Paul Krugman. - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

Paul Krugman.

...

Page 1 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 11

Page 1 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 11

12-09-2011 , 01:07 AM

Riverman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 73,135

Hopefully this one won't get locked. This guy has jumped the shark. Now he's ripping Romney, who I ****ing hate, for saving failing companies!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/op...kkos.html?_r=1

12-09-2011 , 01:12 AM

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Did he support the bailouts?

12-09-2011 , 01:13 AM

e i pi

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 2,230

Krugmans a boss. **** the haters. He wrote a lulzy article the other day about how Hayek was a crank who has never been relevant in economics, only in politics by the rich conservatives.

12-09-2011 , 01:13 AM

tomdemaine

Just tries harder

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 20,065

FREEEE MONEEEY!

12-09-2011 , 01:15 AM

11t

Bo Pelini's #1 Fan

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 31,420

Krugman is obviously a genius

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_926995.html

12-09-2011 , 01:16 AM

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Krugman's a ****ing turd.

12-09-2011 , 01:19 AM

11t

Bo Pelini's #1 Fan

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 31,420

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

Krugman's a ****ing turd.

Did you read the article?

12-09-2011 , 01:21 AM

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Which one? Wait, same answer for both.

I skimmed.

12-09-2011 , 01:24 AM

11t

Bo Pelini's #1 Fan

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 31,420

Haha, the one I posted where Krugman claimed that we needed a fake Alien War to get us out of the recession

12-09-2011 , 01:26 AM

#10

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Yeah I skimmed it and got the jest of it.

He's a hudge turd imo. That **** just makes what 13th did even more hilarious.

12-09-2011 , 01:27 AM

#11

Recliner

old hand

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 1,807

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

Did he support the bailouts?

Unless the bailouts were an alien invasion, he did not.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/200...ilout-through/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_209788.html

12-09-2011 , 01:30 AM

#12

Riverman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 73,135

Pretty sure he opposed the bank bailouts when Bush was in charge then supported all of the Obama bailouts. Partisan hack is partisan.

12-09-2011 , 01:43 AM

#13

e i pi

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 2,230

You're all jelly of his swag

12-09-2011 , 03:51 AM

#14

tzwien

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 5,267

Krugman is hilarious. I wish Bernanke was as entertaining as he was.

12-09-2011 , 12:19 PM

#15

Money2Burn

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 12,628

How many jobs would have been "destroyed" if romney's company hadn't stepped in?

12-09-2011 , 12:25 PM

#16

The 13th 4postle

banned

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 11,244

Can't believe this guy won a Nobel prize.

12-09-2011 , 12:29 PM

#17

Low Key

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 33,327

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

Which one? Wait, same answer for both.

I skimmed.

If this is how seriously you take arguments that might not match your ideological scale, why would you even care what economics schools teach, since you don't seem to think people should be inclined to open their minds to differing points of view?

12-09-2011 , 12:44 PM

#18

NMcNasty

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,990

What's the criticism?

Basically he's just saying that buying a company, firing people, then selling it for a profit != job creation, especially when the company fails anyway.

12-09-2011 , 12:45 PM

#19

PoBoy321

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 9,982

Quote:

Originally Posted by The 13th 4postle

Can't believe this guy won a Nobel prize.

Says the guy without a Nobel Prize.

12-09-2011 , 01:00 PM

#20

Low Key

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 33,327

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMcNasty

What's the criticism?

Basically he's just saying that buying a company, firing people, then selling it for a profit != job creation, especially when the company fails anyway.

Yeah, but he even has the word 'liberal' in the title of his blog, so we can automatically discount everything he says ever. Especially true because he won a Nobel. Those only matter if they're won by people who aren't liberals.

12-09-2011 , 01:03 PM

#21

codemanz4

journeyman

Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 348

Remember when this idiot said that Gabrielle Giffords was shot by a right wing extremist and that all the right wingers were to blame?

"Nuff said.

12-09-2011 , 01:05 PM

#22

jackaaron

old hand

Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,560

What about his contention that we don't need to address deficits when the economy is down.

Is this thought of poorly by this forum too?

12-09-2011 , 01:05 PM

#23

PoBoy321

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 9,982

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMcNasty

What's the criticism?

Basically he's just saying that buying a company, firing people, then selling it for a profit != job creation, especially when the company fails anyway.

Because destroying jobs is actually good, because when big investment banks come in and buy out a company, lay everyone off, then sell that company to some other investment bank for a profit, all the executives take their bonuses and literally piss money on people. Fact.

12-09-2011 , 01:07 PM

#24

PoBoy321

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 9,982

Quote:

Originally Posted by codemanz4

Remember when this idiot said that Gabrielle Giffords was shot by a right wing extremist and that all the right wingers were to blame?

"Nuff said.

Remember when that was exactly NOT what he said?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/op...10krugman.html

Quote:

It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.

Last spring Politico.com reported on a surge in threats against members of Congress, which were already up by 300 percent. A number of the people making those threats had a history of mental illness — but something about the current state of America has been causing far more disturbed people than before to act out their illness by threatening, or actually engaging in, political violence.

12-09-2011 , 01:12 PM

#25

brad2002tj

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 12,058

What do you get when you cross Krugman with Carville?

GOP candidates are bad because GOP voters are dumb. Sad part is it is mostly true. But all voters are dumb, not just GOP.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/08/opinio...lle-gop-field/

Quote:

(CNN) -- As usual, Professor Paul Krugman's piece in the Monday morning New York Times is causing a great deal of chatter among the political types. Krugman points out just how inept the Republican field is. In some cases he takes a scalpel (and in others a machete) to surely the weakest field of presidential aspirants any party has offered in modern American history (see my earlier CNN column comparing this field to 1980). I believe I can explain why this field is so inept. In order to proffer this explanation I am going to utilize Professor Krugman's field of economics.

I confess I've never taken an economics course and if you ask me the relationship between interest rates and bond prices I would have a Herman Cain Libya moment. I could probably get the right answer but it would take me a while. There are some laws of economics that I believe all economists (be they salt, fresh, or brackish water) would agree on. One of these is: The more valuable a thing, the more people will be interested in purchasing that thing. And as Professor Krugman points out in his piece, the 2012 Republican nomination was clearly considered by most observers to be a thing of value.

Even the most partisan Democrat -- me for example -- would concede that three months ago the Republicans had an excellent chance to win the presidency. So ask yourself: Why does this thing that appears to have so much value have so many low bidders? Why did people like Govs. Chris Christie, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Jeb Bush and Sen. John Thune, all look at this and decide not to raise their paddles?

So here we wind up with the political equivalent of the Hope Diamond going for $99.99. I think that these guys were smart enough to see a big flaw in the process and it is this: The majority of the people in the Republican Party who were going to pick their nominee had been so overwhelmed by misinformation, unworkable simplistic solutions -- e.g., electrifying border fences -- and anti-science, right-wing pandering, that the potential candidates decided they just could not go through with it.

We have watched GOP debates where audience members booed gay soldiers and cheered the prospect of someone dying without health insurance. We've seen a candidate who wasn't penalized in the least for not knowing that China has had nuclear weapons since 1964 but had to drop out because of a consensual sexual relationship. We have seen a member of the House Intelligence Committee who apparently didn't realize that we haven't had an embassy in Iran for the last 30 years, candidates who don't believe in evolution, and a candidate that didn't even know the voting age in the United States. Maybe Bush, Daniels, Christie, Barbour and Thune figured out ahead of time what Fairleigh Dickinson University uncovered just recently: that people who watch Fox News are actually more ignorant than people who watch no news at all. Could you imagine what they would have found had they studied people listening to talk radio?

Perhaps the Republicans are getting exactly the kind of candidates that best match the intellectual composition of the majority of the people in their party -- just a thought, but it's my only explanation of our low bidders. Looks like their chance at the presidency is going, going, gone.

Page 1 of 13

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 11

Last

...

Page 1 of 13

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 11

Last