominate the US economy, discipline and dynamism of markets is bullshit. They all strive towards cartelism, effective monopoly if possible, always less competition through merging, overwhelming sector dominance, aka, stasis with them on top, not dynamic at all.

[cheguevara]

Told you there were more emoticons to come.

I'm sorry I have alarmed the emoticon police

I'm sorry I find it hilarious that a Nobel winner and Princeton professor melts down in his own blog and calls ppl that disagree with him trolls. And goes to the lengths of changing his blog posting policies that were in place when the NYT first came online :lmao

[cheguevara]

and also a guy who is responsible for this:

"Europe: The Comeback Continent" I don’t want to exaggerate the good news. Europe continues to have many economic problems. But who doesn’t? The fact is that Europe’s economy looks a lot better now — both in absolute terms and compared with our economy — than it did a decade ago.

But the next time a politician tries to scare you with the European bogeyman, bear this in mind: Europe’s economy is actually doing O.K. these days, despite a level of taxing and spending beyond the wildest ambitions of American progressives.- Krugman in 2008

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

[hater]

goddam Krugman sounds like a condescending faggot

[boutons_deux]

What's Randian Paul's solution for Europe?

For getting the USA 99% economy moving again?

He's great for criticizing, and spouting libertarian inanities, but he's NEVER had responsibility for any thing like a govt or economy, and NEVER WILL.

[coyotes_geek]

He's great for criticizing, and spouting libertarian inanities, but he's NEVER had responsibility for any thing like a govt or economy, and NEVER WILL.

Replace "libertarian" with "keynesian" and you've pretty much described Krugman..........

[boutons_deux]

Krugman was right about Europe's austerity worsening their economies,

was right about the housing/credit bubble,

was right about stimulus being too small,

IS RIGHT now about the Repug/US austerity prolonging the US's Banksters Great Depression (for the 99%) for a decade, or more.

Paul is fundamentally wrong on just about everything, eg, above all, self-regulation works.

[boutons_deux]

As Krugman predicted:

Austerity Pushes Eurozone Unemployment To 15-Year High; Republicans Continue To Ignore Its Failure


Austerity policies pushed countries across the Europe back into recession during the first quarter of 2012, and the Eurozone’s unemployment rate hit 10.9 percent — its highest level in 15 years — in March. Deep budget cuts in countries like Spain, Greece, and Ireland crippled economic growth and exacerbated unemployment numbers. Austerity’s failure is starkest in the United Kingdom, where the economy is performing even worse than the rest of the Eurozone. And yet, Republicans in the United States have failed to grasp austerity’s failures, continuing their push for radical budget cuts that would jeopardize already-modest growth in the American economy and send the U.S. on a path not dissimilar from Europe’s.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/05/02/475553/austerity-pushes-eurozone-unemployment-to-15-year-high-republicans-continue-to-ignore-its-failure/

[coyotes_geek]

lol boutons. lol krugman. lol thinkprogress.

[boutons_deux]

and also a guy who is responsible for this:

"Europe: The Comeback Continent" I don’t want to exaggerate the good news. Europe continues to have many economic problems. But who doesn’t? The fact is that Europe’s economy looks a lot better now — both in absolute terms and compared with our economy — than it did a decade ago.

But the next time a politician tries to scare you with the European bogeyman, bear this in mind: Europe’s economy is actually doing O.K. these days, despite a level of taxing and spending beyond the wildest ambitions of American progressives.- Krugman in 2008

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

in 2008, Europe had not been infected by the US's Great Banksters Depression. 3 or 4 years later, it has (even with US taxpayers bailing out Euro banks).

Go find the Euro economic data for 2008 to prove whether your laughing is or Krugman was right

[boutons_deux]

lol boutons. lol krugman. lol thinkprogress.

Yours are as content-free as the usual teysha or darrin posts.

[coyotes_geek]

Yours are as content-free as the usual teysha or darrin posts.

:sleep

[Galileo]

Great. Krugman supports the economic policies of Diocletian! Google; Diocletian tyrant

[cheguevara]

in 2008, Europe had not been infected by the US's Great Banksters Depression. 3 or 4 years later, it has (even with US taxpayers bailing out Euro banks).

Go find the Euro economic data for 2008 to prove whether your laughing is or Krugman was right

but in 2008 the Euro welfare states and crazy overspending was well put in place. It was just a timebomb waiting to happen.

Krugman loves to rewrite history:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100117124/paul-krugman-is-rewriting-history-now-that-the-eurozone-beloved-by-us-liberals-is-going-down-in-flames/

But the rest of his analysis of the crisis in Europe, as well as the causes, is in the realm of pure fantasy. In his recent piece entitled “Legends of the Fail”, Krugman rejects the idea that “Europe’s woes reflect the failure of welfare states in general, and that Europe’s crisis makes the case for immediate fiscal austerity in the United States”.

The reality that Krugman refuses to accept is that Europe offers a glimpse of America’s future if it continues down the path of European-style big government. The root of Europe’s financial crisis lies in decades of over-spending and over-borrowing, largely to pay for overgrown and bloated welfare systems, vast public sectors, and incredibly generous pension plans. Europe has a huge entitlements disaster heading its way, with graying electorates unable to sustain the status quo. Added to this has been the disastrous euro experiment, which has created a one-size fits all approach for 17 EU countries, with varying levels of economic advancement. It has been a huge leap into the dark, without a shred of democratic accountability.

[boutons_deux]

"but in 2008 the Euro welfare states and crazy overspending was well put in place. It was just a timebomb waiting to happen."

and the US financial sector's insanely high risk bets, and record high household debt pushed hard by the lenders, were a time bomb that did happen.

Euros actually get something for their socialism, while Americans get nothing but butt-fucked by capitalism.

[coyotes_geek]

As Krugman predicted:

Austerity Pushes Eurozone Unemployment To 15-Year High; Republicans Continue To Ignore Its Failure


Austerity policies pushed countries across the Europe back into recession during the first quarter of 2012, and the Eurozone’s unemployment rate hit 10.9 percent — its highest level in 15 years — in March. Deep budget cuts in countries like Spain, Greece, and Ireland crippled economic growth and exacerbated unemployment numbers. Austerity’s failure is starkest in the United Kingdom, where the economy is performing even worse than the rest of the Eurozone. And yet, Republicans in the United States have failed to grasp austerity’s failures, continuing their push for radical budget cuts that would jeopardize already-modest growth in the American economy and send the U.S. on a path not dissimilar from Europe’s.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/05/02/475553/austerity-pushes-eurozone-unemployment-to-15-year-high-republicans-continue-to-ignore-its-failure/

Some content for boutons.


There is of course a major problem with Krugman’s analysis – deep-seated austerity measures have barely been implemented across most of Europe, including in Britain. The reality that Krugman ignores is that real austerity has yet to be introduced in most European countries, whose governments are still in the process of drawing up plans for budget cuts – Spain, with an unemployment rate of nearly 25 percent after years of ruinous socialist rule, is a case in point.


In London, Institute for Fiscal Studies research has shown that just 6 percent of planned cuts in current public service spending in Britain have actually been implemented by the Conservative-Liberal Coalition. That’s hardly a recipe for plunging Britain back into “depression” as Krugman calls it.

link (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100153583/why-the-new-york-timess-paul-krugman-is-clueless-about-the-european-economic-crisis/)

Since boutons is so big on content, I'm sure he'll be along shortly with something to explain how austerity cuts that haven't even been implimented yet are directly responsible for eurozone unemployment.

[Th'Pusher]

based on real government consumption, it looks like austerity has been in effect for quite a while...

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/coordinated-austerity/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

[DarrinS]

A thread about Ron Paul AND Paul Krugman?!!

How long I've waited.

[boutons_deux]

What's Randian Paul's solution for Europe?

For getting the USA 99% economy moving again?

He's great for criticizing, and spouting libertarian inanities, but he's NEVER had responsibility for any thing like a govt or economy, and NEVER WILL.

no response, figgers.